Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
01/28/1992
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Mayor — Jay C. Kim Mayor Pro Tem — Phyllis E. Papen Councilman — John A. Forbing Councilman — Gary H. Werner Councilman — Gary G. Miller City Council Chambers are located at: South Coast Air Quality Management District Board Room 21865 East Copley Drive Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking in the Go--uncil:Chambers MEETING DATE: January 28, 1992 Robert L. Van Nort ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING City Manager MEETING TIME: 7:00 P.M. Andrew V. Arczynski City Attorney Lynda Burgess City Clerk Copies of staff reports or other written. don mentation relating to each: item referred t6on' chis agenda are on file in the:.dffice atf the city Cleirir and are avaulab1 fflr public .inspection If yoh have questions regarding an agenda item, please contacte Gi#tr Clerk at (7t�n4-489 during business hours. The City of Diamond Bar uses RECYCLED paper and encourages you to do the same. THIS MEETING IS BEING BROADCAST LIVE BY JONES INTERCABLE FOR AIRING ON CHANNEL 51, AND BY REMAINING IN THE ROOM, YOU ARE GIVING YOUR PERMISSION TO BE TELEVISED. Next Resolution No. 92-02 Next Ordinance No. 02(1992) 1. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: MAYOR KIM ROLL CALL: Councilmen Forbing, Miller, Werner, Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Mayor Kim 2. COUNCIL COMMENTS: Items raised by individual Council - members 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 or matters of interest to the public that are not already scheduled for consideration on this agenda. Please complete a Speaker's Card and give it to the City Clerk (completion of this form is voluntary). There is a five minute maximum time limit when addressing the City Council. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: 7:00 P.M. OR AS SOON THEREAFTER AS MATTERS CAN BE HEARD. 4.1 TENTATIVE TRACTS 47850, 47851 AND 48487 - The applicants have submitted a request to approve three (3) tract maps for development of 120 lots on 160 acres located adjacent to and within SEA No. 15. The application was approved by the City Planning Commission on November 25, 1991. Recommended Action: Receive additional testimony and direct Staff accordingly. 5. OLD BUSINESS: 5.1 ORDINANCE NO. 1 (1992): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 22.76 TO THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE, AS HERETOFORE ADOPTED, PERTAINING TO ADMISSION CHARGE PARTIES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES - First reading on January 21, 1992. Recommended Action: Approve for 2nd reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1 (1992) adding a New Chapter 22.76 of the L.A. County Code pertaining to admission charge parties in residential zones. JANUARY 28, 1992 PAGE 2 6. NEW BUSINESS: 6.1 RESOLUTION NO. 92 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT AND MITIGATION PROGRAM UNDER SECTION 164.56 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE 1989 FOR ROADSIDE RECREATIONAL PROJECT - The California Resources Agency has announced the availability of grant monies under AB471 for Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation programs as related to the impact of modifying or constructing a new transportation facility. The City can apply for the grant as a result of the Pathfinder Bridge widening and construction of the Park -N -Ride facility. The impact of the modification and construction has an impact on Brea Canyon Road and, therefore, on Heritage Park, due to possible increase traffic. The application will request $338,800 for expansion of the Heritage Park Community Building ($150,000), extending the half basketball court to a full court ($8,000) and adding parking spaces required by the remodeling of the building ($180,000). Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 92 -XX approving the application for grant funds for Roadside Recreational Project. 7. ANNOUNCEMENTS: 8. ADJOURNMENT: 9. CLOSED SESSION: Litigation - Government Code Section 54956.9 Personnel - Government Code Section 54957.6 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Mayor — Jay C. IGm Mayor Pro Tem — Phyllis E. Papen Councilman — John A. Forbing Councilman — Gary H. Werner Councilman — Gary G. Miller City Council Chambers are located at: South Coast Air Quality Management District Board Room 21865 East Copley Drive Please retrain frorn smoking: eating or drinkirigin the unci Chambers MEETING DATE: January 28, 1.992 Robert L. Van Nort ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING City Manager MEETING TIME: 7:00 P.M. Andrew V. Arczynski City Attorney Lynda Burgess City Clerk Copies of staff repgrto `nr othel wntten dgGtlentatigil re4a# ri to each !tem:teferred i..:p.this agenda are on file: in the... qe of the City Clerk and are avarlable for prubltc inspection,. if you have questions regarding an agenda item; please t ' tadtthe C. Clerk at (7 a) s6t1-2489 during bus ness.hours. The City of Diamond Bar uses RECYCLED paper and encourages you to do the same. THIS MEETING IS BEING BROADCAST LIVE BY JONES INTERCABLE FOR AIRING ON CHANNEL 51, AND BY REMAINING IN THE ROOM, YOU ARE GIVING YOUR PERMISSION TO BE TELEVISED. Next Resolution No. 92-02 Next Ordinance No. 02(1992) ms 1. CALL TO ORDER: 7:.e�P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: MAynR uTX k�-Ll� ROLL CALL: Councilmen.Forbing, Miller, Werner, Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Mayor Kim �Zietriod4� 2. COUNCIL COMMENTS: Items raised by individual Council- oj" rlewssEar�dC members are for Council discussion. Direction may be given at 1� ,�,o c f this meeting or the item may be scheduled for action at a pow future future meeting. WJ P°rne r�ria-k- (26A W:11 40 Ire -move. 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 or matters of interest to the public that are not already scheduled for consideration on this agenda. Please complete a Speaker's Card and give it to the City Clerk (completion of this form is voluntary). There is a five minute maximum time limit when addressing the City Council. 4 n PUBLIC HEARING: 7:00 P.M. OR AS SOON THEREAFTER AS MATTERS CAN BE HEARD. -e- [l&4es 4.1 TENTATIVE TRACTS 47850, 47851 AND 48487 - The applicants �n 'sem° have submitted a request to approve three (3) tract maps Po d for development of 120 lots on 160 acres located adjacent to and within SEA No. 15. The application was approved a by the City Plannin Commission on November 25, 1991. �fi�M` ase ` �rirD ► �n. rhe e n c� 0-4ru �A y --.M, 19 `i z . `Sy,�e e3s �O Recommended Action: Receive additional testimony and direct Staff accordingly. S-t>c sFR-CL erg off os�c0� lCo . eal�ex-s �h - Jor 5. OLD BUSINESS: (.eCES5 5.1 ORDINANCE NO. 1 (1992) : AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY -7:3 S COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 7 '..So getzAJMe- 22.76 TO THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE, AS HERETOFORE n t" &wef 06a ADOPTED, PERTAINING TO ADMISSION CHARGE PARTIES IN �iC; 5,c �1�� ASIpENTIAL ZONES - First reading on January 21, 1992 .� F� C14 ecommended Action: Approve for 2nd reading and adopt &AA -1) 6:3d Oe-" nU e -n a rdinance No. 1 (1992 ) adding a New Chapter 22.76 of the j�_ OS .A. County Code pertaining to admission charge parties in residential zones. 4, 313 I JANUARY 28, 1992 PAGE 2 6. NEW BUSINESS: 6.1 RESOLUTION NO. 92 -X -X A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT AND wn�G(!✓� MITIGATION PROGRAM UNDER SECTION 164.56 OF THE STREETS _U AND HIGHWAYS CODE 1989 FOR ROADSIDE RECREATIONAL PROJECT z - The California Resources Agency has announced the availability of grant monies under AB471 for Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation programs as 1_ related to the impact of modifying or constructing a new transportation facility. The City can apply for the grant as a result of the Pathfinder Bridge widening and construction of the Park -N -Ride facility. The impact of ✓r� the modification and construction has an impact on Brea Canyon Road and, therefore, on Heritage Park, due to possible increase traffic. The application will request $338,800 for expansion of the Heritage Park Community .� Building ($150,000), extending the half basketball court to a full court ($8,000) and adding parking spaces required by the remodeling of the building ($180,000). Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 92 -[approving the application for grant funds for Roadside Recreational Project. 11 7. ANNOUNCEMENTS: N 8. ADJOURNMENT: ;\ 9. CLOSED SESSION: \Ao r e. Litigation - Government Code Section 54956.9 Personnel - Government Code Section 54957.6 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager MEETING DATE: January 28, 1992 REPORT DATE: January 21, 1991 FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, Assistant City Manager via Kellee A. Fritzal, Administrative Assistant TITLE: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar approving the application for grant funds for the Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program under the section 164.56 of the Streets and Highways Code 1989 for roadside recreation. SUMMARY: The California Resources Agency has announced the availability of grant monies under AB 471 for Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation programs as related to the impact of modifying an existing transportation facility or the construction of a new transportation facility. The City can qualify to submit an application for a grant as a result of the Pathfinder Bridge widening as well as the construction of a Park and Ride facility. The impact of the modification and construction has an impact on Brea Canyon Road and therefore on Heritage Park due to possible increased traffic. The grant application is due on January 31, 1991, with the announcement of awards in July, 1992. The grant application will request the amount of $338,800 for the expansion of the Heritage Park Community Building ($150,000), extending the half basketball court to a full court ($8,800) and additional parking spaces required by the remodeling Heritage Park Community Center ($180,000). RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached Resolution authorizing the City to apply for a Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Grant for expansion at Heritage Park. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report X Resolution(s) — Ordinances(s) _ Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: NONE 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? MAJORITY 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? N/A _ Yes — No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? — Yes X No Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? — Yes X No Report discussed with the following affected departments: IEWED BY: ; tiut. t( Robert L. Van Nort City Manager /'x�- � 2 Terrence L. Belanger Assistant City Manager CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: January 28, 1992 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Resolution to apply for an Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Grant Application ISSUE STATEMENT: The California Resources Agency has announced the availability of grant monies under AB 471 for Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation programs. The City is currently in the process of planning an expansion of the Community Building at Heritage Park. The City is interested in applying for a grant for the additional on-site parking and expanding the current basketball court from half -court to a full -court. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached Resolution authorizing the City to apply for a Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Grant for expansion at Heritage Park. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: There is no fiscal impact to apply for the grant. BACKGROUND: The Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation program as relates to the impact of modifying an existing transportation facility or construction of a new transportation facility. One of the City's capital improvement projects is the widening of Pathfinder Bridge and the construction of a Park and Ride facility on Pathfinder Road near the 57 Freeway southbound on-ramp. To be eligible for consideration each project must: 1) Demonstrate a direct or indirect relationship with the environmental impact of modifying or constructing a new transportation facility. 2) Provide additional mitigation or enhancement over and above the mitigation required as part of the transportation projects to which they are related. 3) The mitigation, if in or near the right-of-way, must be compatible with and not interfere with the operation or safety of the transportation facilities. 4) The mitigation must not limit currently planned or anticipated future improvements to the transportation facility. DISCUSSION: With the planned modification and construction on Pathfinder Road, the expansion at Heritage Park is an eligible project, due to proximity and impact of the transportation project on Brea Canyon Road. The City is currently conducting public forums for remodeling the Heritage Park Community Building. The aim of the program is to serve the needs of Seniors and tiny tots in addition to providing a meeting location for local organizations, such as Scouts, and conducting recreational programming. The grant application would consist of three elements: 1) Additional funding for building construction ($150,000) 2) Sixteen additional on-site parking spaces ($180,000) 3) Expansion of basketball court from half -court to full -court ($8,800) The total request for $338,000 has been determined by staff with quotations from Wolff/Lang/Christopher Architects. The grant application is due on January 31, 1992 with announcement of awards in June, 1992. PREPARED BY: Kellee A. Fritzak,, nistrative Assistant RESOLUTION NO. 91 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT AND MITIGATION PROGRAM UNDER SECTION 164.56 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE 1989 FOR ROADSIDE RECREATIONAL PROJECT WHEREAS, the legislature of the State of California has enacted AB 471 (Chapter 106 of the Statutes of 1989), which provides $10 million annually for a period of 10 years for grant funds to local, state and federal agencies and nonprofit entities for projects to enhance and mitigate the environmental impacts of modified or new public transportation facilities; and WHEREAS, the Resources Agency of California has established the procedures and criteria for reviewing grant proposals and is required to submit to the California Transportation Commission a list of recommended projects from which the grant recipients will be selected; and WHEREAS, said procedures and criteria established by the Resources Agency require the applicant to certify by resolution the approval of application before submission of said application to the State; and WHEREAS, the application contains assurances that the applicant must comply with; and WHEREAS, the applicant, if selected, will enter into an agreement with the State of California to carry out the environmental enhancement and mitigation project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Diamond Bar: 1. Approves the filing of an application for the Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program for grant assistance. 2. Certifies that said applicant will make adequate provisions for operation and maintenance of the project. 3. Appoints Terrence L. Belanger, Assistant City Manager as agent of the City of Diamond Bar to conduct all negotiations, execute and submit all documents, including, but not limited to applications, agreements, amendments, payment requests and so on, which may be necessary for the completion of the aforementioned project. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 1992. Mayor I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of , 1992, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: City Clerk City Council Meeting Tape 1 1 1/28/92 .in places that do not normally have newsstands at them and it has come to our attention as of recent and that is a new policy that we are going to implement. Madam Chair Tonight I have many people that would like to address the Council, I have almost 30 slips already turned in. We do have a five minute limitation who wants to speak on an agenda item. Last week, we had a discussion that went to 10 til 11. We started at about 7:00 on this project, so we will go again tonight for the amount of time that it needs to take. I am going to ask, however, that you do honor the five hour, (it felt like five hours) the five minute ruling so that everyone who wants an opportunity to speak on the agenda can be heard tonight and we would appreciate your cooperation in that. Also, we have some people who spoke last week who have asked to speak a second time. I would ask that you would waive that unless there is some pertinent new development that has come to rise since last week. We have not had any additional comments from the developer, we have not had any responses yet, so after we take all of your comments, the Council has its questions to ask and then we have a response time, so this could be a very long evening. I am going to ask that we cooperate with one another and abide by the five minute time limit. There is a beeper that will go off and out of courtesy, I will give you another 15 to 30 seconds to wrap up, but lets not go to everyone taking 7 to 10 minutes, like happened last week. Under Public Comments, I have four people who want to address the Council not on the Agenda. If I am not reading your slips right and you want to speak to the item on the Agenda tonight, then I will call on you later, but the four people if they would take the microphone, Ron King, Don Shed, Elron Pilla, Larry Booth Martha Brothsky. Elron Pilla (sp.) Good evening Council, my name is Elron Pilla. I reside at 23958 Golden Springs Drive. FA I also represent and speaking on behalf of the Diamond Bar Gadfly Association tonight. I would like to make some comments about the GPAC Committee and the general plan. After I heard complaints by some of the committee members of GPAC at a planning commission two months ago, I decided to check out what I found out, or I decided to check them out. What I found out was that of the 30 people that were appointed out of the 35 that applied back in June of 1989, that today we only have 8 active members and really only have 5 at any one meeting. I was at the January 18, 23 and 25 meeting of this month to see for myself who and how many people were taking part in putting our general plan together. At all three meetings, there were five pack members, two staff, one to two reporters and 5 to 6 residents. This is really a sad case for something as important as our General Plan. I asked one staff member why these other 25 people were not replaced and what rules applied for attendance. I also asked one Council member the same thing. I got about the same answer from both. 1) there really are not rules set up and 2) if the Council were to try to replace the missing 25 that those newly appointed would not be able to get up to speed with the other 8 active members. The reason I am bringing this to your attention now is that some residents have asked me how to get on the GPAC Committee. Mr. Bill Gross and Mr. Tom Van Winkle are two that would like to help. I told them to contact any of our Council members. The city has asked and received a one year extension on the General Plan. Therefore, I would think that it would be in the best interest of the community and the city that this Council ask and appoint new members that really want to help and would attend these meetings. I do not agree that the new people, if appointed, could not catch up or get up to speed with the other members. Yes, it will require the new members to read the General Plan and it may take two to three weeks to do so. But they would be up-to- date and while they are reading this and studying it and also attending the meeting they would be getting valuable input at that time. Seeing that at the last meeting we are only one third of the way through on the GPAC of review of the General Plan, I feel that ...that we should have the citizens who do want to participate and will participate to show up at these GPAC meetings and I hope the Council will reconsider and pick up the list and start calling people and lets get more input. That is what this Council has been advocating, input, as you can see behind me tonight we have turned out another nice gathering for the Council to be 3 addressed by and their viewpoints. I thank you very much for your time. Madam Chair I ask that you not applause after each one. I am going to ask the City Attorney to respond to Mr. Elron Pilla. City Attorney Madam Mayor Pro Tem, Members of the Council, late last summer or actually early last summer the issue of replacements of members of the GPAC who were not attending meetings was brought up, the Council at that time instructed the replacement of several individuals who had missed a number of meetings and the Council in late summer due to the pending publication of the draft General Plan determined that it would be a poor time to try to get people in to fill vacancies as they occurred. At this point, we are rapidly approaching the public hearing process before the Planning Commission at which the General Plan Advisory Committee's recommendations will be made and everyone is going to have an opportunity to make their input. Thank you. Elron Pilla Madam Chair. Madam Chair Yes. Elron Pilla I think it would be helpful to note for the members of the public here that the GPAC meetings are all open to the public anyone of you or anyone else at home who is interested in participating in that process, has every right and opportunity to do so and I would encourage you to do so at the GPAC level as well as at the Planning Commission and City Council level. 