HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/01/1991Incorporated April 18, 1989
City of Diamond Bar, California
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
Mayor - John A. Forbing
Mayor Pro Tem - Jay C. Kim
Councilwoman - Phyllis Papen
Councilman - Gary H. Werner
Councilman - Donald C. Nardella
City Council Chambers
are located at:
Walnut Valley Unified School District Board Room
880 South Lemon Avenue
Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking in the Council Chambers.
MEETING DATE: October 1, 1991 Robert L. Van Nort
City Manager
MEETING TIME: 6:00 p.m.
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
file In the Office of the City Clerk and are available for public inspection. If you have questions regarding any
agenda item contact the City Clerk at (714) 860-2489 during business hours.
City of Diamond Bar uses RECYCLED paper and encourages you to do the same.
THIS MEETING IS BEING TAPED BY JONES INTERCABLE FOR
AIRING ON CHANNEL 51, AND BY REMAINING IN THE ROOM,
YOU ARE GIVING YOUR PERMISSION TO BE TAPED. ALL
COUNCIL MEETING TAPES WILL BE BLACKED IMMEDIATELY
AFTER AIRING AND WILL BE UNAVAILABLE FOR REPRODUCTION.
Next Resolution No. 91-62
Next Ordinance No. 8 (1991)
1. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: MAYOR FORBING
ROLL CALL: COUNCILMEN 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 sive 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 - October 7, 1991 - 7:00
p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave.
4.1.2
Traffic & Transportation Commission - October
10, 1991 - 6:30 p.m., Community Room, 1061 S.
Grand Ave.
4.1.3
Parks & Recreation Commission - October 10,
1991 - 7:00 p.m., City Hall, 21660 E. Copley
Dr., #100
4.1.4
City Council Meeting - October 15, 1991 - 6:00
p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave.
4.1.5
City Council Meeting - November 5, 1991 - 6:00
p.m., tentatively scheduled at the AQMD Board
Room. Further details to follow.
4.2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES -
4.2.1 Study Session of September 10, 1991
4.2.2 Regular Meeting of September 17, 1991
4.3 WARRANT REGISTER -
4.3.1 Approve Warrant Register dated October 1, 1991
in the amount of $444,214.40.
OCTOBER 1, 1991 PAGE 2
4.4 RECEIVE & FILE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -
4.4.1 Regular Meeting of August 12, 1991
4.4.2 Regular Meeting of August 26, 1991
4.5 RECEIVE & FILE TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMM. MINUTES -
4.5.1 Regular Meeting of July 11, 1991
4.5.2 Regular Meeting of August 8, 1991
4.5.3 Special Meeting of August 28, 1991
4.6 CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES -
4.6.1 Filed by Tom and Joan Berry.
Recommended Action: Deny.
4.7 RESOLUTION NO. 91 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA ENDORSING
LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS TO COMBAT DRIVE-BY SHOOTINGS AND
SUPPORTING H.R.100 (TORRES).
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 91 -XX endorsing
legislative efforts to combat drive-by shootings and
supporting H.R.100 (Torres).
5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS - PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, ETC.
5.1 PROCLAMATION - Proclaiming the Week of October 6-12,
1991, as Fire Prevention Week.
6. OLD BUSINESS:
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 - Approved first reading
September 17, 1991.
Recommended Action: Adopt Ordinance No. 6(1991) adopting
the "National Electrical Code," 1990 Edition.
6.2 ORDINANCE NO. 7(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 - Approved first reading September 3, 1991.
Recommended Action: Adopt Ordinance No. 7 (1991)
pertaining to the shooting of arrows and similar
projectiles.
OCTOBER 1, 1991
7.
PAGE 3
6.3 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
- Approved for first reading September 17, 1991.
Recommended Action: Adopt Ordinance No. 22A (1989)
establishing prima facie speed limits by addition of
Chino Hills Parkway.
NEW BUSINESS:
7.1 L.A. COUNTY PARKS, BEACHES & RECREATION ACT - For
improvement, acquisition, operation and maintenance of
park and recreation facilities. There will be $450
million available through the 1992 Park Bond Act for
specific park projects. The City is considering the
submittal of two specific project applications: Pantera
Park development and Site "D" acquisition and
development.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the Council
approve submittal of the Pantera Park and Site "D"
specific project proposals to the County for inclusion in
the Park Bond Act ballot measure on the June 1992 ballot.
7.2 PAYMENT OF PUBLIC AGENCY FEES FOR THE USE OF FIELDS AND
FACILITIES ON BEHALF OF PRIVATE NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS
- Private, non-profit athletic groups are charged $7.50
per participant or $10.00 per family for use of Walnut
Valley Unified School District's fields and facilities.
It has been reported that this charge has caused a
financial strain on some of the City's non-profit
organizations.
Recommended Action: The Parks & Recreation Commission
recommends that the City Council consider the following
actions: 1) the City Council prepare a strongly -worded
letter to the School District indicating that there is no
apparent justification for the field use fees, and
requesting that all fees be waived; 2) barring a change
in school policy and with a demonstrated hardship, the
City Council should authorize the expenditure of General
Funds for payment of current year fees (FY 90-91) on
behalf of private non-profit sports organizations.
8. PUBLIC HEARING:
8.1 ORDINANCE NO. 15-B(1990): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR EXTENDING THE TERM OF
AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE NO. 15 (1990)
PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 65858 AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -
Ordinance No. 15-A(1990) pertains to certain provisions
OCTOBER 1, 1991 PAGE 4
of Title 22 of the Los Angeles County Code regarding land
uses within the C -M (Commercial Manufacturing) zone. The
Interim Ordinance is scheduled to expire on October 16,
1991 unless extended by the Council
Recommended Action: Receive public testimony and adopt
Ordinance No. 15-B (1990) extending the term of Ordinance
No. 15 (1990) .
9. ANNOUNCEMENTS:
10. ADJOURNMENT:
11. CLOSED SESSION:
Litigation - Section 54956.9
Personnel - Section 54957.6
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
AND AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR )
The Diamond Bar City Council will hold a Regular Meeting at
the Walnut Valley Unified School District Board Room located at
880 S. Lemon Ave., Diamond Bar, California at 6:00 p.m. on
Tuesday, October 1, 1991.
Items for consideration are listed on the attached agenda.
I, LYNDA BURGESS, declare as follows:
I am the City Clerk in the City of Diamond Bar; that a copy
of the Notice for the Regular Meeting of the Diamond Bar City
Council, to be held on October 1, 1991 was posted at their proper
locations.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is
true and correct.
Executed on October 1, 1991 at Diamond Bar, California.
/sj Lynda Burgess
LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
MINUTES OF STUDY SESSION ®RAFT
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
SEPTEMBER 10, 1991
CLOSED SESSION: 5:30 - 6:30 P.M.
Litigation - Government Code Section 54956.9
Personnel - Government Code Section 54957.6
1. CALL TO ORDER: M/Forbing called the meeting to
order at 7:03 p.m. in the Council
Chambers, W.V.U.S.D., 880 S. Lemon
Avenue, Diamond Bar, California.
M/Forbing announced that during
Closed Session, C/Werner and C/
Nardella were appointed to a Council
Committee on Undeveloped Land
Entitlements.
CA/Arczynski announced that dis-
cussion of the Los Angeles County
property tax litigation had also
taken place during Closed Session.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge
of Allegiance by Mayor Forbing.
ROLL CALL: Mayor Forbing, Mayor Pro Tem Kim,
Councilmen Papen, Nardella and
Werner.
Also present were Robert L. Van
Nort, City Manager; Terrence L.
Belanger, Assistant City Manager;
Andrew V. Arczynski, City Attorney;
James DeStefano, Director of
Community Development; Sid Mousavi,
Public Works Director/City Engineer
and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk.
2.1 STUDY SESSION:
2.1.1 GENERAL PLAN - CDD/DeStefano indicated that notices
had been published for the Hearing on the General
Plan conducted by the Planning Commission on
September 9, 1991. In addition, letters were sent
to 39 organizations either directly or indirectly
affected by the Plan and to 25 owners of undev-
eloped properties that may be impacted by General
Plan and zoning changes. Press releases were
published in the S.G. Tribune and the Inland Valley
Daily Bulletin and a substantial portion of the
City's Newsletter was dedicated to the General Plan
process. He recommended that the list of organi-
zations, press members and individuals who pre-
viously received information should be reviewed to
ensure that they receive additional information on
SEPTEMBER 10, 1991 PAGE 2
the status of the Plan. Further, he suggested
sending press releases to the Windmill, Chamber of
Commerce and other organizations with internal
publications and request that Jones Intercable
create a video summary of the Plan and components
and use it for either a normal broadcast or pre-
sentation to various groups in the community. He
proposed a "road show" concept to address local
organizations about the General Plan, the issues,
how the public may be affected and the City's
desire for public input. A summary document for
creation of an education program to present to
organizations, schools, etc. to provide an aware-
ness of the future of the City was also
recommended.
During discussion, further suggestions included:
placing notices of meeting dates in the Windmill
and the City Newsletter, contacting school
districts to arrange for flyers to be distributed
to the students, advertising over cable TV and
contacting the Walnut Valley Water District to
arrange for notices to be sent with water bills.
C/Werner suggested publishing the General Plan's
goals and objectives including background
information and maps as well as a schedule for
review.
C/Papen stated that the plan reviewed by the
Planning Commission was not the document proposed
for adoption by the General Plan Advisory
Committee. She requested that the GPAC be
reconvened to review the current version.
CDD/DeStefano suggested that a flyer be prepared
outlining what the General Plan is all about
(including general goals), why it is important to
the community, why public input is important,
etc., and invite public participation. Once the
Plan is approved, send a general summary of the
Plan including adopted goals and objectives so that
everyone will know what directions the City will be
taking for the next 20 years. He also commented
that approximately two GPAC meetings would be
required for review of the revised Plan.
Following discussion, staff was directed to provide
Council with copies of the revised Plan along with
staff reports and minutes.
Bruce Flamenbaum, General Plan Advisory Committee
Member, stated that, in his opinion, the draft Plan
did not reflect what was approved by GPAC and that
GPAC would like to sign off on the final document.
SEPTEMBER 10, 1991 PAGE 3
Al Rumpilla stated that members of GPAC were upset
over changes in the proposed Plan.
Lavinia Rowland suggested that once the document is
ready for public input, advertise those things that
will shock the public into coming out and speaking.
Staff was directed to meet with GPAC for review of
the draft Plan to determine if it was the document
they approved; conduct Planning Commission Public
Hearings; publish a summary of the Plan and notify
the public further through inserts in utility
bills, etc. In addition, provide a final draft of
the Plan to the Council along with a report regard-
ing what had transpired since conclusion of GPAC
meetings.
2.1.2 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 91 -XX - A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
ESTABLISHING CITY COUNCIL STANDARDS OF OPERATION -
CM/Van Nort stated that Council previously directed
staff to prepare an amendment to the Resolution
establishing Council standards of operation. The
draft amendment contained sections extracted from
similar policies in other cities but did not
include penalties for violations.
C/Papen recommended that Section 1 F, second
sentence, be changed to read "the Council may
listen to their comments" when talking about
scheduling public hearings.
In response to C/Papen's inquiry regarding Section
5, Litigation and Confidential Information,
CA/Arczynski stated that if a Councilmember
released Closed Session information to the press,
the Council's only recourse would be through public
censure.
MPT/Kim requested that Section 1 C be changed to
"Citizens may be requested to put verbal concerns
in writing..." He further requested that Section 1
D be more clearly defined.
Following discussion on Section 1 D, C/Papen sug-
gested that the wording be changed to "the Mayor
may request that there be a spokesperson..." re-
garding multiple speakers on the same issue.
C/Werner suggested the following re -wording for
Section 1 D: "the Mayor may request that there be
a spokesperson and that others limit their comments
by indicating support or opposition to points
already made and raising only non -repetitive
points."
SEPTEMBER 10, 1991
PAGE 4
M/Forbing suggested removal of the words "At the
beginning of the meeting," and inserting "Under
Public Concerns, if there are a number of
people..."
Following discussion of Page 2 Section 1 F, M/
Forbing suggested that the words "public hearing"
be changed to "agenda item" and the word "will" in
sentence 5 to "may."
C/Werner suggested that Section 1 G be changed to
"With Council approval, Mayor may schedule Council
review of agenda items out of their prescribed
order on the printed agenda."
M/Forbing suggested that Section 1 I be changed to
"The Councilmember making a motion should restate
the motion..."
Following discussion, Sections 1 L, 1 0 and 6 G
were deleted.
Following discussion, Section 1 P was changed to
reflect that City Council and Planning Commission
audio tapes are to be retained for two years and
all other Commission tapes may be reused after
approval of Minutes.
C/Papen requested that Section 4 E be changed to
"Councilmembers will direct all issues to the City
Manager."
Section 4 F was changed to read "A Councilmember
shall not initiate any action or prepare any report
that is significant in nature or initiate any
project or study without the approval of the
majority of the City Council."
CA/Arcyznski suggested that the words "It is the
Chair's responsibility to control the conduct of
the meeting" be added to Section 1 along with an
indication that any Councilmember would have the
prerogative to request that a speaker be ruled out
of order.
2.1.3 CITATION AUTHORITY - CM/Van Nort reported that this
matter was for discussion as to whether or not
citation authority is a useful tool for enforcement
of zoning and building codes, regulations, rules
and policies. He further stated that the City
Attorney's opinion was that it is not an appro-
priate tool for code enforcement due to problems in
dealing with the District Attorney's office, etc.
Mr. Van Nort stated that, in his experience, having
a person issue only citations is too limiting and
SEPTEMBER 10, 1991 PAGE 5
that the District Attorney could process the
citations on a contractual basis.
CDD/DeStefano stated that those cities having
citation authority feel it is more expeditious in
eliminating a variety of code enforcement viola-
tions. Cities against establishing code enforce-
ment citation authority were concerned that this
power was inappropriate and determined that com-
plaints be handled through a letter process.
C/Papen requested that required appearance at a
mediation hearing should be included in the policy.
Al Rumpilla was opposed to the City providing
citation authority.
C/Werner stated that he agreed with the City
Attorney that the City is not in need of citation
authority. He suggested that staff be directed to
bring the matter back when there appears to be a
more obvious need, determined by the number and
type of cases inhibiting the community.
C/Papen stated that she believed citation authority
was necessary and asked staff for percentages of
cases not resolved in two weeks and/or thirty days.
In response to C/Papen's inquiry, Code Enforcement
Officer Al Flores stated that approximately 5% of
the cases could not be resolved immediately and
that 15 - 20% take over thirty days. He described
the types of cases requiring over 30 days for
resolution. With Council consensus, staff was
directed to bring the matter back in the form of an
Ordinance.
2.1.4 REAPPORTIONMENT - M/Forbing outlined the plans for
realignment of Senate and Assembly districts and
stated that a hearing would be held on September
11, 1991 regarding the Democratic plan and asked
for Council direction whether staff should be
expected to attend.
C/Papen requested Council consent to go on record
in opposition to the elimination of Diamond Bar
from the L.A. County District.
Following discussion, staff was directed to prepare
a letter to be sent to the City's Lobbyist indicat-
ing the City's opposition to the proposal.
SEPTEMBER 10, 1991 PAGE 6
3. ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/Papen asked staff to contact
CalTrans requesting clean up of the
57/60 freeway interchange which was
littered with newspapers, tires,
etc.
MPT/Kim requested staff to direct
the removal of graffiti on the south
side of the concrete building
located along the 60 fwy. west of
Brea Canyon Rd.
C/Nardella suggested that the City
consider assisting property owners
in planting bramble bushes, poison
ivy, etc., to deter persons spraying
graffiti on the back side of
buildings.
4. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct,
M/Forbing adjourned the meeting at
9:24 p.m.
ATTEST:
Mayor
LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION AND REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF IIAY ONE 121.
SEPTEMBER 17, 1991
5:10 - 6:15 P.M. - STUDY SESSION:
SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING ELEMENT (SRRE) - A:_,s'. -:o Cj_ l
Mgr. Troy Butzlaff introduced Dave Polis, Project Ma:i-igiir,
Associates, and Michael Huls, Associate Project Manaq,!r R.1.3.,
consultants to the San Gabriel Valley Waste Management Joint Pou=rs,
Authority. The two firms jointly produced the draft . ;RRE .
Mr. Polis stated that information gathered for the SRRE was
obtained from the haulers, commercial recyclers sere--,nq the area
and a mail survey to all the JPA cities and that the data regarding
composition of the waste came from the waste characterization
study.
Following Mr. Polis' review of the document, Mr. Huls stated that
the consultants approached AB939 in two phases. The first phase
included examination of solid waste generated, disposed of and
converted and the second phase was to evaluate the actual devel-
opment of the report including new programs, how to address
programs currently available and how to augment the existing rate
of 10%. Five of the report's eleven chapters deal with "action
components" which include source reduction, recycling, composting,
special waste and education. Monitoring and evaluation of the
programs is an extremely crucial element of the process. Regard-
ing funding, Mr. Polis stated that the estimated costs for imple-
mentation of the program were compiled by using the figures in
each component --source reduction, recycling, composting and special
waste --and determining one-time costs, capital costs for the first
five years and actual annual costs. He suggested that the City
research landfill tipping fees to determine what sites may be less
expensive than others in the coming years.
C/Papen expressed concern that the document did not appear to
recommend implementation of cooperative regional approaches as
indicated in the goals of the JPA, there was no reference to the
City's membership in the L.A. County Sanitation District and the
funding outlined in Chapter 9 indicated the cost of a short term
program as approximately $750,000. This amount added to the costs
paid for by residents for curbside pickup would result in a total
cost to the City of approximately $3.5 million. She inquired into
which of the three alternatives would give the highest diversion
rate and could be implemented within six months and indicated that
a landfill greenwaste disposal program was not included although
earlier reports stated that greenwaste would be diverted to
construct insulation and to replace clean dirt in the landfill.
C/Nardella stated that the report should include a discussion
regarding long-range capabilities of current facilities and
indicate what will be done when any facility is no longer capable
of handling the waste stream.
MPT/Kim requested prioritizing of alternatives showing which should
be done on a short term basis as well as some type of phasing
program to reach these goals.
SEPTEMBER 17, 1991 PAGE 2
C/Papen suggested formation of a sub -committee to include Council,
staff and Planning Commissioners to meet within the next few weeks
with local haulers for discussion of programs which could be
quickly implemented and which would best meet the needs of their
customers. The committee would recommend to the Council which of
the 59 alternatives should be implemented by January 1, 1992.
MPT/Kim suggested that: 1) the consultants discuss the programs
with local haulers, 2) meet with staff to discuss financing, 3)
schedule a study session to discuss programs and 4) forming a
citizens committee for further study.
M/Forbing appointed C/Papen and himself to meet with the haulers,
staff and consultants to recommend methods for immediate imple-
mentation and requested that the consultants recommend others to be
included such as representatives from the scrap industry, etc.
Following discussion, staff was directed to notice the forty-five
day review period beginning September 18, 1991 and schedule a
Public Hearing for October 29, 1991 at 7:00 p.m.
M/Forbing adjourned the Study Session at 6:15 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER: M/Forbing called the meeting to
order at 6:25 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 Papen and Nardella. C/
Werner was excused.
Also present were Robert L. Van
Nort, City Manager; Terrence L.
Belanger, Assistant City Manager;
Andrew V. Arczynski, City Attorney;
James DeStefano, Community
Development Director; Sid Mousavi,
Public Works Director/City Engineer
and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk.
2. COUNCIL COMMENTS: C/Papen reported that on September
12, she attended a County -wide hearing regarding gang problems
sponsored by Sheriff Block. As a result, she requested that staff
contact the Walnut Unified School District to discuss expansion of
their recreation program in January to include intra -mural sports
programs for "at risk" junior high students in cooperation with the
Sheriff's Department and the City.
C/Nardella requested that staff contact the Walnut Valley Unified
School District to discuss increased fees charged for use of fields
by local sports organizations.
SEPTEMBER 17, 1991
PAGE 3
M/Forbing announced that the Ranch Festival Parade, beginning on
Grand Ave. and traveling south on Diamond Bar Blvd., will start at
9:00 a.m. on Saturday, September 28th. The Festival itself will
run from Friday, September 27 through Sunday, September 29 in the
Gateway Corporate Center.
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None offered.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Papen moved, MPT/Kim seconded, to
approve the Consent Calendar with correction to the City Council
Minutes of September 3, 1991 (Item 4.2) and award of bid for
traffic signal installation to Hovey Electric (Item 4.7). With
the following Roll Call vote, the motion carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEN - Nardella, Papen, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing
NOES: COUNCILMEN - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - Werner
4.1 SCHEDULE OF FUTURE MEETINGS:
4.1.1 PLANNING COMMISSION - September 23, 1991 -
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
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 Ave.
