Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/02/1991Incorporated April 18, 1989 City of Diamond Bar, California CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REGULAR MEETING Mayor - John A. Forbing Mayor Pro Tem - Jay C. Kim Councilwoman - Phyllis Papen Councilman - Gary H. Werner Councilman - Donald C. Nardella City Council Chambers are located at: Walnut Valley Unified School District Board Room 880 South Lemon Avenue Please refrain from smoking, 'eating or drinking in the Council Chambers. MEETING DATE: JULY 2, 1991 MEETING TIME: 6:00 P.M. Robert L. Van Nort City Manager Andrew V. Arczynski City Attorney Lynda Burgess City Clerk ,opies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to each item referred to on this agenda are on ile in the Office of the City Clerk and are available for public inspection. If you have questions regarding any agenda item contact the City Clerk at (714) 860=2489 during business hours. City of Diamond Bar uses RECYCLED paper and encourages you to do the same. THIS MEETING IS BEING TAPED BY JONES INTERCABLE FOR AIRING ON CHANNEL 51, AND BY REMAINING IN THE ROOM, YOU ARE GIVING YOUR PERMISSION TO BE TAPED. ALL COUNCIL MEETING TAPES WILL BE BLACKED IMMEDIATELY AFTER AIRING AND WILL BE UNAVAILABLE FOR REPRODUCTION. Next Resolution No. 91-48 Next Ordinance No. 4(1991) CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Ma ROLL CALL: COUNCILMEN WER,�NARDELLA, PAPEN, MAYOR PRO TEM KIM, MAYOR FORBING COUNCIL COMMENTS: Items raised by individual Councilmembers are for Council discussion. Direction may be given at this meeting or the item may be scheduled for action at a future meeting. �p(v�- PUBLIC COMMENTS: "Public Comments" is the time reserved on each R,2far`} (c regular meeting agenda to provide an opportunity for members of the rCe,�L'ij,x.nj public to directly address the Council on Consent Calendar items or rns �c� matters of interest to the public that are not already scheduled {�jtrC- + for consideration on this agenda. Please complete a Speaker's Card and give it to the _City Clerk (completion of this form is voluntary). There is a five minute maximum time limit when addressing the City Council . C��. or, f�a re, -40 CONSENT CALENDAR: The following items listed on the Consent -pfLit ^5�r, Calendar are considered routine and are approved by a single u.,,y. D'�',r.0 motion. Fire D 1. SCHEDULE FUTURE MEETINGS Concert in the Park - July 3, 1991 - 6:30 p.m. to �� D 8:00 p.m. Sycamore Canyon Park 3.0 3 $e- 4th of July - City Offices will be closed. " o,� 1991 U.S. Olympic Torch Run - July 8, 1991 - 4:30 n5 s�4 p.m. Diamond Bar Blvd. and Grand Ave. Planning Commission - July 8, 1991 - 7:00 p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave. 1L/- Traffic and Transportation Commission - July 11, s 1991 - 6:30 p.m. , Community Room, 1061 S. Grand Ave. Parks and Recreation Commission - July 11, 1991 (� 7:00 p.m., City Hall, 21660 E. Copley Dr., Suite op 100 d, City Council Meeting - July 16, 1991 - 6:00 p.m., �� ,•,� fi W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave. City Council Study Session - July 23, 1991 - 6:30 p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave. re. Prekes ' , 3g 2,pden P.eA COk+ns, -40 11���os7itn9 crF.scs�n� av $ 395 D" _ 60b 6.V — _g1,a„Lcderor ape re 0U e6 Cup CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PAGE 2 JULY 2, 1991 APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of June 18, 1991. / WARRANT REGISTER - Approve warrant Register dated July 2, C&"ar— 1991 in the amount of $648,385.83. lop,4. TREASURER'S REPORT - Approve Treasurer's Report for the JAG PP. Month of May, 1991. D�, j F -Ar� RESOLUTION NO. 91-XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, CALLING CWW AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 1991, FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW 4C�ITIES. �B) RESOLUTION NO. 91-M A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 5, 1991, WITH THE SCHOOL AND UDEL ELECTIONS TO BE HELD ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 23302 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE. sb RESOLUTION NO. 91-XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 1991 - Pursuant to the Elections Code, the City Council must adopt resolutions calling and giving notice of the holding of an election and requesting the Board of Supervisors to consolidate the City's election with the School and Udel Elections on November 5, 1991. In addition, the City Council must adopt regulations pertaining to the filing of candidates' statements. Recommended Action: Adopt: a) Resolution No. 91 -XX calling and giving notice of the holding of a General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 5, 1991; b) Resolution No. 91 -XX requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of L.A. to consolidate a General Municipal Election on November 5, 1991, with the School and Udel Elections; and c) Resolution No. 91 -XX adopting regulations for Candidates for elective office pertaining to Candidates Statements submitted to the voters at an election to be held on Tuesday, November 5, 1991. .,,6- SERVICES CONTRACT - Amendment to Recreation Services Contract with the City of Brea to add Heritage Youth Sports, Summer Tiny Tots and the American Explorers programs. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PAGE 3 JULY 2, 1991 Recommended Action: Concur with recommendation of the Parks & Recreation Commission to amend the contract for recreation services with the City of Brea, to add three. recreation programs: Heritage Youth Sports, Summer Tiny Tots and American Explorers. It is further recommended that the Council amend the FY 1991-92 Municipal Budget by increasing anticipated recreation fee revenues in the amount of $34,970 and by increasing the recreation services contract in the amount of $35,045. RESOLUTION NO. 91-88: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPLYING FOR FLOOD INSURANCE FROM THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) - The City is prepared to complete the application process to the National Flood Insurance Program by adopting the required resolution pertaining to flood insurance. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 91 -XX applying for flood insurance form the Federal Emergency Management Agency. S oz' RESOLUTION NO. 91-1%: A RESOLIITION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ELECTING TO BE SUBJECT TO PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL CARE ACT - The City has received notice from PERS requiring a new resolution electing participation under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Program to continue health benefit coverage as a PERS agency. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 91 -XX electing to be subject to Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act. 11 I NO. 91 %B:3 RESOLUTION -� A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COIINCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING THE CITY PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS FOR TRENCH REPAVEMENT SECTIONS - Utility companies and various construction projects have required trenching of City streets for provide access to utility connections. Upon completion of the connections, the trenches must be patched using a method that will facilitate safe driving conditions and normal paving life expectancy. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 91 -XX amending public works standards for trench repavement sections, Standard No. ST -911. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PAGE 4 JULY 2, 1991 OLD BUSINESS: Zo ORDINANCE NO. 3(1991): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING SECTION 22.60.100 OF P� TITLE 22 AND ADDING A NEW SECTION 82-7 TO TITLE 27 OF THE J� 4 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE AS HERETOFORE ADOPTED - First PP' reading conducted on June 18, 1991 to amend provisions of J� the L.A. County Code authorizing adoption of fees by ,��► o-ps • resolution. Recommended Action: Adopt Ordinance No. 3(1991) amending Section 22.60.100 of Title 22 and adding a new Section 82-7 to Title 27 of the L.A. County Code. JK RESOLUTION NO. 91X� A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL rJ �OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING AND ADOPTING PP SCHEDULES OF RATES, FEES AND CHARGES FOR SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE BUILDING, PLANNING AND ENGINEERING 3 DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 91 -XX establishing and adopting schedules of rates, fees and charges for services provided by the Building, Planning and Engineering Departments. SCdv r 0r4 -ed SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM FOR "THE COUNTRYIN - In response to no a�ai:��abls, inquiries regarding the sanitary sewer services for 41,%',ti, kjm�w r4eso "M u approximately 148 lots within The Country, staff has Cid. Llan aV4A(0b1c, ,k investigated the possibility of forming a special mer''`— �1i&(LL �' assessment district. ed. A.1}.o11tf loan AQ15-- ��W`1 y�uda-i'i Recommended Action: City Council consider the following irect s necessary: (1) ze staff to use d25, 000 of theCityI s General Fund moniesto dor c r h,e rh.t �,�74.+Nq $ Y conduct feasibility study. The City's General Fund account can be reimbursed only if an assessment district oto is formed; (2) Direct staff to inform the affected property owners to pay for the feasibility cost; (3) ,,,rb �. 0,"hk4 Authorize staff to use General Fund monies only if the Wyk `5 .4-toZ,property owners can sign a petition indicating that they PSP, d�o}ed-' berms. will reimburse the City if an assessment district is not '66. ► K�r formed. bon r�,� o Q_"T44n,� .pl�f� c"xESOLUTION NO. 90-45C: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL bt"vss n OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 90-45B 6 SETTING FORTH PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS REGARDING �ysir�` ko THE PAYMENT OF SALARIES, SICK LEAVE, VACATIONS, LEAVES OF ABSENCES, AND OTHER REGULATIONS - The City Manager has �14 recommended changes to the wages, hours and working P.°' s conditions of City employees, which are set forth as i personnel rules and regulations in Resolutions 90-45, 90- 0o ick �y`' 45A and 90-45B. obP°� ,(,� .� o pr "r e. r e f o r4- o...nd (N e l rn c ri Q • vRts d C� rl 0. +'x�e csca n �3 C� ham$ GAS ' d CESS n . c nd- re pC r+ h CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PAGE 5 JULY 2, 1991 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 90-45C amending Personnel Rules and Regulations as set forth in Resolutions 90-45, 90-45A and 90-45B. PUBLIC HEARINGS - 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matters Jk ,,JS+4an be heard. of atoo 1,� DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-2 (1991) CONCERNING PROPERTY -ati fefov+ T- GENERALLY LOCATED AT AND IDENTIFIED AS 22000 GOLDEN Q,e_oee,mqA ?*' SPRINGS DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA -Council is considering approval of a Development Agreement to permit nG- a self-service gas station, an automated car wash, six ,.60bay automotive detail facility, offices, and a restaurant �j�t,. 46 for property located at 22000 Golden Springs Dr. �• ',a,td•Continued public hearing from June 4, 1991. �i� app fps Recommended Action: Staff recommends continuing the Public Hearing to August 6, 1991. ANNOUNCEMENTS - This time is set aside for any City Councilmember to direct staff regarding any matters to be discussed at the next regular meeting CLOSED SESSION Litigation - Section 54956.9 Personnel - Section 54957.6 '7' 15 �`t ADJOURNMENT � n ryLe-m-m a ryt oo r iparlc j s r1�1 oorParl� yrs- THIS MEETING IS BEING TAPED BY JONES INTERCABLE FOR AIRING ON CHANNEL 51, AND BY REMAINING IN THE ROOM, YOU ARE GIVING YOUR PERMISSION TO BE TAPED. ALL COUNCIL MEETING TAPES WILL BE BLACKED IMMEDIATELY AFTER AIRING AND WILL BE UNAVAILABLE FOR REPRODUCTION. Next Resolution No. 91-48 Next Ordinance No. 4(1991) CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Forbing ROLL CALL: COUNCILMEN VRERNER, NARDELLA, PAPEN, MAYOR PRO TEM KIM, MAYOR FORBING COUNCIL COMMENTS: Items raised by individual Councilmembers are for Council discussion. Direction may be given at this meeting or the item may be scheduled for action at a future meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS: "Public Comments" is the time reserved on each regular meeting agenda to provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the Council on Consent Calendar items or matters of interest to the public that are not already scheduled for consideration on this agenda. Please complete a Speaker's Card and give it to the City Clerk (completion of this form is voluntary). There is a five minute maximum time limit when addressing the City Council. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following items listed on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and are approved by a single motion. 1. SCHEDULE FUTURE MEETINGS A. Concert in the Park - July 3, 1991 - 6:30 p.m. 8:00 p.m. Sycamore Canyon Park B. 4th of July - City Offices will be closed. C. 1991 U.S. Olympic Torch Run - July 8, 1991 - 4:30 p.m., Diamond Bar Blvd. and Grand Ave. D. Planning Commission - July 8, 1991 - 7:00 p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave. E. Traffic and Transportation Commission - July 11, 1991 - 6:30 p.m., Community Room, 1061 S. Grand Ave. F. Parks and Recreation Commission - July 11, 1991 7:00 p.m., City Hall, 21660 E. Copley Dr., Suite 100 G. City Council Meeting - July 16, 1991 - 6:00 p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave. H. City Council Study Session - July 23, 1991 - 6:30 p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of June 18, 1991. 3. WARRANT REGISTER - Approve warrant Register dated July 2, CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PAGE 2 JULY 2, 1991 1991 in the amount of $648,385.83. 4. TREASURER'S REPORT - Approve Treasurer's Report for the Month of May, 1991. 5. A) RESOLUTION NO. 91 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 1991, FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES. B) RESOLUTION NO. 91 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 5, 1991, WITH THE SCHOOL AND UDEL ELECTIONS TO BE HELD ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 23302 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE. C) RESOLUTION NO. 91 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 1991 - Pursuant to the Elections Code, the City Council must adopt resolutions calling and giving notice of the holding of an election and requesting the Board of supervisors to consolidate the City's election with the School and Udel Elections on November 5, 1991. In addition, the City Council must adopt regulations pertaining to the filing of candidates' statements. Recommended Action: Adopt: a) Resolution No. 91 -XX calling and giving notice of the holding of a General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 5, 1991; b) Resolution No. 91 -XX requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of L.A. to consolidate a General Municipal Election on November 5, 1991, with the School and Udel Elections; and c) Resolution No. 91 -XX adopting regulations for Candidates for elective office pertaining to Candidates Statements submitted to the voters at an election to be held on Tuesday, November 5, 1991. 6. RECREATION SERVICES CONTRACT - Amendment to Recreation Services Contract with the City of Brea to add Heritage Youth Sports, Summer Tiny Tots and the American Explorers programs. Recommended Action: Concur with recommendation of the Parks & Recreation Commission to amend the contract for recreation services with the City of Brea, to add three recreation programs: Heritage Youth Sports, Summer Tiny Tots and American Explorers. It is further recommended CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PAGE 3 JULY 2, 1991 that the Council amend the FY 1991-92 Municipal Budget by increasing anticipated recreation fee revenues in the amount of $34,970 and by increasing the recreation services contract in the amount of $35,045. 7. RESOLUTION NO. 91 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPLYING FOR FLOOD INSURANCE FROM THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) - The City is prepared to complete the application process to the National Flood Insurance Program by adopting the required resolution pertaining to flood insurance. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 91 -XX applying for flood insurance form the Federal Emergency Management Agency. 8. RESOLUTION NO. 91 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ELECTING TO BE SUBJECT TO PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL CARE ACT - The City has received notice from PERS requiring a new resolution electing participation under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Program to continue health benefit coverage as a PERS agency. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 91 -XX electing to be subject to Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act. 9. RESOLUTION NO. 91 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING THE CITY PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS FOR TRENCH REPAVEMENT SECTIONS - Utility companies and various construction projects have required trenching of City streets for provide access to utility connections. Upon completion of the connections, the trenches must be patched using a method that will facilitate safe driving conditions and normal paving life expectancy. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 91 -XX amending public works standards for trench repavement sections, Standard No. ST -911. OLD BUSINESS: 10. ORDINANCE NO. 3(1991): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING SECTION 22.60.100 OF TITLE 22 AND ADDING A NEW SECTION 82-7 TO TITLE 27 OF _THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE AS HERETOFORE ADOPTED - First reading conducted on June 18, 1991 to amend provisions of the L.A. County Code authorizing adoption of fees by resolution. Recommended Action: Adopt Ordinance No. 3 (1991) amending Section 22.60.100 of Title 22 and adding a new Section 82-7 to Title 27 of the L.A. County Code. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PAGE 4 JULY 2, 1991 11. RESOLUTION NO. 91 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING AND ADOPTING SCHEDULES OF RATES, FEES AND CHARGES FOR SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE BUILDING, PLANNING AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 91 -XX establishing and adopting schedules of rates, fees and charges for services provided by the Building, Planning and Engineering Departments. 12. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM FOR "THE COUNTRY" - In response to inquiries regarding the sanitary sewer services for approximately 148 lots within The Country, staff has investigated the possibility of forming a special assessment district. Recommended Action: City Coun@il consider the following options and direct staff as necessary: (1) Authorize staf f to use $25, 000 of the City I s General Fund monies to conduct feasibility study. The City's General Fund account can be reimbursed only if an assessment district is formed; (2) Direct staff to inform the affected property owners to pay for the feasibility cost; (3) Authorize staff to use General Fund monies only if the property owners can sign a petition indicating that they will reimburse the City if an assessment district is not formed. 13. RESOLUTION NO. 90-45C: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 90-45B SETTING FORTH PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS REGARDING THE PAYMENT OF SALARIES, SICK LEAVE, VACATIONS, LEAVES OF ABSENCES, AND OTHER REGULATIONS - The City Manager has recommended changes to the wages, hours and working conditions of City employees, which are set forth as personnel rules and regulations in Resolutions 90-45, 90- 45A and 90-45B. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 90-45C amending Personnel Rules and Regulations as set forth in Resolutions 90-45, 90-45A and 90-45B. PUBLIC HEARINGS - 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matters can be heard. 14. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-2 (1991) CONCERNING PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT AND IDENTIFIED AS 22000 GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA - Council is considering approval of a Development Agreement to permit a self-service gas station, an automated car wash, six bay automotive detail facility, offices, and a restaurant for property located at 22000 Golden Springs Dr. Continued public hearing'from June 4, 1991. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PAGE 5 JULY 2, 1991 Recommended Action: Staff recommends continuing the Public Hearing to August 6, 1991. ANNOUNCEMENTS - This time is set aside for any City Councilmember to direct staff regarding any matters to be discussed at the next regular meeting CLOSED SESSION Litigation - Section 54956.9 Personnel - Section 54957.6 ADJOURNMENT MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR JUNE 18, 1991 STUDY SESSION Call to Order C/Papen called the Study Session to order at 4:40 p.m. Source Reduction Admin. Analyst Troy Butzlaff reviewed AB939 and and Recycling the Source Reduction and Recycling Element. He Element also discussed pending legislation that may affect the ultimate deadline for submittal of the SRRE to the California Integrated Waste Management Board. Critical components involve waste characteriza- tion, source reduction, recycling, composting, special waste, hazardous waste, funding, facility capacity and siting, public education, information and coordination and integration. The draft SRRE is expected in August and will be submitted to the Council, members of the public, other jurisdic- tions bordering the City, the County and the State for comment. Under the law, a 45 -day comment period will be provided and a public hearing held. A revised report will then be prepared, incorpor- ated into the County -wide component and submitted to the State for review. After discussing the types of solid waste gener- ated in the City, he suggested establishment of a local business action council, coordinated through the Chamber, to assist in developing guidelines for businesses or industries to reduce the amount of packaging used in their products. In addition, he suggested development of educational programs so that local businesses can be aware of packaging and their harmful effects on landfill capacity as well as the environment in general and incorporate a service message to reduce wasteful purchases through a public awareness program which is part of the AB939 requirement. In response to C/Papen's inquiry regarding pending legislation proposed by Senator Hill, AA/Butzlaff reported that the legislation may have an impact on the City's green waste program at Spadra but indicated that an additional facility in Whittier is proposed to be expanded to accept green waste from other jurisdictions. Following discussion, MPT/Kim suggested meeting with the consultant to discuss the matter directly. Following further discussion, C/Papen requested that this matter be placed on a future agenda to allow for public input. CLOSED SESSION: M/Forbing adjourned the Study Session to Closed Session for discussion of personnel matters. JUNE 18, 1991 PAGE 2 REGULAR MEETING CALL TO ORDER: M/Forbing called the meeting to order at 6:24 p.m. in the Council Chambers, W.V.U.S.D., 880 S. Lemon Avenue, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance ALLEGIANCE: by Mayor Forbing. ROLL CALL: Mayor Forbing, Mayor Pro Tem Kim, Councilmen Werner, Nardella and Papen. Also present were City Manager Robert L. Van Nort, Assistant City Manager Terrence Belanger, Planning Director James DeStefano, City Engineer Sid Mousavi, City Attorney Andrew V. Arczynski and City Clerk Lynda Burgess. COUNCIL COMMENTS: C/Papen requested that the City Engineer review the timing of the signals at Diamond Bar Blvd. and Grand Ave., specifically related to traffic head- ing east toward Chino Hills. She then announced that beginning July 1st, onramps will be metered on the 57 freeway at Pathfinder, Brea Canyon and Diamond Bar Blvd. C/Nardella requested that the meeting be adjourned in memory of Joyce Berry, owner of Sir Speedy, who passed away on June 17, 1991. M/Forbing announced that at 1:00 p.m. on June 21, 1991, a memorial service would be held for Joyce Berry at Northminister Presbyterian Church on Rancheria and Golden Springs. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mr. Al Rumpilla, 23958 Golden Springs Dr., responded to C/Papen's comments on May 21, 1991 regarding "Letters to the Editor." Mr. Jim Paul, 1269 Ahtena Dr., reported on the problems that he has encountered with the postal service. C/Werner suggested that the Mayor write to Arthur Martinez, Postmaster in Alhambra, outlining the problems that are occurring in delivery of the mail. M/Forbing reminded the public that Fourth of July fireworks are prohibited in Diamond Bar and asked all residents to observe this law as a safety precaution. He further stated that due to budget cutbacks, the Fire Department will be scheduling rolling blackouts, which means less protection. In addition, Senator Hill has agreed to sponsor JUNE 18, 1991 PAGE 3 legislation that will benefit both the City of Industry and the City of Diamond Bar as well as the Pomona Unified School District in providing for the development of a high school in north Diamond Bar. CONSENT CALENDAR: MPT/Kim moved, seconded by C/Werner to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN - Werner, Nardella, Papen, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing NOES: COUNCILMEN - None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None Schedule Future A. Economic Development Workshop - June 22, 1991 Meetings 9:00 a.m., Hotel Diamond Bar, 259 Gentle Springs Dr. B. Planning Commission - June 24, 1991 - 7:00 p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave. C. Parks & Recreation Commission - June 27, 1991 - 6:30 p.m, Community Room, 1061 S. Grand Ave. D. City Council Meeting - July 2, 1991 - 6:00 p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave. E. Concert in the Park - July 3, 1991 - 6:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., Sycamore Canyon Park. F. 4th of July - City Offices will be closed. G. 1991 U.S. Olympic Torch Run - July 8, 1991 - 4:30 p.m., Diamond Bar Blvd. and Grand Ave. H. Planning Commission - July 8, 1991 - 7:00 p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave. Approval of Approved Minutes of Regular Meeting of May 21, Minutes 1991 and amended Minutes of Regular Meeting of June 4, 1991. Warrant Register Approved Warrant Register dated June 18, 1991 in the amount of $274,144.46. Claim for Damages Denied Claim for Damages filed by Susan Ford. Paratransit Svcs. Approved agreement with the County for continua - County of L.A. tion of transportation services for elderly and disabled residents for FY 1991-92. Resolution 91-39 Adopted Resolution No. 91-39 entitled: A Issuance/Sale RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND of 1991 Tax & BAR PROVIDING FOR THE BORROWING OF FUNDS FOR Revenue FISCAL YEAR 1991/1992 AND THE ISSUANCE AND SALE Anticipation OF 1991 TAX AND REVENUE ANTICIPATION NOTES Notes THEREFOR. JUNE 18, 1991 PAGE 4 Resolution 91-40 Adopted Resolution No. 91-40 entitled: A Adopting Budget RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF for FY 1991-92 DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AND ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JULY 1, 1991 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 1992 INCLUDING MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS, SPECIAL FUNDS AND CAPITAL IMPROVE- MENTS AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR ACCOUNTS, DEPARTMENTS, DIVISIONS, OBJECTS AND PURPOSES THEREIN SET FORTH. Award of Contract Awarded contract for installation of playground Playground Equip. equipment at Heritage and Sycamore Canyon Parks to Keith Vint & Keith Vint and Associates, lowest responsible Assoc. bidder in the amount of $25,370. Lot Line Adjust. Approved lot line adjustment for property at 2260 2260 & 2276 and 2276 Indian Creek Road, Lots 67 and 68, Tract Indian Creek Rd. Map No. 23483 and authorized City Engineer to sign Lots 67 & 68 the map and directed the City Clerk to process it Tract Map 23483 for recordation. Proclamation - Proclaimed the month of July, 1991 as "Parks July 1991 "Parks & Recreation Month." & Rec. Month." Proclamation - Proclaimed support of efforts by the "Community Picnic Honoring and Veterans United" Committee for their picnic Veterans - set for July 13, 1991 in honor of all veterans. July 13, 1991 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: Certificate of M/Forbing presented a Certificate of Recognition Recognition - to Mr. Robert J. Bowman, Regional Parole Robert J. Bowman Administrator, Department of Corrections, in honor of his retirement on July 1, 1991. OLD BUSINESS: Resolution 91-41 PD/DeStefano reported that on June 4, 1991, Modifying CUP Council directed staff to review the tree preser- 1634-1 - vation plan which was part of additional condi- Evangelical Free tions to permit a five-year extension of the Church, 3255 development permit. Diamond Bar Blvd. C/Werner moved, seconded by MPT/Kim to adopt Resolution No. 91-41 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS, THE MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1634-1 FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXTENDING THE TIME FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3255 DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD OWNED BY THE EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH OF DIAMOND BAR. Motion carried unanimously. JUNE 18, 1991 PAGE 5 1991 Concert in ACM/Belanger stated that the five Concerts in the the Park Series Park begin July 3, 1991 at Sycamore Canyon and are free of charge to the public. The Parks & Recreation Commission discussed sponsorship of the Series and the issue of concessions and recom- mended a policy for Council consideration. Following discussion, C/Werner moved, MPT/Kim seconded to adopt: 1) a contribution donation policy stating that any or all contributions of $100 or more be applied to the entire 1991 Concert in the Parks Series; and 2) providing an oppor- tunity to sell food and beverages at the Series to non-profit organizations with 50% of the proceeds donated to agreed-upon City projects. The other 50% would remain with the organization for their use. Motion carried unanimously. Resolution 91-42 CE/Mousavi reported that on May 30, 1991, the Apprvng. Report Council authorized staff to include park main - Filed re: LLAD. tenance in District 38 and the Engineer's Report No. 38 & Setting was now complete. Public Hearing July 16, 1991, C/Nardella requested staff to prepare a fiscal 7 p.m. impact report including a comparative analysis with the original assessment to determine whether the City is going beyond the original intent of the district. Mr. Don Gravdahl, 23988 Minnequa, presented a report and transparencies regarding the proposal. Mr. Al Rumpilla, 23958 Golden Springs, and Mr. Red Calkins, 340 Eagle Nest Dr., indicated their oppo- sition to including the parks in the assessment. C/Nardella moved, MPT/Kim seconded to Adopt Resolution No. 91-42 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE REPORT FILED PURSUANT TO SECTION 22623 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE WITH RESPECT TO CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38 AND FIXING AND GIVING NOTICE OF A TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE LEVY OF AN ASSESSMENT ON SAID DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1991-92. Following discussion, C/Nardella moved, MPT/Kim seconded to amend the original motion with amendments to the Engineers Report to delete all reference to parks maintenance and cost thereof; reduce the estimated assessment from $31 to $19; make conforming amendments in the Resolution; and change the Resolution title to state the "amended" report filed. Motion carried unanimously. JUNE 18, 1991 PAGE 6 RECESS: M/Forbing recessed the meeting at 8:40 p.m. RECONVENE: M/Forbing reconvened the meeting at 8:50 p.m. NEW BUSINESS: Advisory Measures M/Forbing opened discussion of Advisory Ballot for Nov. Ballot Measures regarding (a) acquisition of Site "D"; (b) overnight parking and (c) election of Mayor by popular vote. Mr. Chuck Martin, 444 N. Red Cloud Dr., spoke in support of a "full term" mayor being placed on the ballot. CC/Lynda Burgess reported that the County estim- ated additional costs to the City of approximately $9,000 to place measures on the November ballot based on what the City would pay without the Walnut and Pomona Unified School Districts sharing election costs. The following persons spoke in opposition to Advisory Measures: Mrs. Lydia Plunk Mr. Al Rumpilla Mr. Jim Paul Mr. Frank Dursa. With Council consensus, the matter of advisory measures for the November ballot were tabled. Resolution 91-46 C/Papen moved, seconded by MPT/Kim to adopt Granting Consent Resolution No. 91-46 entitled: A RESOLUTION & Juris. to Cnty. OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, re: Transfer of CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONSENT AND JURISDICTION Highway Safety TO THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES IN THE MATTER OF Lights to Cnty. TRANSFERRING HIGHWAY SAFETY LIGHTS TO COUNTY Lighting Maint. LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 10006. With the Dist. 10006 following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCILMEN - Papen, Werner, Nardella, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing NOES: COUNCILMEN - None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None Resolution 94-47 CE/Mousavi stated that numerous complaints have Apprvng. Plans & been received from merchants in the area due to Specs. for Brea lack of sidewalks on Brea Canyon Rd. beneath the Cyn. Rd. Sidewalk 60 freeway. Construction at 60 Fwy. JUNE 18, 1991 PAGE 7 C/Werner moved, C/Papen seconded to adopt Resolution No. 91-47 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE BREA CANYON ROAD SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION AT S.R. 60 FREEWAY IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCILMEN - Werner, Nardella, Papen, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing NOES: COUNCILMEN - None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None Crossing Guard CE/Mousavi stated that crossing guard services Services - were previously provided by the County of L.A. MasterGuard Staff investigated the feasibility of entering Intl. into a contract with MasterGuard International for these services for FY 1991-92. Following discussion, MPT/Kim moved, C/Papen seconded to enter into an agreement with MasterGuard International for FY 1991-92 in the amount of $90,000 with the deletion of Item C on Page 7 of the proposed agreement. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCILMEN - Nardella, Papen, Werner, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing NOES: COUNCILMEN - None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None Fountain Spgs. CE/Mousavi reported that the Fountain Springs Pump Pump Station Station located 2148 Fountain Springs Road is Capacity pumping at full capacity. Four additional sewer - lift stations located in the City are also pumped by the Fountain Springs Station which include Castle Rock, Brea, Indian Creek and Longview. No additional sewer connections can be made until the Fountain Springs Pump Station is operating. The County has indicated that draft recommendations have been received from their consultant. Following discussion, staff was directed to post signs at the public counter at City Hall showing the affected area and to notify developers that finalization of all projects within the area will be delayed until corrective measures occur. Furthermore, all developmental departments must verify the location of proposed projects in relation to Fountain Springs, Brea, Castle Rock, Indian Creek and Longview pump stations in order to 1) notify prospective applicants of the possible delay in sewer connection and 2) notify JUNE 18, 1991 PAGE 8 present applicants of the delay in permit issuance. M/Forbing indicated that he would discuss the matter with members of the Sanitation District to encourage completion of the work as soon as possible. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Proposed Sign PD/DeStefano reported that the Public Hearing Ordinance opened on May 7, 1991 was continued to this meeting to provide for preparation of a draft ordinance and receive and review input from the Chamber of Commerce and public. The Chamber indicated three areas of concern: all signs should have a maximum size of 24" per letter and a maximum of 80% of the frontage of the building; monument signs should be increased from the proposed 6' in height to 10' and increase the sign face area of free-standing signs depending on the size of the shopping center; and creation of an over-the-counter permit process to provide tenants of shopping centers permits upon proof that signs conform to the center's requirements. M/Forbing opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Fred Scalzo, representing the Chamber of Commerce, stated that the Chamber had formed a three-member action committee to work with City staff regarding the details of the ordinance. He requested that the matter be tabled for a minimum of 30 days to give the committee an opportunity to work with staff with review by the Planning Commission. The following persons expressed concern over provisions of the draft sign ordinance: Mr. Bill Armith, 20930 Currier, Walnut Mr. John Hemstrau, Young Electric Sign Co. Mr. Frank W. Cho, 2142 Tenderfoot Way. Ms. Margaret Watkins, representing the Seeley Co. With no further testimony offered, M/Forbing closed the Public Hearing. Staff was directed to work with the Chamber Committee for a proposal to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. A Planning Commission Public Hearing will be scheduled for July 8, 1991. JUNE 18, 1991 PAGE 9 Ordinance 9-B PP/DeStefano reported that Ordinance No. 9-A was (1990) Extending adopted approximately one year ago to regulate Term of Interim free-standing signs to a maximum height of 6 ft. Zoning Ord. 9-A and 35 sq. ft. of sign face area. He recommended extension of the Ordinance for one year or until the adoption of a new Sign Ordinance. M/Forbing opened the Public Hearing. With no testimony offered, M/Forbing closed the Public Hearing. C/Werner moved, C/Papen seconded to adopt Ordinance No. 9-B (1990) entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR EXTENDING THE TERM OF AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE NO. 9-A (1990) PURSUANT TO CODE SECTION 65858 AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: C/Werner moved, MPT/Kim seconded to refer the matter back to staff. Motion carried unanimously. Resolution 91-43 CM/Van Nort stated that pursuant to the Calif. Establishing Constitution, the Council is required to hold a Appropriations Public Hearing pertaining to the establishment Limit - FY 91-92 of the appropriations limit for FY 1991. The limit is $11,097,611 and since the budget that was adopted was over $8,000,000, the City would not exceed that amount. M/Forbing opened the Public Hearing. With no testimony offered, M/Forbing closed the Public Hearing. MPT/Kim moved, seconded by C/Werner to adopt Resolution No. 91-43 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1991-92 FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 9 OF TITLE 1 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE, UNDER PROTEST. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCILMEN - Nardella, Papen, Werner, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing NOES: COUNCILMEN - None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None Tentative Minor M/Forbing opened the Public Hearing. Land Division - 1575 S. Valley With no testimony offered, M/Forbing closed the Vista Dr. Public Hearing. C/Werner moved, MPT/Kim seconded to refer the matter back to staff. Motion carried unanimously. Resolution 91-43 CM/Van Nort stated that pursuant to the Calif. Establishing Constitution, the Council is required to hold a Appropriations Public Hearing pertaining to the establishment Limit - FY 91-92 of the appropriations limit for FY 1991. The limit is $11,097,611 and since the budget that was adopted was over $8,000,000, the City would not exceed that amount. M/Forbing opened the Public Hearing. With no testimony offered, M/Forbing closed the Public Hearing. MPT/Kim moved, seconded by C/Werner to adopt Resolution No. 91-43 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1991-92 FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 9 OF TITLE 1 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE, UNDER PROTEST. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: JUNE 18, 1991 PAGE 10 AYES: COUNCILMEN - Papen, Werner, Nardella, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing NOES: COUNCILMEN - None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None Levying Assess. CE/Mousavi stated that on June 4, 1991, Council LLMD 39 & 41 adopted Resolutions pertaining to LLMD 139 and FY 1991-92 141 and set a time for conducting a Public Hearing on the levy of assessments for FY 1991-92. M/Forbing opened the Public Hearing for LLMD #39. With no testimony offered, M/Forbing closed the Public Hearing. Ordinance 3 (1991) Amndng. Sec. 22.60.100 of Title 22 & Adding Sec. 82-7 to L.A. County Code Following discussion, C/Papen moved, C/Werner seconded to set the assessment for District No. 39 at $77 for FY 91-92 and adopt Resolution No. 91-44 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT ON CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 39 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1991-92. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCILMEN - NOES: COUNCILMEN - ABSENT: COUNCILMEN Werner, Nardella, Papen, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing None None M/Forbing opened the Public Hearing for LLMD #41. With no testimony offered, M/Forbing closed the Public Hearing. C/Werner moved, C/Papen seconded to set the assessment for District No. 41 at $228 for FY 91- 92 and adopt Resolution No. 91-45 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT ON CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1991-92. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCILMEN - NOES: COUNCILMEN - ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - Nardella, Papen, Werner, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing None None PD/DeStefano stated that Hogle-Ireland had ana- lyzed existing fee structures and recommended a varied mechanism for City services. Fees included would be those requiring a flat rate for simple services, an hourly -rate basis for more complex projects and, in some cases, an actual cost fee (i.e., services provided by outside consultants). JUNE 18, 1991 PAGE 11 Mr. Larry Hogle, with Hogle-Ireland Development Consulting Group, reported on the analysis con- ducted of Planning, Building & Safety, and Engineering fees now in place. Following Council discussion, M/Forbing opened the Public Hearing. With no testimony offered, M/Forbing closed the Public Hearing. Following discussion, CA/Arczynski presented for 1st reading by title only, Ordinance No. 3 (1991) entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING SECTION 22.60.100 OF TITLE 22 AND ADDING A NEW SECTION 82-7 TO TITLE 27 OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE AS HERETOFORE ADOPTED. C/Papen moved, MPT/Kim seconded to approve for 1st reading by title only and direct staff to schedule second reading and consideration of the resolution establishing fees for the meeting of July 2, 1991. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCILMEN - NOES: COUNCILMEN - ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - Nardella, Papen, Werner, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing None None ANNOUNCEMENTS: M/Forbing announced that on June 24, 1991 at 7:00 p.m. at the Rose Institute, Dr. Heslop will address reapportionment and realigning of State and Federal Legislative Districts and the impact on the S.G. Valley. C/Nardella stated that in lieu of flowers, the family of Joyce Berry requested donations to a memorial fund and that more information could be obtained by contacting staff members at Sir Speedy. AA/Arczynski stated that the Closed Session held earlier was for the purpose of discussing personnel matters and that no action was taken. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Forbing adjourned the meeting in memory of Joyce Berry to Saturday, June 22, 1991 at 7:30 a.m. at Classics Restaurant for a Closed Session regarding Personnel followed by the Economic Workshop. ATTEST: LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk Mayor I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mayor Pro Tem Rim and Councilmember Papen FROM: Linda G. Magnuson, Senior Accountant SUBJECT: Warrant Register, June 28, 1991 DATE: June 27, 1991 Attached is the Warrant Register dated June 28, 1991. Due to the Fiscal Year ending 6/30/91 and the timing the City Council meeting, the Finance Department was authorized to print the warrants as of June 28. The checks will be released in the afternoon of June 28, after the approval by the City Manager and the Finance committee. Please review and sign the attached. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR WARRANT REGISTER APPROVAL The attached listing of warrants dated June 28, 1991 have been audited approved and recommended for payment. Payments are hereby allowed from the following funds in these amounts: FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION 001 General Fund 138 LLAD #38 Fund 139 LLAD #39 Fund 141 LLAD #41 Fund 225 Grand Av. Const Fd TOTAL ALL FUNDS APPROVED BY: Linda G. Mag u4on Senior Accountant AMOUNT $634,126.95 5,517.06 2,838.91 1,002.91 4,900.00 $648,385.83 Phyllis E. Papefi Councilmember /hY r R bert L. Van Nor t Jay C. Kim City Manager Mayor Pro Tem :NVF,.�� CCC N' PRI- NLUMBER NUMBER _!I 7 T_ NLMBER r,Eg G.P':^p -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------- AAA Flao 3 Banner 8811 06/26/91 175179 Open Shelf Wall System 3,354.75 081-4898-6228 8613 86/26/91 115269 +981- 310-1308 0038 06/28/91 889397 Flaos 3 Holders Filing Cabinets-CClk 9 676.31 FLA NNiw NELrlt N (r +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --; ASL Consultants Calif. Council of Corporate Office Engineers b Land Surveyor 041-4238-2320 8#12 138-4536-4000 8085 86/26/91 1216E Landscape Assesmnt May 91 5.199.7x 27.0 06/26/91 0900012418 139-4539-4088 8882 86?26/91 12169 Landscaoe Assesent Mav �Q1 #847 141-4541-4080 0084 @6/26/91 12198 Landscape Assesmnt May 91 950.00 +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED -- 7.649.10 r5r29i 'AA=?.2a: Bee Removers 881-4518-5588 8024 Boys Club/San Gabriel Vly 081-4510-5588 8825 Brea, City of 081-4358-5380 0003 Business Systems Supply Bee Removal-Lvcoming 6/E 52.58 +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED - =:2.50 06/26/91 Px 012' Graffiti Removal -April 91 1.140.08 +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --> 1,140.x0 ?5 2'-l9i 00aG^'2w15 Recreation Svcs. April 91 2311100.@0 ++f+f VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED - 23.708.08 06::28101 0000012416 001-409#-6220 8811 06/26/91 175179 Open Shelf Wall System 3,354.75 081-4898-6228 8613 86/26/91 115269 Filing System Supports 342.63 8#1-4094-6228 0#12 86/26/91 175290 Filing Cabinets-CClk 9 676.31 FLA NNiw NELrlt N (r +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --; 13.375.69 86/26/91 08980124:' Calif. Council of Civil Engineers b Land Surveyor 041-4238-2320 8#12 #6/26/91 10279 Plnq/Zoning Publications 27.88 +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --`.. 27.0 06/26/91 0900012418 Calif. Statewide Communities Authority 01-4898-480 #847 Prgrm Municpl Golf Course 1,000.08 86/26/91 8880013179 ! +++++ VENDOR TOTAL PREPAID ------ 1,000.00 E+ s FRCJ,TRANS F.O. P.O. 1N4'OICE IN'iUS E AC,L-],NT FEuJ.NUMBER NUMBER _N LATE NUMBER IEF 'iP'.'q="CL"iT ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cai:forn,a Cantract ,.a les Association 801-40Y4-25:5 0915 Charlie's Sandwich Shoppe 041-4014-232S 0082 Copy Masters, The 801-4890-2100 4034 66126191 130687 DKS Associates 601-4210-4220 0911 06/28/91 13615 De Stefano, Jim 001-4219-2320 010 441-4216-2325 0930 601-4210-2336 0012 Diamond Bar Business Asoc 061-4096-6366 9013 Diamond Bar Inn 1991-92 Membership Dues 2, W .8? +++++ VENDOP TOTAL GENERATED -- 2.0!8,00 w? Council Mtp 6/18191 +++++ VENDOR. TOTAL GENERATED -- '5.45 86;28:91 •sT«+1ti2u2a Misc. Supplies for copier 347.24 +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED 347,24 86!281pe12,1- Prof. Svcs. Trffc Element 59.291.49 +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED 0,291,a9 86/29/91 0"01242-1 Tapes-Fing Coni 3/91 34,06 Reimb-Mtgs 46.95 Reimb. Ping Conf. 3/91 268.06 +++++ VENDOR. TOTAL GENERATED --? 351.11 06/26/91 0000812423 Rent a Maint. 7/91-6192 70,177.80 +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED -- 70,177.90 86/26/91 8000912424 01-4210-2325 0031 Ben. Plan Mtgs 438.84 ++++} VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED - 438.84 06/26/91 00800/2425 Diamond Bar Stationers 001-4090-1100 0086 06/28191 26795 Fax Paper 13.96 +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED - 13.96 06/28/91 e00e012421 2121 _6= jjE PRCJ.TRANS P.O. P,), INVOICE IN+OI=E ;`e' PtCJ.NUMbER NUMBER N DATE NL,MEER DE:C"TPTT'}N ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E. San Gan. Plana:nc ®a '.rO .,:t ai Duarte 0047 001-+1210-2325 0021'9 0044 06/28/91 Eastman Inc. 0027 86/28/91 9696833 001-41230-1106 4043 06,126/91 7577898 001-4010-1148 8006 86/28/91 7577891 401-4046-1188 4085 06128i91 7577891 661-4456-1106 6062 66!29/917577691 0026 041-4090-1100 0087 06!28/91 7577091 001-4218-1104 6007 46/28/91 7577091 April 22nd Mtq A CalPcly fff+f VENDOR IOTA! HaHS., p- . � n ,yr : a��•'d�Mc:R NUMBER �H :;ATE NUMBS �E3 •I� iTN + _ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- =: o7ex d�l-w21y-2118 801;: ae1-42ia-2118 0012 �PI`u71 P 1}I 44, pp^^ Nit 110Mi 001-4890-2125 882' GTEL 001-4090-2125 0825 Gonsalves 8 Son, Joe A. 081-4498-4000 0006 Grothe, Jack 001-4210-4100 0036 00i-4210-4100 0041 Harmony 3 Assoc. Harmony, Clair 801-4214-4100 0846 001-4216-4100 0846 06128i91 5546113 File Dev-P1nq 06/26/91 5546136 Fila Dev-plug 06/26x91 5546175 Fila Dev-Plnq +ff++ VENDOR 70TAL GENERATED - 9 02 Phone Charges -June 91 2.327,61 ff+++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED -- 2.227.81 ?6 2? a1 0000%'12-:4 Phone Equip Rent -June 91 676.14 +ffff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --'.. 676,14 86126/91 0080812431 Pro Svcs. for July 91 2,100.00 +++f+ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED - 2,100.00 06'26191 0"W2436 Ping Mtg 5/13-6110 Commission Mtg 6/24 fffff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --> 128.00 60.08 160.00 06/26,'91 000801243' +fff+ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED - ., 0.08 06/26/91 9999999990 Ping Mtg 5/13,6110 Plnq Mto 6124 +fff+ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --> 120.00 60.80 160.08 06/26/91 0000012436 Haworth LA interior Systems 001-4090-6228 0810 Office Furniture 3,466.14 ffff+ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --> 3,466.14 06/26/91 0000012439 'k. .SNS PG.J. INVOICE N! TL'E - - ti rk7] NuMBEd NUMBER _N DATE yuM3EA CESCFIPT7.4 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7Kiler 901-2:14-id04 dr54 09:-21i�!