HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/17/1991incorporated Apel 183 1909 ty 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: SEPTEMBER 17, 1991 MEETING TIME: STUDY SESSION — 5:00 P.M. REGULAR SESSION — 6:00 P.M. Robert L. Van Nort City Manager Andrew V. Arczynski City Attorney Lynda Burgess City Clerk Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to each item referred to on this agenda are on "is In the Office of the City perk 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 MEET:CNG IS BEING TAPED BY JONES INrERCABLE FOR AIRING ON CHANNEL 51, AND BY REMAINING IN THE ROOM, YOU ARE GIVING YOUR PERMISSION TO BE TAPED. ALL COUNCIL M}'ETING TAPES WILL BE BLACKED IMMEDIATELY AFTER AIR:_NG AND WILL BE UNAVAILABLE FOR REPRODUCTION. ------------- STUDY SESSION / OaA8 t" r� --- Co: is 5: p.m. - 3iscussion of Source Reduction and Recycling Element I. Ve "- - � --- SoC _ Ilc------- °m- m Next Resolution No. 91-61 Pk.c.ts- CJorn.rnu�a_i� c�ulPrsion r Next Ordinance No. 8(1991) p w- e-F-aJ. a� a rLe� 4 �' (i^aS 1. CALL TO ORDER: 6 ;D9r P.M. yrs �f 1�,.:4Sio PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: MAYORFORBI G CA SCXQP � �- ���_�_g ROLL CALL: COUNCILMEN WERN , NARDELLA, PAPEN, �� let�r:�xrxa on MAYOR PRO TEM KIM, MAYOR FORBING c.>h r e,�Rai-+Je s wr'll J�rinq bex* r-mJ43. sed r,2. 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 on at a future meeting. an �0��19► PUBLIC COMMENTS: "Public Comments" is the time ,,..- ,.i,,-eserved on each regular meeting agenda to provide an �nq3 opportunity for members of the public to directly address the Ph,nq �, Council on Consent Calendar items of matters of interest to \0,sk �00v, the public that are not already scheduled for consideration on -4* �o(.S{ this agenda. Please complete a Speaker's Card and give it to the City Clerk (completion of this form is voluntary. There �i4,y! is a five minute maximum time limit when addressing the City 5P° ��sm ��W" Council. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: � Qq. A, A- 4.1 SCHEDULE OF FUTURE MEETINGS: �s(%,y4aF*' 4.1.1 PLANNING COMMISSION - September 23, 1991 - �` e 7:00 P.M. - W.V.U.S.D Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave. eve, -4.1.2 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - September 26, P P C�,nb 4.1.3 1991 - 7:00 p.m., Community Room, 1061 Avenue DIAMOND BAR RANCH FESTIVAL - September and 29, 1991, Gateway Corporate Center Grand 27, 28 E y� r zp P P' 11/� J �•� J 4.2 �b�_ 4.1.4 APPROVAL 4.2.1 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - October 1, 1991 P.M., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Avenue OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of September 3, 1991 - 6:00 Lemon SEPTEMBER 17, 1991 PAGE 2 4.3 WARRANT REGISTER - 4.3.1 Approve Warrant Register dated September 17, 1991 in the amount of $269,717.38. ' 4.4 TREASURER'S REPORT - 4.4.1 Receive and File Treasurer's Report for Month of July, 1991. 4.5 CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES - 4.5.1 Filed by Carla Clayton Recommended Action: Deny. 4.6 RESOLUTION NO. 91-43B: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE APPROPRIATION 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 - As required by Government Code Section 7910, on July 16, the City Council formally amended the resolution adopting the Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 1991-92. Pursuant to new information received regarding the method of cal- culation, the Council is being asked to amend Resolution No. 91-43A to reflect the corrected Appropriations Limit. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 91-43B amending the protested FY91-92 Appropriations Limit to $10,875,864. 4.7 AWARD OF BID FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALLATION ON GRAND AVENUE AT ROLLING KNOLL ROAD - On September ttC��Jed ,749 W6VeAf 3,1991, the Council authorized staff to readvertise and �eC`�r'�' receive bids for the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Grand Avenue and Rolling Knoll Rd. Bids will be opened on September 16, 1991 and therefore, the names of the bidders and amount to complete the work will not be available until September 17, 1991. Recommended Action: Award contract for installation of traffic signal at the intersection of Grand Avenue and Rolling Knoll Road to lowest responsible bidder. 5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS - PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES ETC. Ria d by LJJ- 5.1 PROCLAMATION - Proclaiming the Week of September 27 - October 4, 1991 as WORLD SUMMIT FOR CHILDREN WEEK. F 5.2 PROCLAMATION - Proclaiming Month of October, 1991 as ESCROW MONTH. J F 5.3 PROCLAMATION - Proclaiming the Week of September 23 - 27, 1991 as RIDESHARE WEEK. 4 (Pr oC'&m&j(-ton J)IJ ��s� - rc �Ln Verne - (AtSS SEPTEMBER 17, 1991 PAGE 3 Pro j ee f. rf o ��yy (2v�f�be of 5.f; PRESENTATION - Verbal Presentation by represeiztative of CalTrans on status of the 57/60 freeway interchange Na and HOV lane connection between 60 fwy. and 57 fwy. ct e'� �f 6. PIIB I HEARINGS: 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matters can be heard. J 0 P eneAC 6.1 ORDINANCE NO. 6(,1991): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY P' t4 • /1,on/ COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REPEALING THE ENTIRETY N o Ccammenfs �"` )OF TITLE 27 OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE AS HERETOFORE AS 44 ADOPTED AND ADDING A NEW TITLE 27 ADOPTING, BY REFERENCE, THE "NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE," 1990 EDITION, WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS, ADDITIONS, DELETIONS AND EXCEPTIONS, J�CJF INCLUDING FEES AND PENALTIES - Pursuant to Title 24 of - PPJ ' the California Administration Code, local jurisdictions must adopt the most recent codes published and adopted by the State. The 1990 National Electrical Code was adopted by the State in January of 1991, and mandated that local jurisdictions adopt the Code within one year. Recommended Action: Receive public testimony, approve for first reading by title only and waive further reading of Ordinance No.6(1991) adopting the National Electrical Code, 1990 Edition. 6.2 ORDINANCE NO. 22A (1989): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY QFPAed P• COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING ORDINANCE 22 �o (1989) ESTABLISHING PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS FOR CERTAIN �oSeA� CITY STREETS BY THE ADDITION OF CHINO HILLS PARKWAY AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMIT THEREFORE - A speed zone survey has been conducted for Chino Hills Parkway in order to enable the Sheriff's Department to � - ON,PP,��+'�F enforce the limit by radar and/or other electronic devices. Recommended Action: Receive public testimony, approve for first reading by title only and waive further reading of Ordinance No. 22A(1989) establishing prima facie speed limits. 6.3 RESOLUTION NO. 91 -*K: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY p � P. 6J. LCOUNCIL • OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUESTING AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE GENERAL PLAN - No fort ��� The California Government Code allows newly incorporated cities 30 months to prepare and adopt a General Plan. (ap The deadline for General Plan adoption by the City is K October 17, 1991. An extension of time is necessary in order to provide sufficient public review of the Plan. "5- Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 91-M requesting an extension of time in order to provide sufficient public review of the General Plan and direct staff to forward an application to the State. SEPTEMBER 17, 1991 PAGE 4 �7--� �' 7 \+m&u—,eC 0 Lf2ne0(. 6.4 ORDINANCE NO. 14-B(1990): AN ORDINANCE OF THE f'�o ft, CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR EXTENDING THE OioseA ►�'���"' TERM OF AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE NO. 14 _ (1990) PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858 AND MAKING FINDINGS IN .JK_SUPPORT THEREOF - Ordinance No.14-A(1990) pertains to � _pN�Pp,Jk.JF certain provisions of Title 22 of the Los Angeles County Code regarding hillside grading and development standards lbs- for properties with slopes in excess of 10%. The Interim Ordinance is scheduled to expire on October 16, 1991 unless extended by the Council. Recommended Action: Receive public testimony and approve extension of the Interim Hillside Management Ordinance. 7. ANNOUNCEMENTS: N)om e_ 8. ADJOURNMENT: 'Cl J '4-0 9. CLOSED SESSION: Litigation - Section 54956.9 Personnel - Section 54957.6 e_ CLe-c1c. q -t mar 1 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. STUDY SESSION 5:10 p.m. - Discussion of Source Reduction and Recycling Element ---------------------------------- 1. CALL TO ORDER: --------------------------------------------------------------------- Next Resolution No. 91-61 Next Ordinance No. 8 (199 1) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: ROLL CALL: 6:25 P.M. MAYOR FORBING COUNCILMAN WERNER NARDELLA, PAPEN, MAYOR PRO TEM KIM, MAYOR FORBING 2. 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. 3. 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 of 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. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 SCHEDULE OF FUTURE MEETINGS: 4.1.1 PLANNING COMMISSION - September 23, 1991 7:00 P.M. - W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave. 4.1.2 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - September 26, 1991 - 7:00 p.m., Community Room, 1061 Grand Avenue 4.1.3 DIAMOND BAR RANCH FESTIVAL - September 27, 28 and 29, 1991, Gateway Corporate Center 4.1.4 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - October 1, 1991 - 6:00 P.M., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Avenue CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PAGE 2 SEPTEMBER 17, 1991 4.2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES - 4.2.1 Regular Meeting of September 3, 1991 4.3 WARRANT REGISTER 4.3.1 Approve Warrant Register dated September 17, 1991 in the amount of $269,717.38. 4.4 TREASURER'S REPORT 4.4.1 Receive and File Treasurer's Report for Month of July, 1991. 4.5 CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES - 4.5.1 Filed by Carla Clayton Recommended Action: Deny. 4.6 RESOLUTION NO, 91-43B: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE APPROPRIATION 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 - As required by Government Code Section 7910, on July 16, the City Council formally amended the resolution adopting the Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 1991-92. Pursuant to new information received regarding the method of calculation, the Council is being asked to amend Resolution No. 91-43A to reflect the corrected Appropriations Limit, Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 91-43B amending the protested FY91-92 Appropriations Limit to $10,875,864. 4.7 AWARD OF BID FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALLATION ON GRAND AVENUE AT ROLLING KNOLL ROAD - On September 3, 1991, the Council authorized staff to readvertise and receive bids for the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Grand Avenue and Rolling Knoll Rd. Bids will be opened on September 16, 1991 and therefore, the names of the bidders and amount to complete the work will not be available until September 17, 1991. Recommended Action: Award contract for installation of traffic signal at the intersection of Grand Avenue and Rolling Knoll Road to lowest responsible bidder. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS - PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES ETC. 5. 1 PROCLAMATION - Proclaiming the Week of September 27 October 4, 1991 as WORLD SUMMIT FOR CHILDREN WEEK. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PAGE 3 SEPTEMBER 17, 1991 5.2 PROCLAMATION - Proclaiming Month of October, 1991 as ESCROW MONTH. 5.3 PROCLAMATION - Proclaiming the Week of September 23 - 27, 1991 as RIDESHARE WEEK. 5.4 PROCLAMATION - HAPPY BIRTHDAY DON NARDELLA. 5.5 PRESENTATION - Verbal Presentation by representative of CalTrans on status of the 57/60 freeway interchange and HOV lane connection between 60 fwy. and 57 fwy. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matters can be heard. 6.1 ORDINANCE NO. 6 (1991): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REPEALING THE ENTIRETY OF TITLE 27 OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE AS HERETOFORE ADOPTED AND ADDING A NEW TITLE 27 ADOPTING, BY REFERENCE, THE "NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE," 1990 EDITION, WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS, ADDITIONS, DELETIONS AND EXCEPTIONS, INCLUDING FEES AND PENALTIES - Pursuant to Title 24 of the California Administration Code, local jurisdictions must adopt the most recent codes published and adopted by the State. The 1990 National Electrical Code was adopted by the State in January of 1991, and mandated that local jurisdictions adopt the Code within one year. Recommended Action: Receive public testimony, approve for first reading by title only and waive further reading of Ordinance No.6(1991) adopting the National Electrical Code, 1990 Edition. 6.2 ORDINANCE NO. 22A (1989): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING ORDINANCE 22 (1989) ESTABLISHING PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS FOR CERTAIN CITY STREETS BY THE ADDITION OF CHINO HILLS PARKWAY AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMIT THEREFORE - A speed zone survey has been conducted for Chino Hills Parkway in order to enable the Sheriffs Department to enforce the limit by radar and/or other electronic devices. Recommended Action: Receive public testimony, approve for first reading by title only and waive further reading of Ordinance No. 22A(1989) establishing prima facie speed limits. 6.3 RESOLUTION NO. 91-W: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUESTING AN EXTENSION OF TIME CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PAGE 4 SEPTEMBER 17, 1991 FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE GENERAL PLAN - The California Government Code allows newly incorporated cities 30 months to prepare and adopt a General Plan. The deadline for General Plan adoption by the City is October 17, 1991. An extension of time is necessary in order to provide sufficient public review of the Plan. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 91-61 requesting an extension of time in order to provide sufficient public review of the General Plan and direct staff to forward an application to the State. 6.4 ORDINANCE NO. 14-B(1990): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR EXTENDING THE TERM OF AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE NO. 14 (1990) PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT -CODE SECTION 65858 AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - Ordinance No. 14-A(1990) pertains to certain provisions of Title 22 of the Los Angeles County Code regarding hillside grading and development standards for properties with slopes in excess of 10%. The Interim Ordinance is scheduled to expire on October 16, 1991 unless extended by the Council. Recommended Action: Receive public testimony and approve extension of the Interim Hillside Management Ordinance. ANNOUNCEMENTS: ADJOURNMENT: 9. CLOSED SESSION: Litigation - Section 54956.9 Personnel - Section 54957.6 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager MEETING DATE: September 17, 1991 REPORT DATE: September 11, 1991 FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director TITLE: Consideration of a Resolution No. _ requesting an extension of time for the adoption of the General Plan. SUMMARY: The California Government Code allows newly incorporated cities 30 months to prepare and adopt a General Plan. The deadline for General Plan adoption is October 17, 1991. An extension of time is necessary in order to provide sufficient public review for the General Plan. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the Resolution and direct staff to forward an application to the State. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report X Resolution(s) ` Ordinances(s) _ Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: X Public Hearing Notification _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office) _Other State of California Office of Planning and Research SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed X Yes No by the City Attorney? ` 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? Yes X No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes X_ No Which Commission? _ 5. Are other departments affected by the report? Yes No Report discussed with the following affected departments: — _ REVIEWED BY: Robert L. Van Nort City Manager C: \ WP5 RAGENDAkov-gplan. rep Terrence L. Belanger Assistant City Manager :tor MEETING DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. September 17, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City Manager Consideration of a Resolution No. requesting an extension of time of the adoption of the General Plan ISSUE STATEMENT: The California Government Code allows newly incorporated cities 30 months to prepare and adopt a General Plan. The Deadline for General Plan adoption is October 17, 1991. An extension of time is necessary in order to provide sufficient public review for the General Plan. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the Resolution and direct staff to forward an application to the state. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: N/A BACKGROUND: The City began its preparation of the General Plan in the fall of 1989. The City Council appointed 30 members of our community to the General Plan Advisory Committee and engaged a consultant (The Planning Network) to prepare the City's first General Plan. The General Plan Advisory Committee began a series of approximately 20 public meeting wherein components of the General Plan were presented, discussed, and forwarded to the Planning Commission. In July of 1991, the Planning Commission began a series of study sessions regarding the forthcoming General Plan. The GPAC concluded its work effort on July 25, 1991. The Planning Commission began its public hearings on September 9, 1991. Section 65360 of the California Government Code allows newly incorporated cities 30 months to adopt a General Plan. Based upon the City's April 17, 1989, incorporation date the deadline for completion of the General Plan is October 17, 1991. Cities are exempt from the requirement that land use decisions be consistent with the General Plan during this 30 month time period. California Government Code Section 65361 authorizes the Director of the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to grant General Plan extensions to cities and counties. While under an extension, a local government is exempt from the requirement that it adopt a complete and legally adequate General Plan or that the adoption be within the specified 30 month time period. The extension waives State Laws which require consistency between local land use decisions and the General Plan. This allows the City to continue acting on Zoning, Subdivisions and related matters. For all land use decisions, the City must still find that a reasonable probability exists that the proposed land use approval will be consistent with the General Plan under consideration or that no probability exists that the proposed land use action will pose a substantial threat to the future General Plan. OPR's Director may grant an extension of up to one year in duration. The Director may grant a second extension of up to one year if the City has made substantial progress towards completing its General Plan. OPR's Director may also impose any conditions on an extension of time that the Director deems necessary to insure compliance with the purpose and intent of the Government Code. DISCUSSION: Application requirements for a General Plan Extension must include 5 basic items: 1. General Plan Application Extension Form. 2. A Resolution from the City Council approving the application for extension. 3. A schedule and budget for preparation and adoption of the remaining tasks to complete the General Plan. 4. Any procedures that would insure that Land Use decisions made during the extension will not interfere with the General Plan proposal. 5. Copies of the existing Draft General Plan document, zoning ordinance, and any interim ordinances. State law requires that the City Council conduct a public hearing and adopt a resolution making any one of six findings required by Government Code Section 65361 (copy attached). Staff believes that the City is able to justify several of the required findings. 1. Data required for the General Plan is awaiting comments from other Governmental agencies which has not yet been provided (i.e. comments from the State Office of Housing and Community Development on the Housing Element and comments from affected agencies on the Environmental Impact Report). 2. Timely preparation and adoption of the General Plan has been hampered by personnel changes within the consultant firm and project managers assigned to this specific task. 3. An extended public review period has been requested and a public participation program is proposed to promote awareness and involvement in order to assure the decision makers that the Plan is reflective of the needs and desires of the citizens. 4. The creation of a series of economic development strategy sessions to solicit input in order to help guide the proposed policies contained within various elements of the General Plan. The attached Resolution will be a part of the application to OPR as part of the City's request for a time extension. The Director of OPP is tho individual that is empowered to Grant the time extension. The Council should be aware that as a part of the approval process, conditions may be attached by the Director. Past examples of conditions have included commitments to the State that projects and actions approved by the City related to land use activities are consistent with the proposed General Plan and the potential for a prohibition against adopting any Development Agreements, Specific Plans or Vesting Tentative Maps submitted after the extension is granted. CONCLUSION: Based upon the desire for additional public input into the General Plan adoption process and the undetermined amount of additional time needed for that public review, and the additional time needed to revise any documents affected by the public review, staff recommends that the City Council find that an extension of time is necessary to achieve final adoption of the City's General Plan and directs staff to prepare the necessary application to the State Office of Planning and Research. PREPARED BY: eS DeStef no, Community Development Director Attachments: Resolution No. Section 65360 and Section 65361 of the Government Code. cAW PS 1\AGENDA\gpage-:p.917 RESOLUTION NO. 91-61 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Ob' THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIAN REQUESTING AN EXTENSION OF TIME, PURSUANT TO SECTION 65361 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODO, YOR THE ADOPTION OF A CITY GENERAL PLAN WITHIN TH)XTY (30) MONTHS OF INCORPORATION A. RECITALS (i) On April 17, 1991, the City of Diamond Bar was established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the Sate of California. (i) Section 65360 of the California Government Code allows ne-wl1 incoj por«.lted cities thirty ( 30 ) months to adopt a general plan following incorporation. (ii) The City of Diamond Bar has been proceeding with the development of a comprehensive General Plan, and has substantially completed its Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Safety, Noise, Open Space and Conservation Elements, along with an Environmental Impact Report for these elements. The City of Diamond Bar has held approximately 30 public meetings in relation to the General Plan from September 1989 through September 1991. (iv) Citizen participation has been provided through the formation of a General Plan Citizen Advisory Committee assigned to review and develop the General Plan. A total of 20 public meetings have been held by GPAC thus far. Input received as a result of these meetings has been instrumental inthe development of the General Plan. (v) The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar has conducted one public, advertised hearing for review of the General Plan on September 9, 1991. (vi) Despite the City's diligent efforts to adopt a General Plan, the City Council hereby makes the following findings to justify a request for a one-year extension of time for the adoption of the General Plan: a) In accordance with Section 65361(a)(4) of the Government Code, the City finds that local review procedures require an extended public review process which has resulted in delaying the decision by the legislative body to resolve issues and concerns relating to the General Plan. b) In accordance with Section 65361 (a)(2) of the Government Code, the City finds that in spite of sufficient budgetary provisions and substantial recruiting efforts, the City has experienced a turnover in both staff and consultant assistance. (vii) On September 17, 1991, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing with respect to this request for an extension of time, and concluded said hearing on that date. (viii) The City of Diamond Bar City Council finds that in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the approval of a time extension for the adoption of the General Plan is exempt under section 65361(f) of the Government Code and requires no further environmental review. (ix) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. REGOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. The City Council hereby approves a request for an extension of time, and directs staff to prepare an application to the State of California Office of Planning and Research requesting an extension of one year to allow final adoption of the Diamond Bar General Plan. 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution and shall forward a copy of this resolution to the Director of Planning and Research of the State of California as part of the City's application for a one- year time extension. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 17TH day of Sept., 1991. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 17_ day of September , 1991, by the following vote of the Council: AYES: Councilmembers: Papen, Nardella, Mayor Pro Tem Kim, Mayor'Forbing NOES: Councilmembers: None ABSENT: Councilmembers: Werner City Clerk /MC0 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. ; TO: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager MEETING DATE: September 17, 1991 REPORT DATE: September 11, 1991 FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director TITLE: Consideration of a Resolution No. _ requesting an extension of time for the adoption of the General Plan. SUMMARY: The California Government Code allows newly incorporated cities 30 months to prepare and adopt a General Plan. The deadline for General Plan adoption is October 17, 1991. An extension of time is necessary in order to provide sufficient public review for the General Plan. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the Resolution and direct staff to forward an application to the State. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report X Public Hearing Notification X Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office) ` Ordinances(s) _Other _ Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: State of California Office of Planning and Research SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed X Yes _ No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? _ Yes X No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? Yes X_ No Which Commission? _ 5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes _ No Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED B J Robert L. Van Nort Terrence L. Belanger mes DeStefano City Manager Assistant City Manager Community Dev lopment Director C:\WP51\AGENDA\cov-gp1an.rep CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: September 17, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Consideration of a Resolution No. requesting an extension of time for the adoption of the General Plan ISSUE STATEMENT: The California Government Code allows newly incorporated cities 30 months to prepare and adopt a General Plan. The deadline for General Plan adoption is October 17, 1991. An extension of time is necessary in order to provide sufficient public review for the General Plan. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the Resolution and direct staff to forward an application to the State. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: N/A BACKGROUND: Section 65360 of the California Government Code allows newly Preparation incorporated cities 30 months to adopt a General Plan. Based of the upon the City's April 17, 1989, incorporation date the dead- line for completion of the General Plan is October 17, 1991. Cities are exempt from the requirement that land use decisions be consistent with the General Plan during this 30 month time period. The City began its preparation of the General Plan in the fall Of 1989. The City Council appointed 30 members of our community to the General Plan Advisory Committee and engaged a consultant (The Planning Network) to prepare the City's first General Plan. The General Plan Advisory Committee began a series of approximately 20 public meeting wherein components of the General Plan were presented, discussed, and forwarded to the Planning Commission. In July of 1991, the Planning Commission began study sessions regarding the forthcoming General Plan. The GPAC concluded its work effort on July 25, 1991. Planning The Planning Commission began the public hearing process on Commission September 9, 1991. The Commission received public comments Review which addressed the General Plan as well as the GPAC process which generated the General Plan. There was criticism ranging from the lack of public participation in the planning process to the reports lack of faithfulness to the GPAC recommendations. The Commission encouraged additional review and comments from the GPAC and directed staff to invite the GPAC to address the Commission at the continued hearing of September 23, 1991. On September lo, 1991, the City Council received a brief review of the previous nights Commission meeting. The Council also reviewed a memorandum from the Staff outlining steps taken to invite public participation in the public hearing process. The Council directed Staff to initiate additional GPAC meetings to review the Goals and Policies of the plan. The Planning Commission will be directed to postpone their review of the Plan until GPAC has concluded its work efforts. The Council also directed staff to explore and implement additional techniques for public participation. Extension California Government Code Section 65361 authorizes the Process Director of the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to grant General Plan extensions to cities and counties. While under an extension, a local government is exempt from the requirement that it adopt a complete and legally adequate General Plan or that the adoption be within the specified 30 month time period. The extension waives State Laws which require consistency between local land use decisions and the General Plan. This allows the City to continue acting on Zoning, Subdivisions and related matters. OPR's Director may grant an extension of up to one year in duration. The Director may grant a second extension of up to one year if the City has made substantial progress towards completing its General Plan. OPR's Director may also impose any conditions on an extension of time that the Director deems necessary to insure compliance with the purpose and intent of the Government Code. EXTENSION Application requirements for a General Plan Extension must APPLICATION: include 5 basic items: 1. General Plan Application Extension Form. 2. A Resolution from the City Council approving the application for extension. 3. A schedule and budget for preparation and adoption of the remaining tasks to complete the General Plan. 4. Any procedures that would insure that Land Use decisions made during the extension will not interfere with the General Plan proposal. 5. Copies of the existing Draft General Plan document, zoning ordinance, and any interim ordinances. State law requires that the City Council conduct a public hearing and adopt a resolution making any one of six findings required by Government Code Section 65361 (copy attached). Staff believes that the City is able to justify several of the required findings related to agency input and local review. 1. Data required for the General Plan is awaiting comments from other Governmental agencies which has not yet been provided (i.e. comments from affected agencies on the Environmental Impact Report). Additionally, the final report on the Economic Development Strategy sessions has not been provided. 2. Timely preparation and adoption of the General Plan has been hampered by personnel changes within the consultant firm and project managers assigned to this specific task. 3. An extended public review period has been requested and a public participation program is proposed to promote awareness and involvement in order to assure the decision makers that the Plan is reflective of the needs and desires of the citizens. The attached Resolution will be a part of the application to OPR as part of the City's request for a time extension. The Director of OPR is the individual that is empowered to grant the time extension. The Council should be aware that as a part of the approval process, conditions may be attached by the Director. Past examples of conditions have included commitments to the State that projects and actions approved by the City related to land use activities are consistent with the proposed General Plan and the potential for a prohibition against adopting any Development Agreements, Specific Plans or Vesting Tentative Maps submitted after the extension is granted. CONCLUSION: Based upon the desire for additional public input into the General Plan adoption process and the undetermined amount of additional time needed for that public review, and the additional time needed to revise any documents affected by the public review, staff recommends that the City Council find that an extension of time is necessary to achieve final adoption of the City's General Plan and directs staff to prepare the necessary application to the State Office of Planning and Research. PREPARED BY: s DeStefan4, Community Development Director Attachments: Resolution No. Section 65360 and Section 65361 of the Government Code. JDS\mco c: \ WP51 \AGENDA\gpage-tp.917 di* 1P to) ZMI USP A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING AN EXTENSION OF TIME, PURSUANT TO SECTION 65361 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE, FOR THE ADOPTION OF A CITY GENERAL PLAN WITHIN THIRTY (30) MONTHS OF INCORPORATION A. RECITALS (i) On April 17, 1991, the City of Diamond Bar was established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the Sate of California. (i) Section 65360 of the California Government Code allows newly incorporated cities thirty (30) months to adopt a general plan following incorporation. (ii) The City of Diamond Bar has been proceeding with the development of a comprehensive General Plan, and has substantially completed its Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Safety, Noise, Open Space and Conservation Elements, along with an Environmental Impact Report for these elements. The City of Diamond Bar has held approximately 30 public meetings in relation to the General Plan from September 1989 through September 1991. (iv) Citizen participation has been provided through the formation of a General Plan Citizen Advisory Committee assigned to review and develop the General Plan. A total of 20 public meetings have been held by GPAC thus far. Input received as a result of these meetings has been instrumental inthe development of the General Plan. (v) The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar has conducted one public, advertised hearing for review of the General Plan on September 9, 1991. (vi) Despite the City's diligent efforts to adopt a General Plan, the City Council hereby makes the following findings to justify a request for a one-year extension of time for the adoption of the General Plan: a) In accordance with Section 65361(a)(4) of the Government Code, the City finds that local review procedures require an extended public review process which has resulted in delaying the decision by the legislative body to resolve issues and concerns relating to the General Plan. b) In accordance with Section 65361 (a)(2) of the Government Code, the City finds that in spite of sufficient budgetary provisions and substantial recruiting efforts, the City has experienced a turnover in both staff and consultant assistance. (vii) On September 17, 1991, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing with respect to this request for an extension of time, and concluded said hearing on that date. (viii) The City of Diamond Bar City Council finds that in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the approval of a time extension for the adoption of the General Plan is exempt under section 65361(f) of the Government Code and requires no further environmental review. (ix) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. The City Council hereby approves a request for an extension of time, and directs staff to prepare an application to the State of California Office of Planning and Research requesting an extension of one year to allow final adoption of the Diamond Bar General Plan. 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution and shall forward a copy of this resolution to the Director of Planning and Research of the State of California as part of the City's application for a one- year time extension. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of , 1991. ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of 1991, by the following vote of the Council: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: City Clerk 65360. Deadline for new citylcounty to adopt plan The legislative body of a newly incorporated city or newly formed county shall adopt a general plan within 30 months following incorporation or formation. During that 30 -month period of time, the city or county is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or.the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: (a) The city or county is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general plan. (b) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following: (1) There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. (2) There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. (3) The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. 65361. Extension of deadline to adopt plan (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon application by a city or county, the Director of Planning and Research shall grant a reasonable extension of time, not to exceed one year from the date of issuance of the extension, for the preparation and adoption of all or part of the general plan, if the legislative body of the city or county, after a public hearing, makes any of the following findings: (1) Data required for the general plan shall be provided by another agency and it has not yet been provided. (2) In spite of sufficient budgetary provisions and substantial recruiting efforts, the city or county has not been able to obtain necessary staff or consultant assistance. (3) A disaster has occurred requiring reassignment of staff for an extended period or requiring a complete reevaluation and revision of the general plan, or both. (4) Local review procedures require an extended public review process which has resulted in delaying the decision by the legislative body. (5) The city or county is jointly preparing all or part of the general plan with one or more other jurisdictions pursuant to an existing agreement and timetable for completion. (6) Other reasons exist that justify the granting of an extension, so that the timely preparation and adoption of a general plan is promoted. (b) The directorshall notgrant an extension of time forthe preparation andadoption of a housing element except in the case of a newly incorporated city or newly formed county which cannot meet the deadline set by Section 65360. Before the directorgrants an extension of time pursuant to this subdivision, he or she shall consult with the Director of the Department of Housing and Community Development. (c) The application for an extension shall contain all of the following: (1) A resolution of the legislative body of the city or county adopted after public hearing setting forth in detail the reasons why the general plan was not previously adopted as required by law or needs to be revised, including one or more of the findings made by the legislative body pursuant to subdivision (a), and the amount of additional time necessary to complete the preparation and adoption of the general plan. (2) Adetailed budget and schedule for preparation andadoptionof thegeneralplan including plans for citizen participation and expected interim action. The budget and schedule shall be of sufficient detail to allow the director to assess the progress of the applicant at regular intervals during the term of the extension. The schedule shall provide for adoption of a complete and adequate general plan within two years of the date of the application for the extension. (3) A set of proposed policies and procedures which would ensure, during the extension of time granted pursuant to this section, that the land use proposed in an application for a subdivision, rezoning, use permit, variance, or building permit will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied. (d) The director may impose any conditions on extensions of time granted that the director deems necessary to ensure compliance with the purposes and intent of this title. Those conditions shall apply only to those parts of the general plan forwhich the extension has been granted. In establishing those conditions, the director may adopt or modify and adopt any of the policies and procedures proposed by the city or county pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (c). (e) During the extension of time specified in this section, the city or county is not subject to the requirement that a complete and adequate general plan be adopted, the requirement that it be adopted within a specific period of time, or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with those portions of the general plan for which an extension has been granted. However, development approvals shall be consistent with the conditions imposed bythe director pursuant to subdivision (d)and any element or elements that have been adopted and for which an extension of time is not sought. (f) If a city or county that is granted a time extension pursuant to this section determines that it cannot complete the elements of the general plan forwhich the extension has been granted within the prescribed time period, the city or county may request one additional extension of time, not to exceed one year, if the city or county is able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the director that substantial progress has been made toward the completion of the general plan. The provisions of this subdivision shall not apply to an extension of time granted pursuant to subdivision (b). (g) An extension of time granted pursuant to this section for the preparation and adoption of all or part of a city or county general plan is exempt from the provisions of Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code. [Amended, Chapter 1441, Statutes of 1990] PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2015.5 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, County of Los Angeles Nancy Paisley do hereby declare that I am a citizen of the United States; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above -entitled matter. I am the Legal Advertising Clerk of the INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN (Formerly the Progress Bulletin) a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published daily in the City of Pomona, County of Los Angeles, State of California, and which has been adjudged a newspaper of general circula- tion by the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, State of California, under the date of June 15, 1945, Decree No. Pomo C-606; that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to -wit: September 6, 1991 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated September 6, 1991 Signature Proof of Publication of Re: GENERAL PLAN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN by the City of Diamond Bar That a Public Hearing will be held by the Diamond Bar City Council an Tuesday, September 17, 1991 at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the Metter may be heard, In the Board Room located at 000 S. Lemon Avenue, Diamond Bar, California, for the purpose of considering an application to the State of California, Offke of Planning and Research, requesting an extension of time In order to complete the General Plan (Government Code Section 65361). New cities are required by Section 65M of the Government Code to complete the preparation of a General Plan within 30 months Of InCarporeflon. The City requests an extension of time In order to broaden PUNIC awareness and involvement loin acddance with the California Envlroal~N Quality Act, as amended, and the adminlsfrattve rspYlaTIons Promulgated tMrelwMer, the City has defermMe? iBet the extension request is exempt from CEQA pursuant a Section 15061(b) (3). ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are Invited to attwid said hearing and Provide their comments and testimony an the matter specified above. APPLICANT: City of Diamond Bar 21660 E. Copley DAve, Sults log Diamond Bar, Callfarnla 91765 PURTHJr INFORMATION may be abHined from the City of DliMOW Bay, 2160 Pe. Copley DNw, 5ulte 100, Diamond Bar, California, or by Calllag (714) IW209. Dated: August 30, 1991 /$/LYNDA BURGESS City Clerk, City of Diamond Bar Publish: September 6, 1964 (kww CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: September 17, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Source Reduction and Recycling Element Review and Adoption Process ISSUE STATEMENT: Pursuant to State law, the City is required to publicly advertise and make available the draft Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) to any member of the public, adjoining city, and other public entity that may wish to review and comment upon it. This process allows affected parties to comment on the proposed programs and policies contained within the SRRE prior to its final adoption by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council receive and comment upon the draft Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE). It is further recommended that the Council provide direction to staff on proposed schedule and the appropriate forum in which to hold the first public hearing on the draft SRRE in order to receive testimony on the programs and policies contained within. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: The known fiscal implications of the Source Reduction and Recycling Element are discussed within the Funding Component. BACKGROUND: In mid-July, the consultant to the East San Gabriel Valley Integrated Waste Management Joint Powers Authority prepared an administrative draft of the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element and disseminated it to staff for internal review and comment. Specifically, staff examined each of the individual components of the SRRE and provided a constructive critique to the consultant on the various alternatives contained within. In response, the consultant has compiled those comments provided by staff as well as comments received from other member cities of the JPA and has prepared the attached preliminary draft copy of the SRRE. DISCUSSION: Pursuant to the statutory provisions of AB 939, the Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) is required to pass through a two-step review process before it can be locally adopted by the City Council. The attached flow chart illustrates the process in which the City must follow once the preliminary SRRE draft is made available. In the first step, the City must prepare a public notice indicating the SRRE's availability for public review. In addition to the public dissemination of the SRRE, the City must submit copies to the California Integrated Waste Management Board, the County Integrated Waste Management Task Force, adjoining cities, and the County of Los Angeles. The law provides that members of the public and each of these agencies have at least 30 days and up to 45 days to review and comment on the preliminary draft. After distribution of the SRRE for public review, the City must schedule at least one public hearing before the Council or other commission to receive public testimony regarding the proposed programs and other issues addressed by the SRRE. Notification for such a hearing must be provided at least 30 days in advance. To facilitate the statutory requirements established by law, there are several options available to the Council with regards to reviewing the draft SRRE and scheduling a public hearing. These options include: I. COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE: The City Council could establish a subcommittee to review and discuss the components of the draft SRRE prior to holding a public hearing on the matter. II. COUNCIL REVIEW: The City Council as a whole could review and comment upon the proposed programs contained within the draft SRRE and hold a public hearing to receive testimony. III. COUNCIL -COMMISSION REVIEW: The City Council and appropriate City Commission could review the draft SRRE and hold a joint public hearing to receive citizen input on the proposed programs. IV. COMMISSION REVIEW: The City Council could direct one of the City's Commissions to review and hold a public hearing on the draft SRRE V. CITIZEN COMMITTEE: The City Council could create an advisory committee comprised of interested residents to assist the Council with the review process. In addition, this committee could take responsibility for the first public hearing and serve as an ongoing advisory committee to the Council on solid waste issues. After receiving comments from both the public and other interested parties, the City must then submit any changes or modifications to the consultation for analysis and possible integration into a final draft SRRE. The final draft SRRE must again be distributed for public review and scheduled for a second public hearing. This time however, the City is only required to submit a copy to the County Integrated Waste Management Task Force for review. The Task Force has 30 days to provide comments to the City and the Integrated Waste Management Board. After the City has received and considered all input made by the general public, affected governmental agencies and private industry, the City may hold a final public hearing to adopt the SRRE by resolution. In order to adopt the SRRE before the end of this calendar year, it will be necessary to implement a rigid schedule for both the public review and hearing process. Attached please find the proposed schedule for local adoption of the SRRE. It is staff's intention to make this process as streamlined and uncomplicated as possible. PREPARED BY: r s � TL. Bu laf Assistto t Cit Manager Attachment "B" Proposed Schedule for Local Adoption of the Source Reduction and Recycling Element DATE EVENT • September 18, 1991 Notice 45 day public review period and distribute document to affected parties and/or other interested agencies. • September 18, 1991 Set public hearing date (30 day notice) and issue appropriate notifications. • October 28, 1991 Planning Commission Meeting. Potential public hearing date. • November 5, 1991 City Council Meeting. Potential public hearing date. • November 4, 1991 End of 45 day review period. Compile public testimony and submit to consultant for integration into final draft. • November 15, 1991 Receive final draft from consultant and distribute to public and County Task Force. • November 15, 1991 Set public hearing date (30 day notice) and issue appropriate notifications. • December 16, 1991 City Council meeting. Potential public hearing date for final adoption of SRRE. NOTE: The proposed schedule is extremely rigid in order to execute the necessary requirements to adopt the Source Reduction and Recycling Element before the end of the year. MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL DRAIM8 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 ---------------------------------------------------------------..