4 Madam Chair I would like to add one further comment, the G-pvc is not the end result. The pvc is putting together a recommendation to go to the Planning Commission, there will be public hearings at the Planning Commission, upon their review it will come back before the City Council and the City Council will review it. So there is going to numerous public hearings and the GPAC's document is not the final of what the could be result. Go ahead, please. Ron Kine Madam Mayor Pro tem, Member of the Commission my name is Ron King and I am hear to voice my concern and opposition to the now under construction apartment development on Grand and Golden Springs Boulevard. I can not comprehend how the Planning Commission and the City Council could allow a development to take place, particularly on Grand Avenue and I would like to further suggest that no further developments like this take place until we come up with a comprehensive General Plan. Larry Booth My name is Larry Booth, 3839 Castle Rock Road, Diamond Bar. Last week I was surprised to hear that we have a 300 foot notification area around any project that is being developed. Living down in south Diamond Bar, like I do, when Arsero built over in Rowland Heights, or Arsero built near Pathfinder, I was notified of those hearings. I suggest that the Council increase the notification area to 1000 feet and I think I have an answer to the problem where people have moved out, the tax records aren't right for the person living in the house, just send it to residence/occupancy. I get all the junk mail. I have a problem, One problem down in south Diamond Bar is the those new radio towers we got up there that blink all night long. I wasn't ever notified of that, that must in Orange County. I would also like to make one other comment, one gentlemen asked last week, why are we not having in place something about saving our oaks. Los Angeles County, when this was a county, they had a rule about saving Oaks and I would like us to go forward and get something implemented on saving our oaks because if we don't we won't have none left. Thank you. 5 Male Speaker Very briefly, Madam Mayor Pro tem, with respect to the issue of addressing notices to occupant, or what not, state law prescribes how the notices are suppose to go out. With respect to the oaks, I am sure Mr. Booth will be pleased to know that the ordinance that the county has is also the ordinance that the city has in place and in fact staff has been working on upgrading it and implementing it in a more significant fashion. Madam Chair Mr. Chad Mr. Chad Good evening members of City Council my name is Don Chad, 1824 Shady Wood Road. It is interesting, that is just what I was going to discuss right now was the tree ordinance. Over 2 1/2 years ago I submitted a comprehensive tree ordinance to get it implement as quickly as possible and I would like to stress that I wish to press for rapid implementation of this ordinance which has been pending for nearly 2 1/2 years. Ann must have retyped this thing a half a dozen times and the Planning Commission has done a good job on it. Without this ordinance developers can do as they please without any regard to the environment or ecology of the area under development. Individual decisions by individuals is not in the best interest of the citizens or the community as a whole. Mr. Van Ort, may I ask what is the hold up on it. Madam Chair Mr. Chad will you complete your statement and then we will address the issues. Mr. Chad Okay. Item #2 in regards to the General Plan, I don't think any further development should be allowed to proceed without the General Plan being in effect. The General Plan Committed has worked very sincerely for over 2 years to complete this draft and we are now redoing all that work due to some insertions and modifications that were not from the 6 original G-pvc group's wishes. As Councilman Miller indicated at the last meeting, how surprised the Council was to see that project get under way on Grand, just south of Golden Springs without their knowledge and I was just as surprised. This points up the fact that the General Plan must be place to provide the guidelines necessary for future developments that will ultimately establish this city's destiny. The General Plan is the voice of the citizens and not just a few in City Hall and that is why we became a City to stop Schabarumism. We don't want councilism we want citizenism ordinance, if I may. Male S Baker I would like to ask what is holding up the tree Mr. Chad the Council has adopted rules and regulations governing ordinances and that ordinance will be scheduled for a study section at the next study session that the C'nnncil going to be holding, which will probably be March 10, I believe. session on March 10. Mr. --Chad Okay, thanks. Mrs__Bruskv Actually I wanted to speak to an Agenda item, shall I wait. Madam Chair So there will be a study Oh, I am sorry. Yes thank you very much. With that, we will move to item 4.1 the public hearing on tentatives of tracts, 47850, 47851 and 48487. Male Speaker Mr. DeStefano Mr. DeStefano Madam Mayor and members of the Council, as you previously announced this is intended 7 to be a continued public hearing for purposes of testimony to be received from the public and from the developers and proponents for the project. This for members of the audience who may not be aware, is a proposal by Diamond Bar Associates and Dr. Al LaPeter for the development of 120 homes on 160 acres located adjacent to and within significant ecological area number 15. The application is for property what is located in what is commonly called the back side of The Country. It is basically the part of the 300 remaining acres within The Country that are presently undeveloped. The application involves three separate tract maps, one containing 57 lots, the second containing 48 lots and the third containing 15 lots. The project involves extensive earth movement, approximately 1.9 million cubic yards of dirt and has an overall density of 1 unit for every 1.33 acres. The average lot size for the project is about 58,000 square feet, it varies significantly, as well as the average pad size which is about 1600 square feet, but varies significantly. The planning commission held three public meetings on the application in September, October and November, 1991 and concluded their analysis of the projects, its impacts and the EIR itself by recommending to the City Council that it approve the project as opposed by the applicants. That would conclude the presentation Madam Mayor unless there are any questions from the Council at this point. Madam Chair Any questions from Council before we continue the public hearing? Mr. Werner. Mr. Werner Yes, Mr. DeStafano, the project also encompasses a draft Environmental Impact Report, can you share for members of the audience and the Council the process that was developed by including the public review process and what kind of response was received as a result of public notice. Mr. DeStafano This project actually started in late 1989, I believe it was December of 89 that it was actually filed. I may be wrong with the specific month. An EIR was determined to be necessary by the Acting Planning Director for Diamond Bar in May 1990. An EIR was prepared, a notice of preparation was distributed to about a dozen local and state agencies in May 1990 soliciting comments that should be incorporated within the document. In August 1990 the first Environmental Impact Report was received from the developer's EIR consultant for city review. And I should stop here and indicate that the developer is the proponent for the project and in this particular case, consistent with county policy, the developer hired and solicited and presented to the city an environmental Impact Report consultant. The consultant was not one selected by the city. The document was submitted for public review, including a variety of local and state agencies in August and September 1990. The City Council in October 1990 created the City's Significant Ecological Technical Advisory Committee. That Committee consisting of four professors from either Cal Poly or Mount Sac, reviewed the contents of the document and some of the specifics related to this project, in terms of their biological impacts, between October and April of 1991. As a result of comments being generated by SETAC the project was amended and changes to the project were incorporated as mitigation measures with the EIR. A second EIR was received, or I should say an amended document was received in April 1991. At that point, the City solicited the services of Michael Branman and Associates, our EIR consultant to review the report prepared by the developer's consultant. Over the course of the summer of 1991, the reviews took place and changes were made at the city's request, through the use of our environmental impact consultant, therefore, the draft that you are reviewing now and that Planning Commission took action on, was presented to the city in August of 91 for review. That is the document that underwent the public hearing review. The document was recirculated through this process, because it was determined that changes that were made to the document were not significant enough to warrant a recirculation. That was a discussion that took place between our consultant as well as our legal staff and we just did not feel that the issues were indeed significant enough. There was a lot of fine tuning, rewording, reparagraphing, replacement of statements that needed to take place, in addition to some additional date but we felt it not to be that significant. In terms of the public review of the documents, the documents have always been stated as being available throughout all of the public hearing notices that have been utilized for this process. They have been stated as being available within the legal ads produced within the newspapers as E well as the notices that were sent to the people surrounding this site, within a 500 foot radius for all of the various public hearings. Madam Chair Any other questions from Council. At this time we are going continue the public hearing, I will start where we left off last week and call upon Mr. Joe Ingram and Cliff Mckye. Cliff Mcae My name is Cliff McKye. I live on 3215 Bent Twig Lane in Diamond Bar. Normally. This is my third time hear, but normally I do not, you know I am too embarrassed to come to things like this, because I am not a speaker, you know. The only reason I am doing this is because there is, what they are going to do is in my back yard. On Hawk Wood, I think they are planning to make a road through there and I don't know if it is going to come through or not. You know right now I don't understand how they are going to do it, because right now we are in a recession and there is a lot of money it is going to take, they are talking about 1 hundred million they are going to invest in this, but I would like to know if the City Council knows that the developer is financially sound and also where the source of money is coming from. And also what is the developers return on this thing. What is the expected ratio of total costs per property to the construction cost of the house and also how would the city be affected if the developer goes bankrupt. Because I have been reading in the paper and a lot of these developments are not finishing. They are stopping because financially they do not have enough money and the banks will not let money in these things like this. So, we are talking about a real big development. It is a 120 homes and it is going to be a lot of money and also we tax payers are going to be paying part of it, because you are looking at a 50-50. I think the tax payers are going to put up some of the money in this development for the roads. So, I would like to know where all the money is coming from. Cause I don't know if they are getting it from heaven or something. Cause I can't get money that easy no more. I use to be able to borrow money with no problem. I have a lot of equity in my house, but it is hard to get to, cause they are not letting it out that easy and you are talking about 1 hundred million plus on this development. It is easy 10 to talk but I don't know how they are going to get this kind of money, because we are looking at this recession going for, they are claiming, for at two years at least. Right now I think we are at rock bottom where all these businesses are going out of business, even in Diamond Bar they are saying. One business a month going out of business, so I don't see where they are getting money or they must be super rich or they are making money and I would like to be their partner. That is all I have to say. Madam Chair Mr. Joe Ingram, Mr. Miller. Mr. Miller In response to that question about the road that was originally planned as far as an easement not a road on the extension of Windmill Drive. To ease some of the concerns in the audience about that, that consideration was removed at the Planning Commission hearing and it is not even being considered by City Council. So there are no plans by Council that I know of, or has been mentioned to me about even considering a requirement of an easement to extend that road. The other question is about a developer's financial stability I can not address, but that one I can. Madam Chair Thank you. Wilbur Smith, Jack Rech and Cathy Meyer Wilbur Smith My name is Wilbur Smith. I live at 21630 (undeterminable). I have some overheads here of my briefing... Madam Chair Mr. Smith if you could stay in front of the microphone then we can hear you. 11 Wilbur Smith Okay. I have some overheads here. Madam Chair Excuse me, would you repeat your address and then we will give you your five minutes. Wilbur Smith Wilbur Smith, 21630 Fair Wind Lane. I have some overheads that I would like to present, I also have copies of what (undetermined).... The first one is simply a general outline of what it is that I want to say. What I would like to present is a statement that comes directly out of the Environmental Impact Report, I would like to make a comment regarding that statement. I would like to ask a question or questions of what I have said previously. I would hope that somewhere along the line the Council would give us written answer to those questions, certainly not at this meeting, but I am presenting the question in the hopes that it will stimulate thinking on the part of the Council and it will also stimulate thinking on the part of the Diamond Bar public. The subjects I want to address are Diamond Bar liability, if is exists. The biological and environmental impacts, geological impacts and financial concerns. In regard to what I say is the Diamond Bar liability, there I present statements to the effect that the city is going to provide standards, plans, present recommendations to the developer, approvals and so forth. On the basis of that Diamond Bar participation, the question is do these approvals and recommendations make Diamond Bar a city, a partner in this development to the extent that the city is liable for losses or damages due to geological or structural failures. The next one, has the city communicated to the developer its plans and recommendations sufficient for him to do a cost analysis and thereby estimate the return on his investment, if so, have they been published? Are the City engineering departments capable of making technical recommendations in monitoring the construction process considering the geological stability problems continually referred to in the EIR and the developer proposes to achieve acceptable margins of safety based upon standards soils engineering practice. And my question there is, is this adequate considering the geological stability problems? Next one please. I will follow that up with some mitigation measures 12 and the major thing is to have the developer hire a nationally known construction firm to perform the following tasks and those are all things traditionally done in these kinds of developments. In particular, there needs to be an actual testing of the soil stability as the project proceeds. Now you don't wait until you get to the end, you have to test it incrementally. This contractor should review and verify all design calculations made by the developer and things of that nature. Under the biological environmental impact, these are again statements concerning primarily the killing or the removal of the animals during the construction process. You claim that this requires mitigation. Next one please. The comment there is that although the developer claims that this requires mitigation, he does not identify mitigation procedures to minimize the animals that are killed. He also proposes to reconstruct the shrubbery and other vegetation on the slope, but he presents no specific plan as to how he is going to do that or whether or not it would be successful. The mitigation procedure is therefore, for him to monitor that and do the same as he is dong with the oak trees. I have statements in regard to the geological things. My time is up. I would like to continue if so allowed, but I can understand your five minute. Madam Chair I will give you another two minutes. Wilbur Smith Okay. Thank you. Under the geological impacts, the major thing is, it says to overcome structural problems associated with colluvium, the application proposes to excavate all identified deposits and recompact them and so forth. Next one. The comment is that the above references to structural problems and geologic instability indicate moderate or higher risks for this project and statements imply that the recompacting colluvium may be used to buttress unstable slopes. But I am saying that since both fill and colluvium have undesirable structural characteristics, it is questionable to me that this is the best way to solve a fundamental geologic stability problems. The other point is that gopher tunneling activity in compacted field could cause serious erosion problems and no where in the reports do they address the possibility or the problem associated with gophers. They make no statement 13 about the use of retainer walls to hole fill in a place, the use of retainer walls is a standard practice that anyone in Diamond Bar knows you have fill, generally speaking there is some sort of retainer wall and no where have they proposed using retainer walls in the project. The other question is where will this excavated colluvium be deposited and what will replace it. The mitigation measures there is simply do not use recompacted colluvium and also to use retainer walls as an additional margin of safety when ever the potential for erosion or damage from the damage is greatest. These financial concerns are essentially what was presented before and I might like to say why I put those there. One is a big issue is obviously the developers ability to stay the course. If he gets down the road a piece and his financing runs out, what is the position of the city in terms of the project there that is incomplete. The other point is the fact that if he does run into a problem, and his money runs short, somewhere he is going to have to start cutting corners. He is going to start cutting corners with the amount of compaction he does for the soil, he is going to start cutting corners with the amount or replanting on the slopes. He is not going to follow through a project that he is not going to make some money on, so I think the city needs to fully understand can this guy complete this project as he has defined in the report. Thank you. Madam Chairman Thank you Mr. Smith. Male Speaker Madam Chairman, Mr. Smith would you share with us if you have any special credentials regarding. Wilbur Smith No, I am an aero space engineer, but that is about the size of it. I am not a geologist. I am not a biologist. I am just simply an aero space engineer. That is all. 14 Madam Chair Thank you. I would like to compliment you on having read the report, it took many hours I am sure. Mr. Rech. Jack Rech I have lived in Diamond Bar since 1976. I presently live at 2447 Alamo Heights which is in The Country. My residence is a short distance from this project and I have reviewed the project and it has been explained to me extensively. I feel it is the design of the project and the amount of work that has gone into it into it is extensive, and in fact I think there had been far more time and effort put into this than actually Transamerica put into the development of The Country. I am 100% for this project. I have been developing single family residences in The Country since 1980 and I think this project has been put together very well. I think it is going to help the economy. At the present time everybody knows California is in a recession, although this is not going to bring us out of the recession, I definitely think it will help Diamond Bar and surrounding communities as far as jobs and increasing taxes. I think it is going to help our schools, the amount of money which will be generated by this project as I understand it over a period of 10 years will have a direct impact on our schools and I think it will improve our schools and I think the number of children that will be attending or the increase in number will be small compared to the amount of money it will generate because these will not be your so called "average homes." It is my understanding these homes will probably have a taxable value of around 1 million dollars or more. Like I said, I have lived in Diamond Bar since 1976, I presently live in Diamond Bar. I have two children I am rearing in Diamond Bar. I am concerned about the welfare of Diamond Bar. This is my home and will remain my home and with that, or taking that into consideration I am for this project. Thank you. Madam Chair Thank you. I have three people. Yes Kathy please. I want to acknowledge that we did receive your letter and the other 29 letters from the Las Brisas Homeowners Association and all the Council received copies of those today. 