4.2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES -
4.2.1 REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 -
approved as corrected.
4.3 WARRANT REGISTER -
4.3.1 Approved Warrant Register dated September 17,
1991 in the amount of $269,717.38.
4.4 TREASURER'S REPORT -
4.4.1 RECEIVED AND FILED TREASURER'S REPORT FOR
MONTH OF JULY, 1991.
4.5 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES -
4.5.1 FILED BY CARLA CLAYTON - Denied.
4.6 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 91-43B: A RESOLUTION OF THE
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.
4.7 AWARDED BID FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALLATION - Grand
Avenue at Rolling Knoll Road - Hovey Electric Co., the
lowest responsible bidder, in an amount not to exceed
$49,749.00.
SEPTEMBER 17, 1991 PAGE 4
5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS - PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, ETC.:
5.1 PROCLAIMED WEEK OF 9/27 TO 10/4/91 AS "WORLD SUMMIT FOR
CHILDREN" WEEK.
5.2 PROCLAIMED OCTOBER, 1991 AS "ESCROW" MONTH.
5.3 PROCLAIMED WEEK OF 9/23 TO 9/27/91 AS "RIDESHARE" WEEK.
5.4 BIRTHDAY WISHES TO C/NARDELLA - M/Forbing announced that
this was C/Nardella's birthday and asked that everyone
sing "Happy Birthday" to him.
C/Nardella introduced his wife, Irene and invited
everyone to share birthday cake.
RECESS: M/Forbing recessed the meeting at 6:32 p.m.
RECONVENE: M/Forbing reconvened the meeting at 6:55 p.m.
5.5 CALTRANS PRESENTATION - CE/Mousavi reported that staff
discussed with CalTrans improvement of the 56/60 fwy.
interchange as well as construction of additional ramps
and lanes connecting to relays between the Counties of
Los Angeles, San Bernardino and Orange, within the City
of Diamond Bar. He introduced Mr. Rollie Rothbart, Chief
of the Project Studies Branch of CalTrans and Haruto
Niyataki, also representing CalTrans.
Mr. Rothbart discussed the progress of the study being
conducted on the 57/60 fwy. interchange and addition of
an HOV lane. These projects will be recommended for
inclusion in the stip list to be adopted in 1992. The
study is limited to the area between Brea Canyon Rd. to
the San Bernardino County line on Route 60 and from the
Orange County line south of the 60 freeway on 57. He
further stated that one of the major problems is that
those persons entering the 57 fwy. must cross three lanes
of traffic to attempt to travel westbound on the 60 fwy.
In addition, accessing HOV lanes between the two freeways
could be solved via a bridge connecting these lanes.
In response to C/NardellaIs question, Mr. Rothbart stated
that sound readings would be taken and walls would be
erected if noise levels increased by the addition of a
bridge. He estimated that the design phase for the
stated improvements would begin in 1994 and with
environmental clearance required, construction would not
begin for three to five years following design.
C/Papen requested a copy of the 1992 stip list showing
Diamond Bar's priority number.
M/Forbing asked if there was a study on a sound wall in
the PSR for the HOV lane at the 57 from Orange County
SEPTEMBER 17, 1991 PAGE 5
north to coincide with construction of the HOV lane. He
asked that a copy of the study be sent to staff.
Mr. Rothbart stated that the project would not be opened
until a sound wall was constructed. He added that the
57/60 interchange had only been studied for a couple of
months and that two areas had been identified for
improvement. It is hoped that, by spring of 1992, a
complete study will outline alternatives with the
ultimate improvement being a complete reconstruction of
the interchange and separation of the two freeways. He
further stated that he would be happy to come back and
address the Council at a later time to discuss the
progress as well as work with staff.
Mrs. Melon, residing in the vicinity of Brea Canyon Road
and Cold Springs, requested consideration of construction
of a sound wall on the 57 freeway.
Jim Paul, 1269 Ahtena Dr., representing Joe Johnston,
stated that a sound study had not been conducted since
1982.
Red Calkins, 240 Eagle Nest, asked for the name of the
engineer who designed the 57/60 interchange.
C/Papen stated that Council had previously met with Mr.
Johnston and indicated their support. She further stated
that she had discussed this issue with a representative
of Supervisor Dana who pledged to contact CalTrans on
behalf of the residents to determine whether funding for
the sound wall could be provided before 1998.
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as 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 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.
M/Forbing opened the Public Hearing.
With no testimony offered, M/Forbing closed the Public
Hearing.
MPT/Kim moved, C/Nardella seconded to approve for first
reading by title only and waive further reading,
Ordinance No. 6(1991) adopting the National Electrical
Code, 1990 Edition. With the following Roll Call vote,
motion carried:
SEPTEMBER 17, 1991
PAGE 6
AYES: COUNCILMEN - Papen, Nardella, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing
NOES: COUNCILMEN - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - Werner
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.
M/Forbing opened the Public Hearing.
With no testimony offered, M/Forbing closed the Public
Hearing.
In response to C/Nardella's question, CE/Mousavi stated
that the speed limit would remain the same and that the
Ordinance would enhance enforcement efforts.
C/Nardella moved, C/Papen seconded to approve for first
reading by title only and waive further reading,
Ordinance No. 22A(1989) establishing prima facie speed
limits. With the following Roll Call vote, motion
carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEN - Nardella, Papen, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing
NOES: COUNCILMEN - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - Werner
6.3 RESOLUTION NO. 91-61: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUESTING AN EXTENSION OF
TIME FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE GENERAL PLAN - CDD/DeStefano
gave an overview of what has transpired in processing the
Plan and stated that the Planning Commission, as well as
the Council, received comments regarding the need for
public participation in the planning process by use of
marketing of the document distribution and consideration
of re-establishing GPAC for review of the document one
more time. In order to continue with the process, the
following are needed: comments from certain public
agencies with respect to the housing element, review by
the City's planning consultants on the General Plan
effort and additional public input into the process.
M/Forbing opened the Public Hearing.
With no testimony offered, M/Forbing closed the Public
Hearing.
C/Papen moved, MPT/Kim seconded to adopt Resolution No.
91-61 requesting an extension of time in order to provide
sufficient public review for the General Plan and direct
staff to forward an application to the State. With the
following Roll Call vote, motion carried:
SEPTEMBER 17, 1991 PAGE 7
AYES: COUNCILMEN - Papen, Nardella, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing
NOES: COUNCILMEN - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - Werner
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 -
CA/Arczynski stated that Council adopted Ordinance No.
14-A (1990) dealing with an interim ordinance pertaining
to hillside grading and related standards for properties
with slopes in excess of 10%. He recommended adoption of
an urgency Ordinance to extend Ordinance 14A for one more
year and explained that a unanimous vote would be
required.
M/Forbing opened the Public Hearing.
With no testimony offered, M/Forbing closed the Public
Hearing.
C/Papen moved, MPT/Kim seconded to adopt Ordinance No.
14-B(1990) extending the Interim Hillside Management
Ordinance No. 14(1990).
With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEN - Nardella, Papen, MPT/Kim, M/Forbing
NOES: COUNCILMEN - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - Werner
7. ANNOUNCEMENTS: None offered.
8. CLOSED SESSION: There being no further business to
discuss, M/Forbing adjourned the meeting to Closed Session for
discussion of Litigation, Government Code Section 54956.9 and
Personnel, Government Code Section 54957.6 at 8:50 p.m.
9. ADJOURNMENT: M/Forbing reconvened the meeting at 9:05
p.m. and declared that, during Closed Session, the Council
authorized the City Attorney to file an Amicus Brief in the matter
of City of Highland vs County of San Bernardino regarding property
taxes.
With no further business to conduct, M/Forbing adjourned the
meeting at 9:05 p.m.
LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk
ATTEST:
Mayor
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNC....6
;REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO.
DATE:
TO: City Clerk___.
FROM:
ADDRESS:
ORGANIZATION:
SUBJECT:
I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the
Council Minutes reflect my name and address as writ)--en,above.
Signature
NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This
form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing
to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of
names in the Minutes.
_._ _.......:... . .. .� TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM NO.
DATE: i '
TO: City
FROM: r. -- ----- `------------
ADDRESS:
----------ADDRESS:
ORGANIZATION:ri
�i
SUBJECT:
I expect to address the CoLinc.--1 on the subject agenda item. Please have the
Council Minutes reflect. my ne-nie and addre as w Bitten above.
tG �:
Signature
NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This
form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing
to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of
names in the Minutes.
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO.
City Clerk --.-
ADDRESS :
,-1
ORGANIZATION: C6=1 > ✓ry� ( /`{� _ �'�`S
SUBJECT: ff�(
I expect to address the Council on the su tag n a item. Please have the
Council Minutes reflect my name 4d addr ss as w�' ten above.
Signature
NOTE: All persons may attend --Meetings and address the City Council. This
form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing
to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of
names in the Minutes.
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO.
DATE: \ f •_- ! Ck t
TO: City Clerk
FROM:
ADDRESS: .' i `. �a : �.. ie -k �
ORGANIZATION:
SUBJECT: -- , t -L_i k-� f� t=_ i
I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the
Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above.
Signat e
NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This
form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing
to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of
names in the Minutes.
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO.
DATE: / �2
TO: City Clerk
FROM:
ADDRESS:
ORGANIZATION: L c L'
SUBJECT:
I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the
Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above.
` / 1
Sicfna
NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This
form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing
to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of
names in the Minutes.
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 Kim and Councilmember Papen
FROM: Linda G. Magnuson, senior Accountant
SUBJECT: Voucher Register, October 1, 1991
DATE: September 26, 1991
Attached is the Voucher Register dated October 1, 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 October 1, 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
LEAD #41
Fund
225
Grand Ave
Const Fund
TOTAL ALL FUNDS
APPROVED BY:
Linda G. M son
Senior Accou tant
Robert L. Van N
City Manager
AMOUNT
$432,479.98
4,408.37
6,890.78
65.93
369.34
$444,214.40
I Lo
Phyl is E. Papen
Councilmember
Jay C. Kim
Mayor Pro Tem
_.a+j
Mii1L. Dist 1-.
'a:nt. Dist :39
=:j .;fJ
74L DUE .rzNDOR--------.
"::-rate _a7cs_-ane
1 :ate
--`,ti_".
y _=
:31
_ =.t
ieec -123_eme^t
3D8.00
in:�
��`: L:'
:�; i
_LUES
5pr: ier Repair Dist 38
464.49
.n
39
''. L J VENDOR --------�i
Al',,'E
�
i,'1 445
a?'25
.�j 'v11
j,Vi4
... 7w vr� _Q::p Repair
.?.i
�.4N
_„_:, D;,E VENDOR - -::
i19.4a
Advantage Roof:ng
Atvantace
tt?.;1-3835
21a91A�;
a t s
;ver_ arg..d an .erm�
5.4 0
"TAL DUE vENDCR--------
5.44
-ngelus Pacific
ArnoelusPac
-A� DUE 'VENDOR--------j
4.88
ria acCflui 1
AquaBack
2 2101A
09/25
10/01
8t99
est Backflow Dist a38
323.41
T}-.L ,H, DUE `VENDOR--------;
v.
323.41
teke?
00,!-4510-4100
1 h u. lc
09/25
101`01
Otgs 8:29-9/12
80.00
ioTAL DUE VENDOR--------;
80.04
-------.
..'c
-..i_v_v�
4-1-4: _'J
_. .i't
��
_ a
J�:Ia_. ?ema•�al—!Jg�i]L
'vrl•_i
7-;T4 '.LTE oEND�R
eat1-n 'vcs. October
26,923.20
!]'AL DUE VENDOR --------)
26.923.00
Char se 10. ra]hlba
j
*00l-3118 .
210017
recreation Refund
5.25
`:TAL DUE VENDOR --------
5.25
vharlie'5 andaich Ehnoe C 8r_;e5
Wl-4n10-2325 1
21M A
09'25
iM)l
-cod for 9;17 CC Ntg
23.19
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------;
23.79
'_havers. 1. Tedd
hd9er5
00i-4519-41410 2
2 0w.0
»MS
ia/01
Ytcs 6i19-9/12
60.00
-OTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
80.00
cmmcnity SwEeo.ng
ComSweep
+Pl_4555-550; 1
21001A
09725
1001
Street Sweep Svcs -August
14,029.29
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------- >
14,029.29
Computer Applied Systems
Cps
*001-4050-.030 1
21001A
09;25
10/01
October Maint.
745.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
745.04
Conlin Bros Sporting Good
ConlinBros
*001-4350-1200 2
21001A 011%1215
0/25
10,'01 40208
So:tbalis
167.66
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
167.66
C.
- - ;C:NL'R--------
. ...to'r`t;!G!2:
i�611
.1T.a
jUi'r-,,10ndltLij`it 3'rC
--i-..r----'
u.it it� O ---'
1.8 1.01
1-tond gar Business
Ac' -Z
X 91-4990'-2'21 0
1 _:'91A
f9. 25
1�i "'."i
.�m�u^. Ared ?Hint. tGG
.:
177.'@0
J'AL DUE VENDOR ---------\
177.00
tdst�an i^�.
�dst?;dn
{001-4,9150-1209
. .:a01c 213
°� rt5
10101
'a'S1?�
5upclies-Finance
27.69
X991-4949-1?�
2 21019 12/1213
341'25
1N191
9jVihyq
E.Ppli es-cclk
21.56
X091-4930-1209
21ti0i9 213
04;25
10191
793hi0
S ppiies-Cmgr
23.14
40j1 -4049 -??00
1 i0i31E;.?13
r9i25
is±;0:
74306123Lpp::es-Gen
Govt
216.15
+901-'4 10-1200
1 21019 08'121?
09/25
10/01
74396'3
3;pp'ies-tngr
47.18
001-4040-1200
1 210018 07.'1213
04/25
10191
7 30,614
ppiies-CCIk.
8.46
001-4510-129
2 210018 04/11213
04/25
10!01
7930615
Sjpp'ies-Engr
34.16
7O?AL DUE VENDOR -------->
318,83
Eaton
ExxonS
+001-4310-2310
2 2:0919
09/25
10/01
3551866
Fuel -Parks
27.78
+001 -4310 -?31x5
1 411:019
09/25
10/01
4254935
�Je'-Parks
13.09
X001-4040-2310
1 210019
04/25
10101
4943606
-uel-Sen Govt
24.75
*001-4090-2310
3 210019
99/25
10/01
4943820
Fuel-6en Govt
19.36
+00'-4930-13'0
1 210018
09/25
19/01
4946141
Fuel-Cegr
10.75
+001-4090-2310
2 21"1B
09/25
19/01
4946406
Fuel -Gen Govt
8.50
'--AL DUE VENDOR --------;
104.16
Flores, Al
FloresA
f09'-4219-2325
1 210919
09/?5
19101
3CACEO Rei®h-91120/91
25.00
1+01TAL DUE VENDOR -------->
25.00
0R --------
4 v
:8.i4
.,_E +ENLEN--------
798.04
ccnsaives ..ce
�, So^sales
L5
J�.r'r�i
:_rnoer 5',cs
2, 10t.00
DUE VENDOR
2,100.09
�. Dan Ials
"EDa _a'S
001-4210-1200
- 21891F:1214
;9/25
10/01 :'+.?
t'rct "ape
v3.53
DiE 'ENDOR------- .
43.53
�ieiier 1 Associates
eiVer
O K -2118-1004
1 219810
09;25
10101
Denrii Preens -October
712.27
f 01-2118-10"/:
1 21ssa1C
89/25
10/91
Vision Prem -October
335.80
'GTI A,L Dt;E VENDOR ,
1,047.87
'EMA Retirement 'rust -447 :C10A
X301 -2110-i907
1 21?81P
99/25
10/01
Def Copp-PP19,20
195.09
*881-4@30-0999
. 219a1P
99125
10/91
Def Comp-rMgr
954.12
0W -440 -WO
i 210018
09125
10,01
Def Cewp-CCIk
502.08
4050-0090
1 210018
x9/25
10/01
Def Comp finance
435.41
+."901-4210-0090
210018
09/25
!0101
Dei Como Piannig
947.24
kfG!1-4319-0099
1 21001$
09125
10/01
Clef Comp parks
593.57
+0r1-4510-0090
1 210018
09/25
10/01
Def Ccmp Engr
1,747.48
131AL DUE VENDOR --------)
5,344.88
independent Computer
:ndccmotr
+001-4090-6230
2 210019 01x1217
99125
10101 33800
Printer Ribbons
235.25
`3?AL DUE VENDOR --------;
235.25
Te !August
6,63.57
_ av lax sz
�et!.nd
5.25
- -- -
-
vD-�R --------;
S.25
ens Far care
r__
{0W1-4'3100-1209
G 2'_''91:
. ..:i2
n"%S
:0(01
59229
cera-.ng
p p I I e s
13.73
09. 2S
10101
_XOII
�peratl^g
Supplies
11.64
+�4^01-43:0-112)8
5
13x1182
99;25
10;+11
5252.:
--Ieratmg
Supplies
28.68
+'01-4310-1200
5 _°91
?.2
09t?5
19; Ai
52GG
Jlierat1ng
Supplies
13.63
+9'-'13 i0-i2t. 0
1
2117~11 iB
.411182
09/2-
19 d1
bi57
.,: erating
SUpCileS
111.89
001-»31.0-1299
4 :18012
1=_,:182
09/25
10x01
S26Sc
-;,e:at1no
Supplies
25.77
-
DUE
vEN"OR --------,
1104.74
IL.A. _ .nty-5herlff`s
ep _aLSne:lff
+001-4411-5401
1 71901B
09125
110;01
59576
.incert In
?ark-8128
303.64
-11pL DluE
4ENDOR--------;
M.64
_.�. ��ount'-Sheriff'_
Deo L:+CSheriff
+001-4411-5.91
2 21601B
99125
10,101
+9629
:Inrract
Service August
8,995.3;
+001-4412-5441
i 210618
89125
10111
99529.,,rac.
5.res August
88,958.25
}001-4413-54,1
1 21001B
09125
110i01
90629
:rr,tract
Svcs-August
209,891.18
':SAL DLE
'VENDOR--------)
299,845.40
IaP.H ord, Diane L.
+001-3478
6 218012
09/25
10%01
832
recreation
Refund
5.25
TOTAL DUE
VENDOR--------)
5.25
ea g
_,.c;.:k e --meet Crjmi_s.
*'�1-4�a18-2339 . «L3a.7
ya,age^enfft]Action urogram A®_mtAct,.,,
*881-403.0-231£5 i 21901"
?aripcsa Horticultural 4aricesa
*tj�31-4313-5390 1
21001B
Martinez, Cressy M, i2
8981-34'9 2190iZ
wartine-, ?raa /3
*801-3478 9 21041Z
Mayersxi, Beverly E. 75
*891-3418 18 21041Z
Myers, Elizabeth MyersE
+991-4553-4884 1 219018
*401-4210-4000 1 21901E
H
_-_, „E,
J '�L :'� ,E?iDOR--------;
315.84
<"9'25
18i8i
'rfs`o-1�/„-lbtS-ACM
1,x95.98 10101/91 �rie��'132i2
T:,TAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----;
1595.09
-OTAL DDE VENDOR --------,
0.00
09/25
18/91
2392
'tee Trim Heritage
125.04
.' •: L NDDR ---------,
':;t 'YE VE
125.99
99:25
19/91
412
Recreation 'Refund
5.25
'TAL DQE VENDOR, -------->
5.25
09/25
19/41
636
Recreatlan Rafund
5.25
'tTAL DUE VENDOR --------i•
5.25
99125
19;81
827
Rac.eatlon Refund
5.25
T;;TAL DUE VENDOR -------->
5.25
99/25
19;81
'rffc 3 Trans 9/12
252.00
99/25
14;41
91DB17
Ping Com 919/91
414.00
''CTAL HE VENDOR --------;
666.48
Favroll Trans:er
lanri�g �et�crk �lar,nin�;�;v
X001 -4216)-422f 1 213015 H9-25 19/01 90593
Public E*P1 Ret:remert F=RS
+001-2110-1008 1 21001L 39/25 13111
{061-211 -1108 21 21001? P/25 13/01
R.F. Comm. Specialties RFConSpec
M1-4411-5401 3 219918 09/25 All &311
Radio Dispatch Carp. Ranon-Ispa
}0131-4555-2130 1 21"M 09125 10101
,R
"8 82
'n Ste,i90
3.557.69
v.:E VENDSR--------,
35^57.60
; 'F 1",
39,500.90 19/91/91 00$000061?