-. 5:00 P.M. - CLOSED SESSION: Litigation - Section 54956.9 Personnel - Section 54957.6 ---------------------------------------------------------------•--- 1. CALL TO ORDER: M/Forbing called the meeting ti order at 6:10 p.m. in the CounciL Chambers, W.V.U.S.D., 880 S. Lemon Avenue, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by CM/Van Nort. ROLL CALL: Mayor Forbing, Mayor Pro Tem Kim., Councilmen Werner, Nardella and Papen. Also present were Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager; Terrence L. Belanger, Assistant City Manager; Andrew V. Arcyznski, City Attorney; Irwin Kaplan, City Planner Emeritus; Sid Mousavi, Public Works Director/ City Engineer and Tommye A. Nice, Deputy City Clerk. 2. COUNCIL COMMENTS: C/Werner announced that the 99th birthday of the Pledge of Allegiance would be celebrated this week. C/Nardella asked staff for a report on publication of hearings for the General Plan. He thanked everyone for their support during his recent illness. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Dan Kushmak, 2491 Sunbright Dr., suggested installation of a sidewalk between the driveway on Fountain Springs to the Krikorian Theater due to a visual obstruction to pedestrians by a block wall. He also suggested installation of a sidewalk on Brea Canyon Rd. south to Diamond Bar High School. He then reported that one of his neighbors appeared to be operating a towing business from his home as tow trucks deliver cars to the home 24 hours a day and that people seem to be sleeping in campers in their driveways. Staff was directed to discuss these matters with Mr. Kushmak. Larry Smith, 22536 Ridgeline Dr., stated that the crosses requested by the D.B. Congregational Church should be con- sidered art work intended to resemble the altar sculpture and should not be considered a sign. The crosses would be 12 feet in height, constructed of bronze and placed behind the monu- ment sign. In order to erect the sign, a diseased and dying tree will need to be removed but the Church would be willing to replace it with two trees, should the City desire. SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 PAGE 2 Red Calkins, 240 Eagle Nest Dr., thanked Council, staff and Charles Janiel for arranging the cleaning of Prospector's Rd. underneath the freeway. Al Rumpilla, 23958 Golden Springs Dr., stated that, in his opinion, M/Forbing had not given the public enough opportunity to speak at Council meetings. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: CM/Van Nort announced that another Concert would be held at Sycamore Canyon Park on September 11, 1991 from 6:00 p.m. to 7:45 p.m. Regarding agenda item 4.12, he requested that the words "cross -streets" be added in addition to the numbers regarding placement of block numbers on bus shelters. In addition, item 4.11 was withdrawn. C/Nardella requested that Item 4.14 be withdrawn from the Consent Calendar, and announced that due to his absence from the meeting of August 20, 1991, he would abstain from voting on the Minutes for that date. C/Werner moved, MPT/Kim seconded to approve the Consent Calendar with the omission of items 4.11 and 4.14 and recog- nition of C/Nardella's abstention from voting on item 4.2, Minutes of August 20, 1991. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCILMEN - Werner, Nardella, Papen, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing NOES: COUNCILMEN - None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None 4.1 SCHEDULE OF FUTURE MEETINGS: 4.1.1 PLANNING COMMISSION - September 9, 1991 - 7:00 p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave. - Discussion of General Plan. 4.1.2 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION - September 10, 1991 - 6:00 p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave. - Discussion of General Plan, Source Reduction & Recycling Element, Policy re: Council Conduct and Citation Authority. 4.1.3 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - September 12, 1991 - 6:30 p.m., Community Room, 1061 S. Grand Ave. 4.1.4 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - September 12, 1991 - 7:00 p.m., City Hall, 21660 E. Copley 4.1.5 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - September 17, 1991 - 6:00 p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon 4.1.6 EXTRA CONCERT IN THE PARK - September 11, 1991 - 6 p.m., Sycamore Canyon Park. 4.2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES - 4.2.1 REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 20, 1991 - Approved as submitted. SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 PAGE 3 4.3 WARRANT REGISTER - Approved Warrant Register dated September 3, 1991 in the amount of $507,890.40. 4.4 PARKS & RECREATION COMM. MINUTES - 4.4.1 REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 25, 1991 - Received and filed. 4.4.2 REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 8, 1991 - Received and filed. 4.5 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMM. MINUTES 4.5.1 REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 9, 1991 - Received and filed. 4.5.2 REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 13, 1991 - Received and filed. 4.6 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - 4.6.1 REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 8, 1991 - Received and filed. 4.6.2 REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 22, 1991 - Received and filed. 4.7 CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES - 4.7.1 FILED BY NEAL CHARLES AND KATHLEEN DEWITT - Denied. 4.7.2 FILED BY BENJAMIN KUDON - Denied. 4.8 ACCEPTANCE OF SIGNAL INSTALLATION ON GRAND AVENUE AT SHOTGUN LANE - Accepted work performed by Intersection Maintenance Service (IMS) and authorized the City Clerk to file the proper Notice of Completion. 4.9 BOND REDUCTIONS - 4.9.1 ROAD IMPROVEMENTS - TRACT NO. 31850 - Accepted work completed in the vicinity of Diamond Bar Blvd. and Gold Rush Dr. and instructed the City Clerk to reduce Surety Bond No. 83 SB 100 426 684 and notify all parties. 4.9.2 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS - TRACT NO. 42564 - Accepted work completed for Private Contract No. 10702 and instructed the City Clerk to reduce Surety Bond No. 83 SB 100 390 297 and notify all parties. 4.9.3 ROAD IMPROVEMENTS - TRACT NO. 42564 - Accepted work completed in the vicinity of Golden Springs Rd. and Diamond Bar Blvd. and instructed the City Clerk to reduce Surety Bond No. 83 SB 100 390 300 and notify all parties. 4.10 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 91-57A: A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 91-57 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS AT GRAND AVENUE AND ROLLING KNOLL ROAD IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS. SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 PAGE 4 4.12 BLOCK NUMBERS ON BUS SHELTERS - Approved installation of block numbers and cross street names on bus stop shelters and authorized the City Manager to execute an amendment to the agreement with Bustop Shelters of California. 4.13 POMONA FREEWAY AT BREA CANYON ROAD WESTBOUND ON/OFF RAMPS - Authorized the Mayor to enter into a cooperative agreement with CalTrans specifying terms and conditions under which the project, consisting of upgrading the signal system, protected left -turn phasing, restriping and widening of the on/off ramp at Brea Canyon Rd. and SR 60, is to be engineered, financed and maintained. MATTERS WITHDRAWN FROM CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.11 RESOLUTION NO. 91-60: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING SIGNAGE FOR THE DIAMOND BAR CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH - Planning Technician Ann Lungu stated that pursuant to Section "p" of Resolution 89-82, City Council approval was required prior to replacement of the existing sign and the new sign must "not exceed 8 ft. in height measured from the adjacent grade." The proposed sign measures 3 ft. 6 in. high with an area of 35 sq. ft. which complies with the interim ordinance pertaining to free-standing signs. It will also conform to the new sign ordinance effective September 20 except for its height. The proposal for two crosses requests placement behind the concrete monument sign, one measuring 1213" and the second 913". Follow- ing discussion, C/Werner moved, C/Papen seconded to approve the proposal as submitted. During further discussion, staff was directed to amend Resolution No. 91-60 by deleting any reference to "crosses;" thereby approving the monument sign alone with a permit to be issued for the crosses. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCILMEN - Nardella, Papen, Werner, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing NOES: COUNCILMEN - None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None 4.14 PREPARATION OF TRES HERMANOS SPECIFIC PLAN - CM/Van Nort recommended entering into a cooperative agreement with the Industry Urban -Development Agency for preparation of Phase 1 of the Tres Hermanos Specific Plan. The agreement calls for the funds to be deposited with the City of Diamond Bar as the disbursing agent. Following discussion, C/Werner moved, C/Papen seconded to approve execution of an agreement for consulting services to prepare the Tres Hermanos Specific Plan with the City's share not to exceed $50,000 and to enter into a cooperative agreement with the City of Industry for the SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 PAGE 5 total project. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCILMEN - Nardella, Papen, Werner, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing NOES: COUNCILMEN - None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None 5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS - PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, ETC.: 5.1 Don Nardella, President of the Diamond Bar Rotary Club, presented a check in the amount of $3,367 representing Rotary's proceeds from concessions during Concerts in the Park as well as a donation for construction of a perma- nent concession stand at Carlton J. Peterson Park. 5.2 Presentation of City Tile - M/Forbing presented a City Tile commending the efforts of Glenda Bona toward the City's Emergency Preparedness Program. Lydia Plunk accepted the Tile on her behalf. 6. OLD BUSINESS: 6.1 SEPTIC SEWER SYSTEM IN THE COUNTRY - CE/Mousavi stated that the inconsistency in operation of the 148 septic tanks in the Country was possibly the result of localized shallow ground water conditions, shallow bedrock and an inadequate septic design. Staff had been informed by property owners that several septic tanks have overflowed, causing effluence to rise to the ground surface and create a potential health and environmental issue. This had not been verified by staff or a qualified consultant. Two soils and geotechnical engineering consultant firms were contacted to complete the study and the cost quoted was approximately $7,000. He further stated that, due to conflicting vacation schedules, staff had been unable to determine the number of property owners experiencing these problems. C/Papen moved to continue the matter for 60 days until such time as staff: 1) verifies what has been reported by individuals, 2) consults the previous geotechnical reports completed when the homes were constructed or 3) obtain a written explanation of the nature of the problem from the person who initiated the issue as well as an indication of those residents willing to participate in correcting the situation. C/Nardella asked that the motion be amended to include the extent of the problem. With Council consensus, the matter was continued for 60 to 90 days. SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 PAGE 6 6.2 ORDINANCE NO. 07 (1991): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING SECTION 13.66.060 AND REPEALING SECTION 13.66.120 OF CHAPTER 13.66 OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE, AS HERETOFORE ADOPTED, PERTAINING TO THE SHOOTING OF ARROWS AND SIMILAR PROJECTILES, AND DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF - Continued from August 6, 1991. ACM/Belanger stated that the ordinance would modify existing policy, not create policy, and that the only changes included requiring written consent from property owners showing permission to use their property and the distance that arrows can be safely shot increased from 150 yds. to 250 yds. The following spoke in opposition to the ordinance: Joe Dotterer, President, California Bowmen Hunters & State Archery Association, 4978 Jones Avenue, Riverside, 92505 John Scruggs, 9813 Greenwood Ct., Fontana, 92335 (distributed a copy of reports regarding diseases related to ticks) Scott Alexander, 24165 Willow Creek Rd. Ernest Brionez, 523 Aldgate Ave., La Puente John Holland, 1750 Paseo Granada, San Dimas (distributed letter from Ronald Holdstock, 1925 Los Cerros Dr., also opposing ordinance) Robert LaRoch, 582 E. Lemon, Glendora The following spoke in favor of the ordinance: Red Calkins, 240 Eagle Nest Dr. Don Gravdahl, 23809 Minnequa Following discussion, C/Werner moved, C/Nardella seconded to adopt Ordinance No. 7 (1991) with amendment to the "safety buffer" distance from 250 to 150 yds. Following further discussion, CA/Arczynski presented for consideration by the Council as an urgency ordinance by title only, Ordinance No. 7 (1991). With the following Roll Call vote, motion died for lack of a 4/5 vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN - Nardella, Werner, M/Forbing NOES: COUNCILMEN - Papen, MPT/Kim ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None MPT/Kim moved to approve for first reading by title only Ordinance No. 7 (1991) including the 250 yd. "safety distance". Motion died for lack of a second. C/Werner moved, C/Nardella seconded to approve for first reading by title only Ordinance No. 7 (1991) with SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 7. PAGE 7 amendment to the "safety buffer" distance as 150 yds. and not as an urgency measure. CA/Arcyznski asked for two motions: 1) waive full reading of the Ordinance and 2) introduce for first reading by title only Ordinance No. 7 (1991) entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING SECTION 13.66.060 AND REPEALING SECTION 13.66.120 OF CHAPTER 13.66 OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE AS HERETOFORE ADOPTED PERTAINING TO THE SHOOTING OF ARROWS AND SIMILAR PROJECTILES. M/Forbing requested a voice vote in favor of waiving of full reading. Motion carried unanimously. With the following Roll Call vote, first reading of Ordinance No. 7 (1991) was approved: AYES: COUNCILMEN - Werner, Nardella, M/Forbing NOES: COUNCILMEN - Papen, MPT/Kim ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None C/Papen asked staff to check with the Department of Fish and Game regarding regulations requiring written permission. NEW BUSINESS: 7.1 COUNCIL POLICY FOR PROVISION OF THE SANE PROGRAM TO PRIVATE SCHOOLS - ACM/Belanger reported that Mount Calvary Lutheran School, a private institution, requested that the SANE Program be provided to students at the elementary school level. He explained that adding three classes for Mount Calvary would require no additional cost to the City and that there cannot be any censorship or control of the content of the instructional subject matter, by officials and/or parents of the school. Following discussion, MPT/moved, C/Nardella seconded to authorize the City Manager to direct the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department to provide the SANE program to the Mount Calvary Lutheran School pursuant to established criteria. Motion carried 4 to 1 (C/Werner voting No. He indicated that he was reluctant to subsidize programs for private schools). 7.2 HERITAGE PARK BUILDING - ACM/Belanger stated that architectural proposals were solicited for the project and were out for bid at that time. He recommended the following: (1) direct the Parks and Recreation Commission to conduct community work sessions as a part of the process for developing the design of the Heritage Park building improvements; (2) consider participation of members of local recreation groups and seniors in design of the facility and (3) direct staff to meet with the SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 PAGE 8 County to determine whether funding a center is feasible for the full three-year entitlement (Period 17) which will allow the City to undertake construction in 1992. The project is proposed to be paid for utilizing City General funds, State Park Grant funds and, possibly, usage of CDBG funds for architectural design and construction. Lavinia Rowland, 23945 Highland Valley Rd., asked if the existing building at Heritage Park was sound and could be renovated and used for a children's center and business office, with the new money used for construction of a senior citizens center, kitchenette and stage. Frank Dursa, 2533 Harmony Hill Dr., requested an update on the possibility of constructing a senior center at the old post office site. He further inquired into the size of the YMCA location that the seniors are presently using, what type of transportation would be provided for seniors to Heritage Park and where are parking facilities for the park. C/Nardella responded to Mr. Dursa's questions. MPT/Kim suggested that the matter be referred to the Parks and Recreation Commission to conduct a community work session in order to discuss the matter further. Following discussion, Council directed staff to follow the recommendations presented and include the Heritage Park Council and other interested groups in the discussions. Council also directed staff to move forward as recommended. 8. ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/Werner apologized to C/Papen for his comments during discussion of Ordinance No. 7 (1991). MPT/Kim requested that staff investigate the possibility of forming a Senior Citizens Commission. C/Nardella reminded everyone of the extra Concert in the Park on September 11, 1991 at 6:00 p.m. 9. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Forbing adjourned the meeting at 9:22 p.m. TOMMYE A. NICE, Deputy City Clerk ATTEST: 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: Voucher Register, September 17, 1991 DATE: September 11, 1991 Attached is the Voucher Register dated September 17, 1991. As requested, the Finance Department is submitting the voucher register for the Finance Committee's review and approval prior to it's entry on the Consent Calender. The checks will be produced after any recommendations and the final approval is received. Please review and sign the attached. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR VOUCHER REGISTER APPROVAL The attached listing of vouchers dated September 17, 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 Ave Const Fund TOTAL ALL FUNDS APPROVED BY: N Linda G. 4adnuson Senior Accoidntant Robert L. Van Nort City Manager AMOUNT $243,765.21 7,480.47 859.67 16,072.03 1,540.00 $269,717.38 G' Phyll's E. Papen Councilmember Jay C. Kim Mayor Pro Tem ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _nt 12n �eca:a `st :35 --.7N �.._^.i1Er ;E.a:r-._5: 139 547.2. } ;2lund ipGs ...j 'E aL D(lE VENDOR--------, 15. t3 �era.an st:ra�e _ _ �;�erSt:rac }i1-Y6>n-21�? ?=:�17A 39%li 39/i% �2':tai et 2 Un:ts-Octo�=r 12:.8.7 TDT-L DUE VENDOR--------> 125.87 Acca nacr::om : A. n:acK 5L3 2 = y1TA 39111 +9,'`17 cb5bTEst "acki :ams in 141 299.95 27aL DLe VENDOR--------\ 299.35 :.ver:aC T_�pany 4,eraatk 09,'1: @9!17 14s °re'l Oorrac*ion 5.90 -.,-a ""E V�Nn"R--------- � YU v rUi 44 =.9.4 Eer'+:•:Z SWPI 2,)'17A P"ll 49x'1 45c.1 ;r: 12t. LaYClit Boards 1F6.22 7'7AL DUE VENDOR--------; .65.22 E_a^eer. Errerc2 BelangerT 239174 .1;0/11 69!17 :;=ere to l'MA-Boston 15.66 - ' :::E YENDOR 75.64 }^:-,aY -2 lr 5 269114 31/1211 09/11 69117 2491 ;;:­get Printing 419.29 -G-AL DUE VENDOR---------- 419.26 Coo. Myuno 53 }031-3478 1 209i7A 69/11 69,17 502 Recreation Reiund Fee 11.66 TuT?4L DUE VENDOR--------- 11.64 --------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- `' `'.- rv.,.t- 4dmif1 __:ia G.44.F+.y� ' 4R- +7,1 ?':+y17A 94'.. iY; !1 a... "„ R 4w ec e. V. � x.44 i� --- r:.c E DDR 15.04 ?�� 91 ih.5i? C Et`ENDOR--------, 136.54 :areiree +41.09'17 h=i.nd-_anceiied i,'rder 640.3]6 Tt�-�'JYL�. . r:'�1 •l'{?/L1 !9/.l IJ IJ �L L�i�Qi Led Order +8.04 }0 1-ct13 3 =^917A r.9 is e9/17 int.-,d-.anceiled Order ttc?1-�4i� 'A r�wiii }9i1' `-i..'-.an=e'led urdeT Y.64 ,TAi "tic :,ENDOR-------- 157.56 . -1 .:area.,t.iare-30r: 5 c49176 49/i: 49/17 __a ue .nsHtn-!iii, ?aper 50.40 49i45%91 44;r.43�113199 rRE9a:D AMO9lNT ----, 50.40 '00-c = tc5.a' i3 +..Y6 Coco's 4 209176 49/11 09/17 -':r.a orOV1s10ns 9;`3191 47.79 09(03/9/ +0G013i9' �;-'=PAID AMOUNT ---- 47.79 ;; t VENDOR ------- . 4.40 - r .:;ac's ,esta��ra: xi14C „aces f401-4410-232- It, e0176 091111 09/17' .cvlsions-atg 9/10 45.17 09/10/91 0404013254 '3-4L-RE°A:D AMOUNT ----; 45.17 "�-AL. vJE 'VENDOR -------- 9.00 _.__s. .,__, _ NA �I,N _,_. - _. �, •r JLC .. .,.__ Sic _-4tj 9i'—L:.: J:iG--------. L�2.ni ..j 'ateui !td�:U _cc:ei'. 2PAR'S 1,133.88 OTAL it.E VENDOR--------) 1.133.80 4 [89:7B 8x:11 99/:',s?91-106-5odSarvev 581.53 :881-4555-551 5 29i7E 89!11 ;19!1' 1;341 rr 'E'._-i80-5Ctl5urvev 40.80 f881-4210-521: 209118 ^9x11 0911' 14N•y5 :cry vcs-TrafiicCir.. 16,564.83 '1'AL '5HvENDCR--------> 16.5,-4.03 .... ?55x:atea E'rS +0ai-555-55:17 4 �19i7B p9 .1 89111 13aa1 r"91-183-'rafSitlnai 2.478.88 2fCiI w9rli 89;17 14812 ;tt=.-_18-98Ur:itAes 350.02 . 2017B es9 1i -i9/ 17 14813 358.80 f'i-w55-5:07 3 2:491:5 99!11 89/11 14842 -. 91-129-5top5ign 138.80 *'_i-v555-5:01 5 20417B 09;11 89117 14.66 ;t91-1@S-Sig4ar:ant5 2.494.18 e'i-555-55 _ •Si"B e9/17 14-82 '-.;5'91-18driodSigTi�Plan 1b8.80 3 289i7B J9/11 09/17 1'+129 ;.T,.-182-Tr3E1mR5tdy 386.79 DuE-'----'- "'" :�NDDP. > 1,429.82 ;3"•'."� ,3i rJS:"2=__ .JC "BBJSAS5DC *•i':- a9r- 2i 2 289118 84!il 39!1' 4-13 =-__..*iaarade 983.25 -74- v:E VENDOR--------; 903.25 :a,ecrd Ea: Rancr =es*.. DBRanchFst 0,1-+895-2131 289118 09/11 89/11 _.:ih-a/27-9/29191 295.88 DI.— 'VENDOR------ — > 295.00 Bar Etationen DBStatlon: ++di-409f-1108 5 289116 8,-111 09;11 27236 _,.... ..,_:ig Labels 5.96 111 VENDOR--------'1 5.96 *::?i-+ij .v4i�.�1 ?l.' +5i+ cry .- 816.40 -'AL :1d VENDOR ------- ^15.4°3 :^C, Edstta.^. +,01-409 -522<• �!j±'t—T4�a.A_11 C' .'� =��1'L •� 1i�J 1x/11 ado �9.1a 2.43 = 2-5176 t 09,'11 a9i17 e51I3o ..applies �9 17 8:2tZ4 Su plle5 6.57 i r-l-wt±9 -Ii$+� _. ? cid" :99 s9r 'li �9jt % J i 31225 5. �cs:ies 51 85 0911' } Q4 '8 11 t9: _'B 1 10 r 3 1 ,i k±9 i aa,, "! '6 --L- r ot�al:es 4t. is 8a394. C'Gf 11 2^9_78 _ .1�"', 91 i ?9x17 'a 1262, 3uCoiies 25.27 i.:2b 28 "Y 15'119? 091:1 09717 7344949 ':IClies 4.31 209: 12; a. - i9; 1. 99%i '^51134 q 7 92 i JC dEvuOR--------: 1]3.12 J E ,E• G0R - 292.81 J Hi J::� Y V--_-.--- _05:1?d^ _ :. Edstta.^. +,01-409 -522<• 2,617P i,,;i 13 -9111 r9'1 7'b1.35 5uaol'es 2.43 = 2-5176 09111 09/1' 09,'11 a9i17 e51I3o ..applies 17.11 +=° :-+ .-.1Qi i. " :7B r'4 i213 0911' 0011' '951:37 S.fnl.es 129.54 ♦. :ii -i.`` - 7829036 J ii13 to 09/ 1 0911' } Q4 '8 11 �m a uopi:n 120.84 •:?I- :r3 79 A1jii21 1 i 8a394. C'Gf 11 22.66 E ,E• G0R - 292.81 J Hi J::� Y V--_-.--- _05:1?d^ _ :. Edstta.^. +,01-409 -522<• 1 20917E 9111 09;17 7829035 P=ray F:n.ar .:solay 295.39 +401-4-40-11nc = 2-5176 09111 09/1' 7829836 Polders 4.45- .455 b2,,P17B 0911: +9/17 Bat`.er.es,Folders 15.97 �."-:-4511- i„s _ ` c „- A4 ii e9/17 7829036 Polders 5.02 }-w1-4v�i0-lie7N 78 c]9/il n19/:7 '829901 t3O2I5 2.98 09I'I 1 C'Gf 11 1pv�L-�ti Ji�i v!e} lei l Pa ,.ers 35.4 5 ',3iAL 91;E VENDOR --------> 359.25 7 Z ei 16,35 :5 2,S] . ,- Ssl34:♦ ._. ]P .7S. .. ;,.,..,r _� D"-a' ,i �,:�AL :,..�n-------- 105.4 !rank mill'_ pranzil +f0=-4012-_=_ IS senator-.;ncheon-CCounci1. 60.00 :1 0?!1' Senator _.ncneon-r, gr -; 10.00 OTAL 9-jE --OCR -------- _._ :a.:i C: 1a _ 7171. `:����i. ilr ��y u'Jt Phone J4l 2 4d4 2",' i;. i.E :'END:OR --------- t"A� 2,,04.21 �? i-Ye1r-2:2. ,o; _ 991:1 29;17 Fere °re.p Phone-August 39.41 •' :- E12-2:_: : 2-917 @9;11 2911' =., E. 'eritaee Prk 47.26 TAL DUE :ENDOR--------- 86.59 .tar 'rest .racn;cs 5oldeni'est 2 20917C A1:i22: "'!I: 09 ..7 ..3s0 9+9.14 ,7AL DUE vENDOR--------; 949.14 -iimes. Rae +rA1-3478 Y 2 91?A 291'1: 29/1% 03A Recrean on Refund Fees 15.A0 TOTAL DUE VENDOR.--------> 15.09 Hidalgo. 4ar:o �iCasgo!' +01-435M30s 3 2A9176 t9; ii 2911) Banc-"smokewood`-9111 400.00 09/091111 00000132Ei TOTAL F&EPA?D AMOUNT ----j 400.08 70TAL DUE VENDOR --------; 0.00 TOTAL CUE VENDOR - - - - - - - 447.00 ^'J. —'.a �4.T_ u-+�:f. .. -.��hYL'v:IT t�' • J - - -. _'n , as !"'+ Y �Jr:?d..., ^,�:+..0 �?e5 +-.'� t.: __--l.ti tea:=_ 1 Gf�• u ` d,'Y it` Sa:L. ..J2_331 "2i rl t�Y Y.yr?.Jr .. �L 'Gc :tyLCR x�: a�L11J —iyJ? a rfYi?`� ,11.11 Nii1/ :iei• �u �><.1C Lr �i.9w. .:.�:-4**3=-a?.4 9/..' 1,41'.;8 *5_-4;`45-:+7d .??i;C 9?/11 091.1 .56 iif, aa:'1. to7 lEi rsm:41nance 644M +rpt'1-4a�.id_ iPu.+, + _."S+- 09%ii mC'P.'g :+ ....?9 4i1i_y`1•;_g0 + '*'41-_ ,9/.i 11 Ei C_mP- P&M 959.33 +,P* tJ.u-s;"24 _ 9/i1 ?��li' ?f. �o-Engr. i,a07.24 a . -erg'. .���• a��.• . i 2r? _�� 9/l1 MI17 �Q.7? �^-+i Siurr� Jeal Ratentn i3,?:4.'i CCE VENDIR-------- 13.914.77 :r,ce 4�5_S"*'_5 .?c:2Hiare x9 1-4"�'?5-2=5. 2 2:291 10 —v of aB Pins ?28.01 TFTACUE s=NOCK--------, 929.91 ..-._=_c:'e 3c_eer,wer°: l�nressiae 2, 91;C 49111 v'9/17 667.1 . 'Sluts :or "ouncil 817.28 T]-h' "LL YENDCR -------- -_a c v_Llev ilv Bu'::etn ;'JCB 6 209110 09/11 09111 Ic5492 `;o'.,ce c; Nominees 37.59 4 209110 59111 9911+1 do 7101 Not icE-"T 22102,CUP 91-8 90.04 *fjt-4210-211: 399170 09111 09/17 dc792? r'jb Hrg-TT 41853,51,81 34.87 <??i-Y 2 1rs-31i{ L:'l/L 09:11 09117 dc7929 ',g Hrg-TPM 23039 3;.88 + �+i-4041-2115 =96:70 09;11 09!11 dc8805 Out Hrg-ord 322 42.?5 0/11 091" �c8814 Put .ru=General Pian 54. 