15 Kathy Meyer Good evening. My name is Kathy Meyer. I reside at 3025 Las Brisas Lane, Diamond Bar. I am president of the Board of Directors for the Las Brisas Homeowners Association. Today the board delivered to Mr. Van Norts office a number of petitions by residents of our community which states the following: We are in opposition to any attempt to provide any primary or secondary public access through our community. We are a private gated community. Any public access to or through Las Brisas would destroy our privacy and reduce our property values. It is also the Board's position that a General Plan should be in place prior to the approval of the 160 acre development which will have tremendous impact upon our community. Thank you. Madam Chair Robert Kelse and Lillian Blasky. Robert Kelse and Lillian Blasky Good evening my name is Robert Kelse. I live at 3001 La Paz Lane, Diamond Bar, which is commonly known as Las Brisas. As a charter member of the Diamond Bar for Incorporation, I strongly believe in the local government concept of control that provides that you control your own destiny. I believe you, as a member of the Diamond Bar City Council, believe in that principle too. However, tonight I stand before you deeply concerned. I see and hear indications of distress among our city citizens and the principal controlling our own destiny eroding. These are same ideals that united us just a few short years ago to achieve Cityhood. You have before you an application for a 120 unit subdivision on 160 acres. A notice dated January 8, 92 was alleged mailed to citizens of this area. Our household did not receive one. A gray area that concerns me is that I hear rumbles of a proposed easement regarding Sugar Pine. IT is not clear whether it is a part of this, excuse me, part of this Council tonight or note. It hasn't been actually denied or it hasn't been accepted, but I certainly would like to hear is there an easement planned in anyway along Sugar Pine or the adjacent area? And I would greatly appreciate if one of the Council members who advise me of this. As we approach retirement, my wife and I went 16 from the oceans to the mountains of Santa Monica to San Bernardino looking for our final home, where we could spend our last years together. We selected Diamond Bar because of its country living. When we moved into Las Brisas about five and a half years ago, deer would come down adjacent to our property and our neighbors and I would look out over them. It was really a scene of tranquility that now has disappeared. I hate to see this happen to Diamond Bar, but I really believe to say that we are unique area to live. I believe that 120 unit subdivision will impact every citizen in Diamond Bar, not just my wife and me, but all citizens. It will be felt in all service areas, whether it be transportation or street access or street maintenance or schools. I believe that no subdivision, including this one or any others that may be coming behind, should be approved until the final General Plan is approved and adopted. If there is any easement attached to this application I believe it is necessary that your bring this forward to us. There seems to be a great deal of confusion. Is there or is there not? If there is we feel that this is private property that we bought and paid for, Sugar Pine in our community and we have maintained that street at our own expense, not costing the city, the county, the state or the federal government one penny. When the moment comes for you to cast your vote on this Application, I trust that you will recall the principles that originally united us together as a city and restored the confidence in locating control, by voting no. Thank you. Madam Chair Mr. Werner you wanted to respond. Mr---. Werner In response to the easement that Mr. Kelse is made reference to, I believe that many of you have been given information that there is an easement or public road proposed with this project. The issue of the public road was apparently not brought forward by the developer, but somewhere in the process, and I can't put my finger on it quite yet. The item of a proposed road was raised, not necessarily at the developers request. The issue was voted down by the Planning Commission and surprisingly 1 believe information was still circulating after the Planning Commission's denial of that issue, that the issue was still not dead. In 17 my mind, the issue was always dead, it never really was a proposal. We spent $150,000 on the circulation element and there is not one mention of a road going through Las Brisas. However, I think that for the members of the audience here tonight and those at home, the council does have an obligation and I think even though Councilman Miller made statements earlier that this Council does not support the concept of a public road, I think it is incumbent upon this Council to set this issue once and for all because it has been circulating. It wouldn't be appropriate at this moment to take such an action, but I would like to suggest to the Council that at the close of this public hearing we clearly state for the record that whether or not that issue is alive or dead and that hopefully if it is dead it will remain so forever. Madam Chair Thank you. Lillian. Lillian Blaskv My name is Lillian Blasky and I am a resident of Diamond Bar and if you permit I would like to mention my specific address just a little bit later in my comment because I have a two prong set of comments to make to you this evening. I have lived in Diamond Bar since 1964. I have been a resident, I feel in good standing. I was one of the unfortunately relatively few who participated in the election that in fact got us Cityhood and have always participated in elections. I come to you and I don't normally advertise this, but under these circumstances let me say that I have three degrees in biological sciences, a baccalaureate, a masters, and a Ph.D. My expertise is not environmental science, I am a more of a cellar biologist, but certainly I have many colleagues who are environmentalist and naturalists. I was at the last meeting and certainly feel that what I heard from the Audubon Society and other individuals speaking to the environmental issues that they are worthy of support. I would certainly be very happy to help participate in such further environmental investigations and I might suggest to those of you that have the power to do so, I know that the organization called the Nature Conservancy has some done some work in the area near Temcula where they purchased land that was environmentally important and thus preserves 18 it for all of us. Now the second prong of my comments has to do with the specific location of my address now. For the last 4 1/2 years I have lived at 2950 Mouliga in Las Brisas. The comments that have just gone before perhaps make some of my comments moot, but I feel I would like ... End of this side of the tape. 19 Tape 1 - Continued Isn't enough. I hope the idea of the road specifically through Las Brisas is mote. But I happen to look down on Sugar Pine. I only moved from other home in Diamond Bar because I saw a condominium development that was spacious that still gave me a view of my beloved Mt. Baldy and I simply decided that I didn't want to take care of my yards, as I always did, but was happy to pay the condominium association to do it for me. If in fact there was ever a chance for that road, whose is going to deal with my property values. I just want to tell you how very upset I was that even this issue should have come up at all. I sincerely hope that it is mote from my personal point of view, because it would be like sacrificing the 97 homeowners in Las Brisas for these potential 120 other homeowners way up the hill. This is my perhaps my one opportunity to speak to you, I show the respect of your office and I hope you will take some of my comments to heart. I am sincerely interested in keeping Diamond Bar as beautiful as it is, and I hope that you will bear that in mind. There are many of us who are very interested in keeping this area the way it is. Madam Chair Nancy Dougherty, and then following her Donald Sizemore and John Phillips. Nancy Doueh� erty Good evening, my name is Nancy Dougherty. I am a librarian and a University Educator at Cal Poly Pomona. I moved to Diamond Bar six years ago, prior to that I had lived for 40 years in the Pomona and Upland areas. I moved to Diamond Bar because I thought that it was one of the last few places left where you could have a sense of open spaces, controlled nice living and maybe get away from some of the hassles that many of those communities around us are now experiencing. I would like to state that I am opposed to the development and also this possible easement. Much of what I was going to say has been said already. But I would like to make two statements to emphasize what brought me her and my concerns. I watched 3 1/2 years ago with horror as the Town Center was being developed and 26 beautiful oak trees were ripped out and chopped up, not even giving consideration 20 to be transplanted, but torn away and replaced with some 3 to 4 foot saplings, that still today are very barren and hardly give any shade or oxygen along that entire development, and I was hoping that perhaps the city will indeed proceed with a gentleman's tree request or ordinance to see that we can try to preserve the trees that we do have and not tear out the one's that take 30 to 40 years to grow and replace them with something that is just a mere joke. My other concern was the easement that we heard about for Sugar Pine, we received a copy of Boyle Engineering Corporation's report to you that said that the city had requested a solution for access to Tonner Canyon in the vicinity by extending Sugar Pine Place, and there were three sentences in this report that was made to you that were very upsetting to me; because we have started to experience in our development of Las Brisas some slope erosion, not only from gopher tunneling, but I think because of the lack of planning and lack of retaining walls that went into the fill that was made when our development was built. I realize you were not a city at that time, but was unincorporated LA county. I voted for city hood in the hopes that we might have control over these for future development. One of the sentences in that report is, I believe on page 2 to Mr. Andrew Arczynski, your attorney, "the developer has performed limited investigation into the proposed extension and has concluded that the construction of the road is not practical due to its high costs and optical horizontal -vertical alignment." The cost was put at 10.1 million. At the end of that statement, it said this cost was 7 to 10 times the accepted cost per mile for a major highway in Los Angeles County. The estimate for the initial report found that the slope on the westerly side was unstable. And then they proposed a buttress fill to stabilize the slope and the cost of that would be an additional 9.1 to 10.5 million for a bridge. Now, I realize that might be mitigated and borne out by the developer, but I would like to caution you that we are concerned now with the movement that is happening in our development with the 91 condominiums and we are approaches some geological assessments gonna have to be done to help us. So, if the City Council could seriously consider future implications of development and the quality of life impacted by this development, it is hard for me to see right now what good could come from it, except for perhaps money. But, I think a lot of 21 us are feeling now that money isn't the only thing that enhances the qualityof life in Diamond Bar. Thank you. Donald Sizemore Good evening ladies and gentlemen. I would like to say that I am in favor of this development because it is privately -owned property and it was bought to be developed. It is not set aside by the state as a park or anything else. The city cannot afford to buy this property. We have a 25 acre park set aside up by the Regency Homes that the city cannot afford to develop right now and I like up in that area on Gold Rush Drive and I see deer, rattle snakes, gophers, and coyotes; everything walking through my back yard on a month-to- month basis. I have seen wild life that was completely graded. It was probably the last development in Diamond Bar, big development, and in tracks. They were completely graded and left, they put a house there with a bare lot. Most of the people have since improved them and developed them and now we have a lot of wild life around, a lot of birds, a lot of everything, and sometimes too much I think. Development is just progress or people where animals would have to learn to live together. My understanding is that is on this development homes will not have any fences going down the slopes, animals will have plenty of room to move around the flat plots will be the only allowable fence area. The fences will not be allowed even on the slope. I think that the animals and wildlife will still have plenty of room to move around and I am in favor the development for the city's income to the school district and just the general population I think it will help out. Thank you very much. John Phillips Thank you. I thought you forgot about me for a moment. My name is John Phillips and I live at 1003 Quiet Creek Lane and I would like to voice my support for the project also. Many of the things I might have said have been covered just previously by the two gentlemen that were up here just a few minutes ago. But, one main reason I could say right off the top of my head is that I would much rather see the low density development that this project has than the kind of development that the first gentleman addressed going down on Grand Avenue, the high density apartment complex going up there which is right on the 22 road. I much rather see development like this, than the type of development that is going on down by Grand on the corner of Golden Springs, that the first gentlemen addressed. So I would like to just address my support for the project. Thank you. Richard Gauf My name is Richard Gauf. I live at 3367 Falcon Ridge Road. This project would also be in my backyard. I would like to speak in favor of it. I live near Mr. Ingram and several of the other residents who have spoken today. I think that all of us would very interested and want to have a voice in this process and would like the Council to hear all of our interests and I think this process is important. We have had a chance to hear from the developer, sit through a 2 hour presentation and talk of some of our concerns. And we as residents have had most of our concerns put to bed. I think they have done a good job, we have asked an awful lot of a development company to spend a tremendous amount of time and effort to justify and go through the environmental processes. They have done in good faith that and we seem to be voicing now do they have enough money to follow it through, yet we want to make the eye of the needle just a little bit harder for them to get through. I think they have done a good job, they have prepared for the wildlife, they are doing a replanting process, they made good plans for traffic into and out of the access road or the easement through Las Brisas, has not been their project and they have spoken out against it, I would like to speak out as a resident in favor of this development. Charlene Gauf Hi. My name is Charlene Gauf. I live at 3367 Falcon Ridge and I would like to speak out in favor of the project as well, and one of the things I noticed about the project: 1) it is a project that was originally planned for Transamerica but was never developed. So, some new developer has come in and taken over this project. The other thing is it is not tract homes, these are custom homes and will be built as people buy them and develop them and I think that is the key issue here. That people need to for the impact financially, what they are looking at. And again, we look at it, I think, there is nothing wrong with looking at homes, they are going to do a lot for the landscaping and making the canyons as attractive 23 as they are now, and also I think for the fire protection it will give something to that canyon and help abate the fire that we have frequently in that canyon. Thank you. Chair Michael Newhouse and then Kevin Alden. Michael Newhouse My name is Mike Newhouse and I would like to speak in support of the project. I think as much as your decision is tonight and the hearing is tonight on the credibility of this project they also cut to the credibility of the city and to the council and to the planning commission. We are novices neophytes in this audience whether we are on one side or the other side of the issue. We are not experts. We leave in your hands and in the planning commission hands the job of determining this and other projects as to the value to the community and individuals. From what I have heard this evening, your commission, in a thorough manner, has reviewed, mitigated and made suggestions on this project and come away with the suggestion that it is a good project. I have heard people make statements well-founded, well -felt and I am sure heart felt. But, nonetheless, this ....subjective opposing the project. Opposing it on many different levels and many different expertise levels. But what it seems to me what you have hear is a project that is funded, proposed and sponsored by a group of people that are related to the community, that live close to the community, that have an interest in the community going forward in a positive away. On one side I see and hear people that already have their place in the community and want to exclude potentially other people from moving into the community and developing. I would ask you what standards you would possibly be able to with credibility apply to future development if you turn down a development that has gone through a process as completely as these people in this project have. It seems to me that you preclude any future development of a reasonable sort if you turn down a project that has been this completely reviewed and this carefully planned. I think that also that you go contrary to the trends of today, well the situation, the economic situation we hear on a national level ...America. We hear on an international level a level playing field between competing foreign interest economically and the American people 24 economically. Tonight and in the future you are going to have to balance ecological versus economic, social, political and personal interests. It is not going to be an easy decision. But I think it is a decision you have to put on an objective level and not on ..visual level. I think you have a project here that has come and met every challenge that has been brought up to it, I think the people that oppose it are heart -felt, they have real feelings about it. I don't think there is anything cynical about their position, but on the other hand, what will be your position and how will you keep your credibility with the people in the future and currently who support projects to go forward when you ignore the policies and commissions' own recommendations you've appointed. Hopefully, from what I heard when I started here this evening, it has been thoroughly and completely reviewed. It is something that has been recommended by your commission, who should have an expertise. I think also that as a city you have allowed this process to go forward, you have allowed these people into ... much like ourselves and make an investment in