-1996 0033 m;nderllter DB _lamas and Associates d01-4990-4410 8081 86/28/91 1086 Hogle-Ireland Development Consulting Group 401-4218-5211 4005 001-4210-5211 4946 Hose Depot Cossercial Account 881-4310-1289 8431 001-4318-1280 8836 HMA Retirement Trust 881-2110-1801 0452 06/26/91 PP12-13 Inland Constructors 225-4525-5502 9861 Inland Valley Oly Bulletn 041-4210-2115 6069 081-4040-2115 0667 661-4040-2115 9666 061-4210-2115 8079 041-4046-2115 0078 001-4040-2115 0669 061-4230-2115 6845 061-4210-2115 0074 641-4236-2115 0004 06126/91 22981 96/28/91 24496 66/28/91 24418 66/28/91 24489 66128/91 24464 66/28/91 24493 06128!91 25602 66/28/91 25666 06/28/91 26123 Dental Press Vision Press fffff 'VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --` Contract Svcs -Apr -June 91 ffff+ VENDOR TOTAL SENEP,ATED Consultng Svcs -May 91 Consulting Svc -April 91 fftff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED -- Operating Supplies Operating Supplies f+fff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --> Def Comp-PP12/13 fftff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --� Grand Driveway Modifictns fffff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED Pub Hrg-Ping Mtg June 4 Pub Hrg-Fees Review Pub Hrg Gann Limitation Pub Hrg-Ping Mtg June 18 Pub Hrg-Ext of Ordinance Pub Notice-Landscpe Maint Resolution 91-32 Pub Hrg-Draft Master Resolution 91-31 ftttf VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --> 4S -12 21..24 Oh. 16 "6;_� 9%+6.pG 968,06 t?�'?•rat 2,292.59 S. 201.54 �.5e9.e9 ?6!28;91999a1�412 151.1'a -2.10 193.69 06/28 V1 �?909124w? 49.00 48.09 86/28!91 9808812444 4,980.88 4,906.00 06/28/91 0000012445 68.75 56.25 24.15 66.15 51.15 31.56 319.50 41.25 317.25 969.15 06/28/91 8000612446 P 4rT .MBEN NjMbER ATE iuMBER DESCR:PT:JN ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ n: . i:.siness Eq,: n�11-4h`'1�-c'2eb �dBS Fuser Lubricant for leroy +t � VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED oILa Jennings Engs:rand d Henrikson 01-4v'i4-4KI 0001 Leaal Syces May 91 412.41 *#** ;'ENDOR TOTAL GENERATED -- 412.41 06/25f�' Jobs Available 001-4234-2115 4002 06/26/91 9112025 Ads Engr Tech/Eng Assoc 93.60 tt*** VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --. 93.60 06i28''1 Kens Hardware 601-4310-2210 0028 06/28/91 49593 Maint. Supplies 1.40 001-4310-2210 0027 06/28/91 51750 Maint. Supplies 3.16 001-4310-2210 0026 06/28/91 51774 Maint. Supplies 30.99 001-4310-2216 0025 06/28/91 52103 Maint. Supplies x.02 001-4310-2210 0024 06/28/91 52229 Maint. Supplies ff {f VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED -- 41.33 06:'28;` 1 00rWl%54 Kotin,Regan S Mouchly In. 001-4095-4260 0001 L.A. County -Sheriff's Dep 001-4411-5401 4036 001-4412-5401 4613 041-4413-5401 0014 L.A. County -Sheriff's Dep 001-4411-5401 6035 Consulting Svc -June 91 8,50x.30 *444* VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --) 8,500.00 06/28/91 900c101245: #6/28/91 82515 Contract Svc -May 91 5,996.91 06/28/91 82515 Contract Services May 91 83.956.11 06/28/91 82515 Contract Svcs -May 91 209,891.78 it*** VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED — 299,845.40 06/281191 40000124:? 06/28/91 62529 Contract Svc -Helicopter t+ff* VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED 67.18 67.18 06128/91 0000012453 L.A.County Public 06/28/91 91100013935 Strip Sign Marking 97.61 06/28/91 91100013934 Bridge Repair 85.31 06/28/91 91100014019 Road Services 12,631.87 06/28/91 91100014066 Store Drain Repair 2,909.40 Yorks Department 001-4510-5506 0044 001-4510-5513 0003 801-4510-5502 0025 001-4510-5512 0005 _hE R _l uE -ATE..... X6'28;"= FS S.?"r,ANS P,3. F.D. 14VDI E INVC1'_E _ 4 ::ANT.K; .NUMBER NUMBER LY DATE NUMBER DESCRIPTION ""„'�"IT =1 _ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _.h.Ccunty Publ : acrks epartment rON INUECI: 8014 N�+1-4118-S5 9 �1:8 06128/91 91100014086 Tree Tr -Mein: 4039 011-4510-5508 4446 06/26/91 91100014091 Parkway Veg!Herbed Ctl 12.900.58 801-4510-5530 0011 06/28/91 91100014308 DBar IV Services 241.05 +4144 VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED -- 28.340.94 L.A.County Public Works Department 801-4518-5501 0025 06/26/91 910003191 Maint. Signals S Lighting f+f+f VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED - LA County Agriculture Coo Weights 6 Measures 1.36-4536-5586 0015 06/26/91 18366 139-4539-5500 0024 06128191 18386 Lewis Engraving Inc. 041-4095-2110 8014 Mac Bride, Dexter 041-42i0-4104 4039 001-4210-4104 0042 Microage 041-4350-6230 0441 Myers, Elizabeth Data Forms Management 001-4210-4040 0914 06/26/91 90811 001-4230-4000 0008 06/28/91 91DBll 041-4319-4090 0949 06/28/91 91DBll Pest Control -Dist 138 Pest Control -Dist 1139 fffff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --> Tile -Pres. D.8 Lions Club +++ff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED - Ping Mtgs 5/13-6/18 Commission Mtg 6124 +4f14 VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --? Recreation Computer Equip ++fff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --;> Ping Cos Mtg-5/13-6/19 Traffic Mtg 6/13 Parks Cos Mtgs-6113 +1ff4 VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED - 3 179. 79 3,119.19 86'2'x91 82w'?':- 169.79 1,18x.96 1,350.15 06/2819/ 00000124:' 20.12 20.12 ;lv 28;,+ 000 CA12'y 120.80 60.04 180.00 06/28/91 000801245? 2.418.14 2,418.14 06128/91 900001245' 342.00 210.04 306.00 918.00 06128f91 080001246 Payroll Transfer 941-1020 0092 Payroll Transfer PP13 35,604.00 06/28191 000000001' fffff VENDOR TOTAL PREPAID ----; 35,609.00 NUMBER Y N -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ?etty Cas. 101-40 0-2325 r1-+ry:i- 3:: A41 5 25 i:i-4bY?1-12A4 00!-4091-[129 wdI-4a'9f-t;iLw +�91-4a91-b369 00!-4995-2!!0 11fi-4L!e-i t�9a 00!-4210-2325 Petty Cash 001-4090-2200 001-4095-1200 001-4095-2110 001-4210-1200 r)01 -423* -1100 ijN63 006 1145 W6 9b29 47!4 1115 W4 0029 0011 9026 0016 9015 0004 Planning Network 001-4210-4220 4818 101-4210-4220 0020 001-4210-4220 0019 Postage By Phone 0x1-4090-2120 0026 Program for Success 001-4350-6230 0002 Public Emp! Retirement System Council Mtq Suoo!:es Notary Bond -Nice CSMFO Mtg Kei's Postage Newsoaoer Subscriotion Storaqe Unit Rent Certificate File-P1nq Mtg-P!annino ffff+ 'VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED Vehicle Maint Certificate Frame Certificates Film-Plna Frames -Pub Notice fffff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --------------------------------------- 4J ��J4 59.021 :.141 22,?3 196.95 x40;29+91 4a0'2_: 5,95 4.10 4.'0 4.56 11.20 31.21 ?6;'2°�.! OaYa±162 06/28/91 90324 DBar GP Phase 2 9.125.10 86/26/91 90432 General Plan 742.50 06128;91 98433 DBar GP Phase 2 14,411.46 fffff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --`. 24.916.96 06/21/91 @000012463 Postage Replenishment 1,000.00 fffff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --? 1.000.00 06%28;91 eaM124a4 66/28/91 4409 Recreation Software 4,216.10 fffff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED - 4,216.10 06/2/191 0880012465 fffff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --� 0.00 06/28/91 9999999999 :N'VC'._E ih'VU1:E . J'ti-.:;R,,.NjOIBER d "°. ,, _N S'A'E NUMRE9 E. P "a ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Public Empl detireser_ °,i 01-x!10-100[ 0090 ^^1-2i10-i00� 0092 Public Empi Retirement System 041-2110-1006 0@93 001-2710-1^08 4094 Radio Dispatch .7orp. 01_W@_4130 0009 San Gabriel Vly Tribune 001-404@-2115 0013 001-4040-2115 0014 001-4040-2115 0015 0@1-4210-2115 00173 W-4210-2115 0012 aa1-421@-2115 0076 001-4210-2115 0011 001-4040-21i5 0011 A01 -4040-211S 0012 001-4210-2115 0015 Sir Speedy 001-4090-1100 0088 Southern Ca. Edison 001-451a-2126 0044 06/26/91 8651 @6/28/91 8712 @6/28191 8860 x6/28/91 8863 46/26/91 8916/8917 06/26/91 8916/6917 06/26/91 8963 06/26191 6226 Employee Contributions Employer Contributions +++++ VENDOR TOTAL PREPAID --- Employer Contr. Employee Contribution +++++ VENDOR TOTAL PREPAID ---- Monthly Service June 91 +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED - Pub Hrg-Gann Limitation Pub Hrg-Landscape saint. Pub Hrg-Title 22 Pub Hrg-CUP 91-4 Pub Hrg-Dvlpsnt Agreement Pub-Hrg Fees Rates Pub Hrq-Ping Comms Mtgs Resolution 91-32 Resolution 91-31 Pub Hro-Tentative Tract +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED Envelopes,Letterhead +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED - Highway i Street Lightng +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --; 4.52�.i3 2.261.58 6: _x. l _.AW'?'.-iA 4.510.16 17.@@ 11.ee 0:x"28:91 18.55 22.04 3S.60 40.tl 38.99 43.65 35.60 2@8.49 208.49 32.21 684.40 06/28/91 300001246' 142.18 142.70 06/28/91 00@001244S 1,01b.76 1.016.18 061281191 0000012469 Southern Ca. Edison 001-4510-2126 0045 Traffic Control -Electric 2,953.31 +f+++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --> 2,953.31 06/28/91 0000012474 - .. a'. MS En t MdEK . a ATE 'i M6E^ ESC? t ° N „r a. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -_ ou.,er a, cc.sOr, el-»�28-c_�G 0423 NI -4 Ji-tiLb �7cuthQrn La. Edison 14.-454#-1126 d@33 Scuthern Ca. Edison 139-4539-2i26 0035 Southern -a. Edison 138-4538-2126 0841 Standard insurance of Ore 0741-2110-1005 0036 Standard insurance of Ore 001-1110-1005 0637 Time Out Personnel Svc. 081-4210-4800 0015 401-4216-400 0016 Traffic Operations O41-4510-5506 0045 66/28/91 1534 06/28/91 1547 66/26/91 91259 Electric -Summit Ridee Electric-Svcamere Cyn +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED Electric Dist 141 +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --. Electric Dist 139 +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED - Electric Dist 136 +++++ 'VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --) Sup Life Ins +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED - Life Ins Premiums +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED - Temp Help Charlene Emersn Teep Svcs -Plug +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED - Addnl pst - inv #91259 +++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --> S2,a1 .57.95 147.5' 50.Oe 68.80 06;128191 00eee1247S 333.59 333.59 06/28/91 0000012476 187.46 535.60 1123.06 06/28/91 0000912477 6.00 6.00 06/28/91 0000012478 .' SUE SITE,.... n�C,uNT KC iJMPEn NuMBE,. .N LATE NUMBER :ESCRIPTION Nu .NT --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- — uS Sorint 01-4230-2125 404: USA Supply 041-4331-2210 0049 46126/91 31431 United Way 841-2118-1649 «1048 Unocal 841-4210-2314 9616 66/26/91 683886 681-4316-2310 6049 66!28/91 663866 041-4690-2310 0015 46/26/91 62191 Walnut Valley Recreation 041-4360-5310 6666 Western City Magazine 041-4230-2115 4003 06/28/91 19042 Willard Marking 041-4690-2200 4010 06/28/91 316116 Lang Distance Svc-Enar S.50 f++++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED -- 5.59 Maint. Supplies-Sycaaore 317. ff+++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --', 37.11 90:'26%�1 :?aslc?,a;al Contributions 48.84 ff+ff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED -- 48.84 96/28:91 994491'Z4°1 fuel -Ping 42.14 Fuel -Parks 39.94 Fuel -Admin 11.44 f+fff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --! 89.'4 90128'"1 Excursions -May 91 2,346.74 ff+ff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --; 2,348.70 06/28/91 4044412483 Pub -Assoc Engr. 240.04 fff++ VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --i 249.44 96/26/91 4490412484 Repair Tieing Stamp 143.24 ff+ff VENDOR TOTAL GENERATED --> 143.20 06/28/91 0000412485 ++fff PREPAID TOTAL -----------> 45,695.89 f+fff GENERATED TOTAL ---------> 682,669.94 fffff TOTAL THIS REPORT -------> 648,385.83 E'-ENLE ----------------------- IGA .`!t. 8@:11 ocz-.. _i Nn CHECK ISSLE CISBURSE G _-`7, C"_ .NC --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL LIRECT PAY REVENUE EP ENSE REVENUE c(PENEE W 6aneral Fund 034112J.9S 46,184.59 58.7.942.36 138LLAG 138 Fend = 5:'.do5,54'.@6 :39LLA8 139 Fund 2,838.91 2.8?8.9i 141LLAD 141 Fund 1,4+02.91 i,y�a..°t 225Srand Ay Const Fu 4,900.@@ 4.900.90 TOTAL------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ALL FUNDS 648,365.63 46,184.59 592,2@1.24 E'-ENLE ----------------------- uH�P.ANT eAPw�tiT ?AYABLt - ------------------------------------------------- 0APR, AN? a"IJ'_-NT --------------- 0 0012411 4:: - FDR�S VOID 0000012412 AAA 1113q i Branner 3.626.99 ON 012413 ASL Consultants 1,649.14 0040012414 Bee Removers 52.54 4400412415 Boys C1uhrSan Gabriel Vly 1.144.04 000#012416 City of Brea 23,744.00 000#012417 Business Systems Supply 13,375.89 0400012418 Calif. Council of Civil 27.40 0000012419 California Contract 2,090.04 0000012420 Charlie's Sandwich 3hoppe 75.45 0000412421 The CopyMas-tern 347.24 000012422 DKS Associates 69,291.09 0404#12423 Jim De Stefano 351.11 0004412424 Diamona Bar Business Asoc 70,177.40 0000012425 Diamond Bar Inn 438.84 0440012426 Diamond Bar Stationers 13.96 0444012427 E. San Gab. Planning Comm 27.00 0440012426 Eastman Inc. 220.19 0000012429 Ewing Irrigation Products 124.63 0000012436 Exxon 159.18 0000012431 Federal Express Corp. 13.00 0000012432 Firestone Stores 14.63 0000012433 Fromex 27.69 0000012434 GTE California 2.327.61 0000012435 STEL 676.14 0006012436 Joe A. Gonsalves E Son 2,100.00 0000012437 Jack Grothe 180.00 0400012438 Clair Harmony 160.00 0000012439 Haworth 3,466.14 0000012440 Heiler 6 Associates 1,806.36 0000012441 Hinderliter De Llamas 990.00 6400012442 Hoyle -Ireland Development 7,500.00 0000012443 Home Depot 193.89 0000012444 ICMA Retirement Trust 40.00 0044612445 Inland Constructors 4.900.00 M012446 Inland Valley Dly Bulletn 969.75 0000012447 int'l Business Equipment 51.93 0000012446 Jennings Engstrand 412.41 0000012449 Jobs Available 93.60 0000012450 rens Hardware 47.93 0000012451 egan 6 Mouchly In. Kotin 81500.00 0400612452 L.A. County -Sheriff's Dep 299,845.40 0000012453 L.A. County -Sheriff's Dep 61,18 0000012454 L.A.County Public Yorks 28,340.94 0000012455 L.A.County Public Yorks 3,179.79 0000012456 LA County Agriculture Com 1,350.15 0000012457 Lewis Engraving Inc. 20.12 tHni N i rARRANT ?A+AOLE � . bihF,AN'. AMn'4' �, ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ^4�riA.2458 Dexter "aZ C-r.ae 18@.80 0i+ei�612459 M:croage 2,418,14 0�i00012460 Elizabeth Myers x18.@9 �4000i2401 Petty Cash 196.45 0400012402 Petty Cash 31.21 00 124o3 Planning Network 24,978,x6 0400012464 Postage Ey Phone 1.008.@0 x000012405 Program for Success 4.216.80 0040012466 Radio Dispatch Corp. 17.00 0000012467 San Gabriel Vlv Tribune 684.40 000012468 Sir Speedy 142.76 000012469 Southern Ca. Edison 1,@16.78 0008012470 Southern Ca. Edison 2,953.31 0000@12471 Southern Ca. Edison 378.35 000@@12472 Southern Ca. Edison 52.91 0@0@012473 Southern Ca. Edison 157.95 0040412474 Southern Ca. Edison 147.57 4000@12475 Standard Insurance of Ore 69.00 0080012476 Standard Insurance of Ore 333.50 000012477 Time Out Personnel Svc. 723.86 0040012476 Traffic Operations 6.00 400012479 US Sprint 5.50 00@9012480 USA Supply 37.77 @0@0012481 United Way 48.84 040012482 Unocal 89.10 0044012483 Walnut Valley Recreation 2,348.88 0440@12484 Western City Magazine 248.80 40@4012485 Willard Marking 103.20 0080012486 VOID - FORMS ALIGNMENT VOID 0000012487 VOID - FORMS ALIGNMENT VOID TOTAL AMOUNT FOR REPORT -------------; 682,689.94 #}#}}##}}t}#+ttt++}}##ttttttttttttt}t#ttitttt}tttttt#+t+t++#tt+tt}t}t} TOTAL AMOUC FOR REPORT - 45,695.69 f f f 0 E;'A E=:: Ea -NECK. :;5U SATE.... 36126/9! vAP,RANT 4LASER ------------------------------------------------------------------- 'SATE PAfEE AMOUNT 13 W6 26r91 Payroll Transfer 35,60.08 13179 96;28/91 Calif. Stateside 11808.88 13188 86/26;91 Public Eimpl Retiresent 4.570.76 13181 8628/91 Public Eapl Retireaent 4,525.13 TOTAL AMOUC FOR REPORT - 45,695.69 AGENDA NO. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DATE: June 18, 1991 MEETING DATE: July 2, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: City Manager FROM: Linda G. Magnuson' Senior Accountant SUBJECT: Treasurer's Statement, May 31, 1991 ISSUE STATEMENT: Per City policy, the Finance department presents the monthly Treasurer's Statement for the City Council's review and approval. RECOMMENDATION• Approve the May, 1991 Treasurer's Statement. BACKGROUND: Submitted for Council's review and approval is the Treasurer's Statement for the month of May, 1991. This statement shows the cash balances for the various funds, with a breakdown of bank account balances, and investment account balances. (Narrative continued on next page if necessary) FISCAL IMPACT: Amount Requested $ N/A Budgeted Amount $ In Account Number: Deficit: $ Revenue Source: D BY: --------------------- ------------------- Ro ert L. Van Nort Andrew V. Arczynski City Manager City Attorney 4"errence L. Belanger Asst. City Manager CITY OF DIAMOND BAR TREASURER'S MONTHLY CASH STATEMENT May 31, 1991 SUMMARY OF CASH: DEMAND DEPOSITS: INVESTMENTS: GENERAL ACCOUNT $123,530.13 PAYROLL ACCOUNT 6,749.95 PETTY CASH ACCOUNT 500.00 TOTAL DEMAND DEPOSITS $130,780.08 TIME CERTIFICATES $0.00 COMMERCIAL PAPER 0.00 L.A.I. F. 7,411,000.00 TOTAL INVESTMENTS 7,411,000.00 TOTAL CASH $7,541,780.08 BEGINNING TRANSFERS ENDING FUND BALANCE RECEIPTS DISBURSEMENTS KIWI): BALANCE GENERAL FUND $3,114,083.47 $1,001,228.71 $732,236.40 $3,383,075.78 TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND 154,387.65 24,174.95 178,562.60 GAS TAX FUND 1,816,887.78 176,379.92 1,023.65 1,994,244.05 TRANSIT TX (PROP A) FD 977,948.93 62,605.00 600,497.11 440,056.82 LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FD 0.00 0.00 FEDERAL AID URBAN FUND (236.98) (236.98) INTEGRATED WASTE MGT FD (5,421.18) 6,654.10 4,277.72 (3,044.80) STATE PARK GRANT FUND 0.00 0.00 LANDSCAPE DIST #38 FD 68,287.62 16,549.31 15,977.71 68,859.22 LANDSCAPE DIST #39 FD 246,697.17 7,449.98 8,540.28 245,606.87 LANDSCAPE DIST #41 FD 112,313.05 12,219.18 22,658.17 101,874.06 GRAND AV CONST FUND 669,144.15 945.11 668,199.04 CHINO HILLS CONST FUND 0.00 0.00 TRAFFIC MITIGATION FEE FD 332,407.37 332,407.37 CAP IMPROVEMENT PRJ FD (18,643.32) 5,671.01 (24,314.33) SB 821 FUND 18,770.50 18,770.50 SELF INSURANCE FUND 137,719.88 137,719.88 TOTALS $7,626,346.09 $1,307,261.15 $1,391,827.16 $0.00 $7,541,780.08 SUMMARY OF CASH: DEMAND DEPOSITS: INVESTMENTS: GENERAL ACCOUNT $123,530.13 PAYROLL ACCOUNT 6,749.95 PETTY CASH ACCOUNT 500.00 TOTAL DEMAND DEPOSITS $130,780.08 TIME CERTIFICATES $0.00 COMMERCIAL PAPER 0.00 L.A.I. F. 7,411,000.00 TOTAL INVESTMENTS 7,411,000.00 TOTAL CASH $7,541,780.08 AGENDA NO. DATE: June 27, 1991 MEETING DATE: July 2, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council VIA: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, Assistant City Manager RE: Proposed Amendment To Recreation Services Contract - Additional Recreation Programs ISSUE STATEMENT: It has been proposed that the Recreation Services Contract, between the City of Diamond Bar and the City of Brea, be amended to add three (3) recreation programs, which include Heritage Youth Sports, Summer Tiny Tots and the American Explorers. RECOMMENDATION• The Parks and Recreation Commission recommends that the City Council amend the contract for recreation services, between the City of Diamond Bar and the City of Brea, to add three (3) recreation programs: Heritage Youth Sports, Summer Tiny Tots and American Explorers. It is further recommended that the City Council amend the Fiscal Year 1991-92 Municipal Budget by increasing anticipated recreation fee revenues in the amount of $34,970 and by increasing the recreation services contract in the amount of $35,045. The City has entered into an agreement, with the City of Brea, for provision of recreation services. The agreement provides for a wide range of recreation programs, including contract classes, adult and youth athletics programs, tiny tots program (school year) and entertainment excursions. (Narrative continued on next page if necessary) FISCAL IMPACT: Amount Requested $ The addition of the three (3) new Budgeted Amount $ recreation programs would result in Account Number No.: $34,970 in added revenues and Revenue Source Fund: $35,045 in added expenditures. REVIEWED BY: Robert L. Van Nort Andrew V. Arczynski City Manager City Attorney Terrence L.Belanger Asst. City Manager RECREATION PROGRAMS PAGE TWO BACKGROUND (con't The adult and youth athletic program did not include revenues or expenditures related to the Heritage Youth Sports program. In the past, the Heritage Park Recreation Council has conducted the youth sports program, in Heritage Park. However, general liability insurance and revenue accounting requirements have led to the conclusion that the Heritage Youth Sports program should be conducted as a City program, under the direction of the City of Brea. The estimated cost of the Heritage Youth Sports program is $17,900. The estimated revenues are $20,800. The City of Brea proposed a Tiny Tot program in its proposal for recreation services. However, the Tiny Tots program proposed was for the school year only (September to June). The City of Brea has proposed a Summer Tiny Tots program. The estimated cost for the nine week program is $3,700. The estimated revenue, utilizing the current hourly rate of $1.71 and presuming thirty-four (34) participants, is $3,250. The breakeven hourly rate would be approximately $1.95. American Explorers is a non-profit company, which provides an exciting variety of trips and excursions, for teenagers (12 to 17). This has not been offered before, to Diamond Bar residents. The estimated revenue for this program is $10,920. The estimated expenditures for this program is $9,830. The City has a contract, for the provision of recreation services, with the City of Brea in the amount of $284,400. The three new programs' cost would be added to the contract, which would result in a total contract amount of $319,445. The City's FY 91-92 budget currently estimates that $130,000 in recreation program revenues will be collected, during the fiscal year. The $34,970 of estimated revenues to be generated by the three new programs would be added to the current $130,000 in estimated recreation program revenues. The total estimated recreation program revenues would be $164,970. The Parks and Recreation Commission has reviewed this proposal and recommends its approval to the City Council. FISCAL IMPACT• The proposed additions to the recreation services contract would result in estimated FY 91-92 revenues of $34,970. An allocation would be required from the FY 91-92 unappropriated General Fund Reserves, in the amount of $35,045. CITU 'I ni) E_AST (-OPLLti DRI%E ITE leu, IMDIA N1O\DBR.C.-\yl AYe - FAX-I-1-vhI-"I I? TO: Terry Belanger Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Supplementary Proposal: Summer Tiny Tots, Heritage Youth Sport, American Explorers FROM: Bob Rose/; Recreation Superintendent DATE: May 22, 1991 As requested, please find attached the proposal to conduct additional programs to supplement the Recreation Services contract between the City of Brea and Diamond Bar: 1) Sumner Tiny Tots 2) Heritage Youth Sports 3) American Explorers Total cost for the three programs is expected to be $35,045. Anticipated revenue is $34,966. This is a difference of only $79, making them very cost effective. Included in the costs are an additional five hours per week of clerical support, which will allow for the additional workload generated by this supplement. This is for your consideration and approval BR:em.sumprop.3 cc: Ret Wixted, Community Services Director Ted Owens, Community Services Manager Kellee Fritzal, Diamond Bar Charlie Janiel, Diamond Bar JOHN A. FOBBING JAY C. KIM PHYLLIS E. PAPEN DONALD C. NARDELLA GARY H. WERNER ROBERT L- VAN NORT Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Councilmernber Councilrnember Counciltnetnber City Manager PROPOSAL -HERITAGE PARK YOUTH SPORTS PROGRAM As requested, below is the City of Brea's proposal to conduct the youth sports program at Heritage Park with the support and cooperation of the Heritage Park Recreation Council. Proposed program will include Youth Baseball (360 participants ages 6-14 years on 30 teams), Youth Flag Football (80 participants in 1st -6th grades on 8 teams), and Youth Basketball (100 participants in 1st -3rd grade on 12 teams). City of Brea will provide for administration and staffing support for entire program (some officiating, no coaching). Heritage Park Recreation Council will provide volunteer support as available (some officiating, all coaching) and will retain control of the operation and profits of the Heritage Park concession stand. Total projected cost for the youth sports program is $17,891. Total revenue is projected at $20,800. Insurance will need to be addressed to insure that liability protection is provided for all three parties. Please see Program Summary attached. BR:em.sports.3db SUMMER TINY TOTS PROPOSAL As requested, please find attached a proposal for conducting the Summer Tiny Tots program at Heritage Park. We propose to maintain the operation of the program as it is currently being conducted. Total cost for a nine week summer program is $3692. Total revenue projected by the participation of 34 students is $3246. This maintains the current charge for attending this program at $1.71 per hour. Please see program summary attached. Revenue (Fees: M,W,F $116 per student T/Th $73 per student) M,W,F 18 students X 67.5 hrs of class time X $1.71/hr - $2073 T, Th. 16 students X 42.5 hrs. of class time X $1.71/hr = 1168 Total Revenue $3246 BR:em.tiny.3db AMERICAN EXPLORERS REVENUE Yosemite Backpacking $169 X 20 Participants - $3,380 Colorado River Canoe Trip $129 X 20 Participants - $2,580 White Water Rafting on American River $149 X 20 Participants = $2980 Bike to Huntington Beach $5 X 20 Participants X 2 Trips - $200 Six Flags Magic Mountain $25.95 X 20 Participants = $519 Fishing Trip $10 X 20 Participants = $200 Beach Days $5 X 20 Participants X 2 Trips = $200 Sea World $24.10 X 20 Participants - $482 Raging Waters $18.95 X 20 Participants . $379 TOTAL REVENUE $10,920 90% x $10,920 - $9,828 BR:em.explore.3db 5/22/91 AGENDA NO. Z_ CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT ----------------------------------------------- DATE: June 26, 1991 MEETING DATE: July 2, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager j FROM: Sid J. Mousavi, City Engineer/Pub 1c r]cs Director SUBJECT: National Flood Insurance Program ISSUE STATEMENT: The City of Diamond Bar is prepared to complete the application process to the National Flood Insurance Program by adopting the required resolution pertaining to flood insurance. RECOMMENDATION• It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution entitled "A resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar applying for flood insurance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency". BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS: As part of the effort to prepare for emergencies of all aspects, the City of Diamond Bar has taken steps to ensure its community and its residents safety and insurance. As a result, the City is currently seeking to complete the necessary requirements that would enable the City to apply for the Flood Insurance Program. On June 19, 1990, the City Council adopted an ordinance entitled "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Adopting Flood Damage Prevention Regulation". However, the necessary work to complete the insurance program was not completed in time. The attached resolution would be the necessary work that would complete the application process for the Flood Insurance Program. FISCAL IMPACT: Amount Requested Budgeted Amount In Account Number: Deficit: $ Revenue Source: (Narrative continued on next page if necessary) $ N/A $ N/A N/A --L�yv V' -i/, y ______________________ `VY �v_—�r�r Robert L. Van Nort Andrew V. Arczynski Terrence L. -Belanger City Manager City Attorney Assistant City Manager FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY O M.B NO 3067-0020 APPLICATION FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM Expires December 31, 1992 1. APPLICATION (City, town, etc.) DATE City of Diamond Bar June 26, 1991 COUNTY, STATE Los Angeles County, State of California 2 OFFICIAL, OFFICE OR AGENCY WITH OVERALL RESPONSIBILITY Tode) HONE NO (Include area Robert L. Van Nort (714) 860-2489 ADDRESS (Street or box no., city, state, zip code) 21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 100, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 3. PROGRAM COORDINATOR (Official, ifdifferent from above, with overall responsible for implementing TELEPHONE NO. (Include area program) code) Sid Jalal Mousavi, City Engineer/Director of Public Work (714) 396-5691 ADDRESS (Street or box no., city, state, zip code) 21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 190, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 4. FIRST FLOOR ELEVATION INFORMATION WILL BE RECORDED BY: TELEPHONE NO (include area code) Department of Public Works (714) 396-5691 ADDRESS (Street or box no., city, state, zip code) 21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 190, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 5- LOCATION OF COMMUNITY REPOSITORY FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION OF FIA MAPS Department of Public Works ADDRESS 21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 190, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 6. ESTIMATES FOR ONLY THOSE AREAS SUBJECT TO FLOOD AND/OR MUDSLIDE AS KNOWN AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION NO. N AREA POPULATION AMILY BUSINEESSLL OTHER STRUCTURES STRUCTURES STRUCTURES 300,000 Sq. Ft. north of the Brea Canyon Road & 4 1 2 3 Lycoming Intersection 7. ESTIMATES OF TOTALS IN ENTIRE COMMUNITY NO. OF 1.4 NO. OF SMALL NO. OF ALL POPULATION FAMILY BUSINESS OTHER STRUCTURES STRUCTURES STRUCTURES 4 1 2 3 FEMA Form 81-11A. JAN 20 REPLACES EDITION OF FEB 97 WHICH It nacnI crc Z.] 3AVNIODNII O IRONBARK At b, 0-38 MAPLE /P aN N`'E R- ui z z F— Lij < LIJ < C) Z.] 3AVNIODNII O IRONBARK At b, 0-38 MAPLE /P aN N`'E R- ui z z AGENDA NO. 4 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT DATE: June 25, 1991 MEETING DATE: July 2, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: City Manager FROM: Joann M. Saul, Financial Management Assistant SUBJECT: Participation in the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Program. ISSUE STATEMENT: The City has received a notice from PERS requiring that a new resolution electing participation under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Program be submitted to continue health benefit coverage as PERS agency. BACKGROUND: On July 18, 1989 the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar passed Resolution 89-66, a Resolution Electing to be Subject to the Public Employee's Medical and Hospital Care Act (PERS Health Benefits Program), effective September 1, 1989. Because the City had not yet signed a contract with PERS to be a member in the retirement system, on August 15, 1989 the City Council passed an additional resolution, Resolution 89-70, electing to be subject to the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act as a special district (as a non -PERS agency). Finally, in October 1989, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 26-1989 authorizing a contract between the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar and the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees' Retirement System which allowed the City and its employees to begin contributions into the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) effective November 18, 1989. The passage of Ordinance No. 26-1989 voided the City of Diamond Bar's "special district" classification and reclassified the city as a "PERS" agency. However, a resolution was never passed which would elect coverage in the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act (health benefits program) as a PERS agency. (Narrative continued on next page if necessary) FISCAL IMPACT: NOT APPLICABLE Amount Requested $ 0 Budgeted Amount $ In Account Number: Deficit: $ Revenue Source: -- ------------------ -- - ---- -- _ Nww Robert L. Van Nort Andrew V. Arczynski Terrence L. Belanger City Manager City Attorney Assistant City Manager Page Two RECOMMENDATION• It is respectfully requested that Your Honorable Body adopt the following Resolution transmitted herewith: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA ELECTING TO BE SUBJECT TO PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL CARE ACT. AGENDA NO. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT DATE: June 20, 1991 MEETING DATE: July 2, 1991 To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager d�?G�' ---� 04 FROM: Sid Mousavi, City Engineer/Director of Pub c Works SUBJECT: City of Diamond Bar Standard Drawing No. ST -911 Trench Repavement Section ISSUE STATEMENT Utility companies and various construction projects often have a need to trench the City streets for utility connections. Upon completion of these connections the trenches must be patched using a method that will facilitate safe driving conditions and normal paving life expectancy. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution for use of City of Diamond Bar Standard No. ST -911, Trench Repavement Section. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The City of Diamond Bar Department of Public Works is working to improve driving conditions within the City. In order to maintain adequate street paving a trench repavement method using an additional asphalt concrete overlay is being recommended. Over time, normal trench patching will settle, creating depressions in the pavement, causing pavement breakdown and possible tire damage to motorists. The use of an additional asphalt concrete overly, as shown on the proposed Trench Pavement Section, will create a smooth trench replacement transition and will alleviate the need for extensive street repatching. FISCAL IMPACT: Amount Requested $N/A Budgeted Amount $N/A In Account Number: N/A Deficit: $ N/A Revenue Source: N/A C' C'�Cfit�tL v ------ Robert L. Van Nort Andrew V. Arczynski Terrence L. Belang City Manager City Attorney Assistant City Manager I11T* 414641b101A Lem A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING THE CITY PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS FOR TRENCH REPAVEMENT SECTIONS. A. Recitals. (i) The City of Diamond Bar has heretofore adopted standards for public works construction which standards require amendment from time to time to reflect new techniques for public works construction. The City Engineer has prepared and provided to this Council a report pertaining to upgraded standards for trench repavement sections within City streets. (iii) The City Council desires to amend the City public work standards by the adoption of a new trench repavement standard. (iv) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby find, determine and resolve as follows: 1. In all respects as set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution. 2. The City Council hereby adopts, as a portion of the City's Public Works Construction Standards, a new Standard No. 91-1, Trench Repavement Section Standard, as set forth in 1 Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. 1991. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this day of July, Mayor I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of July, 1991, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar C\1011\PMESO\DB 5.1 2 NOTE 1. Pavement replacement section shall be as shown on the approved improvement plan. Minimum section shall be 3" A.C. or existing pavement thickness plus 1' 'whichever is greater on 611 aggregate base. Existing Pavement NOTE 2 Asphalt concrete overlay shall be at least 60 but not more than 120 calendar days after trench paving. Overlay dimensions shall be as follows: A. Thickness — 1" maximum B. Width — Five times trench width or ten feet, whichever is greater. ,Asphalt Concrete overlay (See Note 2) Trench Paving (See Note 1) r - Trench W -371R ITY ENGINEER R.C.E. DATE LED WITH CITY CLERK DATE: DWG. NO. ST — 911 EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Office of The City Engineer H REPAVEMENTSECTION Base Material (See Note 1) Compacted backfill as per Section 306-1.3.6 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction Trench W -371R ITY ENGINEER R.C.E. DATE LED WITH CITY CLERK DATE: DWG. NO. ST — 911 EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Office of The City Engineer H REPAVEMENTSECTION ACDNDA NO. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT DATE: June 26, 1991 MEETING DATE: July 2, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: City Manager FROM: Andrew V. Arczynski, City Attorney SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 3 (1991) ISSUE STATEMENT: On June 18, 1991, the City Council conducted the first reading by title only of Ordinance No. 3 (1991) which amends provisions of the County Code authorizing adoption of fees by resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends waiver of full reading, second reading by title only and adoption of Ordinance No. 3 (1991). (Narrative continued on next page if necessary) FISCAL IMPACT: Amount Requested $ Budgeted Amount $ In Account Number: Deficit: $ Revenue Source: REV rED ------ Z Robert L. Van Nort Andrew V. Arczynski Terrence L. Belanger City Manager City Attorney Assistant City Manager AGENDA NO -)Z CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT DATE: June 26, 1991 MEETING DATE: July 2, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager FROM: Sid Mousavi, City Engineer/Directo�fPublic Works SUBJECT: Sanitary Sewer System for The Country ISSUE STATEMENT In response to inquiries regarding the sanitary sewer services for approximately 148 lots within The Country, staff has investigated the possibility of forming a special assessment district. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council consider the following options available to the City and direct staff as necessary: 1. Authorize staff to use $25,000 of the City's General Fund monies to conduct the feasibility study. The City's General Fund account can be reimbursed only if an assessment district is formed. 2. Direct staff to inform the affected property owners to pay for the feasibility cost. 3. Authorize staff to use the General Fund monies only if the property owners can sign a petition indicating that they will reimburse the City if an assessment District is not formed. FISCAL IMPACT: Amount Requested $N/A Budgeted Amount $N/A In Account Number: N/A Deficit: $ N/A Revenue Source: N/A RE 1 WED Robert L. Van Nort City Manager (Narrative continued on next page) ---------------------- Andrew V. Arczynski City Attorney t. Terrence L. Belanger Assistant City Manager Page Two June 26, 1991 Sanitary Sewer System for The Country BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS Approximately 148 lots within The Country are not connected to the sewer system and currently rely on septic tanks. On May 21, 1991, the City Council directed staff to investigate this matter and report back to the Council. Staff has consulted with Jones Hall Hill and White, a professional law corporation and they have provided the attached report which includes the options available to the City. As it is outlined in this report, in order to utilize a petition to have the City commence the assessment proceedings, the costs of acquisitions, improvements, and incidental expenses must be determined prior to completing the petition. It is therefore required that some early efforts at determining the costs be made. The feasibility study must address the constructability of the project, number of pump stations required, estimated size and length of the sewer lines needed, easement problem, slope stability issues, maintenance, financing methods, and ultimately, the cost estimate for design, construction, construction management, administration, and other incidental expenses. The cost of the feasibility study is estimated to be $25,000 at this time. Per City Council's direction staff has also contacted the State Water Resources Control Board to find out if any grants or low interest loans, are available. The City has been informed that the last clean water grant was issued by the State in 1985 and no other granting cycle has been approved since then. Currently, the State has two loan programs. The first loan is the Water Quality Control Fund which requires 50% of the residents' vote indicating that they accept the loan. Further, it is required that residents have a median income of less than $25,000. The second loan is called the State Board Revolving Fund Loan Program. This program appears to be the option that may be considered for The Country's project. The interest rate on this loan is 3.5%. However, the project must first qualify for the loan and then be recommended by the State Water Regional Board in order to be placed on the State's priority list. JoxES HALL HILL & WHITE, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW CHARLES F. ADAMS HAROLD W. HANK* STEPHEN R. CASALEOOIO DRUCE R. COLEMAN THOMAS A. DOWNEY ANDREW G. HALL. JR. KENNETH I. JONES WILLIAM H. MADISON R. WADE NORRIS** DAVID J. OSTER BRIAN D. QUINT PAUL J. THIMMIO SHARON STANTON WHITE • ADXMXD TO NEW YORK AND DISTRICT OP OOLummA RAR9 ONLY • • ADUTTTED TO OROROrA RAR ONLY Mr. Robert L. Van Nort City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100 Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177 June 3, 1991 FOUR EMBARCADERO CENTER NINETEENTH FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 (415) 391-5780 FACSIMILE (415) 391-5784 (416) 391-5785 (415) 956-6308 ROBERT J. HILL (1922-1988) Re: City of Diamond Bar - Sewer System Assessment District No. 91-1 Dear Bob: This replies to your inquiry about forming a special assessment district to provide sanitary sewer services to residences in the area of The Country development in the City of Diamond Bar. I understand that the area in question does not now have sewer service and relies on septic systems, some of which are failing. Further, the cuiTent thinking of the public works department is to provide sewer service by connecting the area to an existing sewer trunk and to use special assessments levied against the various lots in the area to finance the project. To this end, I offer the following: 1. Authority for Assessment District. There are three basic laws that we need to consider in creating an assessment district: a. The Special Assessment Investigation Limitation and Majority Protest Act of 1931 (Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code, beginning at Section 2800) ("Division 4"). This law requires the City to conduct a separate hearing based on a report to determine if there is enough value in the lands to be assessed to allow the assessment. This is an expensive, time consuming and sometimes fruitless process (if there is a majority protest as defined in Section 2930) and is usually avoided using one the exceptions found in Division 4. The most common exception is a petition from the owners of the lands to be assessed (Section 2804 (a) (3)). The petition waives compliance with Division 4, asks the Council to begin the assessment district process and shows the Council the interest (or lack of same) of the landowners for the project. Unless one owner holds 40% or more of the land to be assessed, the petition must be signed by owners holding at least 60% of the area. The second common exception is for sewer work where the local health officer recommends the project as a health measure (Section 2808). This approach is usually restricted to serious health problems (the presence of raw sewage in standing water) and needs a 4/5ths Council vote to begin the proceedings. Mr. Robert L. Van Nort June 3, 1991 Page 2 Enclosed for your reference are: (i) Form of Petition. This is the basic petition format for use in seeing if 60% or better of the ownership of the land in the proposed district are willing to have the City commence the proceedings. The petition must be completed by inserting in section 3 the estimated total dollar amount you want to assess (not necessarily the total project cost) in the proposed district. This is a requirement of state law that forces the City to make some early efforts at determining the costs. Further, the description of work (Exhibit A) must be completed to further define the streets on which lots to be served are located. Finally, the petition must be completed to show the County assessor parcel number of the property, the name of the record owner and be dated and signed by the record owner. The petition may be duplicated and signed in counterparts and this is the usual practice (to avoid destruction of the single petition). (ii) Resolution Requesting Health Officer Recommendation For Skecial Assessment Proceedings. If you decide that the petition route is not suitable, and wish to pursue the Health Officer method of avoiding Division 4, the Council should adopt this resolution. Before it is adopted, you should have on file with the City Clerk a copy of the proposed boundary map of the assessment (Section 3110 and following of the Streets and Highways Code cover details) because a copy of this map must be sent to the Health Officer. Further, Exhibit A to this resolution is the same as for the petition and, so, it must be completed. (iii) Form of Health Officer Letter. When the Health Officer receives a copy of the resolution (item (ii)) and a copy of the boundary map, he (or she) prepares this letter on his (or her) official letterhead and sends it back to the City. This letter tracks the language of the statute and should follow that language. b. The Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 (Sections 10000 et seq. of the Streets and Highways Code) (the "13 Act"). Assuming we have found a way around Division 4 (petition or health), we turn to this law for the procedure to create the assessment district and levy the assessments. Under this law, the Council adopts a resolution of intention that formally begins the process, directs the preparation of the required engineer's report and evidences the intention of the Council to levy assessments and issue assessment bonds. The engineer's report contains the estimate of the cost of constructing the sewer system, city administration and bonding costs and an apportionment or spread of those costs on each property in the proposed district based on the benefit each property gets from the improvements. This is the benefit assessment. When the report is ready, the 13 Act requires the Council to set and hold a public hearing on the formation of the assessment district, the costs of the project and the assessments. Each property owner is required to be given written notice of the hearing and the amount of the proposed assessment on his or her property. At the hearing, the Council receives an oral presentation from staff about the project and the financing and considers any protests (written or oral) and hears proponents. When the hearing is closed, the Council may direct changes to the work or assessment (usually requiring another hearing), confirm the district as -is and levy the assessments or abandon the whole thing: If there is a majority protest (meaning owners of more than half the land area in the proposed district have Mr. Robert L. Van Nort June 3, 1991 Page 3 filed valid, written protests), the Council can continue only if it overrules the protest by a 4/5ths vote. If the Council decides to continue, it adopts a resolution confirming the assessments, directing certain recordings and the giving of written notice to each landowner of the amount of the confirmed assessments and their chance to pay all or part in cash for at least 30 days. After this cash payment period expires, the Council receives the list of assessments remaining unpaid and may authorize bonds. The proceeds of the cash payments and bonds together with any City contribution pay for the construction of the project. c. The Improvement Bond Act of 1915 (Sections 8500 et seq. of the Streets and Highway Code) (the "15 Act"). The 13 Act discussed above is only a procedure law that provides for the assessments. The 15 Act is only a bond law that specifies the nature of the bonds. Most assessment bonds in California today are of the 15 Act type because they are not direct obligations of the City (only of the assessed property), are protected by a special reserve fund (from bond proceeds) and may be easily prepaid once issued. 2. Nature of the Assessment District. The assessment district is not a separate legal entity. Rather, it is an area of land that has been determined through the hearing process to be specially benefitted by a public improvement and specially assessed or charged to pay for that improvement. The sewer system proposed here clearly falls into this definition. 3. Nature of the Assessment Obligation. Once confirmed, the assessment becomes a fixed dollar lien against each property assessed. Unless it is paid off during the cash payment period, the lien continues for ten years unless bonds are issued against it before that time. The assessment is against the land only and is not the personal obligation of the landowner. If the land is sold, there is no requirement in the assessment laws that it be paid on sale. If bonds are issued, the City places an amount on the property tax bill of each property in each year to pay principal and interest on the bonds. If an installment of taxes is not paid, only that installment becomes delinquent and there is no acceleration of the entire unpaid amount. Typically, the City will covenant in the bond documents to judicially foreclose any defaulted installments (there being no general fund liability for these bonds). If a landowner wishes, the outstanding assessment at bond may be paid off at any time (by paying remaining principal, a small amount of interest, prepayment penalty, if any, and city costs) and clear the land of the obligation. Once the bonds are paid off, the charge on the tax bill disappears. 4. Nature of the Assessment Bonds. The bonds are sold to bond investors through a bond underwriter chosen by the City. Since the project is for a governmental purpose, interest on the bonds is fully tax exempt to the investors (subject to certain federal exceptions for certain investors). This means that the interest rates on the bonds are cheaper than ordinary borrowings on the private market. It is this feature, coupled with economies of doing an entire project at one time, that arguably makes it cheaper for an individual property owner to finance, over time and on his or her tax bill, the installation of sewer facilities to serve his or her land. 5. What Can be Financed. The assessment district laws allow the financing of improvements that are owned, operated or maintained by the City or a public sewer district, such as a sewer system. In this case, the sewer trunks, mains , manholes and laterals to the individual property lines can be included in the financing. The individual connections beyond the property Mr. Robert L. Van Nort June 3, 1991 Page 4 lines and the abandonment measures for existing septic tanks cannot be financed and are the responsibility of the individual landowners. Also included in the financing are the costs of engineering, construction management, city administration, legal and bond costs. It must be noted that the last costs usually include a reserve fund and bond discount (required to sell the bonds in the market). If a property owner pays off the assessment during the cash payment period, he or she would receive a rebate equal to his or her property's share of the final reserve and discount costs (since these costs relate only to bonds). 