EPAID AMOUNT ----,
39.=m@.a0
_ I E 'VE!;DOR--------;
0.00
Plan
1,686.+7
-, 2L
EA,-.Iover Sontr:ntions
2,877.15 10/81/91 0000013209
Er^iovee :,untr:but:ons
2.527.79 10/91/91 0690013209
"- PREPAID AMOUNT ----'i
5,4@4.95
l.E .E9DOR--------,
0.00
ia.lar 3 stem Repair
45.00
"SITAL DM :VENDOR --------i
45M
-:ac:ltyContinuation
20.00
i0TAL D E 'VENDOR -------->
20.09
_tertsge.a .,.
Ail
.rNuR--------,
5.25
R:;oertson. Connie
+�01-3418
i4
2i4
A4 ..:
?:
ecrea*.t_r; Kec�nd
5.25
.. HL ilUC ________
J f
RonKranzerlAssoc C.C.
Inc
+401-+551-5223
1
21>013
^9%25
1U Al
�itl-9
Pin :nkg ;r_s
25576.16
--_ : , - cVDCR i
J;Ni JuC rL. _--_-___.
2.6lb..b
Piz, s. Pamela
+041-3478
13
21041..
79125
10101
14%
recreation Ref.^d
1.25
' D:+C- 'VEL. -______'i
- 'TAL, C°lDCR -
5.25
S.S. valley Asn of Cities
56VAsnCity
+401-4030-2325
3
210917
09/25
14.01
"etbership Mtg 9/19
18.00 10/01/91 0000013208
,4TH- PREPAID ?MOUNT
'_-AL DUE VENDOR --------}
0.06
San Francisco 1'ilton
SFHilLon
+401-4010-2330
2
21OIZ
09/25
10/01
_=a, a Mtg :9:15-Forbing
100.00 10/01/91 000,,0013211
TDTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----?
100.00
T'TAL DUE 'VENDOR --------}
0.00
San Gabriel 'vly Tribune
HVTribune
+001-4040-2115
4
21001C
09/25
10/01
Pit H.g-i3rand6RollKnoll
76.26
+001-4040-2115
3
210015
09125
10101
9806
Corrected Notice Nominees
45.90
-IT "DUE VENDOR --------}
t JiHL
124.16
�GUt^°rn La, SQn
Et
+001-4323-212,5 �'a0;q
*001-43SI-2:2h
:southern Ca. E;.son SoCscc.sc,,
•r
*141-441- 1'� i 21�;SIB
�Guthern :,a. E�:sGn �Gi.aECiSGn
{i39-+539-2126 i 2100:8
Southern C.a. Edison j �jSoCaEdison
*1.3/1-4538-2126 1 210018
Standard Insurance of Ore Standard?n
*001-2110-1005 1 210018
*001-2110-/005 2 21A01C
�Jy. j•{
�GTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 515.50
rJ'-�
1,' ..
�ii_ vv •.rG1-�IIauSL
3,ha).99
"J'AL DUE VEND'.R--------;
3,3-A.38
_�;t_
=lactr:c-Su��itrdge
2.,1.13
_.
2�
.3 0
E.ect-3dcamore
209.50
-C-AL DUE VENDOR --------:
459.63
c9i25
: ,0:
Electric Dist 141
65.93
?O -AL DUE VENDOR --------;
65.93
09.25
10,01
Electric -Dist :39
140.02
'CTAL DUE VENDOR --------3
140.02
09/25.
10/01
Electric Dist :38
175.32
'J?AL DUE VENDOR --------;
175.32
09/25
10101
Ltfe ins premium
449.50
09125
10/01
Supp Life Press -October
67.00
�GTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 515.50
'r:L•4i'ffi ..._off
f00i-+030-2321 22@.z' 1..
1EC Records 1 T—In matin _:_-
f�� 1-40 40-234
:S varint _5°ertnt
X20 -i1 2 5
tical pAUnocai
fi01-421 -i31 1 219010
f5�1-4310-2310 4 219910
fN011-4310-2310 3 21$91C
ialnut Valley Auto Body 'MutoBoav
+001-4090-2395 1 21002C
.LE -)R -------- =04.39
��{ it?��ii ._Cs=':pE:'1n rt2ne'8ei ib.b
E 'VENDOR
i5 10/01
5 L . E VEND C'R --------
Distance
------ distance 20.52
;T L r,E -YE ND0R------- 20.52
09125 10102 491-'¢;;'_n 19.79
09125 10/0i 19.52
09x25 10l01 900561=.e;-rars.s 30.09
-='aL LE VENDOR --------} 69.30 /
09/26 10(01 59932 �-To+a: .t Sign 45.00
,T
"Oi�L 5uE '•;E'iDDR-------- 45.00
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- -------- ---- ------------ ---- -- --- - - -- ---
ialf Ut
is l
2126
kihitehouse, Sanry � L,
C; : *-Emouse
fO, 1-449S-INO
D 3 8 - 31 a
'NDCR
i'll Sept
2,788,51
u.AL DuE VEN-OR --
w.too
26
tai h1
Parade Eupplies-Rcr, F2-mt
52.50
7DTAL DUE VENDOR ---------
52.5-4
"ITAL PREPAID -----------
46,617.65
'17AL DUE --------
397. S96.55
TGTAL REPORT ------------ - /
444.214.40
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 12, 1991
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Grothe called the meeting to order at 7:04
p.m. in the Walnut Valley School district Board
Meeting Room, 880 South Lemon Street, Diamond Bar,
California.
PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
ALLEGIANCE: Kent Norton.
ROLL CALL: Commissioner Harmony, Commissioner Schey,
Commissioner Lin, Vice Chairman MacBride and
Chairman Grothe.
Also present were Planning Director James
DeStefano, City Planner Emeritus Irwin Kaplan,
Associate Planner Robert Searcy, Planning
Technician Ann Lungu, Planning Technician Armando
Villa, and Contract Secretary Liz Myers. City
Engineer Sid Mousavi arrived at 7:50 p.m.
MINUTES: PD/DeStefano reported that staff compiled a
response to the Commission's directive for
July 8, 1991 clarification on dialogue on the July 8, 1991
meeting. A verbatim report, taken from the
recording of the meeting, has been submitted. In
addition, staff has included, in its entirety,
VC/MacBride's discourse on the Diamond Bar legacy.
Staff recommended the Commission discuss the
contents of the attachment and the draft minutes of
the meeting of July 8, 1991, and direct staff
accordingly.
C/Harmony suggested that the entire verbatim staff
report be included as part of the Minutes of July
8, 1991, as well as the inclusion of VC/MacBride's
discourse.
Motion was made by C/Harmony, seconded by
VC/MacBride and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the
Minutes of July 8, 1991, as amended.
July 22, 1991 C/Harmony requested that the Minutes of July 22,
1991 be amended on page 4 to delete paragraphs four
through seven.
Motion was made by C/Schey, seconded by VC/Harmony
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Minutes of
July 22, 1991, as amended.
STUDY SESSION: PT/Lungu addressed the Commission regarding the
second draft of the tree preservation ordinance.
Preliminary Draft Comments from the Commission are requested. The
Tree Preservation next time the Commission meets to discuss this
Ordinance ZCA 91-3 topic, it will be in ordinance form, and a public
hearing.
August 12, 1991 Page 2
VC/MacBride made the following comments: Under
Purpose, amend the phrase "as well as defined" to
"definitive of"; under Intent and Applicability,
the ordinance should pertain to both public and
private property; and page 3, under Exception C,
include shrubs, and add the wording "... necessary
to keep street and sidewalk easements clear of
obstruction..."
C/Schey requested that the syntax "shall mean",
"mean", etc. be eliminated from the Definition
section. He also stated that defining a Heritage
Tree, simply by size, seems to be an overly broad
definition.
VC/MacBride requested staff to review the item,
possibly with Don Schad, and reword it.
Following discussion, C/Schey suggested that the
Significant Tree and the Heritage Tree be
differentiated. The Heritage Tree can have the
full review it is warranted, and the Significant
Tree have at least some review.
C/Harmony made the following comments: Under
Diseased Trees, staff should include some reference
to insect infestation, as well as wording
indicating "and others inflicted by, but not
limited to."; he indicated concern regarding the 2
inch guideline referred to in the Routine
Maintenance section and Pruning Permit section; in
reference to the removal or relocation of oak trees
or heritage trees, .some significant tree removal
should remain in the purview of the Planning
Commission and the Council; and on page 7, item E,
replacement trees should be maintained for a period
of five years.
C/Schey discussed item E, page 5, regarding the
enforcement of replacement trees. A warranty
period of 3 to 5 years is a long time, and often
the developer has become unavailable. He suggested
that language be included in the context that the
applicant, permittee, or successor, whoever is
responsible for that property when the tree is
removed, is responsible for the replacement trees.
C/Harmony suggested that a provision for paying the
City the appraised value of the lost tree, if it
cannot be replaced, be included with the tree
replacement clause.
C/Schey, noting that often times developers view
the fines as a more desirable option, requested
August 12, 1991 Page 3
staff to review the provision in Claremont, which
carries a heavier penalty.
C/Lin inquired how the capabilities of tree
specialists are differentiated.
PT/Lungu stated that they must have proof of
qualifications and references of past work.
VC/MacBride requested staff to determine if there
is a California requirement that establishes
standards which indicates that the specialist is
licensed, bonded, or certified.
Chair/Grothe noted that, in the replacement of
trees, quantity is not discussed. Understanding
that tree sizes and types must be varied, he
cautioned that unless there is a minimum
replacement number indicated, some developers will
manage to elude the specifications.
PD/DeStefano stated that a section will be added
pertaining to the replacement ratio, and the issues
pertaining to the size of the replacement trees.
He then stated that, with the Commission's
comments, staff will prepare the document in full
ordinance format, and establish a public hearing
process for the Commission's recommendation to the
City Council.
General Plan CPE/Kaplan addressed the Commission regarding the
General Plan. The discussion for tonight is to
familiarize the Commission with areas of the
General Plan that are either too vague, or too
specific, as well as get the Commission's thoughts
on items that are not, but should be, included in
the General Plan. Lloyd Zola and Kent Norton, from
the Planning Network, will discuss the physical
changes that will happen as the result of the Land
Use Circulation Element. Also, there will be a
discussion on the policies that are in the Housing
Element, and their implications.
Kent Norton stated that the intent of the
discussion is to compare the existing land uses to
the proposed land uses, under the GPAC Plan, and
indicate any major differences. He displayed two
maps to illustrate the areas of change.
C/Harmony inquired which area is being considered
for the High School Swap site, and how the
construction of the school will impact the
particular area.
August 12, 1991 Page 4
PD/DeStefano stated that the Pomona School District
is considering 5 sites for the high school. The
Tres Hermanos area is one of the favored sites.
Kent Norton stated that the GPAC plan for Tres
Hermanos is for a planned development with a
mixture of commercial and low density residential
of about 1.4 units per acre.
VC/MacBride inquired what the Planning Commission's
relationship is to the decision making process in
regards to the location of the high school.
Kent Norton explained that recent State legislation
requires school districts to work more closely with
cities. Cities now have review authority over any
school district development. However, they still
have autonomy in terms of location of sites.
PD/DeStefano stated that Diamond Bar is committed
to assisting the Pomona School District in
providing a north Diamond Bar High School. The
location has not yet been determined, therefore,
the school is not specifically a General Plan issue
at this point. The City of Diamond Bar is working
with the City of Industry in order to prepare a
specific plan for the 800 acre Tres Hermanos ranch
area.
CPE/Kaplan stated that we are working with the City
of Industry and the School District to assure
whatever site is selected makes sense within the
total concept of the area. The General Plan calls
for a specific plan for that area.
Kent Norton, referring to vacant areas, indicated
that areas that had previous building restrictions
would maintain those, as the jurisdiction switched
from the County to the City. However, the
committee designated those areas that had no
previous restriction with appropriate densities
based on slopes, and other physical characteristics
and surrounding land use. The committee set the
maximum for higher density categories at 16 units
per acre. However, one of the overriding goals of
the GPAC plan, regarding land use designation, was
to maintain existing uses as much as possible.
Therefore, there are a number of individual
projects and complexes in the City that may be
slightly over, or under, those density
calculations.
Kent Norton indicated the plan specifically does
not allow through traffic at the Sunset Crossing.
August 12, 1991 Page 5
VC/MacBride inquired if there is sufficient area
allocated for the completion of the 57/60
interchange.
Kent Norton indicated that, at this time, Caltrans
does not have adequate right of way.
Following discussion regarding an interchange
study, VC/MacBride requested sketches of what might
be done with the interchange, so as to be able to
determine it's feasibility, and review the
alternatives.
CE/Mousavi informed the Commission that Caltrans
will have some preliminary information, regarding
the interchange study, sometime in December.
Kent Norton, continuing with the discussion, stated
that the GPAC plan recommended retaining the
recreation uses at present. If at some point the
City determines that that area should be developed,
it outlines some general guidelines for its use.
C/Harmony inquired what the reasoning was in
allowing alternate conditions other than just
leaving it as open space, park, and/or golf course
use.
Kent Norton stated that part of it was to give
direction that would highlight the economic
development goals of the City. There was a feeling
that the Golf Course represented a very centralized
part of the City's future development scheme.
PD/DeStefano explained that GPAC, recognizing that
the Golf Course property represents an opportunity,
if exercised, for the community to broaden its
economic resources, developed a broad definition
concerning open space recreational uses.
Chair/Grothe indicated that there should be a
specific plan for the Golf Course within the
framework of the General Plan.
Upon the request of PD/DeStefano, CPE/Kaplan
discussed the Economic Development Strategy. He
explained that the basic premise of the Economic
Development Session was that if costs continue to
escalate at the same rate, without the provision of
any additional services, and revenues continue at
the same rate, within the next 5 to 10 years, they
will cross and causing distant revenues. There is
a need to develop an Economic Development Strategy
August 12, 1991 Page 6
that recognizes the need to intervene in the
process, today, to be fiscally solvent.
Kent Nolan pointed out more of the primary
geographical changes: GPAC recommended a triangular
parcel, down at the southern end of the golf
course, for commercial uses, and, specifically in
the General Plan, it recommends a restaurant; a
vacant parcel under the powerlines at Golden
Springs and Grand is recommended for office uses; a
pad has been graded, in an area labeled as open
space at the Gateway Center, modifying the open
space line; off of Clear Creek, down east of Grand
and Diamond Bar Blvd., there is a small two and a
half acres that has been designated as residential
hillside; GPAC wants to retain the 10 acre parcel,
located east of Golden Springs, south of the
freeway, that has a previous building restriction,
as open space; retain the slope as open space, on
the Bramalea property, east of Grand and Diamond
Bar Blvd.; prevent through traffic at Washington
and Lycoming, north of the 60, off of Brea Canyon;
the plan calls for existing uses to remain, at the
triangle area between the two freeways and Brea
Canyon, with an alternate plan for potential
development of a moderate to high density mix use
of commercial offices; GPAC recommended that
remaining Country parcels have a density of 1 unit
per acre, except for the far southern end which
will have a density of 1 unit per 2 1/2 acres; the
canyon, off the 57 freeway before Gateway Center,
is designated hillside residential to minimize the
impact to the hillside; it is recommended to leave
site D as a public facility; GPAC recommended
designating the TransAmerica property as lower
density residential; and the canyons north and
south of Pathfinders, west of the 57 freeway, have
been designated as open space, and park areas, but
the area south of Colima has been designated as
hillside residential.
C/Schey, inquiring why open space areas and park
space areas are differentiated, asked if the intent
could be that the open space designation areas
would comes under the ownership of the City through
dedication.
Kent Norton explained that the open space area
designates a more passive or non use, such as
slopes. A park space area designates a more
active, passive use, such as nature centers,
trails, hiking trails, etc. He stated that a
decision was not made regarding the extent of the
August 12, 1991 Page 7
use of the open space, however, there was
discussion regarding maintenance costs.
CPE/Kaplan stated that there was not an agreement
as to the extent for which that open space should
be used for anything else but open space.
C/Schey stated that a lot of the open space
indicated on the map should be converted to park
space so that they City can maintain control. If
some of these areas are left with any development
potential, there will be on going development
pressure.
Kent Norton stated that there are two other areas
designated as open space: The canyons west of the
Orange freeway, south of Pathfinder and north of
the Brea Canyon cutoff; and the area south of
Grand, and adjacent to the Country, off of
Longview.
CPE/Kaplan requested Kent Norton to comment on the
general change in the intensity, or character, of
use, where density has been reduced to conform to
the existing, as opposed to the current zoning.
Kent Norton explained that the GPAC's consideration
was to protect the integrity of existing
neighborhoods in regards to the existing
development intensity. In some cases, the existing
development intensity was lower than what might be
allowed under existing zoning. We will be
developing a consistency information about what
areas specifically could be affected by down
zoning, and other kinds of changes and uses.
PD/DeStefano, indicating two examples of areas that
the zoning was changed to appropriately reflect
what has occurred, stated that the McDermott Mobile
Home Park, on Washington, is designated light
manufacturing and should more properly be
designated for medium density residential, and the
condominium complex at Golden Springs and Temple is
designated as C-1 commercial, and should be more
appropriately be designated as a medium density
residential.
CPE/Kaplan inquired if the GPAC discussed the
potential uses in the areas to the west, in the
proposed sphere, as indicated on the map.
Kent Norton indicated that the General Plan does
have information about potential annexation areas.
One of the potential development options is to take
August 12, 1991 Page 8
the Arciero business park and allow retail uses in
that area. GPAC recommended a tremendous
biological and open space resources in the Tonner
Canyon area. The primary recommendation was that
the land use is to be a planned development,
primarily with open space and recreation uses.
Also, it was recommended that a regional roadway
would not be built through Tonner Canyon.
PD/DeStefano confirmed C/Lin's inquiry that the
area indicated on the map as lavender, adjacent to
the golf course, has been changed from commercial
manufacturing to office professional.
C/Lin emphasized the importance of maintaining park
space area.
Chair/Grothe called a recess at 9:40 p.m. the
meeting was called back to order at 9:50 p.m.
CPE/Kaplan highlighted those issues which are
departures from existing policy, and/or policy that
the Commission should be aware of in the Housing
Element: Build residential development into areas
that have large scale commercial development, to
achieve a mix use concept; there is a provision of
the California Government Code that refers to a
density bonus to developers that build a percentage
of affordable housing; developments which include
more than 250 urban residential units must provide
a mix of dwelling unit types; developments which
include more than 500 urban residential units,
ought to contribute to the city's bounds of
affordable housing at all income levels with the
intent that up to 20% of all new housing within the
project be afforded by very low,low, and moderate
income household; the developers contributions may
be in the form of actual construction within the
project itself or contributions of in lieu fees a
city's low income housing fund; maintain the
existing number of subsidized units; limit the
convergence of rental apartments to condominiums;
annually assess all affordable housing that are
considered at risk; work with LA County Housing
authority in nearby cities to establish the
continuance emergence of shelter programs; revising
the zoning ordinance to reduce parking requirements
for senior citizens housing projects to a level
consistent with the projects age restrictions;
permit sorority, fraternity, and other group
housing only to the extent that the associated
nuisance factors are mitigated; determine the
feasibility of establishing a craftsmen and tool
lending program, utilizing state funding if
August 12, 1991 Page 9
necessary; permitting second units in single family
residential zones, zoned at 3 - 6 units to the
acre, at densities that would not exceed the zoning
densities; work with the State Franchise Board to
enforce the provisions of the revenue and taxation
code which prohibits owners of substandard housing
from claiming depreciation/ amortization; and the
implementation matrix.
VC/MacBride inquired what would happen if a city
does not prepare a suitable General Plan.
CPE/Kaplan explained that the State may decide that
the city is not entitled to certain funds. Also,
the State may impose certain sanctions, if someone
sues the city.
ANNOUNCEMENTS: PD/DeStefano informed the Commission of the plans
to meet at City Hall, Monday, August 26th, at 3:30
Staff p.m., in order to go to the Claremont Colleges to
get involved in a unique process to help develop
our zoning and subdivision code.
Commission C/Schey commented on the ugliness of the new sign
at Vineyard Bank.
C/Schey inquired how it is determined which
Planning Commission seats are associated with which
new City Council person.
PD/DeStefano stated that the new Council persons
will be able to determine if they wish to retain
the Commissioner or select a new one of their
choosing. He stated that he is unsure which
Council seat replaces which Commission seat.
C/Harmony requested staff to determine if the
utility poles, in the area of Golden Springs and
Lemon, are being installed or being removed.
ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by VC/MacBride, seconded by C/Schey
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn at 10:30 p.m. to
Monday, August 26, 1991, at 3:30 p.m. at City Hall
in order to attend a Study Session regarding the
Development Code at the Claremont Colleges Computer
Center (8th & College)
Respectively,
�1 1
James DeStefano
Secretary/Planning Commission
August 12, 1991 Page 10
Attest:
Jack' Grothe
Chairman
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 26, 1991
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Grothe called the meeting to order at 7:08
p.m. in the Walnut Valley School District Board
Meeting Room, 880 South Lemon Street, Diamond Bar,
California.
PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
ALLEGIANCE: VC/MacBride.
ROLL CALL: Commissioner Harmony, Commissioner Schey,
Commissioner Lin, Vice Chairman MacBride, and
Chairman Grothe.
Also present were Planning Director James
DeStefano, City Planner Emeritus Irwin Kaplan,
Associate Planner Robert Searcy, Planning
Technician Ann Lungu, Planning Technician Armando
Villa, Deputy City Attorney Bill Curley, and
Contract Secretary Liz Myers.
MINUTES: Motion was made by C/Harmony, seconded by C/Schey
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept the Minutes of
Aug. 12, 1991 August 12, 1991.
PUBLIC HEARING: PT/Searcy addressed the Commission regarding the
request to expand the maximum number of permitted
CUP 91-6 arcade video game machines within Barro's Pizza,
located within the Diamond Creek Center. Staff
recommended that the Commission approve CUP 91-6
within the findings of fact and conditions as
listed.
Frank Barro, applicant, 21000 Colima Rd., stated
that he would like to expand the number of video
games in order to satisfy the various teams he
sponsors.
Motion was made by C/Schey, seconded by C/Harmony
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve staff's
recommendation subject to the findings of facts and
conditions listed.
Chair/Grothe requested that the applicant, when
installing the video machines, do some general
maintenance within his restaurant.
CUP 90-70 AP/Searcy addressed the Commission regarding the
request to amend CUP 90-70, granted August 27,
1990, to approve a live entertainment/nightclub for
the restaurant project located at 21671 E. Gateway
Center Drive. The applicant also requested a one
year Extension of Time to begin construction of the
project. The extension of time has been submitted
in compliance with the conditions of approval. The
request for the nightclub/live entertainment use is
allowed by the interim CM Zone Ordinance. However,
the application has not specifically identified
August 26, 1991 Page 2
which type of live entertainment uses the
restaurant will present. Staff recommended
approval of the extension of time for a period of
one (1) year from the date of this action via
adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 91-70.
Staff also recommended a continuance on the
nightclub/live entertainment request, until there
is adequate information regarding the live
entertainment use upon which staff can complete an
appropriate analysis.
C/Schey inquired if the code does not provide a
provision prohibiting the type of live
entertainment that would probably not be acceptable
in the community.
AP/Searcy responded that there are no parameters,
in the code, which outline the definition of live
entertainment. However, conditions regarding the
type of live entertainment can be specified within
the CUP.
PD/DeStefano explained that, in order to ask the
Police and Fire Department to respond accordingly,
it is necessary to have the specifics of the
intended use, such as the time of day the
entertainment will occur, the type of music to be
played, and the age group it will attract, and so
forth.
C/Schey inquired if there would be a problem with
time lines, if the Commission accepted the
recommendation for continuance.
DCA/Curley indicated that there is the basic six
month consideration. However, upon the applicant's
consent, continuance of the matter could be dealt
with on an open ended bases.
C/Harmony inquired if it would be appropriate to
simply request that the specific use come back to
the Commission for review.
DCA/Curley explained that there are too many
variables to consider for the Commission to grant a
formal open ended consent of live entertainment.
It is more appropriate for the Commission to
indicate a formal consideration of the idea, when
there are specifics available. The generic
parameters of the live entertainment are lacking.
The Public Hearing was declared open.
August 26, 1991 Page 3
Ernie Del Rey, an agent for the builder, residing
in Diamond Bar, indicated that, basically, they are
considering a small dance floor, engaging a small
band that would play music within good taste,
include a bit of comedy, and cater more to the
professionals in the area.
DCA/Curley, responding to VC/MacBride's inquiry,
explained that the existing Resolution already
indicates that the live entertainment aspect will
be revisited by the Commission. However, the
applicant should come up with a working generic
plan, so that the Commission could condition it
accordingly.
Motion was made by C/Schey, seconded by C/Harmony
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept staff's
recommendation on the approval of the extension of
time for a period of one year.
VC/MacBride inquired why the proposed access way
issue between this facility, and the Days Inn
Hotel, has ceased.
AP/Searcy stated that the Days Hotel was
disinterested in the idea, and not willing to
contribute to the monetary consideration.
Chair/Grothe requested the applicant's concurrence
to continue the matter to October 14, 1991, and to
work with staff to come up with an appropriate
descriptive marketing plan.
C/Harmony explained that the applicant would not be
locked into the specified date, and may in turn
request an extended date.
Ernie Del Rey stated his concurrence for the
continuance, as well as his consent to work with
staff to develop an appropriate descriptive
marketing plan.
Motion was made by C/Schey, seconded by C/Harmony
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the matter to
October 14, 1991.
STUDY SESSION: CPE/Kaplan stated that he would like the Commission
to be aware that GPAC's recommendation has set the
General Plan stage for down zoning in the community. Staff will
be doing an analysis to indicate where this down
zoning occurred, the extent it has occurred, as
well as it's implications. He informed the
Commission that the consultants will be present, at
the Public Hearing scheduled for September 9, 1991,
August 26, 1991 Page 4
to make a presentation to the general public. At
the second Public Hearing, scheduled September 23,
1991, staff will submit a report summarizing the
Commission's and staff's comments from the hearing.
He requested suggestions from the Commission on the
method of publication, the presentation format of
the Public Hearing, and the summary of the
information.
VC/MacBride suggested that a letter be directed to
every person who has worked on the GPAC, and to the
identifiable leaders of the community, such as the
Rotary Club, DBIA, the Lions Club, the Republican
Women, the Historical Society, the Chambers of
Commerce, and the City Council members.
C/Schey stated that the leadership groups are not
necessarily representatives of the community in
general. He suggested placing notices in
supermarkets and stores in order to attract the
average person.
VC/MacBride suggested that notices be placed on
every bulletin board available, and that a prepared
press release be placed in every newspaper vehicle
that can be used. He questioned if the Commission
should serve as a conduit of GPAC, during the
Public Hearing. He suggested that the Commission
make prepatory statements regarding the Plan.
C/Schey indicated that the Commission's capacity is
not just to serve as a forum between the public and
the City Council, but rather serve as an action
body that will amend or accept GPAC's
recommendation. The Commission should make their
comments, include comments from the public, and
make the appropriate recommendations to the City
Council.
C/Harmony made the following comments regarding
publication techniques: The general summary
written by staff is a good overview; the current
proposed zoning map is another good tool; it should
be conveyed to the civic leaders, and the public,
that there are copies of the total Plan available
at City Hall, upon request; not only mail the City
newsletter to each resident, but also make it
available at supermarkets and stores; display the
zoning map, with a detailed color code description,
in several of the local stores throughout the City;
have Jones Intercable scan the maps; and present
well thought out news releases.
August 26, 1991 Page 5
VC/MacBride pointed out that the type of language
used, to properly describe GPAC, is important in
encouraging public interest.
C/Schey indicated that the key is to make the
public understand how the General Plan fits within
the context of the City. It should be described in
laymans terms, rather than getting too much into
specific elements.
VC/MacBride suggested that the General Plan be
portrayed as a constitutional document, of the
City, that outlines our aspirations.
CPE/Kaplan suggested that the specific issues be
dramatized so that the public can perceive the
direction of the Plan. Particular issues will
attract people.
C/Schey suggested that we identify this as a
document that will allow us to help "Reclaim Our
City".
VC/MacBride suggested that the leadership
organizations be asked to contact their members and
inform them of the scheduled Public Hearing.
CPE/Kaplan began his review of the Plans for Public
Services and Facilities. The following are various
elements that the Commission should consider:
Sect. IV, item 111-4d, and item 115 - CPE/Kaplan
indicated that, though he agrees with the
principle, the kind of language used leaves no room
to move in terms of making policy.
Sect. IV, item a, "Discuss plans by MWD to relocate
a reservoir in Tonner Canyon."; on the next page,
"Discuss with the County Sanitation District, the
funding and scheduling any additional sewage
facilities."; item e, "Discuss long term supply of
reclaimed waste water."; and the next page,
"Discuss with County Solid Waste Management the
potential for access for rail haul.." - CPE/Kaplan
pointed out that discussing plans is not a policy.
The Commission may wish to make a policy statement
and convey that as part of the General Plan.
CPE/Kaplan requested the Commission to note the
policy under Strategy, "Permit new developments and
the intensification of existing developments, only
where and when adequate public services and
facilities can be insured."
August 26, 1991 Page 6
sect. IV -6, "Review development projects for their
impacts...it should either require on and off site
improvements, or if such improvement cannot be
provided, decline approval of the project." -
CPE/Kaplan noted that the language does not give
flexibility for overriding considerations.
CPE/Kaplan asked the Commission to note item 141,
regarding the pursuance of a cooperative program
with Industry and Pomona Unified School District;
sect. IV -7, regarding the pursuance of the
acquisition of a site and development of a civic
center and multi -use community center; item 153;
item 211; item 212; item 213; item 214; and item
232.
CPE/Kaplan suggested that the Commission look for
other items that may have constraining language
that need further refinement. He then reviewed the
Plan for Resource Management. The following are
various elements that the Commission may wish to
consider:
Page II -9 & sect. 111; page II -11, sect. 121; paqe
II -12, regarding tree preservation; page II -13,
regarding integrated trails, page II -13, item 133,
item 132, & item 135; page II -14, item 211A, item
212 & item 214; page II -15, regarding the
encouragement of the use of drought tolerant
plants; page II -18, regarding the city wide design
of a system of bike and pedestrian trails; & page
II -18, regarding office on site trash compacting.
CPE/Kaplan reviewed the Plans for Public Health and
Safety. The following are various elements the
Commission may wish to consider:
Page III -10, item 144; page III -11, regarding the
use of lighting to prevent theft, and limiting
concealments; page III -12, item 2; item 110.1; item
110.2; and item 110.4.
VC/MacBride indicated that the last two sentences,
on page III -6, regarding air quality, and
suggesting that the City establish itself as a
model City of innovation in Southern California, is
one of the most significant statements in the
entire book.
CPE/Kaplan indicated that a lot of the stated
policies need to be worded more strongly, or gotten
rid of completely. The important issues can be
boiled down into a very small, and meaningful
document. He suggested that the Commission review
August 26, 1991 Page 7
the document and flag other issues that may need
further consideration.
C/Schey inquired what other issues are scheduled,
on the agenda, for the September 9, 1991 meeting.
PT/Lungu stated that the political sign issue is
scheduled.
PD/DeStefano stated that the Commission will
receive a rough draft political sign ordinance for
the September 9th meeting. He explained that the
City Council will create a sub -committee to deal
with political signs, but they also want the
Planning Commission to create a political sign
ordinance.
INFORMATIONAL PD/DeStefano noted the memorandum from the Traffic
ITEMS: and Transportation Commission (TTC) informing the
Planning Commission that the "Fred Janz Project",
Parcel No. 22986, is scheduled for discussion
before the TTC on September 12, 1991 at 6:30 p.m.
at the Diamond Bar Library.
ANNOUNCEMENT: CPE/Kaplan stated that the group that attended the
Claremont workshop, found the exercise on zoning to
Staff be a useful exercise. It is a worthwhile exercise
to bring to the entire Commission because it will
help the Commission focus their thoughts, and
articulate them in a way that is useful to the
consultant to help prepare the development
standard. We will be doing a similar exercise here
sometime in the near future.
Commission VC/MacBride informed the Commission of the meeting,
consisting of members of the Council,
representatives of the Chamber of Commerce, and the
DBIA, scheduled August 27, 1991 at 4:00 p.m., to
discuss sign monumentation. Because there was
concern about the Commission's effective liaison
with the Council, the Planning Commission was asked
to have one or two person attend the meeting. He
stated that C/Schey and he will attend the meeting
unless another member of the Commission prefers to
attend.
PD/DeStefano stated that the purpose of the meeting
is to outline some of the issues of freestanding
monument signs, and come to a resolution, so that
the committee can forward a recommendation to the
City Council.
The Commission stated no objections to the
appointed sub -committee.
August 26, 1991 Page 8
PD/DeStefano requested the Commission to determine
a day, Monday through Friday, and time, between
8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., that would be good for the
Commission to tour the AQMD facility.
C/Schey suggested either 8:00 a.m. or 4:00 p.m.,
around mid September, 1991. The Commission
concurred.
ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by C/Schey, seconded by VC/MacBride
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting at
9:34 p.m.
Respectively,
l
Jaihes DeStefano
Secretary/Planning Commission
Attest:
Jack Grothe `
Chairman
CARL WARREN & CO.
Insurance Adjusters
Claims Administrators
P O Box 25180
Santa Ana, CA 92799-5180
(714) 972.3146
(800) 572-6900
Date:
TO: City of Diamond Bar
Attention: Lynda Burgess
Sept. 16, 1991
Re: Claim: Berry vs Diamond Bar
Claimant: Tom & Joan Berry
D/Event: 6-10-91
Recd Y/Office: 9-11-91
Our File: S 68168 SWK
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.
(� 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.
0 APPLICATION REJECTION: Reject claimant's "Application for Leave
to Present a Late Claim". See Government Code Section 911.8.
D 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,
CARL WARREN & COMPANY
cc: S.C.J.P.I.A.
k j u
STUART A. HOLMES
ATTORNEY AT LAW
250 WEST FIRST STREET
SUITE 312
CLAREMONT, CALIFORNIA 91711
(714) 621-5886
ATTORNEY FOR: CLAIMANTS
RcCci v F
V
t l F;1 2: ! U
IN RE THE MATTER OF THE CLAIM OF: ) CLAIM FOR DAMAGES
TOM AND JOAN BERRY, )
Claimants. )
TO; THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND
BAR, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
1. Tom and Joan Berry hereby makes claim against the City of
Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, State of California, its City
Engineer and Street Department.
2. The claimant's post office address is:
is:
Tom and Joan Berry
c/o Stuart A. Holmes Esq.
250 West First Street, Suite 312
Claremont, California 91711
2. Notices concerning this claim should be sent to:
The same address as shown in paragraph 2, above.
3. The date and place of occurrence giving rise to this claim
1
June 10, 1991
The 300 Block of N. Prospectors Road, approximately 190
Feet South of Palo Cedro Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County,
California.
4. The circumstances giving rise to this claim are:
a. The claimants are the father and mother of Gene David
Berry, deceased.
b. Gene David Berry, date of birth, June 4, 1968, and
date of death, June 10, 1991, was fatally injured in a traffic
collision on the date and time indicated above. The other party
involved in the traffic collision is: Cynthia Jean Barbosa, 326
Prospectors Road, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California.
exhibit A.
C. Within approximately 3 days prior to this accident,
the City of Diamond Bar, or its predecessor, the County of Los
Angeles, entered into an agreement with IPS Services, Inc., PO Box
10458, San Bernardino, California 92423-0458 to apply a oil sand
mixture, commonly known as a slurry seal to the roadway surface of
Prospector's Road, Diamond Bar, California.
d. on or about June 10, 1991, Gene David Berry was
proceeding northbound on Prospectors Road when Barbosa turned left
into her driveway at 326 Prospectors Road, thereafter stopping her
vehicle in such a position as to block the northbound lane of
Prospectors Road. Mr. Berry applied his brakes and attempted to
make an emergency stop, however, he was unable to stop due in part
to the slurry mixture not being set, and filling his tire treads
N
so that the effective coefficient of friction (skid factor) was
reduced from an expected 60 to 70 percent to approximately 15I
percent.
e. Claimants are informed and believes that the City of
Diamond Bar was negligent in the following particulars, including,
but not limited to,
(1) Failure to adequately inspect and supervise the
application of the slurry seal to the roadway surface to assure
that the roadway would be able to handle vehicular traffic,
including the reasonable probability that a motor vehicle using the
roadway would have to make an emergency stop, and in such failure
re -opened or permitted Prospectors Road to be re -opened before the
mixture had set or hardened to the extent that the mixture would
not be pulled into the tire treads of a vehicle making an emergency
stop.
(2) Failure to maintain quality control inspections
of the slurry mix to assure that the material being applied was of
consistent quality that would or could be reasonably expected to
seal within the time frame allocated for the street closure.
(3) Allowing the continuance of known engineering
defects in the design and route of Prospector's Drive by permitting
or causing to be permitted and continued a curve in the roadway
which impacted adversely on users of the roadway.
f. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence
of the City of Diamond Bar and its employees and agents for the
errors and omissions described above, the claimants. as the
3
surviving parents of Gene David Berry, deceased, suffered injuries
due to the untimely death of their son, and these injuries and
damages continue to this date, and for an unspecified time in the
future.
5. The names of the public employees causing the injuries
and damages to the claimant are presently unknown.
7. The claim as of this date is $1,000,000.00.
8. The basis of the computation of the above amount is as
follows:
a. General and Special Damages: $1,000,000.00
DATED: September 9, 1991
STUART A. HOLMES
Attorney for Claimants
4
CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED (P 944 253 582)
PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL
(1013A, 2015.5 CCP)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
I am a resident of/employed in the aforesaid county, State
of California; I am over the age of eighteen years and not a
party to the within action; my business/residence address is:
250 West First Street Suite 312
Claremont California.
On September 10 1991, I served the
foregoing document(s) described as: Claim for Damages
on, the interested parties
in this action by placing a true copy thereof, enclosed in a
sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, in the
United States Mail at Claremont California,
addressed as follows:
City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
21660 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, California 91765
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is
true and correct, and that this declaration was executed by me
at Claremont, California on September 10, 1991.
G
JEANNE SKINNER
5
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, ENDORSING LEGISLATIVE
EFFORTS TO COMBAT DRIVE-BY SHOOTINGS AND
SUPPORTING H.R.100 (TORRES)
WHEREAS, criminal street gang activity is a significant
social problem in urban areas throughout the United States; and
WHEREAS, the violence and terrorism that street gangs
inflict upon the communities of our nation has been intolerably
exacerbated by the proliferation of "drive-by" shootings
throughout all areas and segments of our neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the constant threat of "drive-by" shootings
has begun to pervade the consciousness of citizens of all ages,
from child to adult; thereby depriving our citizenry of their
right to peacefully pursue the attainment of enriched and
fulfilled lifestyles; and
WHEREAS, "drive-bys" have turned our cities' streets
into a deadly combat zone; so deadly that a young American hero
of the Persian Gulf crisis from Baldwin Park could survive the
horrors of war in the desert; only to lose his life in the war of
the streets.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND
BAR, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City Council expresses its support and urges
the passage of H.R.100, recently introduced by Congressman
Esteban Torres which would increase the penalties for those
convicted of drive-by shootings.
2. The City Council urges all cities to take a
similar supportive position on H.R.100 by contacting their
elected representatives to solicit their support.
3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of
this Resolution and shall forward an executed copy to Congressman
Torres.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of
. 1991.
MAYOR
I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar
do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed,
approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Diamond Bar held on day of ,
1991, by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS -
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS -
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS -
ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBERS -
LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
RECEIVED
CL ITY OF" SOUTH EMON � . D
July 31, 1991
1 11 5 N. SANTA ANITA AVENUE
SOU1 H EL MONTE, CALIFORNIA 91733
579-6540 • 686-0460
TO: Cities In The Los Angeles Area
From: City Council, South El Monte, California
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 91-3122
Enclosed please find a copy of Resolution No. 91-3122 adopted
by the City Council of the City of South E1 Monte, California
at the regular meeting of July 25, 1991, supporting the
passage of H.R.100, introduced by Congressman Torres.
Sincerely,
Kat y Gonzales
City Clerk
Encl.
RESOLUTION NO. 91-3122
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH EL MONTE, CALIFORNIA, ENDORSING LEGISLATIVE
EFFORTS TO COMBAT DRIVE-BY SHOOTINGS AND SUPPORTING
H.R.100 (TORRES)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, criminal street ganq activity is a significant
social problem in urban areas throughout the United States; and
WHEREAS; the violence and terrorism that street aanas
inflict upon the communities of our nation has been intolerably
exacerbated by the proliferation of "drive-by" shootings
throughout all areas and seaments of our neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, the constant threat of "drive-by" shootings has
begun to pervade the consciousness of citizens of all ages, from
child to adult; thereby depriving our citizenry of their right
to peacefully pursue the attainment of enriched and fullfilled
lifestyles; and
WHEREAS, "drive-bys" have turned our cities' streets into a
deadly combat zone; so deadly that a young American hero of the
Persian Gulf crisis from Baldwin Park could survive the horrors
of war in the desert; only to lose his life in the war of the
streets.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH EL
MONTE HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
1. The Citv Council expresses its support and urges
the passage of H.R.100, recently introduced by
Conaressman Esteban Torres which would increase
the penalties for those convicted of drive-bv
shootings.
2. The Citv Council uraes all cities to take a
similar supportive position on H.R.100 by
contacting their elected representatives to
solicit their support.
3. The Citv Clerk shall certify to the adoption of
this Resolution and shall forward an executed
copv to Conaressman Torres.