a project and to change the rules or to unlevel the field post -facto almost, post -facto change the rules is unfair, I think it is inequitable and I think equity is a question here. There is another point to be made too, people are wondering about the liability of the developer. I would refer you, it is not very technical and I don't have the biological degrees, but I like to read the newspaper occasionally, and I like to read Time Magazine occasionally, and I direct you to this week's Time Magazine and their article about the environment and issues like this and where today you have to strike a balance that is not only a reflective balance, one that says yes, we care about the environment, we care about the animals, we care about the oak trees, but you also have to say we care about the people, we care about development, we care about the economy, we care about jobs and we care about our liability as a city. And if you read that article I am sure how much on point the case is, but the Supreme Court of the United States just affirmed 150 million verdict against the United States government for restricting the use of land for a specific purpose, in spite of Environmental Protection laws. So, I would suggest that might be something you might want to review too, when you have your own commission recommending that a project is environmentally sound that it is economically sound and that is sound in every other way. That is me, again, just listen, just as a point of view. Thank you. 25 Kevin Alden My name is Kevin Alden and I live at 2727 Indian Creek which is at the end of Indian Creek in The Country which is property that is contiguous to the Boy Scout Reserve there. I like, another gentlemen, we have developed that street and we have animals come up there all the time, they do not seem to be inhibited by the fact that there are families there and my big concern, I am speaking out in favor of the project, because I have lived in Diamond Bar for 15 years and I have lived in The Country for several years and I feel that the builders who build in The Country, certainly the developers that we are talking about here, developers also like Gary Miller and developers like Frank Geromine have done a wonderful job in developing The Country. Every time they came up with a project, it seems during the years that I have lived there, people spoke out in opposition that the land was being raped and there was strip mining going on, and you name it. I saw the developments go up the homes were beautiful, it brought families together and even the Las Brisas project there was opposition in the community about too many smaller homes and too many people and too much traffic and in each instance it was investigated and it was found that Diamond Bar is a bedroom community. We saw that, constantly, the builders made out to be the villainous landlord and that he may go bankrupt and that there is lack of stability. I have never seen any project in Diamond Bar, thus far, go bankrupt. If it ever did, it certainly appeared to me as a citizen there, another builder was thrilled to come in and pick up the pieces, because Diamond Bar is a valued community, it has property values and people want to live there. I, as an individual resident, feel that precluding other people from living in this community is wrong and to develop homes of that stature obviously brings families together. You folks have talked about removing the pornography, which is a big issue in Diamond Bar. I know we are concerned about animals, but speaking from the Christian community, I am concerned about people, and families mean a cohesive group of people that come together in a cohesive effort and that is the government, that is the council, that is the public and that is the voice of Diamond Bar. If you folks are concerned about the credibility of the developers, I think they can look at the past track record of several people. Several of the builders and look at the developments and I don't think any of the developments that have been approved in Diamond Bar have affected the outcome of the community and as M01 a matter of fact some of the businesses are going defunct in the community would be, I think, helped by the fact that there would be additional citizens there, and most people who live in Diamond Bar, I believe have a sense of shopping in Diamond Bar and wanting to assist their community financially and from the tax base. Again, I feel that there are a limited amount of homes available in Diamond Bar now, and I feel that by building additional homes, we will have additional people come into the community, and again, if there is a question about the credibility of the contractors and the fact that the gentleman spoke out that, banks aren't lending money. Well, it doesn't seem to be a problem. Every time I see a home go up in The Country, then somebody seems to buy it. Speaking in terms of the apartments in the Las Brisas project that was down on Diamond Bar Boulevard, there was a lot of opposition to that because folks felt that it would breach the security of The Country. As it turned out, those fears were unfounded. We found out that decent people moved in, it was a decent community, we have good police protection and I think the City Council has done a credible job since we have become a city in deciding which projects are appropriate and what projects aren't. I have heard talk that Calvary of West Covina is attempting to come into the community and start a church. There is supposedly some opposition to that and I think that anything that we can develop that affects the family, that develops the family, I think is important to this community. I think it will be the catalyst to keep this community going and again, my hats off to the builders who have developed in this community because I think they have done everything they said they were going to do in each and every case and we have no reason to believe that they are not going to. In speaking lastly on aid from the public in terms of taxes and assisting the contractor, I am not a contractor, but I sure read a lot about it and I don't know any contractor who has developed in the City of Diamond Bar that the government has ever assisted in any financial at all. They all have had to bear the burden themselves and have done again, everything like they said they were going to do. Thank you. Chair Bill Palmer, Luis Morollo and John Latrel 27 Bill Palmer I am Bill Palmer and I live at 23422 Wagon Trail and I would like to speak in support of the measure. Principally I would like to speak in support of the measure because I do live in Diamond Bar and do know that at some point that property is going to be developed and I can not think of anything that we could put on that property, or anybody could put on that property, that would be better for the City of Diamond Bar and the people living than what has been proposed. I think having 120 houses on 160 acres will put less burden on the schools, less burden on the streets, less burden on public services and at the same time provide as much in what ever revenues come from individual homes as we can expect. I think it is a very, very good project and will do a lot more for Diamond Bar than 160 acres of more condominiums. Other people have made these points and made them probably better than I do, I would like, however, to make a couple of comments on things that I thought were a little strange that were brought up a little earlier. One is the concerns if the developer is financially strong enough to be able to continue the development. It is kind of odd to hear that because only in socialists country is the government considered to be a better judge of how develop money is spent than the private sector is. Usually if a developer is putting his own money into a project, in this case, we are talking millions and millions of dollars, they just don't blindly go out there a pick a hunk of dirt and throw stuff in there. They put a lot of time, effort and money to make sure it is going to work. I's also like to say that I have lived in Diamond Bar since 1981, it certainly has grown in the last ten years, probably doubled in size, I like everybody else would love it, if somebody would come along pay millions of dollars for a piece of property and leave it vacant so that I could enjoy the nice open spaces that I can't afford to pay for myself. But realistically this is not going to happen and shouldn't happen because that is not the way it should be. People who have put the money into owning property have the right to develop their properties. Those are just two points that I would like to bring up in support of the project. Thank you. Luis Morello Good evening, my name is Luis Morello. l live at 1457 S. Lemon Avenue. Many of the points are being brought up over and over again. I am speaking in favor of the project. I have spoken to several residents and my neighbors and they had two major concerns. One of them is traffic and one is property values. I can say that as this area becomes more desirable, development is inevitable. This project I have seen as a well-planned project. It is quality homes and it will bring quality residents to the area. The traffic, it is not high density project, and I think if the area is going to be developed, as it will eventually, this project being only 120 units on 160 acres is ideal. It may change if this project does not go through because the area becomes more desirable to live in, some other developer may come in and decide to put in a higher density project in so he can make a few more dollars. Case in point, Mission Viejo. My parents moved into Mission Viejo in the early 70's and they have since moved out because of grid lock and traffic jams. The area has been overdeveloped and not just by single family residences, there are condo projects on the lake and all kinds of other stuff. Another issue was brought up about the developer. I don't see how we can determine the developers integrity or his plan, the only thing that we can do is monitor that and if they have presented a plan and the commission has seen it and approved it, and have recommended that the plan go through, I just foresee a better tax base for the city where we can get some revenue, develop some parks and give a better desirable area for our children to grow. Another point was brought up, something about Temecula that environmentalists are buying Temecula property. Well I know this evening my parents are now living in Temecula and they are fighting a 180 unit condo project right in their back yard again. So, those things seem to crop up where ever you are. I feel that if things are well -thought out, as we said sometimes these become emotional issues, but if things are well - thought out and well-planned then my feeling is if it is good for all the people and all the residences, if it is a win-win situation then it should go through. Thank you. John Latrel Good evening, Mayor Pro Tem and Council Members. My name is John Latrel, I am an architect and I am a member of the American Institute of Architects and I am hear to speak in favor of the project. I learned about the project in the last month and try to take it upon myself to understand some of the technical details of the project. I am concerned about the quality of life in Diamond Bar. Not only for myself but my fellow residents and future 29 residents. I feel that the time and effort that has been dealt by both the staff level of the planning commission, the applicant's professionals that they have developed a sensitive and well-planned project for our community. I feel low density is by far better than high density at this point in time without the development of the master planned that is in effect being developed. I also want to point out that this development, even from the inception of Diamond Bar, was planned as a low density area. From its roots it has not changed its intent, yet I think from proper management, us being a city at the present time, we have been able to enhance its quality in its relationship to the environment, its mitigation measures. From an economical stand, especially with the economy right now, I think it is a benefit to proceed with the development. I also feel that through its due process, everyone has been given an opportunity within the city to make their comments on this project. 1 feel that it is incumbent upon you tonight to make a most difficult decision, but hopefully a favorable one that this project proceed. Thank you. Chairperson: We have nine more people who would like to speak. At this time I am going to call a ten minute recess we will reconvene at 8:35. If any of those nine people would like to waive their right to speak, please contact the City Clerk during the break. ....................... Chairperson: Are we ready? I am reconvening the public hearing. I have had two people contact me during the break, Tracy Baldwin was hear to speak in favor of the project, she will waive any further right to speak as will Dan Buffington, who was also in favor of the project. Next, I will hear from John Pringle, Steve Blanda and John Murphy. John Pringle Madam Chairman, Members of the Council my name is John Pringle I am an attorney representing the Board of Directors of the Diamond Bar Country Estates Association. This development will have access through the Diamond Bar Country Estate Association because of a long-standing agreement with Transamerica Development Corporation. The Board of 30 Directors of the Association has reviewed the development, both as originally proposed, and as modified through the process. The Board supports the project. The type of dwelling will be compatible with The Country and the lot size will be compatible with the lot size with other lots in The Country. In fact, all of the lots of this development are larger than the minimal lot size in The Country. My client will be most affected by the traffic generating by the project and yet my client still supports the project for the reasons stated. My client urges the Council to approve the proposed development. Thank you. Question: Mr. Pringle what is the minimum lot size in The Country. Mr. Prinele The minimum lot size in The Country of certain of the lots is 40,000 square feet. Thank you. Mr. Prinele I am sorry it is 20,000 square feet. Chair For everyone to hear that correction it was 20,000 square feet is the minimum lot size in The Country. Steven Blanda, alright John Murphy. John Mumhy Good evening, my name is John Murphy. I am also known as Duff Murphy around town. I have been a resident here in Diamond Bar for six years. When we moved to Diamond Bar, six years ago, my family came from Oregon and Diamond Bar was our choice because we were impressed by the quality of life it wasn't Oregon, but we felt it gave us what we wanted for our family in the form of environment. I come to you tonight to support the project. I think there are some key issues here. As a City Council you have to look at what has gone on. I mean it is wonderful to hear everybody speak out tonight. This is the first 31 time I attended a Council meeting and I guess city hood is working because people are coming out and talking and sharing thoughts, but what we need to do is we need to look at what has gone. We have a developer who has spent a lot of time and energy on a project, that I think, has been well researched and I think they have done their homework. We have an EIR that basically tells you that the project is sound. I don't have a Ph.D., but I do have a degree in biology and I took the time to review some of the details and I think it makes sense. I believe that it is a low density project, many of the points have been brought up prior here this evening, but as a Council I think you need to look at what kind of precedent you are going to set here when you make a decision. End of Tape #1 32 Tape 2 And to come forward now and to deny them and to move forward with this project, I think would be an injustice. It would just be a gross injustice to the developer and I think the community needs to see that the system does work and I stand behind the project and it is good project for Diamond Bar and I think it will enhance the quality of life here. Thank you. Madam Chair Frank Lazano, Ken Demerit and Sue Sisk. Frank Lazano Good evening ladies and gentlemen. My name is Frank Lazano. I have lived in Diamond Bar since 1981. I live at 680 Shady Place and I have heard about this development and of course I have been here all evening and heard all the points pro and con. I am speaking in favor of the development and I just want to point out a few reasons why. I feel that there are a lot of economical benefits to the people in The Country that would be of interest to them. There is also more importantly to me, economically benefits to the community of Diamond Bar in the area of restaurants, shopping centers, etc. Also, the property taxes that our city needs desperately to help some of the other areas of our city which are the schools, the parks, and so on which is my main interest right now. I have three children in Diamond Bar from the ages of 6 to 11 and I have been involved with them, supporting them in the local sports, such as Diamond Bar Little League, AYSO, private soccer clubs, YMCA programs, etc. and I think that this community grew for so many years as a community and not as city that many things were not addressed, that the kids need here. They need a lot of recreational facilities, lights in parks so that people like myself that work for a living could have an opportunity after hours to help the kids and work with them. I am not an architect, an ecologist, biologist, etc., I am an electronics engineer. I am proud of living in Diamond Bar and I think that those issues ecology, etc. that have come up so much tonight are the job of the appropriate agencies, the Council, etc. and I just want to summarize and say that 33 I would just like to request that every careful consideration be taken to allow this project to go forth and happen in Diamond Bar. Thank you. Ken Demirit (sp.) I live at 22136 Steeple Chase, which is the general vicinity of this project and I just want to say that I am for the project and I am also business owner in this town which someone had mentioned earlier that the amount of businesses are leaving this town because of economic conditions that we are all facing. There is something not only are we talking property taxes, we are also talking sales taxes. With the upper income homes that these will be there is more discretionary income and in turn, there is more sales tax. And when you have a low density like this it is something that is also another economic consideration that some people forget, being in retail I don't forget that. The other point that I want to make was you are see in the media and you read the papers of how everybody is leaving California because there are road blocks constantly being put in their way. We are not going to change what happens to California, but if this is just one small example, you times it by 10, 20 or 1000 times this may be example why so many people are leaving California if this denied. Thank you. Sue Sisk Mayor Pro tem, Council my name is Sue Sisk and I live at 1087 Flintlock Road in Diamond Bar. I really can't comment on the project, per se that we are talking about tonight. I do have a comment though on the process that we go through to get this development to where it is at today and I feel that there has been a lot of concerns by some people here in the community because they don't have all the answers and they haven't been able to get their questions answered on this development is going to proceed and it proceeds to where they have their questions and they feel good about it. I am concerned because I live in Diamond Bar and this project could be in my backyard and I could be here at this stage of the process. This probably should all have been done months ago, before the developer went out and spent the money on all these studies that he had done. I think that the people should have been brought in at that point in time and these questions brought up then and 34 I would hope that in the future that maybe some consideration could be given, that people in the community do it notification early enough to the onset of a project that all these things could be aired early on. Thank you. Madam Chair Mark Hawkins, Christine Drum and Chris Hernandez. Mark Hawkins Members of the Council my name is Mark Hawkins. My address is 2618 Broken Feather which is in Diamond Bar and in The Country. I have been a resident of Diamond Bar since 1977. I worked a lot of years in Los Angeles and not work in Ontario which has provided me a change to get to get a perspective of how Diamond Bar views I discuss that where I live, with colleagues and people I come in contact with from the downtown side and from the Inland Empire side. Over the years that I have lived there I have had a change to get a lot of feedback from people about what they know about Diamond Bar and I think I have been pretty much gratified to hear they tell me the kinds of things were the basis for my moving here in the first place. That it