9 +;�N1-4049-2115 20917C 09111 09/17 hc8823 cC Hrg-Ord :14-A 54.00 + y11-4+14:9-2115 . :591;0 09/11 09/17 dc8827 Put Hrg-Ord. 315-N 54.00 £001-+040-2115 L 20911: 09/11 09/17 dc9834 Pub Hrg-Electric Cade 45.90 TOTAL CUE VENDOR - - - - - - - 447.00 �A7E ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 7," 7C LACSherifi S 4 2t 20917C 7 289170 ACPubWk 1 21491'„ r, 17 j2= 9 1 7 Z z - :,;`!E VENDOR - --------4. {1 09, . 17 L,t"37ce s:;n award '.HM 9 AL rR EPA I D A' 0Uj T 2,i: 'VENDOR --------- f.00 09j.- °q,117Yat 3K-reaticn Refund Fee 15.81 0'9/11 09/117 D 1 A 1 2 - 8 -Auoust 212 7-3.00 ;,"DOR -------- 3,233.0 891111 19/117 E1*78nce siQq award 10.0 09118/9! M04132n5 PREPAID AMOUNT I" M 7 . 'A:- DUE 4ENDOP-------- 09ill ill 8911'Q8473 :rlcprt on 33M2 89/11 09!17 9854:1 helicopter Svc ZuIv 91 134.37 ':7AL 3U;- -------- 464.69 09/I1 09/17 70556 ::cvcle Race on 8/24,191 739.82 TOTAL DLE VENDOR --------- ? 739-62 09111 09/17 91008+ W :.dust. paste -Correction 600.00 70TAL DUE VENDOR ---------- 1� 60.0 7 BATCH Pu.i- E 'j T� au: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 77!� DUE VENDOR --------- 8.469.16 -a!,csra,e ;ect -and :car Ed 0 9 7 3 "ant. 5,it 141 3.14.-0 DUE ,ENDGR --------- L_z:F. "U10E OrChEstra 19 73 7 in hd "i +;,4 3 5 53;5 5 �91 I yt , C Tai A i � DuE VE'.1COR -------- -- _'raravl-a inc. L 2 j tg a + 9 3 — 2 11 1 7 n X9"11 .'9"17 7cie for Slerz!a Bona 173.32 9 Ta! DU E V END '_'R -------- % 17.._ u t 4- h,, 3L_-;3., 1 7 9 la 1 7 Rmir-Reagan 33.24 3, 73'91;1' 61 i 7 11 . 1 _'O ❑�- E? I.cr.'rz'.­Dist �.2 14 77!� DUE VENDOR --------- 8.469.16 -a!,csra,e ;ect -and :car Ed 0 9 7 3 "ant. 5,it 141 3.14.-0 DUE ,ENDGR --------- L_z:F. "U10E OrChEstra 19 73 7 in hd "i +;,4 3 5 53;5 5 �91 I yt , C Tai A i � DuE VE'.1COR -------- -- _'raravl-a inc. L 2 j tg a + 9 3 — 2 11 1 7 n X9"11 .'9"17 7cie for Slerz!a Bona 173.32 9 Ta! DU E V END '_'R -------- % 17.._ 4- h,, 3L_-;3., -9 2 t, 9 1 D; 9 la 09;1 Rmir-Reagan 33.24 3, 73'91;1' 61 Ce. 1 '9' 1., 7 2093 PaTy Supplies 130.96 +0'I-43731-5340 1 2,'j '; 1 7 r 6 i I i X19,'17 c3``+ OrInkler R2-,aIr-e_2IerSQn I j5. 36 05/!73 09117 2394 inkier Repai--Mlaole .41 18.94 09 111 6 L3y. SO-, inKler IR2 ' Oair-5um%tRdg 33.62 4 14 S 2A19171,09/11 09/17 2394 ;n-air-Sycasiare 13.03 Jl� 1 70917D F!'' @9i17 219S -rs-Paterson Prk Q2na i 1'48.20 20917D 09/11 2.9117 2396 PeDal,='-4eri+agc Prk ii3.2.6 'n- 42A_53t'C4 1 20917D 09/11 +19x.17 2397 SornCer Repair-SumstRdce 3 2 20917D 09i11 05/1, .398 �e-,airs-Svcame -Nrx 191.84 +01-4322-5300 I 20917D 09111 07/17 2399 Re0airs-Reauan Park 27.24 "CIAL MILE VENDOR -------- 6 1.2r,bM mariposa _SR � 2 N91' 09111 09!17 2391 August U s t M, a 1 n 41 3row 995.00 f?073-431 -530;9 2 2@1917D �q 1; 1 1 ;­ 117 09 'A. 23191 August Maint. Heritage 663.04 OKI -4316-330 2 2091/D 0/111 09/11 21391 August Maint.-N ' plehill! 829.00 1 �>j!-4319-SNO 2 ZO,917.n• 09;731W17 2391 August Maint. Paterson 11244.0 i-�01-4322-SM 3 20917D +^9111 09/17 2391 August Maint.-Reagan Prk 995.8Lhl I 2�)917D 09111 t'9i!7 2391 August Maint.-Starshine 415.04 3 20917D @9/111 e9/17 2391' August Ma-Int.-SummOdge 1,492.0 4 ^4,"1911D M!11 19!17 2291 August Maint.-Sycamore 1.52810 TL -AL DUE VENDOR --------- 8,161.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I ----------- 9 7 4; 7 7,1 "1 7- 20911 .341, 2»+.46 �L IUE VENDOR - - - - - - - - 46 -4 d9/il 99/17 3:;6 Recrealton Refund Fees 0 ylrDUE t,;_NDC;. ---------- .•.K2 b2 Q 7 Recreation Refund 15.8@ ;O'AL I -_- VENDOR mve:sE 7 !3 09111 491117 91n18 aIlng MtI 8i26191 298.00 4 1 LL 2, 1, 8 2, 7, D 9.1 6 -.'ro --omm-Een Plan 2 2 3 7 f 7 91-,b1l ".t: Com. 81281';�I 198.00 2a9i77 WILI +9'17 1@234 'Ysleq Renta'; 3�0.00 DUE VENDOR -------- 30 8.02 . %EIsCr_:; Nelsonics -4354-2170 . 20176 E-ii'miom2nt rent -concerts 604.09 091@4191 T[!'Ai. DREPAID AnUNIT 600.00 ITAL DUE VENDOR ---------- 0.08 N2UVen, Tmeit T. S_.2 1 4�9'7A 09/_ 01117 A,19 Oerreation Refund Fee 1).00 T,'174L DUE VENDOR -------- 36.04 J.E,T BUSIneSS ForjS �_.T Busires + 01-5058-1140 2 2+19170 01;1218 Wil 09/17 38199 CcTpute. OaDer 54.53 7Z -AL DUE VENDOR --------- i 54.53 T L JE :='}DLI{ ___---___"v, }a.- 1- 1 y !:_`:-G+i?i? 4 1i :J9/iT 22_2r R2nt-'Lut ar 9:%1 T77'L D E 'VENDOR --------. 12.8,1 E„y/Plr,� R2„i:l � Aug -t , c 2a ?,i.�. Pin Zhk-Auqusi t v. 41.1.:'0 +,; 1-.. � _r52i . 2, 7D d 0 9 Y1 :4911? .>+or . c�.�u J'A]' 17R310.66 '3' '_ DUE1.END0P---------; 27.831.52 . cf Sf _. Pdv'rCl, a e^+'1-1`.27 crYi7c 891111 ;99%,17 '3/^7:. .rdrsfer - P918 4@,5.18.8@ t8; 38/91 8 88888818 T1T�+L PREPAID AMOUNT ---- 48.51'2.88 - -r- - ,L;riL Di�E eCND;:R ________F r8 �.t @9;11 99/1 odef: "s 22.71 @9/11 1 q,. 111? "2e`_inC 89!11 x9/17 Sjoolies-cclk. 2.84 i-__... . 2t%9,11D @9f .. `; 4/1: Osi37e ,.2. 1-40,94-2,317 3 28917D 89i,11 89/17-Bei-PCCi d' ?1.67 ?''11-4:9 2 20917D 89/11 59/17 "2rL. 7= 8.e3 *r81 -489:-12s+8 _ 289170 09/11 89'17 C -t of Re_ogntion ..c3 ti^1-421 -2 2. 5 289171 89/11 89111 deet r,cs i1.52 1TA?_ :Uu VENDOR --------; 8?.58 ien.�;,R ^o^ Pfenn:noR + . 0,;11 1-40118-5?2.; 1 2Pi'D ?9/11 09117 rin Fcues/Credenza ?84.81 T.; Dt,E VENDOR - 784.81 -- ------- - --------------------------------- -- ------------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - V '"E 'E.inC RKA + 4 2094 16 20qi 76 +"4-551-"223 =t21-4331- -42.1 2 4 5 7 L :ILE VENDOR --------- 1 4,!37.04 d?,11 09417O:stige Re.olvishment -2111E VENDER - --------- I 1.=400.02 7 3-:.s-.eq*-;-MPl0ver PP18 2,48;.'2 :`8/29; Pi 60,'0013195 92-7reqent-Emclovee PP16 2.548.42 W29/91 400t?I3:96 P.HPATD AnIUNT ---- 5.449-14 0911: 49/117 914 ;2:reatlon R2iun� Fees 14.00 7 : - -+:P,.iT;7 ,�L — VENDOR ----------- 0911111 0i17 5if R2cTEaticn Refund P2e5 DH VENDOR - - - - - - - - - -40.04 Pill 09117 -:an --necking 4,802.82 0910'7,!91 0000013203 49111 09i!7 9.1-5892 E1,2-22525 Ridgeline Rd 23.27 09109191 2000013203 09/11 09,117 ql-15?62 7nEael:lcn i2es 10"694.13 09109491 000013293 0911" 6/17 9i-59161 E91-157 176117.98 09/09/91 H00013203 e3/11 91'117 -644? 4722 grading 285.30 09109191 000013243 GTAL PREPAID AMOUNT 22,623.5@ AL DUE VENDOR -------- t(...--.-. __. _13-11_ ; DUE VENDCN --------, =.r+ .._-�_.. 11 7 .-.. L�Yiii d9,•1' 7 47�a�.� 351,494u7 ?x.53 i_Iiz1 G[ Notunae5 a7.6@ =i-+ 'f -2.15 - �;[:7E -'ll v9 1. ?=35 -.itie 27 @.42 :4x-2.:] ?''17t�:11 @9'i7 '� -:g 162 36.i2 {"': :-4 "u'r.'-_li] ..;y:•C "�li @9i�17 -7" ,L')sif 46.44 =09' 7_ X9;11 'x9/17 Y, +r+ '." :14-A x+7.38 TC7AL DUE VENDCR--------. 278.94 ,. qac Na— t ca + Sec ura 11 D9/17 Cmgr rtg v Senator 131.21 *R,l-41.;3-2.'25 [ ]?4'1%t 59; 1i X9/1' "tg iACTC 3-7.82 *OJ01-030-2325 32f9':'_ 09ii1 09/17 tc y!Attornev 18.49 <'9;11 ?9/17 i.nt2.v:ew for Asst to CM 47.54 + rl-4ri3@-2?25 2091"E @9111 r9'1' "?tc Re: Access Road 23.47 S council 285.18 DUE VENDOR 54 :ec{2� +22: _C=-a41c, - 28917E 09/11 @911' 2636-," riic 3gnls :rand/RKnoli 1,340.00 _'AL DUE VENDOR -------- 1.540.09 :;::7.; 5 5csar, sign=Br'Sus - 2@917E x9111 09!11 1363 .^v'. Banner -Concerts 35.19 _ - Lit VENDOR --------, DUE 35.1 c :edv 5ir5peeov ±' 1: 7 20917E @9111 e9/17 5818,:.848 5_.,.:as;'Le.terhead 98.55 20917E 09/11 @9/17 6853 -a.ng ;,acs for Budget 145.83 " E VENDOR -------- 244.38 Gas :G 6oCaGas -2 291%E 09/11 �a9i11 Sas-'reritage Parc 21.11 7DTAL DUE VENDCR--------- 21.11 _ �.. D,'H I,;- 1'UE G`ENDCR--------. lYc.ia -"17E r9; 1. 09;17 .:e.tric .ist 939 8.40 DUt 4eNDCn-------- 88. 4a SoCiEdicon �:;-.�;.-�._ _..•. 09':1 "j3/i7 L e,tr.: Dist 341 24.38 Tu AL DUE VENDOR --------) 20136 2.3917E y?/il do!il eC triC Dist 238 258.86 "S , I'L, 4END0R ---------- 258.86 + X4!11 09/17 1710 TaTo Svc_-ting Secretary 593.88 PtE YENDCR--------, 693.86 :., _ �.• '=r "r a•:Ed T�wneC,ente �'^91.7E 67i11 u9117 a:.r�:e MdVOr 3129 Mrg 89.00 J_'t 'VENDOR --------; 88.89 ' Tranv - 289116 09/ _ _r3'Ce sign award 1q?0.a4 09/10r9l a.^•:0013206 "'J':AL PREPAID AMOUNT ----'i 100.02 DUE VENDOR--------) 0.0 _ _�3i v�•clal d9!17 32r964r0 r :'.40 i9TAL DUE VENDOR----------- 17.44 W a a f Iv Vat E. ."; 1 st a 7 e,- W al nut div ;�z��Cr :ist a t 2 1 s '?1-432-2:i 2 4e— :zt -.0 Qi 7- 1 2 2, R, 2 , I ! E Vii, 1 '. 4 7 1'. s : : - .1-24'6 ,!-24 6 .41 20911A 17 2,,,;171c �111216 :%7 7. ------------------------------ w UL i5'Al- DUE VENIDOR - -------- -,4.88 20 117 Yater Dist :38 -:Lj-;AL DUE iEND-CUR --------- .L,;24.86 .1,9 1 d?i17 '17 water Jsi..e 141 70TAL DUE VENDOR -------- 6,K7.59 tater-Reagan 9330.45 V19i11 L119/i, 4ater-5tarshine 683.92 jENDOR ----------- 49!11.1 09/17 — ipec Event haste Hauling 20.00 7--4,1 DUE VENDOR -------- u 19jil 09/17 3197@8 Repair Stm. Clock 7�7 AL DUE VENDOR -------- 166.3 09/11 09/17 138 Recreation Reiund 15.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------- 15.04 6/11 09117 43829-1i-5 Copy Paper 581.80 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------- 587.60 w ----- -- ------ ---- ---- ---- - --- ---- ---- ------------ ------ ----------------------------- ------------------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - -- ----------- P,,� - ----------------- iRl... [i' .7 2.10 ;0 EWE POEM OEM 3D1:,O - _"r"_ .,r =i'_41S_ iRl... [i' .7 2.10 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council MEETING DATE: September 17, 1991 REPORT DATE: September 10, 1991 FROM: Linda G. Magnuson, Senior Accountant TITLE: Treasurer's Report - July 31, 1991 SUMMARY: Submitted for Council's review and approval is the Treasurer's Statement for the month of July 1991. RECOMMENDATION: Review and approve. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification _ Resolution(s) _ Bid Spec. (on file in City Clerk's Office) _ Ordinances(s) _ other _ Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? Report discussed with the following affected departments: Yes_ No Yes X No Yes X No Yes X No REVIEWED BY• r Lt koibert L. Van Nort Terrence L. Belanger (Department Head) City Manager Assistant City Manager F:\WP51\AGENDA\COVER.FRM CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: September 17, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Treasurer's Statement - July 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 July, 1991 Treasurer's Statement. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: No fiscal impact. BACKGROUND: Submitted for Council's review and approval is the Treasurer's Statement for the month of July 1991. This statement shows the cash balances for the various funds, with a breakdown of bank account balances and investment account balances. PREPARED BY: Linda G. Magnuson F:\NP51\FORK\AGENDA\AGE-RPT.FRM CITY OF DIAMOND BAR TREASURER'S MONTHLY CASH STATEMENT FUND GENERAL FUND TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND GAS TAX FUND TRANSIT TX (PROP A) FD LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FD FEDERAL AID URBAN FUND INTEGRATED WASTE MGT FD STATE PARK GRANT FUND LANDSCAPE DIST #38 FD LANDSCAPE DIST #39 FD LANDSCAPE DIST #41 FD GRAND AV CONST FUND TRAFFIC MITIGATION FEE FD CAP IMPROVEMENT PRJ FD SB 821 FUND SELF INSURANCE FUND TOTALS SUMMARY OF CASH: DEMAND DEPOSITS: INVESTMENTS: July 31, 1991 BEGINNING $12,882.12 TRANSFERS ENDING BALANCE RECEIPTS DISBURSEMENTS IN (OUT) BALANCE $3,657,143.92 $2,461,306.32 $405,020.80 $5,713,429.44 0.00 24,087.35 24,087.35 1,209,168.45 171, 803.20 342.55 1, 380, 629.10 391,095.66 67,283.97 458,379.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 459.86 6,655.75 1,363.25 5,752.36 21,500.00 21,500.00 0.00 42,693.86 7,392.26 11,475.24 38,610.88 225,989.42 5,460.47 7,799.88 223,650.01 91,307.65 3,663.55 9,459.36 85,511.84 655,370.87 56,777.19 598,593.68 332,407.37 332,407.37 4,401.90 50,000.00 54,401.90 18,770.50 347.10 19,117.60 237,719.88 2,115.21 239,835.09 $6,888,029.34 $2,800,115.18 $513,738.27 $0.00 $9,174,406.25 GENERAL ACCOUNT $12,882.12 PAYROLL ACCOUNT 24.13 PETTY CASH ACCOUNT 500.00 TOTAL DEMAND DEPOSITS TIME CERTIFICATES COMMERCIAL PAPER L.A.I. F. TOTAL INVESTMENTS $0.00 0.00 9,161, 000.00 $13,406.25 I:7iG31fiTODY6Ti1 TOTAL CASH $9,174,406.25 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council MEETING DATE: September 17, 1991 REPORT DATE: September 10, 1991 FROM: Linda G. Magnuson, Senior Accountant TITLE: APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT - FISCAL YEAR 1991-92 SUMMARY: As required by Government Code Section 7910, on July 16, the City Council formally amended the resolution adopting the Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 1991-92. Pursuant to new information received regarding the method of calculation, the City Council is being asked to amend Resolution #91-43A, to reflect the corrected Appropriations Limit. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution #91-43B which amends the protested FY91-92 Appropriations limit to $10,875,864. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report X Resolution(s) _ Ordinances(s) Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: Public Hearing Notification Bid Spec. (on file in City Clerk's Office) Other 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed X Yes_ No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? _ Yes X No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes X No which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes X No Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: ji Robert L. Van Nort Terrence L. Belanger (Department Head) City Manager Assistant City Manager F:\WP51\AGENDA\COVER.FRM CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: September 17, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Appropriations Limit, Fiscal Year 91-92 ISSUE STATEMENT: As required by Government Code Section 7910, on July 16, the City Council formally amended the resolution adopting the Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 1991-92. Pursuant to new information received regarding the method of calculation, the City Council is being asked to amend Resolution #91-43A, to reflect the corrected Appropriations Limit. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution #91-43B which amends the protested FY 91-92 Appropriations Limit to $10,875,864. BACKGROUND: Article XIIIB of the California State Constitution was amended in June 1990 (Proposition 111). This article addresses which appropriations are subject to limitation. As a result of the change in the law, there have been new interpretations of the methodology used in the calculation of the limit. DISCUSSION: The methodology in calculating the City's Appropriations Limit has been changed to conform to the new requirements (see the work sheet attached to the resolution). The method used is the procedure prescribed by the City's auditing firm Thomas, Byrne, and Smith. There are two basic differences in the calculation. Originally, the Consumer Price Index was used as one of the factors. Proposition 111, now requires the use of the Annual California Per Capita Income Percentage Change. The other change in the calculation is the conversion of the factors to ratios. Utilizing these changes, the protested Appropriations Limit for the City of Diamond Bar has been changed from $11,585,192 to $10,875,864. It should be noted that this limit is still under protest by the City. The City is protesting the 1986-87 Base Year calculation provided by the Los Angeles County LAFCO. PREPARED BY: Linda G. Magnuson F:\WP51\WORK\AGENDA\AGE-RPT.FRM C co CC)C O1 O 'p O 0) C S SD O 10 00C U SD w � j 2. D CA (D 7 w CD 7 cc O c> > O n O CD CD _ m CD O7 CD 0 SD in CD : CD j� o CD o o O) a 0 < m m CD n * rO— CD O CD T CL OW O n 0 o 37 �7 O � fl. O � o 0 CD o o co o 90 A W 1 1 1 Ii M O O O o 1 W V OD A cn Jw m .41 ' co O V o o CO ffl _cD O Cn 1 J J M W co W N W al m W O o co00 O O N 0) o CO 4A CO 1 1 J J 1 1 00 N O O_ O 1 N CWO W COli N W N co c0 cu N V N c0 0 o O EA .1 N 1 1 1 1 I� ^ N A O to O ONo co m A N 1 A N V CO W N V V 1 0 0 1 1 T c 4 A r A V j OWi A cp CT w A V W A o o c0 N ����CARL WARREN & CO. Insurance Adjusters Claims Administrators P O Box 25180 Santa Ana, CA 92799-5180 (714) 972-3146 (800) 572.6900 Date: Sept. 4, 1991 TO: City of Diamond Bar Attention: Lynda Burgess Re: Claim: Clayton vs Diamond Bar Claimant: Carla Clayton D/Event: 3-01-91 Rec'd Y/Office: 8-30-91 Our File: S 68082 DK/CV We have reviewed the above captioned claim and request that you take the action indicated below: CLAIM REJECTION: Send a standard rejection letter to the claimant. j� CLAIM INSUFFICIENCY: In accordance with the telephone conversation of , 19 , a notice of insufficiency must be mailed to the claimant no later than , 19.THIS MUST BE ' MAILED TO THE CLAIMANT WITHIN 20 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THE ORIGINAL CLAIM IN YOUR OFFICE. DO NOT SUBMIT A "REJECTION" LETTER. See Government Code Sections 910 and/or 910.2 and or 910.4. b AMENDED/SUPPLEMENTAL CLAIM: Send a standard rejection letter to the claimant, refecting this additional/amended claim. i� LATE CLAIM RESPONSE: Return the original claim material to the claimant, advising that the claim is late and that their only recourse is to file a written "Application for Leave to Present a Late Claim". (Retain copies in your file.) THIS MUST BE MAILED TO THE CLAIMANT WITHIN 45 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THE CLAIM IN YOUR OFFICE. DO NOT SEND A "REJECTION" LETTER. See Government Code Section 911.4. APPLICATION REJECTION: Reject claimant's "Application for Leave to Present a Late Claim". See Government Code Section 911.8. [� TAKE NO ACTION: Defer any written response to the claimant pending our further advice. Please provide us with a copy of the notice sent, as requested above. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, cc: S.C.J.P.I.A. CARL WARREN & COMPANY dju e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 I 23 24 25 26 27 28 JACK M. PANAGIOTIS State Bar #35686 MALONEY & MULLEN Attorneys at Law 520 Broadway, Suite 300 Santa Monica, CA 90401 Telephone: 213/393-0175 FAX: 213/394-9323 Attorneys for Claimant CARLA D. HENDERSON CLAYTON ) Claimant, ) V. ) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF ) TRANSPORTATION; COUNTY ) OF LOS ANGELES, DEPARTMENT ) OF PUBLIC WORKS, DESIGN ) DIVISION; CITY OF DIAMOND ) BAR, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION; ) CITY OF POMONA, A MUNICIPAL ) CORPORATION; SOUTHERN ) CALIFORNIA RAPID TRANSIT ) DISTRICT, A GOVERNMENTAL ) CORPORATION; LAMAR BALL, ) Respondents. ) No. CLAIM FOR BODILY INJURIES AND DAMAGES (Government Code Section 9911.2) TO: CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, DESIGN DIVISION, HIGHWAY AND ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that claimant CARLA D. HENDERSON-CLAYTON, HND\02\GOVTCLAI.JMP\JMP\as\08-28-91 Rev. 08-29-91\4:41pn 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 residing at 14879 Weeping Willow Lane, Fontana, California 92335 submits the following claim for bodily injuries and damages: 1. WHEN DID DAMAGE OR INJURY OCCUR? (DATE AND HOUR) March 1, 1991, approximately 5:40 p.m. 2. WHERE DID DAMAGE OR INJURY OCCUR? Eastbound on Colima Road, approximately 26 feet east of Lemon Avenue, City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, State of California. 3. HOW DID DAMAGE OR INJURY OCCUR? Claimant Carla D. Henderson Clayton was a passenger in a vehicle being operated in an easterly direction on and along Colima Road, approximately 26 feet east of Lemon Avenue, City of Diamond Bar. The vehicle in which claimant was riding was involved in an accident with another vehicle. The subject roadways are negligently and carelessly engineered, designed, laid out, constructed, installed, controlled, maintained, painted, marked, repaired and modified, The street, bus and traffic markings, signs and signals are f HND\02\GOVTCLAI.JMP\JMP\as\08-28-91 Rev. 08-29-91\4:41pm 2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 negligently, carelessly, improperly, insufficiently and inadequately placed, posted, installed, controlled, painted and marked. Because of the inadequate, inappropriate and improperly placed and positioned signs, postings and markings as well as the negligently and carelessly engineered, designed, laid out, constructed and positioned roadway, the operator of the vehicle in which claimant was riding became confused, proximately causing his vehicle to collide with another vehicle. 4. WHAT PARTICULAR ACT OR OMISSION ON THE PART OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS DESIGN DIVISION HIGHWAY AND ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION OR CITY OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES CAUSED THE SUBJECT INJURY OR DAMAGE? City of Diamond Bar officers, employees, agents and/or representatives negligently and carelessly engineered, designed, laid out, constructed, installed, controlled, maintained, repaired, modified, painted and marked the subject Colima Road and Lemon Avenue roadways in the City of Diamond Bar. City of Diamond Bar officers, employees, agents and or representatives negligently, carelessly, improperly placed, positioned, painted, marked and installed the street signs, signals, bus signs and markings. HND\02\GOVTCLAI.JMP\JMP\as\08-28-91 Rev. 08-29-91\4:41pn M 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5. WHAT DAMAGE OR INJURIES RESULTED? As a result of aforesaid vehicular collision, claimant sustained multiple injuries, including her right knee. 6. WHAT SUM IS BEING CLAIMED FOR INJURIES AND DAMAGES? $500,000.00. 17. NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF DOCTORS AND HOSPITALS: Brea Community Hospital, 380 West Central Avenue, Brea, CA 92621; (714) 529-0211. Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, 9961 Sierra Avenue, Fontana, CA 92335; Dr. Crane and Dr. D'Amico; (714) 427-5521. 8. SEND OFFICIAL NOTICES AND CORRESPONDENCE TO: Jack M. Panagiotis, Esq., Maloney & Mullen, 520 Broadway, Suite 300, Santa Monica, CA 90401; (213) 393-0175. Dated: August 29, 1991 HND\02\GOVTCLAI.JMP\JMP\as\08-28-91 Rev. 08-29-91\4:41pm MALONEY &1^L EN By: J4AC Panag' s Attorneys fo Claimant CARLA D. HENDERSON-CLAYTON 4. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. l r' TO: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager MEETING DATE: September 17, 1991 REPORT DATE: September 9, 1991 FROM: Sid J. Mousavi, City Engineer/Public Works Director TITLE: Traffic Signal Installation on Grand Avenue at Rolling Knoll Road SUMMARY: On September 3, 1991, the City Council authorized staff to readvertise for bids for the installation of traffic signals on Grand Avenue and Rolling Knoll Road. The City desires to award a contract to the lowest responsible bidder. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council award a contract to the lowest responsible bidder. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:X Staff Report Resolution(s) Ordinances(s) Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: Public Hearing Notification _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office) Other 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed Yes X No by the City Attorney? _ 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? Yes X No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes X No Which Commission? _ 5. Are other departments affected by the report? Yes X No Report discussed with the following affected departments: _ REVJEWED BY: Robert L. Van Nort City Manager Terrence L. Belanger DSid J. Mousavi Assistant City Manager Public Works Director L Crry COUNCIL URPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: September 17, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager SUBJECT: Traffic Signal Installation on Grand Avenue at Rolling Knoll Road ISSUE STATEMENT The City desires to award a contract for the installation of traffic signals at the intersection of Grand Avenue and Rolling Knoll Road to the lowest responsible bidder. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council award a contract to the lowest responsible bidder. FINANCIAL SUMMARY This project will be funded by the City's Grand Avenue Funds. BACKGROUND On September 3, 1991, the City Council authorized staff to readvertise and receive bids for the installation of traffic signal at the intersection of Grand Avenue and Rolling Knoll Road. The poles and traffic controller were ordered separately. The controller was delivered to the Los Angeles County Laboratories for testing on September 6, 1991 and the poles will be delivered to the City during the week of September 16, 1991. DISCUSSION The bids for the installation of this signal will be opened on September 16, 1991 and therefore, the names of the bidders and amount to complete the work, will not be available until such time. As a result, such information will be furnished to the City Council during the Council meeting on September 17, 1991. PREPARED BY: Sid Jalal Mousavi AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.4 NO DOCUMENTATION AVAILABLE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager MEETING DATE: August 20, 1991 REPORT DATE: August 20, 1991 FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director TITLE: INTRODUCTION OF AND SETTING FOR PUBLIC HEARING AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REPEALING THE ENTIRETY OF TITLE 27 OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE AS HERETOFORE ADOPTED AND ADDING A NEW TITLE 27 ADOPTING AND ADDING A NEW TITLE 27 ADOPTING, BY REFERENCE, THE "NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE," 1990 EDITION, WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS, ADDITIONS, DELETIONS AND EXCEPTIONS, INCLUDING FEES AND PENALTIES. Pursuant to Title 24 of the California Administration Code, local jurisdictions shall adopt the most recent codes published and adopted by the State of California. The 1990 National Electrical Code was adopted by the State of California in January of 1991, which mandated that the local jurisdiction adopt the code within one year. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council establish a public hearing date to adopt the 1990 National Electric Code pursuant to California Government Code, Section 50020. To meet the State mandates, it is recommended that the hearing be held on September 17, 1991. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: $Staff Report —Resolution(s) -XOrdinance(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: N/A BYE' Robert L. Van Nort 'Terrance L. Be City Manager Assistant City] _Public Hearing Notification _Bid Specification (on file in Clerk's office) _Other 1 City -I James DeSte ano Community Devilopment Director SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed by the City Attorney? Yes _,No 2. Does the report require a majority of 4/5 vote? __X_No 3. Has the environmental impact been assessed? _Yes NSA _Yes _No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _Yes __�LNo 5. Are other departments affected by the report? _Yes __XNo Reports discussed with the following affected departments: C—'11 TY COUNC 1 L_ RE PORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: August 20, 1991 TO: Honorable I'dayor and Members of the City Council FROM: City I.1anager SUBJECT: ESTABLISHI,IENT OF PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR ADOPTION OF THE 1990 NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE ISSUE STATEMENT: Pursuant to Title 24 of the California Administration Code, local jurisdictions shall adopt the most recent codes published and adopted by the State of California. The 1990 National Electrical Code was adopted by the State of California in January of 1991, which mandated that local jurisdictions adopt the code within one year. RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommend that the City Council establish a public hearing date to adopt the 1990 National Electrical Code pursuant to California Government Code, Section 50020. To meet the State mandates, it is recommended that the hearing be held on September 17, 1991. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: N/A BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Every 3 years the State of California reviews and alters the building codes as relates to mechanical, plumbing and electrical work, to sanction prevailing methods of construction. As previously discussed, the State has adopted the 1990 National Electrical Code which is the latest version. The Building and Safety Department has reviewed the Code and is prepared to recommend amendments to the Code reflecting local conditions on September 17, 1991. PREPARED BY: Dennis A. Tarango, Building Official CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. f , , TO: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager MEETING DATE: September 17, 1991 REPORT DATE: September 10, 1991 FROM: Sid J. Mousavi, City Engineer/Public Works Director TITLE: Speed Zone Survey along Chino Hills Parkway SUMMARY: A speed zone survey has been conducted for Chino Hills Parkway in order to enable the Sheriff Department to enforce the speed limit by radar and/or other electronic devices. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve Ordinance 91 -XX and set the speed limit on Chino Hills Parkway at 45 mph. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:X Staff Report _ Resolution(s) X Ordinances(s) _ Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: Public Hearing Notification _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office) X Other Report to T/T Commission 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed X Yes _ No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? Yes X No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ X Yes No Which Commission? T/T Commission _ 5. Are other departments affected by the report? Yes X No Report discussed with the following affected departments: _ REVIEWED BY: Robert L. Van Nort'Terrence L. Belanger City Manager Assistant City Manager Sid J. Mousavi Public Works Director CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: September 17, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager SUBJECT: Speed Zone Survey along Chino Hills Parkway ISSUE STATEMENT Establish a speed limit of 45 miles per hour (mph) on Chino Hills Parkway. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve Ordinance 91 -XX which will establish 45 mph speed limit on Chino Hills Parkway. FINANCIAL SUMMARY This action does not have any financial impact on the City's 1991-92 budget. BACKGROUND The City of Diamond Bar conducted a speed zone survey for the City in September 1989. However, this survey did not include Chino Hills Parkway. DISCUSSION In order to enforce speed limits by radar or other electronic devices, a study must be conducted every five years. Since speed traps are illegal, the lack of an adequate study effectively precludes the Sheriff Department from using radar enforcement. Through adoption of this survey, the Sheriff Department will be able to enforce posted speed limit with radar equipment. PREPARED BY: Sid Jalal Mousavi ORDINANCE NO. 22A (1989) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING ORDINANCE 22 (1989) ESTABLISHING PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS FOR CERTAIN CITY STREETS BY THE ADDITION OF CHINO HILLS PARKWAY AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMIT THEREFORE. A. RECITALS. (i) California Vehicle Code Section 22358 provides that this City Council may, by ordinance, set prima facie speed limits upon any portion of any street not a state highway. (ii) This City has conducted a speed zone study, dated May, 1991, of a certain street within the City of Diamond Bar which is specified in Part B of this Ordinance. The determination concerning prima facie speed limits set forth in Part B, below, is based upon the speed zone study identified in Section A (ii), above. (iv) The determination concerning the prima facie speed limits referenced herein is intended to impose a prima facie speed limit on Chino Hills Parkway, a new thoroughfare. (v) All legal preconditions 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: Section 1: In all respects as set forth in Part A, Recitals, hereinabove. 1 Section 2: Prima Facie Speed Limits on specified City Streets The prima facie speed which is most appropriate to facilitate the orderly movement of traffic and is a speed limit which is reasonable and safe on such portion of the street is set forth below for such street: Chino Hills Parkway, North City Limit to 45 mph the South City Limits. Section 3: The prima facie speed limits established by Ordinance No. 22 (1989) are to remain in full force and effect, without alteration or amendment, as a result of the amendment to such ordinance as will be accomplished by this amendatory ordinance. Section 4: The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to install appropriate signs upon such portion of the street specified herein giving notice of the prima facie speed limit for the street declared herein. Section 5: 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. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this day of , 1991. Mayor Pa 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: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar C\1011\AMENDORD\DB 1.3B 3 AGENDA NO. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT DATE: August 1, 1991 MEETING DATE: August 8, 1991 TO: Chairman and Members of the Traffic and Transportation Commission FROM: Sid J. Mousavi, City Engineer/Pu 1c Works Director SUBJECT: Speed Zone Survey: Chino Hills Parkway BACKGROUND: The City conducted a speed September 1989. Chino Hills among the study. DISCUSSION• zone survey for the entire City in Parkway, however, was not included In order to enforce speed limits by radar or other electronic devices, a study must be conducted every five years. Section 40802 of the California Vehicle Code defines a speed limit enforced by radar and "...which speed limit is not justified by an engineering and traf f is survey conducted within five years prior to the date of the alleged violation..." constitutes a speed trap. Since speed traps are illegal, the lack of an adequate study effectively precludes the Sheriff Department from using radar enforcement. Through adoption of this study, the Sheriff Department will be able to enforce posted speed limit with radar equipment. The results of the study are summarized on the following pages, showing the existing and recommended speed limits. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Traffic and Transportation Commission concur with DKS Associates' recommendation and establish a 45 mph speed limit on Chino Hills Parkway. DKS Associates MEMORANDUM TO: Sid Mousavi, City of Diamond Bar FROM: Abi Mogharabi, DKS Associates DATE: June 11, 1991 RE: Speed Zone Survey for Chino Hills Parkway Inside the City of Diamond Bar P91128x0 This memo contains information and recommendations for establishment of the speed limit on Chino Hills Parkway inside the boundaries of the City of Diamond Bar as required by Sections 22357 and 22358 of the California Vehicle Code. This survey complements and updates the Citywide Speed Zone Survey performed in 1989. A summary of the existing and recommended speed limit for the surveyed street is presented below. T nratinn Chino Hills Parkway from the southeast city limit to the northeast city limit (Scenic Ridge Drive) Methodology Existing MPH Posted Speed Limit 45 Recommended MPH Speed Limit 45 The survey was performed using methods outlined in the Caltrans Traffic Manual, Chapter 8-03, and includes the following steps: • Consultation with City staff, Sheriff's Department, County of San Bernardino regarding the design speed and specific concerns. • Measurement of prevailing speed by radar measurement, performed by West Coast Traffic Counters. • Twenty-four hour traffic counts in order to determine the Average Daily Traffic (ADT). • Review of accident history using the Statewide Integration Traffic Report Summary. MEMORANDUM June 11, 1991 Page 2 • Field review of the road and roadside development and characteristics. In recommending the speed limit, the following factors were considered: 1. The prevailing speed as represented by the 85th percentile and the 10 -mile pace speed. 2. Road and roadside characteristics. 3. Design and safe speed for curves on hazardous locations within the zone. 4. Parking practices and pedestrian activity. 5. Reported accident experience for a recent 12 -month period. 6. Unusual traffic conditions or unique traffic conditions not readily apparent to the driver. 7. Continuity between adjacent jurisdictions. Definitions The following terms are used in this report. Average Daily Traffic (ADT): Volume of traffic passing a section of roadway during a 24- hour period. Average Speed: The arithmetic mean of all observed speeds. Eighty Fifth (85th) Percentile Speed: The speed at or below which 85% of the drivers travel. This is normally considered to be the speed of the prudent driver. Pace: The 10 MPH range of observed vehicle speeds containing the largest number of vehicles. The higher the percentage of autos traveling within the 10 MPH pace, the safer and more efficient is the traffic flow. Million Vehicle Miles (MVM): Accident rates are generally expressed as the number of accidents occurring per million vehicle miles traveled during a given time period. Accident Data This speed survey covers only a segment of Chino Hills Parkway which is located inside the City of Diamond Bar boundaries. The total length of this segment is approximately 0.9 mile. Chino MEMORANDUM June 11, 1991 Page 3 Hills Parkway was opened approximately 10 months ago and the reported accidents used in this report, therefore, were for the 10 -month period from August, 1990 to June, 1991. Accident data was obtained from the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department in the Walnut Regional Station. The report indicated that a total of two incidents were recorded along this stretch of road, a summary of which is presented below: 1. December 11, 1990: SB Chino Hills Parkway Primary Collision Factor: Other than driver; trying to avoid an animal while traveling at higher speed to allow evasive movements; high speed. Weather Condition: Lighting: Roadway Surface: Roadway Condition: Traffic Control Devices: Type of Collision: Pedestrian: Type of Vehicle: Movement Preceding Collision: Sobriety -Drug: Speed: Clear Daylight Dry No unusual conditions No control present Curb hit No pedestrian involved Passenger car Proceeding straight Had not been drinking Not recorded 2. April 3, 1991: NB Chino Hills Parkway Primary Collision Factor: Inattention; lost control, high speed. Weather Condition: Lighting: Roadway Surface: Roadway Condition: Traffic Control Devices Type of Collision: Pedestrian: Type of Vehicle: Movement Preceding Collision: Sobriety -Drug: Speed: Clear Dark - no street lights Dry No unusual conditions No control present Overturned No pedestrian involved Passenger car Proceeding straight Had not been drinking Not recorded Accident rates in million vehicle miles (ACC/MVM) are computed using a formula which takes into account the number of accidents, usually in a one or two-year period, the length of roadway being studied, and the average daily traffic volume. The stated formula is: MEMORANDUM June 11, 1991 Page 4 ACC/MVM = Number of accidents x 106 Distance x ADT x No. of Days These calculated rates are then compared to predetermined expected rates of streets with similar characteristics. The accident rate expected for a road similar to Chino Hills Parkway is1: Expected Accident Rate Road Characteristics 1.82 ACC/MVM Mountain road Design speed more than 35 MPH Analysis and Recommendations A summary of the analysis performed is presented in the attached table. Chino Hills Parkway - South City Limit to North City Limit The recommended speed limit for this segment of Chino Hills Parkway is 45 MPH. Chino Hills Parkway, classified as a Major Highway, extends from Central Avenue in the City of Chino, runs through Chino Hills, the unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County and through the hilly areas of the City of Diamond Bar to just north of the north city limit where it connects to Scenic Ridge Drive. The speed limit on Chino Hills Parkway is 45 MPH just north of Route 71 in the City of Chino, decreasing to 40 MPH south of Pipeline, increasing to 45 MPH and 50 MPH for a short section south of Carbon Canyon Road and remaining at 45 MPH from north of Carbon Canyon Road to south of Scenic Ridge Drive. North of Scenic Ridge Drive, Chino Hills Parkway enters the City of Pomona, where it changes name to Phillips Ranch Road and serves as a residential street. Inside the city limits, Chino Hills Parkway is 84 feet wide curb -to -curb with two travel lanes in each direction and a 13 -foot wide raised median island. At -curb parking is not allowed on either side of this segment. Abutting land is entirely vacant at this time with no driveway or crossing street except the signalized intersection of Chino Avenue. A Signal Ahead sign is installed south and north of Chino Avenue. Chino Hills Parkway has a northbound downgrade slope combined with horizontal curves. The design speed for this segment of Chino Hills Parkway is 55 MPH from the south city limit to Chino Avenue and 50 MPH from Chino Avenue to Phillips Ranch Road. AXM:kk 28657 P91128A.mem 1 County of Los Angeles. Chino Hills Parkway Speed Survey Scenic Ridge to Chino Avenue to Chino Avenue Grand Avenue Direction NB SB NB SB 50th Percentile Speed 51 44 50 49 85th Percentile Speed 56 49 55 54 10 MPH Pace Speed 47-56 41-50 44-53 44-53 Percent in Pace 82 76 73 67 Range of Speed 41-59 33-57 42-59 39-58 Average Speed 51.5 44.0 50.3 48.8 ADT 4,400 3,700 4,400 3,700 Expected Accident Rate 2.14 2.14 2.14 2.14 Actual Accident Rate 0.83 0.99 0.83 0.99 Posted Speed Limit 45 45 45 45 Proposed Speed Limit 45 45 45 45 Remarks Limited access - no driveway, horizontal curves. No at -curb parking, steep grade. Design speed about 50 MPH. Recommendations Keep speed limit at 45 MPH for consistency along the street. Provide street lights along this segment of Chino Hills Parkway. Perform additional study when this segment has been in use for a longer period. TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES, INC. LOCATION CODE 02107.002 LOCATION - CHINO HILLS PKWY -N/0 CHINO AVE VOLUMES FOR - TUESDAY 3/12/91 **************«************ AM ****** r,t+**� r r++ t**+ k r* r***«* r*«*** F* PI1 TIME NB SB TOTAL TIME NB SB TOTAL 12:00 - 12:15 2 17 19 12:00 - 12:15 45 40 85 12:15 - 12:30 0 7 7 12:15 - 12:30 30 32 62 12:30 - 12:45 1 10 11 12:30 - 12:45 31 37 68 12:45 - 1:00 3 6 11 45 14 51 12:45 - 1:00 39 145 44 153 83 298 1:00 - 1:15 4 9 13 1:00 - 1:15 39 38 77 1:15 - 1:30 4 9 13 1:15 - 1:30 45 39 84 1:30 - 1:45 3 3 6 1:30 - 1:45 36 42 78 1:45 - 2:00 4 15 3 24 7 39 1:45 - 2:00 32 152 42 161 74 313 2:00 - 2:15 1 3 4 2:00 - 2:15 41 38 79 2:15 - 2:30 2 2 4 2:15 - 2:30 47 45 92 2:30 - 2:45 3 1 4 2:30 - 2:45 54 39 93 2:45 - 3:00 0 6 5 11 5 17 2:45 - 3:00 37 179 49 171 86 350 3:00 - 3:15 0 5 5 3:00 - 3:15 44 52 96 3:15 - 3:30 3 3 6 3:15 - 3:30 44 58 102 3:30 - 3:45 1 0 1 3:30 - 3:45 44 51 95 3:45 - 4:00 5 9 2 10 7 19 3:45 - 4:00 56 188 56 217 112 405 4:00 - 4:15 1 2 3 4:00 - 4:15 45 64 109 4:15 - 4:30 17 1 18 4:15 - 4:30 37 71 108 4:30 - 4:45 19 4 23 4:30 - 4:45 47 67 114 4:45 - 5:00 32 69 2 9 34 78 4:45 - 5:00 54 183 87 289 141 472 5:00 - 5:15 61 9 70 5:00 - 5:15 55 95 150 5:15 - 5:30 63 6 69 5:15 - 5:30 58 100 158 5:30 - 5:45 93 6 99 5:30 - 5:45 55 132 187 5:45 - 6:00 107 324 8 29 115 353 5:45 - 6:00 56 224 107 434 163 658 6:00 - 6:15 123 7 130 6:00 - 6:15 63 107 170 6:15 - 6:30 115 15 130 6:15 - 6:30 58 102 160 6:30 - 6:45 168 24 192 6:30 - 6:45 56 100 156 6:45 - 7:00 184 590 20 66 204 656 6:45 - 7:00 40 217 111 420 151 637 7:00 - 7:15 161 32 193 7:00 - 7:15 35 93 128 7:15 - 7:30 194 31 225 7:15 - 7:30 41 108 149 7:30 - 7:45 181 28 209 7:30 - 7:45 27 93 120 7:45 - 8:00 163 699 31 122 194 821 7:45 - 8:00 24 127 92 386 116 513 8:00 - 8:15 143 25 168 8:00 - 8:15 27 69 96 8:15 - 8:30 136 28 164 8:15 - 8:30 22 74 96 8:30 - 8:45 100 27 127 8:30 - 8:45 17 81 98 8:45 - 9:00 72 451 19 99 91 550 8:45 - 9:00 10 76 62 286 72 362 9:00 - 9:15 73 24 97 9:00 - 9:15 14 67 81 9:15 - 9:30 68 22 90 9:15 - 9:30 12 68 80 9:30 - 9:45 59 31 90 9:30 - 9:45 13 59 72 9:45 - 10:00 33 233 20 97 53 330 9:45 - 10:00 18 57 58 252 76 309 10:00 - 10:15 41 19 60 10:00 - 10:15 14 72 86 10:15 - 10:30 49 20 69 10:15 - 10:30 13 39 52 10:30 - 10:45 60 26 86 10:30 - 10:45 9 29 38 10:45 - 11:00 38 188 30 95 68 283 10:45 - 11:00 5 41 26 166 31 207 11:00 - 11:15 40 34 74 11:00 - 11:15 11 23 34 11:15 - 11:30 50 27 77 11:15 - 11:30 4 19 23 11:30 - 11:45 37 32 69 11:30 - 11:45 5 16 21 11:45 - 12:00 42 169 31 124 73 293 11:45 - 12:00 3 23 13 71 16 94 TOTALS 2,759 731 3,490 1,612 3,006 4,618 ADT'S 4,371 3,737 8,108 TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES, INC. LOCATION CODE 02107.002 LOCATION - CHINO HILLS PKWY -N/0 CHINO AVE AVERAGED VOLUMES FOR - TUESDAY 3/12/91 TO WEDNESDAY 3/13/91 PM TIME NB SB TOTAL TIME NB SB TOTAL 12:00 - 12:15 2 17 19 12:00 - 12:15 45 40 85 12:15 - 12:30 D 7 7 12:15 - 12:30 30 32 62 12:30 - 12:45 1 10 11 12:30 - 12:45 31 37 68 12:45 - 1:00 3 6 11 45 14 51 12:45 - 1:00 39 145 44 153 83 298 1:00 - 1:15 4 9 13 1:00 - 1:15 39 38 77 1:15 - 1:30 4 9 13 1:15 - 1:30 45 39 84 1:30 - 1:45 3 3 6 1:30 - 1:45 36 42 78 1:45 - 2:00 4 15 3 24 7 39 1:45 - 2:00 32 152 42 161 74 313 2:00 - 2:15 1 3 4 2:00 - 2:15 41 38 79 2:15 - 2:30 2 2 4 2:15 - 2:30 47 45 92 2:30 - 2:45 3 1 4 2:30 - 2:45 54 39 93 2:45 - 3:00 0 6 5 11 5 17 2:45 - 3:00 37 179 49 171 86 350 3:00 - 3:15 O 5 5 3:00 - 3:15 44 52 96 3:15 - 3:30 3 3 6 3:15 - 3:30 44 58 102 3:30 - 3:45 1 0 1 3:30 - 3:45 44 51 95 3:45 - 4:00 5 9 2 10 7 19 3:45 - 4:00 56 188 56 217 112 405 4:00 - 4:15 1 2 3 4:00 - 4:15 45 64 109 4:15 - 4:30 17 1 18 4:15 - 4:30 37 71 108 4:30 - 4:45 19 4 23 4:30 - 4:45 47 67 114 4:45 - 5:00 32 69 2 9 34 78 4:45 - 5:00 54 183 87 289 141 472 5:00 - 5:15 61 9 70 5:00 - 5:15 55 95 150 5:15 - 5:30 63 6 69 5:15 - 5:30 58 100 158 5:30 - 5:45 93 6 99 5:30 - 5:45 55 132 187 5:45 - 6:00 107 324 8 29 115 353 5:45 - 6:00 56 224 107 434 163 658 6:00 - 6:15 123 7 130 6:00 - 6:15 63 107 170 6:15 - 6:30 115 15 130 6:15 - 6:30 58 102 160 6:30 - 6:45 168 24 192 6:30 - 6:45 56 100 156 6:45 - 7:00 184 590 20 66 204 656 6:45 - 7:00 40 217 111 420 151 637 7:00 - 7:15 161 32 193 7:00 - 7:15 35 93 128 7:15 - 7:30 194 31 225 7:15 - 7:30 41 108 149 7:30 - 7:45 181 28 209 7:30 - 7:45 27 93 120 7:45 - 8:00 163 699 31 122 194 821 7:45 - 8:00 24 127 92 386 116 513 8:00 - 8:15 143 25 168 8:00 - 8:15 27 69 96 8:15 - 8:30 136 28 164 8:15 - 8:30 22 74 96 8:30 - 8:45 100 27 127 8:30 - 8:45 17 81 98 8:45 - 9:00 72 451 19 99 91 550 8:45 - 9:00 10 76 62 286 72 362 9:00 - 9:15 73 24 97 9:00 - 9:15 14 67 81 9:15 - 9:30 68 22 90 9:15 - 9:30 12 68 80 9:30 - 9:45 59 31 90 9:30 - 9:45 13 59 72 9:45 - 10:00 33 233 20 97 53 330 9:45 - 10:00 18 57 58 252 76 309 10:00 - 10:15 41 19 60 10:00 - 10:15 14 72 86 10:15 - 10:30 49 20 69 10:15 - 10:30 13 39 52 10:30 - 10:45 60 26 86 10:30 - 10:45 9 29 38 10:45 - 11:00 38 188 30 95 68 283 10:45 - 11:00 5 41 26 166 31 207 11:00 - 11:15 40 34 74 11:00 - 11:15 11 Z3 34 11:15 - 11:30 50 27 77 11:15 - 11:30 4 19 23 11:30 - 11:45 37 32 69 11:30 - 11:45 5 16 21 11:45 - 12.00 42 169 31 124 73 293 11:45 - 12:00 3 23 13 71 16 94 TOTALS 2,759 731 3,490 1,612 3,006 4,618 ADT'S 4.371 7 717 8.108 WEST COAST TRAFFIC COUNTERS STREET................Chino Hills Parkway LIMITS ................ Scenic Ridge to Chino Ave. DIRECTION(S).......... Northbound 50TH PERCENTILE SPEED.................51 DATE..................5-14-91 85TH PERCENTILE SPEED ................. 56 TIME ..................12:45-2:00 10 MPH PACE SPEED .......... 47 through 56 POSTED SPEED LIMIT .... 45 PERCENT IN PACE SPEED .............. 82.0 PERCENT OVER PACE SPEED.............10.0 PERCENT UNDER PACE SPEED............ 8.0 CUM. RANGE OF SPEEDS.................41 to 59 SPEED NO. PCT. PCT. VEHICLES OBSERVED ................... 100 AVERAGE SPEED ....................... 51.5 41 1 1.0 1.0 42 0 0.0 1.0 +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 43 1 1.0 2.0 100 *******100 44 1 1.0 3.0 - ** - 45 3 3.0 6.0 90 * 90 46 2 2.0 8.0 C - - 47 9 9.0 17.0 U 80 ** 80 48 4 4.0 21.0 M - - 49 8 8.0 29.0 70 * 70 50 13 13.0 42.0 P - - 51 10 10.0 52.0 E 60 * 60 52 8 8.0 60.0 R - - 53 8 8.0 68.0 C 50 * 50 54 10 10.0 78.0 E - - 55 4 4.0 82.0 N 40 * 40 56 8 8.0 90.0 T - - 57 6 6.0 96.0 S 30 * 30 58 1 1.0 97.0 - - 59 3 3.0 100.0 20 * 20 10 * 10 p***************************** p --------------------------------------------------- 15 25 35 45 55 65 --------------------------------------------------- 20 20 P 15 15 E - - R - * - C - * - E - * - N 10 ** * 10 T- S - 5 * ****** ** 5 --------------------------------------------------- 15 25 35 45 55 65 WEST COAST TRAFFIC COUNTERS STREET ................Chino Hills Parkway LIMITS ................ Chino Ave. to Grand Ave. DIRECTION(S) .......... Northbound 50TH PERCENTILE SPEED.................50 DATE..................5-16-91 85TH PERCENTILE SPEED ................. 55 TIME ..................12:45-2:45 10 MPH PACE SPEED .......... 44 through 53 POSTED SPEED LIMIT .... 45 PERCENT IN PACE SPEED .............. 73.0 PERCENT OVER PACE SPEED.............24.0 PERCENT UNDER PACE SPEED............ 3.0 CUM. RANGE OF SPEEDS.................42 to 59 SPEED NO. PCT. PCT. VEHICLES OBSERVED ................... 100 AVERAGE SPEED ....................... 50.3 42 1 1.0 1.0 43 2 2.0 3.0 +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 44 4 4.0 7.0 100 *********JOC 45 6 6.0 13.0 - - 46 7 7.0 20.0 90 * 9C 47 7 7.0 27.0 C - * - 48 10 10.0 37.0 U 80 * 80 49 6 6.0 43.0 M - * - 50 12 12.0 55.0 70 * 70 51 7 7.0 62.0 P - - 52 8 8.0 70.0 E 60 * 60 53 6 6.0 76.0 R - * - 54 4 4.0 80.0 C 50 50 55 6 6.0 86.0 E - * - 56 5 5.0 91.0 N 40 40 57 7 7.0 98.0 T - * - 58 0 0.0 98.0 S 30 30 59 2 2.0 100.0 - * - 20 * 20 10 10 p**************************** p + ----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----F----+ 15 25 35 45 55 65 --------------------------------------------------- 20 20 P 15 15 E - - R - - C E N 10 * * 10 T S 5 ********* *** 5 --------------------------------------------------- 15 25 35 45 55 65 WEST COAST TRAFFIC COUNTERS STREET ................Chino Hills Parkway LIMITS ................ Chino Ave. to Grand Ave. DIRECTION(S) .......... Southbound 50TH PERCENTILE SPEED.................49 DATE..................5-15-91 85TH PERCENTILE SPEED ................. 54 TIME ..................9:30-10:45 10 MPH PACE SPEED .......... 44 through 53 POSTED SPEED LIMIT .... 45 PERCENT IN PACE SPEED .............. 67.0 PERCENT OVER PACE SPEED.............17.0 PERCENT UNDER PACE SPEED ............ 16.0 CUM. RANGE OF SPEEDS.................39 to 58 SPEED NO. PCT. PCT. VEHICLES OBSERVED ................... 100 AVERAGE SPEED .......................48.8 39 3 3.0 3.0 40 3 3.0 6.0 +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 41 5 5.0 11.0 100 ********100 42 2 2.0 13.0 - * - 43 3 3.0 16.0 90 ** 90 44 7 7.0 23.0 C - ** - 45 5 5.0 28.0 U 80 80 46 7 7.0 35.0 M - * - 47 3 3.0 38.0 70 * 70 48 6 6.0 44.0 P - * - 49 9 9.0 53.0 E 60 60 50 10 10.0 63.0 R - * - 51 6 6.0 69.0 C 50 50 52 6 6.0 75.0 E - * - 53 8 8.0 83.0 N 40 * 40 54 4 4.0 87.0 T - * - 55 3 3.0 90.0 S 30 * 30 56 2 2.0 92.0 - * - 57 3 3.0 95.0 20 20 58 5 5.0 100.0 - ** - 10 * 10 ************************ 0 ---------------------------------------------------- 15 25 35 45 55 65 ---------------------------------------------------- 20 20 P 15 15 E - - R - - C - - E - - N 10 * 10 T- S 5 * *** ****** * 5 --------------------------------------------------- 15 25 35 45 55 65 WEST COAST TRAFFIC COUNTERS STREET ................Chino Hills Parkway LIMITS ................ Scenic Ridge to Chino Ave- ve.DIRECTION(S)..........Southbound DIRECTION(S) .......... Southbound 50TH PERCENTILE SPEED.................44 DATE..................5-14-91 85TH PERCENTILE SPEED ................. 49 TIME..................2:00-3:00 10 MPH PACE SPEED .......... 41 through 50 POSTED SPEED LIMIT .... 45 PERCENT IN PACE SPEED .............. 76.0 PERCENT OVER PACE SPEED ............. 1.0 PERCENT UNDER PACE SPEED ............ 23.0 CUM. RANGE OF SPEEDS.................33 to 57 SPEED NO. PCT. PCT. VEHICLES OBSERVED ................... 100 AVERAGE SPEED ....................... 