Res. 91-3122
July 25, 1991
Paae Two
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of July, 1991.
May r
ATTEST:
74
R" , M01 ;T9 F4
a 71 ____
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS:
CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE )
I, Kathy L. Gonzales, City Clerk of the City of South El Monte,
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution
No. 91-3122 was dulv passed and adoT)ted by the Citv Council of
the Citv of South El Monte at a regular meeting of said Council
held on the 25th day of July, 1991, and that said Resolution was
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Olmos, Pardo, Perez, Sanchez, (Mayor) Kelly
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF DIAMOND BAR, PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF
OCTOBER 6-12, 1991 AS "FIRE PREVENTION WEEK"
IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
WHEREAS, Fire in the home disproportionately strikes the very young and
very old, and the majority of home fire deaths occur at night, when victims are typically
asleep, and
WHEREAS, Early warning of fire is essential to life safety and minimal fire
loss, and smoke detectors can be an important part of this early warning; and
WHEREAS, Proper fire safety planning and preparedness include regular
maintenance and testing of smoke detectors and well -rehearsed home fire escape plan; and
WHEREAS, A well planned and frequently rehearsed fire escape plan is
absolutely vital to the safety of all household members; and
WHEREAS, The Los Angeles County Fire Department and the City of
Diamond Bar are dedicated to the protection of life and property of its citizens from the
devastating effects of fire, and recognize the value of proper planning and preparedness
before the fire strikes; and
WHEREAS, The members of the fire service are joined in their fire prevention
efforts by the citizens of this community, and businesses, schools, service clubs and
organizations;
THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, does hereby
proclaim the week of October 6-I2, 1991 as "Fire Prevention Week. " This week
commemorates the Great Chicago Fire of 1871, in which 250 persons were killed, 100,000
left homeless and more than 17,400 buildings destroyed.
We call upon the people of Diamond Bar to participate in activities at home,
work and school, and to do as the Fire Prevention Week theme for 1991 suggest, "Fire Won't
Wait - Plan Your Escape. "
DATED:
MAYOR
ATTEST.•
LYADA BURGESS, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
+' °I -LOS'
F
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
LA ';ANADA F'LJNTRIDGE
Al`s
t
FIC[
FIRE DEPARTMENT
ARTE5IA
CARSO',
GLENDOR,
LAKEWOOD
NORWALK
1320 NORTH EASTERN AVENUE
C+LIi°F
of
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90063-3294
HAWAIIAN GARDE'.S
MENS
k'818) 963-2411
P MICHAEL FREEMAN
FIRE CHIEF
FORESTER & FIRE WARDEN
SEPTEMBER 13, 1991
TO: MR. ROBET 1— VAN NORT, (" TTY MANAGER
C JTY i_)F 1111. AMOND BAR
FROM: ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF ROBERT LEA/
DIVISION II, OPERATIONS BUREAU
SUBJECT: FIRE PREVENTION WEER - OCTOBER 6-12, 1991
In past years, the City of Diamond Bar has proclaimed Fire
Prevention Week. Sample proclamatic:-;,s are attached for the
council's con,,,:,.deration.
Open houses at,? 'ting planned it; s Angeles county fire
stations. Of course, our stations are always open for guests
but Fire Prevention Week open hoLlses are being publicized ter
stress the national theme of "Fire Woy-, ' >- Wait ...... Plan Your
Escape!"
I will contact yc-,,; w).-}, specifics 7ef�arding local fire station
open houses.
RL:mnr
Attachment.
SERVING THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY AND THE CITIES OF
AG.IUR4 HILL:
BRADE LIP,
D� APTE
LA ';ANADA F'LJNTRIDGE
MAYWOOD
ROLLING HILLS
SOUTH GA'F
ARTE5IA
CARSO',
GLENDOR,
LAKEWOOD
NORWALK
ROLLING HILLS ESTATES
TEMPLE C''
AZUSA
CERRITOS
HAWAIIAN GARDE'.S
LA MIRADA
PALMDALE
ROSEMFAD
WALN'..'T
PALDWIN PARn
CLAREMON-
HIDDEN HILI- =
LANCASTER
PA -OS VERGES ESTATES
SAN DIVAS
WFS-
ES'RE_.
RE -
COMMERCt
'-NTINGTCN
_a r'_'ENTE
PARAMOUN-
SANTA CLAR17A
WES'. A✓E
RF. -WFP
clirIAHv
11,7,'C-Rti
.AN":^/.
Pi((-RIVERA
SIGNAL11—WHI-TIEP
5`� N�,
[ AMON7PAR
APV, ID.'r.,:
_ '._
RA^.'�.•-PALC- ,ER�ES
SO�;T'--EL V')'r-E
WHEREAS More than 4,000 people in the United States died n home fires !n 1990; and
WHEREAS Approximately eighty percent of all U.S. fire deaths occur in the home; and
WHEREAS Developing and rehearsing home escape plans is a proven life-saving
measure that we all can take; and
WHEREAS Every household should devise and practice such a home fire escape pian
that includes having working smoke detectors and two ways out of each
room; and
WHEREAS Fire safety behaviors such as crawl low under smoke and strip, drop and
roil save lives; and
WHEREAS The fire service of Lcs Angeles County is dedicated to the safety of life and
property from the devastating effects of fire; and
WHEREAS Those members of the fire service are joined by other concerned citizens
of this state; as well as business, schools, service clubs and organizations
in their fire safety efforts; and
WHEREAS The local efforts of the fire service are supported by the activities of
organizations such as the National Fire Protection Association, the United
States Fire Administration, the International Association of Fire Chiefs, the
International Association of Fire Fighters, the International Association of
Black Professional Fire Fighters, the National Volunteer Fire Council,
Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs; and the Fire Marshals Association cf
North America.
IJWe (Mayor or City Counsel name), (Mayor or City Counsel of ,}, do
hereby proclaim the week of October 6-12, 1991 as Fire Prevention Week. This week
commemorates the great Chicago Fire of 1871, which killed 250 person, left 100,000
homeless and destroyed more than 17,400 buildings.
I call upon the people of this (City Name) to participate in fire preventicn activities at
home, work and school, and to heed the message; "Fire Won't Wait - Pian Your Escape,"
as the 1991 Fire Prevention Week theme suggests.
In witness hereof, I hereunto set my hand this day cf ;month), the year
of our Lord nineteen hundred and ninety-one.
WP:FIREPREV.MEM.NA3
WHEREAS Fire in the home disproportionately strikes the very young and very old, and
the majority of home fire deaths occur at night, when victiniS are typically
asleep, and
WHEREAS Early warning of fire is essential to life safety and minitoal fire loss, and
smoke detectors can be an important part of this early warning; and
WHEREAS Proper fire safety planning and preparedness include regular maintenance
and testing of smoke detectors and well -rehearsed home fire escape plan;
and
WHEREAS A well planned and frequently rehearsed home fire escape plan is
absolutely vital to the safety of all household members; and
WHEREAS The Los Angeles County Fire Department and the City of --} _ are
dedicated to the protection of life and property of its citizens from the
devastating effects of fire, and recognize the value cf proper planning and
preparedness before the fire strikes; and
WHEREAS The members of the fire service are joined in their fire prevention efforts by
the citizens of this community, and businesses, schools, service clubs and
organizations;
THEREFORE!AWi a Af _ ^ereby
proclaim the week of October 6 - 12, 1991, as Fire Prevention Wcek. This week
commemorates the Great Chicago Fire of 1871, in which 250 persons were killed, 100,00
left homeless and more than 17,400 buildings destroyed.
VAdall upon the people of - to participate in activities at nome, work
and school, and to do as the Fire Prevention Week theme for 1991 suggests, "Fire Won't
Wait - Plan Your Escape."
In Witness Hereof, 1 hereunto set my hand this _ day of _ in the
Year of our Lord, nineteen hundred and ninety-one.
WPIFIREPREV.MEM:NA3
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO.
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
MEETING DATE: October 1, 1991 REPORT DATE: September 27, 1991
FROM: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager
TITLE: Los Angeles County Park, Beaches and Recreation Act of 1992
SUMMARY:
There will be $450 million available through the 1992 Park Bond Act for specific park projects. The City is
considering the submittal of two specific project applications: Pantera Park development and Site "D"
acquisition and development.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Council approve the submittal of the Pantera Park and Site "D" specific project
proposals to the County, for inclusion in the Park Bond Act ballot measure, on the June 1992 ballot.
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? Yes x No
3. Has environmental impact been assessed? _ Yes _ No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? x_ Yes _ No
Which Commission? Parks and Recreation
5. Are other departments affected by the report? x_ Yes _ No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
Community Development
REV )kED BY:
Lf YuP ,
y t
Robert L. Van Nort Terrence L. Belanger
City Manager Assistant City Manager
FAWP51\AGENDA\C0V ER.FRM
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: October 1, 1991
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager
SUBJECT: Los Angeles County Park, Beach and Recreation Act of 1992
ISSUE STATEMENT:
There will be plebiscite, in June 1992, on the $800 million Los Angeles
County Park, Beach and Recreation Act of 1992. The City is considering the
submittal of two (2) proposed specific project applications for funding from
a $450 million allocation, which will be set aside for specific projects.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council approve the submittal of two (2)
proposed specific project applications, for funding through the Los Angeles
County Park, Beach and Recreation Act of 1992. The recommended projects for
application submittal are:
1. Development of the City -owned Pantera Park property.
2. Acquisition and development of the Site "D" property.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
It is estimated that the fiscal impact related to the submittal of the two
(2) project applications will be approximately $5,000.
BACKGROUND:
In November 1990, the Los Angeles County Park Bond Act was submitted to the
voters of the County. The voters strongly supported the passage of the Park
Bond Act, with 57% voting in the affirmative. Although it failed to receive
the required 2/3 majority, the Park Bond Act received one of the highest vote
totals among all measures on the November, 1990 ballot, in Los Angeles
County. Proponents of the 1990 Park Bond Act are now propounding a similar
bond measure for the June, 1992 ballot. The Los Angeles County Park, Beaches
and Recreation Act of 1992 will provide approximately $800 million in bonds
to preserve, improve and restore park, beach and open space lands and
recreation facilities, throughout Los Angeles County. The 1992 Park Bond Act
would be funded through a special benefit assessment levied by a Los Angeles
County Regional Park and Open Space District. Senator Frank Hill is
authoring State legislation (SB659), which would form the Los Angeles County
Regional Park and Open Space District.
DISCUSSION:
The 1992 Park Bond Act would provide for a per capita allocation of monies to
all cities in Los Angeles County. Diamond Bar's allocation, based on a
population figure of 53,672, would be $732,000. The Park Bond Act will
provide for $20 million per year for maintenance and operations. Also, there
would be a $75 million competitive grant fund pool created, for post -passage
project applications. Finally and most significantly, $450 million would be
set aside to fund specific projects. These specific projects will be
selected for funding prior to the June of 1992 plebiscite. The selected
specific projects will be included in the measure with a specific funding
amount for each project, allocation to a specific public agency and general
designation of the area in which the funds will be spent. the specific
projects can include acquisition, development and/or rehabilitation of park,
recreation, wildlife, coastal, trail or other open space lands anywhere, in
Los Angeles County.
There are two (2) City park acquisition and/or development projects which
would meet the criteria (attached exhibit) for the Park Bond Act of 1992's
specific projects. Those projects are the development of the Pantera Park
site and the acquisition and development of the Site "D" property.
The Pantera Park site is approximately 23 acres in size. The City owns the
property in fee simple. Forma, has been retained to develop alternative
schematic studies for Pantera Park development. The park program includes
active uses for all ages. The park use components include lighted ball
fields, lighted soccer fields, 15,000 square foot community center with
indoor basketball, volleyball, recreation facilities and gymnasium, outdoor
courts for basketball, volleyball and tennis, children's active play area
including tot lot and sand box, picnic and passive activity areas and on-site
parking. The estimated development costs for Pantera Park are $5 to $7
million.
The Site "D" is located at the southeast corner of Diamond Bar Boulevard and
Brea Canyon Road. The site is approximately 28.4 acres in size. The Site
"D" schematic development plan includes the following park use components:
lighted ball fields; lighted soccer fields; 20,000 square foot community
center with indoor basketball, volleyball, recreation facilities and
gymnasium; outdoor courts for basketball, volleyball and tennis; children's
active play area including tot lot and sand box; picnic and passive activity
areas; and on-site parking. The estimated acquisition and development cost
for Site "D" is $10 to $12 million.
The specific project application deadline is October 15, 1991. The Parks and
Recreation Commission has considered the proposal to submit the Pantera and
Site "D" projects. The Commission recommends that the Council submit the
Pantera and Site "D" projects to the County, for approval.
NIOI,"NT,NINS RECREATION .-VND.-
kp3750 Solstice Canyon Road
nE«�riOh
,NOW K tilalibu. California 90265
oarncr (213) 456-7807
"r;�1'•3^y �� FAX (213) 456-1042
September 3, 1991
The Honorable John Forbing
Mayor, City of Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley Dr. #330
Diamond Bar, California 91765
Dear Mayor Forbing:
We are writing to update you on the Los Angeles County Park, Beach and Recreation Act of 1992
which will provide approximately $800 million to preserve, improve and restore park, beach and open
space lands and recreation facilities throughout Los Angeles County.
The measure will provide funds directly to the City of Diamond Bar for the improvement,
acquisition, operation and maintenance of park and recreation facilities. The measure will also include
funds for specific projects throughout Los Angeles County and competitive funds for rivers, trees, trails,
senior recreation facilities, gang prevention, and historical facilities. We are enclosing an information
packet on the measure that includes criteria for specific projects, a timeline, preliminary estimates of per
capita grants to cities, and other information.
Please carefully review the criteria for specific projects in the enclosed packet. A specific project
must be a sound environmental project of regional significance, must be noncontroversial and have strong
local support from your city council and from local groups. We need to receive your city's proposed
specific project information and completed questionnaires no later than October 15, 1991 (see
enclosed packet).
We have met with over fifty cities throughout Los Angeles County and we will be meeting with
the remaining cities in the next couple of weeks. We would be happy to meet with you at your
convenience to discuss the proposed measure, the specific funding allocation, the amount of money that
will be generated for your city, and the timeline for the measure.
If you would like to meet with us to discuss this in greater detail please call us at (213)456-7807.
We would really appreciate your input in this process. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
Esther Feldman
Director, Special Projects
cc: Mr. Robert Van Nordt, City Manager ✓
Mr. Charles Janiel, Director of Parks
✓ Joscelyn Herzberg
Research Director
A public entity of the State of Caitfornta exercisingjotnt powers of the SantaMomma Mountatns Conservancy. the Canelo Recreation and Park DLsmcr and
the Rancho Simi Recreation and Park Drstnct pursuant to Sectton 6300 et seq. of the Gouerrtment Code.
NJOUNTAINS RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
37x0 SOl4tice Canyon Road
4California 902W
48&7807
'FAX J20) 4504042
"Y'
��. RANCHO MOUNTAINS RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
f,
sM. 3750 Solstice Canvon R(xid
r aAND Avg Malibu, California 90265
jP _ �.__ °IS'"'Cr (213) 4,56-7807
°+i„area FAX (213) 456-1042
LOS ANGELES COUNTY PARK, BEACHES AND RECREATION ACT OF 1992
Summary
The Los Angeles County Park, Beaches and Recreation Act of 1992 will provide approximately $800
million in bonds to preserve, improve and restore park, beach and open space lands and recreation
facilities throughout Los Angeles County. The measure will include badly -needed funds to improve
neighborhood and regional parks, plant trees in urban areas, restore rivers, build trails, develop
senior recreation facilities and protect disappearing wildlife and open space lands. The measure will
also include an annual amount of approximately $20 million to operate and maintain these park and
recreation facilities.
Need for Funds for Parks. Beaches ad Recreation
Our parks, beaches, recreation and open space lands are vital to maintaining our quality of life in
Los Angeles County. With a population rapidly approaching nine million, we cannot meet the
existing need in the county for park, beach and recreation facilities. Our parks are deteriorating; we
do not have adequate recreation facilities to provide youth with alternatives to gang involvement; we
are unable to meet the recreation needs of our expanding senior population; and our last remaining
open space and wildlife lands are disappearing rapidly as the county continues to develop. We must
act now if we hope to restore our existing parks, beaches and recreation areas, and if we want to
preserve a part of our natural heritage for our children.
Content of Measure
The Los Angeles County Park, Beach and Recreation Act will include funds for the following
purposes:
• Renovate and increase safety at regional and neighborhood parks
• Plant trees in urban areas
• Restore rivers and streams throughout the county
• Restore Los Angeles County beaches and improve public access
• Develop senior recreation facilities
• Purchase important park, recreation, wildlife and open space lands
• Expand and acquire public sports facilities
• Protect threatened mountains and canyons
Voter Sunnort
Los Angeles County voters continue to strongly support funding for park, recreation and open space
purposes. In November of 1990, 57% of Los Angeles County voters voted YES on Proposition B,
the Los Angeles County Park Bond Act. This was one of the highest votes in Los Angeles County
among all measures on the November ballot.
Adaun&trudon
The Los Angeles County Park, Beaches and Recreation Act will be funded through a special benefit
assessment levied by a Los Angeles County regional park and open space district formed to
administer this program. Under existing state law, a park and open space district can raise funds to
acquire, improve, operate and maintain park, beach, recreation and open space lands throughout the
county. Funds generated by the district will be allocated among all areas of the county, including all
incorporated cities.
A public entity of the state tmt Park District
hf rc:and
hoS
Recreation and Park District pursuant to Seetton 65W et s he Government code.
`'''' ��l all RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
~t .,'` _ `.� i OUNTAWS RE R '
•.,aj�= �', �'..;i'• Viz' . ;• �^a7► ^ w� 37so solstice Canyon Road
*�,1'+ �`.i Y •�=� � I�; ,.:;,.Ntt i
Malibu, Caliromia 90265
; .- J. 'tri;,. •�* It• ori tar:• 1213)456-7807 _ .
FAX (20) 45£-1042
F ON ON •T7IE
- IN ORMATT -
r,O.S -ANGELES COUNTY,;' -
�:
D' RECREAT70N.A C?`-0F:19g
"? ,t kk BEr1LH�A1V
r
'iiii:' i' t kt , ccil.taicis.tLt ic,Iloivi[t informa an
llt. !' = v.
.t.
List -of Per: capita funds to.caici �'2.
Criteria , nd q stionr>aizc ftr:
Due dat ' 'f 1: I�rt� ;;r t•�+.•' ; I
t - sCa st, Liri, 1rojLCts
Outlirlc,of,state, emblin :lC�isl t;t)r1' r 7`
4,4
F.0. rior4 i ljorr;raiian;'rlt:ase. ctintczcs L.l3TP;;'i�'eldnc n or. Joiadyn,' .,etzhLT, 4t t e r�Gls.rr�acf 5 � �t it criiz
d �i
�� �a,�;'C'o;sort%at;�,ri��lutrihriti�;'3iSt7�ScIsric�Cutyorr ltticid; 1rfQliilL{;�G3:+"-•sL•J=f.+�i}r-'?{,7i7�� ..�r r ? [
MOUNTAINS RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
RECMATgM 3750 SOIStice canyon Road
a AmP"K Malibu, California 90265
s
06� (213) 456-7807
"M
-_ FAX (213) 456-IU42
LOS ANGELES COUNTY PARK, BEACH AND RECREATION ACT OF 1992
Allocation of Per Capita Grant Funds to Cities in Los Angeles County
These figures are an estimate of the per capita grants each city in Los Angeles County would receive
from the Los Angeles County Park Act of 1992. These figures are based on an allocation of $120 million
to all cities and the unincorporated area of the county based on each city's portion of the total county
population. Population figures are taken from 1990 census figures.
Funds could be used for capital outlay projects to acquire, develop, improve or restore real property for
parks and recreation purposes. In addition to the funds listed here, competitive funds would also be
available to local agencies for tree -planting, senior recreation facilities, gang prevention, rivers
restoration, trails and historical resources.