is quality country living in essence. In those years I have also had a chance to drive down to the Temecula area and I have seen development in Fontana and Corona and Norco and I have seen some of the biggest developers in this country put together huge projects of high density single-family dwellings that make me cringe because they advertise it as a fantastic family opportunity, but as you gaze at the project from the freeway you see nothing but solid red, even if it is red brick, you see no interruption for trees, roads or anything except for a few street lights popping overhead. I was going to say that nothing of that sort had bothered me here in Diamond Bar although I have to admit to sharing some of the concerns about the apartment complex on Grand Avenue, that is something that makes me cringe a little bit too and I was not involved in the process of discussing that but it brings, I think, to the fore, the fact that we have a choice about what kind of projects get approved and get implemented here in town. I have to say I am not to equivocal about my support for a project of this sort that is being discussed here if I have the contrasts that I just mentioned to consider at the same time. If we have a little 35 bit of available space to consider in Diamond Bar, I think that what is being discussed here tonight is one of the best and highest uses of that property and we should be encouraging it. On the other hand, I can not say I am 100% in favor, because I do have some concerns. One is, is this going to be a development that is going to be permitted to hit the market and hit the communities all at once, or is some consideration be given to the phasing, the pace at which these properties are permitted to be developed, and I can see a considerable difference between having 6 to 12 of them per year available to the consuming public, as opposed to 30 or 40. I also have some concerns about the loss of wildlife, and that includes oak trees and although I think it is better to have a replacement project, a replacement plan so that we put some of the desirable kinds of trees back into the area that is going to be graded and developed and it is better to provide a way that animals can be relocated, there is going to some loss, but I think that those questions have to be answered by a balancing test of some sort, and is that overall loss going to be such that it should outweigh the potential benefits of the project as a whole. In the time that I lived in The Country, I have noticed that even though there are other residences that surround mine and even though as many County residents know, the easements between the properties have been phased out through litigation, that has not prevent the squirrels, the deer and all of the other animals, not only from getting an awful lot of free roaming of the back area, but they jump right over the fence and they help themselves to my garden and a lot of my landscaping. I am not too concerned about them being totally chased out, I think they know there is always a home for them. So overall, I can't come up here and say I am 100% in favor, but on balance I think it is a good idea overall and I think it is the kind of thing that is going to enhance our community values, so my overall position is that I hope you will vote in favor. Thank you. Christine Drum My name is Christine Drum. I live at 3364 S. Falcon Ridge Road in Diamond Bar and before I state my feelings on this opinion, I would like to make a correction. A couple that spoke earlier in favor of the project, I believe their last name was Gauf, this project is not going to be happening in their back yard. Their back yard faces Diamond Bar Blvd. However, this project is happening in my back yard and I lived in Diamond Bar since 1978. 36 I was S when I moved here with my family and I enjoy looking through my kitchen window and seeing the green hills, having the wild life in my backyard, watching the raccoons eat my cat food and play on the lawn. I worry about the wildlife and I worry about the vegetation and though they may be moved, it is not always feasible. I worry about the traffic and I worry about the noise of the construction and after the construction and I am highly opposed to this and I ask that the Council seriously look into all aspects of the project and please remember that money is not everything. Thank you. Madam Chair Chris Hernandez. All right. Mark Score. Mark Score My name is Mark Score and for the past five years I have been a community pharmacists for the city of Diamond Bar and I know a lot of people in the room, but over the past five years there has not been that much opposition to this project and basically my feeling is that what the people do in The Country have always taken the best interest for the city of Diamond Bar and if the people of The Country are not against this project, and if they were, they would be here tonight, I would have to say I would be in support of this measure to bring in the income into the city for the taxes, for everything else. It is quite true since being at CVS in this city that the people of The Country and the people on that side of the city definitely do shop Diamond Bar and if you have 120 more families that come into the Country, they definitely going to shop Diamond Bar. They just love to shop Diamond Bar and feed the city and everybody in the city shopped the city no business would go out. I am not ask... but The Country people support the city and if they support this project, as a pharmacist, and not hearing opposition over the last three years, I have to support the issue. That is it. Madam Chair I would like to ask once more if Chris Hernandez is here or Joe Ingram? If not, we are going to continue. Mr. Van Winkle did you speak to us last week? All right, briefly please 37 new information. Mr. Van Winkle City Council my name is Tom Van Winkle. I live at 21103 Gurndell. Thank you for letting me speak. I did speak last week and I had just one more thing that I wanted to say. There have been some things said tonight thought that bother me. First off, right up front we talked about everybody being noticed, given notice to come to these hearings, to understand the procedures, and I think it has been made quite clear that whether the people involved intentionally or otherwise actions took, people were not noticed and I would like very much to let people know that that is one reason nobody would come, nobody knew about it. I did not know about it until September of last year. Madam Chair We discussed this last week. Could we have the new information. Thank you. Mr. Van Winkle Yes. I had an opportunity to review the video tapes of last week and Mr. Miller you made several statements that were interesting and would like to just go on one of them. The apartments on Grand you said that the horse was let out of the barn on this one. I assume that you mean that nothing can be done now that it has started, is that correct? Madam Chair Mr. Van Winkle this is not the issue. We have been here for two hours, the Council needs to go on with the Agenda and we have a public hearing on this project so I need to ask you with your indulgence if you would restrict your comments to this public hearing. Mr. Van Winkle Okay, then I ask that the horse isn't let out of the barn again, because I would like very much for you guys to know that I signed a petition that has well over 300 names on it, that support you people going back to the drawing board and getting the General Plan finished. W I think this is important to know, because this petition wasn't circulating last week. I am not totally convinced that I am against this project either, in some respects, but in other respects 120 homes are a lot of homes and it does not reflect the density levels that this city wants. Thank you very much. Madam Chair I am going to ask Cecil Mills if he would like to come forward and Mr. Mills is one of the applicants on this project so I am going to give him longer than 5 minutes to respond to the comments, then I am going to close the public hearing to the floor and limit it to Council comments and then we will proceed from there. Cecil Mills Thank you Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I had substantial remarks and I am going to reduce them significantly in the interest of time. At the beginning of our last meeting, Councilman Werner and Miller asked me some questions relating to our original acquisition and the dates and times and how we came into possession of the various tract and I answered those questions to the best of my ability at that time. I did, however, make some mis-statements and I would like to very briefly correct those if I could. They will display for me, may I have the... This is a diagram of the property, this property here is that which is owned by Diamond Bar Associates. This parcel here is the tract that is owned by Al LaPeter. In 1985, one of my partners initially contacted, or was contacted by Transamerica Development Company who you all refer to as TADCO and asked if he wishes d to purchase 35 lots that they had projected for this portion of the property. This is difficult to read, but it consists of 3 20 acre parcels. There was approximately a seven acre piece that was out of it, right in that area, which is the 53 acres I referred to last week. My partners indicated an interest in it, and the circumstances of the sale were that TADCO was to obtain a final map on the property. They were not able to do that and ultimately came back to us and said that we discovered that there is a significant geologic problem along this property line and we have been informed that in order to mitigate that we have to get permission of 12 property owners that live along here. That was a function that was beyond the capability of TADCO 39 to comprehend. They are a big corporation with no people skills. They had just reeled and rebounded from a lawsuit by The Country and they through up their hands and said they had it, do you want it? We bought it. I thought I knew a solution to that problem, I took that map that they had prepared, we got an option on it and had the right to do geologic studies and soil tests and we did those and we decided that the problems were not incorrectable or insurmountable. So, I put my marrying, burying suit on Saturday morning, wandered out there and started knocking on doors and talking to those people that lived there. Showed them that map and 35 lots, showed them also the map that we prepared subsequent to that time that had 45 lots, but before I went out to see them, I sent everyone of them a letter that said that we are trying to develop our property, we are trying to get about 40 lots on it and I will be out to see you. I went out to see them, took them out another copy of the letter and I would like to have this marked Exhibit A which I will place in the administrative record at the end of my comments. I went out and talked to them, showed them the maps, went over the project with them, everyone of them signed grading easements to us, we went back to Transamerica and said yeah we think we can do it, we will buy the property. They said well there is one other little thing. There is another 40 acres of property down here that doesn't have any access and we won't sell you this without this and we looked at it and we thought that if we could 35 lots or more on the property that it would be worthwhile to go ahead and include that and we also hoped that sometime in the future, way down the road that there would be some access become available, because we had already heard about the golf courses that were proposed over in the Boy Scout property and the other things that were going on, I mean we had not completely not done our homework on Diamond Bar. So we bought it. We had our engineer take a look at the maps and they came up with a plan for 53 lots and in February 1989 I sent a letter to everyone of those property owners, telling them among other things that we had a map ready for submission that contained 53 lots. It changed somewhat and it ended up 57 subsequent to that, but I submit to you that the issue of the implied misrepresentation that was banded about here last week doesn't exist and I am not going to waste any more of your time discussing it. Folks that were involved with it, they knew what we were doing, I believe, we certainly made every effort to tell them what we were 40 doing. I think that a number of other things have caused some bad feelings and misunderstandings among those people who live in the Diamond Ridge tract and many of those are not at all related to our development proposal. During that same time frame, we went to The Country made a presentation to them. I had occasion to meet members of the City Council and tell them that we were starting this project and on June 26, 89 The Country Homeowners Association passed a resolution endorsing our project and I would ask to have that marked "D" for identification for the administrative record and also "E" for the administrative record is a ratification of that position which was issued on March 21, 1990. In addition to that, we went to the Boys Scouts who we knew were very environmentally sensitive people and had been a particular concern and a major difficulty for Transamerica to deal with respect to their development. We talked to them about why. We asked them what was wrong with the Transamerican development. How could we improve it to solve their concerns. We didn't just ask them that we listened to what they had told us, we addressed those issues and on April of 1990 the Boy Scouts Council of the L.A. area gave me a letter and an authorization to publish the letter indicating that their representatives had reviewed the proposed development maps, landscaping plan and environmental concerns and stated "we do not find anything objectionable about the proposed development" and they went on to say that we believe that our development would enhance the entire area and I would ask to have that entered into the administrative record as Exhibit "F" and a copy of the diagram which I had displayed I would ask to have it go in as Exhibit "A." The history that brought us to this point is that at the time we had the 53 lot map prepared we were getting ready to close and we ran a title report and we found out that there is another little 40 acres, if you could display that for me on the screen again, up here that showed up as being in TADCO ownership and I said to myself, self that piece of property gives me access down below, so maybe I wasn't so dump when I bought that 40 acres down there that was trapped. If could get that we have a development project. We went to them, we bought the property and that is how this project came to be. Subsequent to that time, I met A] LaPeter when we found out, I am doing alright I went over and got twelve people on the other side to give an easement not I need one from A] LaPeter, he is just one guy I ought to be able to get that, so I looked him up found him, went over to his office in Bellflower and said, I 41 am the guy that needs something from you and he said well I have been kind of thinking about doing a development too and we got together and have been working on our respective projects, kind of in conjunction with each other since that time. I said that I think there are lot of issues that have been raised that are clouding this matter in the public's eye that don't really relate to our project and I am not going to spend a lot of time on those things, but this issue of notice is one that is a legislative issue. There is nothing I can do about that, if the people of Diamond Bar think they are not getting sufficient notice. I mean we have certain requirements with respect to our obligation and I think we have met them. If the notice requirement should be changed, that is an issue for the Council to address in some forum outside of how it relates to our project, as long as the present requirements have been addressed and properly done with respect to this project. We had a lot of people here last week that were talking about issues, addressing comments against our project on issues that really don't involve our project. IT was a great feeling of concern among a number of people that were here about some proposal that they heard some where that this Council was going to change the zoning on a golf course that is owned by the LA County Employee's Pension Fund over in a different part of the city and converted to commercial and somehow because of some road that they heard about that they believed our project was in some way connected with that. The fact is, that is simply not true I don't know how those kind of half truths and misconceptions get sorting out through the community, but the people have come here to express their views on it and I am really not sure that they had those views all properly addressed. They will have before the Council has an opportunity to conclude its comments, I believe. But the way the system works it just kind of feeds one thing on another. One lady told Dr. Buffington at the end of the meeting that she was here because she heard that this Council was going to condemn her house so that they could build some new houses and she thought our development proposal was the new houses. So she thought maybe she ought to come down and find out what was going on, of course that wasn't true either. This road, Councilman Miller and Werner both addressed it. I don't intend to spend near the time on it that I did had you not done that. But I think that I must comment briefly. That it is incorrectly perceived by almost everybody here prior to those comments that you made that this proposed road was 42 something that was dreamed up by Diamond Bar Associates and plugged into this project at the last minute for some motivation of our own, and I believe there maybe some people til still think that, even in spite of your comments. Mr. Maxwell is a very decent kind gentlemen with whom I have talked about this project many times and while we have differences, I respect his views, I thought he was going to have a stroke, he got so excited and wound up when he was talking about this road. Mr. Ingram is a decent, bright very intelligent man, owns a business, raised his family in this community, taught them the value of hard work down there in his gas station, he is so upset about this road coming through his backyard he seems to have lost confidence in his city government, you can tell it by the way he was talking to, or attempting to, he was just very upset about it. Mr. Gross raised the issue, you know, why is the city spending all this time of this issue. Everybody is opposed to the road. Well, they got another convert because I am sure opposed to it, as you all know. I don't want the road, we didn't propose it. Every opportunity we had to object to it, we objected to it. It was put in by the city over our objection without any consultation with us before our last hearing in front of the City Planning Commission. It was a very vocal display by members of the public and by Diamond Bar Associates and after hearing all that evidence the Commission as your correctly reported struck the provision in its entirety. As you say, it is a dead issue. It is not before this Council, it can't be before this Council unless you by an affirmative vote make it a condition of this project and I take it from your comments that may not happen. But if it does happen, I would like to heard at the end of the meeting so I can make the appropriate legal objections to protect our rights and I won't say any more about it, it is a dead issue, I believe. There were issues raised that appropriately do relate to our project and those are environmental concerns that were raised, the EIR process that occurred in this matter has been extensive, we have Mr. King our environmentalist here who will make a presentation to you on addressing those comments that were raised primarily Audubon Society letter and I would only wish to say that this EIR has been out and has been circulated since November 1989. The Audubon Society, while I don't believe we had any legal obligation to notify them, has been noticed regularly as part of the process. They made a conscious serious determination not to participate in the process. Instead, they did there research, they waited and they came in 43 here in the last minute before approval, and raised these, what I believe to specious, but nice legal sounding issues for the purpose of derailing another development project. I believe we will show you that there specious when we get to that portion of the presentation. The botanic concerns will be addressed by our landscape/architect and you know a number of people tried to steal my speech tonight. They have been talking about the economic impact of this project. Folks this is an interesting night that we would be hear talking about this project when it is the night that our President gave his State of Union Address. For the first time that I could remember, that was mostly devoted to economic concerns and it is certainly no secret that this county is in trouble. Very few little pockets and places or