44.0 33 1 1.0 1.0 34 1 1.0 2.0 +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 35 1 1.0 3.0 100 ****************100 36 3 3.0 6.0 - * - 37 3 3.0 9.0 90 90 38 4 4.0 13.0 C - * - 39 5 5.0 18.0 U 80 80 40 5 5.0 23.0 M - * - 41 5 5.0 28.0 70 * 70 42 6 6.0 34.0 P - - 43 7 7.0 41.0 E 60 * 60 44 9 9.0 50.0 R - - 45 10 10.0 60.0 C 50 * 50 46 3 8.0 68.0 E - - 47 7 7.0 75.0 N 40 * 40 48 9 9.0 84.0 T - * - 49 9 9.0 93.0 S 30 * 30 50 6 6.0 99.0 - * - 51 0 0.0 99.0 20 * 20 52 0 0.0 99.0 - * - 53 0 0..0 99.0 10 * 10 54 0 0.0 99.0 - ** _ 55 0 0.0 99.0 0******************** 0 56 0 0.0 99.0 +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 57 1 1.0 100.0 15 25 35 45 55 65 --------------------------------------------------- 20 20 P 15 15 E - R C E N 10 * 10 T S 5 ************ 5 --------------------------------------------------- 15 25 35 45 55 65 <v � S �i 1 1 VEHICLE SPEED SURVEY SHEET FOR CITY AND COUNTY THROUGH HIGHWAYS, ARTERIALS, AND COLLECTOR ROADS. Jurisdiction 1v � / 6 Date )S �6 q 1 Location C�,;n� �l,ils ��wy �dS5/0 L �l;no tWeather 00(6ig I Recorder Eli k1 ✓l Begin Time 1r); End Time a yJ MPH 65 60 55 25 NUMBER OF VEHICLES TOTAL NUMBER VEHICLES PERCENT CUMULATIVE OF TOTAL I PERCENTAGE Signed i� �l. Date �� `I l Title I ec i to z O H 0 z 0 U J Q D Q z VEHICLE SPEED SURVEY SHEET FOR CITY AND COUNTY THROUGH ARTERIALS,• • • • • Jurisdiction S /R Date ■ 115 4ve, Weather 6ormc, Recorder 'To nvov� Begin Time End Time ®NUMBER •5 10 is 20 25' MINE IN SEEM IN SEEM IN SEEM 01 SEEM IN RIMIN E7►.11.117■■■■ ■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■N'��i� ■►.1■00"EM■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■tNN so EIG'/E/:tG"X17■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■t1•N� � MEIN IN ►�1►X15■■■■■■■■■■■■■1■■■■■■■■■■■■■© MOZE IN ►:/GIG'1Ei1���■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■i' MMUM IM 40 SOME IN ROME IN MEMO SEEM INSEEM IN SEEM IN� IN SEEM 01 ■■■■SEEM IN �■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�� 04 iiiiiii�iiiiiiiiiiiii■iiCiiSEEM IN SOME 01 ■■■■■■■p■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■NME IN NINE 01 ■■■■NSEEM IN SEEM 01 ■■N■�■■■N ■ N■■■�■■■■■�� ■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■ ■■■SEEM IN IMEM IN 0 _(n x H z W 0 U Q I Signed ;' / ^' ✓ ` Date �- } - Title E �4 �' CID z 0 0 z 0 C.) J Q z D VEHICLE SPEED SURVEY SHEET FOR CITY AND COUNTY THROUGH HIGHWAYS, ARTERIALS, AND COLLECTOR ROADS. Jurisdiction J I Date ✓ Location C LIO 0,15 4-v y (Soo L/ S�Ev�C �°�(yelNeather rI Recorder w L�lh V1 Begin Time �� End Time 3 D Title Cn z O F- A z O U J Q Q z VEHICLE SPEED SURVEY SHEET FOR CITY AND COUNTY THROUGH HIGHWAYS, ARTERIALS, AND COLLECTOR ROADS. Jurisdiction NIB Date LocationL k; oo i�; `� S Q� Y I �7c S/,? 5 (fin c t�XPlNeather i� o (rn i Recorder s n yh Begin Time j q-5 End Time Title cn Z O F- n Z 0 U J Q D N Q O Z CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT TO: Robert L. Van Nort MEETING DATE: September 17, 1991 FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director TITLE: Extension of Interim Hillside Management Ordinace No. 14-A (1990) AGENDA NO. :. `-� REPORT DATE: September 11, 1991 SUMMARY: Ordinance No. 14-A (1990) pertains to cetain provisions of Title 22 of the Los Angeles County Code regarding hillside grading and development standards for properties with slopes in excess of 10%. The Interim Ordinance is scheduled to expire on October 16, 1991 unless extended by the Council. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Council approve an extension of the Interim Hillside Management Ordinance. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Resolution(s) X Ordinances(s) _ Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: _ Public Hearing Notification _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office) Other 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed X Yes _ No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? 4/5 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? X Yes _ No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes X No Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes X No Report discussed with the following affected departments: RE.VXWE :BY:/ Robert L. Van Nort errence L. Belanger es DeStefano City Manager Assistant City Manager Community Dev lopment Director c; l W P511AGENDA\hillext. cov A. Recitals. ORDINANCE NO. 14-B (1990) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR EXTENDING THE TERM OF AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE NO. 14 (1990) PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858 AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. (i) On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State of California and, on that date, the City Council adopted, by reference, the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City, including Title 22 thereof pertaining to Planning and Zoning Regulations for the City of Diamond Bar. (Hereinafter said Title 22 shall be referred to as "the Zoning Ordinance.") (ii) On October 16, 1990, pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code Section 65858 (a), this City Council adopted its Ordinance No. 14 (1990) adopting interim zoning regulations pertaining to development involving hillside areas which exceed a slope of ten percent (10%) within the City. (iii) Pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code Section 65858 (d) this City Council issued its written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the conditions which led to the adoption of Ordinance No. 14 (1990) and Ordinance No. 14-A (1990) at least ten (10) days prior to the expiration of Ordinance No. 14 (1990) and Ordinance No. 14-A (1990) . (iv) A duly noticed public hearing as required by California Government Code Section 65858 (a) was conducted and concluded prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 14-A (1990) and this Ordinance. (v) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this ordinance have occurred. B. Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does ordain as follows: Section 1. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all the facts wet forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct. Section 2. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the adoption of this Ordinance is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder pursuant to Section 15305 of Division 6 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. Section 3. The City Council finds and determines that the development of proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance are continuing; however, such development of amendments to the Zoning Ordinance cannot be completed prior to the expiration of Ordinance No. 14 (1990) and Ordinance No. 14-A (1990). Section 4. The City Council hereby specifically finds that there are presently pending applications for development of hillside areas which exceed a slope of ten percent (10%) which would contradict the ultimate goals and objectives of the General Plan and would not be subject to adequate local review under the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance unless Ordinance NO. 14 (1990) is extended and, further, that the approval of any such hillside developments under the current provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would result in an immediate threat to the public health, safety or welfare of persons and property within the City of Diamond Bar. Section 5. Ordinance No. 14 (1990) of the City of Diamond Bar, as heretofore enacted under the authority of California Government Code section 65858 (a), hereby is extended and shall be of no further force and effect as of the 16th day of October, 1992. Section 6. This Ordinance hereby is declared to be an urgency measure pursuant to the terms of California Government Code Sections 65858 (a) and 36937 (b), and this Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption. Section 7. 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 No. 89-6. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 17th day of September, 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 17th day of September, 1991, and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 17th day of September, 1991, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST Lynda Burgess, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar MEETING DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. September 17, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City Manager Extension of Interim Hillside Management Ordinance No. 14 A (1990) ISSUE STATEMENT: Ordinance No. 14-A (1990) pertains to certain provisions of Title 22 of the Los Angeles Code regarding hillside grading and development standards for properties with slopes in excess of 10%. The Interim Ordinance is scheduled to expire on October 16, 1991, unless extended by the Council. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Council approve an extension of the Interim Hillside Management Ordinance. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: N/A BACKGROUND: On October 16, 1990, the City Council considered and approved an Interim Hillside Management Ordinance. The Ordinance was extended, with minor amendments, on November 13, 1990. The Ordinance will expire on October 16, 1991, unless extended. California Government Code Section 65858 permits the extension of the interim ordinance for an additional one year time period. When adopted in October 1990, the Ordinance was intended to serve as a stopgap measure to provide the City with an opportunity to review the future of our hillsides. Several development projects were in process without the benefit of clear policy guidance from which to evaluate the proposals. The Ordinance was prepared with components of other communities' hillside development regulations. Several projects remain in various stages of the formal review process. The first, and only, project to utilize hillside grading techniques was approved by the Planning Commission and City Council earlier this year (TTM 47722 - Frank Piermarini). Mr. Piermarini is currently grading his 19 acre property for development of 13 custom homes. In October of 1990, six major projects were under review proposing a total of approximately 250 homes to be placed upon 228 hillside acres. Today, the interest in developing our hillsides has grown to reflect nine active projects with a current total of approximately 380 homes proposed on 360 acres. We are also "aware" of an additional 200 hillside acres under serious consideration for residential development. The City is presently developing a General Plan. The Plan, in its draft form, contains several policy statements regarding the development of the hillsides. The current Zoning Ordinance does not contain adequate policies or standards for application by the Staff, Commission or Council. No changes are recommended for the Interim Ordinance until the General Plan and its hillside policies are adopted. Attached for reference purposes are previously prepared agenda reports on the Interim Ordinance. The Interim Hillside Management Ordinance has been retyped (no changes to policies, guidelines, standards or graphics) and is also attached for review. DISCUSSION: PREPARED BY: i —z jWnes De5tef tno, Community Development Director Attachments: Agenda report dated 10-16-90 Agenda report dated 11-13-90 Ordinance 14-B (1990) Interim Hillside Management Ordinance c: \ WP51 \AGENDA\hillside.917 REPORT ON ACTIONS TAKEN FOLLOWING ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 14-A (1990) Pursuant to the requirements of California Government Code Section 65858(d), and at the express direction of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, the following constitutes a written report of the City Council concerning those measures taken to alleviate the conditions which led to the adoption of Ordinance No. 14-A(1990) BACKGROUND 1. On November 13, 1990, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No. 14-A (1990) entitled "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, Adopting an Interim Zoning Ordinance Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858(b) and Making Findings in Support Thereof." Said Ordinance No. 14-A (1990) adopted interim zoning regulations, extending Ordinance No. 14 (1990) , effective for no longer than the 16th day of October, 1991. Pursuant to the requirements of said Section 65858, Ordinance No. 14-A (1990) was adopted by the city Council upon its finding that approvals of such development applications within the City would result in an immediate threat to public health, safety or welfare. 2. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858(b), ten (10) days prior to the expiration of any interim ordinance, or any extension thereof adopted pursuant to the terms of said section, the City Council shall issue a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the condition which led to the adoption of such interim zoning ordinance. 3. On September 17, 1991, at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, the City Council was presented with an oral staff report concerning the measures taken to alleviate the conditions which prompted the adoption of said Ordinance No. 14A (1990). At said meeting and following said staff report, the City Council authorized and directed staff to prepare a written report concerning the actions taken following, and relative to, the adoption of Ordinance No. 14-A (1990) ACTIONS TAKEN Following the adoption of Ordinance No. 14-A (1990), the following actions have been taken relative to the interim zoning regulations: 1. At the express request and direction of the City Council, the City Staff has initiated efforts to formulate specific amendments to the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The goal of such amendments is to create a unified and balanced plan of development pertaining to hillside development exceeding 10% slope, for the City of Diamond Bar which will eventually result in the establishment of permanent and comprehensive hillside development policies for the City. 2. The City Council directed that such General Plan and Zoning Ordinance studies emphasize the formulation of hillside development provisions thereof. The preparation thereof will provide the necessary guidelines for long-term development in the City. Moreover, the contemplated amendments to the Zoning Ordinance will permit the comprehensive review, together with public input, of applications of hillside development. With the adoption of the amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, the City Council would consider the earlier repeal of Ordinance No. 14-A (1990). Dated: September 18, 1991 James DeStefa o Community Dev lopment Director AGENDA NO. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT DATE: October 12, 1990 MEETING DATE: October 16 1990 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager FROM: Irwin M. Kaplan, Interim City Planner *lm" SUBJECT: Interim Control Ordinance Proposal: Hillside Development INTRODUCTION: In response to Council direction given at the Strategic Planning Session on September 27, an ordinance has been prepared, the ob- ject of which was to come up with an interim ordinance as quickly as possible which: a. Has reasonably clear standards and guidelines with which to evaluate projects. b. Errs on the side of conservatism, until a permanent ordi- nance can be adopted. C. Is relatively easy to administer. To accomplish these objectives, the ordinance relies heavily upon graphics to illustrate what is intended. The ordinance was re- viewed by the Commission at its October 8 meeting and was for- warded to Council for its consideration. BACKGROUND: a. The County code (which was adopted by the City) requires a Conditional Use Permit on hillside sites which contain slopes in excess of 25%. The code also contains a general statement of purpose, calling for protection and enhancement of "the natural topography, resources and amenities of the hillside management areas, while allowing for limited controlled development therein. Although the existing ordinance provides wide latitude for deci- sion making (including grounds for reducing project densities, as well as for denial of a project), a project would not be subject to Hillside Regulations unless it contained slopes in excess of 25%. As such, the slope threshold of 25% may be too high for the City of Diamond Bar and the "Statement of Purpose" too general to provide adequate guidance for decision making. Council Agenda Item October 16, 1990 Page Two b. The hillside development controls suggested by the City's General Plan consultant in the preliminary draft of the develop- ment code would establish a slope of -15o as the threshold for projects subject to hillside regulation. As currently proposed, it contains specific standards for development with respect to building heights (so as to minimize the intrusion of man-made development, view obstruction and ridgeline development), wall heights (so as to maintain the natural character of landforms) and street standards (for safety and aesthetics). It also con- tains generalized guidelines for drainage and protection of ani- mal and plantlife. The consultant's proposal is clearly an improvement over the existing code, but does probably would not suffice as an Interim Ordinance, as it does not contain graphics to illustrate the intent of the ordinance nor does it propose specific stan- dards or guidelines for all aspects of the code. It also doesn't define the range of the Commission's discretionary authority to modify or reject a project. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES: The following lists a series of objectives which summar- izes the problems the proposed ordinance attempts to solve. a. Public Health and Safety i) Long term - (e.g. fire safety, slope stability, emergency services, etc.) ii) During construction (e.g. methods of excavation, storage and disposal of excavated materials, etc.) b. The natural environment including unique wildlife habitats, native vegetation, major and minor natural drainage flows, natural topography, etc. C. Socio -cultural resources, including resources of sig- nificant historical, archeological or cultural impor- tance to the public, which may have unique scientific or educational value. d. Recreational, aesthetic and scenic resources, includ- ing views of and from slope areas, vistas from major public view corridors and public lands, site plan- ning, grading and landscaping consistent with the character of the City's predominant land forms, etc. Council Agenda Item October 16, 1990 Page Three PROGRAM COMPONENTS OF PROPOSED INTERIM ORDINANCE The attached draft ordinance is a slightly modified version of the proposal which was distributed to the Planning Commission. The highlights are as follows: a. Any site with slopes in excess of 10% would be subject to regulation by this ordinance, b. The maximum allowable density of a Hillside Project is a function of the steepness of the slope and such environ- mental considerations as the existing vegetation, native habitats, archeology, etc. Depending upon the slope, the maximum density from two units per acre for slopes of 10-15%, per ten acres for slopes in excess of 35%. There is also a provision to retain a certain of a site in its natural form, depending upon ness of the slope. The following is offered reference: i. Grand Avenue, between Summit Ridge and Longview has a grade of 8.5%. ii. Gateway Center Drive, between Golden springs and the Days Hotel has a grade of 14%. may vary to one unit percentage the steep - as a point of iii. Sunset Bluff on the south side of Amar, west of Grand Avenue, has a 15% grade for a distance of approximately 1,000 feet. iv. The steepest driveways in "The Country" are at a grade of 20%. C. Since the City does not yet have a General Plan in place which identifies prominent vistas and establishes criteria to evaluate hillside development, judgments would be made on a project -by -project basis, utilizing environmental data prepared for each project. For this reason, the in- terim ordinance contains fairly specific standards and guidelines, so that there is a consistent procedure to evaluate each project. In addition, the draft ordinance relies heavily upon guidelines and graphics to illustrate its intent. Council Agenda Item October 16, 1990 Page Four d. The interim ordinance places substantial emphasis on re- taining the appearance of natural hillsides, even though they are to be developed. This would be accomplished by paying careful attention to the character of architecture proposed for hillsides and prominent ridgelines which are visible from thoroughfares and public spaces, the type and placement of landscaping, restrictions on the height and placement of retaining walls, and fences, the size and placement of houses, the configuration of roads and drain- age systems and the techniques and amounts of grading. e. The Interim ordinance also addresses the issue of mainte- nance of slopes. Through a combination of such factors as site design, types of vegetation, requirements for ir- rigation and assignment of maintenance responsibility. This may be expanded as part of a permanent ordinance. STATUS OF CURRENT PROJECTS At the present time, six (6) project applications are in process which are likely to fall under the requirements of the interim ordinance as proposed. These applications request appro- val of 252 units on 228 acres. One of these projects was recent- ly denied by the Planning commission. The six developments will require the movement of 2.456 million cubic yards of earth. \pj s Attachment: Interim Ordinance AGENDA NO. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT DATE: November 9, 1990 MEETING DATE: November 13, 1990 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: City Manager FROM: resin M. Kaplan, Interim City Planner via James DeStefano, Director of Planning SUBJECT: Extension of Interim Hillside Control Ordinance BACKGROUND: A: When adopted on October 16, the Interim Hillside Control Ordinance was in- tended as a stopgap measure to provide the City with the opportunity to reconsider the future of the hillsides. In general, there appeared to be agreement on several key issues, they are: 1. Development should continue to be permitted on hillsides. 2. The existing regulations do not provide clear policy guidance, ei- ther to the developer or to the City, with which to evaluate devel- opment proposals. 3. The primary issue is the form development takes, not the density. 4. Development should respect the natural terrain, so that grading is minimized and reminiscent of landforms found in nature; and ridge - lines are protected and development is less obtrusive, blending into the hillside. B: The interim ordinance was drawn from the experience of other hillside com- munities and, as such, was not tailored to the specific characteristics of the City of Diamond Bar. Several problems have already become apparent. These include: 1. A potential development site may not be self-sufficient, in that Narrative continued on next page. FISCAL IMPACT: Amount Requested $ Budgeted Amount $ In Account Number Deficit: $ Revenue Source: REVIEWED BY: Robert L. Van Nort Andrew V. Arczynski Terrence L. Belang City Manager City Attorney Assistant City Manger 1 AGENDA ITEM Page Two November 13, 1990 because of its size or configuration, can not always be designed to achieve the hillside program objectives. 2. The slope density formula which is intended to regulate density based upon the steepness of the slope will not accomplish its in- tended purpose, unless further modifications are made to the City's existing zone standards. C: There are several projects in various stages of the formal review process, including a project under appeal, several with draft EIRs and at least one which is expected to be submitted shortly. Most of these projects have momentum which began prior to incorporation, so it is entirely understand- able that the applicants are reluctant to accept further delays and chang- es in the groundrules at this late date. As such, there is little sympa- thy in the development community for efforts by the City to hold back the clock in order to change the rules so that development in Diamond Bar can be distinguished from development elsewhere in the County. D. The dilemma is exacerbated by the fact that approval of those projects currently in the pipeline will determine the future of some major hill- sides in Diamond Bar, including the 180 acres of Tonner Canyon located in Diamond Bar. E. What, then, are the City's choices? Since many of the individually owned parcels in the hillsides are relatively small for planning purposes, it will be very difficult to come up with creative solutions for the design of hillside tracts on a parcel -by -parcel basis. Conversely, the opportu- nities to capture the spirit of the hillside ordinance increase as the size of the site increases. Where a proposed tract is hemmed in by existing development ( such as is the case with TT #47722, the Piermarini Tract, or TT #45290, the Arciero/ Marlborough Tract on Fernhollow), the planning opportunities will be less than where a potential development site is surrounded by undeveloped land, such as is the case in Tonner Canyon. In a "new town" situation, where a master plan would be prepared in anticipation of future development, ad- joining vacant parcels under separate ownerships could be planned as a single unit with a basic road network and open space plan. This plan could be adopted as City policy and the road network and open space plan could be implemented on a piecemeal basis by the individual developers as development occurred, or by the City in anticipation of development. F. Since the City of Diamond Bar came into being after these development ac- tivities were initiated, the City has not had the opportunity to plan ahead and finds itself in the difficult position of having to respond, rather than to plan. In the best of all worlds, therefore, the City would have an overall Hill- side Development Program which would create the opportunity to: 1. Plan for the largest possible area. 2. Design a road network, utilities plan and open space program which crosses individual property lines. Agenda Item Page Three November 13, 1990 3. Require individual parcels to be developed in accordance with the area -wide plan. 4. Require equitable financial participation in the plan by each of the prospective developers. 