6. Role of the City. The City Council is responsible for conducting the proceedings and adopting the required resolutions needed to form the district, order the assessment and the work and issue the bonds. The engineering for the project is also the City's responsibility. This takes two forms. The first is the engineering needed to complete plans and specifications to allow the project to be bid and the second is the engineering needed to prepare the cost estimates for the assessment district engineer's report. At the discretion of the City, either or both of the these duties may be hired out to a private consulting engineer. Finally, City staff and consultants may conduct informal information meetings with property owners as the project moves forward from early stages to completion to keep the residents informed and to answer questions. 7. Doing the Work. The sewer improvements are public works and require compliance with the usual public contract laws. When the financing uses an assessment district, the best approach is to try to receive bids on the work by the time the public hearing on the assessment district is held. While the assessment process may (and usually is) begun on cost estimates, the assessed owners of the land and the City Council are better served if the most final costs available (the apparent low bid) are known when the hearing is conducted. It is important to note that if estimates are used to start the process, they should be conservatively high to allow for reduction at the hearing. If the estimates are artificially low, the assessment law will force use to hold further hearings to increase assessments against the actual costs. The contract award should await the expiration of the 30 -day cash payment period and the authorization of bonds (to be sure that money will be available to pay for the work). Please call me with questions or comments. Very truly yours, Stephen R. Casaleggio SRC: jeb Enclosures cc: William P. Curley III, City Attorney, w/encl. 11031-01 ]}iF wota. 63/91 PETITION FOR IMPROVEMENTS UNDER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ACTS AND WAIVER OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER DIVISION 4 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE OF CALIFORNIA CITY OF DIAMOND BAR (Sewer System Assessment District No. 91-1) The Honorable City Council City of Diamond Bar 21660 E. Copley Drive, Ste. 100 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Members of the Council: The undersigned respectfully petition and show that: 1. They are all of the owners (as shown on the Assessor's Roll, or in the Assessor's records, of the County of Los Angeles, on which general taxes are collected) of more than 60% in area of the assessable property within the proposed assessment district hereinafter described. 2. You undertake special assessment proceedings and issue assessment bonds for the proposed acquisitions and improvements described in Exhibit A attached hereto. 3. You assess the costs of said acquisitions and improvements, which together with the incidental expenses of said proceedings are in the total estimated amount of $ , upon the proposed district benefited thereby, the boundaries of which are shown on a map to be filed in the office of the City Clerk. 4. This waives the taking of proceedings under Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code of California in regard thereto. They understand that in doing so they are waiving certain rights to protest against and stop the formation of the proposed assessment district. 5. They do not waive preparation of a report showing the estimate of the costs of the acquisitions and improvements divided among the lands benefited and the conduct by you of a public hearing on that report after notice to us. M , 1991 Respectfully submitted, THE PROPERTY IS County of Los Angeles THE RECORD TITLE OWNER IS: Assessor's Parcel No(s).: Print or Type Name(s) 0 Title: MMSACjeb 67/9 t EXHIBIT A CITY OF DIAMOND BAR (Sewer System Assessment District NO. 91-1) DESCRIPTION OF WORK Within the City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, State of California, the construction and acquisition of the following public improvements, including the acquisition of all lands, easements, rights-of-way, licenses, franchises, and permits and the construction of all auxiliary work necessary and/or convenient to the accomplishment thereof, (including but not limited to the removal and disposal of toxic materials related to the public improvements), in accordance with plans and specifications to be approved by the City of Diamond Bar: The construction of public sanitary sewer improvements, including all mains, laterals, manholes, sewer pumps, fittings and appurtenances to serve the area within the development known as "The Country" and in and along the following streets: 14031-01 MWSRCjeb 6WI RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION REQUtSTING HEALTH OFFICER RECOMMENDATION FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS City of Diamond Bar (Sewer System Assessment District No. 91-1) RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Diamond Bar (the "City") that: WHEREAS, it is the intention of this Council to undertake proceedings pursuant to appropriate special assessment and assessment bond acts for the making of acquisitions and improvements requisite for the sanitary sewer facilities described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, it is intended that the costs and expenses of said acquisitions and improvements be made chargeable upon an assessment district, the exterior boundaries of which are shown on a map thereof on file in the office of the City Clerk, to which reference is hereby made for further particulars. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Health Office for. the City of Diamond Bar be requested to recommend said proceedings as necessary as a health measure, and the the City Clerk cause a certified copy of this resolution and a copy of said boundary map to be delivered to said Health Officer I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar at a meeting held on the day of , 19_ by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: ATTEST: City Clerk 14071-01 JHHW SRCj.b 6'3 91 EXHIBIT A CITY OF DIAMOND BAR (Sewer System Assessment District NO. 91-1) DESCRIPTION OF WORK Within the City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, State of California, the construction and acquisition of the following public improvements, including the acquisition of all lands, easements, rights-of-way, licenses, franchises, and permits and the construction of all auxiliary work necessary and/or convenient to the accomplishment thereof, (including but not limited to the removal and disposal of toxic materials related to the public improvements), in accordance with plans and specifications to be approved by the City of Diamond Bar. The construction of public sanitary sewer improvements, including all mains, laterals, manholes, sewer pumps, fittings and appurtenances to serve the area within the development known as "The Country" and in and along the following streets: 1103101 JflHW3RCjeb [To Be Prepared On Health Officer's Letterhead] [DATE] Honorable City Council City of Diamond Bar 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Re: City of Diamond Bar -Sewer System Assessment District No. 91-1 Members of the Council: &"I I am acquainted with the (sanitary sewer, storm drainage and/or domstic water) project which you propose to undertake pursuant to special assessment and assessment bond proceedings, or other appropriate proceedings, which protect is more particularly set forth in your resolution requesting my recommendation, and I am familiar with the area to be served by the project as shown on the boundary map referred to in said resolution. I recommend, as necessary as a health measure, that you undertake proceedings pursuant to appropriate special assessment and assessment bond acts of this state, or other appropriate proceedings, as you may determine, for the making of said acquisitions and improvements. This recommendation extends to such changes and modifications therein as you shall find to be proper or advisable, in the manner provided by law. Yours respectfully, Health Officer City of Diamond Bar AGENDA NO. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT DATE: June 26, 1991 MEETING DATE: July 2, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Dir 14P SUBJECT: Development Agreement No. 91-2 Continued from June 4, 1991 ISSUE STATEMENT: The City Council is considering approval of a Development Agreement to permit a self-service gas station, an automated car wash, six bay automotive detail facility, offices, and a restaurant for property located at 22000 Golden Springs Drive. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council continue the public hearing to August 6, 1991. On June 4, 1991, the council opened the public hearing on the project. The public hearing was continued to July 2 in order for the applicant, Toran Construction, to respond to a variety of project concerns. The applicant needs more time to prepare and submit the necessary information in response to the council concerns. In addition, staff will need time to review the submitted data and prepare a report for Council consideration. ATTACHMENT: Letter from Gary D. Clapp dated June 27, 1991 FISCAL IMPACT: Amount Requested Budgeted Amount N/A In Account Number: Deficit: Revenue Source: BY: Rofiert L. Van Nort Andrew V. Arczynski Terrence L. Belanger City Manager City Attorney Assistant City Manager Paye 2 Development Agreement No. 91-2 The applicant is pursuing letters of confirmation of intent from Marie Callender's, Hoff's Bar & Grill, Tony Roma's, and other restaurants of this caliber to occupy the restaurant pad. The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment. There will not be a significant effect in this case because mitigation measures shall be incorporated into this proposed project and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. The project was first presented to the Planning Commission on February 25, 1991 at a public hearing. At this hearing the applicant, Toran Development and Construction, was asked to address the concerns of the Planning Commission and return on March 25, 1991. On March 25, 1991, after careful deliberation, the Planning Commission recommended denial. As a result, the Applicant withdrew the proposed project. The applicant, presented a newly designed project to the Planning Commission at a public hearing on May 25, 1991. This newly designed project addressed the concerns that the Planning Commission had about the original proposed project which was presented to them on March 25, 1991. On May 13, 1991, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Development Agreement 91-2 with conditions. A complete analysis of the proposal contained within the Planning Commission staff report (attached) dated May 10,1991. RECOMMENDATION• The Planning Commission recommends approval of the Negative Declaration and the Development Agreement with the listed conditions. Attachments: lnpi mu un- l_ CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT DATE: May 29, 1991 MEETING DATE: June 4, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager FROM: James DeStefano, Director of Plann SUBJECT: Development Agreement No. 91-2. A request for a Development Agreement to allow the sale of gasoline, including self-service; automated car wash; six bay automotive detail facility, corporate offices for the developer and a restaurant, not to include take-out. BACKGROUND: The applicant is Gary Clapp of Toran Development and Construction. The property owner is Arciero and Sons, Incorporated. The proposed project location is 22000 Golden Springs Drive. Generally, the uses surrounding the subject site are to the North, the Pomona Freeway; to the South, C -M -BE -UC (Commercial -Manufacturing - Billboard Exclusion -Unilateral Contract) zone; to the West, the Pomona Freeway and C -2 -BE zone; to the East, Open Space (OS)zone which consists of a golf course. The proposed project is in a C -2 -BE (Neighborhood Business, Billboard Exclusion) zone. The applicant is requesting a Development Agreement in order to permit a variety of land uses on the site which include a car wash. An automatic car wash is not permitted in this zone by right or by Conditional Use Permit. The proposed project is to be located on a vacant 4.70 acre triangular shaped parcel. The proposed project area to be covered by structures is about 19,050 square feet. The structures will contain an automatic car wash islands, six detail bays and corporate offices, and containing the six detail bay and corporate offices FISCAL IMPACT: Amount Requested $ Budgeted Amount $ In Account Number: Deficit: $ Revenue Source: xB1 Ell V - - '--C--- ---------------------- Robert L. Van Nort Andrew V. Arczynski City Manager City Attorney and self-service gasoline,. a restaurant. The structure will be two stories. Terrence L. Belanger Assistant City Manage AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: REPORT DATE: MEETING DATE: CASE/FILE NUMBER: APPLICATION REQUEST: PROPERTY LOCATION: APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: BACKGROUND: City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report May 10, 1991 May 13, 1991 Development Agreement 91-2 A request for a Development Agreement to allow the sale of gasoline, in- cluding self-service; automated car wash; six bay automotive detail fa-- cility, corporate offices for the developer and a restaurant, not to include take-out. 22000 Golden Springs Drive Gary Clapp Toran Development and Construction 23441 Golden Springs Drive Diamond Bar, California 91765 Arciero & Sons, Inc. 950 North Tustin Avenue Anaheim, California 92807 The applicant, Toran Development & Construction is proposing a project consisting of a restaurant, an automatic car wash, a two story struc- ture to house six bays, an automotive detail facility on the first sto- ry and corporate offices of the applicant on the second story, and gas- oline island for self-service gasoline sales. The proposed project is in a C -2 -BE (Neighborhood Business, Billboard Exclusion) zone. The restaurant and offices are permitted in this zone by right. The automotive detail facility is permitted as an accessory use in the C -2 -BE zone. An automatic car wash is not permitted in this zone by right or by Conditional Use Permit. Therefore, a Development Agreement is necessary to allow this use in the C -2 -BE zone. The Com- munity Plan designation is commercial for this site. Generally, the following uses surround the subject site: to the North is the Pomona Freeway; to the South is C-M-BE-U/C (Commericial-Manufac- turing-Billboard Exclusion - Unilateral/Contract) zone; to the West is the Pomona Freeway and C -2 -BE zone; to the East is Open Space (OS) zone which consists of a golf course. AGENDA ITEM May 13, 1991 Page Two This proposed project was first presented to the Planning Commission on February 25, 1991 at a public hearing. Following the direction of the Planning Commission, Toran Development and Construction was asked to address the issues of traffic and safety, architectural style, con- venience store/snack shop, and the use of a development agreement as the method of approval for this project to allow the use of an automat- ic car wash in a C -2 -BE zone. On March 25, 1991, Toran Development and Construction addressed the Planning Commission concerning the above mentioned issues. After care- ful deliberation, the Planning Commission recommended denial. As a result, Toran Development and Construction withdrew the proposed pro- ject. At this time, Toran Development and Construction is proposing a newly designed project. This newly designed project will address the issues that the Planning Commission had concerning the last proposed project presented on March 25, 1991. APPLICATION ANALYSIS: The newly proposed project is located on a vacant 4.70 acre triangular shaped parcel. This includes a pad area of approximately 106,000 square feet and slope area on the perimeter of the property. Grading on this site will result in the moving of approximately 250 cubic yards of soil to be balanced on the site. The proposed project area to be covered by structure is about 19,050 square feet. The landscaping and open space will equal approximately 86,000 square feet. The restaurant structure will be approximately 6,500 square feet and will have seating for 175. The car wash struc- ture will equal 7,600 square feet. The office structure and six detail bays will equal 5,850 square feet and will be two stories. The car wash equipment will be automatic, with one shift - 8 am to 6 pm, and will have twenty-five (25) employees to operate it and the de- tail facility. Unocal 76 gasoline sales will be self-service, open twenty-four (24) hours a day, with three (3) shifts, and one(1) atten- dant for each shift. It is estimated that the restaurant will have thirty-two (32) employees and the hours of operation are not confirmed. The architectural style of the proposed project is English Carriage House. The architectural styles in the City of Diamond Bar are eclec- tic. Although the architectural style of the proposed project is not consistent with the Gateway Corporate Center which will be the backdrop for this project, the applicant believes it will be in harmony with the country living in Diamond Bar. AGENDA ITEM May 13, 1991 Page Three The materials used for the exterior of the structures of this proposed project are Sierra tile, Vermont blend for the roof and La Habra stucco and Belgian Castle Rock for the walls. The wood facia will be painted the color of limestone and Del Piso Endicott Brick for the chimneys. On designated areas of the site plan (Exhibit "A-1" and "A-211), fenc- ing will be provided. Materials used for fencing will be rough wood painted white, Belgian Castle Rock,and red brick. Gas lantern type lighting will be provided on rock pillars of the fencing. A complete sign program for this project has not been submitted. The applicant will be required to submit a complete sign program to the Planning Department of the City of Diamond Bar for review and approval by the Planning Commission. The landscape requirements in a C-2 zone is a minimum of ten percent (10%) of the parcel area. The landscaping for this site as proposed meets this ten percent (10%) requirement. On the final set of landscape plans presented to the City for review and approval, the staff would like the applicant to indicate the place- ment of 24 inch box trees throughout the parking area of the site. The staff feel that these trees would be a natural aesthetic resource which would help define the City. Not only is this important considering the location of the site, but it is also important ecologically. The proposed site plan indicates fifty-eight (58) parking spaces for the restaurant with an occupancy load of one hundred seventy-five (175); eighteen (18) parking spaces for the car wash: ten (10) parking spaces for the offices. All parking spaces will have a minimum back-up area of twenty-six (26) feet. The applicant is pursuing letters of confirmation of intent from Marie Callendar's, Hoff's Bar & Grill, Tony Roma's and other restaurants of this caliber to occupy the restaurant structure on this site. As of the date on this staff report, the only letter of intent submitted to the City is from Seven Fortune's Denny's Restaurant. Three driveways are proposed for this project. Two of the proposed driveways are located on Golden Springs Drive. One driveway is an exit only. The other driveway which is the main driveway, is two lanes, and for entrance only. The third driveway is at the west end of the sub- ject site, is two lanes, and exit only. The three driveways as desig- nated on the site plan Exhibit "A-111, will allow traffic to flow is a safe and systematic manner, allowing for easy ingress and egress for large fuel trucks and automobile as well as for the other uses on the subject site. The driveway which is planned for an "entrance only" will need to have proper signs installed to inform drivers that they should exit from one of the other two project driveways. AGENDA ITEM May 13, 1991 Page Four To accommodate the proposed driveway opposite Gateway Center Drive,the necessary signal modifications will need to be installed. When the signal modification is designed the appropriate striping and signing information will need to be incorporated with the modification. The median opposite the left -turn land into the subject site will need to be modified and lengthened to discourage vehicles from exiting from the "entrance only" driveway. This lengthened median section should be designed to allow vehicles, including trucks, to safely make a left turn into the site. The driveway width at this location should be de- creased to thirty (30) feet to discourage exiting traffic movement. The two rows of parking which are parallel to Golden Springs Drive be- tween the project entry and the restaurant exit will need to be angled. This angled parking will remind restaurant patrons that they should exit at the west driveway. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment. There will not be a signifi- cant effect in this case because mitigation measures shall be incorpo- rated into this proposed project and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. NOTICED OF PUBLIC HEARING: This item has been advertised in the San Gabriel Valley Tribute and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. Notices were mailed to prop- erty owners within a three hundred foot radius of the project site on April 29, 1991. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Development Agreement 91-2 with conditions as listed. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit "A-1" Exhibit "A-2" Exhibit "A-3" Exhibit "A-4" Exhibit "B-1" Exhibit 11B-2" Exhibit "B-3" Exhibit 11B-4" MITIUAl'EU NEURTIVS D�� i,Ax�rroN Case Number: DA 91-2 Applicant: Gary Clapp Toran Development & Construction 23441 Golden Springs Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Proposal: A request to allow the sale of gasoline, including self-service; automated car wash; automotive de- tail facility; corporate offices for the develop- er; and a restaurant, not to include take-out, through the Development Agreement. Location: 22000 Golden Springs Drive Environmental Findings: The proposed project, as determined in the City of Diamond Bar, could have a significant effect on the environment. There will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation mea- sures described on the attached sheet have been incorporated into the proposed project. II. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation: Mitigated Negative Declaration Explanation to supplement "yes" and "possible" answers given in initial study. Environmental Impacts: 1. Earth b. Disruption, displacements, compaction or over - covering of the soil? yes. Explanation• There will be the displacement of approximately two hun- dred and fifty (250) cubic yards of soil. Mitigation• The two hundred and fifty (250) cubic yards of soil will be balanced on the site. 7. Light and Glare a. Will the proposal result in significant new light and glare or contribute significantly to existing levels of light and glare. Pos- sibly Explanation• The proposed uses for this site will introduce lighting to this site which could possibly create glare. Mitiaation Lighting plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department showing the lighting arranged and shielded in such a manner as to prevent glare or direct illumination to surrounding uses. 8. Land Use a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use in an area. Possibly Explanation• The proposed use of an automated car wash is not permitted in this zone by right or by CUP. Mitigation: A Development Agreement with appropriate condi- tions shall be drawn up to allow the use in this zone. 9. Natural Resources a. An increase in the rate of use of any natural resources. Possiblv Explanation• The proposed use of an automated car wash can pos- sibly cause an increase in the usage of water. The irrigation of landscaping could possibly cause an increase in water usage. Mitigation• Ninety percent (90%) of the water to be used for the proposed car wash will be recyclable. Accord- ing to the Walnut Valley Water District, the irri- gation for the landscaping can come from reclaimed water. 10. Risk of Upset a. A risk of an explosion or the release of haz- ardous substances (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset condi- tion. Possiblv Explanation: When flammable chemicals, solvents, and gasoline are used, there is always the possibility of ex- plosion and release of hazardous substances. Mitigation• The only chemical to be used would be paint thin- ner applied to a cloth for cleaning at the detail 12. facility. All cloths used would be laundered. There are four gasoline storage tanks to be in- stalled for this proposed project. Gasoline tanks will be double walled, fiberglass and totally rust -proof. For each tank, there will be a "built- in" monitoring system and a continuous precision tank tester. The hydrostatic monitor continuously monitors and tests the tanks every day of the year against potential leaks. This monitoring system can detect leaks in either the inner or outer walls of the gasoline tanks. Transportation/Circulation a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? Yes b. Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking? Yes d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or move- ment of people and goods? Possibly Explanation• a. This project is proposed on a vacant parcel. The uses: car wash, gasoline sales, restaurant and detail bays and corporate offices will add more vehicular movement in this area. b. The new uses to the vacant parcel will require new park- ing facilities. d. The proposed uses of this site will create more and new patterns of circulation and movement of people and goods. Mitigation• a. According to the traffic study report, a significant portion of the project traffic is expected to be "pass- er-by" traffic that is already on Golden springs Drive. b. Applicant shall provide adequate parking for the uses on this site. d. Implement conditions contained within the Development Agreement. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, ENGINEERS TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 9 TRAFFIC ENCINEERING - PAMINd 1680 CORPORATF 11RIVE, SIJITL 122, COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92628 TELF.PHONF' 014) 641.1551 • FAX: (714) 641-0139 PHILIA M, LIN.SCOTT, R.E. May 3, 1991 JACK M. OAEENSPAN, P.E. WILLIAM A. LAW, P.E. PAUL W. WILKINSON, P.E. LEON D WARD, P C. DONALD W. BARKER, P r Mr. Gary Clapp TORAN DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION 23441 Golden Springs Drive Diamond Bar, California 91765 Subject: TRAFFIC ANALYSIS REVISED SITE PLAN RESTAURANT/CAR WASH PROJECT Diamond Bar, California Dear Mr. Clapp: Upon your request, we have examined the revised site plan for the proposed restaurant and car wash on Golden Springs Drive in the city of Diamond Bar. The revised site plan has not changed the amount of development planned on the site. However, major modifications relating to project access and on-site circulation have been incorporated in the revised site plan. The proposed site plan has one entrance only driveway near the middle of the site, and two exits (one right -turn -only exit near the restaurant and one exit at the signalized intersection of Golden Springs Drive and GatewayCenter Drive), The revised site plan will not change the amount of traffic that will be generated by the project, therefore the prior traffic study completed for the project adequately address the off-site traffic impacts associated with the prpject. This analysis evaluates potential traffic impacts associated with project access and on-site circulation. The revisions to the site plan are based on input from City staff and are designed to improve on-site circulation and provide safer ingress and egress at the site. Ingress to the site will be provided at the existing median opening on Golden Springs Drive near the middle of the Project. This driveway is planned as an "entrance only" and proper signs should be installed to inform drivers that they should exit the site from one of the other two project driveways. To improve safety for motorist leaving the site, left -turns from the project will only be permitted opposite the existing traffic signal on Golden Springs Drive at Gateway Center \ Drive. A second right -turn -exit -only driveway is planned east of the restaurant. The Toran Development Traffic Impact Study submitted to the City in March, 1991 indicated that the proposed project wits not expected to change the future levels of service at any of the key intersections. The site plan revisions will result in the redistribution of OTHER OFFICES. PASADL+NA TF1 FPHONE: (213) 681-2629 .-. FAX- (8 18) 792.0941 SAN UII-GO I I-LtNt1UNL: (6 19) 299-309tr FAX (619) 299.7041 AN LG2W8 COMPANY Llnscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers May 3, 1991 TORAN DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION Page Two project traffic at the project driveways. Attachment 1 illustrates the peak hour project traffic volumes from the previous traffic study for the project, plus the revised driveway volumes are shown parenthetically. The project -related traffic volumes at the other three key intersections evaluated in the traffic impact study for the project will not change based on the revised site plan. To evaluate the potential project -related traffic impacts at the new project driveway opposite Gateway Center Drive (the only key intersection were project volumes are expected to change based on the revised site plan) the service level calculations with the revised project traffic assignments have been performed. The AM and PM peak hour capacity (ICU) calculation worksheets are included with this letter as attachments 2 and 3, respectively. The ICU analysis indicates that w04, ith the completion of the proposed project this intersection will operate at Level of Service (LAS) B or better during the morning and evening peak hour. At buildout (the buildout analysis assumes the completion of Gateway Corporate Center, Plus five other cumulative projects and additional areawide traffic growth, which was documented in the March 1991 traffic study for the project) this intersection is also expected to operate at an acceptable service level, with LAS B anticipated during the morning peak hour and LAS D during the PM evening peak hour. ,The project should be conditioned to install the necessary signal modifications to accommodate the new project driveway opposite Gateway Center Drive. Further, when the signal modification is designed the appropriate striping and signing information should be incorporated with the signal modification plans. At that time, we recommend that the two outbound lanes shown on the revised site plan he shifted approximately 15 feet to the west, so the southbound left/ through option lane aligns better with Gateway Center Drive. The proposed site plan will provide safe ingress and egress to the project, and good on-site circulation. Trucks, including gasoline tankers, can efficiently access the site, and proper sight distance is provided at the proposed project driveways. We believe the following site plan refinements would further improve on-site circulation and project access. Modify and lengthen the median opposite the left -turn lane into the site to discourage vehicles from exiting from the "entrance only" driveway. The lengthened median section should to be designed to allow vehicles, including trucks, to safely make a left -turn into the site. The driveway width at this location should also be decreased from 44 feet to 30 feet to likewise discourage exiting traffic movements. Attachment 4 provides a conceptual drawing of these recommendations. U115GOit, Law & Urnenspan, Engineers May 3, 1991 TORAN DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION Page Three Further, we recommend that the two rows of parking parallel to Golden Springs Drive between the project entry and the restaurant exit be angled. This will remind restaurant customers that they should exit at the west site driveway, not at the entrance only driveway. Angled parking should not decrease the total number of parking spaces on the site. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this proj any questions. Oct. please call me if you have Very truly yours, LINSC.OTT, LAW AND GREENSPAN, ENGINEERS .lay L. Nelson, P.E. Transportation Engineer ATTACHMENTS jln/diamond.rpt by o CRAND 4 x a . ON O N ro /S $loejv �Z Of Q4? `► V6'' W, 0 OHo L nacntb,� 1 It: lJ H N n. III - P, � d op c W N_ O a. Ld o a . to r to 1 in V 41 a M � � o y C o � m laluaa raz/!;yQ,o' gMasa� raai5r10,0 A v 'MFO AJI 0 0 O In x U M N .....�F- � N v v� o � a a� � R c 1 It: lJ H z Q n. III - P, W W C O a. Ld \� U a w c v 0. m CD W \� U a c v m ca N F V' dJ v 'MFO AJI 0 0 O In x U M N .....�F- 1 1_. 3v=n it aLM in D I 1 i:] 1 G G O C+ O O Ss a:> "; ii L. i Cr C+ Ca O f? a:> O O O O O Y C9 1 y11 1 1 l � �.✓ K+ t> �> a_> s_s i? t1 Ca L:a .C} O n LAA L.aJ 1 1 F t C+ G d O O G C. C. O Ca t. V� � O G a 1 a�T W O } ►" l 1 41 G] b G`• G O O O C, Ca p p J [,1 V a•. W J Cl i 1 Cl O 1 rl ay� aa• M Pat 1 J• 4 t wl- syr 4 . • . y+ t> • - i`I ti> N• 4 .u-, II 11 N 1 1 O 11 PC L, 1 t? L,r {s C.a {> (rs ,s r. a Gs R',a sa •;} O N Q 1 W C.1 Q O �} to •-•+ i G 1 Ca M 0. G C O+ LT. d G L?• O• m Ul 1 laJ 1 rl �^> 11•] G N O R7 R7 Min -0 -_T H 1 1 O C! 1 �i r• � � u i i 1.1 1 Gl J I ✓i C� G tra O r.J •7 'Y 1 �> `9 q N LY q 1 ca v• w �+ 4 v o u c♦L 1 Q Q 1 C, O O C+ O Ca Ca O c O f? O O Y O 1 11 W 1 V li 1 r G G: a_S v � a•ra v O 4 O i, V O: G: I L-1 � M n- /n ... 9rU• .r. .. b- rnl,1i U• W w 1 tJJ a ari ra m ✓> C� ✓] G+ R7 Nr Ni I!a .y Yu' CT. J CL /Cj 4 _> 1 1� •/ • } C] O 1 •-•i 2 til r— a J V w t V J 44 C -j R l:] I ri ~ •rr' V ., ♦ 1 - .1 a7 - ., Cs a.. .• . O • _n -Al r. t'> !} 11 Q- 1 ay '+♦ >•• 1 L`, C O Ca CG Ca b o O C. C+ G O N C+ 1 U 1 I M-1 41 In i N 4-' [tl u] Gs aH G m Y> 1.7 4 G W Z W J tG J (14 CIA r- / 1 a• 1 aS - ►' W J Z. �✓ G`> O li'a C a�1 Lti C G Yr U CI . H 1 1 f>) CV 4 =+ 1 O 1 �! / _. c •, 0 0 0 a d �] ..r r-, n c> 11 ar 1 a 1 / Or C, G ._-, C] O 4rl Q> ti �. 11 C.> 11 M 1 4 i of l) Ci C LA J t CD V > K J i t N i m VV h a7, sr F I 1 N -•i O Q. :Y .� ba 0 0 1 i Z l 1•- -7.1 J aVF.+ J 1 O O V R:J C+ La O Vwo KI Ir! C. O f] V 1 ✓] /•• 1 } 1 G 0 8 C.-> C G tW 0 4` C+ LY O .•', N H I Q Lk; i {: Cs O Ca t? R"< C• t•'+ O O O O O fl a5 1 11 I.IJ 1 V Ci 6 0 0 0 G fl.. ��Opp o O O a 1 CA 1 m c..a n a;+ G O W U1 =i rl ti 1-+ n a G 1 c } 1 Z W U) W Lj :i 1 i J r 0. J H '' -I +— ae V J tY uL °O W 1 'k 1 as z z Ln ui {�qIy f/] ?aa m cn 4.1 Ora Oj m m m :+i ftr L 1 ar «A.. N z W u I { 1 , w I Gt 1 w w w -c> 6i N cv N coM H es G, Cl Ga 11 O 1 V .T 1 L ti� Ca a W O G Q z+ V_ Ir rn c, fl, rn n: rn I,t ar _ f -I 1f7 fa o..'t tL 1 1 ' uj qjGs W m G1 041 K G O C-1 CJ F- t 1 M S. G> C, H 11 W 1 y CI: it Ca G> 4 C.> O O O O 11 r� 1 • 11 1 1 , O 0 0 fl II Q 1 W Cl Ga C� f1 fTy+ G m W {,�.I i H ,0y fA O. p., fj t p 17 c N (14O V p- Q p Z C2 O G J 1 a -x L J 1 ; 9-1 J C-33 w 1 rt I i�Ir I w w �9 � UUCr 2 1 C! a.:+ �`, %-i LL,r-. , Q.4-1 CAJ 0,0 p• + e.. :—o ui J 1 C '✓ O G, C, [.a O G G1 CA a-.. uj O U G `) . f'+1 IT ^; C..] !L Q I I M 4, 2 W O 6 p r, Ir: W tti qpdx "1 1f' 1 Li l ( C• O Cti C, O [a p 0 J W — a.� 1 C7 1 s•) 1 �+. +S l " _ �t G G �'� w G G . �..• 'Ch' C1 t ti G II CV 1 mb 1 1 1 G O G d f:i Q 1 1 a c a s, 1 O !.! s,t' '. = cc M {A W 1 C4. 04 n 3. cc fa, �•.>F7 I ' G J 7 , ~ f•f I `� f" a e-0`. G "► '^> G en C, � +A'„• o u i �, 4�}i >'r. }a 1 o 1 1 u 14 vp1T a%1 G.) ; W 7 I O rO o O Ir, Ca , T7 A" C/f J 1 y p.. f,3 , N D+ 2 J n 1 .M1�•_i ih Cl,W a 1 OD OG m 1 m m J ♦— n- � ) IV V' pi lu� dtn .� � Meal;ate Mod �ca�+bn rp�1 ATTACHMENT 4 Conceptual Plan Entrance Only Curb/Median Recommendations South Coast AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 9150 FLAIR DRIVE, EL MONTE, CA 91731 (818) 572-6200 May 13, 1991 Chairman Schey Planning Commission City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 190 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Dear Chairman Schey: In My last letter and at two of your previous meetings, the District opposed the carwash matter brought before your commission. The District opposed that project on essentially two grounds, traffic on Golden Springs, and traffic circulation within the project. I have met with Mr. Clapp and Mr. Schabarum and have discussed the problem issues with them and have encouraged them to make certain improvements. In my latest review of the carwash project, I find that the District's concerns have been satisfactorily addressed. I now believe that the project with an exit at Gateway Center Drive, a signalized intersection, and with non conflicting on site traffic circulation that the project is now acceptable. I want to thank you and the Planning Commission for its careful deliberations and level of concern for the quality of life in Diamond Bar. Very truly urs, Jack Guiso Dir, of Admin. Services (818) 572-6345 JG:lg cc: Vice Chairman Harmony Commissioner Grothe Commissioner MacBride Commissioner Lin James DeStefano Irwin Kaplan CITY OF DIAMOND BAR D R A F T MINUTED or wan pr iumnZ O cUMMIOUI©N MAY 13, 1991 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Schey called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Walnut Valley School District Board Meeting Room, 880 South Lemon Street, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by ALLEGIANCE: Vice Chairman Harmony. ROLL CALL: Commissioner Lin, Commissioner MacBride, Commissioner Grothe, Vice Chairman Harmony, and Chairman Schey. Also present were Planning Director .James DeStefano, Associate Planner Robert Searcy, Planning Technician Ann Lungu, City Engineer Sid Mousavi, Deputy Attorney Bill Curley, and Contract Secretary Liz Myers. City Planner Emeritus Irwin Kaplan arrived at 8:33 p.m. MINUTES: Planning Director James DeStefano explained that the Minutes of Jan. 10, 1990 and July 9, 1990 had Jan. 10. 1990 never been approved. Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by C/Lin and CARRIED to approve the Minutes of Jan. 10, 1990. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Grothe, Harmony and Chair/Schey. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: MacBride. July 9, 1990 Motion was made by C/MacBride, seconded by VC/Harmony and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Minutes of July 9, 1990. April 22, 1991 Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by C/MacBride and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Minutes of April 22, 1991. PUBLIC HEARING: Associated Planner Robert Searcy addressed the CUP 90-0125 Commission regarding the request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a two story office building with 15 subterranean parking stalls. This project is a continued public hearing from the April 22, 1991 meeting. The traffic study requested by the Commission is currently being completed, and will be placed on the earliest available agenda for the Traffic and Transportation Commission (TTC). Staff recommended that the item be continued until such time that the application has been before the TTC, and is renoticed for public hearing before the Planning Commission. The Public Hearing was declared open. Ed Jaworsky, the applicant, consented to a continuance pending the traffic study report. May 13, 1991 Page 2 Joe Bacara, resident of Diamond Bar, stated that his neighbors and himself are concerned with potential traffic hazards due to poor visibility within the project entrance. He stated that there would have been a greater audience had the public hearing notice better described the project location. VC/Harmony indicated to staff that it would be appropriate to be more specific in the public hearing notices as to the location of the project. Chair/Schey stated that the notice area should be increased due to the nature of the project location. Motion was made by C/MacBride, seconded by C/Grothe and CARRIED to continue the matter indefinitely to a date to be decided by staff. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Grothe, Harmony and Chair/Schey. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: MacBride. DA 91-2 Planning Technician Ann Lungu addressed the Commission regarding the request for a Development Agreement to allow a project consisting of a restaurant, an automatic car wash, a two story structure to house six bays, an automotive detail facility on the first story and corporate offices of the applicant on the second story, and a gasoline island for self-service gasoline sales. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the proposed project on the March 25, 1991 meeting. Toran Development and Construction withdrew the proposed project. At this time, Toran Development and Construction is proposing a newly designed project which addresses the issues of concern expressed by the Commission concerning the last proposed project. PT/Lungu presented the application analysis, as well as the environmental assessment for the newly proposed project. Staff recommended that the Commission approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Development Agreement 91-2 with the listed conditions. PD/DeStefano stated that there are changes to the Resolution and the Development Agreement. The changes to the Resolution are: Page 1 of the Resolution, the heading has been changed to indicate "...City of Diamond Bar Recommending Approval..." Page 3 Condition F. the last sentence should be omitted. May 13, 1991 Page 3 Page 4 Condition U, the word "Traffic" should be added to the beginning of the statement. Page 4 Co dition Vol should read "The applicant shall provide to the engineer...". Page 5 Condition AA, add to the end of the statement "...of the development agreement.". The changes to the Development agreement are: Page 4 section 7 should be clarified in terms of the "effective date". Page 11 sec on 28 allows the developer two options to the conveyance of the Restaurant Parcel. The developer has chosen the second alternative. Page 11 sectio„ 2g will be stricken and inserted with the proceeding page which is the alternative option. Page 12 will indicate John Forbing instead of Gary Werner. Staff recommends the Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council. Deputy Attorney Bill Curley informed the Commission that the Title Report had not yet been submitted. VC/Harmony requested staff define the Conveyance of Restaurant Parcel. PD/DeStefano explained that the issue of repayment, or in lieu payment, is addressed in the Development Agreement to assure that the City receives liquid damages, from the developer, for loss of sales tax revenue if the proposed project is not developed. DA/Curley specified that if the project is not developed, the intent is not to penalize the developer, but rather to allow a means for the City to obtain liquid damages for the loss of revenue. C/Grothe noted that the way the agreement is written, it indicates that it is a one time fee rather than an annual payment. He directed staff to insert wording to clarify the issue. PD/DeStefano affirmed that the intent was to receive an annual fee. If the project is approved, the Commission can direct staff to refine the document. The Public Hearing was declared open. Gary Clapp, of Toran Development and Construction, explained the changes made to the project, and displayed various illustrations that demonstrated the structural changes made. He stated that every May 13, 1991 p=ge 4 effort was made to utilize the recommendations made by the Commission on the last project. He specified that two feet of the project will be dedicated to the City. C/Lin inquired if, in comparison to the previous application, there is an increase in the parking space area. Gary Clapp stated that the parking abilities have been almost doubled. He noted that every compact parking has been eliminated, and extra handicapped parking have been added. Ben Reiling, of Zelman Development, in support of the entire proposed project, stated that he is comfortable that the issues of concern have been addressed. Frank Schabarum, representing Mr. Arciero, stated that Mr. Clapp is in escrow and prepared to move forward with the project upon approval. John Brewster, 4071 Second Street, Yorba Linda, speaking also in behalf of Russ Hand of Diamond Bar Honda, opposing the project, assured the Commission that the already approved car wash/restaurant is not a dead project. He explained that the grading permit has been received and they now await the plan check for the parcel map. He emphasized that approval of two very similar projects within a one mile radius could create financial difficulties for one of the projects. The Public Hearing was declared closed. VC/Harmony inquired if the deceleration lanes are being recommended. City Engineer Sid Mousavi explained that it is not being recommended because there is an additional lane in the plans, on the easterly portion of the project, bringing the total to three lanes. VC/Harmony inquired about the setbacks and the dedication. CE/Mousavi stated that because there will be sidewalks within the property itself, the two feet dedication will suffice. C/Grothe made the following requests: There should be a sidewalk on either side of the street; the terminology needs to be changed to indicate that reclaimed water will be used for landscaping; the May 13, 1991 page 5 restaurant pad should be maintained and landscaped until construction; the car wash should have an architectural style wrap; and the monument sign Agreement with Mr. Arciero needs to be satisfied. PD/DeStefano explained that an architectural design contest is in progress. The winners package will have elements that should be incorporated into the City's monument sign and/or the signage proposed in this project. The timing of the award is running. concurrently with the sign of this project. It was suggested that the proposed clock tower be part of the signage for the entire program, to come back to the Commission for approval at a later date. VC/Harmony stated that the previous monument sign was an historical representation of Diamond Bar. There is no relevance between the proposed clock tower and the City's monument sign. The monument sign should remain separate from the project. He also expressed concern for allowing the project to be piece-mealed. PD/DeStefano, in response to Chair/Schey's inquiry, confirmed that the restaurant project will have to come back to the Commission for a CUP and a development review. C/MacBride stated that the applicant has made great strides in addressing the traffic concerns previously stated. He will accept the architectural style of the project since the corporate neighbors are satisfied with the total projected concept. He emphasized the importance of architectural symmetry. VC/Harmony noted that the agreement does not have a clause for mediation. PD/DeStefano explained that normally there is not such a clause within a development agreement. Because it is an ordinance, it is subject to interpretation, review, and amendment through the public hearing process. C/MacBride stated that there is an ordinance regarding the inclusion of a mediation clause in all public works contract. He suggested that staff review it and included it into the agreement as a reaffirmation of the City Council's intent. C/Grothe reiterated his concern that there is an immediate need for a sidewalk. May 13, 1991 Page 6 CE/Mousavi indicated that it would be difficult to create sidewalks on the northern part of the project because of the difference of elevation of the existing street and the golf course. If the street is not extended, there would be room for a sidewalk. However, staff felt it is in the best interest of the City to have 3 lanes for traffic. C/Grothe suggested a sidewalk on the corporate center side, as it abuttes the property. C/Lin inquired who determines the designs for the driveway entrance signs. CE/Mousavi stated that the signs must meet uniform traffic signs spaces, and is not subject to the sign program. VC/Harmony inquired if competing car washes is an issue that the City's economic development program and GPAC would deal with in any way. PD/DeStefano indicated that it is not probable the City would get into this level of detail to dictate the number of competing businesses that may be appropriate in the City. Chair/Schey stated that even though the project redesign has mitigated a number of concerns, he is not favorably inclined using a development agreement as a procedure to allow a use in a zone otherwise not permitted. Motion was made by C/Grothe, seconded by C/Lin to send the project to the Council with a recommendation of approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Development Agreement 91-2 with the listed conditions, and modifications of those conditions as amended by staff, including the conditions requested by the Commission which consist of landscaping the pad; an architectural style wrap; a four foot wide sidewalk built on the south side of Golden Springs from Gateway to Copley Drive; and that the monumentation sign be submitted concurrently with the sign program reviewed by the Planning Commission. The MOTION CARRIED. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Grothe, MacBride, and VC/Harmony. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Schey. ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None. Chair/Schey called a recess at 9:06 p.m. The meeting was called to order at 9:20 p.m. May 13, 1991 page 7 NEW BUSINESS: PD/DeStefano informed the Commission that the California Government Code section 65401 requires CIP FY 1991-1992 the Planning Commission to review public works projects proposed for the ensuing fiscal year and determine compliance with the General Plan. He stated that the CIP scheduling is based upon fiscal resources and the choice of public improvements. The CIP budget is the facilities that are programmed for a specific fiscal year. The program is generally outlined for an additional four or five year period. The benefits of the CIP are: assurance that the plans are carried out in a schedule; allows for public participation and long range financial planning; and a general overall management of City affairs. PD/DeStefano reviewed some of the fiscal resources available to obtain revenue to fund CIP projects. Staff recommended that the Commission review and approve the document with a recommendation to the City Council for it's adoption May 21, 1991. CE/Mousavi explained that a chart has been developed to give an idea of how and when these projects will be implemented, as well as the costs and the fiscal impact on the City's available funds in general. The Parks and Recreation, and the Traffic and Transportation Commission has established a priority list for each project, as well as recommendations for street improvements and other projects. The list may be changed or revised as additional funds are received. VC/Harmony made the following comments: Item 148 - He questioned the improvement of the athletic facilities when there is no agreement with the Pomona School District to have recreation programming in north Diamond Bar schools. Chair/Schey also indicated concerned with ongoing maintenance once the project is completed, unless the City is willing to take on that responsibility. Item ¥44 - Upon learning that the project does not involve freeway frontage roads, he inquired if it is part of the assessment district. PD/DeStefano responded that it is. This is the reflection of the desire to eliminate the asphalt medians between the frontage roads and the major streets. Item 112 & 117 - He indicated that construction or improvement of these borderline streets should be held up until the City gets the annexation of the adjacent property. Item 136 - He stated that this project is inconsistent with GPAC and the General Plan. It is May 13, 1991 page 8 not a City project, but a Water Company project, and should be taken out. Item 127 - He inquired why this project is a consideration, since there is no residential district in there. CE/Mousavi stated that the project is presently on hold, pending what will happen with developments in the golf course area. C/MacBride commented on Item X49. He inquired if the pending date for the Senior Citizen Center remains tangible. PD/DeStefano explained that the actual date for the Senior Civic Center is subject to many different issues. He indicated that the location of the building still needs to be resolved. Chair/Schey, referring to Item 142& 43, noted that there is no wooden play equipment at the indicated location. He stated that Softwind and Stardust is the actual park that has the wooden equipment that fell down. C/Lin noted that the summarization of the estimated costs differ from the costs stated in the item breakdown. She inquired if the reason for this is because the summarization is updated. CE/Mousavi concurred and explained that as the projects move along, there is a better indication as to their costs. He also pointed out that funding sources are also different than first proposed. Motion was made by VC/Harmony, seconded by C/MacBride and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Resolution as drafted by staff with the proviso that the comments of the Commission are noted in the minutes and thereby transmitted to the Council for their information. Presentation CPE/Kaplan stated that the Economic Development on upcoming Strategy will examine existing potential funding Economic resources to support the community lifestyle. He Development explained that the General Plan is made up of land Strategy Study use components, circulation components, and economic development components. There is an interactive nature with decisions made in the General Plan regarding commercial, circulation, and economic development areas. These decisions must be tested against an Economic Development Strategy. The firm of Kotin, Regan, and Mouchly has been retained to assist in defining some of the issues, such as the type of fiscal resources available, and May 13, 1991 Page 9 the tradeoffs that need considering. An Economic Development Strategy workshop has been designed involving the community, GPAC, the Chamber of Commerce, the Commissions and the Council for the purpose of discussing these issues and placing our priorities. The workshop is scheduled sometime mid June. VC/Harmony inquired where the City stands on forming a redevelopment agency. He discussed reasons to support it's formation. PD/DeStefano stated that the City is not discussing, and has frozen all thoughts towards, the creation of the redevelopment agency. C/MacBride indicated that the premise and the assumptions must be well known by the people attending to assure the success of the workshop. The community must be aware that the decisions can go in any given direction. ANNOUNCEMENTS: PD/DeStefano informed the Commission that the Council was introduced to the Sign Ordinance at Staff their last meeting. Through conversation with the Chamber of Commerce, it was determined that additional time was needed for the Chamber to work on the program, and for the Council to review the material. The Sign Ordinance was postponed to June 18, 1991 for further discussion. PD/DeStefano stated that the Commission will receive replacement pages for the Draft Setting Document as it is received. The Commission's comments should be given to staff prior to May 23, 1991 so they can be incorporated. C/MacBride suggested including names of those volunteers that attended the GPAC meting, as well as the number of times attended. It would give a better community feeling towards the document if it were perceived as a community effort and not a consultant firm project. PD/DeStefano, in reponse to Chair/Schey's inquiry, stated that hearings for the General Plan should come before the Commission in August. Chair/Schey suggested structuring the review of these documents much like the review of the Development Code. ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by VC/Harmony,seconded C/MacBride and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY the meeting at 10:30 p.m. May 13, 1991 Page 10 Respectively, James DeStefano Secretary/Planning Commission Attest: David Schey Chairman April 2, 1991 Mr. Gary Werner Mayor - City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Dear Mr. Werner: I write you regrettably to voice my dismay at the recent Planning Commission Hearings I have attended. As I sat there, I realized the role politics plays in my everyday life and how a simple body of individuals can decided how I live. I refer to the recent denial of the car wash and restaurant project that would be located on Golden Springs Drive. After listening to conclusive testimony on the part of the project owners, I witnessed the Commission squirm in their seats as thr - .;ere afraid to even make a motion in any direction. They were under the scornful eye of two "big time" developers that were present to oppose the project. I have never been so ashamed of being a resident of Diamond Bar for so many years, realizing that the fate of much needed services were being treated in this manner. I remember the ballyhoo of the car wash that was (is?) to be located behind the Honda dealership. I was very excited to know that I needn't drive to Walnut to get my car washed. Now, it seems that people are committed to providing these services locally and the bureaucrats are stopping them. What is more infuriating is the fact the these are local area residents that are seeking a form of sustenance and community participation, not "hired guns" from a distant conglomerate. I ask that you intervene and let these appointed officials know what the elected officials of the City expect of them. It is only through these means that the constituency can benefit from the choices made at election day. I thank you for your concern. Sincerely, RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 91-2, AN APPLICATION TO ALLOW THE SALE OF GASOLINE, AUTOMATED CAR WASH, SIX BAY AUTOMOTIVE DETAIL FACILITY, CORPORATE OFFICES AND A RESTAURANT AT 22.000 GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE - ASSESSOR'S PARCEL #8717-001-006. A. Recitals 1. Gary Clapp, on behalf of Toran Development and Construc- tion has filed an application for a Development Agree- ment (D.A.) located at 22000 Golden Springs Dr., Diamond Bar, California, as described in the title of this Reso- lution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Agreement application is referred to as "application". 2. On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was establi- shed as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State of California. On said date, pursuant to the requirements of the California Government Code Section 57376, Title 21 and 22, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted it Ordinance No. 1, thereby adopting the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City of Diamond Bar. Title 21 and 22 of the Los Angeles County Code contains the Development Code of the County of Los Angeles now currently applicable to development applications, including the subject Application, within the City of Diamond Bar. 3. Because of its recent incorporation, the City of Diamond Bar lacks an operative General Plan. Accordingly, action was taken on the subject Application, as to consistency to the General Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of California Government § 65360. 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, on May 13, 1991 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said Application and concluded said public hearing on that date. 5. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolu- tion have occurred. B. Resolution NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. MAY --Zo-9 1 -THU - 1 5 : 06 MNRKmAtf ;o ARCZYNSI< I P . 02 'S ORDINANCE NO. (1991) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL of THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THAT DOCUMENT ENTITLED PIDEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-2 (1991) CONCERNING PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT AND IDENTIFIED A8 22000 GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA" AND AUTHOR12ING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE SAME 6N BEHALF OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. A. Recitals. (i) California Government Code Section 65864 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: "The Legislature finds and declares that: "(a) The lack of certainty in the approval of development projects can result in a waste of resources, escalate the cost of housing and other developments to the consumer, and discourage investrent in and commitment to comprehensive planning which would make maximum efficient utilization of resources at the least econonic,cost to the public. 11(b) Assurance to the applicant for a developrient project that upon approval of the project, the applicant may proceed with the project in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, and subject to conditions of approval, will. strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning, and reduce the economic costs of development. .11 (ii) California Goverment Code Section 65865 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: "Any city . . . , may enter into a development agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the de-elepment of such property as provided in tris article. . . ." (iii) California Government Code Section 65865.2 provides as fo:lows: "A development agreement shall specify the duration of the agreement, the permitted uses of the property, the density or intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and provision for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, 1 MF4Y-30-9 1 THU 1 S �3 i MHRF-::MAhJ d I F' _ E1 = -' +=yc The development agreement ray include conditions, terns, restrictions and requirements for subsequent discretionary actions, provided that such conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements for subsequent discretionary actions shall not prevent development of the land for the uses and to the density or intensity of development set forth in the agreement. . ." (iv) I ttached to this Ordinance, narked Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, is a proposed Development Agreement No. 91»2 (1991), concerning that approximately 4.7 acre parcel located the site generally addressed as 22000 Golden Springs Drive, in the City of Diamond. Bar, and as legally described within the attached Exhirit "A." Hereinafter in this Ordinance, that agreement attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is referred to as "the Development Agreement." (v) This City Council has heretofore adopted an ordinance amending the zone designation for the subject property from Light Industrial designation to Restricted Connercial. The proposed developer of the property and the City desire to provide through the attached Development Agreement specific development options and controls on the site cahich will provide for naXimum efficient utilization of the site in accordance with sound planning principles, all in accordance with the above -referenced provisions of law. (vi) on Mair 13, 1992., the Planning Cormission of the City of Diamond Ear held a duly noticed public hearing concerning the proposed Development Agreement and has reconinanded to this Council the adoption of the Development Agreement. (vii) This Council has heretofore conducted a duly noticed public hearing concerning the potential adoption of the Development Agreenent and said public hearing was concluded prior to the adoption of this Ordinance. (viii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. Qrdinanae. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does ordain as follows: 1. In all respects as set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance. 2. (a) The City Council of the City of Diarond Bar hereby finds that a Negative Declaration was adopted with respect to the project on May 13, 1991 which was prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as 2 MAY — 3 0— 9 1 T H U 15:07 M A R K M A N as A R C Z Y N S K I P. 0 4/ 6 S amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder and that this Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with respect to the project identified in this Ordinance. (b) The City council hereby specifically finds and determines that; based upon the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned upon the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. (c) The City Council finds that facts supporting the above-specified findings are contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff report and exhibits, and the information provided to this City Council during the public hearing conducted with respect to the project and the Negative Declaration. Mitigation measures will be made a condition of approval of said project and are intended to mitigate and/or avoid environmental effects identified in the Negative Declaration. 3. This Council specifically finds that: (a) The location, design and proposed uses set forth in the Development Agreement are compatible with the character of existing development in the vicinity; (b) The Development Agreement will produce within the project an environment of stable and desirable character, and will not tend to cause traffic congestion on surrounding streets; (c) The proposed development will be well integrated into its setting; (d) provision has been designed in the proposed development for both private and public open spaces at least equivalent to that required by the Zone; and (e) (1) There is a reasonable probability that the land use proposed for approval hereby will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered; (2) There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the proposed general plan; and (3) The proposed use complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. 4. It is expressly found that the public necessity, general welfare and good zoning practice require the approval of the Development Agreement. s 3 15:08 M A R K M A N as A R G Z Y N S K I R. O n '- 0 5 5. This Council hereby approves the Development Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit "A." 6. This Council hereby authorizes and directs the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Development Agreement on behalf of the City of Diamond Bar forthwith upon adoption of this Ordinance. 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted in three (3) public places as specified by Resolution No. 89-6. >, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 4th day of June, 1991. s# Mayor I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 4th day of June;• 1991, and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 4th day of June, 1991, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL NEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL P:EMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar S%10W0RDDA912M 6.12 4 2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the CEQA of 1970, as amended, and guidelines pro- mulgated thereunder, and, further this Planning Commis- sion has reviewed and considered the information con- tained in the said Mitigated Negative Declaration with respect to the application. 3. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above -referenced May 13, 1991, public hearing and oral testimony provided at the hear- ing, this Commission hereby specifically finds as fol- lows. (a) The project relates to a site which is comprised of 4.70 acres of vacant land within the C -2 -BE zone on the North side or Golden Springs Drive, City of Diamond Bar, California. (b) Generally, to the north is the Pomona Freeway, to the south is C-M-BE-U/C zone, to the east is OS (open space) which consists of a golf course. (c) This property is designated by the Community Plan for Commercial development. (d) The nature, condition, and size of the site has been considered. The site is adequate in size to accommodate the type of development being proposed as depicted within Exhibits Al, A2, A3, A4, Bl, B21 B3, and B4. (e) The Development Agreement will not have an adverse impact on adjacent or adjoining residential commercial uses. It will not be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment, or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity and the Development Agreement will not adversely affect the health or welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding area. (f) The subject property shall be maintained and oper- ated in full compliance with the conditions of this grant and any law, statute, ordinance or other regulations applicable to any development or activity of the subject property. Failure of the permittee to cease any development shall be a vio- lation of these conditions. 4. Based upon the substantial evidence and conclusion set forth herein above, and conditions set forth below in this Resolution, presented to the Planning Commission on May 13, 1991, public hearing as set forth above, this Commission in conformance with the terms and provisions of California Government Code S 65360, hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a) The development shall conform to all plans as sub- mitted to and approved by the Planning Commission labeled Exhibits A-1, A-2, A-3, and A-4, B-1, B-2, B-3, and B-4, dated 5-13-91. (b) This grant allows for the development of a commer- cial project with structures equaling approximately 19,950 square feet on a 4.70 acre site. (c) Revised lighting, landscaping with 24 inch box trees throughout the parking area, irrigation, and fencing plan (which is to surround the site) shall be submitted to the City Planning Department and the Director of Parks and Maintenance for review and approval within sixty(60) days of the pro- ject's final approval from the City Council. (d) The subject site and landscaping shall be maintained in good condition. (e) The CUP and Development Review shall be required for the proposed restaurant upon submittal of application. (f) The hours of operation for the car wash and detail bay shall be between the hours of 8 am and 6 pm. The hours of operation for self-service gasoline sales shall be 24 hours a day. (g) Delivery of gasoline fuel to this site shall be limited to between the hours of 10 pm and 6 am. (h) A sign program for all uses on the site shall be submitted to the City for a Development Review and approval by the Planning Commission. (i) The custom polish detail shop shall not include auto body and fender work or auto paint work. (j) All detailing functions shall take place within the confines of the detail bays. (k) There shall be no outdoor displays of merchandise of any kind on this site. (1) Outside speaker volumes shall be modulated so as to not exceed ten decibels over ambient noise levels at property line. (m) All mechanical equipment needs for all uses on this site shall be enclosed within the appropriate building. (n) Water reclamation and conservation devices shall be incorporated into the design of the car wash and irrigation system for landscaping. (o) The chemicals and detergents used for cleaning of the vehicles shall be composed of biodegradable compounds. (p) Petroleum waste products shall be disposed of by appropriate methods and shall not be discharged into the public sewer system except as allowed by law. (q) The proposed restaurant for this site shall be of the size and caliber of a Marie Callender's, Hof's Bar & Grill, or Tony Roma's. (r) All 'on-site utility services shall be installed under ground. (s) Any work to be done within the City right-of-way requires prior approval from the Engineering De- partment of the City of Diamond Bar. The appro- priate permits are to be obtained and all con- struction is to be per City specifications. (t) The applicant shall comply with all traffic miti- gation conditions listed in the Revised Traffic Report dated March, 1991 and the Traffic Analysis Revised Site Plan dated May 3, 1991 (u) Traffic mitigation measures' fair share cost is only determined for the intersection of Grand Avenue and Golden Springs Drive and that is based on estimates of 1989. This cost estimate must be updated and fair share costs must also be devel- oped for the left turn lane addition to the traf- fic signal on Brea Canyon Road at Golden Springs Drive/Colima Road. In the absence of these calcu- lations, the fair share cost of the developer for the intersection improvements at Golden Springs Drive/ Grand Avenue and Brea Canyon Road/Golden Springs/Colima Road is recommended to be $50,000. (v) The applicant shall provide to the City Engineer the necessary signal modifications which are needed to accommodate the proposed driveway Opposite Gateway Center Drive. The applicant shall also provide the necessary stripping and signing information to incorporate this modification. (w) The applicant will be required to dedicate two (2) feet of subject property along Golden Springs Drive for street improvements. (x) Grading plans and drainage plans shall be submit- ted to the Planning Department and Engineering Department for review and approval. (y) Any broken or damaged curbs, gutters, sidewalks and pavement on streets within or abutting this project shall be repaired by the applicant. (z) Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Codes, State Fire Marshall's regulations, and Planning requirements have been complied with. (aa) All special assessments, utilities, sewers or storm drain connection fees are to be paid prior to recordation of the Development Agreement. (ab) The applicant shall pay for all costs associated with plan check, review of documents, permits and inspections required by the City of Diamond Bar. (ac) Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Codes, State Fire Marshall's regulations, and Planning requirements. (ad) This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until the permittee and the owner of the property involved. (if other than the permittee) have filed, at the City of Diamond Bar Planning Depart- ment, their affidavit stating that they are aware of and agree to accept all the conditions of this grant. 5. This Commission hereby provides notice to Gary Clapp for Toran Development that the time within which judicial review of the decision represented by this Resolution must be sought is governed by the provisions of the California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. The Planning Commission Secretary shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Reso- lution, by certified mail, return receipt request, to Gary Clapp at the address as set forth on the application. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF MAY, 1991. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. BY: ATTEST: David Schey, Chairman James DeStefano, Secretary I, James Destefano, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolu- tion was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Com- mission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of May, 1991, by the fol- lowing vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Grothe, Lin, McBride and Vice Chairman Harmony NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Schey ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None i i 'IX, y ' x �r SITE RE tMr�A�N RUNYAtN� ENGINEERING . INC.Dun .. .....,,.... .......,.. V ., ..,.., SITE PLANDIM RUNYAN ENGWNEERING.INC. rL1'AHON7 couu7lcY OKW�{�� ^�� � "'� �`1 11 v ..... .....11— — ­`*­ .. I raa� "n',yyQb ���� G►aMl�w RUNYAN ENGINEERING. INC. Dim QJPJJ.J�tj.?Pl?i-i'f. -1'A ;1 IPA FSR alla cRt',oh bo C h ►,�g�it .�tia f:, ani' �•i���,fiS li �.1 f► � r__: ti a "iiiC�� 1 •'vI'i �� PAM PLANTING PLAN' w= ;.gymENGIWE-ERING, INC. �•°�.;. � �°� '4���►,�� ill a, vu fv° •gam 11 �o Eiy ♦ 4 .:.i�'U r l9� t�. 4 ftG.T.R.Lrti' Py!ty +n � 7r�A,, \'•�i' q► tt rr ►,�g�it .�tia f:, ani' �•i���,fiS li �.1 f► � r__: ti a "iiiC�� 1 •'vI'i �� PAM PLANTING PLAN' w= ;.gymENGIWE-ERING, INC. s � i • tics J A F 6 >m 2 r �a, � .,.ate • ,0 r x n B ........... THUMINARY PLANTING PIAN .N •• RUNYAN ENGINEERING, INC. snn Vr�.+1aJo C«wn�y GeW�aH .......,.«.. .... .n. ......•w e.u.a..,..,.. 2700o rnaoa..+ SP""i � n+eiere-,sae 19 p �Y O�f� YMYYf flfl■ � JOY- OO.lO ' 000■ CY'0 � OY[Of 0011000 YOOJ007 I' OLIIYI � EO[[YIfi MTO IOLL ELEVATIONS (CARWASH) RUNYAN ENGINEERING, INC. fI M0. OM YINII..fY.Ilool O...OYY..O.l1.0YM10 OI IOt u 1 eisn-7640 3 ..t. eM..T TITL. EIIeMT EO•.YLf J.te .e.L Je.• .iel■ ..eel "0.e0 ..sueT RUNYAN ENGINEERING, INC. I1-0, Ne...•J. Ual.•MI. 911.1 e1e78-+844 ..Y .1C.e ' a -- - Z a 0 T v r O O R a Z t -- R 3 ..t. eM..T TITL. EIIeMT EO•.YLf J.te .e.L Je.• .iel■ ..eel "0.e0 ..sueT RUNYAN ENGINEERING, INC. I1-0, Ne...•J. Ual.•MI. 911.1 e1e78-+844 ..Y .1C.e Fr - � a l I 1� v leas w, 1 I i elle .M..T ,IR. ol1..T ...eYIT..Te 69.1 IO.. BCALS O.AoM Wo .»a.T ...... ..Oleo, RUNYAN ENGINEERING. INC. /1 »O. OM .MOLL .,.. 11..1. ....0..., 0111.011.1..11.1 lala1670-10.. un.wo Recorded At the Request Of And When Recorded Mail To: Lynda Burgess City Clerk City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-2 CONCERNING PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22000 GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the "Effective Date" set forth herein by and between BIG DIAMOND BAR, a partnership, and the CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California ("City"). W I T N E S S E T H• A. Recitals. (i) California Government Code Sections 65864, et seq. authorize cities to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property. (ii) Developer owns all interest in and to that real property located entirely within City, the common and legal description of which is set forth in Exhibit " ," attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and hereinafter is referred to as "the Site." (iii) The Site is now zoned C -2 -B-E (Neighborhood Business, Billboard Exclusion Zone) pursuant to the provisions of City's Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map, as amended to date hereof. Developer and City desire to provide through this Development Agreement more specific development controls on the Site which will provide for maximum efficient utilization of the Site in accordance with sound planning principles. (iv) On , 1991, City adopted its Ordinance No. thereby approving this Development Agreement with Developer and said Ordinance was effective on . 1991. B. Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless the context otherwise requires, the following terms shall have the following meaning: a. "City" is the City of Diamond Bar. b. "Developer" is BIG DIAMOND BAR, a partnership or any assignee thereof. C. "Development Plan" are those plans and specifications attached hereto, marked as Exhibit " " and incorporated herein by this reference, and comprised of the documents including, but not limited to, landscape plan, a site plan, design elevations), and site utilization map, stamped "Received, •" The Development Plan attached hereto includes variousconditions of approval set forth in Exhibit " " hereto which are not changed, altered or modified by this Development Agreement unless specifically set forth herein. The project also includes the records of applications by Developer, the proceedings before the Planning Commission and City Council, and all such records and files in these matters are incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. d. "Project" is that development approved for the Site as provided in this Development Agreement comprised of a automated car wash, six bay automotive detail facility, corporate offices for the developer and restaurant, all as reflected in the Development Plans attached hereto as Exhibit " " and the conditions set forth in Exhibit " ." e. "Effective Date" shall mean the 31st calendar day following adoption of the ordinance approving this Agreement by City's City Council. f. "Restaurant Parcel" shall mean that portion of the Site identified on Exhibit 11_11, including the metes and bounds legal description related thereto. 2. Recitals. The Recitals are part of the agreement between the parties and shall be enforced and enforceable as any other provision of this Agreement. 2 3. Interest of Property Owner. Developer warrants and represents that it has full legal title to the Site, that it has full legal right to enter into this Agreement and that the persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Developer are duly authorized to do so and thereby bind DEVELOPER to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 4. Binding Effect of Agreement. Developer hereby subjects the Project and the land described in Exhibit " " hereto to the covenants, reservations and restrictions as set forth in this Agreement. The City and the Developer hereby declare, represent and warrant that their specific intent that the covenants, reservations and restrictions as set forth herein shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall pass to and be binding upon Developer's successors and assigns in title or interest to the Project. Each and every contract, deed or other instrument hereinafter executed, covering or conveying the Project or any portion thereof shall conclusively be held to have been executed, delivered and accepted subject to the covenants, reservations and restrictions expressed in this Agreement, regardless of whether such covenants, reservations and restrictions are set forth in such contract, deed or other instrument. City and Developer hereby declare their understanding and intent that the burden of the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth herein touch and concern the land in that the Developer's legal interest in the Project is rendered less valuable thereby. The City and Developer hereby further declare their understanding and intent that the benefit of such covenants touch and concern the land by enhancing and increasing the enjoyment and use of the Development by Developer and the future occupants of the Project, the intended beneficiaries of such covenants, reservations and restrictions, and by furthering the public purposes for which this Agreement is adopted. Further, the parties hereto agree that such covenants, reservations and restrictions benefit all other real property located in the City of Diamond Bar, provided, however, that only City shall be entitled to enforce the provisions hereof pursuant to paragraph 16, below. 5. Relationship of Parties. It is understood that the contractual relationship between City and Developer is such that Developer is an independent party and is not the agent of City for any purpose whatsoever and shall not be considered to be the agent of City for any purpose whatsoever. 6. Term of Agreement. The term of the Agreement shall commence on the effective date and shall expire on December 31, 2016, so long as Developer remains in material compliance with this Agreement, as from time to time amended. 3 7. Construction. Developer shall complete construction work for the Project on the Site, and all phases thereof, including, but not limited to, landscaping and all off-site improvements, pursuant to a building permit or permits issued by City within three (3) years following the Effective Date. Notwithstanding any other term or provision of this Agreement, Developer shall complete rough grading of the Site, in accordance with approved grading plans, within eighteen (18) months of the effective date. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 28 hereinbelow, the failure to construct the Project shall cause this Agreement to be void and of no further force and effect; provided, however, that completion of the car wash portion of the Project, together with all required off-site improvements and perimeter landscaping requirements, and compliance with the terms of this Agreement pertaining to the car wash portion shall not render this Agreement void as to the car wash portion. 8. Transfers, Assignment and Encumbrances . Developer shall have the right to sell, lease, ground lease, mortgage, hypothecate, assign or transfer all or any portion of this Site (as may be subsequently subdivided), to any person or entity at any time during the term of this Development Agreement. Any such transfer shall be deemed to include an assignment of all rights, duties and obligations created by this Development Agreement with respect to all or any portion of the Site. The assumption of any or all of the obligations of Developer under this Agreement pursuant to any such transfer shall relieve Developer, without any act or concurrence by the City, of its legal duty to perform those obligations except to the extent that Developer is in default with respect to any and all obligations at the time of the proposed transfer. 9. General Standards and Restrictions Pertaining to Development of the Site. The following specific restrictions shall apply to the use of the Site pursuant to this Development Agreement: a. Developer shall have the right to develop the Project on the Site in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and City shall have the right to control development of the Site in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. b. The density and intensity of use, the uses allowed, the size of proposed buildings, provisions for the reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, the maximum height of proposed buildings and location of public improvements, together with other terms and conditions of development applicable to the Site, shall be as set forth in this Development Agreement and the attached Development Plan. 4 10. Effect of City Regulations on Development of Project. Except as expressly provided in this Development Agreement, all substantive and procedural requirements and provisions contained in City's ordinances, specific plans, rules and regulations, including, but not limited to, the Zoning Ordinance, in effect as of the effective date of this Development Agreement, shall apply to the construction and development of the Site. a. The provisions of this paragraph 10 shall not preclude the application to the development of the Site those changes in City ordinances, regulations, plans or specifications which are specifically mandated and required by changes in state or federal laws or regulations as provided in California Government Code Section 65869.5 or any successor provision or provisions. b. The payment of fees associated with the construction of the Project, including land use approvals, development fees, building permits, etc., shall be pursuant to those fees in effect at the time application is made for such approvals or permits. C. City may apply any and all new ordinances, rules, regulations, plans and specifications to the development of the Site after the effective date provided such new rules and regulations do not conflict with the terms of this Development Agreement as of the effective date. d. Nothing herein shall prevent the application of health and safety regulations (i.e., fire, building, seismic, plumbing and electric codes) that become applicable to the City as a whole. 11. Permitted Uses. Those uses allowed on the Site shall be as follows: a. Permitted Uses. 1. Sales. Art Galleries. Art supply stores. Automobile service stations, limited to automobile accessories and facilities necessary to dispensing petroleum products only. Automobile supply stores. Automobile washing, waxing and polishing, car washes. Bakery Shops, including baking only when incidental to retail sales from the premises. 5 Bookstores. Confectionery or candy stores, including making only when incidental to retail sales from the premises. Delicatessens. Florist shops. Gift shops. Hobby supply stores. Ice cream shops. Jewelry stores. Leather goods stores. Notions or novelty stores. Photographic equipment and supply stores. Silver shops. Sporting goods stores. Stationery stores. Tobacco shops. Toy stores. 2. Services. Barber shops. Beauty shops. Bicycle rentals. Locksmith shops Lodge halls. Offices, business or professional. Photography studios. Shoe repair shops. Tailor shops. Watch repair shops. b. Uses Requiring Conditional Use Permit. Restaurants and other eating establishments. C. City Council Approval of Uses. Each use which requires the approval of a Conditional Use Permit shall, prior to City acceptance of such application, be reviewed and approved by the City Council. The Council's review shall consider, among other factors, the reputation of restaurant, the experience of the operator and the design of the proposed facility. 12. Annual Review. During the term of this Development Agreement, City shall annually review the extent of good faith compliance by Developer with the terms of this Development Agreement. Developer shall file an annual report with the City indicating information regarding compliance with the terms of this Development Agreement no later than March 15 of each calendar year. 13. Indemnification. Developer agrees to, and shall, hold City and its elected officials, officers, agents and employees harmless from liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injuries, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of Developer or those of his contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee or other person acting on his behalf which relate to the construction and operation of the Project. Developer agrees to, and shall, defend City and its elected officials, officers, agents and employees with respect to actions for damages caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of Developer's activities in connection with the Project. This hold harmless provision applies to all damages and claims for damage suffered or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the operations referred to in this Development Agreement regardless of whether or not the City prepared, supplied or approved the plans, specifications or other documents for the Project. 14. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended or canceled, in whole or in part, only by mutual written consent of the parties and then in the manner provided for in California Government Code Sections 65868, et seq., or their successor provisions. 15. Minor Amendments to Development Plan. Upon the written application of Developer, minor modifications and changes to the Development Plan may be approved by the Director of Planning pursuant to the terms of City's Zoning Ordinance. 16. Enforcement. with the sole exception of the provisions set forth in paragraph 28, in the event of a default under the provisions of this Agreement by Developer, City shall give written notice to Developer (or its successor) by registered or certified mail addressed at the address stated in this Agreement, and if such violation is not corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of City within sixty (60) days after such notice is given, or if not corrected within such reasonable time as may be required to cure the breach or default if said breach or default cannot be cured within sixty (60) days (provided that acts to cure the breach or default must be commenced within said sixty (60) days and must thereafter be diligently pursued by Developer), then City may, without further notice, declare a default under this Agreement and, upon any such declaration of default, City may bring any action necessary to specifically enforce the obligations of Developer growing out of the operation of this Development Agreement, apply to any court, state or federal, for injunctive relief against any violation by Developer of any provision of this Agreement, or apply for such other relief as may be appropriate. F 17. Event of Default. Developer is in default under this Agreement upon the happening of one or more of the following events or conditions: a. If a material warranty, representation or statement is made or furnished by Developer to City and is false or proved to have been false in any material respect when it was made; b. If a finding and determination is made by City following an annual review pursuant to paragraph 12 hereinabove, upon the basis of substantial evidence, that Developer has not complied in good faith with any material terms and conditions of this Agreement, after notice and opportunity to cure as described in paragraph 16 hereinabove; or C. A breach by Developer of any of the provisions or terms of this Agreement, after notice and opportunity to cure as provided in paragraph 16 hereinabove. 18. No Waiver of Remedies. City does not waive any claim of defect in performance by Developer if on periodic review City does not enforce this Agreement. Nonperformance by Developer shall not be excused because performance by Developer of the obligations herein contained would be unprofitable, difficult or expensive or because of a failure of any third party or entity, other than City. All other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement are available to the parties to pursue in the event that there is a breach of this Development Agreement. No waiver by City of any breach or default under this Development Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach thereof or default hereunder. 19. Rights of Lenders Under this Agreement. Should Developer place or cause to be placed any encumbrance or lien on the Project, or any part thereof, the beneficiary ("Lender") of said encumbrance or lien shall have the right at any time during the term of this Agreement and the existence of said encumbrance or lien to: a. Do any act or thing required of Developer under this Agreement, and any such act or thing done or performed by Lender shall be as effective as if done by Developer; b. Realize on the security afforded by the encumbrance or lien by exercising foreclosure proceedings or power of sale or other remedy afforded in law or in equity or by the security document evidencing the encumbrance or lien (hereinafter referred to as "a trust deed"); 8 C. Transfer, convey or assign the title of Developer to the Project to any purchaser at any foreclosure sale, whether the foreclosure sale be conducted pursuant to court order or pursuant to a power of sale contained in a trust deed; and d. Acquire and succeed to the interest of Developer by virtue of any foreclosure sale, whether the fore- closure sale be conducted pursuant to a court order or pursuant to a power of sale contained in a trust deed. 20. Notice to Lender. City shall give written notice of any default or breach under this Agreement by Developer to Lender (if known by City) and afford Lender the opportunity after service of the notice to: a. Cure the breach or default within sixty (60) days after service of said notice, where the default can be cured by the payment of money; b. Cure the breach or default within sixty (60) days after service of said notice where the breach or default can be cured by something other than the payment of money and can be cured within that time; or C. Cure the breach or default in such reasonable time as may be required where something other than payment of money is required to cure the breach or default and cannot be performed within sixty (60) days after said notice, provided that acts to cure the breach or default are commenced within a sixty (60) day period after service of said notice of default on Lender by City and are thereafter diligently continued by Lender. 21. Action 1�y Lender. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, a Lender may forestall any action by City for a breach or default under the terms of this Agreement by Developer by commencing proceedings to foreclose its encumbrance or lien on the Project. The proceedings so commenced may be for foreclosure of the encumbrance by order of court or for foreclosure of the encumbrance under a power of sale contained in the instrument creating the encumbrance or lien. The proceedings shall not, however, forestall any such action by the City for the default or breach by Developer unless: a. They are commenced within sixty (60) days after service on Developer of the notice described herein- above; 4 b. They are, after having been commenced, diligently pursued in the manner required by law to completion; and C. Lender keeps and performs all of the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement requiring the payment or expenditure of money by Developer until the foreclosure proceedings are complete or are discharged by redemption, satisfaction or payment. 22. Notice. Any notice required to be given by the terms of this Agreement shall be provided by certified mail, return receipt requested, at the address of the respective parties as specified below or at any other such address as may be later specified by the parties hereto: To Developer: BIG DIAMOND BAR, a partnership c/o ARCIERO & SONS, INC. 950 North Tustin Avenue Anaheim, California 92807 To City: City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 Attention: City Manager 23. Attorneys' Fees. In any proceedings arising from the enforcement of this Development Agreement or because of an alleged breach or default hereunder, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its costs and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred during the proceeding as may be fixed within the discretion of the court. 24. Bindina Effect. This Agreement shall bind, and the benefits and burdens hereof shall inure to, the respective parties hereto and their legal representatives, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, wherever the context requires or admits. 25. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California. 26. Partial Invalidity. If any provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality or enforceability of the remaining provisions hereof shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. 10 27. Recordation. This Agreement shall, at the expense of Developer, be recorded in the Official Records of the County Recorder of the County of Los Angeles within ten (10) business days following the Effective Date. 28. Non -Development of Restaurant Parcel. Parcel is not fully developed with a restaurant which is actually operating and open for business to the general public on or before the date specified in Paragraph 7 herein, then CITY may, at its sole option, require DEVELOPER to convey to CITY an amount of monies equivalent to the reasonably estimated tax revenues derived from such a restaurant use. The parties recognize that estimation of such an amount is a difficult and impractical process and therefore desire to establish an agreed upon factor by which such amount is to be calculated. The parties agree that DEVELOPER shall annually convey to CITY, without demand by CITY, an amount equivalent to ten (10) percent of the gross revenues accumulated by the car wash in the proceeding twelve (12) month period. DEVELOPER shall dispatch such monies to the CITY not less than ten (10) business days subsequent to the date specified in Paragraph 7 herein. DEVELOPER grants CITY the right to review any and all books, ledgers, and accounts maintained by DEVELOPER in regard to the carwash to determine the dollar amount due to be conveyed to CITY. CITY'S right to audit such materials shall be exercised in a reasonable manner. CITY'S calculations shall be performed using generally accepted accounting principles as may currently be in effect at such time. CITY'S conclusion as to the dollar amount due from DEVELOPER shall be conclusive and binding upon DEVELOPER without further recourse to DEVELOPER. In the event DEVELOPER fails to convey such monies as may be due to CITY, on the date such monies are due, DEVELOPER shall pay to CITY, in addition to the overdue amount, a late charge equal to Bank of America's then prevailing prime rate of interest per annum plus an additional three (3) percent over such prime rate of said overdue amount from the date such payment was due until paid. This provision is intended to compensate CITY for all losses, including lost interest opportunities, legal costs, and the administrative costs involved in this matter. At such time as the monies due, including interest, are calculated to be 90 days in arrears then, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the DEVELOPER shall be conclusively deemed to be in default upon this Agreement. DEVELOPER agrees that, notwithstanding any other remedies available to DEVELOPER pursuant to this Agreement, including 11 paragraph 16, that DEVELOPER shall cease operating the carwash facility until such time as all monies due CITY are paid, including interest. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by the parties and shall be effective on the effective date set forth hereinabove. Dated: ATTEST: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, a municipal corporation By John Forbing, Mayor Lynda Burgess, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar BIG DIAMOND BAR, a partnership By Arciero & Sons, Inc., partner by FRANK ARCIERO, President On , 1991, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared John Forbing and Lynda Burgess proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persons who executed this instrument as Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, a municipal corporation existing and organized under the laws of the State of California, and acknowledged to me that the City of Diamond Bar executed it. Notary Public in and for said State 12 STATE OF ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On , 1990, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared FRANK ARCIERO, President, ARCIERO & SONS, INC. proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persons who executed this instrument. Notary Public in and for said State N1101211012kDA91-2DB\DB 6A2D 13 ORDINANCE NO. (1991) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THAT DOCUMENT ENTITLED "DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-2 (1991) CONCERNING PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT AND IDENTIFIED AS 22000 GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA" AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE SAME ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. A. Recitals. (i) California Government Code Section 65864 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: "The Legislature finds and declares that: "(a) The lack of certainty in the approval of development projects can result in a waste of resources, escalate the cost of housing and other developments to the consumer, and discourage investment in and commitment to comprehensive planning which would make maximum efficient utilization of resources at the least economic cost to the public. "(b) Assurance to the applicant for a development project that upon approval of the project, the applicant may proceed with the project in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, and subject to conditions of approval, will strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning, and reduce the economic costs of development. . . ." (ii) California Government Code Section 65865 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: "Any city . . . , may enter into a development agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of such property as provided in this article. . ." (iii) California Government Code Section 65865.2 provides as follows: "A development agreement shall specify the duration of the agreement, the permitted uses of the property, the density or intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and provision for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes. 1 The development agreement may include conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements for subsequent discretionary actions, provided that such conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements for subsequent discretionary actions shall not prevent development of the land for the uses and to the density or intensity of development set forth in the agreement. ." (iv) Attached to this Ordinance, marked Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, is a proposed Development Agreement No. 91-2 (1991), concerning that approximately 4.7 acre parcel located the site generally addressed as 22000 Golden springs Drive, in the City of Diamond Bar, and as legally described within the attached Exhibit "A." Hereinafter in this Ordinance, that agreement attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is referred to as "the Development Agreement." (v) This City Council has heretofore adopted an ordinance amending the zone designation for the subject property from Light Industrial designation to Restricted Commercial. The proposed developer of the property and the City desire to provide through the attached Development Agreement specific development options and controls on the site which will provide for maximum efficient utilization of the site in accordance with sound planning principles, all in accordance with the above -referenced provisions of law. (vi) On May 13, 1991, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar held a duly noticed public hearing concerning the proposed Development Agreement and has recommended to this Council the adoption of the Development Agreement. (vii) This Council has heretofore conducted a duly noticed public hearing concerning the potential adoption of the Development Agreement and said public hearing was concluded prior to the adoption of this Ordinance. (viii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does ordain as follows: 1. In all respects as set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance. 2. (a) The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar hereby finds that a Negative Declaration was adopted with respect to the project on May 13, 1991 which was prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as 2 amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder and that this Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with respect to the project identified in this Ordinance. (b) The City Council hereby specifically finds and determines that, based upon the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned upon the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. (c) The City Council finds that facts supporting the above-specified findings are contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff report and exhibits, and the information provided to this City Council during the public hearing conducted with respect to the project and the Negative Declaration. Mitigation measures will be made a condition of approval of said project and are intended to mitigate and/or avoid environmental effects identified in the Negative Declaration. 3. This Council specifically finds that: (a) The location, design and proposed uses set forth in the Development Agreement are compatible with the character of existing development in the vicinity; (b) The Development Agreement will produce within the project an environment of stable and desirable character, and will not tend to cause traffic congestion on surrounding streets; (c) The proposed development will be well integrated into its setting; (d) Provision has been designed in the proposed development for both private and public open spaces at least equivalent to that required by the Zone; and (e) (1) There is a reasonable probability that the land use proposed for approval hereby will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered; (2) There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the proposed general plan; and (3) The proposed use complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. 4. It is expressly found that the public necessity, general welfare and good zoning practice require the approval of the Development Agreement. 3 5. This Council hereby approves the Development Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit "A." 6. This Council hereby authorizes and directs the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Development Agreement on behalf of the City of Diamond Bar forthwith upon adoption of this Ordinance. 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted in three (3) public places as specified by Resolution No. 89-6. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 4th day of June, 1991. Mayor I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 4th day of June, 1991, and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 4th day of June, 1991, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar S\1012\ORDDA912\DB 6.12 4 IN REPLY PLEASE REFER TO: MEMORANDUM TO: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager James DeStefano, Planning Director City of Diamond Bar FROM: William P. Curley III J+� Deputy City Attorney RE: Arciero/Clapp Development Agreement; Analysis of Alternative Paragraph_ 28 In response to the perceived concerns that the developer of the carwash/restaurant site may not commence and conclude development of the restaurant use, this office has drafted two alternative paragraphs (paragraph 28) which are intended to create a strong incentive for the development of the restaurant use. The first alternative contemplates the developer conveying, at no cost to the City, the portion of the parcel which would otherwise be dedicated to restaurant use to the City. If this approach is taken, staff will be required to prepare an exhibit which 9Freates a legally conforming lot for conveyance purposes. The lot would be required to conform to the Subdivision Map Act and the C-2 zoning standards. It is obvious that such a measure is clearly a forfeiture; the law is clear that forfeitures are abhorred. The City would certainly argue that the developer knowingly and voluntarily assented to such terms and that on a contract theory, such a provision is binding upon the developer. The developer would obviously dissent and argue that it is a coercive forfeiture not justified by the nondevelopment of the site. It is inescapable that litigation would result and this office cannot provide any assurance that the City would prevail in this matter. The second alternative considers the developer conveying to the City a monetary sum equivalent to an UJ', t i 1✓ V PAV, ` 10' &) q c6sed JAMES L. MARKMAN NUMBER ONE CLIC CENTER (-IRC-E ANDREW V. ARCZYNSKI P. O. 6 D 1055 RALPH D. HANSON BREA, CALIFJF NIA 9. ?622-1059 JEFFREY KINGx1714) 990-0901 TELEPHONE D. CRAIG FOX 12131 591-2.611 MARTHA GEISLER PATTERSON WILLIAM P. CURLEY III May 10, 1991 9113 FOOTHILL BOLLEVARD MARSHA G. SLOUGH SUITE 200 JULIA A. KEMP RANCHO CUCAMONG A, CA _IFORNIA 91730 PAMELA P. KING F(714) 980-z742 PERSONAL & CONFIDENTIALTELEPHONE U7, 4) 381-0218 IN REPLY PLEASE REFER TO: MEMORANDUM TO: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager James DeStefano, Planning Director City of Diamond Bar FROM: William P. Curley III J+� Deputy City Attorney RE: Arciero/Clapp Development Agreement; Analysis of Alternative Paragraph_ 28 In response to the perceived concerns that the developer of the carwash/restaurant site may not commence and conclude development of the restaurant use, this office has drafted two alternative paragraphs (paragraph 28) which are intended to create a strong incentive for the development of the restaurant use. The first alternative contemplates the developer conveying, at no cost to the City, the portion of the parcel which would otherwise be dedicated to restaurant use to the City. If this approach is taken, staff will be required to prepare an exhibit which 9Freates a legally conforming lot for conveyance purposes. The lot would be required to conform to the Subdivision Map Act and the C-2 zoning standards. It is obvious that such a measure is clearly a forfeiture; the law is clear that forfeitures are abhorred. The City would certainly argue that the developer knowingly and voluntarily assented to such terms and that on a contract theory, such a provision is binding upon the developer. The developer would obviously dissent and argue that it is a coercive forfeiture not justified by the nondevelopment of the site. It is inescapable that litigation would result and this office cannot provide any assurance that the City would prevail in this matter. The second alternative considers the developer conveying to the City a monetary sum equivalent to an Memorandum to Robert L. Van Nort and James DeStefano May 10, 1991 Page Two established formula. The numbers set forth in the alternative provision have been randomly selected; any alternative numbers which you may suggest would be equally appropriate. Again, this office cannot guarantee that the City would be able to enforce this provision, either in whole or in part. In any normal circumstance a development agreement does not necessarily contemplate a cash flow component, in that such consideration is not generally within the scope of a land use decision. Monetary exactions for performance and/or nonperformance are common within redevelopment practice, in that redevelopment transactions are generally deemed to be a "for profit" proposition. Development agreements are intended to insure the harmonious development of the cityscape. It is recommended that the provisions be submitted to the developer for its consideration, however, the City may wish to maintain a willingness to delete such provisions if the developer objects. Alternatively, if the City deems the risk of litigation an acceptable risk in light of the pressure the provisions put on the developer, then such provisions may be strenuously pursued by the City. Please advise this office at your earliest convenience in regard to your thoughts on this matter. WPC/nlc N\1012\MRVN\DB 6.12D Recorded At the Request Of And When Recorded Mail To: Lynda Burgess City Clerk City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 91-2 CONCERNING PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22000 GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the "Effective Date" set forth herein by and between ARCIERO & SONS, INC., a California corporation, and GARY CLAPP, a sole proprietor, ("Developer" hereinafter collectively) and the CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California ("City"). W I T N E S S E T H• A. Recitals. (i) California Government Code Sections 65864, et seq. authorize cities to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property. (ii) Developer owns all interest in and to that real property located entirely within City, the common and legal description of which is set forth in Exhibit " ," attached hereto and incorporated h rein by this reference and hereinafter is referred to as "the Si e." (iii) The Site is now zoned C -2 -B-E (Neighborhood Business, Billboard Exclusion Zone) pursuant to the provisions of City's Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map, as amended to date hereof. Developer and City desire to provide through this Development Agreement more specific development controls on the Site which will provide for maximum efficient utilization of the Site in accordance with sound planning principles. (iv) Ordinance No. Agreement with On , 1991, City adopted its thereby approving this Development Developer and said ordinance was effective on 1991. 1 B. Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless the context otherwise requires, the following terms shall have the following r meaning: a. "City" is the City of Diamond Bar. • b. "Developer" is ARCIERO & SONS, INC. and GARY CLAPP or any assignee thereof. C. "Development Plan" are those plans and specifications attached hereto, marked as Exhibit " " and incorporated herein by this reference, and comprised of the documents including, but not limited to, landscape plan, a site plan, design elevations), and site utilization map, stamped "Received, ." The Development Plan attached hereto includes variousconditions of approval set forth in Exhibit " " hereto which are not changed, altered or modified by this Development Agreement unless specifically set forth herein. The project also includes the records of applications by Developer, the proceedings before the Planning Commission and City Council, and all such records and files in these matters are incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. d. "Project" is that development approved for the site as provided in this Development Agreement comprised of a automated car wash, six bay automotive detail facility, corporate offices for the developer and restaurant, all as reflected in the Development Plans attached hereto as Exhib t " " and the conditions set forth in Exhibit e. "Effective Date" shall mean the 31st calendar day following adoption of the ordinance approving this Agreement by City's City Council. f. "Restaurant Parcel" shall mean that portion of the Site identified on Exhibit 11_11, including the metes and bounds legal description related thereto. 2. Recitals. The Recitals are part of the agreement between the parties and shall be enforced and enforceable as any other provision of this Agreement. 3. Interest of Property owner. Developer warrants and represents that it has full legal title to the Site, that it has full legal right to enter into this Agreement and that the persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Developer are duly authorized to do so and thereby bind DEVELOPER to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 4. Binding Effect of Agreement. Developer hereby subjects the Project and the land described in Exhibit " " hereto to the covenants, reservations and restrictions as set forth in this Agreement. The City and the Developer hereby declare, represent and warrant that their specific intent that the covenants, reservations and restrictions as set forth herein shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall pass to and be binding upon Developer's successors and assigns in title or interest to the Project. Each and every contract, deed or other instrument hereinafter executed, covering or conveying the Project or any portion thereof shall conclusively be held to have been executed, delivered and accepted subject to the covenants, reservations and restrictions expressed in this Agreement, regardless of whether such covenants, reservations and restrictions are set forth in such contract, deed or other instrument. City and Developer hereby declare their understanding and intent that the burden of the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth herein touch and concern the land in that the Developer's legal interest in the Project is rendered less valuable thereby. The City and Developer hereby further declare their understanding and intent that the benefit of such covenants touch and concern the land by enhancing and increasing the enjoyment and use of the Development by Developer and the future occupants of the Project, the intended beneficiaries of such covenants, reservations and restrictions, and by furthering the public purposes for which this Agreement is adopted. Further, the parties hereto agree that such covenants, reservations and restrictions benefit all 9ther real property located in the City of Diamond Bar, provided,1however, that only City shall be entitled to enforce the provisions hereof pursuant to paragraph 16, below. 5. Relationship of Parties. It is understood that the contractual relationship between City and Developer is such that Developer is an independent party and is not the agent of City for any purpose whatsoever and shall not be considered to be the agent of City for any purpose whatsoever. 6. Term of Agreement. The term of the Agreement shall commence on the effective date and shall expire on December 31, 2016, so long as Developer remains in material compliance with this Agreement, as from time to time amended. 7. construction. Developer shall complete construction work for the Project on the Site, and all phases thereof, including, but not limited to, landscaping and all off-site improvements, pursuant to a building permit or permits issued by City within three (3) years following the Effective Date. Notwithstanding any other term or provision of this Agreement, Developer shall complete rough grading of the Site, in accordance with approved grading plans, within eighteen (18) months of the effective date. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 28 hereinbelow, the failure to construct the Project shall cause this Agreement to be void and of no further force and effect; provided, however, that completion of the car wash portion of the Project, together with all required off-site improvements and perimeter landscaping requirements, and compliance with the terms of this Agreement pertaining to the car wash portion shall not render this Agreement void as to the car wash portion. S. Transfers, Assignment and Encumbrances . Developer shall have the right to sell, lease, ground lease, mortgage, hypothecate, assign or transfer all or any portion of this Site (as may be subsequently subdivided), to any person or entity at any time during the term of this Development Agreement. Any such transfer shall be deemed to include an assignment of all rights, duties and obligations created by this Development Agreement with respect to all or any portion of the Site. The assumption of any or all of the obligations of Developer under this Agreement pursuant to any such transfer shall relieve Developer, without any act or concurrence by the City, of its legal duty to perform those obligations except to the extent that Developer is in default with respect to any and all obligations at the time of the proposed transfer. 9. General Standards and Restrictions Pertaining to Development of the Site. The following specific restrictions shall apply to the use of the Site pursuant to this Development Agreement: a. Developer shalllhave the right to develop the Project on the Site in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and City shall have the right to control development of the Site in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. b. The density and intensity of use, the uses allowed, the size of proposed buildings, provisions for the reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, the maximum height of proposed buildings and location of public improvements, together with other terms and conditions of development applicable to the Site, shall be as set forth in this Development Agreement and the attached Development Plan. 10. Effect of City Regulations on Development of Project. Except as expressly provided in this Development Agreement, all substantive and procedural requirements and provisions contained in City's ordinances, specific plans, rules and regulations, including, but not limited to, the Zoning Ordinance, in effect as of the effective date of this Development Agreement, shall apply to the construction and development of the Site. a. The provisions of this paragraph 10 shall not preclude the application to the development of the Site those changes in City ordinances, regulations, plans or specifications which are specifically mandated and required by changes in state or federal laws or regulations as provided in California Government Code Section 65869.5 or any successor provision or provisions. b. The payment of fees associated with the construction of the Project, including land use approvals, development fees, building permits, etc., shall be pursuant to those fees in effect at the time application is made for such approvals or permits. C. City may apply any and all new ordinances, rules, regulations, plans and specifications to the development of the Site after the effective date provided such new rules and regulations do not conflict with the terms of this Development Agreement as of the effective date. d. Nothing herein shall prevent the application of health and safety regulations (i.e., fire, building, seismic, plumbing and electric codes) that become applicable to the City as a whole. 11. Permitted Uses. Tho�e uses allowed on the Site shall be as follows: a. Permitted Uses. 1. Sales. Art Galleries. Art supply stores. Automobile service stations, limited to automobile accessories and facilities necessary to dispensing petroleum products only. Automobile supply stores. Automobile washing, waxing and polishing, car washes. Bakery Shops, including baking only when incidental to retail sales from the premises. 5 Bookstores. Confectionery or candy stores, including making only when incidental to retail sales from the premises. Delicatessens. Florist shops. Gift shops. Hobby supply stores. Ice cream shops. Jewelry stores. Leather goods stores. Notions or novelty stores. Photographic equipment and supply stores. Silver shops. Sporting goods stores. Stationery stores. Tobacco shops. Toy stores. 2. Services. Barber shops. Beauty shops. Bicycle rentals. Locksmith shops Lodge halls. Offices, business or professional. Photography studios. Shoe repair shops. Tailor shops. Watch repair shops. b. Uses Requiring Conditional Use Permit. Restaurants and other eating establishments. I C. Citv Council Approval of Uses. Each use which requires the approval of a Conditional Use Permit shall, prior to City acceptance of such application, be reviewed and approved by the City Council. The Council's review shall consider, among other factors, the reputation of restaurant, the experience of the operator and the design of the proposed facility. 12. Annual Review. During the term of this Development Agreement, City shall annually review the extent of good faith compliance by Developer with the terms of this Development Agreement. Developer shall file an annual report with the City indicating information regarding compliance with the terms of this Development Agreement no later than March 15 of each calendar year. t 13. Indemnification. Developer agrees to, and shall, hold City and its elected officials, officers, agents and employees harmless from liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injuries, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of Developer or those of his contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee or other person acting on his behalf which relate to the construction and operation of the Project. Developer agrees to, and shall, defend City and its elected officials, officers, agents and employees with respect to actions for damages caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of Developer's activities in connection with the Project. This hold harmless provision applies to all damages and claims for damage suffered or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the operations referred to in this Development Agreement regardless of whether or not the City prepared, supplied or approved the plans, specifications or other documents for the Project. 14. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended or canceled, in whole or in part, only by mutual written consent of the parties and then in the manner provided for in California Government Code Sections 65868, et seq.; or their successor provisions. 15. Minor Amendments to Development Plan. Upon the written application of Developer, minor modifications and changes to the Development Plan may be approved by the Director of Planning pursuant to the terms of City's Zoning Ordinance. 16. Enforcement. With the sole exception of the provisions set forth in paragraph 28, in the event of a default under the provisions of this Agreement by Developer, City shall give written notice to Developer (or its successor) by registered or certified mail addressed qrt the address stated in this Agreement, and if such violation is not corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of City within sixty (60) days after such notice is given, or if not corrected within such reasonable time as may be required to cure the breach or default if said breach or default cannot be cured within sixty (60) days (provided that acts to cure the breach or default must be commenced within said sixty (60) days and must thereafter be diligently pursued by Developer), then City may, without further notice, declare a default under this Agreement and, upon any such declaration of default, City may bring any action necessary to specifically enforce the obligations of Developer growing out of the operation of this Development Agreement, apply to any court, state or federal, for injunctive relief against any violation by Developer of any provision of this Agreement, or apply for such other relief as may be appropriate. 17. Event of Default. Developer is in default under this Agreement upon the happening of one or more of the following events or conditions: a. If a material warranty, representation or statement is made or furnished by Developer to City and is false or proved to have been false in any material respect when it was made; b. If a finding and determination is made by City following an annual review pursuant to paragraph 12 hereinabove, upon the basis of substantial evidence, that Developer has not complied in good faith with any material terms and conditions of this Agreement, after notice and opportunity to cure as described in paragraph 16 hereinabove; or C. A breach by Developer of any of the provisions or terms of this Agreement, after notice and opportunity to cure as provided in paragraph 16 hereinabove. 18. No Waiver of Remedies. City does not waive any claim of defect in performance by Developer if on periodic review City does not enforce this Agreement. Nonperformance by Developer shall not be excused because performance by Developer of the obligations herein contained would be unprofitable, difficult or expensive or because of a failure of any third party or entity, other than City. All other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement are available to the parties to pursue in the event that there is a breach of this Development Agreement. No waiver by City of any breach or default under this Development Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach thereof or default hereunder. 19. Rights of Lenders under this Agreement. Should Developer place or cause to be placed any encumbrance or lien on the Project, or any part thereof, the beneficiary ("Lender") of said encumbrance or lien shall have the right at any time during the term of this Agreement and the existence of said encumbrance or lien to: a. Do any act or thing required of Developer under this Agreement, and any such act or thing done or performed by Lender shall be as effective as if done by Developer; b. Realize on the security afforded by the encumbrance or lien by exercising foreclosure proceedings or power of sale or other remedy afforded in law or in equity or by the security document evidencing the encumbrance or lien (hereinafter referred to as "a trust deed"); 8 C. Transfer, convey or assign the title of Developer to the Project to any purchaser at any foreclosure sale, whether the foreclosure sale be conducted pursuant to court order or pursuant to a power of sale contained in a trust deed; and d. Acquire and succeed to the interest of Developer by virtue of any foreclosure sale, whether the fore- closure sale be conducted pursuant to a court order or pursuant to a power of sale contained in a trust deed. 20. Notice to Lender. City shall give written notice of any default or breach under this Agreement by Developer to Lender (if known by City) and afford Lender the opportunity after service of the notice to: a. Cure the breach or default within sixty (60) days after service of said notice, where the default can be cured by the payment of money; b. Cure the breach or default within sixty (60) days after service of said notice where the breach or default can be cured by something other than the payment of money and can be cured within that time; or C. Cure the breach or default in such reasonable time as may be required where something other than payment of money is required to cure the breach or default and cannot be performed within sixty (60) days after said notice, provided that acts to cure the breach or default are commenced within a sixty (60) day period after service of said notice of default on Lender by City and are thereafter dili4ently continued by Lender. 21. Action by Lender. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, a Lender may forestall any action by City for a breach or default under the terms of this Agreement by Developer by commencing proceedings to foreclose its encumbrance or lien on the Project. The proceedings so commenced may be for foreclosure of the encumbrance by order of court or for foreclosure of the encumbrance under a power of sale contained in the instrument creating the encumbrance or lien. The proceedings shall not, however, forestall any such action by the City for the default or breach by Developer unless: a. They are commenced within sixty (60) days after service on Developer of the notice described herein- above; 0 b. They are, after having been commenced, diligently pursued in the manner required by law to completion; and C. Lender keeps and performs all of the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement requiring the payment or expenditure of money by Developer until the foreclosure proceedings are complete or are discharged by redemption, satisfaction or payment. 22. Notice. Any notice required to be given by the terms of this Agreement shall be provided by certified mail, return receipt requested, at the address of the respective parties as specified below or at any other such address as may be later specified by the parties hereto: To Developer: ARCIERO & SONS, INC. 950 North Tustin Avenue Anaheim, California 92807 GARY CLAPP Toran Development and Construction 23441 Golden Springs Diamond Bar, California 91765 To City: City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 Attention: City Manager 23. Attorneys' Fees. In any proceedings arising from the enforcement of this Development Agreement or because of an alleged breach or default hereunder, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover itll costs and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred during the proceeding as may be fixed within the discretion of the court. 24. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall bind, and the benefits and burdens hereof shall inure to, the respective parties hereto and their legal representatives, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, wherever the context requires or admits. 25. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California. 26. Partial Invalidity. If any provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality or enforceability of the remaining provisions 10 hereof shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. 27. Recordation. This Agreement shall, at the expense of Developer, be recorded in the Official Records of the County Recorder of the County of Los Angeles within ten (10) business days following the Effective Date. 28. "NOTICE TO PARTIES: SECTION 28 CONTAINS PROVISION WHICH MAY RESULT IN THE CONVEYANCE OF REAL PROPERTY TO THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR." conveyance of Restaurant Parcel. If the Restaurant Parcel is not fully developed with a restaurant which is actually operating and open for business to the general public on or before the Effective Date then CITY may, at its sole option, request DEVELOPER to convey the Restaurant Parcel to CITY. If CITY elects to request conveyance of the Restaurant Parcel to itself, CITY shall dispatch written notice of such election to DEVELOPER. Upon receipt of written notice of such election by CITY, DEVELOPER shall, on or before thirty (30) calendar days have lapsed, execute a grant deed conveying fee title in the Restaurant Parcel to CITY and shall deliver such grant deed to CITY. Such grant deed shall be in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney. Title to the Restaurant Parcel shall be free and clear of all liens, mortgages or other encumbrances. CITY shall not pay, convey, reimburse, compensate or otherwise provide any consideration to DEVELOPER in exchange for the conveyance of the Restaurant Parcel. Further DEVELOPER shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY from any claim, demand, request or lawsuit which seeks damages or equitable performance by CITY in regard to the conveyance from DEVELOPER to CITY. City's Initials Developer's Initials IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by the parties and shall be effective on the effective date set forth hereinabove. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, a municipal corporation Dated• By John Forbing, Mayor ATTEST: Lynda Burgess, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar 11 FRANK ARCIERO, Title GARY CLAPP, Title STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) On , 1991, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared Gary L. Werner and Lynda Burgess proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persons who executed this instrument as Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, a municipal corporation existing and organized under the laws of the State of California, and acknowledged to me that the City of Diamond Bar executed it. STATE OF COUNTY OF Notary Public in and for said State ) ss. On 11 , 1990, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for County and State, personally appeared FRANK ARCIERO and GARY CLAPP proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persons who executed this instrument. Notary Public in and for said State NM110121DA91-2DB WB 6.12D 12 ALTERNATIVE 28. Non -Development of Restaurant Parcel. If the Restaurant Parcel is not fully developed with a restaurant which is actually operating and open for business to the general public on or before the Effective Date then CITY may, at its sole option, require DEVELOPER to convey to CITY an amount of monies equivalent to the reasonably estimated tax revenues derived from such a restaurant use. The parties recognize that estimation of such an amount is a difficult and impractical process and therefore desire to establish an agreed upon factor by which such amount is to be calculated. The parties agree that DEVELOPER shall convey to CITY, without demand by CITY, an amount equivalent to ten (10) percent of the gross revenues accumulated by the car wash in the proceeding twelve (12) month period. DEVELOPER shall dispatch such monies to the CITY not less than ten (10) business days subsequent to the Effective Date. DEVELOPER grants CITY the right to review any and all books, ledgers, and accounts maintained by DEVELOPER in regard to the carwash to determine the dollar amount due to be conveyed to CITY. CITY'S right to audit such materials shall be exercised in a reasonable manner. CITY'S calculations shall be performed using generally accepted accounting principles as may currently be in effect at such time. CITY'S conclusion as to the dollar amount due from DEVELOPER shall be conclusive and binding upon DEVELOPER without further recourse to DEVELOPER. In the event DEVELOPER fails to convey such monies as may be due to CITY, on the date such monies are due, DEVELOPER shall pay to CITY, in addition to the overdue amount, a late charge equal to Bank of America's then prevailing prime rate of interest per annum plus an additional three (3) percent over such prime rate of said overdue amount from the date such payment was due until paid. This provision is intended to compensate CITY for all losses, including lost interest opportunities, legal costs, and the administrative costs involved in this matter. YI At such time as the monies due, including interest, are calculated to be 90 days in arrears then, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the DEVELOPER shall be conclusively deemed to be in default upon this Agreement. DEVELOPER agrees that, notwithstanding any other remedies available to DEVELOPER pursuant to this Agreement, including paragraph 16, that DEVELOPER shall cease operating the carwash facility until such time as all monies due CITY are paid, including interest. N\1012\ALT28\DB 6.12D //,, 9e ,�/C�n4,a4z, a&vin � JAMES L. MARKMAN ANDREW V. ARCZYNSKI RALPH D. HANSON JEFFREY KING D. CRAIG FOX MARTHA GEISLER PATTERSON WILLIAM P. CURLEY 4I MARSHA G. SLOUGH JULIA A. KEMP PAMELA P. KING May 30, 1991 NUMBER ONE CIVIC CENTER CIRCLE P. O. BOX 1059 BREA, CALIFORNIA 92622-1059 TELEPHONE tL [(7141 990-0901 (213) 691-3811 9113 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SUITE 200 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91730 TELEPHONE fL (17141 980-2742 (7141 381-0218 IN REPLY PLEASE REFER TO: Brea MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor John A. Forbing, Mayor Pro Tem Jay Kim, Council Members Donald Nardella, Phyllis Papen and Gary Werner and Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager FROM: Andrew V. Arczynski, City Attorney RE: Request for Amicus Participation in City of Moorpark v, Moorpark Unified School District (1991) 226 Cal. App. 3d 942 As the City Council will recall, some time ago this office reported that the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District had issued an opinion regarding the effect of the "Naylor Act" (California Education Code §§ 39390, et seq.). As you know, the Naylor Act provides specific procedural requirements for school districts proposing to declare existing school recreational property and school sites as surplus and provides a mechanism for cities to obtain such school sites at a portion of their fair market value. The Court of Appeal ruled in favor of the City and required the School District to process its surplus property through the provisions of the Naylor Act. Since the time of the opinion from the Court of Appeal, the School District has appealed the matter to the California Supreme Court which, unfortunately, has accepted the case for consideration. The City of Moorpark has requested all cities to participate in the process before the California Supreme Court. This would be accomplished by way of an amicus curiae brief which we have been requested to join. Joinder in the amicus brief would not require the City to participate financially; rather, the City would be listed in the brief as an entity having a interest in the matter. It is likely that Memorandum to Mayor, City Council and City Manager May 30, 1991 Page Two the School District will obtain an amicus brief on behalf of a substantial number of school districts throughout the State and, accordingly, the City of Moorpark believes that participation by interested cities will be of assistance in the process. we concur with that analysis and believe the City should be a participant in the amicus brief, at least insofar as letting the Supreme Court know that the matter is one of State-wide import and should not be dealt with lightly. The City of Moorpark has requested a response to the request for amicus participation not later than June 7, 1990. Accordingly, we respectfully request the City Council to authorize this office to indicate to the City of Moorpark that the City of Diamond Bar wishes to participate in the process and to be listed as an amicus curiae participant in the litigation on behalf of the City of Moorpark. Should any member of the Council require further information, we shall, of course, be available at the meeting of June 4, 1991 to discuss the matter in further detail. AVA/nlc N\1011\MCC2\DB 15.5 RESOLUTION NO. 91 - 54 w A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING AND ADOPTING SCHEDULES OF RATES, FEES AND CHARGES FOR SERVICES PROVIDED • BY THE BUILDING, PLANNING AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR A. Recitals. (i) . The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar has heretofore established various schedules of rates, fees and including, but not limited to, .rates, fees and charges for the processing of applications, issuance of permits and related public services. (ii) Pursuant Ito the provisions of the California Constitution and the laws of the State of California, the City of Diamond Bar is authorized to adopt and implement rates, fees and charges for municipal services; provided, however, that such rates, fees and/or charges do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing such services. (iii) California Government Code Section 6601.7 requires notice to be given, and data made available, at rates, fees and charges or the adoption of new rates, fees and charges, for zoning variances, zoning changes, use permits, building inspections, building permits and related planning and zoning services ("development fees" sometimes thereinafter) at a public meeting of this City Council. (iv) California Government Code Section 66018 requires notice to be published in accordance with California Government Code Section 6062a and data made available' concerning rates, fees and charges prior to conducting a public hearing with respect to the adoption of increases in rates, fees and charges or the adoption of new rates, fees and charges for which no other procedure is provided by law. (v) Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66016, this City Council has held at least one public meeting and received oral and written presentations thereat, with respect to "development fees" prior to the adoption of this Resolution. (vi) Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66018, this City Council has conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing with respect to the rates, fees and charges not included within the "development fees" described above, prior to the adoption of this Resolution. (vii) - This City Council desires to adjust the rates, fees and charges and to implement new rates, fees and charges for various governmental services provided by the City of Diamond Bar as set forth herein. (viii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. In all respects as set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution. 2. This City Council hereby finds and determines that, based upon the data, information, ."analyses, oral and written documentation presented to this City Council concerning the fees and charges described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, the rates, fees and charges set forth in said Exhibit "A" do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the rate, fee or charge is levied. 3. The rates, fees and charges set forth in Exhibit "A", as further described below, hereby are adopted and approved as the rates, fees and charges for the services identified for each such rate, fee and/or charge. 4. The rates, fees and charges set forth in Exhibit "A" and each of them, shall be effective and shall be implemented commencing August 19, 1991. 5. Immediately upon the effective date of the rates, fees and charges set forth in Exhibit "A" inclusive, any previously established rate, fee and/or charge shall be, and the same hereby is, superseded by the rates, fees and charges established in said Exhibit "A". PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of July , 1991. MAYOR I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on 2nd day. of July 1991, by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - Nardella, Papen, Mayor Pro Tem Kim, Mayor Forbing NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - Werner ABSTAINED: COUNCIL -MEMBERS - None ATTEST: LYND RR�CESS, Cit, Jerk City of Diamond Bar O Y > O O q O p O - n• O O> M> y O w ■ C L •w _. _. > p p A nC ■ n1O•� . .Ar Y > n^ ens n n .A+ n b n .bi n n 7 6 N 3 6 ^ O A r r A f��� ■ A A 1W A A Ao w 7 eny n n 7 n ■ p n n f1 1 O OAi S a S i 7 •A7 S a TAi 7 a 4 ^ n o N 7 A b ill -• a s T N N n J M w A - n y • tl n A N n m y -w 7 M N 7 Y M [7 1O GGGGG A L A 7 V N^ N• C 1 b 's ■ b b 1 b AAA ■ -i O M `C A A fs A n A M N A w �f n f► A n l w (� n n n n GGG S l n •n O b N W < A A 3 A A A 3 A a O 7 A S <• A •' w �1 , 1 t0 •� b tl •tl to ^ tl 1 -s A O ? O b Y O O O N O 3 0 ^ O y 0 q Oo ■ C 0 A_ A^ O ^� •y o -'t -'c 7 1 n l c o 0 w K •`C CL n •On 7no o o n 00 o o m m + o CID 111 ■ n. n n A r tp A ■ A n fs A ■ A n A n A A 7 C1 N R ((>ff A Z A n A A Z A A A O O O `C y y n y 1+ N r It ~ A b a n b n O b e n■ n o $ a n� -.a[ lM A n p -� O b A A _ ■ A A 7 1.4a n A Q N ■ n yC n �.• �^ nn < In N yQo V -• N Li 0 O^• 7 a n A w If55n n en n J ^ n _ n n M 0 7nr p �_ „ � L �_ s xz• � 7 3 "z •� o g �s0�'od3n 37 77 vObA■n o L � _ � w -bi A b• Y� ey1 n A N ,c t1 ) A m m > 70 ^ m m m H Q o ern z v m v c z �m<.. Y a < < -=a m Z A c2 9 K N m C Q -n A NN_ �o 164 inNp 3. m r A m p- ti m 2 i 2 < T Z -. Li n S z 4 r Z N = N = N N R1 2 > A y M T y y m O m p~ m> m -� m A m b 5 p H A -ni 10 m r nT h i -t 70 m A m m m y m ...e m19 An AAA A m4 = 2c 4 H Mm > �<' g74 = 2 -. 30 Apl O A NpR�'` S , 3 >' A M_p0 2 m A A A ... r g ! Z > r > r N v. r v > N m >� m z — - r p m oo N Z Y O Yze CII I M N O 16402", M x M � ee M W A m M N Y O 2 O Z O Y O O 2 'q" p N %A C'f O O to {m/� O,^. yA IKM N 'oi O O yS + < J S r O y M9, N• o N A■ m m T x z m ~ SMS SM� m :ppipp o �v� iz ■ Cl A r >An A 2 INoo -+ -1 A -7 n r 7C N A w L S N N .+ g N N m A m 2 . O. � -' , _ pp _ Am + OV10 O p m m Ir, r m O No s �Ox N O �-+ S orro -+00-+ •y co < m A N; A -t N •-1 N N N r. m -IA x —,a 2' + + + N p p2 T AAAOf m T A NOPO \ \ \ p m r r r m O m 70 m m > A O 00 y A m A T rn < m > m A N m N • Y � T O v x O Y > O O q O p O - n• O O> M> y O w ■ C L •w _. _. > p p A nC ■ n1O•� . .Ar Y > n^ ens n n .A+ n b n .bi n n 7 6 N 3 6 ^ O A r r A f��� ■ A A 1W A A Ao w 7 eny n n 7 n ■ p n n f1 1 O OAi S a S i 7 •A7 S a TAi 7 a 4 ^ n o N 7 A b ill -• a s T N N n J M w A - n y • tl n A N n m y -w 7 M N 7 Y M [7 1O GGGGG A L A 7 V N^ N• C 1 b 's ■ b b 1 b AAA ■ -i O M `C A A fs A n A M N A w �f n f► A n l w (� n n n n GGG S l n •n O b N W < A A 3 A A A 3 A a O 7 A S <• A •' w �1 , 1 t0 •� b tl •tl to ^ tl 1 -s A O ? O b Y O O O N O 3 0 ^ O y 0 q Oo ■ C 0 A_ A^ O ^� •y o -'t -'c 7 1 n l c o 0 w K •`C CL n •On 7no o o n 00 o o m m + o CID 111 ■ n. n n A r tp A ■ A n fs A ■ A n A n A A 7 C1 N R ((>ff A Z A n A A Z A A A O O O `C y y n y 1+ N r It ~ A b a n b n O b e n■ n o $ a n� -.a[ lM A n p -� O b A A _ ■ A A 7 1.4a n A Q N ■ n yC n �.• �^ nn < In N yQo V -• N Li 0 O^• 7 a n A w If55n n en n J ^ n _ n n M 0 7nr p �_ „ � L �_ s xz• � 7 3 "z •� o g �s0�'od3n 37 77 vObA■n o L � _ � w -bi A b• Y� ey1 n A N ,c Z A x n o > JC x v N m •� I ) Z N N T � O Oo p,] Y C to � T m T R Z Or T H n T Y w � T O m pn r p cl n T n T O n A OyO T n m N pZ C n m r O~O (A'� m A O m = p T -i L f i nz > Y z rn L C v m m n m n w r z m = r m8rn A ) } rn = r r m C LZ'f O T m C Z m CZ'fc)f ,Cn f0 .- S G •n rn 2 A z 7o m .< r n N R o i T Y nnp Y m C T = O -r 2 m Z m 39 rn m A x ~ m ) N -+ en m m t r _ 7C -y -� N ro roIcCA n n r pA b A ]% 2 T O V a V N () V, N p v O. N N ro A ro A A A A O• G h ]e -. b N m N m .+ N m N cm N O O R1 O O O O N A y A P O <_ N N N N O V1 VI O %A y m m N N N N N Z+1 O Oo p pp -1 m N pp T m N „ 2 m m > z m m x s ti m - N O N Y o r O Z v ro n n Y •••� N �+) Y— v) M v } O ) ) } ) O o v ) v s) ) m v i m s v z V O y m r 0 0 r. s s -+ n i +. — n -q C 2 Y) O b w m n n r n m r O n y n n m m r m r m n m m .+ n n r r 1 -, > t� r S �+ K m C O O m C C C c T C C r C C T T C T T O C C c r{ O ^ r— oZ r r n m r r T o r r r r m m m r m T r r pnO 114N T T A n m m A7 m -+ r O O O s x z O s 2 O -1 O O O C CC ^-� N O ro A S UI n -•' ^-' O H y N -+ '^ ^• N �+•+ Y N T K .� m m K i niD r O N 2 AI A N y I. -1 -� m N 1 -1 N O w N A m 7 m nxnry O mr)m Cr .. o Zn Zr mOm O m ) C i n .• Y n m y b n Y n y nm n n <^ y^ C p m ti )^ O r O r y) mm m m 2 'p 2. m m K N O Y_ Kn w o O M M M M •pn-1 M -p7� Knp �7 "' M n» vl Xm1]O -y CY Z -1nr Arn m • •N T O r O N > Z N O O O O n O -� ^_ Oo O pKi m O �pf o v O m p Z> i Z A N A V pp V H 2 -•, n O A > -1 V -•1 AAA O � O O 777DDD -< N O O O to pp 7! A O A 7b A S O -1 N -iN No A 76N-� 'V y rmT... 0 m O o m O Ow C O 7LL-p .O K A A T) '•1 m T T u� y r N m 0 ny n ypm np ypm vTp Z pmm 8m C, --. A C^C�� Jam) W r O C m Q= K C } O_ m y m .-. I,1 3 m N -. N .- m m m m N m m 1 �, — m m O o — 0 0 Y r o o -� n -. -. m m �1 A •-VN A2c m b O-1 mn> S-+ 1J Z N A 16 0 nrr Nr m n> -+Fa •- O A ••• -� -1 = n -'1 Y m O my V r O !i m 31 :�AAKK n� n= 7 o 0 A ^ m Y W > m 2. > n o mTaO n nnaK v i pA pmn-1-, N> N Zo - 4- n r N O m b .+ Z N n z -. n • 7Y cli m r N N r N T 40 2 In 7b miQp^ N A n 7b 7 ` m w m p _ n m n 9 pp •O 70 N m O n -• 3 m r C o z O -v r ti Q -C A b N N z n m n _ T m T -� m . :.. J� • • ran < :1 Q•M+nC A pnC n O+ ?p C• A n g 7 0 �+ V• O C, 'o • +y N O 0OO0� N rON •+a q \ O C O Q' O+� niCnfG rnfV.r1.i >p CyN O�w Ow p. _Os > � Kni Vr o• o• Kn07 > Anm r mr to 0 -, N N m -+N - C O +• a MON+OV1 O0M w Op r m N N nC Oel epi n O O O OO O v 3. N C, O ^ w O O P O O O A n Z O 7 7 C A r N Q O O O P O n r S [ On N 7 n e n n 0 m r, C -11 cp C O K�L� A w 'nf O V m Oo0 r c � nn a �' a m pOOO 0000 ps p�pg pg pg 0000000 �4 O0 ~ Oi n Nip A -. u 7 7'O �� 00 n a A A� otW tv �� a� b .5o n p c bf n o000 0 0 0 o m n � n O O A n w r w r o . • CY mm m r ,i it ., n �v.00•N.cv, O r erm o n .n. m� n n s r rrrO m -r ,w .• iii n n y e w ' m yr 0000-1 N N N N N 7oS N 7 T w 7.O /► A O N � 'aa1 -. N M n w pp pp pp O (� p•pTff b , M m N -D S� ONN O 'A ov vA > AA]O 70m 0p a? 7O 'pA p p mrQ- W 0 N N C) 70 N FM N > m O m 7s7 �n1 O O rya 'O 'f "cg nic C ani a n -• p^ Y i b n O ^ r, m r n n a » 4 G o n « i N m r - 0 9-~. C C C)"W O N O •A S S O• C, 0 0 C)O O� O p 0 0 0 0. 0 0 7 O O G N « O •+ W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 1[ n L A O p C Q7n +•N O +. J+p -Oi.N On O O r pp%AJ ! 0 SoSogQ ���. oz 8888VI • o A •Or O IA O O S. C .;5W. � o S - S. 8 & & S � n n $nn n -C -c O_~i CC m si ni i a; �� n n i-c•t-c m N& n N P c O el r r. .