City
Population
$ Allocation
Agoura Hills
20,390
$276,000
Alhambra
82,106
$1,116,000
Arcadia
48,290
$648,000
Artesia
15,464
$204,000
Avalon
2,918
$36,000
Azusa
41,333
$564,000
Baldwin Park
69,330
$936,000
Bell
34,365
$468,000
Bell Gardens
42,355
$576,000
Bellflower
61,815
$840,000
Beverly Hills
31,971
$432,000
Bradbury
829
$20,000
Burbank
93,643
$1,272,000
Calabasas
15,697
$216,000
Carson
83,995
$1,140,000
Cerritos
53,240
$720,000
Claremont
32,503
$444,000
Commerce
12,135
$168,000
Compton
90,454
$1,224,000
Covina
43,207
$588,000
Cudahy
22,817
$312,000
Culver City
38,793
$528,000
Diamond Bar
53,672
$732,000
Downey
91,444
$1,236,000
Duarte
20,688
$276,000
E1 Monte
106,209
$1,440,000
El Segundo
15,223
$204,000
Gardena
49,847
$672,000
Glendale
180,038
$2,436,000
Glendora
47,828
$648,000
Hawaiian Gardens
13,639
$180,000
Hawthorne
71,349
$972,000
Hermosa Beach
18,219
$252,000
Hidden Hills
1,729
$24,000
Huntington Park
56,065
$756,000
A public entity -F"U*W �J h ,Santa Monica Mountains Consenxincy, the ConeJo Recreation and Park M&tct and
the Rancho Stmt Recreation and Park tsalct pursuant to Section &500 et seq. of the Gouemment Code.
MOUNTAINS RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
3750 Solstice Canyon Road
"�o .rowroc Malibu. California 90265
(213) 456-7807
FAX (213) 456-1042
August, 1991
FACT SHEET on the
LOS ANGELES COUNTY PARK, BEACHES AND RECREATION ACT of 1992
What will the Los Angeles County Park, Beaches and Recreation Act do?
It will improve the quality of life in Los Angeles County by providing funds to acquire, develop, restore
and maintain parks, beaches, recreation and open space lands throughout the county.
Why do we need this park measure?
Los Angeles County's population continues to grow at an increasing rate every year. We have a
tremendous and growing need for parks and recreation facilities throughout the county, and we are far
behind other urban areas in the sate in providing these facilities. Safe and accessible parks, beaches,
recreation and open space lands are vital to our quality of life in Los Angeles County; and we must act
now if we hope to protect some of these lands for the future.
How much money will the measure provide and what will the funds be spent on?
The measure will provide approximately $800 million for specific park, beach, open space and recreation
purposes and approximately $20 million per year for operations and maintenance.
Funds will be provided for the following purposes:
• Renovate and increase safety at regional and neighborhood parks
• Plant trees in urban areas
• Restore rivers and streams throughout the county
• Renovate Los Angeles County beaches
• Develop senior recreation facilities
• Purchase important park, recreation, wildlife and open space lands
• Expand and acquire public sports facilities
• Protect threatened mountains and canyons
Funds provided for operations and maintenance will be allocated between all cities and the county to pay
for operations and maintenance of park and recreation facilities acquired, developed or restored with
funds from the act.
A pubUc entity of the scare of Cally ^ 9Jant Pmve s ooJJrhe Santa Horvat Mou WUrw Ca the Cone Recreation and Park Dlshict and
the Rancho Stmt Rerneatton and Pork lhstrlct pursuant to Sectfon6500etseq. ofthe Government Code.
LOS ANGELES COUNTY PARK, BEACH AND RECREATION ACT of 1992
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PROPOSED SPECIFIC PROJEC7S
(See Criteria for Specific Projects)
Please answer the following questions in as much detail -as possible and return to the Mountains
Recreation and Conservation Authority. This information is essential to evaluate your proposed
project for inclusion in the Los Angeles County Park, Beach and Recreation Act of 1992.
Please include:
Project Name
Your name and affiliation, or name of key contact for proposed project
Address
Telephone number
1. Description of the land to be acquired or proposed project if not acquisition. Include
breakdown of proposed development, restoration or improvement projects.
2. Exact location (please enclose a map indicating location).
3. How many acres (approximately)?
4. What amount of funds is needed to acquire the property or carry out this project?
5. How was this amount determined? Has the property been appraised?
6. Which governmental agency/agencies would acquire the property or receive funds to carry out
the proposed project?
7. Does the project have regional significance (see previous page)? Is it or will it be used by
many communities? Please include information on regional nature of project.
8. Who would operate and manage the property after acquisition? Have they agreed to do so?
9. Who are the current property owners? Are the current owners willing to sell?
10. Would the current property owners oppose the proposed project being included in the district?
if. Does the Board of Supervisors support the project and the designation of agencies for
acquisition and management?
12. Does the City Council(s) support the project and the designation of agencies for acquisition
and management?
13. Which local or state organizations SUPPORT the project? (Please list groups)
14. Which local or state organizations OPPOSE the project? Who might oppose the project?
15. Has there been any publicity about the above area or project? Has it been positive or
negative?
Please send to: Attn: Joscelyn Herzberg, MRCA, 3750 Solstice Canyon Road, Malibu, CA 90265.
4 'f l'`i+•tri ref r..
a MOUN'T'AINS RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AUT14ORITY
� 3750 Solstice Canvon Road
AWPAW Malibu. California 9o26s
06� (213) 456-7807
citleOMN
FAX (213) 456-1042
LOS ANGELES COUNTY PARK, BEACH AND RECREATION ACT OP 1992
CRITERIA FOR SPECIFIC PROJECTS
In addition to the general categories of funds for parks, beaches, recreation facilities and
countywide competitive programs, the Los Angeles County Park, Beach and Recreation Act
will include funds for specific projects throughout Los Angeles County. These projects will
be included in the measure with a specific funding amount for each project, allocation to a
particular public agency and general designation of the area in which the funds will be spent.
These projects can include acquisition, development and/or rehabilitation of park, recreation,
wildlife, coastal, trail or other open space lands anywhere in Los Angeles County.
Note: Every project must meet the minimum criteria listed below in order to be considered
for inclusion in the measure. Please read over and then fill out the attached questionnaire.
CRITERIA FOR SPECIFIC PROJECTS:
1) The project must be a sound environmental project of regional significance*, with good
reasons for being preserved or improved;
2) The project must be absolutely non -controversial and all parties involved (particularly
landowners, if applicable) must agree that the project should be carried out;
3) There must be willing sellers if the project is an acquisition;
4) The project must be part of a local or county general plan;
5) The project must have local political support (City Council must support by resolution);
6) The project must have strong support from local conservation and/or neighborhood groups
and/or other involved organizations;
7) There must be an entity willing to operate and maintain the area once it is acquired and/or
developed for park, recreation or open space use.
*Regional signijfsi ew must be documented through:
1) Evidence that the project is a significant natural resource;
2) Letters or studies documenting the regional use of the -proposed project by surrounding
communities;
3) Documentation that the project is or will be made available or advertised on a regional basis;
4) Evidence that the project is the only one of its kind in the surrounding region.
A public entihy of the State of eaoe►cistn9Jdnc res ooj(the Sanm Mon4ia Mountains Gon&nvarxy rtl�eaue►nme U cadge mea Phr7c ncsaicc ana
the Rarrhn Simi Recreation and Perk lksti7ctpwsuant 1 SeMiat 8500 et seq. of tlr
6 � MOUNTAINS RECREATION AND CONSER\,ATION AUTHORITY
RANCHO
3750 Solstice Canyon Road
':..•, �.� i .'. " RECREATION
AND PARK Malibu. California 90265
°M°"r' (213)456-7807
i6 -' - FAX (213) 456-1042
OUTLINE OF ENABLING LEGISLATION
FOR THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY PARK, BEACH AND RECREATION ACT OF 1992
Senate Bill 659 (Hill)
The Los Angeles County Park, Beach and Recreation Act of 1992 would be funded through a special
benefit assessment levied by a Los Angeles County Regional Park and Open Space District. Under
existing state law, a regional park and open space district can be established to address Los Angeles
County's growing park, recreation and open space needs. A regional park district may levy a special
benefit assessment to raise funds for park, recreation and open space purposes. State legislation (Senate
Bill 659 - Hill) addresses the specific needs of Los Angeles County in forming such a district.
SB 659 (Hill) includes the following requirements for formation of the Los Angeles County Regional Park
and Open Space District:
• Voter approval of the formation of the district, the special benefit assessment and the
specific spending plan for the district;
• A spending plan that includes a list of specific park, beach, recreation and open space
projects;
• Expenditure of a minimum of 80% of all funds generated by the district on capital outlay
projects;
• Use of all operations and maintenance funds to operate and maintain park, beach,
recreation and open space projects funded according to the approved spending plan;
• Allocation of all funds generated by the district among the county, all cities in the county
and the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy;
• Definition of district boundaries;
• Prohibition against changes with respect to district boundaries, specific projects or rate
of assessments once approved by voters;
• Designation of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors as the Board of Directors
of the park district;
• Voter approval of any future assessment or spending plan.
August 1991
A pubitc entity of the State oJCalffornia exercistngjotnt powers Of &W Santa Monica Mmmkdns Consennncy. the Conep Recreation and Park District and
the Rancho Stmt Recreation and Aar* District pursuant to Section 6500 et seq. oJthe Gouemraent Code.
INFORMATION DUE DATES
All proposed projects will be reviewed by the countywide Advisory Committee for the
Los Angeles County Park, Beach and Recreation Act of 1992.
October 15, 1991 Submit all proposed project information with completed
questionnaire
November 15, 1991 Submit letters of support for proposed project
December 15, 1991 Submit City Council resolution in support of proposed project
For additional information, please contact Esther Feldman or Joscelyn Herzberg at (213)456-7807.
RAMCM MOUNTAINS RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AL7HORM'
.e ' nEaa.rcr 3750 Solstice Canyon Road
�, oAM PWW
T Malibu. California 90265
(213) 456-7807
FAX (213) 456-1042
September 18, 1991
To: All those interested in the Los Angeles County Park, Beach and Recreation Act of 1992
Re: Update
Gewnd IgformaRion: The Los Angeles County Park, Beaches and Recreation Act of 1992 will provide
approximately $800 million in bonds to preserve, improve and restore park, beach and open space lands
and recreation facilities throughout Los Angeles County. This measure is proposed for the June 1992
Los Angeles County ballot.
The measure would be funded through a special benefit assessment levied by a countywide Regional Park
and Open Space District. Voter approval is required to form the district, to implement the expenditure
plan and to levy the assessment. The required expenditure plan includes an allocation of funds to all
cities in the county, countywide competitive programs and funds for specific regional park projects (see
below for more detail).
fWuft Breakdown: In November of 1990, 57% of Los Angeles County voters voted Yes on
Proposition B, the 1990 Los Angeles County Park Bond Act. To ensure the same strong voter support
for the Los Angeles County Park, Beaches and Recreation Act of 1992, the expenditure plan will be
modeled after the funding allocation developed for Prop. B. The following is a preliminary estimate of
the proposed funding breakdown:
• $120 million for per capita grants to cities and the unincorporated area of the county for
capital outlay projects
• $400-450 million for specific regional park, beach, recreation and open space projects
• $50-75 million for countywide competitive grants for tree -planting, gang prevention, trails,
river and stream restoration, senior recreation facilities and historical resources
• $20 million for county regional parks
• $50 million for county beaches
• $75 million for mountain and canyon preservation
In addition, approximately $20 million will be available•a,nnually to cities and the county. for operations
and maintenance of projects funded by this measure.
Fun* Aviadobdi to Cities: Per capita funds will be allocated to all cities in the county based on each
city's percentage of the total population in the county. These funds can be spent on the most pressing
park and recreation capital outlay needs in each city; these funds would be available approximately six
months after the measure is approved by voters.
Cities will also be able to apply for funds from countywide competitive programs. These programs will
be administered by the county, similar to statewide competitive programs administered by the State Parks
and Recreation Department. The County Park and Recreation Department would develop criteria for each
program.
Cities may also submit proposals now for specific projects that will be included in the measure with a
specified funding amount (see below).
A public entity of the State of Californta exercfsinq joint powers of the Santa Monlcn %fountains Consennncv. the Conelo Recreation and Perk T)-r--rr -- ,1
, tiects: PLEASE NOTE: Any city planning to propose a specific project for the
proposed measure needs to submit a completed questionnaire and information on the project no
later than October 15, 1991. We do not need an official city council resolution at this time to consider
proposed projects.
The Los Angeles County Park, Beaches and Recreation Act of 1992 will include funds for specific
projects with a specific funding amount for each project. The funds must be allocated to a particular
public agency and must be designated for a specific park project. These projects can include acquisition,
development and/or rehabilitation of park, recreation, wildlife, coastal, trail or other open space lands
in Los Angeles County. The Advisory Committee established to guide the development of this measure
will be responsible for reviewing all proposed projects.
A specific project must be a sound environmental project of regional significance, must be
noncontroversial and have strong local support from your city council and from local groups. Specific
projects should be those which could not be addressed through discretionary per capita funds. Each
project must meet the criteria established for all projects that will be specifically listed in the measure.
Please call Joscelyn Herzberg at (213)456-7807 if you need copies of this criteria or if you have any
questions. We will be contacting cities which have indicated interest in submitting a specific project.
Advisory Committee: A citizen's Advisory Committee made up of community, civic, business and
environmental leaders from throughout Los Angeles County is being put together to guide the
development of this measure. The Advisory Committee will , review specific projects proposed for
inclusion in the measure, guide the drafting of the measure, and help garner support for the measure's
passage. We will notify you when the Advisory Committee meets; you are welcome to attend these
meetings.
Asswwnt Snead: We are currently working with assessment engineers to develop an assessment
spread and will keep you informed of our progress.
If you have any questions or would like to discuss the measure in more detail, please do not hesitate to
call Esther Feldman at (213)456-7807.
Sincerely,
au" IJAGIW14� a71---
Esther Feldman Joscelyn erzberg
Director, Special Programs Research Director
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
JULY 11, 1991
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Ortiz called the meeting to order at 6:30
p.m. at the Diamond Bar Library, 1061 South Grand
Avenue, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
ALLEGIANCE: Chairman Ortiz.
ROLL CALL: Commissioner Beke, Commissioner Fritz, Vice
Chairman Gravdahl, and Chairman Ortiz.
Commissioner Chavers was absent.
Also present were City Engineer Sid Mousavi,
Engineering Administrator Deborah Murray,
Administrative Analyst Tseday Aberra, Parks and
Maintenance Director Charles Janiel, and Sergeant
Rawlings.
APPROVAL OF
MINUTES:
May 9, 1991 Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by C/Fritz and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Minutes of May
9, 1991.
June 13, 1991 Chair/Ortiz requested the Minutes of June 13, 1991
be amended to indicate the correct spelling of
Suzanne Rhino.
Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by VC/Gravdahl
and CARRIED to approve the Minutes of June 13,
1991. C/Fritz abstained.
COMMISSION Chair/Ortiz stated that C/Chavers submitted written
COMMENTS: comments regarding various items on the agenda.
The comments will be read as the items are
discussed.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mr. Larson, residing at 1436 Linberry Drive,
requested a stop sign at the intersection of Maple
Hill and Mountain Laurel. Presently, there are two
stop signs located on Maple Hill, however, due to
the geographic nature of the location, there is
still a potential for traffic hazards.
Chair/Ortiz requested staff to review the location,
and place the item on the next agenda.
July 11, 1991 Page 2
NEW BUSINESS:
"Keep Clear" zone:CE/Mousavi addressed the Commission regarding the
Eastbound on request for a "Keep Clear" zone on Grand Ave., by
Grand Ave. the Medical Plaza. Due to the heavy flow of
traffic, it is difficult to exit the driveway
during the evening hours. Staff recommended that
the Commission deny the request due to it's close
proximity to the Fire Station's "Keep Clear" zone.
However, as an alternative, the Commission may wish
to consider a right turn only lane from the Plaza.
Toni Lewis, from Century 21, 1081 South Grand Ave.,
stated that the turn to egress from the driveway
and enter into the right turn lane would be
difficult because of the way the driveway is
situated. She suggested that two left hand turn
lanes be reconsidered on Grand at Diamond Bar
Boulevard.
John Newt emphasized that doctors need to be able
to egress and ingress safely and quickly for
emergencies. A right turn only would hinder their
access to the medical facility.
John Melendez, from the Century 21 office,
reiterated the need for a "Keep Clear" zone, and
suggested modifying the driveway for an easier
egress and ingress.
Marilyn Pardee emphasized the traffic hazards
caused by traffic congestion in the area.
Tom Williams stated that the right turn lane will
not sufficiently eliminate the traffic hazards.
C/Beke read the comments made by C/Chavers stating
his support of staff's recommendation to deny the
request for a "Keep Clear" zone. However, he
indicated that the City should articulate a formal
policy addressing public street crossing, private
drives, pedestrian crossing, etc. to the use of
"Keep Clear", before the issue at hand is
addressed.
C/Beke, concurring with C/Chavers written remarks,
indicated that the matter needs to be reviewed
further.
VC/Gravdahl requested that the matter be further
studied and returned to the Commission at a later
date.
July 11, 1991
OLD BIISINESS:
Page 3
C/Fritz stated his support for additional study,
taking into account not just the "Keep Clear" zone,
and the driveway, but the double left turn as well.
Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by C/Fritz and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to direct staff to further
review the matter and continue it to the September
12, 1991 meeting.
Parking Spaces: CE/Mousavi addressed the Commission regarding the
DBHS and decision made at the last meeting to invite the
Evergreen Spring principal from Diamond Bar High School to attend
tonight's meeting in order to discuss solutions to
the shortage of parking spaces at DBHS.
C/Beke read C/Chaver's comments stating that he
supports exploring creative and innovative
solutions to the parking issue. He suggested the
possibility of remote parking or outside parking
structures, but noted that this would require the
collective support of the School District, the
City, and the parents.
Randy Clute, 21541 Birch Hill Drive, reemphasized
his suggestion made at the last meeting to have a
parking permit system allowing residents in the
area to park in front of their homes, which is
currently prohibited during school hours.
C/Beke pointed out that permits are not a solution
to the existing problem.
Upon CE/Mousavi's confirmation that the School
District did not respond to the correspondence,
C/Fritz volunteered to represent the Commission,
regarding the issue, at the next School District
meeting. He suggested that the matter be deferred
to the August meeting.
Motion was made by C/Fritz, seconded by VC/Gravdahl
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to defer the matter to the
August meeting.
NEW BIISINESS:
Priority List for CE/Mousavi addressed the Commission regarding the
signalization establishment of a priority list for signalization.
The Subcommittee has discussed the issue and has
recommended the following procedures: determine
intersection candidates for signalization;
establish the criteria; and then bring the
information back to the Commission to weigh those
intersections based on the established criteria.
July 11, 1991
Request for
Stop Control:
Armitos Place
OLD BUSINESS:
Page 4
Staff recommended that the Commission consider the
Subcommittee's recommendation.
C/Beke questioned the reason for establishing the
priority list. He cautioned that if it is a
warranted signal, it must be addressed regardless
of the priority list.
CE/Mousavi explained that staff receives various
request for signals every week. The reason for
establishing a priority list is to determine how
and where to start, in accordance to the budget. A
warrant study will be considered for intersection
signals on the priority list.
VC/Gravdahl stated that he approved of the idea as
long as there is flexibility to add an intersection
to the list.
C/Fritz indicated that he does not see the reason
for establishing a list, other than the one created
by problems perceived by citizens, or problems
identified by the Commission.
C/Beke read C/Chavers written comments stating his
approval for establishing a priority list.
Motion was made by VC/Gravdahl, seconded by
Chair/Ortiz and CARRIED to table the matter to the
September meeting.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Gravdahl and Chair/Ortiz.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Beke, and Fritz.
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None.
Staff requested that the item be continued to the
next meeting to allow time to gather all the
necessary information.
Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by VC/Gravdahl
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the matter to
the August meeting.
Request for Staff requested that the item be continued to the
Stop Control: next meeting to allow time to gather all the
Racquet Club Road necessary information.
at Golden Springs
Ruth Schleikert, residing at 22889 Calpicino,
stated that it was unsafe to egress from the
driveway on Racquet Club Road because visibility of
the lane was blocked by the cars parked on Golden
Springs, up to Racquet Club Road, by those people
attending the Concert in the Parks series. If the
July 11, 1991
NEW BUSINESS:
Request for
Stop Control:
Intersection of
Windwood and
Silverfir
ADJOURNMENT:
Page 5
signal is not warranted, she requested that the
Commission consider a red curb.
CE/Mousavi stated that those who parked in the area
had parked illegally. The success of the concert
had been unanticipated.
Motion was made by C/Fritz, seconded by C/Beke and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the matter to the
next meeting.
Staff requested that the item be continued to the
next meeting to allow time to gather all the
necessary information.
Janice Roller, residing at 2785 Silverfir Drive,
Vice President of the Board of Directors of the
Condo Association, stated that because of the
traffic congestion in the area, it is unsafe for
children to cross the indicated intersection to get
to the pool area.
Sgt. Rawlings stated that there has been two
accidents on Windwood in the last two years, and
three on Silverwood.
Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by VC/Gravdahl
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the rest of the
agenda until August.
CE/Mousavi informed the Commission that one of the
items of the Council's Study Session, on July 23 at
6:00 p.m., will be a review of the Prop 57 Corridor
Study. It is requested that the Chairman attend
the joint meeting with the Council and the
Commission.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
Att
mas Ortiz
Chairman
Respectively,
Si ousavi
Secretary
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
AUGUST 8, 1991
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Ortiz called the meeting to order at 6:30
p.m. at the Diamond Bar Library, 1061 South Grand
Avenue, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
ALLEGIANCE: Chairman Ortiz.