5. Allow individual parcels to be developed without being dependent upon concurrent development of all parcels in the area. G. While most of these components can be encompassed in a specific plan for hillside development areas and an appropriate implementation mechanism (such as an assessment district), these components could not be in place in less than six months and would probably take longer. While such a pro- gram may be desirable and could be done within the two year time limit of the interim ordinance, it does not address the problem of projects cur- rently in the pipeline. H. Such a program also does not address the problem of parcels hemmed in by development which are too small for a meaningful specific plan. I. Based upon the above, here are four issues to be considered in conjunction with the extension of the Interim Hillside Control Ordinance. They are: 1. Modification of the Ordinance to deal with the slope density issue. 2. Modification of the Ordinance to recognize the special curcumstances of relatively small, isolated parcels. 3. Modifications to the Ordinance to encourage cooperation among prop- erty owners of adjoiningvacant, developable parcels. 4. Establishing a framework for a permanent ordinance which would con- sist of a Master Plan process to assure the coordinanted planning of developable hillsides and an implementation program to make it hap- pen. Recommendations to accomplish this will be forthcoming as part of the General Plan and related circulation studies. J. It is recommended that the interim ordinance adopted by Council on October 16, 1990, be amended as follows: (There may also be a need for other amendments before the permanent ordinance is adopted, based upon experi- ence gained in the meantime). 1. Modification of the Ordinance to deal with the slope density issue. Assuming that the intent of the ordinance (as contained in the de- velopment standards of the Ordinance and the accompanying drawings) will be rigorously maintained, then the slope density formula which regulates density by degree of slope, is not essential. (Slope den- sity provides no assurance of good site design. It simply would reduce densities, creating more flexibility in the design of the site.) Accordingly, it is suggested that the slope density formula be de- leted. (Proposed deletions are shown as strikeouts in Ordinance). Once the slope density formula is deleted, it should be pointed out that the density standards of the City's Zoning Ordinance would dic- tate the density limits in hillside areas. These vary in hillside Agenda Item Page Four November 13, 1990 areas from approximately 5 units per acre to one unit per two acres. Without slope density requirements, therefore, the existing density limits would prevail, provided the development otherwise met the criteria of the Hillside Ordinance. With the deletion of the slope density formula, specific reference should be made to the provisions of the City's existing code which establishes a range of densities within which the City has the dis- cretionary authority to make judgments as to the appropriate number of lots for a particular site. This provision of code is necessary to assure that the City has at least the same level of protection under the Interim Code as it does under the existing regulations. To accomplish this, the following language has been inserted into the Interim Ordinance: (Proposed additions are shown in Underline form). "This ordinance shall be administered in conjunction with the provisions of Chapter 22.56 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code. Where a conflict or inconsistency exists, the more restrictive regu- lation shall apply." (The Section which establishes the percentage of the site to remain in its natural state based on slope, is retained. Actual experience with the Ordinance over the next few months would be useful in de- ciding whether or not this provision should be included in a perma- nent ordinance.) 2. Modifications to the Ordinance for Relatively Small, Isolated Par- cels. It is suggested that the following provision be added to the Interim Ordinance. "Where the Planning Commission determines that the literal enforce- ment of the provisions of this Ordinance for parcels which may be too small and of a configuration which would create a hardship, the Commission may vary from the standards contained herein; provided that a variation from the strict application of the Code be accompa- nied by a reduction in the maximum permitted density to the extent deemed necessary to maintain the intent of the Ordinance. Variations may include modifications of the setback requirements to achieve clustering of development on the parcel, in order to main- tain the grading, drainage, siting and circulation objectives of the Ordinance; except that residential structures shall be sited and de- signed in a manner which will, in the judgment of the Planning Di- rector, maintain a vertical and horizontal distance from other resi- dential structures which will provide a reasonable degree of priva- cy, light and air between residential structures." 3. Modifications to the Ordinance to Encourage Cooperation. The following language is suggested: "where development is proposed for a parcel which adjoins one or more vacant, developable parcels, Agenda Item Page Five November 13, 1990 cooperation of the respective propertyowners is encouraged in the planning of the road network, utilities plan and open space program for the area as a whole. The City shall consider variations from the strict application of the provisions of this ordinance as may be needed to achieve cooperation among all contiguous propertyowners of vacant, developable properties, to the extent that such variation may better achieve the objectives of this Ordinance". EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF DIAMOND BAR INTERIM HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE Section 1. Statement of Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is: A. To preserve and protect the views to and from hillside areas in order to maintain the identity, image and environmental quality of the City of Diamond Bar; B. To maintain an environmental equilibrium consistent with the native vegetation, animal life, geology, slopes, and drainage patterns; C. To facilitate hillside preservation through appropriate development standards and guidelines of hillside areas. The guidelines are not intended to be strict standards, but rather to provide direction and encourage development which is sensitive to the unique characteristics common to hillside properties, which include, but are not limited to slopes, land form, vegetation and scenic quality. Innovation in design is encouraged as long as the end result is one which respects the hillside and is consistent with the purposes expressed in this section and in the goals and objectives of the General Plan; D. To ensure that development in the hillside areas shall be concentrated in those areas with the least environmental impact and shall be designed to fit the existing land form; E. To preserve significant features of the natural topography, including swales, canyons, knolls, ridgelines, and rock outcrops. Development may necessarily affect natural features by, for example, roads crossing ridgelines. Therefore, a major design criterion shall be the minimization of such impacts; F. To provide a safe means of ingress and egress for vehicular and pedestrian traffic to and within hillside areas, with minimum disturbance to the natural terrain; G. To correlate intensity of development with the steepness of terrain in order to minimize grading, removal of vegetation, land instability and fire hazards; H. To provide in hillsides, alternative approaches to conventional flat land development practices by achieving land use patterns and intensities that are consistent with the natural characteristics of hill areas such as slopes, land form, vegetation and scenic quality; and I. To encourage the planning, design and development of home sites that provide maximum safety with respect to fire hazards, exposure to geological and geotechnic hazards, drainage, erosion and siltation, and materials of construction; provide the best use of natural terrain; and to prohibit development what will create or increase fire, flood, slide, or other safety hazards to public health, welfare, and safety. 1 Section 2. Hillside Manactement District. All property which contains grades in excess of 10% shall comply with the following: A. Definitions: The following definitions shall apply to this Section: CONTOUR: A line drawn on a plan which connects all points of equal elevation. CONTOUR GRADING: A grading technique designed to result in earth forms which resemble natural terrain characteristics. Horizontal and vertical curve variations are often used for slope banks. Contour grading does not necessarily minimize the amount of cut and fill occurring. CUT: The mechanical removal of earth material. CUT AND FILL: The excavating of earth material in one place and depositing of it as fill in an adjacent place. DRIVEWAY: A means of access over private property to a single residential unit. EFFECTIVE BULK: The effective visual bulk of a structure when seen from a distance of from below. ELEVATION: Height or distance above sea level. EROSION: The process by which the soil and rock components of the earth's crust are worn away and removed from one place to another by natural forces such as wind and water. FILL: A deposit of earth material placed by artificial means. ' FINISH GRADE: The final elevation of the ground surface after development, which is in conformity with the approved plan. t GRADING: To bring an existing surface to a designed form by excavating, filling, or smoothing operations. HILLSIDE: Refers to a parcel of land which contains grades in excess of 10%. ' NATURAL SLOPE: A slope which is not man-made. A natural slope may retain natural vegetation during adjacent grading operations or it may be partially or completely removed and replanted. PAD: A level area created by grading to accommodate development. RIDGE: A long, narrow, conspicuous elevation of land. { ROADWAY: A means of access over private property to more than one residential unit. SLOPE: An inclined ground surface, the inclination of which is expressed as a ratio of horizontal distance (run) to vertical distance (rise), or change in elevation. The percent of any given slope is determined by dividing the rise by the run, multiplied by 100. SLOPE, MAN-MADE: A manufactured slope consisting wholly or partially of either cut or filled material. SLOPE TRANSITION: The area where a slope bank meets the natural terrain or a level graded area either vertically or horizontally. PROMINENT RIDGE: A ridge or hill location which is visible from a major arterial, secondary, or collector street, which forms part of the skyline or is seen as a distinct edge against a backdrop of land at least 300 feet horizontally behind it, or is so designated by the Plannning Director. B. Hillside Designation The following are standards for hillside slope categories to ensure that development will complement the character and topography of 2 the land. The standards for one category may be applied to limited portions of the property in an adjacent category when a project is developed on property in more than one slope category. Slope Category % Natural Slope Site Standards 1. 10 to 14.9 Special hillside architectural and design techniques that minimize grading are required in these Slope Categories. 2. 15 to 19.9 Structures shall conform to the natural topography and natural grade by using techniques such as split level foundations of greater than 18 inches, stem walls, stacking and clustering. Conventional grading may be considered by the city for limited portions of a project when its plan includes special design features, extensive open space or significant use of green belts. 3. 20 to 24.9 Development within this category shall be restricted to those sites where it can be shown that safety, environmental and aesthetic impacts can be minimized. Use of large lots, variable setbacks and variable building structural techniques such as stepped foundations are expected. Structures shall be designed to minimize the visual impact of their bulk and height. The shape, materials, and colors of structures shall blend with the natural environment. The visual and physical impact of driveways and roadways shall be minimized by eliminating sidewalks, and reducing their widths to the minimum required for emergency access and following natural contours, using grade separations where necessary and otherwise minimizing grading. 4. 25 and over. This is an excessive slope condition and development is extremely limited. 3 C. Density The maximum number of residential dwelling units which may be permitted to be constructed on a given parcel of land shall be the calculated development limit less the number eliminated due to environmental constraints as determined Pursuant to this ordinance. Average Percent Slope of Site 0.0 - 14.9% 15.0 - 17.4% 17.5 - 19.9% 20.0 - 22.4% 22.5 - 24.9% 25.0 - 27.4% 27.5 - 29.9% 30.0 - 32.9% 32.5 - 34.9% 35.0 and above % Minimum Percent of Site to Remain in Natural State (No Cut or Fill) or Be Developed Solely For Recreational Purposes 32.5 % 40.0% 47.5% 55.0% 62.5% 70.0% 77.5% 85.0% 92.5% 100.0% PATIO RUN/RISE PERCENT RISE/RUN CEGREE ANGLE BET-EEN RUN 6 RISE RUN 4 Figure 1: Slope ratio percent slope and degree of slope are shown for some hillsides of varying steepness RUR (HORIZONT:.LJ 1 5a 20 3:t 33 1 2=� 50 25 1.5.1 67 3; 1. Environmental Constraints - The maximum number of residential dwelling units shall be further reduced by the impact of the following development constraints, as determined by environmental assessment, unless such development constraints can be shown to have been eliminated or mitigated to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission or the City Council on appeal: a. Land areas subject to inundation during a 100 -year storm. b. Land areas which have been subject to wild fire. C. Land areas which are above the hillside view line. d. Land areas which are subject to geologic hazard, landslide and debris over flow. e. Land areas which lie within a federally recognized blue line stream, or which contain significant riparian stream bed habitats or other established plant formations which constitute a significant natural feature or ecosystem or which contain rare or endangered species. 5 10 f. Significant vegetation formations and habitat areas. g. Land areas which are within 100 feet of a significant ridgeline or hiking trail. h. Land areas containing significant archaeologic or historic sites. 2. Exemption - Other provisions of this subsection to the contrary notwithstanding, lots of record as of the date of adoption of this Ordinance shall be entitled to a minimum of one dwelling unit. 3. Administration: This Ordinance shall be administered in conjunction with the provisions of Chapter 22.56 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code. Where a conflict or inconsistency exists, the more restrictive regulation shall apply. Uses Permitted. Subject to conditional use permit, the uses and structures permitted by the Hillside Management Ordinance shall be those uses permitted in the underlying base district. E. Hillside Management Standards and Guidelines. The following Hillside Management Standards and Guidelines are intended to ensure the appropriate management of hillside areas. The Standards are requirements for the use, development, or alteration of land in Hillside areas. The Guidelines are to be utilized to provide direction to encourage development which is sensitive to the unique characteristics common to hillside properties. The purpose for the Guidelines is to protect existing hillsides and to encourage innovation, to the extent that is, the end result is one which respects the/hillside and is consistent with the goals and policies of this Ordinance. The Guidelines shall be used by the Planning Commission and the City Council in evaluating those development proposals for which it is proposed to go beyond the minimum standards herein specified. Exceptions to the standards specified herein may be approved, pursuant to the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process, when the approving agency determines that such exceptions are not materially injurious to the intent of the standards and guidelines set forth herein. In granting any such exception, the approving agency shall set forth appropriate findings specifying the facts supporting its determination. In granting any such exception, the approving agency shall set forth appropriate findings setting forth the facts supporting its determination. "Where the Planning Commission determines that the literal enforcement of the provisions of this Ordinance for parcels which may be too small and of a configuration which would create a hardship, the Commission may vary from the standards contained herein; provided that a variation from the strict application of the Code be accompanied by reduction in the maximum permitted density to the extent deemed necessary to maintain the intent of the Ordinance. Variations may include modifications of the setback requirements to achieve clustering of development on the parcel, in order to main- tain the grading, drainage, siting and circulation objectives of the Ordinance; except that residential structures shall be sited and designed in a manner which will, in the judgment of the Planning Director, maintain a vertical and horizontal distance from other residential structures which will provide a reasonable degree of privacy, light and air between residential structures." "Where development is proposed for a parcel which adjoins one or more vacant, developable parcels, cooperation of the respective property- owners is encouraged in the planning of the road network, utilities plan and open space program for the area as a whole. The City shall consider variations from the strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance as may be needed to achieve cooperation among all contiguous property owners of vacant, developable properties, to the extent that such variation may better achieve the objectives of this Ordinance". Section 3. Application Filing Requirements. A. A natural features map, which shall identify all existing slope banks, ridgelines, canyons, natural drainage courses, federally recognized blue line streams, rock outcroppings, and existing vegetation. Also depicted shall be landslides and other existing geologic hazards. B. A conceptual grading plan, which shall include the following items in addition to those required by the Municipal Code or as part of the Submittal Requirement Checklist: 1. A legend with appropriate symbols which should include, but not be limited to, the following items: top of wall, top of curb, high point, low point, elevation of significant trees, spot elevations, pad and finished floor elevations, and change in direction of drainage. 2. A separate map with proposed fill areas colored in green and cut areas colored in red, with areas where cut and fill exceed depths established in the hillside development guidelines and standards clearly shown. Additionally, the areas of cut and fill, calculated as a percentage of the total site area, shall be included on the plan. 3. Contours shall be shown for existing and natural land conditions and proposed work. Existing contours shall be depicted with a dashed line with every fifth contour darker, and proposed contours shall be depicted as above except with a solid line. Contours shall be shown according to the following schedule: 7 Natural Slope Maximum Interval Feet 0% to 20% 2 Above 20% 5 C. A conceptual drainage and flood control facilities map describing planned drainage improvements. D. A Slope Analysis map for the purpose of determining the amount and location of land as it exists in its natural state falling into each slope category as specified below. For the slope map, the applicant shall use a base topographical map of the subject site, prepared and signed by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor, which shall have a scale of not less than 1 inch to 100 feet and a contour interval of not more than 2 feet provided that the contour interval may be 5 feet when the slope is more than 20 percent. This base topographical map shall include all adjoining properties within 150 feet of the site boundaries. Delineate slope bands in the range of to 10 percent, 10 up to 15 percent, 15 up to 20 percent, 20 up to 25 percent, 25 up to 30 percent, 30% to 35% and 35 percent or greater. Also included shall be a tabulation of the land/area in each slope category specified in acres. Comoining 'B' and 'C' is not a permitted calculation ------ — — —' 20' 30 j Slope '8' II -30 0 Slope 'A• 5 100' SLOPE FORMULA Average Cross Slope - Slope -A- Slope 't3• Slope C' oo ` •C•i 6' 5'1100' = .05 = 5% 30'120' = 1.50 = 150% 6'130' = .2 = 20% The exact method for computing the percent slope and area of each slope category should be sufficiently described and presented so that a review can be readily made. Also, a heavy, solid line indicating the 8 percent grade differential shall be clearly marked on the plan, and an additional copy of the map shall be submitted with the slope percentage categories depicted in contrasting colors. E. Provide a sufficient number of slope profiles to clearly illustrate the extent of the proposed grading. A minimum of 3 slope profiles shall be included with the slope analysis. The slope profiles shall: 1. Be drawn at the same scale and indexed, or keyed, to the slope analysis map, grading plan, and project site map. 2. Show existing and proposed topography, structures, and infrastructures. Proposed topography, structures, and infrastructures shall be drawn with a solid, heavy line. Existing topography and features shall be drawn with a thin or dashed line. 3. The slope profile shall extend far enough from the project site boundary to clearly show impact on adjacent property, at least 150 feet. 4. The profiles shall be drawn along those locations of the project site where: (a) The greatest alteration of existing topography is proposed; and, (b) The most intense or bulky development is proposed; and, (c) The site is most visible from surrounding land uses; and, (d) At all site boundaries illustrating maximum and minimum conditions. 5. At least two of the slope profiles shall be roughly parallel to each other and roughly perpendicular to existing contour lines. At least one other slope profile shall be roughly at a 45 degree angle to the other slope profiles and existing contour lines. F. Both the slope analysis and slope profiles shall be stamped and signed by either a registered landscape architect, civil engineer, or land surveyor indicating the datum, source, and scale of topographic data used in the slope analysis and slope profiles, and attesting to the fact that the slope analysis and slope profiles have been accurately calculated and identified. 0 G. A geologic and soils report, prepared by an approved soils engineering firm and in sufficient detail to substantiate and support the design concepts presented in the application as submitted. Additional environmental studies and investigations, such as, but not limited to, hydrologic, seismic, access/ circulation, and biota research may also be required in order to help in the determination of the buildable area of a site. H. A statement of conditions for ultimate ownership and maintenance of all parts of the development including streets, structures and open spaces. I. In the event that no grading is proposed, i.e., custom lot subdivision, a statement to that effect shall be filed with a plan which shows possible future house plotting, lot grading, driveway design, and septic system location for each parcel proposed, to be prepared on a topographic map drawn at the same scale as the conceptual grading plan. J. When unit development is proposed, illustrative building elevations, that show all sides of the proposed structure(s) and which accurately depict the building envelope for each lot, shall be provided. K. The following items may be required if determined necessary by the Planning Director or Planning Commission to aid in the analysis of the proposed project to illustrate existing or proposed conditions or both: 1. A topographic model; 2. A line of sight or view analysis; 3. Photographic renderings; 4. Any other illustrative technique determined necessary to aid in review of a project. L. Exceptions to the filing requirements shall be determined by the Planning Director. Section 4. Public Safety Standards. A. Fire Protection Standards 1. Residential developments shall be constructed in such a manner so as to reduce the potential for spread of brushfire through consideration of the following: a. In the case of a conflict where more restrictive provisions are contained in the Uniform Building Code or in the Fire Code, the more restrictive provisions shall prevail. 10 b. Roofs shall be covered with noncombustible materials as defined in the Building Code. open eave ends shall be stopped in order to prevent bird nests or other combustible material lodging within the roof and to preclude entry of flames . C. Exterior walls shall be surfaced with noncombustible or fire resistant materials. d. Balconies, patio roofs, eaves and other similar overhangs shall be of noncombustible construction or shall be protected by fire-resistant material pursuant to the Building Code. 2. Residential developments shall be constructed with adequate water supply and pressure for all proposed development in accordance with standards established by the Fire Marshal. 3. A permanent fuel modification area shall be required around development projects or portions thereof that are adjacent or exposed to hazardous fire areas for the purpose of fire protection. The required width of the fuel modification area shall be based on applicable building and fire codes and a Fire Hazard Analysis Study developed by the Fire Marshal. 4. Fuel modification areas shall incorporate soil erosion and sediment control measures to alleviate permanent scarring and accelerated erosion. 5. If the Fire Marshal determines in any specific case that difficult terrain, danger of erosion or other unusual circumstances make strict compliance with the clearance of vegetation undesirable or impractical, he may suspend enforcement thereof and require reasonable alternative measures designed to advance the purposes of this ordinance. 