•ni M n o p � p O NN J 8—v y m 7 W S p n O x CC CC -Oi ••.n i 0 n n C O A OT La _ C M L O j m A ••• �. n 00 A n n x oo-c > x x n o o w n r n n r cc CL& N « • n z jw X X z m O O O O C x m � � � Z ! �e Ll A 2 C1 N oo gn n n n b A = m -• O 3 � •". Q N m y n r w b N N Z m s O m r -.� > m > •+ , n r•, w w 0 p 7e m n m m T r o n o Vf m N T m O m m fo m yf 7e m m n_ OK i� onnn m o m - Gp 7 n n•o ^7Osow X n C, CL rte s yr •f '1 � H 7, C -.^w.., , � •+ i _ V O. O M A ••C po a,a N3 n, N N }7 _n n d 0 ,p `•C N ^ 0�7 O n,.D X u•O N b , + -. T• S N N o a N -1 t� ,K '•• M N r' R n N "s 4a1 , �_ O N ^ f61 O m n O O rt � n « , ] P V+ [1 • n �! ^� a A O O O N O O R ... Y (i� N •o+ .•�j p^ 7•N 0 ;� oo x 0 .01 f> +•N O +. J+p -Oi.N On O O r pp%AJ ! 0 SoSogQ ���. oz 8888VI • o A •Or O IA O O S. C .;5W. � o S - S. 8 & & S � n n $nn n -C -c O_~i CC m si ni i a; �� n n i-c•t-c m N& n N P c O el r r. .•ni M n o p � p O NN J 8—v y m 7 W S p n O x CC CC -Oi ••.n i 0 n n C O A OT La _ C M L O j m A ••• �. n 00 A n n x oo-c > x x n o o w n r n n r cc CL& N « • n z jw X X z m O O O O O f•1 r N oo gn n n n n N 3 s rrr. w r w b n N w S X H M A n N O•M-+n n n nV-- Sz o Y N In> 0 0 O r 0 !'C -•• •V •.3. m noS o�fr�$EfFY�.- in«n r N oo gn n n n n N 3 s rrr. -•o n A to 0 O pp , O •+ , n r•, w w 0 n n O �-$ •� �f O 0 0 m Snn�El�• O o n n n i o n .• r �' « M n M 7 0, n n b rt w w r- C.� , m m C, — ii n o n ^ OK i� onnn m o • - Gp 7 n n•o ^7Osow n C, CL rte s yr •f '1 or 7, C -.^w.., , � •+ i _ V O. O M A ••C po a,a N3 n, N N }7 _n n d r•. ,p `•C N ^ 0�7 O n,.D n O 7 K u•O O� b , + -. T• S N N o a n -1 t� ,K '•• M N r' R n N 4a1 , �_ O N ^ f61 O CSL n O O rt � n « , ] P V+ [1 • n �! ^� a A O O O O O R ... (i� N •o+ .•�j p^ 7•N 0 ;� oo .01 f> 7 7 cs n n m n n nn nn c T p 0 9 + Z7 w M w N , n Q n• .N�r• n K O N n O O O r N O S O N • .. .. .• p N r+ N n n �«- rt -rtt Q t' bd �d gri F3€ti�3a t' t� �$ j�N 3d cad to 33 3dR rQ2 �w p TTnTT ~�AOT oT m ti!1 `Q TID— T A C'pw rn OS i.+ r m.p+ ^ Z nnN Cl•-• r" IC u�m Y� nz CO i A mvx -. A T 7 } / ro f l -rz m in "rnA m Ap N = QX.p m YO -( Z Nr" Q C -Y> -(r Q C Oe�T}�p-.ri O wm.-. pNy m ti-( rti DDD�17 K11_ 1" m� m gS-4 T A•H �p1 Gp S T i � R Om NA N CZ 2 O CO -C) np tet. tC�i^ m �lpro L1. m ANC m •t GMI+�1 pi Y -Oi t � Cmi i C !rl 7b m '" ',p / I ! Y m _ +Oi i p� _m -mom+ O Ino o Y C 8 T)p H i> Z 10pQ nm -i CR1 Or }O A ? m � m in g r N�mp y}Y( z < xg 20, Tx } x>i -• z m1 p O T Y T~ N N N N m m} N N Q C y m fiA-4' O rm T m TO A N mrm r A� m•I Y m .NG T) ro �n T -4 ~ m Y_ m O O �O_ Am A vE22A L T (pm�D m}m7 ZN ' O Cr �TS�T11 m A^ O S O ! O A w..1� T L'1 .. H r'- }` H mZ Y 97 mK S C1m-r i v .-. ym CCC mrY O C S RN m mIn m O m m O Ski p -[ Nw Of A H dpp m Oro' T A T^ Z p i rK O pp..NOr .-. .Na O O O O O O O O O O O O O O m N O = ~ T O � m m Nw w V• O N N -+ O O O M N N O r O N O N O O O O N OQ V M = m z S ngi Aij Y Y"i $ n s Y,i$ giros zoo FMn nz i n -ez g mn rN -tZ z�m x -y y C7ro��� m rm m c pPr,. p t"f r i + Y m ctrl o 1. exit n i 7r e1 A n i �' * s rx+t i m i z ezie mm ~ m> tern mmm :-4 : z xx x Y ` a� on nn- N Nr mr m 99 p .y N N P T O �+ T < N S 2 N b t r T O �c Z T T mLi 11tA00 }s Y mY m�C e+l N D O ae T.. �1 Te1i Y i T -�7°L A iAA i OO A -+-+C n A -r } PZ -ti �Y rr S S r xr C�i^ Qm- � z r Pr^mQm m Amm} ~•y wry A AP -f +fr zm m wz K p -1 ]cT � m..0 O O � n O 'y Z• m -R!! N O N^ mm l~ A N tF eft Z f) ^ Z lop, AM AL T T A T yy po sw po T �o MA ' A A.P.. �T � �"! r >R Z N A rr \NNQ Z i n ^ oq 8� mR`�oicr^ RA �� ... fn O 2 O!a PANT -f Al m yr �m A� 0" .!q m n O � - _.~. liy NNy p xp O O O i 77 P x e T S Y e0 w NO i n "'ZZ w i yy m >y Q mYT2 59 Orob A� 40 C= - Z ZCf� } m Y - Y " r 11 x m N C- r n T ! A ti N N Y P CC n Z _ A N N n m i �( --� N S C7 T • O P T C x mT> b -� m O x r P ^ N m _ Z ro Z A O m?C PSIn AZ m Cf rN�-a2 S } n Y Z'O�1 rY ~Tm OC.. �_ ;C:, N v b rmPZ ZNw fPf1H-f _ ppCC ... .+ m T P N 95 + 2 O' ni y N m L7 O O .. Qa - t P N 5�. m r O A } A N C n x 7D p T -. 'NQS ![ -1 -� T P Q ~ -f f m0 (] ! ! ro x N o T gypp„ � fn w N N v o o a "' °' o• x N 0 O O 0 C O N Fm 0 00 00 00 O O S H M = N ~ O T O m o m z 4 2 s H .r of 4 N V c b - P P O W NO N k p, y� •p p fn vii O O 00 O G O O O O N O �l - I I I I I I III I I I 1 1", QN Z infmff$ $..� X.0 m V m r m = A m -. — r O r O s„� V ,0 7o n A N Z a> P; g .• T; m P P T N Z T J6 N T 70 N > r N 1N' $ 70s r r TPT �! H m N T m m WO win win / 1� m y m y 2 7 N Y O A _ Z9 f 1 O i ps—mm �m CCmNA !=A s n �Z-a Pf itiA A. -•� �N N m_ p Q X N N> .� O m A O P T O 7 T ; Cf 7�0% o sr_ T8 i A�+� ti� } }vN S O N =O N T r Z C T A o z m m ry �> 1l� f" y o y }� �1 ... f- p..4 A�O Q -1 TT b ZIZ�L AT T. ~TG_ N OOO L.+ y 'C •r •-� ! MR P N ^ --1 1 'O O -1 N �1 1 -!1 -� N m r Z — T Z _ ••1 T N lel-pwm i+f >r- mbP i_}yo SsA MM -W ='M 0 �mC -y f7 '► -1 A -� n O O> Np N m Z C1 ! T' 7!! N O N> I-4 rnpf f 9 fNpze� AO Z O A, x A 2 H A IJ � Y ft1 !P* 1 H O bbr.. �' �C INeI N O� YI � 9 N � 0P C ny I r y� A 1'f O p `cam Ceri�io .. QQ.� -0 A C ff�I� -ti P' ••1 O� X41 -1 N N Oft. 1- Crm m N N N 7yQ1 S Z x m S T N nn Z = b M Z N X A A D 2 O N T > N 70 m xQ C I� (7 p ©©p 700 CK p =m T 7[ C6 Apt (App 1pmQT pTQ�6N. 2Jm �p P 'Oy m N N m X A I'f1 Z N O -/ ffffy O 11 11 S C Z > m O r N N A Z OO. G fn p N OO p vp1 O G b A ti r M p yt O O O a Qr�C r O O O m A H P iniiNff n m fel! N m N N = -. Z r� O O O O _ O O O �n a� s n Y :FA N O O •� � _I -R1 O �Q4 � fel n -s m ! m N y V .+ C f J T 't O vr V O T N _ r: -4 r H rn m _ . T T N U �1 T m m j� pp N V1 2 T f N A fn N U N 2 infmff$ $..� X.0 m V m r m = A m -. — r O r O s„� V ,0 7o n A N Z a> P; g .• T; m P P T N Z T J6 N T 70 N > r N 1N' $ 70s r r TPT �! H m N T m m WO win win / 1� m y m y 2 7 N Y O A _ Z9 f 1 O i ps—mm �m CCmNA !=A s n �Z-a Pf itiA A. -•� �N N m_ p Q X N N> .� O m A O P T O 7 T ; Cf 7�0% o sr_ T8 i A�+� ti� } }vN S O N =O N T r Z C T A o z m m ry �> 1l� f" y o y }� �1 ... f- p..4 A�O Q -1 TT b ZIZ�L AT T. ~TG_ N OOO L.+ y 'C •r •-� ! MR P N ^ --1 1 'O O -1 N �1 1 -!1 -� N m r Z — T Z _ ••1 T N lel-pwm i+f >r- mbP i_}yo SsA MM -W ='M 0 �mC -y f7 '► -1 A -� n O O> Np N m Z C1 ! T' 7!! N O N> I-4 rnpf f 9 fNpze� AO Z O A, x A 2 H A IJ � Y ft1 !P* 1 H O bbr.. �' �C INeI N O� YI � 9 N � 0P C ny I r y� A 1'f O p `cam Ceri�io .. QQ.� -0 A C ff�I� -ti P' ••1 O� X41 -1 N N Oft. 1- Crm m N N N 7yQ1 S Z x m S T N nn Z = b M Z N X A A D 2 O N T > N 70 m xQ C I� (7 p ©©p 700 CK p =m T 7[ C6 Apt (App 1pmQT pTQ�6N. 2Jm �p P 'Oy m N N m X A I'f1 Z N O -/ ffffy O 11 11 S C Z > m O r N N A Z OO. G fn p N OO p vp1 O G b A ti pp w C p yt O O O a S r O O O m A H P n m y O O r O 0 O O O O m O O O Y M n N O O infmff$ $..� X.0 m V m r m = A m -. — r O r O s„� V ,0 7o n A N Z a> P; g .• T; m P P T N Z T J6 N T 70 N > r N 1N' $ 70s r r TPT �! H m N T m m WO win win / 1� m y m y 2 7 N Y O A _ Z9 f 1 O i ps—mm �m CCmNA !=A s n �Z-a Pf itiA A. -•� �N N m_ p Q X N N> .� O m A O P T O 7 T ; Cf 7�0% o sr_ T8 i A�+� ti� } }vN S O N =O N T r Z C T A o z m m ry �> 1l� f" y o y }� �1 ... f- p..4 A�O Q -1 TT b ZIZ�L AT T. ~TG_ N OOO L.+ y 'C •r •-� ! MR P N ^ --1 1 'O O -1 N �1 1 -!1 -� N m r Z — T Z _ ••1 T N lel-pwm i+f >r- mbP i_}yo SsA MM -W ='M 0 �mC -y f7 '► -1 A -� n O O> Np N m Z C1 ! T' 7!! N O N> I-4 rnpf f 9 fNpze� AO Z O A, x A 2 H A IJ � Y ft1 !P* 1 H O bbr.. �' �C INeI N O� YI � 9 N � 0P C ny I r y� A 1'f O p `cam Ceri�io .. QQ.� -0 A C ff�I� -ti P' ••1 O� X41 -1 N N Oft. 1- Crm m N N N 7yQ1 S Z x m S T N nn Z = b M Z N X A A D 2 O N T > N 70 m xQ C I� (7 p ©©p 700 CK p =m T 7[ C6 Apt (App 1pmQT pTQ�6N. 2Jm �p P 'Oy m N N m X A I'f1 Z N O -/ ffffy O 11 11 S C Z > m O r N N A Z OO. G fn p N OO p vp1 O G b A ti 3 i 9 94 p1 2 u a w a O O O N m O O O O O O O O O O O O r O O O n n r m 2 N U O O 3 i 9 94 p1 2 T -�a T =7! K- 7 T ^^ .T.. �! T OT T 00- N C T Cl - T -- >)--O- . 7 T n 2 70. m o < A N jr m—i :mn - r N A m ^-1� y�H pQ>mO 2 N< m- m --I m N- O n O = 2C n p 5m CZjm O m 70 'mOr 5is -A Z p� P'N C^ ! y O m < Q T 2 -d A p� ' i TTpm A= T A vn --. x N O -i �A1Ooo $Q T -4 Z ffQ71 pn Z Cyy i2 ^ i-+ v=>= 2 'p m A z C1 ZA nm 7 > r m' T v »TA >}m Y tt _ m �? -n Zt x S m A x Z N -+ = rn > n CS m x m y A rR1 » -+� O C SS AN> N m N r�r T �1 p0 m Syy > b >r Y n m Sm m> n N C SS <T N C!-� m N A m A A p ZO-a Z O s rn 1' n m m > IZm> n S> O O ^ 1 < AI CJI xrm mn r CSf >~y N AaO� TZ in N vi '�Z m O XT 642 2 =m nny O N.<T.. 7111 pC z-1 m ASm _m> An C fOt tSI } m2C AZ- r po A f O Z O ~0-4 n s O�O ""p A Cm r� i Q NC m mp> -n Z S m- A -y -� A A7> cc N Y ~ im -� -. Z m -mi p X A >m> ' T RS1 XCL7H 76�Z m-4 7~oA 7=v N M. O <m V. C S > eA 7-4 � _ 0 ti po m A N m C m m~ A m I_ nNim >m> in n V 1 7 C- � S "'T A�7r ^m nZ X 1�1 Cn N po i C m )m m>'1 ti N ff1 �O =q `A ob> A Z A T~ N -1 O msic O- C N 0m '649N �m7 m m p A N V V V V N V V V N y y V V V 7 O O V1 O V1 O %A O V1 O O N O %n O N O O O %A O N O O O • O 70 O N RI m rno A 4 1 � l!1 N N VI N O VI V� Vf V1 N N VI N VI m m �n T N T C)a f1! (l Sm S T n Z 8 m �rT m•r imX TPCTAA �v~ , } �Om... �N P »AA 1 r T� t7 r -1T -fir m m m ,MRM m O•t .-1 Nr i O�r x r T a0 A M1 C r N T C rC ppLi -Oim T i7 3 xA y -mT Z A '_ n g V v m V m T m mrT m W oo C p m ` r N Z TnT O m r 7C a Zp rPrr Z rn P A P P T- '� rn x o •• _ _ P i ! •- S Or T m i O O O N n C) A MM m es a m Z mp p p 8j C 71 _CNrmv 2 N N 11�� 000 Zp ee 4Ll SO�.y vN ZAC1 _ ff!!11 hh11 my�. -1 <� -4 pfel ~�S A� Nm-. 7O ^ -�-t-� N A A_ A m Z N _ r i L7 'n �O NN 24n = O. S O M. . OA p� ��,�f1m S N(a1. �-4 "R A )> ~v m 9a Z •t ]O �11 A A a m� YC'f x 7( Za! A-�m yy nS �N TS D S Tlr m O m m N��1111 QF V 2 •pr O ;a[f1 H •�•1� m) �a�Oe aAl1S mYmm� N1 a-4Nm ff O A -1 r P •-� T n A N C y N rA m+ N -1 'aT N n . A _Nn.T. --� a N m ' Z-�• N. -4-r �op.(p(Q'1�A— mimi n. � 1. O>= OAN T 7C e= r7trm m c� �^ ^" N O {, f1f A 7 1 ICA O m -- F" 5: -:i < Z Z Nr C <r7 A O Cf 2-m �. Z r O O .. Z.• C l- T T= '. T P N a C 1 2 a Z N r T r r -. Z m m^ 2}vp -12tN. e�„n T ar a •[� m p?<op N >•=-. 700�ro� _ _ > Q A1C n!- s-. I ggg m N7Ai Az~ ZZ RRRIII On t'70r Tao AA ri m-. n 0r r •� A hhfl A S N n! A mz •s ((S�AO ar p . N C 2 C ^ A m es r Zm Al I(�I-PC Er -4 mn A a> ... ]CT Xr N= ml'C/O ��N�s N Z •�.. y r !O m f6` C1 A all s N < y= T a N A N N! Oars T r "a m +1 r r u mazes• z -czr m.. 'a I n A N n d 0 p A A A r T m m m 2 m r 20- Nji Z�PA,'.'< A zvr zzp +�s...m mm mus zO yvB•A.1 NO=Y m flCf m pzAr 8 A '. RRII pN A p A T T T= O ' rrT...y r N S .� m n- m O ! 2 I- n �r p A -4m O s ? r Tr O. p JjpO t/r�7ppO �pT m N S N O z m NZ ZAti 70• ? pp T KAA N C a r ymm> OA Z W. n Oy P�ry m N m pt 'j vN P xx n m mT -a m r T m m ..� N P y� N.G to W N V p O O 8 m O O 1 m m • I I i 0 0069 $ n m r Tn i. r fl r 2 f c S Y N Y A m n An, p O Q v o Q o O p 7 Y r Z mr � N f"170 ]0 071r A � O f0 Ar A-+ nA r -gym AAnD> y � r -y r Cep m rrr rnzr S -N^ -N�t -r S "c _ m --Z mNmS rn� mNMT (C� p 11�, p Z^' ps nr mT N�O m Vp1r Hint x y+> A ANNx N` pn A ti >-�Oti YON 7 N O OOOI 'OANAY f'f �1 pn-y=o>nm S Nr0 rZA D A r ^= T_ r� T Y 1 NM77m��Y-4 rn> N� fR'lii G nM C. I M 00>in§Z -4 M AO ��y im=marrDZnr- n s: Y 8 _ (q�A r /" XS TT 4 Ommm ?>nsmml" mti :0 MAC � Z 1 � M y-1 -CC� N X m 77 -t r- m` m SS n � m N�;,c: i N`Nv mS^�? m rl frim O 7� isBA C N CC -+ D 7O "T99 Z ? R m /yyyy�11`{{`` > 7 AAn CTm? ' i m N m Nyn n CC NIr�r���nA P' fIAI r- m N R1 cnr G.. j Z ON. CCr N O > Nmm Np(D'r -. n'S ymy/Z min, S p _ n S O` OIC us Nm.. R -1 N•�m F r C �C fll /TETT C -1 r-. -1 Z A R n r X K 171 R1 1r+1 -1 mn C L mC~-� Cy 1 y nm Ipn�R S• R�fl i r N' -'i -1 Yr NCO .--11"A m i R 1 r m I lll!!! "` • Z Q n C m M S N iY p1 -+nr SNK rrONi P y v Z Srn -N m- m Z O OZ r << mS_77to0o m N C S = n om i N? yyyyyyN pn= xp pom mr m -.R (((("'' >x R mni 1 -+2 0 A AN�1pr m n 1 O T "m N O r m r >r Am IS rm` r f] S n 5 O A N m �8C n v cO] xmmpp� " 3d i°w M=OO,mCm n Cm >rrre Annm f0 M rDn SCO i mp7 M 2 N r = `n �1 ! r Xf m C m rm> .� o m s rn = m m i N A v N i r T (nC�' off 2 t�i1 o O N N b N P O O O O O � , 53 A ocoC T' ooT m> Tp >. T a p T o m n f}f O > "acN X�- Y A C rnrnp r A= pTp m iA!-Tpp -or. mmN Kj vO ti eft M .0 -C A m r C - d A -+r0 K_CC Ni ! N—z O x Z 4 � �- O m �1 yp1 /� Z ... -i >nm of N N n-A+NNN Nr nInc i i A C A n3C C) z 1A AKrC'N y C�� NA r- 8�7 fy1 �r -r R m i= N n xA_ C•�-1 O JO>A_ C_ m O A K < WO _ 1-04 O-4^^ A •A _ �N�r ai i> Q�CIr m nmm N HN C A ! H Cr, i N N A -1a rrs Offix oz m A ba w�NA......m 70ZN 7� {]� AmaYin x -� m N _{f� is > .;t f71 P>" • A A N Cm r Z Z N C N N O N A— N l T YCInK m -, X -V rn en N � Nz r p mS N N yyQ1 H�� r zN _ r GM N T' i lin L) — m a Z C n R/ .. r E 9 m l �1• >> A O -r — Z N O A m m ! A A S > Qbo S'T> C9Q N87C Z = O O C O r �I A K = 0 m A m— ypQ TIS— M-4 Ar r x Cf r m N r -+ m r 7e n m> -ySOY Te=�1 T>P>P Nmr p > r xr" -az m >A pC�- Q r N m 'm Y N Z -r m �v FM n m po NnfA+lf7a v r� z mth A mn rn -40 o� = im jr.gI m� rA+rvip�' �ei-z Vi A'm m0 K rx K N O y> m-CZfA N S Y N2 n m.r+N O C 2� Azo n.. mr rn N C Z m A m 2 a T Kr O A y> /Ar 1 N > C' 1 O A N fffhhh >Z 2 C -r 2.-x -40 ,p -� .~» p m m y r' S TAAA Z r A 70 s Cf O >r C C m Cf -t N O N >A — rO n z ! ` N n v N z r N N y p N LW V O N g 0 O 0 o m o o 6 6 m 0 0 m * -+ T z n � m x rn rn m N n A p A A c� v C r -, � m m Fn C z y r m m N -1 Q p n F" O C m N 1 u Or C N�O N r C V O O N O _ m N m A ri 1 N N N C T O O N Opo n x T m rn Lo m n rn n x C r m C ~ T mp A C r m m -i N S O C r m s T TI T M'w N 25 O Vol P ^ n o t �ii O o ogoo v C = T RI > 2 1 v n A vl .. T• m = A N -r m _ ~ O ^ O O Z Z N O Q s y m 1 p r T z > A C N i n T < ti O31 v O vp OOp0 Z 10 T N } Pr N A PZ A 5Ce -4 C: n m m rn m m IC y N In y A A A T� y � c G O T _ A m Q T m _ N ,.o> F- T rn n 000 ) m 7, T 1 �A1 T O 70 P O m m 1�1 r � N� Ny 0 m n ^ x A / > c T C T _ 71 IA 0 Nn = p r T m ^ C P T r O A T P N ~ O Z 4n T (1 n -r i r"T x rm S Y > n N wp. A J T M'w N VI mrQQoQ (Y'I Np 70 i VI m m m O o ogoo I C = T N > 2 1 v n A vl .. T• m = Nn -r m _ m O r O C O s m > A O N O A n T .y rn O31 v 7C0 N vp OOp0 Z 10 T M A N A T A -4 C: m m rn m O N H �1 N W -ml a T L n N Q 1 N r w T M'w N VI mrQQoQ (Y'I Np 70 O O -4 O = A w O m y o—c,n m m o ogoo I C = T N > > rn 1 v n A vl .. T• m = O -r m _ m O r O m O s m O N O A n T .y rn O31 A A 7C0 N vp OOp0 Z 10 T M A N A T O M -4 C: 0o m rn O O O M dl O A m T N.. y � c G O T 2 Im r O -4 O = A w O m y o—c,n m m o ogoo I � V C, a O N N N A T rm y -r m s r- O O O~ O s m O N O = N .y O31 vp OOp0 r yp1 m r r C, rm I V N N n_ A A O O N A O O O~ O O O .y O31 ~C Z 10 T O > O T 3c O A T N.. y = G OG O m ,.o> F- z 000 70 7, A T O Q O 0 '^ 1�1 r � N� Ny 0 m -a A > c T C _ 0 C T m ^ C P T r O A T P N ~ T (1 r"T m > n wp. A O M n m Z m C 00 n7D aa � r"m Z o 0 rn m j o N fm O M O n _ • O 0 I? O 0 m Im G O i A v LA � w n > 1 z m p _ m -4 m I rn m O m ozo A � r N— T y VI O r W 00 T r w r Nm ONNZ r N i m z S S crm „ -� m -pc 2 O r_rn rn > > o T O x70 „ m ~ T > Z n� m n �+ > S mom _ T T T1 N = O v -4 A = H > f=7r, O m p Nv = 4�rA r1 v A 1 CO .�.. m> T F = r > : T -4 L N T m T N � — G m m� � Z > A o T> m =m 70 A A N N A _= m 70 N m A T 1 >m rrnn co m Q O r m m m m A mm mcim _ m O z r T z > mO r r_ H oaom i m m rrnn > ^ rm O A m m ZY z T mz 0> K X mX3 m r „z,� > A O Z r r N I'm, o m m T : — mNv m�. z — nm H ti x > O '- mi> Mw mCA A < N _ T X00 m N Z m > O N i � -ni < > H l7 p mrm _ rn :° �Nm o > A Om z z r mm A >> m > C) Y m m O r O 1'. G N m N r 0 m m z X O m n No O 7C S i A z > � w m m \ i m p _ m -4 m I rn m O m ozo A � r N— T y VI O r W 00 T m K w r Nm ONNZ r N i m z S S crm „ -� m -pc 2 O Z A > > o T o „ m 7>0 8 m >.aOnr�rNir> > m m Din m n �+ > ... T mom K m _ N v m>> y ID < yQm > VI N VI m p Nv = 4�rA r1 RI A CO m> IA y "rte L N r T r T m T ~ — G m m� r— n o 07>0 D T> _ r m mm m A A N N A _= m 70 Y m o -4 rrnn co m Q O A A mm mcim m O r T z > mO r r_ ... z oaom i m m rrnn > rm O A mz 0> -.a X mX3 m m m+. A O Z >m • N I'm, o m : — mNv m�. z — nm H ti x > O '- mi> Mw mm o G m =o X00 m > O = rp � -ni < > H l7 p _ rn :° �Nm i o � w N N \ R r In W W W N — m M M = N P O P.n O y VI O r W 00 T m K w r Nm ONNZ m ti y 3. r O S S N S 2 O Z A > > o T o „ m 7>0 8 m >.aOnr�rNir> > m m Din n n ... T x K _ N m>> y ID A yQm N m, Nv = 4�rA r1 OZr 'O M !1 O IA rnm "rte L go o O m T v G m m� r— n o 07>0 D T> = m A A N N A -off 70 Y i = m x b N NW W W W N O P.n n C -yi 0 C O 00 O O r Nm ONNZ V1 1 O 3. M CT CD CD O Z A am o T o „ m 7>0 8 m >.aOnr�rNir> > m m Din O y ... T x _ N m>> y ID yQm N Nv = 4�rA r1 OZr 'O M !1 IA "rte L go o m in v G m m� r— n o 07>0 T> = m A A N N A >�Z 70 -c m A mT L-� v��' rn>'w mz 'p n co m Q O A A mm mcim >r— O r z > rn m r r_ ... z n m m rrnn > r mz 0> -.a mX3 m m m+. >wz >m • N I'm, : — mNv m�. z — nm '- mi> mm =o X00 m = rp � -ni < > _ rn :° o > Om z z r A >> m > C) m O r O 1'. G N N r m m i M M to Zp N n m m m x m m z -NiQQn T !IA r oor[` N T im Iv n P40O y T > rn 7M . ,. O m D O r x s •y o > � � i •n L= t C m z s x p z n m = • O �o 7c o C7 pr N RI n --4 T P oOrO�-Or O DTZ i' L« i r i r Z Z O n N O m r K T r > r !-/ ^ O r O -� Ll -•� O 1 -� C _ N _ _ N _ < m m 7C O n •r. snc A r > L m Y $ m > > ~ m T .. o Nagy A A g C) n r r.p r-ppryys r kA > FA .x > �3c z C - W 7t m • m m T m m w m-. m -+ -4v N N = owwo m O N -yi rn _ _ 0 $ m ~ N m N� 0 n o o oC -4 H s z N u sat ri c o FF++ f m ^ o nvs' o y N n T y O -oy y j N -0 C �Ome ~ b 0 Csy rn O rn A In O F, T Z m 2 2 S 0 0 m y > y N O si L r �« r L m w m 7 Z m r F' !'• ••� Z> C y F, Ln > av M ji m rn to Zp m m r mN �.. O sO O: z x m> rN O JbmpO p w im Iv n P40O =n sn Crum m-- v v v x • O C < < oOrO�-Or O DTZ i' L« i r i r Z Z O N N O m r K T r > r > r ^ O r O -� Ll -•� O 1 -� C _ N _ _ N _ < m to r -. $ $ i m o Nagy } g C) n r r.p r-ppryys r > z rn MOMS�8�0 O g000 m -+ = owwo i _ n o o H s z N u ri "i f m > Ste.no o O -oy y j N -0 C ~ o� i 0 ~ s _ 2 2 S 0 0 m pp y O N L m Z m r F' !'• ••� y F, M rn N N J. TV rn O O r V1 P N _ O O 0 0 0 T O O %A M M � C O O O m m T, m m> O M m ri n c N N Ttit O O K Nn xnx n in 11lllmmmmm S n S n S n S T •Y > m V 73 C N •-1 r C -0 O n S m N 'n C3 T� � � O >>CrC 7?� CC> rr>> O �COv �> 2> mr• i Cl Cmr O 0050 < �n o zr V = ago mr Z O t > < > m C oororaro>x > O^Z---Z-•• Z^ ZO r O m m nn O -m -�77 v -yn m =O•r Imo K n ti O O-r-� C. Cl--�N.... i O N O M p M p V Z ? -Ni n O Q T -Ni T N N S < O omr O O x m m m vZ i_ N 2 N i O n > O> O> lA > O r O -n -C t n --• N T m C T N Ow'p v m rn w2 O n r Or- r- r , >-+ r CC - N ONON ONO` m r n O -V '•� 2 ' T _. O r O .,. O r = - FCY O -to O <_ O • m m r A N O r -rR1 •-I T O to O 0 O O O O N O n Z N 0 0 0 oxo .. x -+ n= m"' o o ��o n A , o ov x 7c N n m < o N T T T T p n > : _R � »n, 0si o n z m r o > x o � mm z o m v ori+ rm O O O N m r rm p O m F ti F n A m O n m ->+ > - r y S K n m K O g x N 8 > r w N -- m 1 V O o o o o m x*°Lzn (n>C H>A O.A. U h Z x m O O n n o z x t _ yn (7 � pTm �>mN t7[ . m S > A - n _m z -V -� m nnst 2 nnr 2KQ i N p10 A m z L ,rift r nn-< 27n'Cp x 7.} nn *d S7Cy -i m z' it N O L m S N = m O x m of O T y m T A � A A x m 2 m x o y Dp m i m C D K -� m> z z m _ r= i o m O n ~ y p "• 2 0 r L -C y mm x y z m . rm g n m rn Op L r K m z r m n Cl > A n r^ Ind z m n n A n K X XXXX XQQ= p_p p=p N Zp N= N P N m N N 2 Z .TZ I. N O > '.' T f7 (1 Q f7m m mmm Om Om N� 00 O O O O 7 A T T m O O ym� R1 N Zpg ZO Zp ZZ N N N N 1p. N O O O y rTi r" 0 0 y n... m O O A A 000 N S S N_ m x w C C C C m m N m FM ~ Z m IA n z z > m m x m n CC CC c r > > >YDID > m m W 8 �pp �pp Hpp N N N n pti pti Oy j N o N f O L z z z z Z 0 0 o m n . A n x y m m z O t A A � n n } > > A n r r r W-+ W Wy WN Cyy yy N V �Y n V N N x m 2 m ON 00 �N �N �• N K VI N N T. fn CC mr mr NGS O• C O N O Y N > O O n m n m O O On O O • SO • O O • O Oo O > O O • ' O O • 7C -� 7C -r o00o o O> O 0 O o - m m-+> iOn 00 0 0 cl -4 nA r- c m m > 00 0 o x xs w n -f Ln n- >N > h rn m > m oo _ cv m n �j m n �+ < t i6 m id m T 00 -( -4 A W ~ A -1 K < H O O O m O� O K K O �m�((N O N O 0 ui " 8 N g N. 2 m Z m O y m ; c > C = m m A m 10 T T Z T T m TK - M m m m m T m m Z Z K m ti T a O 0 O m m O T O T > A > T } m m m m AN > m > m N > N > N > x m m m m x zm z m x m -4 z z z H H �1 W> < S m>< M v N S> m r Q ap s m r N ortCTl> j > � m S O P O S O Oa co O w O 60 40 NVV 44 N M Nv T T N n p m i .+ Vl S D Z m m •�-• V a> m z A O O O 00 m �° m z i o m m Z O O r r D O C_, A m A A 70 O >_ N T M mT�+ K zK -C O 'ppA O C ON m ti n N m LolZ NO Y 7o m A mamz O V! > -' X Z -� 9 n y A m N D r i TQ n . " m m m > z x TC �v?• m m -+ N p F c�L ZN off f[ Z to N� .<-. N Y A O O > m SN Z 1 W�O o Y A y -,m 0 0 0 N 2 A � r m m N S ONV O 8m z n N O s 'O m Z m n 2 o N n -� Vim_= r_ m V. N T N w A > S O m Z ti C > O m r w r T C n v > D -< A 8 > In x m D z o T r C k N5�> O OFM O O n a i 25oy rm a a a a c D O 2 C O N N N N O N T m N i A > C H W> < S m>< M v N S> m r Q ap s m r N ortCTl> j > � m S O P O S O Oa co O w O 60 40 NVV 44 N M Nv T T N N UI VI O O .+ Vl U =SQS O O O 00 -+000 O T r T T m m m m Z O O r D O A A m A A 70 O >_ N T M mT�+ K zK -C O O �t O C ON m ti n N m NO Y 7o m A mamz X Cmmrt > n In n r ti^ > T A T m H Z m m m <Oim r- m ;c M m m -+ N p F c�L ZN N� Z m ti O O > m SN Z W�O Y A y -,m 0 0 0 2 A O O m m N FM ONV 8m N O s 'O m Z m n ti p -1 b N n -� Vim_= m N T n 0 m Z ti m z z m -. M '.zmo x O L) N O JO < '-d m a T A > A 1. ;g w p N n OOT A N n A O s 70 A In m m i N � A A mo� O C� 7 A > m A 'q y 7OD IK 07 N m r O C O O O offit Lm [ 2m A o m m A O np on , N O 1 N N N 7CI A G o pp pp tf _ > _ ; i O a � s T > O m n r n m m N S T C T > > N M N M M N N M N> Cm Cl) y VVN y�M1 !11u vM 1 N V I V I N W N V I V N m m nn- o > r > r p p o00 O o 00 0 00 0o as = x O O S m m T n GI n O n V 7 0 0 7o A x N 70 > Z a+ > X S T v v m S S >> m N N Y n Ton 7oA.N T„ u� O .n + Mimmm a+' NN G) » -+ nn - z an> nm OOA OO O O O O O $ N } r r T T a O m m m N N m_ o_ T m m m na z n m m0 x r T T m V a m Q i y r r N O Z z z N N s O C rrn a7 a m 32110 -.n_ x Y n N m n i rp) i zm + P N i R� b P O T n r' H m N �7cc ]c N m n + g r > n mrm 7C = 70 _ �- N 'a m Cl) -+ � V 30m > T n n aa m wzz a2 eA O w x g r<> nw w N p < �o< > T p f l m Nr A N f> p V1 p N -. •-� r = o o z N j M O O A C N p A G O Z2O N N ~ P C O M p C Cl O 2 � m m O O O O 1 O O _. O O O p T O f! i O O r ••i N -•1 Q r ' o� 2 OCrH. r"Om C--NCO'C N30 T 45 3- 0 r {p ONNJfn mZ O D• O x 1vyI0 OK Nm H0070 , OF, > m Tp K O< O O Z o 0 f O T A A - Om f Jm0 N j N M N x N O O N N V1 N O < O o n oN A �v go O O O m y mm m • A A o O m A m m 70 O m m 2 A O O O o� m O m m Z Z Z Z C m > Y > Y A A 70 A P m p 8S p S Q H N N N O L4 N U N innk O 2 Z Z P O m m m 0 • N O r T m80 P�m Z -� c z_ N r • CN A > ZZZ 70 P N m O _ O � T O O O d -y O m P AGENDA NO. T CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT DATE: June 12, 1991, MEETING DATE: June 18, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager FROM: Jim De5tefano, Planning Dire�to SUBJECT: Review of Planning, Building and Engineering processing fees and rates. ISSUE STATEMENT• Cities charge fees for processing of development permits in an attempt to recover all or a portion of their cost to provide such services. State Law requires that fees not exceed the estimated cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged. The City is currently operating under a fee system utilized by the County when Diamond Bar incorporated in 1989. An analysis of processing and permit fees is necessary to provide a basis for revisions to more closely cover our costs. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. XX (1991) and Resolution No. 91 -XX setting forth new processing fees for development services. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City consulted with Hogle-Ireland Development Consulting Group to analyze our current development fee structure and provide recommendations for change. The results of their report is contained within the attached Fee Comparison Study. An Executive Summary may be found on pages 4 and 5 of the report. (narrative continued on next page) FISCAL IMPACT: amount Requested 9udgeted Amount N/A :n Account Number: >eficit: ;avenue Source: EVIEWED BY: &9 obert L. Van Nort Andrew V. Arczynski Terrence L. Belanger ity Manager City Attorney Assistant City Manager BACKGROUND: Several provisions of State Law govern the establishment and adoption of planning, building and safety and city engineering fees. Various sections of State Law provide authority for cities to adopt these fees but in all cases the fees shall not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged. Sections 66016,'66017, and 66018 of the State Planning and Zoning Law set forth the procedure for adopting the fees. The fees must be adopted using the public hearing process Any fees adopted or revised will not be effective until 60 days following final action of -the City Council. The report regarding the proposed fees shall be made available to interested parties at least 10 days prior to the public hearing. The review includes an analysis of the existing fees in comparison with surrounding and like jurisdictions as well as an assessment of actual cost of each application based on city records and documentation and interviews with city staff and consultants as to actual time spent. Since the City does not have long term information and documentation relating to costs, the consultants (Pacesetter) utilized their experience with other jurisdictions in establishing actual costs. Based upon the review, a revised fee structure has been developed to provide fees which will more closely recompense the city for the cost of the services provided. Care has been taken to keep the revised fee structure simple and easily understandable to facilitate its incorporation into city procedures. ANALY6I6: The decision to establish fees for service involves policy choices. Should the City subsidize the cost of services to the development community or should developers pay their own way. Some cities consciously choose to collect less than the cost of the services provided in order to attract development. other cities choose to operate as a private business where subsidy would be rare. Currently our fee structure is based upon a set fee for processing a specific request for service, i.e. a construction plan check, conditional use permit, or Trading plan review. While appropriate for a variety of services, set fees often :reate inequities depending upon the project complexities. Therefore many cities ire utilizing established "hourly rates" for the typically more complex projects ind "flat fees" for the typically less complex projects. 'he City of Diamond Bar presently charges $1,285.00 to process a CUP. This set ee does not take into account the actual time involved but is intended to be an verage cost. The County has increased their fees and presently charges $2,235.00 o process a CUP. In reality, the time involved in processing a CUP varies remendously depending on the complexity of the project. One project may take my ten hours, while a shopping center may take 100 hours., This obviously reates inequities as to the fees charged for a specific project. The 10 hour roject is overpaying, while the 100 hour project is underpaying. any cities and counties are going to an "actual cost's fee system for planning and )me engineering activities using hourly costs. Upon project submittal, a deposit s accepted and all processing time is charged against that deposit at an stablished hourly rate. As the deposit approaches depletion, additional funds -e requested from the applicant. If, upon project completion, funds remain in ie deposit account, they are refunded to the applicant. ch a system provides a way to charge costs to a project based on that project's complexity. Additionally, it has been found that in many instances the quality of developer -submitted projects and plans improve under the "actual cost" fee system. Developers soon find that their processing costs are less if they submit high quality, well designed projects to the City. The hourly rate system does, however, require additional project time and fund accounting. BUILDING AND SAFETY FEES: Fees for these services currently are provided as percent of construction valuation. Pages 23 through 25 of the Study discuss the Building and Safety Function in more detail. The consultant is advising that the City continue to use the Los Angeles County fee format with minor adjustments. It is recommended that the determination of valuation be based upon tables published by the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBG). Present and proposed fees for comparison purposes are located on pages 26 through 34. PLANNING FEES: Planning Fees are based upon the County fee structure. The County fee structure does not provide fees for all services. Planning fees are discussed within pages 12 through 18 of the Study. The consultant recommends that all projects requiring public hearing review before the SEATAC, Planning Commission or City Council be charged based upon an hourly rate fee of $75.00 per .hour. Those projects typically handled administratively by the staff would continue to be assessed a set fee. Present and proposed fees for comparison purposes are contained on pages 19 through 21. ENGINEERING FEES: Fees for engineering services are described on pages 36 - 37. Fees currently are based upon County ordinances and upon a percentage of the construction cost with some set fees. Recommendations for engineering include a combination of set fees, actual cost and hourly rates. FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed revision to the amount of fees charged by the City will increase revenues. The amount or percent of the increase is unknown at this time. The proposed fee structure and system is designed to cover the real or actual costs associated with development processing. PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE: A Notice of Public Hearing was published, in accordance with Section 66017 and 66018 of the Government Code, within the San Gabriel Valley Daily Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on June 7, 1991. kttachments: Fee Comparison Study dated May 1991 Proposed Ordinance No. XX (1991) Proposed Resolution No. 91 -XX ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING § 22.60.100 OF TITLE 22 AND ADDING A NEW § 82-7 TO TITLE 27 OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE AS HERETOFORE ADOPTED. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. A new paragraph "E" hereby is added to § 22.60.100 of the Los Angeles County Code, as heretofore adopted, to read, in words and figures, as follows: "E. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Title 22, the City Council may amend, by resolution, all or any portion of the fee schedule established herein for the purpose of defraying the expense involved in connection with any application or petition required or authorized by this Title 22." SECTION 2. A new § 82-7 hereby is added to Title 27 of the Los Angeles County Code as heretofore adopted to read, in words and figures, as follows: 1182-7. Amendments to fee schedule. Notwithstanding any other provisionof this Title 27, the City Council may modify, by resolution, all or any portion of the fee schedule established in § 83-8 for the purpose of defraying the expense involved in connection with any application or work required or authorized by this Title 27." 1 SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted in three (3) public places within the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to the provisions of Resolution 89-6. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this day of 1991. Mayor I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of , 1991, and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of , 1991, ,by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST: i City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar S1101110TITLE221DB 1.3B 2 RESOLUTION NO. 91 - XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING AND ADOPTING SCHEDULES OF .RATES, FEES AND CHARGES FOR SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE -BUILDING, PLANNING AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR A. Recitals. (i) The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar has heretofore established various schedules of rates, fees and including, but not limited to, rates, fees and charges for the processing .of applications, issuance of permits and related public services. (ii) Pursuant to the provisions of the California Constitution and the laws of the State of California, the City of Diamond Bar is authorized to adopt and implement rates, fees and charges for municipal services; provided, however, that such rates, fees and/or charges do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing such services. (iii) California Government Code Section 66D17 requires notice to be given, and data made available, at rates, fees and charges or the adoption of new rates, fees and charges, for zoning variances, zoning changes, use permits, building inspections, building permits and related planning and zoning services ("development fees" sometimes thereinafter) at a public meeting of this City Council. I (iv) California Government Code Section 66018 requires notice to be published in accordance with California Government Code Section 6062a and data. made available concerning rates, fees and charges prior to conducting a public hearing with respect to the adoption of increases in rates, fees and charges or the adoption of new rates, fees and charges for which no other procedure is provided by law. (v) Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66016, this City Council has held at least one public meeting and received oral and written presentations thereat, with respect to "development fees" prior to the adoption of this Resolution. (vi) Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66018, this City Council has conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing with respect to the rates, fees and charges not included within the "development fees" described above, prior to the adoption of this Resolution. (vii) This City Council desires to adjust the rates, fees and charges and to implement new rates, fees and charges for various governmental services provided by the City of Diamond Bar as set forth herein. (viii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. In all respects as set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution. 2. . This City Council hereby finds and determines that, based upon the data, information, analyses, oral and written documentation presented to this City Council concerning the fees and charges described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, the rates, fees and charges set forth in said Exhibit "A" do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the rate, fee or charge is levied. 3. The rates, fees and charges set forth in Exhibit "A", as further described below, hereby are adopted and approved as the rates, fees and charges for the services identified for each such rate, fee and/or charge. 4. The rates, fees and charges set forth in Exhibit "A" and each of them, shall be effective and shall be implemented commencing August 19, 1991. 5. Immediately upon the effective date of the rates, fees and charges set forth in Exhibit "A" inclusive, any previously established rate, fee and/or charge shall be, and the same hereby is, superseded by the rates, fees and charges established in said Exhibit "A". PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1991. ` MAYOR I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on day of , 1991, by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBERS - ATTEST: LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar ORDINANCE NO. 3 (1991) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING § 22.60.100 OF TITLE 22 AND ADDING A NEW § 82-7 TO TITLE 27 OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE AS HERETOFORE ADOPTED. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. A new paragraph "E" hereby is added to § 22.60.100 of the Los Angeles County Code, as heretofore adopted, to read, in words and figures, as follows: "E. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Title 22, the City Council may amend, by resolution, all or any portion of the fee schedule established herein for the purpose of defraying the expense involved in connection with any application or petition required or authorized by this Title 22." SECTION 1. A new § 82-7 hereby is added to Title 27 of the Los Angeles County Code as heretofore adopted to read, in words and figures, as follows: 1182-7. Amendments to fee schedule. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Title 27, the City Council may modify, by resolution, all or any portion of the fee schedule established in § 83-8 for the purpose of defraying the expense involved in connection with any application or work required or authorized by this Title 27." 1 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FEE COMPARISON STUDY Prepared by: Hogle-Ireland Development Consulting Group 19752 MacArthur Boulevard Suite 210 Irvine, California 92715 MAY, 1991 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SECTION II DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING AND PERMIT FEES SECTION III PLANNING SECTION IV BUILDING AND SAFETY SECTION V CITY ENGINEERING SECTION VI HOURLY COST ALLOCATION SECTION VII ADOPTION PROCESS AND ORDINANCE PROVISIONS SECTION VIII APPENDICES 2 SECTION I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SECTION I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The assignment was to review the City of Diamond Bar's fees associated with the Planning, Building and Safety, and City Engineering activities to determine their adequacy to recover City costs and to recommend updates and revisions where necessary. The City's existing fees, ordinances and processes were reviewed to determine fee categories, and staff including the Planning Director and City Engineer were interviewed to determine processing times, work load and budget. Additionally, other city's fees were reviewed for comparison purposes. After hourly costs of City employees were calculated, fees were developed for each fee category based on the estimated time required to perform the service. The fees presently in use by the City are those fees used by the County at the time of City incorporation. They have not been updated since that time, although the County has revised its various fee schedules at least once. The present fees do not reflect present day costs and require revision. 1. That a system of "actual cost" fees be implemented for planning and engineering projects requiring public hearing. The "actual cost" process charges the applicant the actual cost of providing the services based on hourly rates for City staff and the actual cost of consultant services. An hourly rate of $75.00 for City professional staff services is recommended. 2. That "set fees" continue to be used for minor, non-public hearing. planning, and engineering applications and projects. 3. That Building and Safety plan check and permit fees continue to be calculated using the "project valuation" method historically used for these activities. Since the City still uses 4 building codes and amendments adopted by Los Angeles County, the fees have been updated to approximate the present County fees. 4. Engineering fees have been updated to more closely reflect the costs of providing the services. 5. Additional fee categories have been added for Planning and Engineering to better reflect categories of services provided. Several County fees that have no applicability to the City have been deleted. The remainder of this report is divided into the following sections: Section II Development Processing and Permit Fees Section III Planning Section N Building and Safety Section V City Engineering Section VI Hourly Cost Allocation Section VII Adoption Process and Ordinance Provisions Appendices 5 SECTION II DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING AND PERMIT FEES Cities charge fees for processing permits and use entitlement applications in an attempt to recover their cost of providing services. The underlying theme is generally that development should pay for itself and not be supported from the general funds of the City. Development is usually thought of as being the large retail, commercial, or residential projects, but it also includes small projects such as patio covers, room additions, and interior remodeling for an individual single family dwelling. The distinction between fees and taxes by State law is significant, and this report deals with fees only, not taxes. By State law, fees "shall not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged." Examples of fees include: • Building permit fee: Covers the cost of providing inspection services. • Building plan check fee: Covers the cost of reviewing the proposed project for conformance with building and other health and safety codes. • Conditional use permit fee: Covers the City's cost of processing and taking action on the conditional use permit. • Appeal fee: Pays for the City's cost of processing the appeal. State Law also sets forth the process for adoption of fees. These processes have been revised in recent years, and are summarized below: • Increases in existing fees and establishment of new fees must be approved by the City Council by ordinance or resolution. 7 • Prior to adopting the fees, the City Council must conduct a public hearing at a regularly scheduled meeting and allow oral and written presentations. Certain notification requirements are specified.' • Fees shall not become effective sooner than 60 days following final action by the City Council. The 60 -day requirement is extremely important. Any increase in existing fees and new fees cannot be collected until 60 days after final City Council action on the fees. This must be taken into account when making revenue projections. Full cost recovery is a common term used by cities which unfortunately has no common definition. For some cities, full cost recovery means that developer -initiated applications and permits pay their direct costs plus overhead. Other City initiated projects that are not directly related to development projects have their costs paid from the City's general fund. Other cities charge the entire cost of operating the Planning and City Engineering Departments to development projects. It is not unusual for these cities to charge development applications and permits hourly rates ranging from $160 to over $200. The question of what full cost recovery means to a specific city is a policy decision of that city. Upon incorporation, the City of Diamond Bar, in accordance with State Law, adopted all ordinances, including fees, of the County of Los Angeles. These fees are still in effect and have not been updated. : [oil) "Wd Xll I Cities have traditionally established a single, set fee for processing a specific type of planning application such as a Conditional Use. Permit (CUP). For example, the City of Diamond Bar 8 presently charges $1,285.00 to process a CUP. This set fee does not take into account the actual time involved but is intended to be an average cost. The County has increased their fees and presently charges $2,235.00 to process a CUP. In reality, the time involved in processing a CUP varies tremendously depending on the complexity of the project. One project may take only ten hours, while a shopping center may take 100 hours. This obviously creates inequities as to the fees charged for a specific project. The 10 hour project is overpaying, while the 100 hour project is underpaying. Many cities and counties are going to an "actual cost" fee system for planning and some engineering activities using hourly costs. Upon project submittal, a deposit is accepted and all processing time is charged against that deposit at an established hourly rate. As the deposit approaches depletion, additional funds are requested from the applicant. If, upon project completion, funds remain in the deposit account, they are refunded to the applicant. Such a system provides a way to charge costs to a project based on that project's complexity. Additionally, it has been found that in many instances the quality of developer -submitted projects and plans improve under the "actual cost" fee system. Developers soon find that their processing costs are less if they submit high quality, well designed projects to the City. The hourly rate system does, however, require additional project time and fund accounting. The following systems must be in place: • Accurate time sheets with time charged against project cases. • Project deposit accounting - charges hours and hourly costs against each project deposit and keeps track of deposit balance - manual or computerized. • Procedures to request additional deposits and to make refunds of unused deposits. 0 Although at fust glance these requirements may appear to be extremely complicated, they actually are relatively simple to implement. For a City the size of Diamond Bar, the accounting can easily be done manually with a time commitment of only several hours per week. 10 SECTION III PLANNING 11 SECTION III PLANNING The Planning operation is currently functioning under the fee system that was in place in the County at the time the City of Diamond Bar incorporated. Since that time the County has revised its fee schedule once and incorporated an additional element which will raise the fees automatically by four percent on an annual basis (to become effective May 1, 1991.) The County's revised fee schedule is included in the Appendices. The County fees are based on the County's zoning code and the application types therein. While the City of Diamond Bar adopted the County zoning code, not all the processes are needed in the City - and the City has adapted some of the processes to meet its own needs, e.g. the Site Plan Review is used for Plot Plan Review, Yard Modification (Minor Variance), and Sign Review. Some of the fees identified are for processes which will most likely never be used in the City of Diamond Bar, such as Surface Mining Permit and/or Reclamation, Aviation Case, and Zone Changes Equestrian District. In several of these cases, we have recommended that the fee category be deleted so as to make a more manageable and understandable City fee schedule and if one of these cases should actually be submitted to the City, it would be processed under a category defined as "other projects." There is also an additional category of fees entitled "Surcharge Fees". In speaking with the County Planning Department, it was noted that these fees were adopted by the Board of Supervisors to provide a fund for "automation". Since the City adopted the County fees across the board to be used for the same purposes, if the City intends to charge the Surcharge Fees, there must be a separate account set aside for the fees to go into specifically for automation. We have recommended that the surcharge fees be deleted. 12 There are a number of processes/fees for which the City does not currently charge a .fee. Some of these processes are in use while others may need to be incorporated into the City's system: AppWs. At the current time the City uses the Variance procedure in lieu of an Appeal. This can be appropriate if the project needs to deviate from the Code requirements in order to be approved; however, if the applicant wishes to disagree with an Administrative interpretation or feels a condition is too restrictive, it should be heard under an Appeal process. Also, a neighboring property owner or other interested party should have the opportunity to file an appeal. There is an appeal period written into the Code - there should be an appeal procedure, application, and fee to coincide. An appeal fee has been included in the proposed fee schedule. Annexation. Obviously the County had no need for an Annexation procedure; however, the City should have this procedure and application in place with a fee for its implementation. Frequently an annexation is City -initiated, but there are cases of owner - initiated annexation applications. We have recommended that the category titled "Projects for which there is no appropriate fee category" be used for annexation. Business License/Home Occupation Permit. These procedures allow the City the discretion to ensure that the Zoning Code is being followed and that inappropriate activities are not being permitted in zones designated for something else. For instance, Business Licensing allows the City to ensure that such things as parking and even that a proposed use are adequate in an existing building. It can also be advantageous with respect to uses requesting a liquor license. The Planning Division must ensure that these uses are located appropriately according to the code, e.g. no closer than a certain number of feet from a public school. Residential zones are designed for residential activities; Home Occupation Permits allow the city to ensure that uses which will change the character of the residential neighborhood are not'permitted. It can also prevent unknowingly hazardous uses from 13 endangering a residential area, such as an activity which uses large concentrations of materials or fluids which have the potential to be hazardous if spilled or mixed. We have not included fees for these activities and processes in the fee schedule. If the City makes the decision to implement these procedures, a fee should be adopted at the same time. Development Review/Architectural Review. Ordinance No. 5 (1990) gives the City the authority for Development Review - both by the Planning Commission with a noticed public hearing and by the Planning Director (no notice required). There is no fee prescribed for either procedure. At the present time staff has stated that the fee for a Conditional Use Permit is being charged for Development Review. Obviously, the amount of staff time varies significantly between a Development Review which goes before the Planning Commission (which can justifiably use the CUP fee) and an administrative determination (for which no public hearing is required). Additionally, with the current process existing staff and the Planning Commission perform the Development Review; however, should the City wish to create a separate review panel for Design or Architectural Review, this process may need to be reassessed with respect to the fee structure. Preliminary Project Review. The City may wish to provide some mechanism wherein a project proponent may receive coordinated direction from City departments prior to expending significant engineering and architectural monies on plans. Such a procedure would allow the proponent to submit "conceptual plans" which would then be reviewed by the Planning Division, Engineering, and other departments as applicable for direction. The City as well as the applicant can benefit from such a procedure in that "problems" can be identified and solved early in the process saving design dollars, time and review on both sides. We have included a fee for this process in the proposed fee schedule. 