ROLL CALL: Commissioner Beke, Commissioner Fritz, Commissioner
Chavers, Vice Chairman Gravdahl, and Chairman
Ortiz.
Also present were City Engineer Sid Mousavi,
Administrative Analyst Tseday Aberra, Parks and
Maintenance Director Charles Janiel, Sergeant
Rawlings, and Contract Secretary Liz Myers.
APPROVAL OF C/Beke requested the Minutes of July 11, 1991 be
MINUTES: amended on page 2, first paragraph to read
"reconsider".
Sgt. Rawlings requested that the minutes be amended
to properly spell the name "Randy Clute".
Motion was made by VC/Gravdahl, seconded by C/Beke
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Minutes of
July 11, 1991, as amended.
COMMISSION C/Beke requested an update of the sidewalk project
COMMENTS: on Brea Canyon under the 60 freeway.
CE/Mousavi indicated that the contract for the
project has been awarded. The City awaits CalTrans
encroachment permit.
Chair/Ortiz suggested that the Commission meet
again later in the month to be able to discuss all
the items on the agenda. The Commission will
determine the date later in the meeting.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Pat Byham, resident of Diamond Bar, expressed her
concern for the traffic problem on Grand Avenue.
She requested a solution to the problem.
NEW BUSINESS:
Request for AA/Aberra addressed the Commission regarding the
Road Closure: request to limit access to the Gateway Center,
Ranch Festival Copley, Valley Vista, and Bridge Gate during the
Ranch Festival. It is recommended that the area
have a limited access between 3:00 p.m. September
27 and 10:00 p.m. September 29, 1991. It is
further recommended that the Commission waive all
fees required for road closure.
VC/Gravdahl inquired where parking will be
permitted.
August 8, 1991 Page 2
AA/Aberra responded that parking will be permitted
on the empty lots, as well as along Copley.
Don Wise, Vice President of the Ranch Festival
Board, further specified the parking locations, as
well as the location of the Ranch Festival. He
informed the Commission that a shuttle service will
be provided to and from the Festival. The Rotary
Club will direct parking, as they have in the past.
Chair/Ortiz requested that the Rotary Club show
proof of insurance to protect the City from
liability.
Motion was made by C/Fritz, seconded by C/Beke and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the closure subject
to staff's receipt of adequate assurances that the
liability issue has been taken care of.
Road Improvement:CE/Mousavi reported that the City has been working
Brea Cnyn. Rd. atwith Caltrans to improve the signal at the on/off
State Route 60 ramp at Brea Canyon Road at State Route 60
Westbound on/off Westbound. One of the requirements to install
ramps double left turns onto the on ramp is the
elimination of parking, as indicated on the map.
In order to complete their designs, Caltrans has
requested that they be formerly informed that this
has taken place. Staff requested the Commission's
approval to send this information to Caltrans, and
authorize them to proceed with the design.
C/Chavers suggested considering the elimination of
parking on the southbound approach to cure the
traffic on Colima at the same time.
The Commission discussed other proposed projects,
and the effects on this particular project.
CE/Mousavi stated that staff, at this time, is
requesting approval for the elimination of parking,
so the design can be completed. When it is
completed, it will be brought back to the
Commission. The Commission will also be kept
informed as more information is received regarding
other projects, enabling a more complete picture of
improvements in this area.
August 8, 1991
Page 3
Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by C/Chavers
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept staff's
recommendation.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Beke, Chavers, Fritz,
VC/Gravdahl, and
Chair/Ortiz.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None.
Circulation CE/Mousavi introduced Kathy Higley, from DKS and
Element Study: Associates. It is desired that the Commission
DKS & Assoc. give a recommendation to the Council, with respect
to the Circulation Element Study, which can be
incorporated into the General Plan concept.
Kathy Higley stated that the emphasis on the entire
General Plan, and the Circulation Element, has been
on the environmental quality and the quality of
life issue, within Diamond Bar as a unique
community. Three fundamental premises were focused
on regarding the Circulation Element: 1) the
desire to return local streets to local use; 2)
maintain and improve Grand Ave. as an arterial; and
3) work closely with other agencies and surrounding
jurisdiction to insure that corollary improvements
are made on the regional systems. She reviewed
certain issues that will need reconciliation to
finalize the document and prepare it for the public
hearing. She then requested comments and direction
from the Commission.
The following comments were made by C/Beke:
C/Beke, referencing page 6, regarding Diamond Bar
Blvd. and Grand, stated that anything done to
reduce through traffic within the City will be an
inconvenience to the people in the City. If there
is a need for a bypass to the freeway, people will
take the path with the least resistance until the
freeway is improved.
C/Beke, regarding Sunset Crossing, stated that if
the intent to cul-de-sac the street is to keep
truck traffic from the City of Industry out, then
simply open the street and put a weight
restriction. Opening Sunset Crossing would be a
benefit to the City's circulation element.
C/Beke, referencing page 16, corrected the misuse
of Diamond Bar Hills Parkway and Diamond Bar Ave.
August 8, 1991 Page 4
C/Beke noted that the opening of Knoll/Tonner
Canyon Road was discussed in great detail at the
City Council meeting, but is not stressed in the
report.
Kathy Higley explained that this tends to be a
dividing issue among the GPAC. There is a
contingency that feels strongly that a Tonner
Canyon is needed from a traffic engineering
prospective. The argument from the other side is
that Tonner Canyon has a limited capacity which
will quickly fill up and return Grand Ave., and
Diamond Bar Blvd., as it is today, or worse.
However, the Canyon will have been forfeited.
C/Beke indicated that if Tonner Canyon is not
built, then traffic on Grand Ave. and Diamond Bar
Blvd., will continue to get much worse.
C/Beke commented that if this is to be the
Circulation Element, then it is a one sided
picture.
The following comments were made by C/Chavers:
C/Chavers concurred with C/Beke's opinion regarding
Grand Avenue. He suggested that a number one
policy should be to explore Tonner Canyon, and when
that is filled up, begin exploring Soquel Canyon.
The options to the south of us should be explored.
The Canyon shouldn't be preserved at the sake of
making Grand Ave. look like the 57 freeway.
C/Chavers, noting the inconsistencies within the
document, requested some technical discussion, from
staff, relating to the inclusion of level of
service standards and the definition of streets.
He suggested pulling some of the numbers out, and
replacing them with implementation figures, and
practice figures, that reflect Diamond Bar
standards.
C/Chavers commented on some of the problems of the
TIA guidelines document: the Circulation Element
recommends TRB 212, however, the TIA guidelines
request the use of the Intersection Capacity
Utilization Method; the TIA document has capacity
volumes for streets, but Diamond Bar should come up
with its own level of service, and the numbers
should be retracted until that time; and the Trip
Generation used in the model for the Diamond Bar
August 8, 1991 Page 5
circulation element is inconsistent relating to the
ITE rates required of developers to utilize the
TIA's. He suggested that the TIA guidelines be
revisited.
The following comments were made by VC/Gravdahl:
VC/Gravdahl stated that the City would have a
better bargaining tool if Sunset Crossing remained
closed. It is better to grab the bull by the horn
prior to, than after the fact, as it had happened
with Grand Avenue.
VC/Gravdahl inquired what the report addresses
regarding public transportation, or car pooling, in
Orange County, and how it is implemented.
Kathy Higley responded that Diamond Bar's most
sensible and cost effective measure will be to
continue to work with, and pressure, Caltrans to
implement car pool lanes along the 57 and 60
freeway, as well as improve the 60 freeway. Other
programs that can be effective are Park and Ride
Networks, van pools and car pools, biking and
subsidizing transit.
The following comments were made by C/Fritz:
C/Fritz stated that if people must travel through
Diamond Bar, then the traffic ought to be confined
to arterial streets and be kept off of residential
streets.
C/Fritz indicated that there should be more
emphasis on alternative modes of transportation.
In twenty years, we may not have to develop Soquel
Canyon, for example, because people are using
alternative modes in a way not foreseen today.
C/Fritz, regarding an article referring to the
purchasing of Union Pacific rights, inquired if it
referred to tracks that run on our City's border.
He suggested that the item be looked into further.
C/Chavers stated that LACTC leased right of way,
and leased the ability to operate commuter rail on
existing UP lines, which basically parallel Valley
Blvd.
C/Chaver inquired what affect the Commission's
comments have regarding the Circulation Element and
the public hearing process.
August S, 1991 Page 6
CE/Mousavi responded that the Commission is an
advisory board to the Council. The Commission's
comments and recommendations will be presented to
the Council for their determination.
The Commission concurred to have another meeting
later in the month to be able to provide their
comments to the Planning Commission, and allow time
for the revision of the draft Circulation Element.
The Commission also requested that DKS and
Associates highlight the changes and additions made
within the document.
Motion was made by C/Fritz, seconded by C/Beke and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the matter to a
special session meeting of August 28, 1991 at 6:30
p.m.
OLD BUSINESS:
Parking Spaces CE/Mousavi addressed the Commission regarding the
at DBHS, Brea existing parking problem, at Brea Canyon Road and
Cnyn. & Evergreen Evergreen Springs, generated by students at Diamond
Bar High School(DBHS). C/Fritz had volunteered to
attend the next the School Board meeting to discuss
this matter.
C/Fritz stated that the School Board had not had a
meeting, however, Mr. Chapped, of the School
District, is present at tonight's meeting.
Mr. Chaput, Assistant Superintendent for Fiscal
Facilities Management with the School District
(WVUSD), indicated that because of the successful
bond election there is now money to begin
construction on DBHS. The first project, to be
constructed by the end of January of 1992, is 113
parking spaces on the corner of Pathfinder and
Diamond Bar Boulevard. Toward the end of the
process, 67 spaces will be put in at the lower
level by Evergreen Springs, and 19 additional
spaces at the staff lot. The parking area on site
will basically be built out at that point.
C/Chavers suggested exploring the possibility of a
parking structure above the 113 lots that could be
tied into a Park and Ride lot.
The Commission directed staff to contact the LACTC
regarding the likelihood of getting a cooperative
Park and Ride with the school's parking facilities.
August 8, 1991 Page 7
C/Fritz suggested that this item should be placed
on the agenda of the liaison group, consisting of 2
Council members and School Board members, as was
indicated by Mr. Chaput.
Request for Stop CE/Mousavi addressed the Commission regarding the
Control: Racquet request for a stop control at Racquet Club Road and
Club Rd./ Golden Golden Springs. The Racquet Club Road is a private
Springs Rd. road, and a signal would have to be paid for by the
Association. Staff did not begin preliminary
studies determining if a signal is warranted until
a commitment, regarding payment of a signal, has
been confirmed. Staff recommended, as an
alternative, a refuge area in the central part of
the street, within the striped area, for an easier
left turn.
C/Beke stated that if the City has the commitment
to fund a signal, the City may do the study.
C/Fritz suggested that the Association may wish to
try the refuge lane first before committing to a
warrant study.
Mr. Giamporcaro and Alice Mills, representing the
condominiums, had been under the impression that
the road was not a private road. After learning
otherwise, they indicated that they will discuss
the issue with the Association.
Motion was made by C/Chavers, seconded by C/Beke
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the matter
until a response is received from the Association.
Speed Zone Survey: CE/Mousavi addressed the Commission regarding the
Chino Hills Pkwy. speed zone survey at Chino Hills Parkway. Staff
recommended that the Commission approve a 45 mph
speed zone.
Motion was made by C/Chavers, seconded by
VC/Gravdahl and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept
staff's recommendation.
Block Numbers on PMD/Daniel addressed the Commission regarding the
Bus Shelters suggestion, by Mayor Forbing, to use bus shelters
as a reference point for locating business
addresses within the community. Bus Stop Shelters,
Inc. has agreed to install the adhesive back type
of lettering on the single vertical post in front
of the bus shelter, at no cost to the City.
Motion was made by C/Fritz, seconded by C/Chavers
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept the project.
August 8, 1991 Page 8
C/Chavers suggested that the City place illuminated
numbers on the illuminated signs attached to the
mast arms, as they are replaced by the City.
Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by VC/Gravdahl
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to carry all items to the
meeting of August 28, 1991.
STAFF COMMENTS: CE/Mousavi distributed brochures, regarding a
workshop for Traffic Commissioners, put out by the
City Traffic Engineers, and requested that he be
contacted if any of the Commissioners are
interested in attending it.
COMMISSION C/Beke addressed the Commission regarding the
COMMENTS: opening of Pathfinder Road to Fullerton, around
December of 1991. He suggested that a design for
an operational signal at Brea Canyon Road and
Pathfinder be considered now. He asked staff to
review a possible lead for a signal upon the
opening of Pathfinder Road.
ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by C/Fritz, seconded by VC/Gravdahl
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting at
8:53 p.m.
Respectively,
Sid Mousavi°
Secretary
Attest:
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
AUGUST 28, 1991
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Ortiz called the meeting to order at 6:33
p.m. at City Hall, 21660 East Copley Drive, Suite
100, Diamond Bar, California.
ROLL CALL: Commissioner Beke, Commissioner Fritz, Commissioner
Chavers, and Chairman Ortiz. vice Chairman
Gravdahl was absent.
Also present were Assistant City Manager Terrence
Belanger, Administrative Analyst Tseday Aberra,
Sergeant Rawlings, and Contract Secretary Liz
Myers.
APPROVAL OF
MINUTES:
Aug. 8, 1991 C/Beke requested the Minutes of August 8, 1991 be
amended on page 4, third paragraph, to correct
"has" to "is"; page 7, first paragraph, to omit
..."if deemed warranted."; and page 8, first
paragraph, to correct "directed" to "asked".
C/Fritz requested that the Minutes be amended to
indicate the correct spelling of Mr. Chaput.
C/Chavers requested the Minutes be correct on page
4, sixth paragraph, to correctly indicate "TRB";
and page 7, ninth paragraph to read "... to place
illuminated numbers on the illuminated signs
attached to the mast arms."
Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by C/Fritz and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Minutes of
August 8, 1991, as amended.
July 23, 1991 Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by C/Fritz and
CARRIED to approve the Minutes of the Study
Session of July 23, 1991. C/Chavers abstained.
ACM/Belanger explained that he is the acting Public
Works Director, while CE/Mousavi is attending the
APWA conference.
OLD BUSINESS:
"Right Turn Lane" ACM/Belanger addressed the Commission regarding the
Grand approaching staff request for a "Right Turn" lane on Grand
Montefino Avenue, approaching Montefino Avenue, to help ease
the traffic situation. It is recommended that the
Commission concur with staff's recommendation to
stripe the third lane for approximately 200 feet,
and include a pavement marking to read "Right Turn
Only" on Grand Avenue.
August 28, 1991
Page 2
Following discussion, the Commission suggested that
staff do a follow up, and closely monitor the area.
Motion was made by C/Chavers, seconded by C/Beke
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept staff's
recommendation.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Chavers, Beke, Fritz, and
Chairman Ortiz.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Vice Chairman Gravdahl.
Modif. of Bike ACM/Belanger addressed the Commission regarding the
Lane: DB Blvd at modification of the bicycle lane on Diamond Bar
Golden Springs Blvd. at Golden Springs Road, under State Route 60.
Staff had previously submitted a conceptual
striping plan for the Diamond Bar/Golden Springs
area. However, the Commission expressed a need for
the bicycle lane modification to extend past
Palomino/Gentle Springs up to SR 60. A second
conceptual striping plan has been drafted by staff.
It is recommended that the Commission direct staff
as necessary.
C/Chavers suggested that, if the striping lane is
to remain as illustrated, then it should not be a
right turn only at Gentle Springs, but a through
lane all the way to Golden Springs, and make the
right turn lane there. The Commission concurred.
Motion was made by C/Fritz, seconded by C/Chavers
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept staff's proposal,
as modified.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Fritz, Beke, Chavers, and
Chairman Ortiz.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Vice Chairman Gravdahl.
Reorganization The Commission requested the reorganization matter
be continued to the September meeting.
Circulation Kathy Higley informed the Commission that the
Element Study: Commission's requested changes to the document have
BKS Assoc. been highlighted with orange marker on the margin.
She reviewed the document by sections and indicated
the changes made. The changes can be found on the
following pages: page III -2; page III -27; page
III -32; page III -5, table and graphics on next
page; page III -43 to page III -51; and page V-4.
Chapter VI will have to be reviewed and compared to
the latest Congestion Management Program. Chapter
VII will be revised after Chapter II has been
reviewed. Chapter II will not be revised until
after the Public Hearing process.
August 28, 1991 page 3
The following are suggestions made by the
Commission.
C/Chavers noted that on page III -4, local
residential streets are defined as having 2,500 per
day, and 200-300 vehicles per hour, but on page
III -27, level service A for local roads begin at
3,000 per day. He suggested that the City should
have set standards. He suggested that the figures
indicated are too high, and should be changed to
2,500 cars per day for Level Service C; 3,500 -
4,000 per day for upper bound Level Service B; and
Level Service A to be the 1,000 per day category.
C/Chavers stated that there needs to be a
correlation between the classifications used in
Chapter 5 and Chapter VII -3 & 4.
C/Chavers, referring to Chapter V-10, Future
Circulation Systems, questioned if it was the
intent to go to the Public Hearing with the
statement "grade separate intersections with key
arterial."
Kathy Higley explained that the intent is to
suggest that a backbone regional infrastructure be
built on Grand Ave. to move traffic quickly to and
from the freeway, thereby keeping traffic off of
Diamond Bar Boulevard. If Diamond Bar is grade
separated, then it is returned to local use.
C/Chavers indicated that the suggested concepts are
not environmentally feasible. He questioned why an
unworkable solution would be included in the
document.
C/Fritz suggested that the concept of grade
separation is so ludicrous that it may cast out the
rest of the program.
C/Chavers suggested that the following wording be
used as an alternative in page V-10: "If the
development of Tonner Canyon, or something else,
does not occur, then the magnitude of the problem
on Grand Ave. could suggest the kind of solutions
that could include grade separation.".
ACM/Belanger stated that the Commission's opinion,
as it relates to this particular alternative to
page V-10, will be conveyed to the Planning staff
and the Planning consultant.
August 28, 1991 Page 4
C/Chavers pointed out that the specified number of
options on page V-14 is inaccurate.
ACM/Belanger informed the Commission that the first
Planning Commission Public Hearing on the draft
General Plan is scheduled for September 9, 1991.
The City Council will be meeting on September 10,
1991 to have an update on the General Plan process.
They will be indicating that we will probably be
seeking an extension, from the State, of our
October 17th date. This will allow for a thorough
public hearing process before the document gets to
the adoption stage. The Traffic and Transportation
Commission is encouraged to attend and express
their comments at the Public Hearing.
ITEMS FROM C/Beke inquired what happened to various items that
COMMISSIONERS: were supposed to be carried over to this agenda.
AA/Aberra stated that a couple of the
intersections, that were supposed to be discussed,
were turned over to DKS Assoc. for further
analysis.
ACM/Belanger stated that the street cleaning item
will come back to the Commission at a later date.
Chair/Ortiz stated that he received a complaint
from a citizen regarding the near traffic accident
southbound on Diamond Bar Boulevard at Cold
Springs. Motorists are making U turns and nearly
colliding with people making right turns. Another
complaint regarding the same intersection is that
the street lights at that intersection go out,
completely, late at night.
Sgt. Rawlings informed the Commission that section
#40802 of the Vehicle code, that defines a speed
trap, is being revised January 1, 1993 to delete
the section that refers to the "no requirement for
speed survey on residential streets". After the
indicated date, we will not be allowed to use radar
on residential streets unless a speed survey has
been done.
August 28, 1991 Page 5
ITEMS FROM C/Fritz indicated to staff of his intentions of
STAFF: attending the September 14, 1991 workshop.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:13 p.m. to the next
regular meeting of September 12, 1991.
Respectively,
/s/ Sid Mousavi
Sid Mousavi
Secretary
Attest:
/s/ Tom Ortiz
Tom Ortiz
Chairman
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 1, 1991 REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 1991
FROM: ROBERT L. VAN NORT, CITY MANAGER
TITLE: PAYMENT OF PUBLIC AGENCY FEES FOR THE USE OF FIELDS AND FACILITIES ON
BEHALF OF PRIVATE NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS
SUMMARY: Private non-profit athletic groups are charged $7.50 per participant or $10.00 per family for use
of Walnut Valley Unified School District's fields and facilities. It has been reported that this charge has caused
a financial strain on some of the City's non-profit organizations.
RECOMMENDATION: The Parks and Recreation Commission recommends that the City Council approve the
following actions:
1) The City Council prepare a strongly worded letter to the School District indicating that there is no
apparent justification for the field use fees; and, requesting that all fees are waived.