prosperity that have come out of it and weathered the storm, California is not one of them. Our defense industry is decimated, our people are out of work, our educational system is in trouble and I don't think we can expect President Bush and the Congress to solve all those problems for us. I think that we as members of this great state, community have an obligation to help ourselves come out of it. We can do that by working together, industry, government, and I think we have an obligation to do it. And i believe while this kind of project certainly is not going to solve all the problems of Diamond Bar, but it certainly is one of the things that can proceed to be a step in the right direction towards doing that. The school fees alone generated by this project are a million five hundred fifty thousand forty dollars and those aren't my figures, those are the figures that are provided by the School District that we used to compute them. We have also done an economic analysis, through our environmentalist, so that we would know what sort of income this project was going to generate, as compared to the expense it was going to take for the city to support it, and to cut down through the shaft of the wheat, it turns out that this project will bring in to the city of Diamond Bar an average of Three Hundred Seventy Six Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy -Eight Dollars every year more than the costs that are attributable to the project as city expenses. One of the things about this project is that all the road are of course are private roads. They will be maintained by our homeowners association. We hope by The Country, because we hope to annex to them. There is no expense to the city in maintaining those. Many other things. This is low budget cost project for the city with high returns and I don't think those considerations should not be considered carefully by the 44 Council. I heard the President say tonight in the very brief time that we spoke, something that I already written down here. What do we need to do to turn this country around? And I think I heard him say, we need jobs, jobs, jobs. This project will create jobs, create jobs over a long period of time, because this is not a project that we are anticipating building 120 houses at the same time and being gone out of Diamond Bar in 20 months. We expect that the market conditions dictating sales on this project will probably be in the neighborhood of 10 to 12 a year. We are not going to sell the lots off, other than perhaps a few. So there will be some natural phasing, depending upon the current market conditions. I would had to have 10 to 12 of them under construction in todays market. We would hope in those kind of markets there would be fewer per year and in better markets, perhaps slightly more. But we have a whole host of people that will receive benefit. People that live and work in Diamond Bar, like engineers, surveyors, grading equipment owners and operators, cement workers, all the framers, carpenters, electricians and all the numerous other artisans at work, in addition to the host of other companies, businesses and workers and the businesses that will receive the lunches of those workers and it is a domino effect, but it is a start and we need to jump-start this economy and Diamond Bar is no different than the rest of the state and we need to do something and we need to do it together and I think that is a very significant issue for you to consider in your rulings on this project this evening. I was going to mention significantly about SETAC. I am not, I only want to cover that they looked at it, they reviewed it, they asked that it remain in its present state. They commented that they thought it would be appropriate for the city to attempt to acquire it. That is not unusual, these folks are environmentalists. We did not expect them to come back and say we ought to be permitted to make a whole bunch of condos all over the hill and that is certainly an option. But I haven't to this day received any indication that the city has any desire or the ability to buy that property at is market value. And I don't think that the citizens of Diamond Bar would enjoy that additional tax burden that would be placed on them by doing that and it would be very nice if a piece of property, the size of this one, could remain in virgin pristine character in the ownership of person that just enjoyed it and didn't feel the need to develop it. I had an opportunity to buy the property, I bought it, I bought it to develop it. I can not afford, nor do I have any desire to give it to the city for the purposes 45 that have been referred to here. If I had not bought it somebody else would, because Trans America owned it and they were going to sell it and we just happen to be there with the right opportunity and we took advantage of it. This matter was heard before your Planning Commission, they studied it, boy did they study it. They listened to us on several occasions, they jumped us through more hoops than I knew existed and they did not rubber stamp anything that was done by the city or by us or by any of the public people. They made us do it until they felt in their heart and in the minds that they knew it was a right, good, appropriate project to recommend to this Council for approval and I also heard our President say tonight, Why do we do that. Why will we do it. We will do it because it is the right thing to do. That is what the Planning Commission did, they had the courage in the face of opposition to hold to their conviction that this project had been appropriately presented, had adequate environmental safeguards, they sent in on to you for your consideration. You have heard, patiently, all of us speak for and against the project. And it is the process that this difference of opinion that we had expressed here that causes a project to be able to come to the Council in as good as shape as this one is. Diamond Bar Associates has an unusual opportunity here, we have the opportunity to put forth into this city a project that is environmentally superior. We ask you to carefully consider the action of your Planning Commission, we ask you to follow their recommendations to certify the EIR and to approve this project. The city staff has raised a concern with us that we have addressed and that is that they felt that lot sizes should be expanded to not less than 125 feet frontage with the exception of the cul-de-sac lots. We have asked our engineer to look at that and that will work. They can make that adjustment without significantly altering the plan. If that is a concern the Council has through its staff we would certainly favor and urge you to consider a condition of approval that the map be redrawn and consultation with the city so that no lot other than the cul-de-sac lots had less than 125 foot frontage. And those cul-de-sac lots could be identified by number and the pads placed on those so they were not up against the street and you would have adequate room for the type of houses that we are planning to build on this project. And I am done except that I want to remind you that there are three tentative tracts before you. I want you to approve all three of them, but I can't see in your head and know what you are thinking as I stand here and I have to 46 anticipate that you have some concerns and if I raise an issue that you have no concern about, please forget that I raised it. But there are three separate tracts and if there is one or more of those tracts that you are having problems with and others that you are not, than please approve the ones you are not having problems with any that you feel need additional study or review, please we would be happy to respond, we would like to have you approve all three tonight if you will. The only other request that I would have of you is that if you make a determination not to approve these projects this evening, either all or a portion of them, and you feel there is additional input and study that needs to be done, I would ask you with all due respect to keep this matter before the city Council. I would ask you please do not refer it back to some subordinate body. They have already made their decision. You will be the ultimate decision makers in this matter. I urge you to approve it tonight and I thank you for your patience and you have dutifully been patient with us on this project. I would prefer at this time, I had anticipated calling each of the consultants to make a presentation. I am not unaware of the hour and I would prefer at this time to defer to the Chair as to whether you would wish me to make those presentations and pool those various consultants or if you would wish to have them address specific comments or questions from the Council and we will adjust to whatever the Chair feels is the appropriate method of presentation. Madam Chair Thank you Mr. Mills. I am going to ask the City Attorney to address some of the issues regarding the legalities that were brought up and then I would like to have the consultants... End of this side of the tape. 47 Tape 2 (Continued) Madam Chair Mr. King speak to the issues that the Audubon Society made and then we are going to go to council discussion and at that time, as required, in response, the Council will respond to your staff. Mr. Kine I would be most happy to and with response to any question, I will have that addressed by the appropriate consultant that we have here. I would also indicate that Dr. LaPeter is here on behalf of his portion of this presentation and would wish to comment to you I believe. I would be pleased to here from the City Attorney. Madam Chair Dr. Lapeter, if you want to make comments now that would be appropriate. Dr. Lapeter Thank you very much and I realize the evening is late and I don't want to repeat some of things that have been said tonight, but there are certain things that I want to share with you, some thoughts that I have. In a few hours in the morning I have to get on a plane and go to Washington D.C. for business, as a matter of fact I suppose to be there tonight but I had to change my plans. I think Washington D.C. should be required of every United States citizen to visit. It is a great place to go. It is a great place to see what our country is about. One of the things I enjoy doing and I will be doing it tomorrow night, is you get there in the evening and get a taxi and go visit some of the sights at night when nobody is there. It gives you an idea of what we are all about. Why this is great country. Go see the Washington Memorial there in the evening, the Lincoln Memorial, the Whitehouse, Capitol Hill. Go by and see the statute of the soldiers of Iwojima. In the day time maybe go by Arlington Ceremony and look at the people, the graves, the people that have given their lives for our country and that is what our country is about, a great country. We have freedoms, we have 48 rights. They touched upon it I don't want to belabor the point that the United States right now is a tremendous terrible recession. We have not had one like this since the depression of the 30's. We need to get out of the recession. How do you get out of a recession, by not doing anything, by just waiting. Or taking positive action. Some of the people that applauded for no growth, no development, for not doing anything. If this recession continues some of those people are going to lose their jobs and if they lose their jobs, some of those people are going to lose their homes or have to sell their homes. It is getting to the point that we must do something. You as a Council need to send a message that the City of Diamond Bar is not closed. We do not want to put closed signs on our city limits. We do want to go forward. That is what America is all about. I represent the 20 acre parcel and we talk about, we banner the word developer. Well, I am a resident of Diamond Bar and yes I have lots of partners in my project, I have my wife, Sharon Lapeter who is here, she is one of my partners and I have three small children. I have a six year old daughter named Morgan. I have a nine-year old son named Michael and an eleven -year old son named Alphie and those are my partners. I bought that property. I didn't win the lottery. I didn't inherit the property. I bought it with hard earned dollars. With an expectation, with a right an American has to be able to with my property that is allowed. Last week this was, the first part of the meeting was on the TV, on cable. I got home late, the next day I talked to my eleven year old son Alphie. God, kids are smart. My son watched that meeting last Tuesday and he comes up to me and says Dad sounds to me like those people are trying to take our property away. I said Alphie no not in America. You see people are saying no development but I don't hear anybody saying if we are not going to develop the property as Cecil so well mentioned, we are going to buy it. You don't have a right, when I say, people do not have a right to steal my property and when they take part of my right away of my property to me that is stealing it. I have a right to do with that property as the law has allowed. It is a right that I demand. One hundred fifty years ago if people would nave talked about stealing your property, what did they do they take you out to the edge of town and shoot you. I think we have a project that is good for the City. I don't need to repeat the advantages to the City, the advantages to the country, the advantages to the people that live here. We have worked very hard, very hard to come up 49 with something in front of the Council that is good for the city. I believe in the project. It would be interesting if the people that are up here saying about don't develop it, take the property away is what you are really saying. How would they feel if all of the sudden we said to them, okay we are taking your home away, no enumeration, no money, we just decided to take out all the homes and not give you anything. Well, that wouldn't happen in America. This is not the 1930's and we are in Nazi Germany, this is America. It think it is important to realize these things. As Cecil mentioned I ask that you will give us a Positive decision on this. If there is something that you have a problem with, let us go forward with part of this. We want to go on with our lives. We want to jump start the economy if I will. Sure we are not going to turn the world around, but I got a guarantee that we are going to do our part. We are going to make a difference. There is a saying that I believe in that I have heard for many years. You are either green and growing or you are ripe and rotten. And the message is that we need to growing. We need to be going ahead. We need to be doing the right things. I want to thank you for your time, I want to thank the Planning Commission, your staff at city have done an outstanding job of this and you have in front of you a project that is good and I believe in it and I feel in your heart of hearts if you look at what is right for the city, what is right for the country, what is right for everything, you will give us a positive vote. Thank you very much for your time. MLczynski Madam Mayor Pro Tem, Members of the Council with respect to some of the specifics that were raised particularly at the last meeting, I note that we have written responses from D.G. King Associates as well Michael Branman Associates those have previously been provided to the City Council. Those should be incorporated as part of the Environmental Impact Report. Obviously, if the Council has any questions on the specifics of those responses, they should feel free to ask the consultants to come forward and respond to those. I would like to take a couple of minutes, however, to go over some of the items that were raised both at the last meeting as well as this evening regarding the project. I am going to defer to the environmental consultants, the geologist engineers and planning staff of those issues. I will try to touch on the legal issues, if I can. There is not any question but the document before 50 you requires your careful review and scrutiny before it is certified as a final Environmental Report. If the Council has any questions or concerns about that this matter should be continued to the appropriate time to resolve those issues in the Councils mind. Specifically, with regard to some issues framed by Mr. Bath of the Audubon Society, I believe as I said earlier, you have the response from both the developer's consultant as well as the City's environmental consultant regarding those issues. Some of the things that Mr. Bath raised are really more legal issues such as whether or not the city is going to be liable if a child is attacked by a cougar. I am not sure what relevance the lower small case has to this project. That case was against the County of Orange in a park setting. The issue there was whether or not the public should have been notified that cougars existed. The issue of bonding with respect to whether or not trees will be watered by homeowners. We are talking private property bonding typically is not an appropriate mechanism. With the Homeowners Association in place, however, and particularly with ties to The Country, I think reasonable CC & R's and other conditions can be imposed to ensure that the trees that are planted to replace those that are taking out would grow and would be watered properly. The couple of issues that were raised about who is going to be responsible if something happens with this project or the financial issues frankly it is the developers risk if this project goes or doesn't go. It is there problem. The city will have reasonable assurances that grading standards are met there will be bonds in place there to assure that dangerous conditions don't exist and are simply left out in the field. But if the developer goes belly up that is the developer's problem not the city. I don't think the city wishes that to occur if the project is approved, but the city is not in a position to require some type of financial analysis of the of the... developer to make this project go. With respect to issues of whether or not the city has a liability exposure for the private development, the generic answer to that is no. The city is not responsible for what occurs on private property unless there is some city project or structure, sewer, storm drain, water or something like that, that causes or contributes to a problem. As indicated by Mr. Mills and others, the vast majority of what is going to occur here is private property, there will be private streets, the City is not going to have public easements through there for many things, if at all. The sewer lines are private and what not. I wish I could remember the gentlemen's name who prepared the comment sheet that was 51 shown on the overheads, Mr. Smith I believe it was, Yes. In some of the issues that are framed by Mr. Smith deal with liability issues or financial issues that are better directed to the developer. It really is not the city's position to demand some kind of financial accountability for private improvements. We can and we will obtain financial assurances with respect to public improvements. We talked at great length about the issue of notice in this case, it seems to me that the staff has presented to you the information that indicates while there may not be much question that some people didn't receive notice, the notice process as prescribed by state law was followed. Unfortunately, the requirements of state law may tend to cause some people not to get notice, but we have to follow those to the letter or we are going to be sued and we are going loose. Absent any specific questions from the Council those are the comments we would have from a legal perspective and I am sure the staff is ready to address any other environmental issues that may be present. Madam Chair: Thank you. Is there any comments for the Council or questions for the City Attorney? Councilman Werner. Councilman Werner Mr. Arczynski, the comments offered by Mr. Smith regarding City liability, there was one comment that went a little bit further and I would like to get your feedback on. That was regarding the fact that the city of Diamond Bar will be reviewing by through our permanent procedures the improvements to the property, mainly the slopes, the grades, etc. Does that review procedure place the city in any liability position with regards to the future homeowner? Male Speaker Well there is probably no shortage of creative lawyers out there who could try to dream up theory. There are several immunities that are set forth in state law that specifically indicate that a city is not liable for the issuance of permit and things of that nature. Again, we are talking private property. If the city approves and accepts a public road that slips and causes damages to someone's property, then the city would be liable. But with respect to private property, the answer is no. 52 Councilman Werner Okay. Two other questions. With regards to the Environmental Impact Report, it is quite a hefty document, it apparently has taken a lot of effort to prepare. To the City Attorney, are you comfortable with the procedural aspects of the preparation and review of that draft EIR? City Attorney With the sole exception of comments made by those who indicated that they did not get some type of notice, I am comfortable that the process that this required by state law was followed. Even those who indicated that they didn't get notice, such as the Audubon Society, there is some dispute over that and we are present and we are able to provide their input, so I am comfortable that we have gotten the environmental input we need to have. Councilman Werner Okay. The second question. On that same document with regards to the substantive issues that have been raised in the initial study prepared by staff and the responses and analysis prepared in this document, do you feel that it is bullet proof sort of speak? City Attorney Mr. Werner I have had too many cases before the courts of this state on environmental issues to guarantee anything is bullet proof in an EIR. The important thing to remember is that any EIR is an informational document. IT doesn't have to be a perfect document, it can't be a perfect document. However, if the Council has any concerns or questions in its mind about whether or not certain aspects of the information are thoroughly fleshed out, then this would be the time to get further data on it. Councilman Werner Thank you. That would conclude my questions to the City Attorney. 