14 Permanent Record Storage. Because of the volumes of material a City is required to store for specified periods, most cities microfilm these documents and plans. There are options available other than microfilming for the City to consider; however, whatever the City chooses to do will require the expenditure of funds to accomplish. A fee should be collected upon plan submittal to provide for the required storage of these documents and plans. We have included a fee for this in all of the proposed fee schedules. Miscellaneous Chugcs. There are some services which the City provides which have a. clear relationship to an actual cost and would, therefore, easily justify a charge. Examples of these are: • Research and Copying Costs: A "per page" copying cost for an amount over $1.50 usually covers staff time to make the copies and the cost of the copy. However, there are instances which require research into City or County records to obtain the requested information. If such is the case, a research fee could be charged for staff time spent in research in addition to the cost of the copies. Charge for copying of single sheets or which would cost less than $1.50 would not be cost effective because the staff time just to make out a receipt and accounting in the Finance Department time would result in an actual loss to the City. These fees have been included in the proposed fee schedules. • Document charges: Document charges differ from copying costs in that the City may have large documents or portions thereof which the public may wish to acquire. Examples may be an entire General Plan or section (elements) thereof, the Development Code; a Specific Plan; etc. For documents such as these the City may wish to have some preprinted and available for purchase. The cost should include the cost the printing, whatever binding or folder, plus City overhead costs. This charge has been included in the proposed fee schedules. 15 • Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting. AB 3180, effective January 1, 1989, requires adoption of a monitoring or reporting program for every Environmental Impact Report and every N itigated Negative Declaration for the purpose of verifying completion of mitigation measures. AB 3180 also authorizes recovery of costs incurred in its implementation. A fee for this program has been included in the proposed planning fee schedule. Anticipated Future Programs: There are known programs "on the horizon" for which the City will need to consider fees. Some can be folded into a project cost while others may need separate consideration. An example of this type of program is: • AQMD Monitoring. Each City will be required to provide a Transportation Management Program which will then be subscribed to by each new development as well as existing businesses. RECOMMENDED REVISIONS TO EXISTING FEES: • Eliminate existing "Surcharge Fees" • Provide for separate fees for "Site Plan Review" as there are separate applications for: 1. Plot Plan Review 2. Yard Modification (consider calling this a Minor Variance) 3. Sign Review. This requires additional consideration; because the proposed ordinance requires a considerable number (if not all) of signs to be reviewed by the Planning Commission, the fee will need to be adjusted accordingly. 16 • SEATAC. Rather than have a separate review fee for SEATAC, we would recommend that this would be an appropriate category for a Surcharge Fee. The reason for this is that we have not been able- to identify any SEATAC review which would be triggered without a project which would already require public hearing review by the Planning Commission. Because of the extensiveness of the review required by SEATAC and the cost of the public hearings before SEATAC, an hourly rate should also be adopted for SEATAC review. Knowing in the beginning that SEATAC will require additional staff time and public hearings, we would recommend that the deposit amount of the initial application be increased by SO percent when SEATAC review is required. That recommendation is reflected in the attached Fee Schedule. Provide for the recovery of actual costs for environmental work. This will include staff time plus consultant costs. Consultant costs will be billed to the project at cost plus general City overhead. If an EIR is required, the applicant will be required to establish a separate deposit account and pay all consultant fees plus general City overhead. No separate deposit will be required for environmental actions conducted in conjunction with an actual cost case, such as a Negative Declaration, the environmental costs will be charged against the case deposit. Add new fees for: Appeals Development Review Plot Plan Review Yard Modification (Minor Variance) Permanent Record Storage Consider fees/processes for: Business Licenses 17 Annexations Preliminary Project Review Sign Review Document Charges Research & Copying Costs Home Occupation Permits FEE SCHEDULE The following tables show the existing fee for each type of planning application and process and the proposed fee. The present, existing fee is the Los Angeles County' fee that was adopted at the time of City incorporation. The present, updated Los Angeles County Planning Fees are included in the Appendices. 18 1� O �y=j W IL L A Y U U 1CO all J a 7ttJlit" C �Ya •C G g q q L 4 `� O L �a �o a>+ ✓q ` a U 4 L A•" Yl] pw q q 0V ✓rL aCUq Eapp •4� a Oq` G77Y 0 t N -. U •- � •- �► C W v u L L 4 ✓ -. Y ✓ L OI 7 q a Ol a s M 01 r L _r o L g q C Y YY CM �Y✓q�+ur us.0 3 ` yp ca y O ( np y�11' O 11 E- n L q a o L D. n•7 O �+ O w VNe q E yj C �0 O ✓✓ M • L �✓ r g .. N a Y r 1- y i Y - .- O U01 C 3 7v < 6 Y L UN v0- LU • U L 1/� fGV N dq a✓C E up77 LF � w O r O U$ q Y 7u > < D 80U IML �� �1 r Op `6' q Y ✓C r Y Uq Q1 a C L Y Y� ✓Y �Y1 Y O O w a ` O •p �0 wOApp rM Y ~ r L elq •pp[ 7 ✓ q N V tYJ Y O O C Ql ■ a 'pCu C u ya a wO>qq. CO O � r Y Uq L - r Y Y Y U1 O Y O w p_ C Y � L 'pCCuu C� qY ✓ O w1pp� •`>- a q ✓C ✓ Y Uq✓ - V r q O Y Yp v Y C �► a s ` O p 4 O w�qp+1 CY OrON Y F' r L q U r Y M b Y(] Y C O C E L 'pCu C✓ �q/ Vq O '~�p.H wOc Y •> r Y q L U pJ M Y O O O � Ur O Y G `1- r- O O O M1 N • <J 7 f~.1 < IL C O N N • IJ J u < O w!O O� +Y+ q u Y Y Y u C 2 QW ` V• ... N Z O N w N W J_ W > 16ag _ a aKFW O O O J J J O N IV< W � W I 1•- O � + ♦ O � W x > L N N K O F Wat C pp QOO 1x..> o J J W W 1 - NO G O N N 4 r W K 1•- O H H < '^•O� N N`j W J {{Mq�� L �y 3 i< W i 0 GWC K L C 7 s q CL O z W�} LU m Z= ., O Y ✓ a •fO, •O m< x G O W G O O Opat O b. 4O4 O O 2 O UN N y p, Q ¢ N O= UON y N �� 'n P 0 3NUN ..Op{ N q N = Z Y i 2 M W U N L7 ZZ N N QQ wQ 3 J < U 7 N N a < J t O. of ui IL Lj a ►- cn W ci y~j W i W _ °` ~ °' $.-1 ~ g 1- 0- gob W 1LLy J W N W y� Sys W ~ tpC3� L!!7 •<�O6(!L W M W V C7 = W < tt W J < Vl N aoc N_ OC < N_ O W F- In W ►O- OC N yY 0• i pW : > > Y > W I-- W _ W > 0• W d Z W W Y. V t W O. W IN f.J •+ O GGG N t) W r W K W ee i dw < 1- K < U 19 20 O z U WO Nr- N JFyp- U Z 0 F- W r `` d W OW. �pp��. H [1 t.f p O Z �a1+_N 67 < St <�W.C1< Y<C7OY iWa Y OCC y, < u J m d s< J W pmt = Y N= V W i V � J Y m W t7 N W K .~.. Y O U 2 x O a d x O— ca r u O H W < = .may j U= d o p maw J a0 F" Z W i - �� 1- i OUs GJl lu N W K p� O W yy N/{-018 _WI.-pUd _ S <1.7 W OL ►"O It ~ ~ ~ ~ of 0 ~ r^J _ as3t� 4 W W W W W W W ~ yyy W W F _ O N p Y F- <� 0 0 O 6 W W W d LL, F -d /- 60. W V N V m f.7 N - -- d~ W O -Y. M N IL O IV O W O W O W O W O W Y. W a W 6 W W W W m< W bl u O K 3 p -OKI.... < ►- N + O O p p O W O 1- J< JJ S W N F- N = O=< yH O L r r O In O Y p� Y p� Y pQ O 4 8 O F p� pq H_ ~ a y< W N r+ d U N W N H _ 9 < w i N T 111 ~ 8 O O O (� �y O m W< U = . 1- 93 S- Z tYJ `H < < t N < t t < < < N M N N yp O H N AlN FW- W �Il 6 fl! F- 2 W W W N W W F 7 1` Y v > Y N_ l/1 H_ N_ N_ Fyy-� 4yy-� ►y- 1f/-1 66 f- ►- N {y W ` Op�WO Wy ZZ� G & J i ~ f►�-! O~ u gyp^ 2 2 (1�- O x S x O p O Y _N x _ = C-2 Y CCW�77 sW H ►N- O m IOU hY- ►' � U t- ►- � t3 ci t> u u u � u � f10/J1 W N `Z U ~ O m` U W W J W W W J J J J O W J J W J F� W i J J N pi 9K~= U .jfQ•Q+ O? J F M J J J J J �pppOp J Qu S g K O = Nt `` oc U < u �+ < 4 W O W p U < W p W p W p U U U U W U U J W QiC tJ d! t v J yp 8 d y~�1 O W d 1L ` < < O < O .-. N t p C U Z « O O tJ U N 8 N a 3 W_ _ 4A W W W < H lu W = us ly W Wi I 6 IWi _ s W _ H ~ N Z y = N N N N N O O m > O dp YO K N v K N O O y W N CS! q � Ifs N M N N N N N M NP M N = N M i N pp pd pd pd W W W W tr d d N $A 31F Q� C7 INW K ` N CL ~ � 330 v i = 6 Y d W K J _ is 3t N H {y af ad F d W L i7 S ! p u t7 _ ppi 2 W U IYy Y W y y to U Z O d ~ Z W i i W K 't7 2 1L d= i W d W W i i W J J W -j to ou8 ci Z .U. dcW 1y i M. d W x N Y = W = Y W W < = = u <us = u a IL U t~ K ^ U N W�L mQJ dN (�Q y K N N N O Z ti W 6 W 20 e §. k $° s .a g " uj § r \ § _ U.§� § § 2 k R k� #� e �3 ce� §§§ ■- §� E I■ U. as «g . ' q _ _ d ©�� _ �I' UA $.- #.- ■� ®g � B� w ■_ akk ■�■ Wim% ` gas -s° %�� k ■■® eus §__ $�<§ ■§� 0- -,j �■: §-B§ _§■s � § 2 Q_ a r g LU � af d §c f §§ w ®� - § sUJ -i uj - §§�� �Lu ■IW &_§2$ $e 8 2 s Bug u ®RS�tu �o$ • - .d s«§B�■§ . � > 0 § � R em § � 44 ■ } � ® , § § § ui _ in § . uj in I k & ® ui- 2§ k Ff __ In on§ � m m § z « J& 2 2« e @ 2«« a■ «_� § ■§& @ §2 ■ § o�� �§ � L _ U UO oa §k s § _ § u ac k■ cn ■ § $.- a.$ _ _ � w Lu k § § 69 _ L fn § _ to to § w § ■ a @ I,- 2 ■ ■-- § s - -s- ■ §, a k LU &$ 2 06 b _ ) e � e § - - E I § ■ - ■ I I § § § � k § 7 § -A § _ : ■ _ _ _ _ 4 a 21 § / U k 01 $ tu LU0 s � ui§ _ uj im IA IA\ B § § § rL ■ c UA § k § 0 0 � d � § SECTION IV BUILDING AND SAFETY 22 SECTION IV BUILDING AND SAFETY The Building and Safety function is involved primarily with permit and inspection activities on private property. These traditional activities include plan checking prior to permit issuance and the issuance of building, electrical, plumbing, and electrical permits for buildings and structures on private property. Permits authorize the construction to proceed and the permit fee is intended to cover the cost of inspection and related overhead. A fee is charged for plan checking the project prior to permit issuance and the plan check fee covers that cost plus related overhead. Building and Safety activities are regulated and controlled very closely by State Law and local ordinances. State Law specifies the codes (building, electrical, plumbing, and mechanical) that must be adopted by cities. Cities are permitted to make technical amendments to those codes only if justified by local climatic or other technical reasons. The Uniform Codes published by the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) plus the National Electrical Code are the codes required to be used by cities in California. However, the administrative provisions of these codes, including fees, may be amended by the adopting cities. Building permit fees historically have been calculated as a percent of construction valuation using a sliding scale. The percent decreases with increased construction cost to reflect the fact that just because a building costs twice as much to build, it doesn't mean that twice as much inspection time is required. This method of determining permit fees obviously reflects an average cost but has historical acceptance and has been shown to be reasonably reflective of costs. Many jurisdictions adjust these standard tables to more closely recover their actual costs. The Uniform Building Code sets a standard that 65 percent of the building permit fee be charged for plan checking. As the complexity of building and structure design has increased because of such things as seismic design, new materials, and new design methods, it is being found that 23 actual plan checking costs have increased to 85 percent or more of the building permit fee. Some cities have found that for certain building types and uses, the cost of plan check actually exceeds the inspection cost. The City of Diamond Bar and Los Angeles County charges a plan check fee of 85 percent of the building permit fee. Upon incorporation of the City of Diamond Bar, the County building codes and fees were adopted. Although the codes have been updated as required by State Law, the permit and plan check fees remain unchanged. These fees became effective May 14, 1989 for the County of Los Angeles. The updated codes are essentially the Uniform Codes plus the County of Los Angeles Administrative and Technical amendments. There is an alternative to the traditional method of permit and plan check fee calculations that appears to be slowly gaining acceptance. This method monitors actual inspection and plan check times per type and use of building and calculates the fees based on building type, use, and size. This is being pioneered by the City of Irvine and should be watched for future applicability by the City of Diamond Bar. The City of Diamond Bar contracts all building and safety activities to a private consulting firm. A private consulting firm will generally provide complete plan check, inspection, counter, and administration services for a percentage of the plan check and permit fees (typically the range is 65 to 80%). The remainder of the fee is used by the City to cover general City costs related to the Building and Safety activities and department and City overhead. Since the City has adopted the Los Angeles County versions of the Uniform Codes with the County amendments, it is recommended that the County fee format continue to be used with adjustments of the actual fees to reflect City costs. The proposed fees basically are those 24 presently being used by Los Angeles County with a few adjustments to better fit the needs of the City of Diamond Bar. Valuation is determined administratively by the local Building Official and most cities use valuation tables published by the International Conference of Building Officials in the magazine, Building Standards. Diamond Bar, however, has used valuation tables provided by Los Angeles County and is dependent upon the County to provide updates. We recommend that the City start using the ICBG tables. We have set forth the fees in a table showing the present fees and the proposed fees for ease of comparison. 25 $§_ & 2 k�do B § � uj � k ems �§ kms k� us §d 2 k § LU uj ° t § 0� �■ ®® 2Z «» 93 § uj ° _ � e_ Ba §� § § e - 9 s AL s 2 .- 2 K2 §k § § § a a40 ® ° k - - -UA R e a$ _ uu k ) ) ) 8)§ s§ s o_«§«§«.« § _j- 2 §§k"BU,k�- § $2 Z Z Z§ o§§�§�a §Na§�§ §�§�be a lux, A : Lf% Ln a § § 7 k Q\ - j LL, LU LLA �\ §2 a § a § a a B n a a a B in LU cmcm _ § ui_ ui a e a 2 § §f j 8 2 2 ] ) ) § ° em § B_j j e§ s a a K K f 2 Ge Ge0__ K E 2 2 § �$to se 2 a (LU tu - - in - ka § 2 3 - 2 k C3 § LU G § @ § 3 3: u _ �Na$ �-L--�§ _ a 8 @�2 g § ■ _ LU . s uj $ &w � § § LU w§ � - 2e ]§ e UA L §. s 2 = §§gw ■ a� ` �- §� § _ _ _ - % E $ E ui § u � $ - ' : - § w _ _ « U. � - § � � ■ k - § _ � � § � ■ § Q $ - § ■Qu _� « Z. Q u a k)It CL g§ / ■ ® :8 a , _ IK§ �_u -_- 2 w k § 2 § uj IK ta 2 $ _ L B§_ § u §§ z) btu m. 9L I _ a a _ u_ � ■_ w _ k 26 § 2 §LU °Sss k§1§ _ \o§ /§ § a ■ 2a�2 § §�$k zU"i § § § B u � ' 2 a ■ 2 ` � 2 ■ e §UA § \ u $ § § § § aLUUA as ®CL LU - LU � § §§. B . § - 1 B E - CL o ■ 'A § § Sass LL §KB§ _■ 2 _ ) a ul ■ 2 ' aus 9 2 §a . 2 � � ■ �8 � LL; 40 s ,2 ■ LU um ts ® C k UA _ - ■ Cie IK e_§ _ tj � k ��k k 8 a a � § uj § §��k B ° 6nI*M. a ka§ @s§ �� $ @ ° ®- ® --Ji U, Itk « § § __e o §§ � JU $ ■ § -aLU §_ k ■■ § §$ §� � )� 2 k -- �■ t� < ■ -2 ° §) e %i g - § § ■ b-0 IU .1 2 B2 -0 ■ � 8 -§ �d U.§2 _■§2§ $' - 1.- § e ■UWA _ bus 0 W a§ §/ 2 - ° _k § e� _3 � de O 735 § a 2: g�_ ��¢� 2 2 B k § §� k § _a - �-LU _ § B uj 3.- 0. § §@ §$ § ,:a -_ -u $a -_ ■_s§ 27 2 S ■ @ s ui B LU � k s � LU _ UM § q \ . k § ui § 40 UA B45 § 0 - � / a ® ul uj $ & § 2 q e § w a a §m a UA (=A a Lr! ri �vp e § § \2 k 2) ■ . §§ -wM. �, 2 -§ ■ �_§\ '� ) -- Q uu9 §■k $ BB. .z1 Ku § ■§ \� 2 w§ 7u§4 �e aw 1L7U L - u §SMR �- ) luk .v§. J» ko ■ _ $ k�§ -U § a }2B� -i2 $�§ LAI . k�/lit� � g g�§� �- �B§ � �; §;§§ _ ��� is°§ § �a o.� 2■§ k 2� ©- � $ § ��■ - - LU r� �■§f ®�� . © B§§§ ) o § IIA § § :sem- §�2 ■ �§ §§§g E § §�§ § - § �e■��■ - § _ \�$u: ___U§ _�- � ) -U, B � <2 � § wad §§us �< §_ - «§\ OK 40 $%$2 ■ §§§k - U § §§2 2 �$ "021 U. us 28 k � ■ § � ■ ui \ 201 . � §§ § § . § � . . � . § ■ § ■ § � � § .16 ■ 064 § §� ■ _ B / kj \ Ll � 89 § §mi -�� e s §� ® -Cal as§=�.§ -§ � s §°e §sem s _ ■-S�s § ■2@� _j�`$_ . §-&rQ§_� GMK § �tA ' @-. § k� NS- A9 §�§� ��■ §P- _� ■ a��- § e Mal ■ � ■ �K§�g�■ ■ 0/r§ § B d ® %B2§■■us �d§� 2E § ■ _ . - ■ -§k _■■■ §■°° �2$ #-®$ A - _� _ _�_ -�§ $- ■§__ oaf §�Q tea- ■ §�B§-� _ x- s §3§ §§§©■ § e - § ■ $§§ =�§ § �■ 2-2:e@ § ■-�§2 § 4L � §§e -§ ©dam a _a§§k v ;a 4,u oD_ 40 4L ■ 2©�§ _ i ■�B _� .s■ s 1. �- «=�� @ §_' -- 0111 §� ��0es�: B� -�©- U. -s§�§ to cm ��k� �_ - -®■- Vis■§\§0-§ uw R§k§ _ e sU ,■G�§�=��_ kaq§�§ j w § I§§§§i � 29 W � p f. p p ONMSIOO PN�ti S M W� S �F• N - O p S S O S p O 1s`1, OP AN�d � UJ UA CCO Z W 1� WNC)O S S J ti2i d< Wo -JF yy H8� OZ NW i P.- �� Y 2�ir-•r ►• K 1L W. p�W3 �fffff//Njllllll)1 1IIU///S!!!! OUP > - im _ 1-. v t i N W W ZW J S OMlt fla`k �Ny W. r i i y Ny// S O� y X/ J 8 i S i g CI S ►-W. QQT K N < 3 h v LK 1LL N W N} K y n ► W K O UK1�Owy/Xoj S •y.• ` S spy -1 n �Wy <OyTi,�(/N► s p X J01 �N�F`y rN <W W W ����+++0 �_ W W Sy i����Wiy~ �y <W'LQ�l I -m���I^tC t7 ��_Y� �S J�-NW i�J' W mp0j W y6 < m Vy� •i••Zh 7i=i CV oF• N< Y SCt)7a��-W �l�y� S��yy at �_ <a< �S �E }ZZ = J DSI Jfi F• Wr = O SO •F W� tSr FY-C1�S ¢1 Jp2 W ! ` !K_Op S� XW J 3 r WUJI11; y�{Hty W1y US C)M•� iN `J W S� "'i 13W01.7 U; U; VO OIR i Jr JI� GGhtt• 3�Q S SHK O N .+ W i O_S J JHM• HJO W 1tt-l-F• ` {say]! yzK� y2/yZ1 1- W • SOOrLL<LO KM OrL �OFCO N W W W J N HvV W • O iM N• J S►• S�..S p W YXr 6S 000 �y F W 2 i i pFQ•1-C� �, Or W Oot NS U.�i WH dSfZJ� JSJ W K_< iZ�` WO •i• Jh-S «W W $ Wtu U. UP W 2 WN W v iGGV W .7 Y yy�� i yy`•C S v W p •• SS <►W- vm W f� F• XO�••OS WQ~Z�s i N pr C7 00 ! * i� ••S S�ZOOiC OY►=.CU i' al W O O W W 8 /�C<qq�K �s g— yM�^yam {^y � 00 0 Z � 0C per" q ui 1•J<� uOi 2 eWt� t/2`•[ 'In e k § $ & e U ■ a § . ° \ • 8 . 8 ■ . 8 a - - 8 S 8 w � fti- k k§ $ \ g & ƒ k § § e $ � \ § � $ & / 9L e . § w - C! § s ■ . n k S 28 k B m in � ■ r §§� r §_ § � @s � � � f E § e b § §§ § § e CA W j2 § 2 - Ug k \� _ - § ■ �■ s z x §■- : § - \ §�� $�f f� �� : §� -u UP ® UA i § § E� �� §§ § 'OW' § _ § B§ § $ ■§ �e § § - §k §%up IK §�§ \� ■ � '§ $ § $ Uj � k § § -i Ge � _ 2 § $.� ��■ _ ��§ WE- ■- e§e §LLI d§ - - k @ � § § ais _ Ui § ■ e 16 _§k f e § - - 9L T E _ & § � 7 2 \ B ? /\ ,§ ) § ) $§ /$2 § -a-§� § :� ��k ) - - �c §K § § §� -�- ■ - ■ lug § ■42 e�= -®® _ �§ ■- ..§ - §� '�- ] § a § sem: §�$K $ w§ r §§§§ e § ■■w ■ ■ U. fi e§ ■ ■ : 31 § k § s ■ � a 2 ■ a a a■ a a� � a 2 a a it _ _ t_ E� �■ _§ & §§ §s 8 e2- 2 -§� 7 § _■ § �:■ UA$§2 �2k2 � a § � �� %1 0UWJ§ Mu IL_K� -§ _ _ - ■ § e§ � 2- ri� §� © - §k 9& a§U - § e ■ § INS k & q - ■ - 2 _ 'wc ■� / �o $ § 2 � �k08 )uj ¢§ K up E K2 §$� U. §§ U UA 0- use � kok sk § §§k _a � - k _§ ) W.om a e _ $30 §\ -& �� _2 E- ©■ L6 - ■�� ■ _ _ ■ - CL 2 § _ k ■ § § 2 _ § § ■ § g ) ■ �- _ ■ a■ _■ § © s_ -� a v a_- �_� _ u a� 3 a� � ■: u e § uj-s§■§§ �■_ §2§ s 6w a« a u§ 9w, NO ■_ kk §-� Ul § U. s$■ � §§ U. U§§ w U.& U.0 s W: ) S2 a- § § 32 e k § ■ $ � e � ° S � ■ § . sC2 $ _ a W% . . k � B � @ � . � e § ui a § a a a 8 8a a a a � a s 7 s I r fms § 2� § o 2 Lipt - © ■ e ■ _ § 7 K� . 0.- mug, 0 a_a_ § o us \� k2 & 2pe 2 s ƒk 2 92 � k cc § ^ B § § e . � § k § f : $ k Cl §_�f �$ § �- \w ��s§- a e a is §■ § §2 ( �k gig » x °® °� 2§ § $ul , «�ks 22 -� m _ §§ k § i c e - � « & � E § k ■ e _ co _ a§ @■ u § § §� §� _� ��§ s§ §� ■ 22 « 4§ �� 3! � � kk kB � \2 f /2 ?§ §aaim §< §§ �L §§ � _ § §tj � §§ LU �.���0 ■ k �§ �k §k2 §2lu §X■ 2%§ �f B �� §� 2 W w- tuu U. �# 2■«a § §§ doe ■ Via$§c L6 CL 14l a w W O O N � pp O M pp P O O A � N MryryO p M O N O r o o 0 M vn 8� yid i ^ W op_ O Y. ! O M W{ H H O S S S I^ N N H S O O O pp P N pp M .N- N8Q8QLU J au W< . O O J U S W �= p i J�C< J =r N QJ 1y-•+ W i 1•.r O L S Up7 C7 r y<� y USpW rrW !! y<� rz > b(A OaC i W r J W d J SJtJ S 0W 2 WJ F- p 7= y i W 8 OL NK .J( �SS SW JWr p ►. d �•+ r 7Z6 -N W H •» UW K J O W W I�Ii r IIIY! W op W y •ii J< J W r K F i C7 2 O < p Z IYY N r Y 2 Y N~ �_ �- J i W Y V1 N {Uy t7 i 4' K .Oi.. Ot S S r= W OY us W d ` SZ F V < S m W IOU, 2UF V X" ;:I'—I ►-upi EN rW (ptJ O SOC J••• �f/y1Z m W O {9'vV S KK S p J J N I yid yyiC� Jy W O1 Z S S W o Y 02 Ot Y 6 dYF W Sv2 N O ` OWC ►<- Hat S< C7 t Z W U ! > i i O i! OCH S W2 ..S O C O J r i W Y « Y yC 4 i Y. N � C0 •� � = S r Y 1•+ J � O � O . � U Q O h• O � � o O W u� � at 1• W i � f/1,<1L ►`� J H h� < W � W W Y. ON JK J �`/ r !-Z � CCiyy {CKyy �!d J W J t r_ yOyC� U N OC {yY 8 H � �IYO U) OC yzC �!H_ W 1- < i- OC W i Si fA OC O 1� G! W i V W H _i~iSOy<C N W S S J 2 .ir iSr b N W „y �C7S v i1Li (1/�� i�r ` Jy K1 I[ W M j t Y S v JNSN �<•WF W <W W rUU ^ pQ Cy VO 2 Sri < ►- S H i r U < W {{SJ OCi `W W ! r< O N is �r«. O C1yY Y2 S yW/ < d yC< _�K {sy {ya "82Ji p8 SO ••J i1LrH pW <tW J JJ YJ O OCL r S W 'ZI W 11 W OCC 8 WJ l72 �H 1 O�ptC H6C r CJS �OCi H � F2 U_W8 {y WC �pNC iOY W i�SZh- .=•. � < S W W W 1�I SCJ iS� 10n 6 34 SECTION v CITY ENGINEERING 35 SECTION V CITY ENGINEERING The City Engineering function provides engineering and inspection services to private development and property as well as being responsible for construction within the public right- of-way. Activities related to private development and property include: • Grading permits and plan checking for private property. • Retaining walls on private property that are not a part of a building. • Review and input into tentative tract and parcel maps, conditional use permits and other planning processes. • Final tract and parcel map analysis, easement checking, and similar activities. • Review of traffic analysis. • Review of hydrology reports. Activities within the public right-of-way include the plan checking and inspection of: • Streets • Storm drains • Sewer and water lines • Utility installation • Curbs and curb cuts • Street vacations At the time of incorporation, the City adopted all County ordinances including fees relating to City Engineering and Public Works. The fees have not been revised since that date. Engineering fees are usually a combination of set fees for relatively minor projects such as curb cuts and driveway approaches and permit and plan check fees based on a percentage of 36 construction costs for such things as storm drains and sewer lines. The fees presently being charged by the City fall into these categories. The City of Diamond Bar contracts the majority of their Engineering plan check and inspection work to a private consulting firm. They provide services either for a percentage of the fees collected or on an hourly basis. The present City fees were reviewed to determine if they:. • Adequately provide fees for all Engineering Services being provided by the City. • Are comparable to fees being charged by other jurisdictions. • Cover the City's cost of providing the service. The following table lists all existing and proposed engineering fees. In several instances, new fee categories have been added to provide for fees and services that are not presently covered adequately. When set fees are proposed for plan check, permit, or inspection fees, they have been calculated using an estimate of the time required to perform the service. Actual costs and deposits are recommended for several activities. Actual cost refers to the cost incurred by the City in processing an application, plan checking a project, issuing a permit or conducting project inspections. For projects subject to actual cost fees, a deposit is paid at the time of project submittal or permit issuance and all costs of City staff, consultants, contract services and other project related costs are charged against the deposit. If the deposit is depleted prior to project completion, the applicant will be requested to replenish the deposit account. Upon project completion, any funds remaining in the deposit account will be refunded. 37 !�'Mp � • W � q �Nsw+Y V r Yi u u V •� �H NO w v CI'O 3 0 w '' •� b` N� V W kn C ytp Q 6/ p -^ tL..5�+0 � �+dU �Y 'a ••_ '� `� N✓ «w«N LVL w u « u• w 8•— U C• w M O Y �y+ w•. 06i t 0 •- • L NNN M Q 401 w Y.8 O OIL yC yyy ~ O 'er � •1�1,,, �� a )A 7 C t L Q •� us LIP C .� C C E O u L O O u 0 L �aYp ~ a Y O ~w Y L Y~ •ag L C p •� W v- Y L CC�wpp L r� y.V � w• C M M -.. i L Y •- O yC L H C WpQ8 i• A L O L O'a V .r Y M M 3 ~ • CC ppMM s M •- w Y wMO w •� O L• M �+ . Y •~ o M ~ 4j.9. L U L O u u � S u0uo 8o Q u O •-US � p QQ U U r- Y L. •G ( Y� Y M L.L W QQ C Y M M w M i M Y SOC a E C 0000�•u � * QQ 4ap O IJY 7fu.0 M• -CV ��•��YU ~��•CY � c O•L w o� -� � N ppN y� YyO po u �+M W t �S��� �y0-40 Y 7�QQjQ� ywj p N u >E 3 X Y y u C 19 H uN\ Y 7 C C� Q. iN % S 8 ��►► E p O w H U O 4 L O Y 1Yr�/ Y r a Y. i w MC .p y pn •000 �M ' Y �•q M1 N ` q q O c NNN Y 'N tCCvL. w w u O us O.W M w Q u ►- u u kj w` g� S� L � O Zf u u Hul r {,, Y \YOi CD& In 01 ��\}}� Or•N ON O H W_ H N N i H = uu W W K N N W N H W W t3 N � .<I Y H W y ►' i i V H IL zus J W W o u O IA _ W < d awe y u _ O f 7� FW ppS W 1IIVLV crT i O 8 _ Maa L NwCC 7 i C�Q _� u M a 02 a- �pp ~NN ■ + � •� to U a1 p 8 N ♦+ < t •L ■ M t AL1 M Y C ' Ug �W <U t Y �j C ■■g L) Y OL p Y Mp UaO M C M•L Y O W. W x =(4 OI`•. W W � -4 K UA JS ec � W MA OW 0OOOOOpin 0 0 0 0-, 0 0 � X88 6-1 U% 7 tyy. L J u N N N N J< J J W U a H W 1.1 U W W pt�l UUOL Y y�� �SSCOOO S &D EG #A 44 W N H Q SJ oOyOOJp�� UN F, �•O�NY1C� J N 8E 8t a «76 x1 � cc "C 7 J u N u p o 8 O 7 Y 7 M 8 �CC 1�rf O ej O u O C~ 4. u S Spp g O �p N •^ N` ~` L S S S S S S S SSSS 8 W y'y yy a'Y 9y S t M S S S EEC, N O f�. 1R M N 8 S O O 1R ►�• Y- m MCC rc • L T �7N. O Fn NP C O u u u Q _U W O Y U UUU U . a8 U {C WJYU��Ur�Nty- Y 43O wuL+. 8OrrY 8ONY 8ONO QOu_ O{�QSQSY NYJ OOr�- IOIL 1i{��yLy 8Or•U._u 2C: NNNOJ OH 1O�aJy.1 WGJ7 S�\�u 2_ T>ti. \ r N 41 10 0-1 O QYren-j V UHppOU Nv_ J NN\ �4j 4j Nlu ^8p? ��tt�L A• uu U U0!!!N Nu Nr-Y j%t1 S O iC ~ K 40 $O `iUA I ~ „Q t7 N J W to a 8wp� -� N u• u ►�- dim M4M O N Y J W ~ W ui 5 u i a� eWc N W U' W N W_ a Z S _ _ 4 0 t� 13 S `J Y § a § LU § $ §� ea � "aLU K § § $ °L § \� �§ '�� �§ 29 § § § o of B K § s k I \� \�a� § « a� .9§ ■§ & �� tu � B CD e �k § 40 4* § a w § uj uj k � - § \ « ' § d §§ e § � §§ .ulat E§ $ 2 q § ka §§§B _- § § §B $ ) § L)u u . . � k k k LMA _ # a s § . ■ $ �■ k §§d§ � & �§ § ■ » ■ / e kUs LU aUJIUAq ■ ■ § § § § k �B BUA a LU �� �q _ _kk �k § 2 §§ a § § a■ « @} ,_q @§ @§ @■■�� $in B � s kLU { $ $IIAI _ u u § IL & ss K § § � k k �� �� s � ��� $ ■s ■ � �� - - § § k _ LL LU k § § § f d a § - _ - e ■ ac § $ $ _u� (A Kb e § _ _ -2 k § § Au Li It B§§ WU w§� $�kk UJI §� wk k B @ � �_ MA SIL §�� »,o - - ■ _IA-4 § § a_ u 2 c ■ �- k ■ ■ § � ■ 2 $ � � 2 § §�( ( u 40 40 . � .-j Cal e f �. Epp@ Id 2 S S42 &2 he ujoto§ 2 M0. 8 E 8§ E $) � ■ � §( ■■3. LU 21 LU40 UA a Q ■ a kLU E§w§ - ) ) fu f § / § � § cc e « ■ .;a ills §77 �2§�-3 _ @ 2 � $ � B a $ — d 2 ) « � @ @ e @ § § « -C § § . § � $ § 7 � e 7 ) � 2 § § CL &de § - \ § ci - -� U - @ § § - 2 - Be a _ § B 2 k 2 § ■ I.-_ 93 $§§ $ $ r u Am 3 k k � ■ - _ a � — 41 § § & § w ■� § §\ §.BL q�Z s)§ �� tv s $■ § § ■3 - & § . . § 22. . -� §j as49a - n k < / . ■ § 4 8 � ■ s CL 8 C; g :■ ■2 8§ #ui §§ -- CL �q «g +k§ k§ LU a+ at �§-\§q�k§ g � §§�� A_ a_�K____�-_ . + 9§§§k § ©�)_ §§§■§s § k § @ § d CD . 8 § . § � w e 7 S §e 8 - § § � k §§ k d k _§ tea■ ■ K � �» K ■ e @■ Ul § k . § § s k . k $ k � _ w 2 § UA IL ■ Id w IL 0 o_ § a § § k §/ ■2 § § § 40 ■ ■ ■CLup a . 42 § _ 2 $ IliU2 Q§ §§ ofw_ of km\ §2 _ § § MAe ' « §Bk us us ��� og AL AL CD�§ �M` __ §\ 41 J2� 8.0 �2--- 4444« aui _ LU us emi e$ CL 882 4444_ � B § < . - ) B B « LU § (A-j-i � L) mi c ■ CL s § ■ 4444 -j -i 00 - LU W ■s sa B& § �_ 3E • . k s u § § ■ < e § § � _ k k Bus B _ us\_ � � ■ $ ■ @ @ � � a @ o . u§ _IWag� $ � § B§§ � §§ §- § ■ _ sm ca. z k k § 2 _ G uLU ■ §§§_ _� _ : .K 2 r k ■ ■ $ k 0.0 -�_: Q § U. s e �° u asui $ . - 'A ■■ _ @§■ /�w � ■ « 2 _ ■ -$ of _ 43 SECTION VI HOURLY COST ALLOCATION M, SECTION VI HOURLY COST ALLOCATION The hourly cost methodology uses an average hourly rate for "line staff" in the Planning and Engineering Departments. Line staff are defined as those staff members who would normally deal with the public and/or process or work on developer or City initiated projects. The hourly rate is not to be used for other, non -line, support staff such as clerical and secretarial. The cost of these support employees is considered departmental overhead and is included in the hourly rate calculation. One average hourly rate is proposed for Planning and Engineering instead of calculating an hourly rate for each line staff member. This is recommended for two reasons: 1. One average hourly rate is simpler to use and calculate. 2. The use of an average hourly rate eliminates disputes as to why a higher or lower hourly cost employee was assigned to a project. The budget figures used in the calculation are an estimate of the 1991-92 budget developed after meeting with the Planning Director and City Engineer. It reflects the general fund portion of the department budget and in the case of Engineering, deletes processional consulting services . since those costs are provided for separately in the proposed fees. An overhead factor of 17.75 percent is used for general government support such as City Council, City Attorney, City Manager's Office, City Clerk, Finance and General Government, and is added to the departmental budget estimates. In theory, the project hourly rate calculation is relatively simple. The budget plus general government support overhead is divided by the hours worked by the line staff. The yearly hours (2080) of an employee must be reduced to a yearly "productive" number. The productive hours 45 takes into account vacation, sick leave, holidays, training, breaks, and similar time away from actual work. For established cities with staff with longevity, the productive hours will typically be about 1590 or about 76 percent of the. annual 2080 work hours available. However, for the City of Diamond Bar, we feel that the productive hour number is closer to 80 percent because the employees have not accumulated extensive vacation and other leave benefits. We have used an annual productive hour rate of 1,664 in our calculations. The project hourly rate represents the average hourly cost of a Planning or Engineering line staff person working on a project. The =jam can be either developer or City initiated, or could be time spent answering general planning or engineering questions from residents or developers at the counter or by telephone. Examples of project work are: • Time spent by line staff working on developer initiated projects - CUPs, tract maps, parcel maps, zone changes, annexation, etc. • Time spent by line staff working on City initiated projects - sphere of influence study, annexation, development of a sign, antenna, microwave dish or a similar zoning ordinance, development of a business license or home occupation ordinance, etc. • Time spent by line staff working on and reviewing programs and projects from AQMD, SCAG, and similar agencies as well as compliance with State -mandated programs such as review and update of General Plan. • Time spent by line staff answering questions at the counter and by telephone for residents, property and business owners and developers. Examples of work that is not project work and falls into the category of departmental overhead include: • Secretarial and clerical services. 0 • Time spent on administrative or management activities - budget development and maintenance, personnel reviews and other personnel actions (recruitment, interviews, etc.) • Participation with and attendance of activities sponsored by organizations such as League of California Cities, APA, ICBG, AEP, ASCE, etc. • Attendance at conferences and seminars. City Engineering uses extensive consultant services for plan review and field inspection. For these and other similar cases, it is recommended that the actual cost of consultant services, plus the 17.75% general city overhead be charged against the deposit for "actual cost" projects. 47 HOURLY COST CALCULATION Planning Budget Estimate $ 500,000.00 City Engineering, Budget Estimate $ 117.900.00 (General Fund portion less professional consulting services) TOTAL: $ 617,900.00 Budgeted Line Staff Less Non -Project Planning Planning Director 0.7 Associate Planner 1 Planner Technician 1 Code Enforcement 1.20 Planning Intern 0.25 Consultant Services 0.75 City Engineering City Engineer 0.50 Technician 0.10 Associate Engineer Q, TOTAL: 5.75 Total line employees (5.75) times productive hours per employee (1,664) = 9,568 hours. Total budget (Planning + Engineering + 17.75% overhead) _ $727,577.00 48 Hourly Rate Calculation: Project Hourly Rate_ Total Budget: $ 727,577 Divided by: total productive hours 9,568 Hourly Rate: $ 76.04 Round to even number: $ 75.00 Although "actual cost" fees using hourly rates is gaining acceptance, the vast majority of jurisdictions use set fees. Although set fees are easier to use than hourly rates, it is difficult to set a fee that accurately and reasonably reflects the time and cost of processing that application. Several cities are successfully using hourly rates but there is no set standard as to how those rates are established or as to how much of the actual cost they are recovering. As an example, the City of Irvine uses an hourly rate that they describe as full cost recovery. However, in reality it is what we have defined as a project hourly rate. Other cities are using very low hourly rates ($30-$45) but are only including salary costs, benefits, and perhaps some minor share of fixed costs in the calculations. They definitely are not including department and City overhead in their hourly rate calculations. For comparison purposes, we have provided information on the hourly rates, used by several cities and one county. Full cost recovery recovers cost of development review activities only. Present hourly rate is $61.50. 49 CITY OF BREA: $75.00 per hour. CITY OF IRVINE: $75.75 per hour. CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL: Present fee is $50.00 per hour, but looldng to increase it to about $75.00. CITY OF YUCAIPA: Present hourly fee is $165.00. This fee allows them to recover 80 to 90% of entire Planning Department cost including City -initiated projects. COUNTY OF SAN BERN RDINO, The County attempts to recover the entire cost of their land use operations (planning and engineering) from developer fees. They use hourly rates that are calculated using the employee's actual hourly salary multiplied by a factor averaging about 10. A $15.00 per hour employee (Assistant Planner) would bill time to a development case at $150 per hour. A $20 per hour employee (Associate Planner) will bill time at $200 per hour. Senior and management staff bill time at $300 per hour and up. It is recommended that the staff hourly rate for "actual cost" fees be set at $75.00. When technical consultants under contract to the City, such as engineering and planning consultants, are used, the hourly rate for these services shall be the actual cost of the services plus the City overhead factor. In the case of development agreements, the staff hourly rate shall be used, plus the City Attorney's actual hourly rate including City overhead. 50 SECTION VII ADOPTION PROCESS AND ORDINANCE 51 SECTION VII ADOPTION PROCESS AND ORDINANCE PROVISIONS Several provisions of State Law govern the establishment and adoption of planning, building and safety and city engineering fees. Various sections of State Law provide authority for cities to adopt these fees but in all cases the fees shall not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged. Sections 66016, 66017, and 66018 of the State Planning and Zoning Law set forth the procedure for adopting the fees. Important provisions of these sections include the following: • The fees must be adopted using the public hearing process. • Any fees adopted or revised will not be effective until 60 days following final action of the City Council. • The report regarding the proposed fees shall be available to interested parties at least 10 days prior to the public hearing. • The fees may be adopted by ordinance or resolution. It is recommended that the City of Diamond Bar initiate a process to allow fees to be adopted by resolution. However, for this year both an ordinance and resolution will be required. The ordinance will delete the previously adopted County fees. The fee resolution will establish the actual cost process, set the $75.00 hourly rate, establish a refund process, and adopt the Planning, Building and Safety, and City Engineering fees. In subsequent years, the only action required will be a fee resolution establishing the new fees and rescinding the previously adopted fee resolution. 52 It is recommended that the following provisions be included in the fee resolution: 1. ACTUAL COST a. Actual cost refers to the cost of the City in providing the service. The cost of City staff time shall be an hourly rate for line, professional level staff. The hourly rate shall be calculated to include salary, benefits, and department and City overhead. The hourly rate shall be $75.00. Consultant services shall be charged to the project at the actual cost of the services plus City overhead. b. At the time of project submittal, a deposit shall be paid to the City. Whenever 75 % of the deposit has been expended and the City determines that the estimated actual cost of processing the project will exceed the amount deposited, an additional deposit shall be required. Notification of any additional deposit required will be mailed to the applicant who shall deposit such additional monies with the City prior to the date specified in the notice. When an additional deposit has been requested, work will be suspended on the project when 95 % of the funds on deposit has been expended. Projects will not be completed with money due. If the additional deposit is not made by the date specified in the notice, the project may be deemed denied without further action on the part of the City. C. If the City determines that the estimated actual cost of a project will be less than the specified deposit, the City may require a deposit that equals the estimated cost of the project in lieu of the specified deposit. 2. REFUNDS a. A full refund shall be made if any fee which was erroneously paid or collected. 53 b. A refund in accordance with the following schedule shall be made when the applicant fails to submit required infomration within the allotted period of time or voluntarily withdraws the application before official acceptance, and before commencement of any work by staff: 1. Actual Cost - return deposit except for $60.00. 2. Set Fee - return fee except for $60.00. C. A refund in accordance with the following schedule shall be made when the project is withdrawn during the process; 1. Actual Cost - return balance of deposit after costs incurred are deducted less $60.00. 2. Set fee: a. Application accepted and referrals sent - 90% of fee. b. Referral response period completed - 60% of fee. c. Initial staff review process has been completed - 40% of fee. d. Staff report prepared or process completed - no refund. d. Unused deposit money will be fully refunded to the applicant when the project is completed. e. When additional fees need to be charged or collected for actual cost projects or where a refund of unused deposits or set fees is ten dollars or less, a charge or refund need not be made. 54 APPENDICES 55 APPENDIX A GENERAL CITY OVERHEAD FACTOR General City overhead refers to the cost of providing general government services to support the operating departments and activities of the City. Included in general government services are the cost of City Council, City Attorney, City Manager, City Clerk, Finance and General Government. Using the 1990-91 City of Diamond Bar budget as adjusted in January, 1991, these costs total $1,363,161. Using an assumption that these costs should be allocated to each other activity of City government proportionally to their budget level, we can establish a factor (percentage) which, if applied to increase each budget would pay for the general City overhead. For 1990-01, this overhead factor is approximately 17.75 percent. 56 APPENDIX B SAMPLE FORMS, DOCUMENTS, LETTERS B. SAMPLE FORMS, DOCUMENTS, LETTERS • Time sheets • Developer's Deposit Log • Additional Deposit Request Letter • Deposit Refund Letter • Withdrawal of Application and Refund Request 57 N N N N G O z r. w A r.Ja z -.4 •A a w ) r .a w 3 of C41 U b ,14 1r-1 W O V w2aa H w w x intorn im H 3 N N P4 bl � R ro •� O Z a N waz a .4N V1d'I- ri 0 O iT '�a3i�Ns� >3 ax tr w o+ as 90 rra► 0Vri I tr (4 , cli No W a cc0 ui t2 �o 0 w i Z ci 0 w 0 0 z w m im a iii ilii i momiii cli No W a cc0 ui t2 �o 0 w i Z ci 0 w 0 0 z w CITY OF DEVELOPER'S DEPOSIT LOG CASE NO. PROJECT NAME NAME OF PERSON PAYING FEES MAILING ADDRESS DATE SUBMITTED SET FEE DEPOSIT RE -ASSESS @75% WEEK HOURS RATE TOTAL BALANCE ENDING CASE NO: WEEK HOURS RATE TOTAL BALANCE ENDING SUBJECT: ADDTI'IONAL DEPOSIT REQUEST - CASE NUMBER In the process of working on your project, we have determined that the current deposit balance will be insufficient to complete (lie work. The cost of processing your project is on an actual cost basis. You were required to make a deposit at the lime the project was submitted and at the time the deposit is reduced to below 25 percent of the original amount, additional funds are requested. An additional deposit of $ is requested by _ to allow work to continue on your project. Please make your check payable to the City of , and reference your case number on the check. JOB STATUS: Project Contact Person: Telephone Number: (714) Deposits: Charges: Deposit Balance: Please send your check and a copy of this additional deposit request to: CITY OF , Planning Department, I , CA If you have any questions regarding your project status or this notice, please call your Project Contact Person. Director of Planning SUBJECT: DEPOSIT ACCOUNT REFUND - CASE NUMBER Your case has been closed by the Planning Department, and a refund of unused fees has been processed. A refund check is enclosed. CASE STATUS: Closed Project Contact Person: Deposits: Charges: Deposit Balance: If you have any questions regarding the status of your case, please contact the Project Contact Person. Director of Planning WITHDRAWAL OF APPLICATION AND - REFUND REQUEST A refund of a portion of processing fees may be requested when the application being processed is withdrawn prior to action. Refunds will be made based on the amount of time and expense incurred by the City and in accordance with City ordinances. A full refund of fees will only be made for fees erroneously paid or collected. CASE NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: APPLICANT'S NAME: FEE PAYOR AS SHOWN ON RECEIPT: FEE PAYOR ADDRESS: REQUEST: I/we request that the above referenced application be withdrawn and that the unused portions of the processing fees be refunded in accordance with the refund schedule of the City of . This request is made for the following reason: APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE: APPENDIX C LOS ANGELES 'COUNTY CURRENT PLANNING FEES 58 LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF REGIONAL PLANNING 320 WEST TEMPLE STREET LOS ANGELES CALIFORNIA 90012 FILING FEES ENVIRONMENTAL FEES (1) INITIAL STUDY $270.00 (2) MINOR EIR ' $1.195.00, plus $280 for each factor Identified as having a potential significant effect In the Initial study. (3) MAJOR EIR ' $2.140.00, plus $290 for @sch factor identified as having a potential aipnilicent effect In the Initial study. (4) SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL $125.00 AREA TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (SEATAC) REVIEW For the purpose of fee determination an Environmental Impact Report shall be considered major as opposed to minor where the initial study discloses more than three factor@ indicating a possible significant effect on the environment. SUBDIVISION FEES (1) TENTATIVE TRACT $2.510.00 (lot 1-10), plus S6011ot 11-25, plus $3011ot 26-50, plus $1211o151+ REVISIONS Before Tentative $450.00 beginning with the third major revision and for each Approval additional major revision thereafter. After Tentative 30% of the filing tee required for the filing of an original map Approval (major revision); 5505.00 (minor revision) (2) MINOR LAND DIVISION $1.925.00 REVISIONS Before Tentative $450.00 beginning with the third major revision and for each Approval additional major revision thereafter. After Tentative $640.00 (major revision) Approval $605.00 (minor revision) (3) CERTIFICATE OF $250.00 plus an additional $122.00 for subsequent requests COMPLIANCE requring the recordation of documents, Including the Clearance of Conditions and Amendments; OR $60.00 where s Notice of Intent to File a Notice of Violation or Notice of Violation is filed on residential property, which is owner occupied (4) MINOR LOT LINE $215.00 ADJUSTMENT (5) PARCEL MAP WAIVER $445.00 (6) CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION 59.00/unit NOTIFICAITON (7) MULTI -UNIT CONDO/APTMT/ S1.925 plus $10/unit (100 units or less); STOCK COOPERATIVE $5/unit (101-500); $2/unit (501+). (Parcel Maps) (a) MULTI -UNIT CONDO/APTMT/ $2.510 (lot 1-1u) plus 56011ot (11-25); $30/1ol (26-50); STOCK COOPERATIVE S12Rot (51+); plus S10/unit,(100 units or less); (Tract Maps) $5/unit (101-500): $2/unit (501+) ZONING FEES (1) ANIMAL PERMIT $155.00; plus an additional $015.00 with hearing. (2) APPROVAL IN CONCEPT $24.00 (for Coastal Commission) (3) AVIATION CASE $595.00 (4) CEMETERY PERMIT $2.235.00, plus sum determined to be adequate to defray cost of notification requirements. (5) COASTAL DEVELOPMENT $280.00; except where a public hearing Is required an PERMIT additional tea of $2.235.00 shall be paid. However, when filed concurrently with any other application, petition or tentative map required by this Title 22 or by Title 21 of this code which is the eubjeet of a public hearing for the same or substantially the same property. no separam fee shall be charged for such coastal development permit. ZONING FEES (cont.) (8) COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, $125.00 AMENDMENT (7) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $2,235.00 (8) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $2.235.00, plus eum latermined to be adequate to defray FOR LAND RECLAMATION cost of required publication and/or posting. PROJECTS (9) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $2.235.00 for each eign or 2 or more sign faces on the same FOR SUBDIVISION sign structure If they relate to the same subdivision DIRECTIONAL SIGN development. (10) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $1,285.00 FOR LOW & MODERATE INCOME HOUSING (11) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $285.00 APPEAL TO THE RPC (12) DEVELOPMENT $2,200.00 except where a petition for change o1 zone for the AGREEMENT same or substantially the same property Is filed concurrently, no separate fee shall be charged. (13) EXPLOSIVE STORAGE $2,235.00 (14) HIGHWAY REALIGNMENT $2.910.00 (15) MOBILEHOME PERMITS $2.235.00; time extenstions $120.00 (18) NONCONFORMING USE/ $2,235.00 STRUCTURE REVIEW (17) OAK TREE PERMIT $125.00 (18) PARKING PERMIT $2.235.00 (19) PLAN AMENDMENT, LOCAL $1.490.00 (20) PLAN AMENDMENT, $2.205.00 COUNTYWIDE (21) SITE PLAN REVIEW $125.00, including intial or revised plan, director's review, Coastal Commission exemptions. (22) SITE PLAN REVIEW. $280.00. where site plan has 20.000 or more sq it COMM ERCIALANDUSTRIAL or gross floor area. (23) SITE PLAN REVIEW. $280.00 RESIDENTIAL IN HILLSIDE AREAS (24) SITE PLAN REVIEW $285.00 APPEAL TO THE RPC (25) SPECIFIC PLANS $2.840.00 (26) SURFACE MINING PERMIT/ $2.235.00 RECLAMATION PLANS (27) TEMPORARY USE PERMITS $125.00; plum an additional $280.00 with public hosting. (28) VARIANCE $2,235.00 (29) ZONE CHANGES $2,835.00 FEE REDUCTIONS FOR MULTIPLE CONCURRENT CASE FILINGS - When more then one application, petition or tentative map for the same or substantially the same properly are filed concurrently, the total ftiing I" for the second and each additional application thereafter shall be reduced by $250.00, respectively. Ravibad January 1001 Land Development Management Agency SURCHARGE FEES' - (2) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF REGIONAL PLANNING 320 WEST TEMPLE STREET LOS ANGELES CALIFORNIA 90012 ENVIRONMENTAL SURCHARGE (1)' INITIAL STUDY NO FEE (3) (2) MINOR EIR• NO FEE NO FEE (3) MAJOR EIR• NO FEE SUBDIVISION SURCHARGE 11) TENTATIVE TRACT OR REACTIVATION A. IN WHICH NO CONDOMINIUMS ARE PROPOSED Per Lot MINOR LOT LINE LOTS 1 - 25 $30.00 LOTS 26 - 50 520.00 LOTS 51 - 100 $15.00 PARCEL MAP WAIVER LOTS 101 - 200 $10.00 (7) LOTS 201+ S 5.00 NO FEE e. CONDOMINIUM PROJECT NOTIFICATION Per Unit (Ordinance Units 1 - 50 510.00 Units 51 - 100 $ 5.00 ANIMAL PERMIT Units 101 .200 $ 3.00 NO SURCHARGE FEE SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR ANY UNITIS) IN EXCESS OF 200 UNITS (2) MINOR LAND DIVISION OR REACTIVATION 5300.00 (3) REVISIONS NO FEE (4) CERTIFICATE OF NO FEE COMPLIANCE 151 MINOR LOT LINE NO FEE ADJUSTMENT (6) PARCEL MAP WAIVER $25.00 (7) CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION NO FEE NOTIFICATION (Ordinance NO. 12.364) ZONING SURCHARGE 11) ANIMAL PERMIT NO FEE (2) APPROVAL IN CONCEPT NO FEE (tor Coastal Commission) (3) CEMETERY PERMIT NO FEE (4) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $50.00 (5) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $50.00 FOR LAND RECLAMATION PROJECTS (6) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO FEE FOR SUBDIVISION DIRECTIONAL SIGN (7) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT • S50.00 HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT ANO SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREAS (8) VARIANCES $50.00 (91 DIRECTOR'S REVIEW NO FEE APPENDIX D FEE COMPARISONS PRESENT FEES COMPARED TO PROPOSED FEES SAMPLE PROJECTS 59 PLANNING FEES Assume two Conditional Use Permits (CUP) for comparison purposes. One is a relatively simple CUP taking 10 hours to process and the second is a complicated CUP such as a retail shopping center taking 80 hours. Present Present Proposed Projec City Fees County Fees City Fees 10 hour CUP $ 1,285.00 $ 2,235.00 $ 750.00 80 hour CUP $ 1,285.00 $ 2,235.00 $ 6,000.00 The proposed City fees establish the processing of a CUP as an "actual cost" fee with the applicant paying only for the number of hours spent by City staff and consultants on the project. The City's hourly rate including overhead is $75.00. In the case of a small project such as the 10 hour CUP, the City fees will actually be less than the present fees and will more accurately reflect the actual cost of processing the project. The larger 80 hour CUP project will pay an increased fee but it also reflects actual costs. 01IJ-11) The following comparisons are for plan check and building permit fees only and compare the present fee system to the proposed fees using the ICBO valuation tables. Present Proposed Building T= Cily Fees City Fees 3,000 s.f. wood frame house $ 715.28 $ 807.92 Building Permit 841.50 950.50 10,000 s.f. wood office Plan check $1,870.42 $1,822.82 Building permit 2,200.50 2,144.50 .E The above listed fees do not include the permit issuance fee or State seismic or energy compliance fees. 61 APPENDIX E BUILDING VALUATION TABLES The first table titled "County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works, Building and Safety Division" is the valuation table presently used by the City's Building and Safety consultant, and which is provided as an information sheet at the counter. The second table is a copy of the valuation table provided by the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) and which is published in the Building Standards Magazine. This is the valuation table used by most cities and which is proposed for use in the City of Diamond Bar. 62 Building Valuation Data At the request of numerous building officials, Building Standards offers the following building valuation Bala representing average costs for most buildinKs. Because residential buildings are the most common for many c ities, Iwo general( las;ps are considered for these, one for "average" construction and the other for "good." Adjustments should be made for special architectural or structural features and the location of the pmjecl. I ligher or lower unit costs may often result. The unit costs are intended to comply with the definition of "valuation" in Section 42 3 of the Uniform BuildingCodeT"t and thus include architectural, struc- tural, electrical, plumbing and mechanical work, except as specifically listed below. The unit costs also include the contraclor's profit, which should not be omitted. Thedelerminalion of plan check fees for projects reviewed by the International Conference of Building Officials will be based on valuation computed from these figures which were compiled in April 1991. Occupancy and Type Cost per Square Fool, Average cost per Square fool, Occupancy and Type Average cost per Square Fool, Occupancy and Type Average Corr per Square Fool, Occupancy and type Average 1. APARTMENT HOUSES: Western U.S. 7, DWELLINGS: Connecticut ............. 