2) Barring a change in school policy and contingent upon demonstrated hardship, the City Council
should authorize the expenditures of General Funds for payment of current year fees (FY 91-92), on behalf of
private non-profit sports organiztions.
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 N/A _ Yes _ No
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? N/A
3. Has environmental impact been assessed? N/A _ Yes _ No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _X Yes _ No
Which Commission? PARKS AND RECREATION COMNIISSION
5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes _X No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
REVIEWED BY:
x
Obert L. Van Nort errence L-1
City Manager Assistant City
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: October 1, 1991
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: PAYMENT OF PUBLIC AGENCY FEES FOR THE USE OF FIELDS AND
FACILITIES ON BEHALF OF PRIVATE NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS
ISSUE STATEMENT:
Should the City pay fees that are charged to private non-profit athletic
groups, by other public agencies.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Parks and Recreation Commission recommends that the City Council approve
the following actions:
1) Prepare a strongly worded letter to the School District indicating
that there is no apparent justification for the fees charged; and,
request that all fees be waived.
2) Barring a change in school policy and contingent upon a
demonstrated hardship, authorize expenditure of General Funds for
payment of current year fees (FY 91-92), on behalf of private, non-
profit athletic organizations.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
The fiscal impact of this proposal would be up to $5,000. The funds would be
allocated from the General Fund.
BACKGROUND:
Currently, private non-profit athletic groups are charged $7.50 per
participant or $10.00 per family for use of Walnut Valley Unified School
District's fields and facilities. It has been reported that this charge has
caused a financial strain on some of the City's non-profit sports
organizations.
The paying of the field use fees on behalf of the non-profit athletic
organziations would forestall the raising of annual registration fees, which
could have effect on keeping some of the community's families and their
childen from participating in these types of activities.
DISCUSSION:
The Parks and Recreation Commission were informed that all but one non-profit
organizations have paid the field use charges, although several groups have
reported that it is a financial hardship. The Commission was further
informed that the City of Diamond Bar is from 2 to 4 acres per thousand below
the established developed parkland standard. With this established parkland
deficit there are not enough City -owned athletic fields and facilities
avialable for the games and practices of private, non-profit sports
organizations, without using other public agencies' (school districts) fields
and facilities. The Walnut Valley Unified School District charges user
groups for the use of District fields. The $7.50 per participant charge has
caused financial strains upon some of the City's non-profit groups. There
has been a request that the City consider paying the field use fees on the
non-profit groups' behalf. Although there is a "gift of public funds" issue
to resolve before such payment could be made, it would appear to be possible
to pay the fees.
Based upon the information available, it would appear that the non-profit
groups do not incur the full impact of the WVUSD user fees. For example, one
of the groups affected owes $870 in fees, yet the group's membership is 950.
On a per capita basis, the annual charge per participant is less than $1.00.
Nevertheless, there has been an assertion of hardship.
PRE?,ED
i
Terrence L. 1 nger, Assistant City Manager
REPORT ON ACTIONS TAKEN FOLLOWING ADOPTION
OF ORDINANCE NO. 15-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. 15-A(1990)
1. On November 13, 1990, the City Council of the City
of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No. 15-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. 15-A (1990) adopted interim zoning regulations,
extending Ordinance No. 15 (1990) , effective for no longer than the
16th day of October, 1991. Pursuant to the requirements of said
Section 65858, Ordinance No. 15-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 October 1, 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. 15A
(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. 15-A (1990)
ACTIONS TAKEN
Following the adoption of Ordinance No. 15-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 the
City's General Plan and specific amendments to the Zoning
Ordinance. The goal of such amendments is to create a unified and
balanced plan of development pertaining to permitted land uses
within the C -M Zone, for the City of Diamond Bar which will
eventually result in the establishment of permanent and
comprehensive land use and development standards policies for the
City.
2. The City Council directed that such General Plan and
Zoning Ordinance studies emphasize the formulation of permitted
land use and 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 for land use approvals within
the C -M Zone. With the adoption of the amendments to the General
Plan and Zoning Ordinance, the City Council would consider the
earlier repeal of Ordinance No. 15-A (1990).
Dated: September 26, 1991
JaVes DeStef no
Community De elopment Director
ICITV 4I~ I3I141MOND 13AR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO. _ (
TO: Robert L. Van Nort
MEETING DATE: October 1, 1991 REPORT DATE: September 26, 1991
FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director
TITLE: Extension of Interim Ordinance No. 15-A (1990) pertaining to Quasi Public Uses in the C -M
Zone
SUMMARY: Ordinance No. 15-A (1990) pertains to certain provisions of Title 22 of the Los Angeles County
Code regarding land uses within the C -M (Commercial Manufacturing) zone. 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 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? _ 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:
RE SEWED BY: n /�
lkc�bert L. VanNort Terrence L. Belanger JaYnes DeStefano
City Manager Assistant City Manager Community Devel pment Director
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: October 1, 1991
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: Extension of Ordinance no. 15-A (1990) pertaining to Quasi -
Public Uses within the C -M Zone.
ISSUE STATEMENT: Ordinance No. 15-A (1990) pertains to certain provisions of
Title 22 of the Los Angeles County Code regarding land uses
within the C -M (Commercial Manufacturing) zone. 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 Ordinance.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY: N/A
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: On October 16, 1990, the City Council considered and
adopted an Interim Ordinance No. 15 (1990) amending the list
of permitted and conditionally permitted uses within the C -M
(Commercial Manufacturing) Zone. The City Council adopted the
interim ordinance in order to provide the necessary study time
to review the most appropriate land uses for the CM Zone. The
Ordinance removed all non -revenue producing land uses from the
CM Zone. The Council, on November 13, 1990, extended the
interim ordinance to October 16, 1991. As a result of public
testimony received at the November, 1990, hearing, the City
Council directed that Staff provide the Planning Commission an
opportunity to investigate the appropriateness of
reintroducing quasi -public uses into the CM Zone. The
Planning Commission recommended in February of 1991 that
quasi -public uses be permitted within the CM Zone subject to
certain circumstances, guidelines and procedures. On March
19, 1991, City Council reviewed the Planning Commission
recommendation concluding with direction to Staff to develop
an Ordinance for the specific Quasi -Public Use (Calvary
Chapel) under discussion and work toward a future ordinance
for consideration consistent with the policies contained
within the upcoming General Plan.
The City Staff has reviewed a Draft Development Agreement
prepared by Calvary Chapel and has provided comments on the
rough draft. Calvary Chapel is presently working on
refinements to their proposal and are in discussions with
various commercial developers with the intent to provide the
City a "development package" for consideration.
X1:5 CV1Li1ZG11 1 22 dWCLL C, tI1C Cl -Ly
first General Plan. Policies
application by Staff, Commiss
available. No changes are
Ordinance at this time until th
policies are adopted.
is presently duvalupin9 its
and standards adequate for
ion or Council are not yet
recommended for the Interim
e General Plan and its land use
Attached for reference purposes are previously prepared agenda
reports on the Interim Ordinance and the Interim Ordinance
list of land uses is attached for information.
PREPARED BY:
11
James DeStefano` Community Development Director
JDS\mco
Attachments: Agenda Report dated 11/13/90
Ordinance 15-B (1990)
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: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager
FROM: James DeStefano, Director of Plann'
SUBJECT: Report on Actions Taken Following Adop ion of Ordinance No. 15 (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 mea-
sures taken to alleviate the conditions which let to the adoption of Ordinance
No. 15 (1990).
BACKGROUND:
1. On October 16, 1990, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted
its Ordinance No. 15 (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 Sup-
port Thereof." Said Ordinance No. 15 (1990) adopted interim zoning regu-
lations, effective for no longer than forty-five (45) days pertaining to
land use proposals for non-commercial or manufacturing uses in the C -M,
Commercial Manufacturing Zoning District within the City. Pursuant to the
requirements of said Section 65858, Ordinance No. 15 (1990) was adopted by
the City Council upon its finding that approvals of such development ap-
plications 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 is-
sue a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the condi-
tion which led to the adoption of such interim zoning ordinance.
Narrative continued on next page.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Amount Requested $
Budgeted Amount $
In Account Number
Deficit: $
Revenue Source:
REVIEWED BY:
bert lf.van Nort Andrew V. Arczynski Terrence L. Belang
City Manager City Attorney Assistant City Man ger
Agenda Item
Page Two
November 13, 1990
3. On October 15, 1990, at a meeting of the City Council of the city of
Diamond Bar, the City Council was presented with an oral and written
staff report concerning the adoption of said Ordinance No. 15 (1990>
At said meeting and following said staff report, the City Council au-
thorized and directed staff to prepare a written report concerning the
actions taken following, and relative to, the adoption of Ordinance No.
15 (1990).
ACTIONS TAKEN:
Following the adoption of Ordinance No. 15 (1990), the following actions have
been taken relative to the interim zoning regulations:
The City Council adopted an Interim Zoning Ordinance on October 16, 1990. Fol-
lowing the adoption of Ordinance No. 15 (1990) the City staff has continued to
develop the General Plan, formulate specific amendments to the Zoning Ordinance
and prepare economic development strategies for the City. City staff has coor-
dinated an Economic Development Retreat between the City Council and Chamber of
Commerce Board and discussed development opportunities with retail developers.
As a result of these efforts the City Council has directed the Staff to coordin-
ate the creation of an Economic Development Subcommittee of the Chamber and
City. The purpose of the subcommittee is, generally, to maintain and expand
existing local businesses and identify commercial expansion opportunities
throughout the community. City staff has met with the General Plan consultant
and a new working draft document is expected by the year's end. The Circulation
Element consultant selection process is underway. The element will further de-
fine the existing and future transportation network. A review of the draft De-
velopment Code is proceeding with revised drafts anticipated early next year.
The goal is to create a unified and balanced plan of development which will
eventually result in the establishment of comprehensive policies for the City.
The preparation of the referenced documents will provide the necessary guide-
lines for long-term development in the City. The contemplated amendments will
permit the comprehensive review, together with public input, of applications for
development within the C -M zone. With the adoption of said documents the City
Council would consider the earlier repeal of Ordinance No. 15 (1990).
\pis
ORDINANCE NO. 15 (1990)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF DIAMOND BAR ADOPTING AN INTERIM ZONING
ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE 65858(a) AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF.
A. Recitals.
(i) On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the
State of California. Thereafter, the City Council adopted its
Ordinance No. 14, thereby adopting by reference the Los Angeles
County Code as the ordinances of the City of Diamond Bar,
including Title 22 thereof setting forth the applicable planning
and zoning regulations for the City of Diamond Bar. (Hereinafter
said Title 22 shall be referred to as the "Zoning Ordinance.")
(ii) With the recent incorporation of the City of
Diamond Bar, the City Council has examined the existing
Los Angeles County General Plan, Zone District Plan and Zoning
Ordinance as it pertains to existing and potential development in
the City of Diamond Bar. Such examination has revealed that
rt
there are areas within the City which do not provide a stable
transition of densities and/or uses and are, as such,
incompatible both internally and with adjacent zones and uses.
The City Council has not adopted the existing Los Angeles County
General Plan (as the same would apply to the City of Diamond Bar)
and action on development applications, as to required
consistency to an adopted General Plan, has taken place pursuant
1
to the terms and provisions of California Government Code section
65360. More specifically, the C -M Commercial -Manufacturing
zoning district of the Zoning Ordinance allows for a wide range
of land uses, including non-commercial and non -manufacturing uses
which are permitted by right and as such do not require
discretionary review by the City. Further, it is not certain
that all such non -commerical and non -manufacturing permitted land
uses are appropriate land uses within such zoning district.
Lacking both an adopted General Plan, and consistent local
development standards for review of development, such an approval
scheme does not contribute to appropriate community development
and would frustrate any effective long-range planning efforts
within the City of Diamond Bar.
(iii) In recognition of the need for effective
long-range planning criteria, the City Council has directed staff
of the City to study and formulate amendments to the Zoning
Ordinance to assure adequate local review of, development
standards for, and appropriate permitted land uses within the C -M
Commercial -Manufacturing honing district pending the adoption of
the ultimate General Plan and development criteria for the City
of Diamond Bar.
(iv) There are presently pending applications and/or
proposed land uses, the approval or institution of which would
not conform to the contemplated General Plan or development
approval scheme and would contradict the specific purposes for
such Zoning Ordinance amendments and the adoption of a unified
2
General Plan. Moreover, pending the completion of such
amendments, it is foreseeable that further development proposals
or land use proposals for property within the C -M
Commercial -Manufacturing zoning district will be sought or
submitted which would contradict the ultimate goals of the
proposed Zoning Code amendments and General Plan.
(v) This Council is concerned about the creation of an
orderly and balanced development within the City of Diamond Bar.
Accordingly, to protect the integrity of the ultimate General
Plan and to assure the continued development stability of those
properties zoned C -M Commerical -Manufacturing within the City,
this Council finds it is necessary to establish interim zoning
policies to allow City staff the time necessary to investigate
and formulate the above -referenced Zoning Ordinance amendments.
(vi) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of
this Ordinance have occurred.
B. ordinance.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS: 11
Section 1. The City Council hereby specifically finds that
all the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this
Ordinance are true and correct.
Section 2. The City Council further finds as follows:
a. The City of Diamond Bar is presently developing a
General Plan for development in the City of Diamond Bar. The
ultimate goal of the General Plan is to provide a balanced and
3
unified plan of development within the City of Diamond Bar and
will ultimately upgrade the economic, social and cultural welfare
of persons and properties within the City of Diamond Bar. The
current Zoning Ordinance of the City of Diamond Bar does not
provide sufficient standards for application to City staff,
Planning Commission or City Council review for the approval of,
or determination of appropriate land uses within the C -M
Commercial -Manufacturing zoning district zone within the City;
b. There are presently pending applications and/or
land use proposals for non-commercial or manufacturing uses in
the C -M Commercial -Manufacturing zoning district, the approval
of which would contradict the ultimate goals and objectives of
the General Plan and would not be subject to adequate local
review under the current provisions of the Zoning Ordinance; and
C. The approval of non-commercial or manufacturing
land uses within the C -M Commercial -Manufacturing zoning district
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 3. The interim Zoning Regulations pertaining to the
permitted commercial or manufacturing land uses within the C -M
Commercial -Manufacturing zoning district, as set forth on Exhibit
"A" hereto, which are incorporated by reference herein as if set
forth in their entirety, are hereby adopted.
4
I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond
Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was
introduced and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Diamond Bar held on the _1.6th_ day of October ,
1990, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Papen, Kim, Horcher
Mayor Pro Tem Forbing
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None Mayor Werner
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ATTEST •
•Lynd urgers, City Clerk
of the City of Diamond Bar
SPATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LC -S ANGELESSS
CITY OF DIAW1-)iJ1) BA`;i
I. LYNDA I !:!;GESS CITY CLERK OF THE
CITY O5' PAR, DO HEREBY CERTIFY
THE FORGC:;; TO ES A FULL, TRUE AND
CORRECT .Ir"i' OF i 11 ORIGINAL AS SAME
APPEARS Civ i=J.;_': iid :'-i1' 0 ; ICE.
IN VJITi ;•' i ',"� �L,'; t��. I HAVE I•;EREUNTO SET
MY ii.�'rD ,+.;: AFI::cD THE SEAL'" pE CiTY
OF �b iiV'OND BAR, THISI>%-----DAY
OF�_ '19
LYNDA BURGESS, CITY CLERK
BY—' Z�j,' G ' r,,___ —
DCPULv
,, _-
DCPULv
S1101110RDIZONEIDB 6.6 6
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR )
I, TOMMYE A. NICE , Deputy City Clerk of the City of Diamond
Bar, California, hereby certify that on October 26, 1990, I
caused to be posted ORDINANCE NO. 15 - (1990) a copy of which is
attached hereto and by reference made a part of this certificate.
I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is
true and correct.
Executed at Diamond Bar, California this 26th day of
October, 1990.
Zs/ Tommye A. Nice
TOMMYE A. NICE
Deputy City Clerk of the
City of Diamond Bar
ATTACHMENT "A"
C -til CONIMERCIAL ?YI. ', tUTACTtiRII,*G ZONE
Sections:
22.25.230 Permitted uses.
22.21S_240-;cccssor-uses.
22.25.250 Uses subject to directors review and approval.
n-).2.-60 Uses subject to permits.
?2.25.270 De,:clopmcnt standards.
22.?S.230 Per, .itted uses. Prcmiscs in Zone C-�! .,.a, be used ic..
: The foi!ov,in2 commercjai uses:
ntjcuC s`�0ps.
Anpi --rice stores, household.
art gzllcrlcs.
Art supply stores_
— Auction houses. cNcludinz animal auctions.
— .automobile sales. sale of now and used motor vehicles.
lutomobile supp!% stures. pro�'idcd a!I repair alti� ides arc con-
ductc % ithin an enclosed building_
Ba<cr% shops.
Bicvcic shoos.
— Boat and other marine sales.
Bookstores.
CCra,'TIICSIs!IODs_
— Clothing stores.
— Contectjop - or candy stores.
y De(icatcsscrls.
Department stores.
Disability rehabjli tatjon and trainjn4 centers. except i!,,at assembly
and manufactunna are cermitted oniv as oroyided in subsecuon B
of this section.
— Dress shops.
- — Druzstores.
— Feed and grain sales.
— Florist shops.
— Fruit and veaetabte markets.
— Furniture stores.
— Furrier shops.
_ — Gift shops.
22.23.2-40 Accessory uses. Premises in Zone C -M ma%- be used Cur.
A. The Collo%vinv acccssol-v uses. subject to the same Iimitations and condi-
tions provided in SCCtiUn 22.23.040 (Zone C -H):
— Accessory buildines and structures.
— Buildine materials. storaQc of
B. The Folio,,%ing additional accesson- uses. subject to the samie lir:',itatiorts
and conditions provided in Section 22.23.190 (Zone C-3):
\uiornobilc bode and fender repair. p inting and uphcistcri�2. %'.hen
incicicntnl to the safe of nev,- automobiles.
Boats. minor repair of.
— Manufacturing processingtrcnIM2 and pac a--in4 inridc ,_. to and
guested in conjunction %6101 the business conducted on ti.e pr,,=S�:s.
C.CCC,^vt a5 otnCr',':ISC prop idcd as a principal use !7, SMion
C. T he f'clliov.ins additional zcccssor uses:
— Si?_tls. as oro','i;cd in Part 10 of Ch2.
. � ...p[er _ 22. j
(OLd- I tC Cn. 2.'.ri. i.0 259.3, 1927.)
22.2S.250 Uses subject to dIrectur's revie�i and 1pproval. I[ sit? :- a; s :1' -1z -:L -
for
: ;re -
for arc fust subm17:Cd to and aporoved b�' the director. pre ises :n Lone C -NI
be used for:
�.. The follo�': i:,� uses. subject to the sam. lir nations a d conditions
prop iin Section 22.23.050 (Zone C -H):
22.23.260 uses subject to permits. Premises in Zone C -NI rnav be used for:
- A_ The follo%ving uses provided a conditions1 use cermit has 'first b?en
obtained as provided in�Part 1 of Chapter 22.50, and while such PC:—nit is in full
Force and effect in conformity with the conditions ofsuc 1 cermit for:
— Hoicis.
i"Totels.
Offices. busines) or professional.
Restaurants and other eating establishments. including Food takc-
out.
ORDINANCE NO. 15-B (1990)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF DIAMOND BAR EXTENDING THE TERM OF AN
INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE NO. 15
(1990) PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858 AND
MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF.
A. Recitals.
(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. 15 (1990) adopting interim zoning
regulations pertaining to land use proposals for non-commercial or
manufacturing uses in the C -M, Commercial Manufacturing Zoning
District within the City.
(iii) On November 13, 1990, pursuant to the provisions of
California Government Code Section 65858(a), this City Council
extended the Ordinance to October 16, 1991.
(iv) 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. 15-A (1990) at least ten (10) days
prior to the expiration of Ordinance No. 15-A (1990).
(v) A duly noticed public hearing as required by
California Government Code Section 65858(a) was conducted and
concluded prior to the adoption of this Ordinance.
(vi) 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 set 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 the General Plan and proposed amendments to the
Zoning Ordinance are continuing; however, such development of the
General Plan and amendments to the Zoning Ordinance cannot be
completed prior to the expiration of Ordinance No. 15-A (1990).
Section 4. The City Council hereby specifically finds
that there are land uses permitted within the C -M, Commercial
Manufacturing Zone, the approval of 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. 15-A (1990) is extended and,
further, that the approval of any such land uses 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. 15-A (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, unless the City Council has extended said Ordinance
in the manner provided in said Section 65858 (a).
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 1st day of October, 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 1st day of October, and was finally passed at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the
1st day of October, 1991, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ATTEST:
:mco
Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
of the City of Diamond Bar