53 Madam Chair Thank you if we could have the consultant on the EIR now address the Audubon's questions, please. Donald Kin Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Donald King. My firm D & J King Associates were the prepares of the EIR. I brought some of the documents here tonight. I promise not to read all of this, by the way. This is the draft master EIR document that had been referred to a lot. This is not all of the environmental information that was before the City in the Planning Commission that they used in making their determination. This is the official document. It does refer to other documents which are part of it by reference. Such as, the reports that went through GPAC, additional biological information, the several months that this project was before the GPAC, a number of very detailed analyses, over and above those which are in the ... section of the EIR were prepared specifically for that body. The recommendation of the GPAC were incorporated in the mitigation measures in the report itself, in the official Environmental Report. Per the authority in SECWA, the GPAC report is referenced in pages 1-2 of the EIR, right up front. It is now over the two year period that these projects have been under analysis. A tremendous amount of sincere effort has gone into the preparation of the review and the environmental document. Not only by my firm, by sub -consultants, by your staff, by the Planning Commission and the GPAC. It is understandable that individuals and organizations that have not been involved in this process may not find the information they are looking for without a lot of time and background in flushing out where that it is in all of these documents. You have before you, I believe, my written response to the written comments, concerns addressed by the Audubon Society. You will note that each and every item of their concern has been addressed in either the EIR or in the GPAC documents. Items were not ignored or missed. If we did not identify them originally, the GPAC did and caused additional analysis to be done. In the case of the concern over the alternatives, I would suggest to you or perhaps remind the Council and the public here tonight, the project before the City Council is in fact one of the alternatives. The project was completely redesigned in terms of its grading, landscaping and 54 hydrology, as a result of the review of the original EIR which has since been substantially updated because of the changes made mitigating the impacts identified in the first go round Of view. So, the project has been before the city for a two years now in environmental review. Literally, a tremendous amount of analysis has been done. I have been reviewing as a City Planner and as a Consultant, preparing and reviewing EIR reports since 1970. I have not done this much work on a project before and I have worked on projects substantively larger than this one, and that is not to say they did not get a long of efforts and concern, it is to say, however, that the concerns that have been addressed by the staff, by the Planning Commission and by the GPAC have, in fact been addressed to the satisfaction of the staff, the Planning Commission and the GPAC, and what is before you tonight is the draft EIR on the three tracts. The revised design for the three tracts which represents an alternative to the original submittal and it does carry the recommendation of the Planning Commission who did not do not do a slip -shot job, they worked hard, they worked us hard. IF you have a specific question of wanting further elaboration on any of my written comments, I would be happy to respond and provide that to you. I did try to identify for You, rather I did identify before you specifically the page, chapter and verse where the concern of the Audubon Society was in fact covered, either in the EIR or the GPAC documents. Madam Chair Questions to Mr. King? I have one question Mr. King, on your report on page, your page 6, regarding the potential migratory birds and their nesting period, you have a comment it is expected that construction would begin during the summer season to avoid grading during the rainy season, therefore there is no potential from the impacts on nesting migratory birds, since nesting occurs during the spring season. I would like to ask is that being considered in the issuance of grading permits and was that discussed at the Planning Commission? Don Kim Mayor Pro Tem, that was not an issue that was raised at the Planning Commission and it is not an issue to my knowledge that has been raised at the staff level, i.e. the issue of when 55 permits would be issued and when grading would take place. Additionally, one of the conditions of approval that the planning commission applied to the project, was one of requiring a phasing plan and it detailed issues regarding the grading activities, because it is our understanding that this project will not be graded in its entirety at one time and that it will be developed over many years. Mayor Pro Tem Then I would like to ask that this be considered in the issuance of the consideration of the grading plans and the phasing plans. Thank you. Thank you Mr. King. Councilman Werner This would be the time to address questions to the EIR consultant, am I not correct? Mr. King, the EIR indicates that the project would have no significant impact. Is that on every aspect of the project? Don Kine With the mitigation measures as proposed, it was our finding and that of the Planning Commission and your staff and your consultants, that all of the issues identified in the impacts identified would be mitigated to a level of insignificance. Should the mitigation measures be implemented. Councilman Werner With regards to the amount of grading proposed, that is 1.9 million cubic yards, correct? Don Kine I'll ... to the number. Yes. Councilman Werner Well, that is the number I have seen and heard. 1.9 million dirt cubic yards of dirt will be 56 moved, the landforms at the site would be altered, part of it is going to be stabilize portions of the property, the mitigation monitoring program and the design which has been selected which is the landform grading design have resulted in major mitigation enhancements from the original project proposed. The question that I have is there going to be a significant alteration in the appearance of the property from the way it now exists to the way it is going to be when it is completed? Don Kine Yes. Councilman Werner Will that be significant. Don Kine Is the question will it be significant and negative? Councilman Werner No, just significant. Don Kine The change would be significant. Councilman Werner Okay. Let me offer a point of agreement with you, I believe you were going to suggest it was going to be significant, but positive in terms of the ultimate development when it is all completed. Don King My comment was to respond. There is a problem in terminology that I have conscious of and I try to be careful of by definition, significant is negative. 57 Councilman Werner Okay. Don Kine The change in the site will be large. There is no question that the grading required will cause a physical change in that site. There is also no question that based on the grading plan proposed and the landscaping plan proposed that the result would not be negative. Councilman Werner Will every aspect of that change fall into the same category of being not significant, such as during the period of construction and the earth moving. My contention is that will be significant during the period of the regrowth of the vegetation until it reaches a point where it is found acceptable by most people. My feeling is that until the time that it matures to that acceptable level, that the impact has in fact been significant. Its interim temporary, but significant, nonetheless. And you EIR comes to other conclusions. Don King No, I would have to go back and read the particular pages that maybe relevant to your comment. There is no question that during construction it is going to messy, it is not going to be pretty. If we determine that any construction is a significant impact, then so be it, it must be. What we are looking at in the EIR is information relevant to an informed decision on the project. Will the final result be a significant negative thing, if it is a temporary or interim, is that going to be a long enough period where it will be significant. It was our 4,0 determination that the temporary impacts during construction would be significant, because the time period is short. Councilman Werner Okay. That is where I have some disagreement with what is written in the EIR. I can't fathom the concept that you are proposing to move 1.9 million cubic yards of dirt, alter the landform and even if I were to agree, which I am inclined to do that the ultimate 58 development of the site is a positive project, but during the interim I can't not fathom the fact that there is no significant impact. I can be more specific with regards to the number of California Live Oaks and Black Walnut trees. What is the total number of trees to be removed? Don KinLy I am sorry. I don't have all those numbers memorized, but I do have them in the report. Councilman Werner I believe it is the 8 to 9 tree numbers, 8 to 9 hundred trees. Don Kine Our landscape architect is here who could quote the exact figures to you without looking them up. Councilman Werner 1800 trees. The city's tree replacement policy will, as indicated in the mitigating program, will require replacement trees. In the last week's presentation, I believe it was the landscape architect indicated that there will be some seeds taken from the site and propagated. I understand that is going to be only part of the replacement. Other trees will be brought in to provide some more immediate results. The size of those trees have yet to be determined and I know that the experts have disagreements amongst themselves with regards to the size of the trees upon initial planting which is best for the site. But the question again, as I indicated earlier, with regards to the construction, the replacement of trees will not provide immediate relief and a result, in my judgment, will not mitigate the significant impact to a non-significant level. And yet the EIR indicates that in that area there is no significant impact. The point that I am trying to make is that the EIR out of all of the issues, and I have only touched on two. The EIR mitigates or suggests that the project is fully mitigated to a non-significant level. In a project of this size I am uncomfortable and just can not fathom the idea that there is no significant impacts. I would like you to respond to that. 59 Do It is not a requirement that professions always agree. SECWA provides for that. In the case of this particular project and the landscaping that you are speaking to, we found that the mitigation measures, and again we can not look at the final result as only a year to 18 months down the road, we look at what the total final result would be. Our firm found that the result would not be a significant impact on the environment. The consultants hired by the city agreed with that finding, the staff of the city agreed with the finding, the GPAC agreed with the finding, the Planning Commission agreed with that finding, it is not a requirement that everyone agree with that finding. Professionals can and do often disagree. Councilman Werner Well, you can stand there and indicate that professionals can disagree, however, I am one among the Council that has to render a decision on this and in order for me to render that decision, I have to feel comfortable with the information provided. I would like to hear from some of the others that you have referred to in terms of city staff, or the city's consultant. Are they here? The City's Consultant? Can I get a response from the City Consultant on those points. Male Speaker Mayor and Council I would like to introduce to you Tony Lacashiado who is representing Michael Branman and Associates, the city's consultant on the project. Tony Lacashiado Mayor Pro Tem, Members of the Council. As Jim said, I am Tony Lacashiado, manager of Environmental Services for the Los Angeles Office and Michael Branman and Associates. Your question, Councilman Werner, is a good one, it relates to the significance of construction impacts, when they should be considered significant. I think Mr. King's response is correct. It depends normally on the duration of the construction period. Now the SECWA guidelines at SECWA don't specifically state when or how you are to determine the significance of a construction impact. We reviewed the document based on the 60 information that was provided with regard to phasing of the project. I think there is some other information available about the length of that phase and the amount of time it takes to revegetate, that is a factor for you to consider. Council Werner Can you give us some information as to that length of time. I am still at a loss to know what period of time we are talking between the start of initial grading to the time of revegetation. Just to plant and then once the vegetation is placed, what time period we are talking about before it is going to have results? Tony Lacashido As you staff consultant, we were asked to review the information in the EIR, we did not produce any of that information. So a question like that I would have to defer to the applicant or their consultant. Council Werner Okay. Well, if duration is part of the formula for determining significance, how could determine that there is no significant impact if you don't know the duration. Tony Lacashido Normal, customary and usual practice throughout preparation of the documents and state is the construction impacts have to be a very long duration before they are usually considered significant. The main purpose of SECWA and the guidelines in documents are mainly to look at the end result of the projects and that would be usual practice. I think your specific question on this, you could look into further. But that would be usual practice. Council Werner Well, short-term impacts are also to be considered, as far as I know. 61 Tony Lacashido Yes, they are to be considered. I am saying that normal practice would be that there are not considered significant because of the short-term nature of the actual impact. The actual length of the grading period being usually 90 to 100 days or something to the effect usually is not considered significant because of the duration of the impact, the fact that revegetated slopes are usually planted immediately even if the plant material isn't mature immediately. There is no hard and fast SECWA rule or case law that I am aware of that states when you are to make that judgment call on significance. The usual and customary that construction impact of that nature would not be found to be significant. Councilman Werner What about the tree issue, the loss of 1700 trees and the replacement policy? Tony Lacashido Well again, looking at the usual and customary, the end -result, the city has a replacement requirement, the mitigation monitoring program. As written and prepared, requires that those trees be monitored until they are considered mature and considered as mitigation. So again, speaking of if they are replaced to the city ordinance, monitored and brought up to mature health, then that impact would be considered mitigate. Councilman Werner Do we have any time element? Do we know what time period it is going to take for those trees reach...? Tony Lacashido I believe the landscape architect would probably address, you know, specifically it would be normal to consider 3 to 5 years for the trees to be established, that is healthy and capable of growing into fully mature trees. So normally applicants are asked anywhere from 2 to 3 to a 5 year period maybe to monitor that, submit annual reports to a jurisdiction by an ...architect indicating the health of the trees that have been replanted. So you are sure you 62 actually do get the vegetation back. Councilman Werner Okay, thank you. Male Sneaker Councilman Werner, the landscape architect is here that could answer the detailed questions if you wish? Councilman Werner I would appreciate it. Craig Weber Yes, Councilman my name is Craig Weber. I represent the developer. My firm is in Long Beach, California and I am a licensed landscape architect. The issue I would like to deal with initially, is the fact that the total number of tress is not 1800 trees it is closer to 1200 trees, of which, and that is a significant amount but at the same time we are looking to mitigate that. So you are probably looking at 140 existing oaks and I think 1100 walnut trees. Approximately 2/3 of the oak trees will be retained, 1/3 of the walnut trees will be retained. Councilman Werner Is that out of the number you just stated? Craig Weber Yes, that is correct. So again, 1/3 of the walnut trees, 2/3 of the oak trees. The walnut trees are severely impacted due to the fact that they are on the ridge lines that are being developed and the oak trees tend to be down in the lower canyon areas. Regarding the reconstruction of the vegetation, as was mentioned earlier, you are usually looking at a 3 to 5 year time period, from the time it is planted to where it starts showing significant visual 63 results. Also, recognize the fact that is a native community that is probably 50 to 100 or 200 years old and for me to stand here and say within 5 or 10 years it is going to have that 100 or 200 year look to it, would be a very incorrect statement. So I am saying that within this 3 to 5 year period you will see the slope significantly covered with plant material and the plant material starting to regenerate itself. Councilman Werner Is that 3 to 5 years per project, or is the whole thing going to be done at the same time Craig Weber I can't respond to the phasing. If it is all done at one time, it could be 3 to 5 years. If that project is completely graded at the end of year one and planting starts at that particular point in time, within 3 to 5 years of that period you will see establishment. So I can't respond to the phasing. If the phasing is a much longer period of time, I could not answer that question. Councilman Werner Okay. I would like to get an answer to that eventually. Craig Weber The answer to the phasing, is that correct? Councilman Werner Yes. If it is 3 to 5 years per project, then they are all on their own time sequence. It could be anywhere from 3 to 15 years. Crai2 Weber I can't respond to that. Other questions. Councilman Werner That is all I had to ask at this point. 64 Madam Chair While we are discussing trees, I have some questions regarding the restoration and concern that none of the trees are going to be boxed and relocated. It seems to me that is a technology that is developed and I would like to see something in the draft EIR that would have a requirement of boxing or relocated some of these trees. I understand the issue of planting new trees from the seeds of the existing trees was not a Council or Planning Commission idea, but this came from SETAC, a significant ecology, technical a board that we had and this was their idea how to preserve the trees and maintain the growth. But I would like to see, in addition to that, some mitigation where these trees would be boxed and relocated. I know that the extremely large ones, in these 50 trees they are going to be lost. I would like to see that a majority of them not be lost, but that they be relocated. I would like to ask if there is Council occurrence with that? Male Speaker Well he did say they are going to retain a third of the walnut trees and what is it, half of the oaks? When we say retain does that mean... Craig Weber 2/3 of the oak trees will be retained and this is a fairly close figure and 1/3 of the walnut trees. The walnut trees are severely impacted, due to the fact that they are on the ridge line and when we first sat down and talked to SETAC we suggested to them, us representing the developer that we look beyond the oaks trees, and retaining the oak trees, we looked to also trying to mitigate the walnut tree forest and that is more of a oak -walnut woodland than just purely a oak or walnut stand. We are looking to address both issues. If I could respond to your question of moving trees. The walnut trees that are there, there have been many movers of large trees that have had a very difficult time moving walnut trees, they just do not move. Old established trees you can not box and move them. They have had much better luck with the oak tress. 