13. JAILS: Pennsylvania Type III -N ............. 26.30 Type I or 11 F.R.e ....... $ 70.40 Type V -Masonry ....... 59.90 Type I or II F.R. ......... 126.70 Type V -1 -Hour ....... 22.80 (Good) $85.80 California (Good) $76.80 District of Columbia . , .... 0.87 Type III -1 -Hour ....... 115.20 20• RESTAURANTS: 0.84 Type V -Masonry 1.00 Type V -Wool Frame ... 51.50 Type V -1 -Hour ........ 82.80 Type III -1 -Hour ....... 73.70 (or Type III) .......... 56.00 (Good) $72.90 o.68 14. LIBRARIES: 0.70 Type III -N ............ 70.20 (Good) $69.70 0.94 Basements- 0.81 Type I or 11 F.R. ......... 92.80 Type V -1 -Hour ....... 65.30 Type V -Wood Frame ... 49.80 Semi -Finished ......... 16.00 Type II -1 -Hour ........ 64.90 Type V -N 62.20 (Good) $63.00 Type I -Basement Garage 29.50 (Good) $ 18.20 Unfinished 12.00 Type II -N ............. 61.60 ............ 21. SCHOOLS: 0.80 2. Ai1DITORIUMS: ............. (Good) $14.10 New Hampshire Type 111-1 Hour yp " ' ' ' • ' ' ' Type III -N 70.60 67.20 Type I or II F.R.......... 88.70 Type I or 11 F.R........... 82.60 8. FIRE STATIONS: New Jersey .............. ............ Type V -1 -flour ........ 63.30 Type 11-I -flour ........ Type III -1 -Hour ....... 63.20 63.70 Type II -I -Hour ......... 58.60 Type I or 11 FR. ......... 90.40 lype V -N ............ 60.30 Type III -N ............ 60.40 Type II -N ............. 55.70 Type 11 -1 -Hour ........ 58.60 15. MEDICAL OFFICES: Illinois ................. Type V -1 -Hour ....... 58.30 Type III - I -Hour ........ 62.70 Type 11-N ............. 55.70 Type I or II F.R.' ........ 94.80 Type V -N 55.20 Type 111-14 ............. Type V -1 -Hour ........ 59.80 57.50 Type III -1 -Hour ........ Type III -N 65.20 61.90 Type II -1-1 lour ........ 70.50 .........:.. 22. SERVICE STATIONS: Wisconsin.............. Type V -N ............. 54.70 ............ Type V -I -Hour ........ 58.30 Type 11-N ............. Type III -1-1 lour ....... 67.20 77.10 Type II -N • • • • • • -four Type III -1 -Hour 52.60 52.80 3. BANKS•e Wyoming ............... Type V -N ............. 55.40 Type III -N 73.60 . ....... Type V - I -flour ....... 46.40 Type I or II F.R. ........ 118.20 9. HOMES FOR THE ELDERLY: Type V -1-I lour ........ 71.80 Canopies .............. 20.30 Type II -1 -Hour ......... 84.90 Type 1 or 11 F.R. ......... 81.60 Type V -N ............ 67.90 Type 11-N ............ Type III -1 -Hour ........ 80.90 96.30 Type II - I - Hour ........ Type II -N 65.40 62.30 16. OFFICES—: 23. STORES: Type I or 11 F.R.e ........ 66.40 Type III -N ............. 91.90 ............. Type III -1 -Hour ........ 68.20 Type I or 11 FIR .' ........ Type 11 -1 -Flour 84.90 55.00 Type II -1 -Hour ........ 40.00 Type V -1 -flour ........ 84.90 Type III -N ............ 65.20 ........ Type 11-N 52.40 Type II -N ............ 39.20 Type V -N ............. 80.80 Type V- I -Hour ........ 65.00 ............. Type III -1-1 lour 60.50 Type III -1 -Hour ....... 48.90 4. BOWLING ALLEYS: Type V -N ............. 61.80 ....... Type III -N ............ 57.70 Type III -N ............ TYpe V -1 -flour 46.10 39.00 Type II -1 -Hour ......... 39.50 10. HOSPITALS: Type V-1-1 lour ........ 56.00 ....... Type V -N 36.50 Type II -N ............. 37.70 Type I or II FR.* ....... 129.60 Type V -N ............ 53.40 ............ Type III -1 -Hour ....... Type 111-N 43.30 41.30 Type III- 1-1 lour ....... Type V 107.80 17. PRIVATE GARAGES: 24. THEATERS: Type I or 11 F.R.......... 86.50 ............. Type V -1 -Hour 36.90 -1 -1 -four ....... 100.00 Wood Frame ........... 18.30 Type 111-1-f lour ....... yp 62.70 .. , ..... 11, HOTELS AND MOTELS: Masonry21.70 .............. Type III -N 59.70 S. CHURCHES: Type j II F.R........... 78.00 Type I or 11 F.R.' ........ Type III 81.00 Open Carports ......... 13.10 ............ Type V -1 -Hour ... - ... 56.50 or Type II - I -flour ......... 58.30 -1 -flour ........ Type III -N 69.90 18. PUBLIC BUILDINGS: Type V -N 5.1.00 Type II -N ' � • ' • • • • � • .. 55.40 Type V-1-1 four ........ 61.00 T e I or II F.R.' ........ Type Type 11 -1 -Hour 98.90 73.80 25. WAREHOUSES Type III -1 -Hour ........ 62.60 Type V -N ............. 58.20 ........ Type II -N 70.50 ... Type t or II F.R.......... 39.30 Type III -N ............. 59.60 12, INDUSTRIAL PLANTS: ............. Type III -1 -[-four ....... 82.60 Type II or V -1 -Hour ... Type II or V -N 23.20 21.90 Type V -1 -Hour ........ y� V -N 56.90 54.20 Type I or II F.R. ......... 44.90 Type III -N 78.90 ........ Type 111 -1 -flour ....... 26.70 ......... ... Type II -1-1 lour ........ 30.60 Type V -1 -Hour ........ 7.3.00 Type III -N .......... , . 25.50 6. CONVALESCENT HOSPITALS: Type II-(Sto(k) ......... 29.00 Type V -N ............ 70.00 Type I or II F.R.' ........ 110.60 Type III- 1-I lour ........ 33.80 19. PUBLIC GARAGES: EQUIPMENT TYpe 111-14lour....... 78.90 Type Ill -N ............ 32.30 Type I or II F.R.e ........ 39.00 AIR CONDITIONING: Type V -1 -1 -lour ........ 71.00 Tilt -up ................. 22.70 Type I or 11 Open Parking' 30.50 Commercial .......... 3.40 Type V -1 -flour ........ 30.50 Type II -N ............. 22.90 Residential ........... 2.80 Type V -N ............. 28.80 Type III -1 -[four ....... 27.50 SPRINKLER SYSTEMS .... 1.60 Ano u.5 percent to total cost for each story over three. **Deduct 20 percent for shell -only buildings. • Deduct I1 percent for mini -warehouses. REGIONAL MODIFIERS The following modifiers are recommended for use in conjunction with the building valuation data. In addition, certain local conditions may require further modifications. To use these modifiers, merely multiply the listed cost per square foot by the appropriate regional modifier. For example, to adjust the cost of a Type III- 14lour hotel building of average construction for the Iowa area, select Regional Modifier 0.80 and unit cost from valuation data, $69.90. 0.80 X 69.90 _ $55.90 (adjusted cost per square foot) Eastern U.S. Modifier Eastern U.S. (cont.) Modifier Central U.S. Modifier Western U.S. Modifier Connecticut ............. 0.95 Pennsylvania Kentucky ............... 0.77 Arizona ................. 0.82 Delaware .... 0.84 Philadelphia .......... 0.96 Louisiana ............... 0.78 California District of Columbia . , .... 0.87 Other ..... .. 0.83 Michigan ......... 0.84 Los Angeles ,.......... g 1.00 Florida ................. 0.74 Rhode Island ............ 0.94 Minnesota .............. 0.86 Sari Francisco .......... 1.13 Gd.Yxgia ................. o.68 South Carolina .......... 0.70 Mississippi .............. 0.71 Other ................. 0.94 Maine ................... 0.81 Vermont................ 0.80 Missouri................ 0.78 Colorado................ 0.81 Maryland .......... . .... 0.79 Virginia ................. 0.73 Nebraska ............... 0.75 Hawaii ................. 1.14 Massachusetts ........... 0.94 West Virginia ............ 0.82 North Dakota ........... 0.80 Idaho ................... 0.80 New Hampshire ......... 0.82 Central U.S. Ohio .................. 0.80 Montana ................ 0.79 New Jersey .............. 0.91 Alabama 0.72 Oklahoma .............. 0.71 Nevada .... , ............ 0.89 New York ' ........ Arkansas ............... • .. . 0.70 South Dakota ........... 0.78 New Mexico ............ 0.76 New York Cit City ......... 1.16 Illinois ................. 0.87 Tennessee .............. 0.72 Oregon ................. 0.83 Other ................ 0.87 Indiana 0.82 Texas ........... ....... 0.74 Utah ....... ............ 0.75 North Carolina ........... 0.70 ................. Iowa ................... 0A0 Wisconsin.............. 0.85 Washington ............. 0.88 Kansas ................. 0.74 1 Alaska ................. 1.30 1 Wyoming ............... 0.80 BUILDING STANDARDS/March-April, 1991 Building Valuation Data At the request of numerous building officials, Building Standards offers the following building valuation data represenIing average costs for most buildings. Because residential buildings are the most common for many cities, two general classes are considered for these, one for "average" construction and the other ((it "good." Adjustments should be made for special architectural or structural features and the location of the project. I ligher or lower unit costs may often result. The unit costs are intended to comply with the definition of "valuation" in Section 423 of the Uniform Building CodeTI and thus include architectural, slruc- lural, electrical, plumbing and mechanical work, except as specifically listed below. The unit costs also include the contractor's profit, which should not be omitted. The determination of plan check fees for projects reviewed by the Inlernalional Conference of Building Officials will be based on valuation computed from these figures which were compiled in April 1991. Cost per Square Fool, Occupancy and Type Average Coil per Square Fool, Occupancy and Type Avenge Cost per Square Fool, Occupancy and Type Average Cost per Square Fool, Occupancy and Type Average 1. APARTMENT HOUSES: Modifier 7. DWELLINGS: Connecticut ............. 13. JAILS: Pennsylvania Type III -N ............. 26.30 Type I or II F.R.• ....... $ 70.40 Type V -Masonry ...... 59.90 Type I or II F.R. ......... 126.70 Type V -I -Hour ....... 22.80 (Good) $85.80 California (Good) $76.80 District of Columbia ...... 0.87 Type III -1 -flour ....... 115.20 20. RESTAURANTS: 0.84 Type V -Masonry 1.00 Type V -Wood Frame ... 51.50 Type V - I -Flour ........ 82.80 Type III -1 -Hour ....... 73.70 (or Type III) .......... 56.00 (Good) $72.90 0.68 14. LIBRARIES: 0.70 Type III -N ............ 70.20 (Good) $69.70 0.94 Basements- 0.81 Type I or tl F.R. ......... 92.80 Type V -1 -Hour ....... 65.30 Type V -Wood Frame ... 49.80 Semi -Finished ......... 16.00 Type 11-1 -I lour ........ 64.90 ............ Type V -N62.20 0.75 (Good) $6.3.00 1.14 (Good) $18.20 0.94 Type II -N ............. 61.60 21, SCHOOLS: 0.80 Type I -Basement Garage 29.50 Unfinished ............. 1200. Type III- 14lour ....... 70.60 Type I or II F.R.......... 88.70 2. AUDITORIUMS: 0.79 (Good) $14.10 0.91 Type III -N ............ 67.20 Type II -1 -Hour ........ 63.20 Type 1 or II F.R........... 82.60 8. FIRE STATIONS: Type V -1 -Hour ........ 63.30 Type III -1 -Hour ....... 63.70 Type II -1 -Hour ......... 58.60 Type I or II F.R. ......... 90.40 Type V -N ............ 60.30 Type III -N ............ 60.40 Type II -N ............. 55.70 Type 11-1-1lour ........ 58.60 15. MEDICAL OFFICES: 0.82 Type V -1 -Hour ....... 58.30 Type III -1 -Hour ........ 62.70 Type 11-N ............. 55.70 Type I or II F.R.' ........ 94.80 Type V -N .........:.. 55.20 Type III -N ............. 59.80 Type III -I -Hour ........ 65.20 Type II -14 lour ........ 70.50 22. SERVICE STATIONS: 1.30 Type V-1 -flour ........ 57.50 Type III -N ............ 61.90 Type II -N ..............67.20 Type II -N ............ 52.60 Type V -N ............. 54.70 Type V-1 -Hour ........ 58.30 Type III -1-1 tour .. , .... 77.10 Type III -I -Hour ....... 52.80 3. BANKS: Type V -N ............. 55.40 Type III -N ............ 73.60 Type V -I -Hour ....... 46.40 Type I or II F. R. ........ 118.20 9. HOMES FOR THE ELDERLY: Type V-1-1 lour ........ 71.80 Canopies .............. 20.30 Type 11 -1 -Hour..:...... 84.90 Type I or II F.R. ......... 81.60 Type V -N ............ 67.90 23. STORES: Type II -N ............ 80.90 Type II - I -Hour ........ 65.40 16. OFFICES-: Type I or II F.R. ........ 66.40TVPe III -1 -Hour •---••--96.30 Type II -N •...••....... 62.30 Type I or II F.R.' ........ 84.90 Type II -1 -Hour ........ 40.00 Type 111-N ............. 91.90 Type 111 -1 -Hour ........ 68.20 Type II -1 -Hour ........ 55.00 Tye 11-N • ' 39.20TYye V -1 -Hour •••••-••84.90 Type 111-N -• -•• •�•-. 65.20 Type 11-N ............. 52.40 Type 111 -1 -Hour 48.90 Type V -N ............. 80.80 Type V-1 Hour ........ 65.00 Type III -1 -Hour ....... 60.50 ....... T 111-N Type 46.10 4. BOWLING ALLEYS: Type V -N ............. 61.80 TYIu III -N ............ 57.70 lour ....... Type V -1 -flour ....... 39.00 Type II -1 -Hour ......... 39.50 10. HOSPITALS: Type V-1-1 lour ........ 56.00 Type V -N ............ 36.50 Type II -N ............. 37.70 Type I or II F.R.• ....... 129.60 Type V -N ............ 53.40 24. THEATERS. - Type III -1 -Flour ....... 43.30 Type 111-1-I lour ....... 107.80 17. PRIVATE GARAGES: Type I or II F.R.......... 86.50 Type III -N ............. 41.30 Type V -1 -[-lour....... 100.00 Wood Frame - - - - ...... 18.30 Type III -1 -Flour 62.70 Type V -1 -Hour ........ 36.90 11. HOTELS AND MOTELS: Masonry .............. 21.70 ....... Type III -N ............ 59.70 5. CHURCHES: Type I or II F.R.• ........ 81.00 Open Carports ......... 13.10 Type V -1 -Flour ....... 56.50 Type I or II F.R........... 78.(A) Type 111 -1 -Flour ........ 69.90 18. PUBLIC BUILDINGS: Type V -N .. .... 54.00 Type 11 -1 -Hour ......... 58.30 Type III -N ............ 66.60 Type I or 11 F R.' ........ 98.90 25. WAREHOUSES"*: Type 11-N ............. 55.40 Type V -1 -Hour ........ 61.00 Type II -1 -Hour ........ 73.80 Type I or II F.R.......... 39.30 Type III -1 -Hour ........ 62.60 Type V -N ............. 58.20 Type II -N ............. yP 70.50 Type II or V-1 -Hour 23.20 Type 111-N ............. 59.60 12. INDUSTRIAL PLANTS: Type III -1 -Hour ....... 82.60 ... Type II or V -N 21.90 Type V -1 -Hour ........ 56.90 Type I or II F.R. ......... 44.90 Type III -N............ 78.90 ........ Type III -1 -Hour 26.70 Type V -N ............. 54.20 Type II -1-1 lour ........ 30.60 Type V -1 -Hour ........ 7.3.00 ....... Type III -N ..... , ...... 25.50 6. CONVALESCENT HOSPITALS: Type 11-6to(k) ......... 29.00 Type V -N ............ 70.00 Type I or II F.R.' ........ 110.60 Type III -1 -Hour ........ 33.80 19, PUBLIC GARAGES: EQUIPMENT Type III -1 -flour ....... 78.90 Y ............ Type III -N 32.30 T .. Type I or 11 F.R.• . , ... . 39.00 AIR CONDITIONING: Type V-1-1 lour ........ 71.00 Tilt -up ................. 22.70 Type I or 11 Open Parking' 30.50 Commercial .......... 3.40 Type V-14lour ........ 30.50 Type II -N ............. 22.90 Residential ........... 2.80 Type V -N ............. 28.80 Type III -1 -Hour ....... 27.50 SPRINKLER SYSTEMS .... 1.60 *Add 0.5 percent to total cost for each story over three. **Deduct 20 percent for shell -only buildings. **'Deduct I1 percent for mini -warehouses. REGIONAL MODIFIERS The following modifiers are recommended for use in conjunction with the building valuation data. In addition, certain local conditions may require further modifications. To use these modifiers, merely multiply the listed cost per square foot by the appropriate regional modifier. For example, to adjust the cost of a Type 111 -1 -Hour hotel building of average construction for the Iowa area, select Regional Modifier 0.80 and unit cost from valuation data, $69.90. 0.80 X 69.90 = $55.90 (adjusted cost per square fool) Eastern U.S. Modifier Eastern U.S. (cont.) Modifier Central U.S. Modifier Western U.S. Modifier Connecticut ............. 0.95 Pennsylvania Kentucky ............... 0.77 Arizona ................. 0.82 Delaware ............... 0.84 Philadelphia .......... 0.96 Louisiana ............... 0.78 California District of Columbia ...... 0.87 Other ................ 0.83 Michigan ............... 0.84 Los Angeles . , ......... 1.00 Florida ................. 0.74 Rhode Island ............ 0.94 Minnesota .............. 0.86 San Francisco .......... 1.1.3 Georgia ................. 0.68 South Carolina .......... 0.70 Mississippi .............. 0.71 Other ............... , . 0.94 Maine .................. 0.81 Vermont................ 0.80 Missouri................ 0.78 Colorado................ 0.81 Maryland ............... 0.79 Virginia ................. 0.73 Nebraska ............... 0.75 Hawaii ................. 1.14 Massachusetts ........... 0.94 West Virginia ............ 0.82 North Dakota ........... 0.80 Idaho ................... 0.80 New I lampshire . , ....... 0.82 Central U.S. Ohio .................. 0.80 Montana ................ 0.79 New Jersey .............. 0.91 Alabama............... 0.72 Oklahoma .............. 0.71 Nevada ................. 0.89 New York Arkansas 0.70 South Dakota ........... 0.78 New Mexico ............ 0.76 New York City ......... 1.16 ............... Illinois ................. 0.87 Tennessee .............. 0.72 Oregon ....... . ......... 0.8.3 Other ................ 0.87 Indiana ............... 0.82 Texas .... 0.74 Utah 0.75 North Carolina ........... 0.70 Iowa ................. .. 0.80 Wisconsin .............. 0.85 Washington ............. 0.88 Kansas ................. . 0.74 1 Alaska ................ 1.30 Wyoming ............... 0.80 BUILDING STANDARDS/March-April 1991 51 COUNTY OP LOS ANGELES Oate: 4-I-90 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Supercedes: 11-1-89 BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION BUILDING VALUATION GUIDE SHEET (DOLLARS PER SQUARE FOOT) Reference: Marshall Valuatlon Service !tom -- -TYPI57 CONSTRUCT -ION 11 ling 1>1 odes A.C.) (MX5 ' ood _ 4. li '3000 veryGood .40 1 . x(05 Zo j os Fiber Eis t3.� ,.r, y p`ficm6� •,d �r , � Meta residential Additions wood under 600 sq. ft. 3. F( tonal Cost actors: where app lcab a M '- i onditionin9 omm. S 3.60/sq.-ft. Retaining_ welts: 6" comer eta block $ 5.20/sq.ft. Res. lsq: ft. so concrete block ■1-M. /sq.ft. 120, concreti block • ;TTS/sq.ft. i :'Height Floors, = 1.40%sq. ft. ,• Foundations: Use same values as'12l above Ire Sorinkler System S�2._l0/sq. ft. Signs: 2 -Sides 1- l e ilmning Pools (private) $29_, .40/sq. ft. Painted S 40.90 S 32.60/sq.ft. : nercial and Permissible to use reductions Electrical fiWaO $ .1 /S4 -ft. idustrial Bldgs. over based on Floor Ares/Perimeter Sign Poles: 000 sq. ft. multipliers listed in Marshall4" 0 $ 32.60/11n.ft. Valuation Service (on reverse) 6" 0 =`3:40llin.ft. 8. 0 * $-39.2a/11n.ft. rE: Hillside Buildings --add 5% to 20% for additional 10° 0 • $ 7239/lin.ft. foundation work. 12" 0 • S-95.901lin.ft. Tenant Improvements --is approximately the 14" 0 5111n•tt. difference between completed use above and shed ISO 0 * SiZ8.00/11n.ft. (warehouse). 240 0 • S17'2.00/l in.ft. Tract.Housing--10-49 units 5.7% decrease 30" 0 . 1 /lin.ft. 50 units or mora �x decrease S�iolkfs-YolU�-rcr1 rease for Medical Officas 15.2% ! iWilliam Haglund 55110 Supervising Civil Engineer III SK7/MARSHALL/MAR-4-90 WH: sh B-2 A•V• 1-nK N N wood Wood incl. Frame Masonry Frame artments x I 76s70 74.7-58.50 52.40 •a . 4U• ri ----- ----- --- -- -- -- - 12.00 1 4'.:ae3 x -- 4. ?te 1 ote x 57010+ :tris an ---- i . +• _d." ____ . t Wages es !stuarants x __-75.SF" - 71.20 65.60 :0 !S X 4 . 44 . . 1.67.70 5Z.10 !rvice Stations ---- ----- - ---- - --- - -- _ - im Cancoios ---- - -- --- -- -- 18.10 ---- -- -- -- ie tarsx i 6.10 1. --- irenouses 4 .• 1 .40 1 22.00 1r :S DENTIA R-3 DWELLING GARAGE valit wood Frame Masons hoodt2 Frame Masons Car o• 11 ling 1>1 odes A.C.) (MX5 ' ood _ 4. li '3000 veryGood .40 1 . x(05 Zo j os Fiber Eis t3.� ,.r, y p`ficm6� •,d �r , � Meta residential Additions wood under 600 sq. ft. 3. F( tonal Cost actors: where app lcab a M '- i onditionin9 omm. S 3.60/sq.-ft. Retaining_ welts: 6" comer eta block $ 5.20/sq.ft. Res. lsq: ft. so concrete block ■1-M. /sq.ft. 120, concreti block • ;TTS/sq.ft. i :'Height Floors, = 1.40%sq. ft. ,• Foundations: Use same values as'12l above Ire Sorinkler System S�2._l0/sq. ft. Signs: 2 -Sides 1- l e ilmning Pools (private) $29_, .40/sq. ft. Painted S 40.90 S 32.60/sq.ft. : nercial and Permissible to use reductions Electrical fiWaO $ .1 /S4 -ft. idustrial Bldgs. over based on Floor Ares/Perimeter Sign Poles: 000 sq. ft. multipliers listed in Marshall4" 0 $ 32.60/11n.ft. Valuation Service (on reverse) 6" 0 =`3:40llin.ft. 8. 0 * $-39.2a/11n.ft. rE: Hillside Buildings --add 5% to 20% for additional 10° 0 • $ 7239/lin.ft. foundation work. 12" 0 • S-95.901lin.ft. Tenant Improvements --is approximately the 14" 0 5111n•tt. difference between completed use above and shed ISO 0 * SiZ8.00/11n.ft. (warehouse). 240 0 • S17'2.00/l in.ft. Tract.Housing--10-49 units 5.7% decrease 30" 0 . 1 /lin.ft. 50 units or mora �x decrease S�iolkfs-YolU�-rcr1 rease for Medical Officas 15.2% ! iWilliam Haglund 55110 Supervising Civil Engineer III SK7/MARSHALL/MAR-4-90 WH: sh B-2 SUBJECT: DEPOSIT ACCOUNT REFUND - CASE NUMBER Your case has been closed by the Planning Department, and a refund of unused fees has been processed. A refund check is enclosed. CASE STATUS: Closed Project Contact Person: Deposits: Charges: Deposit Balance: If you have any questions regarding the status of your case, please contact the Project Contact Person. Director of Planning WITHDRAWAL OF APPLICATION AND - REFUND REQUEST A refund of a portion of processing fees may be requested when the application being processed is withdrawn prior to action. Refunds will be made based on the amount of time and expense incurred by the City and in accordance with City ordinances. A full refund of fees will only be made for fees erroneously paid or collected. CASE NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: APPLICANT'S NAME: FEE PAYOR AS SHOWN ON RECEIPT: FEE PAYOR ADDRESS: REQUEST: I/we request that the above referenced application be withdrawn and that the unused portions of the processing fees be refunded in accordance with the refund schedule of the City of . This request is made for the following reason: APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE: APPENDIX C LOS ANGELES 'COUNTY CURRENT PLANNING FEES 58 LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF REGIONAL PLANNING 320 WEST TEMPLE STREET LOS ANGELES CALIFORNIA 90012 FILING FEES ENVIRONMENTAL FEES (1) INITIAL STUDY $270.00 (2) MINOR EIR ' $1.19500. plus $280 for each factor Identified as having a potential significant effect In the Initial study. (3) MAJOR EIR ' S2,140.00, plus $280 for each factor Identified as having a potential significant effect In the Initial study. SUBDIVISION FEES ZONING FEES (4) SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL $125.00 AREA TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (SEATAC) REVIEW For the purpose of fee delerminallon an Environmental Impact Report shall be considered major as opposed to minor where the initial study discloses more than three factors Indicating a possible significant effect on the environment. (1) TENTATIVE TRACT REVISIONS Before Tenlative Approval After Tentative Approval (2) MINOR LAND DIVISION REVISIONS Before Tentative Approval After Tentative Approval (3) CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE (4) MINOR LOT LINE (2) ADJUSTMENT (5) PARCEL MAP WAIVER (6) CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION (4) NOTIFICAITON (7) MULTI -UNIT CONDO/APTMT/ STOCK COOPERATIVE (Parcel Maps) (a) MULTI -UNIT CONDO/APTMT/ STOCK COOPERATIVE (Tract Maps) (1) ANIMAL PERMIT (2) APPROVAL IN CONCEPT (for Coastal Commission) (3) AVIATION CASE (4) CEMETERY PERMIT (5) COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT $2,510.00 (lot 1-10), plus $6011ot 11-25, plus $30Aot 26-50, plus $12/1ot 51+ $450.00 beginning with the third major revision and for each additional major revision thereafter. 30% of the filing fee required for the filing of an original map (major revision); $505.00 (minor revision) $1,925.00 $450.00 beginning with the third major revision and for each additional major revision thereafter. $640.00 (major revision) $505.00 (minor revision) $250.00 plus an additional $122.00 for subcaquent requests requring the recordation of documents, including the Clearance of Conditions and Amendments, OR $60.00 whets s Notice of Intent to File a Notice of Violation or Notice of VWalion is riled on residential property. which is owner occupied $215.00 $445.00 59.00/unit 51.925 plus $10/unit (100 unite or less); $5/unit (101-500); $2/unit (501+). $2.510 (lot 1-1U) plus $60Aot (11-25); $30/lot (26-50); $12Aof (51+); plus $10/unit.(100 units or leas); $5/unit (101-500); $2/unit (501+) $155.00; plus an additional $615.00 with hearing. $24.00 $595.00 $2,235.00. plus sum determined to be adequate to defray coat of notification requirements. $280.00; except where a public hearing Is required an additional fee of $2,235.00 shall be paid. However, when filed concurrently with any other application, petition or tentative map required by this Title 22 or by Title 21 of this code which is the subject of a public hearing for the same or substantially the same property, no separate fee shall be charged for ouch coastal development permit. ZONING FEES (cont.) %visedJanury lest (6) COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, $12500 AMENDMENT (7) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $2,235.00 (8) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $2.235.00, plus sum dptermined to be adequate to defray FOR LAND RECLAMATION cool of required publication and/or posting. PROJECTS (9) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $2.235.00 for each sigr or 2 or more sign faces on the same FOR SUBDIVISION sign structure If they relate to the same subdivision DIRECTIONAL SIGN development. (10) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT St,285.00 FOR LOW d MODERATE INCOME HOUSING (11) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $265.00 APPEAL TO THE RPC (12) DEVELOPMENT $2,200.00 except where a petition for change of zone for the AGREEMENT same or substantially the some property is filed concurrently, no separate fee shall be charged. (13) EXPLOSIVE STORAGE 52,235.00 (14) HIGHWAY REALIGNMENT $2,910.00 (15) MOBILEHOME PERMITS $2,235.00; time extenstione $120.00 (16) NONCONFORMING USE/ $2,235.00 STRUCTURE REVIEW (17) OAK TREE PERMIT $125.00 (18) PARKING PERMIT $2.235.00 (19) PLAN AMENDMENT, LOCAL $1,490.00 (20) PLAN AMENDMENT, $2,205.00 COUNTYWIDE (21) SITE PLAN REVIEW $125.00, including Intial or revised plan, director's review, Coastal Commission exemptions. (22) SITE PLAN REVIEW, $280.00. where aIle pian has 20,000 or more eq it COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL of gross floor area. (23) SITE PLAN REVIEW, $280.00 RESIDENTIAL IN HILLSIDE AREAS (24) SITE PLAN REVIEW $265.00 APPEAL TO THE RPC (25) SPECIFIC PLANS $2,640.00 (26) SURFACE MINING PERMIT/ $2,235.00 RECLAMATION PLANS (27) TEMPORARY USE PERMITS $125.00; plus an additional $280.00 with public hearing. (28) VARIANCE $2,235.00 (29) ZONE CHANGES $2.635.00 FEE REDUCTIONS FOR MULTIPLE CONCURRENT CASE FILINGS - When more than one application, petition or tentative map for the same or substantially the same property are filed concurrently, the total filing fee for the second and each additional application thereafter shell be reduced by $250.00, respectively. Land Development Management Agency SURCHARGE FEES COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF REGIONAL PLANNING 320VVEST TEMPLE STREET LOS ANGELES CALIFORNIA 90012 ENVIRONMENTAL SURCHARGE (1)' INITIAL STUDY NO FEE 121 MINOR EIR• NO FEE (3) MAJOR EIR• NO FEE SUBDIVISION SURCHARGE (1) TENTATIVE TRACT OR REACTIVATION A. IN WHICH NO CONDOMINIUMS ARE PROPOSED Per Lot LOTS 1 - 25 530.00 LOTS 26 - 50 $20.00 LOTS 51- 100 515.00 LOTS 101 -200 $10.00 LOTS 201+ S 5.00 B. CONDOMINIUM PROJECT Per Unit Units 1 -50 $10.00 Units 51 - 100 S 5.00 Units 101 - 200 S 3.00 ZONING SURCHARGE 11) NO SURCHARGE FEE SHALL BE REQUIRED NO FEE FOR ANY UNITIS) IN EXCESS OF 200 UNITS 12) MINOR LAND DIVISION OR ( for Coastal Commission) REACTIVATION $300.00 (3) REVISIONS NO FEE (4) CERTIFICATE OF NO FEE $50.00 COMPLIANCE FOR LAND RECLAMATION 15) MINOR LOT LINE NO FEE ADJUSTMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (6) PARCEL MAP WAIVER $25.00 (7) CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION NO FEE NOTIFICATION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT . (Ordinance NO. 12.364) HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT ZONING SURCHARGE 11) ANIMAL PERMIT NO FEE 12) APPROVAL IN CONCEPT NO FEE ( for Coastal Commission) (3) CEMETERY PERMIT NO FEE (4) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $50.00 (5) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $50.00 FOR LAND RECLAMATION PROJECTS (6) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO FEE FOR SUBDIVISION DIRECTIONAL SIGN (7) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT . 550.00 HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT AND SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREAS (81 VARIANCES $60.00 (9) DIRECTOR'S REVIEW NO FEE APPENDIX D FEE COMPARISONS PRESENT FEES COMPARED TO PROPOSED FEES SAMPLE PROJECTS 59 PLANNING FEES Assume two Conditional Use Permits (CUP) for comparison purposes. One is a relatively simple CUP taking 10 hours to process and the second is a complicated CUP such as a retail shopping center taking 80 hours. Present Present Proposed project Cily Fees County Fees City Fees 10 hour CUP $ 1,285.00 $ 2,235.00 $ 750.00 80 hour CUP $ 1,285.00 $ 2,235.00 $ 6,000.00 The proposed City fees establish the processing of a CUP as an "actual cost" fee with the applicant paying only for the number of hours spent by City staff and consultants on the project. The City's hourly rate including overhead is $75.00. In the case of a small project such as the 10 hour CUP, the City fees will actually be less than the present fees and will more accurately reflect the actual cost of processing the project. The larger 80 hour CUP project will pay an increased fee but it also reflects actual costs. The following comparisons are for plan check and building permit fees only and compare the present fee system to the proposed fees using the ICBO valuation tables. Present Proposed Build' T- City Fees City Fees 3,000 s.f. wood frame house $ 715.28 $ 807.92 Building Permit 841.50 950.50 10,000 s.f. wood office Plan check $1,870.42 $1,822.82 Building permit 2,200.50 2,144.50 KIK The above listed fees do not include the permit issuance fee or State seismic or energy compliance fees. 61 APPENDIX E BUILDING VALUATION TABLES The first table titled "County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works, Building and Safety Division" is the valuation table presently used by the City's Building and Safety consultant, and which is provided as an information sheet at the counter. The second table is a copy of the valuation table provided by the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) and which is published in the Building Standards Magazine. This is the valuation table used by most cities and which is proposed for use in the City of Diamond Bar. 62 Building Valuation Data At the request of numerous building officials, Building Standards offers the following building valuation data representing average costs for most buildingq. Because residential buildings are the most common for many cities, two general classes are considered for these, one for "average" construction and the other for "good." Adjustments should be made for special architectural or structural features and the location of the project. I ligher or lower unit costs may often result. The unit costs are intended to comply with the definition of "valuation" in Sed ion 423 of the Uniform Building Code"' and thus include architectural, struc- lural, electrical, plumbing and mechanical work, except as specifically listed below. The unit costs also include the contractor's profit, which should not be omitted. The determination of plan check fees for projects reviewed by the International Conference of Building Officials will be based on valuation computed from these figures which were compiled in April 199.1. Cost per Square Fool, Occupancy and Type Average cost per Square Fool, Occupancy and Type Average cost per Square Fool, Occupancy and Type Average Cost per Square Fool, Occupancy and Type Average 1. APARTMENT HOUSES: Modifier 7. DWELLINGS: . Modifier 13. JAILS: 0.95 Type I11 -N ............. 26.30 Type I or 11 F.R.• ....... $ 70.40 Type V -Masonry ....... 59.90 Type I or 11 F.R. ......... 126.70 Type V -I -Hour ....... 22.80 (Good) $8S.80 0.78 (Good) $76.80 Type III -1 -Hour ....... 115.20 20, RESTAURANTS: 0.83 Type V -Masonry 0.84 Type V -Wood Frame ... 51.50 Type V -1 -Hour ........ 82.80 Type III -1 -Hour ....... 73.70 (or Type 111) .......... 56.00 (Good) $72.90 1.13 14. LIBRARIES: 0.68 Type 111-N ............ 70.20 (Good) $69.70 0.71 Basements- , . 0.94 Type I or II F.R. ......... 92.80 Type V -I -Hour ....... 65.30 Type V -Wood Frame ... 49.80 Semi -Finished ......... 16.00 Type 11-14four........ 64.90 Type V -N ............ 62.20 (Goof) $63.00 0.75 (Good) $18.20 1.14 Type 11 -N ............. 61.60 21. SCHOOLS: 0.82 Type 1 -Basement Garage 29.50 Unfinished ............. 12.00 Type III -1 -Hour ....... 70.60 Type I or If F.R.......... 88.70 2. AUDITORIUMS: Ohio .................. (Good) $14.10 .............. Montana.. Type III -N ............ 67.20 Type 11 -1 -Hour ........ 63.20 Type I or II F.R........... 82.60 8. FIRE STATIONS: Nevada ................. Type V -1 -Hour ........ 63.30 Type 111 -1 -Hour ... - ... 63.70 Type Il -1 -Hour ......... 58.60 Type I or II F.R. . ....... 90.40 Type V -N ............ 60.30 Type III -N ............ 60.40 Type II -N ............. 55.70 Type II -1 -Hour ........ 58.60 15. MEDICAL OFFICES: Other ................ Type V -I -Hour ....... 58.30 Type III -1 -Hour ........ 62.70 Type II -N ............. 55.70 Type I or II F.R.• ........ 94.80 Type V -N .........:.. 55.20 Type III -N ............. 59.80 Type III -1 -Hour ........ 65.20 Type II -1 -I lour ........ 70.50 22. SERVICE STATIONS: ................... Kansas ................. Type V -1 -flour ........ 57.50 Type III -N ............ 61.90 Type II -N ............. 67.20 T II -N ....... Type 52.60 Type V -N ............. 54.70 Type V -1 -Hour ........ 58.30 Type 111-1-1lour ......: 77.10 our Type III -1 -Hour ....... 52.80 3. BANKS: Type V -N ............. 55.40 Type III -N ............ 73.60 Type V -I -Hour ....... 46.40 Type I or 11 F.R.• ........ 118.20 9. HOMES FOR THE ELDERLY: Type V -I A lour ........ 71.80 Canopies .............. 20.30 Type 11 -1 -Hour ......... 84.90 Type I or 11 F.R. ......... 81.60 Type V -N ............ 67.90 23. STORES:TyTe II -N •••••-•• --80.90 Type 11 -1 -Hour - -65.40 16. OFFICES--: Type l or II F.R.• ........ 66.40 Type III -1 -Hour ........ 96.30 Type II -N ............. 62.30 Type I or II F.R.' ........ 84.90 Type II -1 -Hour ........ 40.00 Type III -N ............. 91.90 Type III -1 -Hour ........ 68.20 Type II -1 -Flour ........ 55.00 Tye II -N .u........ 39.20 Type V -1 -flour ........ 84.90 Type 111-N .......... . 65.20 Type 11-N ............. 52.40 Type III -1 -Hour ....... 48.90 Type V -N ............. 80-80 Type V - I -Hour ........ 6500 Type III -1 -Hour ....... 60.50 Type III -N ............ 46.10 4. BOWLING ALLEYS: Type V -N ............. 61.80 Type III -N 57.70 Type V-1-11our ....... 39.00 Type 11 -1 -Hour ......... 39.50 10. HOSPITALS: Type V -I -I lour ........ 56. MType V -N 36.50 Type 11-N ............. 37.70 Type I or II F.R.• ....... 129.60 Type V -N ............ 53.40 24. THEATERS: Type III -1 -Hour ....... 43.30 Type III- 1-1 lour ....... 107.80 17. PRIVATE GARAGES: Type I or 11 F.R.......... 86.50 Type III -N ............. 41.30 Type V -1 -Hour ....... 100.00 Wood Frame ........... 18.30 Type 111-1-1four ....... 62.70 Type V -I -Hour ........ 36.90 11, HOTELS AND MOTELS: Masonry .............. 21.70 Type III -N ............ 59.70 S. CHURCHES: Type I or II F.R.' ........ 81.00 Open Carports ......... 13.10 Type V -I -Hour ....... 56.50 Type j or II F.R........... 78.00 Type III -1 -Hour ........ 69.90 18. PUBLIC BUILDINGS: Type V -N ............ 54.00 Type 11 -1 -Hour......... 58.30 Type III -N ............ 66.60 Type I or II F.R.• ........ 98.90 25, WAREHOUSES '••: Type II -N ............. 55.40 Type V -1 -1 -lour ........ 61.00 Type II -1 -flour ........ 73.80 Type I of II F.R.......... 39.30 Type III -1 -Hour ........ 62.60 Type V -N ............. 58.20 Type 11-N ............. 70.50 Type II or V -1 -Hour ... 23.20 Type III -N ........ . .... 59.60 12, INDUSTRIAL PLANTS: Type III -1 -Hour ....... 82.60 Type II or V -N ........ 21.90 Type V -I -Hour ........ 56..90 Type t or II F.R. ......... 44.90 Type III -N ......... I .. 76.90 Type III -1 -Hour ....... 26.70 Type V -N ............. 54.20 Type 11-1-1 four ........ 30.60 Type V -I -Hour ...... , . 7.3.00 Type III -N ............ 25.50 6. CONVALESCENT HOSPITALS: Type 11 -(Stock) ......... 29.00 Type V -N ............ 70.00 Type I or II F.R.• ........ 110.60 Type III -1-1 four ........ 33.80 19, PUBLIC GARAGES: EQUIPMENT Type 111 -1 -Hour ....... 78.90 Type III -N ............ 32,30 Type 1 or 11 F.R.• ........ 39.00 AIR CONDITIONING: Type V-1.1 lour ........ 71.00 Tilt -rip ................. 22.70 Type 1 or 11 Open Parking* 30.50 Commercial .......... 3.40 Type V -1 -(four ........ 30.50 Type II -N ............. 22.90 Residential ........... 2.80 Type V -N ............. 28.80 Type III -I -Hour ....... 27.50 SPRINKLER SYSTEMS .... 1.60 *Add 0.5 percent to total cost for each story over three. **Deduct 20 percent for shell -only buildings. -Deduct 11 percent for mini -warehouses. REGIONAL MODIFIERS The following modifiers are recommended for use in conjunction with the building valuation data. In addition, certain local conditions may require further modifications. To use these modifiers, merely multiply the listed cost per square fool by the appropriate regional modifier. For example, to adjust the cost of a Type 111 -1 -Hour hotel building of average construction for the Iowa area, select Regional Modifier 0.80 and unit cost from valuation data, $69.90. 0.80 X 69.90 = $55.90 (adjusted cost per square foot) Easlem U.S. Modifier Eastern U.S. (cont,) Modifier Central U.S. Modifier Western U.S. . Modifier Connecticut ............. 0.95 Pennsylvania Kentucky ............... 0.77 Arizona ......... , ....... 0.82 Delaware ............... 0.84 Philadelphia .......... 0.96 Louisiana ............... 0.78 California District of Columbia ...... 0.87 Other ................ 0.83 Michigan ............... 0.84 Los Angeles ........... 1.00 Florida ................. 0.74 Rhode Island ............ 0.94 Minnesota .............. 0.86 San Francisco .......... 1.13 ("cYxgia ................. 0.68 South Carolina .......... 0.70 Mississippi .............. 0.71 Other ............... , . 0.94 ZMaine ................... 0.81 Vermont ................ 0.80 Missouri................ 0.78 Colorado................ 0.81 Maryland ............... 0.79 Virginia ................. 0.73 Nebraska ............... 0.75 Hawaii ................. 1.14 Massachusetts ........... 0.94 West Virginia ............ 0.82 North Dakota ........... 0.80 Idaho ................. . . 0.80 New Hampshire . , ....... 0.82 Central U.S. Ohio .................. 0.80 .............. Montana.. 0.79 New Jersey .............. 0.91 Alabdina 0.72 Oklahoma .............. 0.71 Nevada ................. 0.89 New York . . . ' . . . . . . Arkansas .... 0.70 Smith Dakota ........... 0.78 New Mexico .......... 0.76 New York Cit City ......... 116 ............... Illinois 0.87 Tennessee ............. 0.72 Oregon ................. g 0.83 Other ................ 0.87 ................. Indiana 0.82 Texas ............ ...... 0.74 Utah .................. . 0.75 North Carolina ........... 0.70 .............,... Iowa 0.80 Wisconsin .............. 0.85 Washington .......... , .. 0.88 ................... Kansas ................. 0.74 Alaska ................. 1.30 1 Wyoming ............... 0.80 BUILDING STANDARDS/March-April, 1991 51 Building Valuation Data At the request of numerous building officials, Building Standards offers the following building valuation data representing average costs for most buildings. Because residential buildings are the most common for many cities, two general classes are considered for these, one for "average" construction and the other for "good." Adjustments should be made for special architectural or structural features and the location of the project. I ligher or lower unit costs may often result. The unit costs are intended to comply with file definition of "Valuation" in Section 423 of the Uniform BuildingCodeT"^ and thus include architectural, struc- tural, electrical, plumbing and mechanical work, except as specifically listed below. The unit costs also include the contractor's profit, which should not be omitted. The determination of plan check fees for projects reviewed by Ibe International Conference of Building Officials will be based on valuation computed from these figures which were compiled in April 1991. Occupancy and Type Cost per Square Fool, Average Square Occupancy and Type Cost per Foot, Average Square Occupancy and Type Cost per Foot, Average Cost per Square Foot, Occupancy and Type Average 1. APARTMENT HOUSES: Connecticut ............. 7. DWELLINGS: Pennsylvania 13. )AILS: Kentucky... . ....... Type III -N ............. 26.30 Type I or 11 F.R.' ....... $ 70.40 Type V -Masonry ....... 59.90 Type I or II F.R. ......... 126.70 Type V -1 -Hour ....... 22.80 (Good) $85.80 District of Columbia ...... (Good) $76.80 Other ................ Type III -1 -Hour ....... 115.20 20. RESTAURANTS: Los Angeles . Type V -Masonry Florida ................. Type V -Wood Frame ... 51.50 Type V-1-1 lour ........ 82.80 Type 111 -1 -Hour ....... 73.70 (or Type III) .......... 56.00 (Good) $72.90 South Carolina .......... 14. LIBRARIES: Mississippi .............. Type III -N ............ 70.20 (Good) $69.70 Maine .................. Basements- Vermont ................ Type I or 11 F.R. ......... 92.80 Type V -1 -Hour ....... 65.30 Type V -Wood Frame ... 49.80 Semi -Finished ......... 16.00 Type II -1 -Hour ........ 64.90 Type V -N ............ 62.20 (Good) $6.3.00 (Good) $18.20 0.94 Type 11 -N ............. 61.60 21. SCHOOLS: 0.80 Type I -Basement Garage 29.50 Unfinished ............. 12.00 Type 111 -1 -Hour ....... 70.60 Type I or 11 F.R.......... 8870 2. AUDITORIUMS: Montana ................ (Good) $14.10 New Jersey .............. Type IIIN ............ 67.20 Type 11 -1 -Hour ........ 63.20 Type I or II F.R........... 82.60 8. FIRE STATIONS: New York Type V -1 -Hour ........ 63.30 Type III -1 -Hour ....... 63.70 Type II -1 -Hour ......... 58.60 Type I or II F.R. ......... 90.40 Type V -N ............ 60.30 Type III -N ............ 60.40 Type 11-N ............. 55.70 Type II -1 -flour ........ 58.60 15. MEDICAL OFFICES: ................. Indiana Type V -1 -Hour ....... 58.30 Type 111 -1 -Hour........ 62.70 Type 11-N ............. 55.70 Type I or II F.R.' ........ 94.80 Type V -N .........:.. 55.20 Type 111-N ............. 59.80 Type III -1 -flour ........ 65.20 Type 11-14 lour ........ 70.50 22. SERVICE STATIONS: Alaska ................. Type V -1 -Hour ........ 57.50 Type 111-N ............ 61.90 Type II -N ............. 67.20 Type II -N yp 52.80 YP • • • • • • • . Type • - • • • 54.70 Type V-1 -Hour ........ 58.30 Type III -1 -f lour ....... 77.10 -Hour ...•••• Type 111 -1 -Hour ....... 52.80 3. BANKS: Type V -N ............. 55.40 Type 111-N ............ 73.60 Type V -1 -Hour ....... 46.40 Type I or II F.R.' ........ 118.20 9. HOMES FOR THE ELDERLY: Type V -1 -Hour ........ 71.80 Canopies .............. 20.30 Type II -1 -Hour ......... 84.90 Type I or 11 F.R. ......... 81.60 Type V -N ............ 67.90 23. STORES: Type II -N ............ 80.90 Type II - I -Hour ........ 65.40 16. OFFICES-: Type I or II P.R." 66.40 Type III -1 -Hour ........ 96.30 Type II -N ............. 62.30 Type I or II F.R.• YI � • • • • • • • 84.90 ........ Type 11 -1 -Hour 40.00 Type III -N ........... . . 91.90 Type 111 -1 -Hour ........ 68.20 Type 11 -1 -(-lour ........ 55.00 ........ Type II -N 39.20TY e V -1 -Hour •••••-••84.90 Type III -N -••••- •••.. 65.20 Type II -N ............. 52.40 Type III -1 -Hour ....... 48.90 Type V -N ............. 80.80 Type V -1 -Hour ........ 65.00 Type Ili - l -Hour ....... 60.50 Type III -N ............ 46.10 4. BOWLING ALLEYS: Type V -N ............. 61.80 Type III -N ............ 57.70 Type V -1 -Flour ....... 39.00 Type II -1 -Hour ......... 39.50 10. HOSPITALS: Type V-1-1lour ........ 56.00 Type V -N ............ 36.50 Type II -N ............. 37.70 Type I or 11 F.R." ....... 129.60 Type V -N ............ 53.40 24. THEATERS: Type III- 1-1 lour ....... 43.30 Type III -1-1 lour ....... 107.80 17. PRIVATE GARAGES: Type I or Il F.R.......... 86.50 Type III -N ............. 41.30 Type V -1-I lour ....... 100.00 Wood Frame ... I ....... 18.30 Type III-14lour 62.70 Type V -1 -Hour ........ 36.90 11, HOTELS AND MOTELS: Masonry .............. 21.70 ....... Type III -N ............ 59.70 5. CHURCHES: Type I or II F.R.• ........ 81.00 Open Carports ....... . . 13.10 Type V -1 -Hour ....... 56.50 Type I or 11 F.R........... 78.00 Type III -1 -Hour ........ 6990 18, PUBLIC BUILDINGS: Type V -N ......... , .. 54.00 Type II -1 -Hour ......... 58.30 Type III -N ............ 66.60 Type I or If F.R." ........ 98.90 25. WAREHOUSES-: Type II -N ............. 55.40 Type V -1 -Hour ........ 61.00 Type 11 -1 -Hour ........ 73.80 Type I or II F.R.......... 39.30 Type III -1 -Hour ........ 62.60 Type V -N ............. 58.20 Type 11-N ............. 70.50 Type 11 or V -1 -Hour ... 23.20 Type III -N ............. 59.60 12, INDUSTRIAL PLANTS: Type 111 -1 -Hour ....... 82.60 Type 11 or V -N ........ 21.90 Type V -1 -Hour ........ 56.90 Type I or II F.R. ......... 44.90 Type III --N ............ 78.90 Type III -1 -flour ....... 26.70 Type V -N ............. 54.20 Type 11-1 -1 lour ........ 30.60 Type V -1 -Hour ..... , .. 7.3.00 Type III -N ............ 25.50 6. CONVALESCENT HOSPITALS: Type ll -(Stock) ......... 29.00 Type V -N ............ 70.00 Type I or II F.R.' ........ 110.60 Type III -1-1 lour ........ 33.80 19. PUBLIC GARAGES: EQUIPMENT Type III -1 -Hour ....... 7890 Type 111-N ............ 32.30 Type I or 11 F.R.' ........ 39.00 AIR CONDITIONING: Type V-14four ........ 71.00 Tilt -up ................. 22.70 Type I or If Open Parking* 30.50 Commercial .......... 3.40 Type V-14 lour ........ 30.50 Type II -N ............. 22.90 Residential ........... 2.80 Type V -N ............. 28.80 Type 111 -1 -Hour ....... 27.50 SPRINKLER SYSTEMS .... 1.60 *Add 0.5 percent to total cost for each story over three. **Deduct 20 percent for shell -only buildings. ***Deduct l l percent for mini -warehouses. REGIONAL MODIFIERS The following mcxiffiers are recommended for use in conjunction with the building valuation data. In addition, certain local conditions may require further modifications. To use these modifiers, merely multiply the listed cost per square foot by the appropriate regional modifier. For example, to adjust the cost of a Type 111 -1 -Hour hotel building of average construction for the Iowa area, select Regional Modifier 0.80 and unit cost from valuation data, $69.90. 0.80 X 69.90 = $55.90 (adjusted cost per square foot) Eastern U.S. Modifier Eastern U.S. (cont.) Modifier Central U.S. Modifier Western U.S. Modifier Connecticut ............. 0.95 Pennsylvania Kentucky... . ....... .... 0.77 Arizona ................. 0.82 Delaware ...... 0.84 Philadelphia .......... 0.96 Louisiana ............... 0.78 California District of Columbia ...... 0.87 Other ................ 0.83 Michigan ............... 0.84 Los Angeles . , .....:... 1.00 Florida ................. 0.74 Rhode Island ............ 0.94 Minnesota ..... , ........ 0.86 San Francisco .......... 1.13 Georgia ................. 0.68 South Carolina .......... 0.70 Mississippi .............. 0.71 Other ................. 0.94 Maine .................. 0.81 Vermont ................ 0.80 Missouri................ 0.78 Colorado................ 0.81 Maryland ............... 0.79 Virginia ................. 0.73 Nebraska ............... 0.75 Hawaii1.14 ................. Massachusetts ........... 0.94 West Virginia ............ 0.82 North Dakota ........... 0.80 Idaho ................. . . 0.80 New Hampshire ......... 0.82 Central U.S. Ohio .................. 0.80 Montana ................ 0.79 New Jersey .............. 0.91 Alabama 0.72 Oklahoma .............. 0.71 Nevada ......... ... 0.89 New York ........... Arkansas ............... .... 0.70 South Dakota ........... 0.78 New Mexico ............ 0.76 New York Cit City ......... 1.16 Illinois 0.87 Tennessee .............. 0.72 Oregon ................. 0.8.3 Other ................ 0.87 ................. Indiana 0.82 Texas .................. 0,74 Ulah ................... 0.75 North Carolina ........... 0.70 ................. Iowa................... 0.80 Wisconsin .............. 0.65 Washington ............. 0.88 Kansas ...... 0.74 1 Alaska ................. 1.30 1 Wyoming ............... 0.80 BUILDING STANDARDS/March-April 1991 51 � e — 2 1 — z' 41 i•i `. .. - - CQUNTY OF {,QS ANGELES Date: 4-1-90 OEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORK5 Supercedes: 11-1-89 BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION U_ ,,p `� BUILDING VALUATION GUIDE SHEET (DOLLARS PER SQUARE FOOT) Reference: Marshall Valuation Service TYPES ZW-CONSTRUCTION UJC 1 1It* K 111 11 r-1 MK 1-n A. C. I -MR N N Woodwood-1 incl. Frame Maso ry Frame artment3 x 7 6 7r 74.70-- 4 • F-- - - -- --• --. - --.-- --•.. 1 il: :hes X 109. 11-.3 1.----- ital att z9 - -65. :d-.:tria an --•-- 1 -- -- -f :es * x 1. - - - t Lres tstuarants x ----75. :0 is x 4 . ----- 44 ` irvice Stations ---• •---- -----1 ---- -- - -- -- - im anooies - - -- -- -- 1 .1 ---- ---- - -- �e tars x 1 . . i 1. - ----79.90 7 trehouseS 4 4 .• - - 1 ---- ; r c5 DENTIAL R-3 DWELLING GARAGE— Wood Wood Quality. Frame Masonry Frame Masonr Carpo ,ie ling tiF • ' udes A.C.) �t000� ood _ :• _60wik Very Ioad 1�. .40 4. 11 7.30 12.30 jos ibexas t3� +v' y �tesidential :. Dista Additions Wood under 600 sq. ft. i s4: tt. M 1c tional Cost actors: where app scab e iConditioning -:Cam. S 3.60/sq. ft. Retaining Walls: 6" concrete block $ 5.20/sq.ft. ,,•._ :-'Res. S�/34.'-ft- 8" concrete block ■,:53:m/s4.ft. Ta/sq-tt. 120, concrete block ■ ;T c. Height Floors,, 1.40/3q. ft. -. Foundations: Use same values as•12" above ;. ire Sprinkler System Sr2.10/sq. ft. - Signs: 2 -Sides h t wimming Pools (Private) $29_, 40/sq. ft. Painted $ 40.90 $ 32.60/sq.ft. Electrical 5= $ 78.=/sq.ft. o nercial and Permissible to use reductions ndustrial Bldgs. over based on Floor Area/Perimeter Sin Poles: S 32.60/lin.ft. 0 000 sq. ft. multipliers listed in Marshall 6" 0 . ■ =`3'370/11n.ft. valuation service (on reverse) 8" 0 s-1.'� TE: Hillside Buildings --add 5% to 20% for additional 10" 0 I/lin.ft. • S- n.95/lin.ft. S-85.90/lin.ft. foundation work. 12" 0 14" 0 . • S—ffm/lin.ft. Tenant Improvements --is approximately the 18" 0 ■ Ms 00/lin-ft. difference between completed use above and shell 24" 0 $17M/1 in.tt. (warehouse). Tract.Housing--10-49 units 5.7% decrease 30" 0 . ; :�31ltn.ft. _ 50 units or more 97% decrease -YoCUo-r U-) i reale for Medich Offices 15.2x '• ��� �2OiCObO-) William Haglund III < Supervising Civil Engineer SK7/MARS14ALL/MAR-4-90 WH:sh B-2 �r) -- P.9_ --