6. In the event the abatement is not performed as required in subsection C of this section, the City Council may instruct the Fire Marshal to give notice to the owner of the property upon which said condition exists to correct such prohibited condition and, if the owner fails to correct such condition, the City Council may cause the same to be done and make the expense of such correction a lien on the property upon which such conditions exist. 7. Require special construction features structures where site investigations geologic hazards. 11 in the design of confirm potential B. Grading The following standards define basic grading techniques which are consistent with the ordinance and avoid unnecessary cut and fill. Limitations on project grading amounts and configurations will be decided on a case-by-case basis under the conditional use process. 1. Standards. a. No finished slopes greater than fifty percent (50% or 2:1) may be created except beneath a structure where the maximum created slope is limited to sixty-seven percent (67% or 12:1) or less. b. Grading shall be phased so that prompt revegetation or construction will control erosion. Where possible, only those areas which will be built on, resurfaced, or land- scaped shall be disturbed. Top soil shall be stockpiled during rough grading an used on cut and fill slopes. Revegetation of cut and fill slopes shall occur within three (3) months to the satisfaction of the City. C. Grading operations shall be planned to avoid the rainy season, October 15 to April 15. Grading permits shall only be issued when a plan for erosion control and silt retention has been approved by the City Engineer without regard to time of year. d. No excavation or other earth disturbance shall be permitted on any hillside area prior to the issuance of a grading permit with the exception of drill holes and exploratory trenches for the collection of geologic and soil data. These trenches are to be properly backfilled and in addition, erosion treatment provided where slopes exceed twenty (20) percent. e. No point on any structure subject to the provisions of this Section shall be closer to a prominent ridge than one hundred (100) feet measured horizontally on a topographic map or fifty (50) feet measured vertically on a cross section, whichever is more restrictive. And in no case, shall the roof line or any other portion of a structure extend above the line of sight between a ridge line and any public right of way, whether said ridgeline is above or below the right of way. f. Lot pad grading is limited to the boundaries of the structure's foundation, vehicle parking space and a yard area as shown on the approved grading plan. 12 g. Cut slopes for purposes of establishing building pads shall not exceed twenty (20) feet in height and fill slopes shall not exceed eight (8) feet in depth at any point on the site. h. Retaining walls associated with lot pads are limited to: i. Upslope (from the structure) walls not to exceed four (4) feet in height. Terraced retaining structures may be utilized which are separated by a minimum of three (3) feet and appropriate landscaping. ii. Downslope (from the structure) walls not to exceed three and 1/2 (3 1/2) feet in height. Where an additional retained portion is necessary due to unusual or extreme conditions, (such as lot configuration, steep slope or road design) then the use of terraced retaining structures shall be considered on an individual lot basis. Terraced walls shall not exceed three (3) feet in height and shall be separated by a minimum of three (3) feet and appro-priate landscaping. Terracing shall not be used as a typical solution within a development. iii. Retaining walls which are an integral part of the structure shall not exceed eight (8) feet in height. Their visual impact shall be mitigated through contour grading and landscape techniques. i. Lot lines shall be placed two feet beyond top of major slope areas within public view corridors to help ensure their maintenance by the downhill owner. 2. Guidelines. a. Contour grading techniques should be used to provide a variety of slope percentage and slope direction in a three dimensional undulating pattern similar to existing, adjacent terrain. Hard edges left by cut and fill operations should be given a rounded appearance that closely resembles the adjacent natural contours. b. Where possible, graded areas should be designed with manufactured slopes located on the uphill side of structures, thereby, hiding the slope behind the structure. 13 3. THIS Larger manufactured slope* should be located on the uphill side of the structure to reduce the appearance of gra%dlag from the street { Slopes should be rounded to provide a m ore natural appearance Str"t NOT THIS S tree t Retaining walls are limited to: a. One upslope (from the structure) not to exceed 4 feet in height. Otherwise, terraced retaining structures shall be utilized which are separated by a minimum of 3 feet and appropriate landscaping. THIS 14 NOT THIS `rte,. b. One downslope from the structure not to exceed 3 1/2 feet in height. Where an additional retained portion is necessary due to unusual or extreme conditions, (such as lot configuration, steep slope, or road design) then the use of terraced retaining structures shall be considered on an individual lot basis. Terraced walls shall no exceed 3 feet in height and shall be separated by a minimum of 3 feet and appropriate landscaping. Terracing is not to be used as a typical solution within a development. C. on lots sloping with the street, and other configurations not discussed above, one retaining wall, not to exceed 3 1/2 feet in height may be used in a side yard where necessary (also see roadway). d. Walls which are an integral part of the structure may exceed 8 feet in height; however, their visual impact shall be mitigated through contour grading and landscape techniques. 4. The following factors shall be taken into consideration in the design of a projects a. When space and proper drainage requirements can be met with approval by the City Engineer, rounding of slope tops and bottoms shall be accomplished. b. When slopes cannot be rounded, vegetation shall be used to alleviate a sharp, angular appearance. C. A rounded and smooth transition shall be made when the planes of man-made and natural slopes intersect. d. When significant landforms are "sliced" for construction, the landforms shall be rounded as much as possible to blend into natural grade. e. Manufactured slope faces shall be varied to avoid excessive "flat -planed" surfaces. 5. No manufactured slope shall exceed 30 feet in height between terraces or benches. 15 Retain the integrity THISof the natural slope Lr l 1 Over -emphasized vertical NOT THIS structures disrupt the natural silhouette of the hillside i N, a. Where cut or fill conditions are created, slopes should be varied rather than left at a constant angle which may be unstable or create an unnatural, rigid, "engineered" appearance. Varying cut or fill %tope creates a more natural appearance 16 Q C. The angle of any graded slope should be gradually adjusted to the angle of the natural terrain. Existing development proposed development Tract boundary c Variable Natural grade \ 4 proposed slope extension Existing drainage device \, This Natural grade Not this `\ Y Combine slopes to more closely approximate, natural grade Hard edges left by cut and fill operations should be given a rounded appearance that closely resembles the natural contours of the land. THIS NOT THIS Small irregular berm accentuates the top of the slope Variety in � J slope bank grading �� _ Landscaping accentuates Drainage 4 creates a t ^'n 4 contour features natural appearance �`i• f�.Ll i more resembling become undulation\op.� very nature visible Engineered Drainage \ banks look forced features are and unnatural obscured Use of radii and uneven slopes Use of angles and uniform slopes 17 d. Manufactured slopes adjacent to roadways should be modulated by sufficient berming, regrading, and landscaping to create visually interesting and pleasing streetscapes. THIS Variety in undulating slope / bank creates pleasing roadscap NOT THIS Section 5. Drainage Where a conflict exists between the provisions of this section and Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code, the drainage, soils and geology provisions of Chapter 70 shall prevail, unless in the opinion of the City Engineer, the provisions of this section meet sound engineering standards consistent with the standards of Chapter 70. A. Standards. 1. Debris basins, rip rap, and energy dissipating devices shall be provided where necessary to reduce erosion when grading is undertaken. Except for necessary flood control facilities, significant natural drainage courses shall be protected from grading activity. In instances where crossing is required, a natural crossing and bank protection shall be preferred over steel and concrete systems. Where brow ditches are required, they shall be naturalized with plant materials and native rocks. 18 2. Building and grading permits shall not be issued for construction on any site without an approved location for disposal of runoff waters, including but not limited to such facilities as a drainage channel, public street or alley, or private drainage easement. 3. All cuts shall be drained. 4. The use of cross lot drainage shall be subject to Planning Commission review and may be approved after demonstration that this method will not adversely affect the proposed lots or adjacent properties, and that it is absolutely required in order to minimize the amount of grading which would result with conventional drainage practices. Where cross lot drainage is utilized, the following shall apply: a. Project Interiors - One lot may drain across one other lot if an easement is provided within either an improved, open V-swale gutter, which has a naturalized appearance, or within a closed drainage pipe which shall be a minimum twelve (12) inches in diameter. In both cases, an integral wall, shall be constructed. This drainage shall be conveyed to either a public street or to a drainage easement. If drainage is conveyed to a private easement, it shall be maintained by a homeowners association, otherwise the drainage shall be conveyed to a public easement. The easement width shall be determined on an individual basis and shall be dependent on appropriate hydrologic studies and access requirements. b. Project Boundaries - Onsite drainage shall be conveyed in an improved open V-swale, gutter, which has a naturalized appearance, or within an underground pipe in either a private drainage easement, which is to be maintained by a homeowner's association, or it shall be conveyed in a public easement. The easement width shall be determined on an individual basis and shall be dependent on appropriate hydrologic studies and access requirements. 19 THIS variable I use of native rocks to naturalize man-made brow ditch NOT THIS B. Guidelines. i with finer 1. Where possible, drainage channels should be placed in inconspicuous locations, and more importantly, they should receive a naturalizing treatment including native rock, colored concrete and landscaping, so that the structure appears as an integral part of the environment. IN Wei �y ,z -., .,��^ ^ SIS.„-.- .'.—'�� �! e" c- .�(I.:.�a ,y w:x J• 20 2. Natural drainage courses should be preserved and enhanced to the extent possible. Rather than filling them in, drainage features should be incorporated as an integral part of the project design. Section 6. Access and Parking. A. Standards. 1. Driveway grades up to a maximum of twenty (20) percent are permitted, and shall be aligned with the natural contours of the land. Proper design considerations shall be employed, including such items as vertical curves and parking landings. In any case, parking landings shall be utilized on all drives over ten (10) percent grade. 2. Driveways shall not be permitted which exceed twenty (20) percent slope except that one length, not at the point of access, of not more than ten (10) feet may have a slope of twenty-two (22)percent. 3. Grooves for traction shall be incorporated into the construc- tion of driveways with a slope of twenty (20) percent or greater, a coarse paving matter into the construction. -'HIS L max max or "31rrun; Street ' r 7� Str��t 21 4. Where retaining walls are necessary adjacent to roadways or within street setbacks, they shall be limited to three (3) feet in height in order to avoid obstruction of motorists' and pedestrians' field of view, and to create an aesthetically pleasing streetscape. No more that three (3), three (3) foot high terraced or stepped retaining walls shall be utilized which are separated by a minimum of three (3) feet and appropriate landscaping. Slopes not greater than fifty (50) percent (or 2:1) will be permitted upon review and approval by the Fire Marshall. 5. Driveways shall enter public/private streets maintaining adequate line of sight. 6. Local hillside street standards shall be used to minimize grading and erosion potential while providing adequate access for vehicles, including emergency vehicles. The right-of-way may be a minimum of 48.5 feet with 40 feet of paved width and parking on both sides and a sidewalk on 1 side. 7. Grades of streets in the hillside areas shall be as provided in this subsection. Hillside collector and arterial streets shall not exceed 8 percent. Hillside residential local streets shall not exceed 12 percent. 8. Cul-de-sacs to a maximum of 750 feet in length may be permitted with a maximum of 30 dwelling units, and to a maximum of 1000 feet in length with a maximum of 20 dwelling units and shall terminate with a turn around area not less than 35 feet in radius to curb face. 9. All other street improvement standards shall conform to the standard plans and specifications for public streets of the City of Diamond Bar. 10. The Planning Commission may approve modifications to the above right-of-way design standards provided such modifications are in substantial conformance with the objectives stated in this section. B. Guidelines. 1. Roadways and driveways, where feasible, where feasible, should conform to the natural landform. They should not greatly alter the physical and visual character of a hillside by creating large notches in ridgelines or by defining wide straight alignments or by building switch -backs on visually prominent hillsides, split sections and parking bays should be utilized in the layout of hillside streets. 22 THIS Reduce grading by (� aligning roads along natural grades NOT THIS Roads and hillside grading Avoid running counter to steep grades A + To get from A to 8, route selection would be somewhere between perpendicular and Parallel to the contours 2. Where road construction is permitted in hillside areas, the extent of vegetation disturbance and visual disruption should be minimized by the combined use of retaining structures and regrading to approximate the natural slope. The following techniques should be used where feasible: a. Utilize landform planting in order to create a natural appearance and provide a sense of privacy. 23 b. Reduce the visual and safety impacts by use of terraced retaining walls and landscaping. C. Split roadways increase the amount and appearance of landscaping and the median can be used to handle drainage. No parking Stabilize and reforest distributed banks � � .•fir Y.eL �. Separate sidewalk — Steep slope Split section Roadway' Parking Day Steep -lopes Possible trail Sidewalk Roadway Flatter slope Section 7. Trails A. Trails are an integral part of a hillside area and provide recreation areas for equestrian, hiking and biking uses. They can also function as a means to take up grade or to convey drainage. In hillside areas, it is not always necessary to provide full improvements for trails. A more natural experience may be achieved, and the amount of grading required can be reduced, by providing minimal improvements in appropriate areas, such as undevelopable, steep slopes. 24 Section S. Roadways A. Where retaining walls are proven to be absolutely necessary adjacent to roadways or within street setbacks, they shall be limited to 3 feet in height in order to avoid obstruction of motorist's and pedestrian's field of view and to create an aesthetically pleasing streetscape. Otherwise, terraced or stepped structures shall be utilized, which are separated by a minimum of 3 feet and appropriate landscaping. NOT THIS Unnatural edge conditLon Cut slope into hillside Roadway Knob remaining 1�from roadway cut Roadway i Too steep for plants to become established Mass grading to accommodate one level arterial highway �\ Natural gr Roadway \ _ .y 25 THIS Round oft cut slope to conform to the natural contour of the hill Roadway Round off cut slopes Remove small knobs on roadway cut \ tonform to the no-t'-ral grade Vista Round all cut elopes Split roadway sections to accommodate grade Chang• Natural grade Roadway \'le / Roadway Section 9. A. Standards. Site Design. 1. The dimensions of a building parallel to the direction of the slope shall be maximized in order to limit the amount of cutting and filling and to better fit the house to the natural terrain. THIS NOT THIS Terraced decks do not Overhanging decks increase building bulk i make building seem more '✓ I Effective bulk with?;� massive ✓Y% or without decKs Effective bulk Building correctly fits into the ground and - -� minimizes the effect on the hillside` a Use of roof decks, low level decks, and side of building decks Terracing reduces bulk Ta Effective bulk Ellective bulk Smaller overhangs for individual floors or windows help break-up mass and protect against excessive sunlight Nigh profile building stands out on the hillside_ Avoid decks hanging from the downhill side \ with long pole supports Cantilever makes building appear taller, more monumentat, Effective bulk F;2 �~ Excessive root overhang results in additional visual bulk Effective bulk `1V B. Guidelines, 1. Design of building sites should be sensitive to the natural terrain. Structures should be located in such a way as to minimize necessary grading and to preserve natural features such as prominent knolls or ridgelines. 2. Views of significant visual features as seen from both within and outside a hillside development should be preserved. The following provisions shall be taken into consideration: a. Dwellings should be oriented to allow view opportunities, although such views may be limited. Residential privacy should not be unreasonably sacrificed. b. Any significant public vista or view corridor as seen from a secondary, collector or major arterial should be protected. 3. Projects should incorporate variable setbacks, multiple orientations and other site planning techniques to preserve open spaces, protect natural features and offer views to residents. THIS section 10. A. standards. NOT THIS Architecture. 1. The building envelope for all structures shall be as follows: a. Downhill Lot - A maximum/ height of thirty-five (35) feet as measured from natural grade at the front setback, extending towards the rear of the lot. The maximum height at the side setbacks shall be twenty (20) feet extending 27 up to the center of the lot at a forty-five (45) degree angle to a maximum height of thirty-five (35) feet as measured from natural grade. BUILDING ENVELOPE FOR DOWNHILL LOT 35; X35' u I _C Minimum front setback > C. ' f Downhill Section Minimum side setback I f Rear setback Street Elevation b. Uphill Lot - A maximum height of twenty (20) feet at the front setback extending up and toward the rear of the lot at a forty-five (45) degree angle to a maximum height of thirty-five (35) feet as measured from natural grade. A maximum height side setbacks shall be twenty (20) feet extending up to the center of the lot at a forty-five (45 ) degree angle to a maximum height of thirty -f ive (35) feet as measured from natural grade. C. Cross Slope Lots - A maximum height of thirty-five (35) feet, as measured from natural grade, at the front setback extending toward the rear of the lot. The maximum height at the side setbacks shall be twenty (20) feet extending up to the center of the lot at a f orty-f ive (45) deqree angle to a height of thirty-five (35) feet as measured from natural grade. 28 THIS Height limit - I I Large root sections to parallel the average slope Softening of large vertical surfaces NOT THIS Building envelope Maximum height limit I \ I i lowed imum height limit 2. The building shall be terraced to follow the slope. 3. Architectural treatment shall be provided to all sides of the structure visible from adjacent properties, roadways or public rights of way. 4. Exterior structural supports and undersides of floors and decks not enclosed by walls shall be permitted provided fire safety and aesthetic considerations have been adequately addressed. 5. Exterior flood lighting for safety shall be located and shielded so as not to shine on adjacent properties. Decorative lighting to highlight a structure is prohibited. MW THIS Large root areas Oroken up Use of natural materials and window placement in small increments create interesting small state patterns Break up massing of structural elements to more closely approximate the natural slope Stone foundations and retaining walla relate to the ground B. Guidelines. NOT THIS Massive roof area is very visible in contrast to the natural slop/ell Large facade of one material, even if modulated by windows, seems plain 1. The form, mass and profile of the individual buildings and architectural features should be designed to blend with the natural terrain and preserve the character and profile of the natural slope. Some techniques which may be considered include: a. Split pads, stepped footings and grade separations to permit structure to step up the natural slope. b. Detaching parts of a dwelling such as a garage. C. Avoid the use of gable ends on downhill elevations. The slope of the roof should be oriented in the same direction as the natural slope and should not exceed natural slope contour by twenty (20) percent. 2. Avoid excessive cantilevers on downhill elevations. 3. Excavate underground or utilize below grade rooms to reduce effective bulk and to provide energy efficient and environ- mentally desirable spaces. However, the visible area of the building shall be minimized through a combined use of regrading and landscaping techniques. 4. Use roofs on lower levels for the deck open space of upper levels. 5. Building materials and color schemes should blend with the natural landscape of earth tones and natural chaparral vegetative growth. 30 6. To the extent possible, the width of a building measured in the direction of the slope, shall be minimized in order to limit the amount of cutting and filling and to better "fit" the house to the natural terrain. THIS Building pulls back from steeper slopes and ravines y on the hillside i Building is parallel with the contours Minor building protrusions which are perpendicular to the contours are acceptable but should be stepped or inset in the hillside NOT THIS Building is perpendicular to the contours Section 11. Fences and Landscaping. A. Standards. 1. Walls and fencing, not exceeding six (6) feet in height, visible from roadways or public rights-of-way shall be visually open and non-opaque. 2. Privacy walls and fences, not exceeding six (6) feet in height, are permitted adjacent to structures, in order to provide a private outdoor area. Walls and fences shall be of materials and colors compatible with the structure's facade. 31 3. Native or naturalized plants or other plant species that blend with the landscape shall be utilized in all areas with required planting. 4. Fire retardant plant materials shall be utilized. Plants selected as ground cover, shrubs or trees shall be from the list as approved by the City. 5. A permanent irrigation system, for purposes of establishing and maintaining required planing, shall be installed on all slopes. The emphasis shall be toward using plant materials that will eventually need minimal irrigation. Water and energy conservation techniques shall be utilized including but not limited too such items as drip irrigation. THIS planting pockets on stepped retaining wall allow screen planting at several levels �? No effective bulk`\ " ��• NOT THIS No planting possible due to toe of retaining wall Effective bulk r 1( Large concrete retaining wail surtaces can be seen for miles and take years to conceal with planting and trees 6. Landscaping shall be used to screen views of downslope building elevations. When the structure height exceeds twenty (20) feet from finished grade on a downslope, additional landscaping is required and a landscaping plan shall be submitted for review with the submittal package. 32 7. Slopes with required planting shall be planted with informal clusters of trees and shrubs to soften and vary the slope plane. Where slopes are 2:1 and five (5) feet or greater in height, jute netting shall be used to help stabilize planting and minimize soil erosion. 8. Native vegetation shall be retained and supplemented within canyons and along natural drainage courses as allowed by state and federal resource agencies (State Department of Fish & Game, U. 5. Fish and Wildlife, U. S. Army Corp. of Engineers). THIS Planting naturally follows L the average slope 7 y,. 1 Open see-thru fencing that ;q -- blends into the natural environme 3.5'mazimum retaining wall Screening required. —Q�'\ /'2 Tr�nsitlon area NOT THIS B. Guidelines. Highly visible solid wall Over 3.5'(not allowed) Clear cut separation ��f— No screening between natural condition and developed are• :1h no transition 1. Natural landform planting should be used to soften manufactured slopes, reduce impact of development on steep slopes or ridgelines, and provide erosion control. 33 2. Maintain a "vegetative backdrop" by replanting with approved trees. The vegetation should screen structures to the extent possible at maturity and preserve the appearance of the natural hillside. _Skyline ��`'�-moi' { ' ,,v '���� •� ' Typical building clustering 3. Natural landform planting should be used to soften manufac- tured slopes, reduce the impact of development on steep slopes or ridgelines, and provide erosion control. THIS Landform planting 1 Irregularvjsuai plane in cross-section r yr � �. .c. 1, "`"• Sac Ion NOT THIS gyp' 0 Conventional planting i r•�' 1Z Unilorm visual plan* in cross -.action �l i .a''— / 1 f,7 j section 34