65 Madam Chair I was referring more to something of a tree with maybe a 12 inch diameter, something moderate where I am not trying to move a 50 inch girth or whatever, something like that. I would think that there could be some trees that could be relocated and I don't know if that was addressed. Councilman Miller maybe you wanted to add to my thoughts. Councilman Miller Some of these areas that are heavily impacted, both environmentally and visually, perhaps we can analyze through staff an appropriate amount of trees that we could box of a reasonable size, maybe in the oaks and relocate to some of those areas after grading in conjunction with the reforesting of the 4 to 1 ratio. I do agree with the arborist on his recommendation on the size of plant and tree that he recommends to replant. I think you are going to end up with a healthier product when it does mature and they acclimate better, but perhaps there is some way we can mix this. We can determine a certain amount of trees that can be specified, part of the grubbing process. On the oaks, I know that is a process that will take 9 to 12 months. I believe the sides have to be boxed for 9 and the bottom can be cut in the following 30 days and they can be allowed to sit boxed and acclimate and then replanted, but on the process that we are going through and the phasing schedule we are going through I think that could be appropriate and I think the amount is something should be determined. But something that is reasonable and practicable I think we should look into. Councilman Miller I would like to suggest that we leave it to the experts, the arborist. But that they put together a plan that identifies the appropriate trees that would be most successfully relocated but ones that are also of good hardy condition that they are worthy of preservation. Craig Weber Could we have the opportunity to share three slides with you. There were more, they were part of my presentation, but I think these are three significant slides that deal with, its a case MOO study project. It is a project in the Irvine area. The amount of grading, the visual look of the site is very similar to Diamond Bar and I wanted to share that with you. What this is documenting is the fact that in talking to the developer, we as a team have decided and it reflects what you just said, that possibly there are areas that we look at that the size of the vegetation is greater than this one or five gallon size in terms of mitigating the problem. The one or five gallon container size will mitigate the problem from a long-term standpoint, possibly a littler healthier tree, but doesn't do much in the short run. So, what we look at is possibly some areas that are visually very exposed and a concern of the community and maybe plant those with larger container stock. This slide depicts what might be a cut slope with the surrounding costal sage community in the background and then to revegetate that and the slide you are going to see is after probably two to three years. The next slide please. The general character in terms of vegetation trees were planted not from one or five gallon containers, trees were planted from 24, 36 or 42 inch box containers. The shrub material in most cases was not totally hydroseeded, therefore, hydraulically blown on the slopes. Some of the shrub material was planted from 4 inch or 5 gallon containers. And then from a distance, if I could have the next slide, that would be a close up of the slope and there is the overall slope from a distance, showing the fact that, again after, and this is a case study that our office took monitoring this project in Irvine. This was about after 2 and 1/2 to 3 years and most of the tree material there is anywhere from 15, 1 wouldn't say 15, probably 12 to 16, 17 feet in height. The shrub material is anywhere from 2 to 4 feet in height. Councilman Miller Are all tree slides of the same slope? Craig,, Weber Yes. And this final slide looks rather archaic in terms of a growing ground, but it is some of the plant material they have on site and plant material are being grown in fairly large containers relative to what it is. This is native material. That is opantia, which is a native cactus. Then there is ruse, which is lyminabari and there is a native pinestoriana, the tori 67 pine and it is demonstrating the fact that stock is available in fairly large containers, so possbly, one does not need to wait for a long period of time before one is able to see a highly visible landscape. So that is what I wanted to share with you. Thank you. Madam Chair Councilman Miller. Councilman Miller I reviewed the minutes from SETAC and ...from Planning Commission and the arborist, his concern and I know the National Forest Service has the same concern, is that gene structures in certain areas remain and continue and he spoke against the concept of bringing in the larger boxes. I know the National Forest Service when you go to replant forests that have been ... End of Tape. 012 Tape 3 Existing trees. Now we are not trying to saying all of them perhaps, but a certain amount of existing trees and you have the time based on the phasing of the project and we could transplant some of those trees right back on site to these impacted areas, thereby the seed dropped from a tree that is acclimated to that area were just transplanting in that area. I have seen it done before and it does mitigate visual impact, environmental impacts tremendously from the onset. Male Speaker I think that is a viable alternative. At the same time, depending on the time schedule there is a possibility if this goes tomorrow, the project, it is a problem. If it goes six months, a year or further downstream, or maybe 2 years before the landscaping actually takes place, one can borrow from the gene pool on the site and start contract growing. Councilman Miller Well that is a requirement of SETAC. Male Speaker I understand that. Councilman Miller So that has to be done and based on what we are hearing from the developers and the magnitude of the grading project that we have here and the process that we are going to go through to get to final map, so I think that will most likely allow us adequate time if we move expeditiously to locate certain trees that would be transplanted to accomplish that. I think that Mayor... is trying to imply reasonableness in what her suggestion is not that everything is going to be picked up and moved and there is not going to be a problem, because we know that can't happen. Arborist would have to specify which trees were healthy, which ones could be moved, that had a high percentage rate of being able to exist 69 once they have been transplanted, because it doesn't do any good to transplant a tree to die, and a certain amount I know we would be likely to loose. I think that is a relatively small percentage if it is done properly. Male Speaker We have a comfort level in terms of researching that as well. Councilman Miller I don't think that has any impact on what ever decision is made by this Council, I think that is something that could go hand in hand with the rest of the process, so that doesn't necessarily have to be answered in advance either. Madam Chair With that, I would like to go back at the minute when I was talking about the nesting seasons, I want to refer staff to comment #2 and comment #5 in the letter from Michael Branman Associates, January 24, 1992, which recommends that the draft EIR add information on the potential presence of cougars, but that the site's specific wildlife movement study is not necessary and #5 has to do with the nesting and the grading situations. I would also like with the consent of the Council to make it clear to staff that they delete from further discussion the roads easement from Diamond Bar Blvd to Tonner Canyon Road via Sugar Pines so that issue is settled for those folks is hear. Any Objection. Councilman Miller I will support that. Madam Chair Okay, then staff is directed in that manner. We'd like to take a five minute break and then continue. Thank you. 70 Madam Chair Ladies and Gentlemen if you could take your seats, we would like to reconvene. This Council has had a policy of continuing our meetings if the hours goes past 11 o'clock and we have two other items on the Agenda, besides this one. I am going to ask fellow council members if they would provide to staff a list of questions that need further discussion and then I am going to continue the public hearing to a date that we will decide on and there will not be any decision made this evening, as far as we could tell. I think there are too many unanswered questions still and so we are going to have to continue it. (Applause) All right we won't, the discussion will continue. We are going to close the public hearing tonight. We have taken everyone's testimony. We are going to give our Council responses and list the questions for staff to respond to, close the public hearing and then we will bring the item back for resolution at some other time for Council action. I would like to ask Councilman Miller would you like to start with your questions of staff. Councilman Miller Sure. We have had a response from Michael Branman & Associates we received today to various questions that were posed to the city and I want to make sure that these have been adequately addressed and reviewed by staff and come back with a formal response from staff. Also the comments to the Master EIR that we received, it was on the overhead projector, the items that were not addressed by City Attorney, I would like to have any questionable items addressed, and we will address that publicly. On the Conditions of Approval, I will start with Tract 47850. Item #6 deals with conveyance conditions and restrictions. My questions are these CCR's consistent with the CCR's of The Country. Such as fencing requirements in front of houses, they require landscaping front and rear, certain requirements like that. We had discussed earlier and I saw in Conditions, set back requirements which went beyond requirements of The Country, requiring a minimum 40 foot separation between dwellings and a concern I have is that there is no floor plan repetition, this is a custom project and in a custom community and I think the character of that needs to be carried through. A question was raised on item #7, 71 Urban Pollutant Maintenance, how those are to be maintained in the future and who is to bear the burden of that maintenance cost? Item #9 talks about construction activities being between 7 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. I again suggest that we make that coincide with the association. They have certain close -down dates for holidays and such. One issue that is going to come that wasn't addressed, is that most of us have this heavy machinery, typically they try to maintain it night and that will not, it is not allowed in the Association, yet they have no control over it. So maintenance hours are also between those hours. Item #10 dealt with landscaping and irrigation and again that does comply with The Country's requirements. Item #20 talks about two parcels that were requested to be out -parcels. The Planning Commission requested that they were designated building restriction areas. I would like to have that addressed to the applicant and staff to have those handled as deed restrictions dedicated to the Homeowners Association and perpetuity be considered open space and the property of homeowners there. Item #21 talks of retaining walls. I have a concern with that being that there is no retaining walls specified on the grading plans or any plan whatsoever and I would hate to see a... come back and numerous retaining walls appear all of the sudden. Item #22 phase boundaries. That has been addressed as a concern and I believe a Council concern from the ones I talked to that we have a specific phasing map. That we know when each project is going to be graded, if it is going to be a 10 or 12 year period, we want to know how many per year and what sections per year and we have something we can hang our hat on. On some of the cult -a -sac lots, that were in question, the size of the lots and the separation I would like to see a proposed building envelope of those lots, so we know how those are going to be developed in conjunction with the other lots contiguous to it. Also, a restriction on architectural control of breaking up the mass of structure so you don't have a lot of massive two-story building with two-story walls contiguous to each other that would break the mass of buildings through cantilevers off -set the pop -outs of various architectural programs. That be a condition also. On sub -division item #1 there is an existing heliport pad there and the conditions that I read earlier said that it was an agreement that may be located. I would like to see that in agreement because it is required by the fire department that shall be located elsewhere. Item #10 discusses detailed on-site lighting plans. Normally in The Country, there are no street lights. That 72 should be analyzed and considered prior to being made a requirement of this project. I would hate to have this project annexed in an Association meeting one of the only places that has street lights, so that should be looked at. On #20, item d, it talks of slope banks in excess of five foot should be seeded with native grass. I want some reference in there also to appropriate tree and shrub planting on those slopes. Item #23b talks of growth stability of 150 foot high field slope and unstable slopes shall be redesigned and stabilized, using slope reinforcement. I think there needs to be some sort of a determination what the geologist is referring to. I would have to have gunite slopes or other slopes like that, just because they couldn't be stabilized in any other way. So, I think we need an answer on how those are to be stabilized or options of various methods of stabilization. Item #24 refers to public and/or private streets. I think that should be changed to just private streets. Item #35 talks about permission from effected property owners prior to final map for easements on that blue line stream bed. I think we need to determine if permission was withheld by any individual how does that affect this project. Item #34 talks of sewage pumps and the question was raised on how is to maintain those or if those are accepted by the county. Item #38 talks about capacity of sewer lines on the system to this project, if they are adequate and I think that is something I would like to see determined. I would hate to see us approve a project and find out that down the road, a mile or two, that we don't have adequate capacity and that throws us into another issue so that is something that should be very easy to answer and we should address that. Item #47 talks of stop signs. I would like to see that any requirement for signs or such would be the same as The Country's standards. They use a different type of a stop sign that we would normally use on our public streets, so that we would be in compliance with what they use. Subdivision on #9, it says a nine mile radius to determine street names. I think that is incorrect, don't you want to within the city of Diamond Bar that we are not repetitious of streets, but a 9 mile radius, isn't that going a little too far, because one map called for a 9 mile radius, another map condition called for within the city of Diamond Bar, so we need to make the maps being consistent within the three conditions. Item #32 was the irrevocable easement and that is history as far as I am concerned at this point. The question was raised by many about the uneven bedding planes and they didn't specifically state, they knew there was a soil problem, they 73 didn't know what it was, that and the layers of bitonite. And just have staff come back to Council make sure those are properly addressed in the soil report and how that is going to be, they said c... problems. I don't think that is really going to be an issue. Have it addressed publicly so those questions have been answered. There has been question on impact of The Country gates. I think staff should come back with what impact fees are being charged against this project for various sidewalk improvements that are off-site, signal improvements and other improvements that these people are being required to fund also so the committee is made aware of that. The question was answered by the applicant about the slope easements contiguous to it. That is all I will turn it over to the next individual at this point. Madam Chair On that same project 47850, there has been some discussion and some statements made by the developer that regardless of how many homes are built on that tract, the whole slope is going to have to be rebuilt and I would like to have at some point a report from the staff as to whether or not those statements are accurate or if there are other alternatives. All right. I have a couple of other things as I review throughout the EIR correspondence, there is a letter from the Department of Water Resources that recommends the use of reclaimed water for irrigation purposes in order to free fresh water supplies for beneficial uses. I would like to require that we have a dual system required on these lots, so that the landscape irrigation is done with reclaimed water at some time in the future when we can get it piped in that they have the capacity to switch over. Secondly, there is a letter response from the school district that takes exception to the applicant's answering question 12 and I would like to have a report from staff that the school district is satisfied with the finalization of that. The applicant did suggest that they would be willing to modify their frontage, some of the proposed lots have less than 100 feet of frontage. I would like to require that they have a minimum of 125 feet on the one's where they are straight. On the ones on the cul-de-sac, I have concerns that the radiuses are too small to provide adequate 74 set -backs and driveways and it looked to me that if the cul-de-sacs were extended, those radiuses could be enlarged, and I would think some where in the range of 60 to 65 feet or whatever staff can work out appropriately on the radius of the cul-de-sac would improve the project substantially. Councilman Werner do you want go and then I will pick up... Councilman Werner Okay, on the mitigation monitoring program is attached as a condition of each of the projects. I would like to address points in the mitigation monitoring. Number 1 with regards to the biological resources in Section 3.7 at provisions to 7a-1 that would provide for a mix of relocated newly plants and newly planted trees as we discussed earlier and that is involving the black walnuts. Same thing would apply to the California Live Oak species, that there be a mix among the trees replanted, including potted trees and relocated trees. The specifics, I would like to know what the specifics are that are proposed by the arborist. I would rather not see the mitigation monitoring program be left without any specific standards in there. I would like to see it more specific. There is an issue in the EIR dealing with reclaimed water. I pose this issue to the Council. The EIR indicates that it will be desirable for water conservation purposes. However, there is no reclaimed water line currently available. The question is what provisions is the developer making, if and when that reclaimed water line is made available, and the other question is whether the developer should have any obligation or responsibility for a portion of that water line brought to this project. I pose that to the Council. Water conservation is an important issue, we are talking about a lot of slopes on this property and it would seem to be that the success of the mitigation program is going to be largely dependant upon the landscaping taking root and being properly nourished. Let me ask you this, is there any support of the Council to have the developer, place on the developer responsibility for a portion of the reclaimed water lines brought to the site? Male S eaker I think we should address the issue of where it is going to be available, when is it going to be available, and how is it going to be available. I think we need to provide for it. Whether 75 we require dry lines or something for future hookup, I think that should be looked at and responded to by staff. I think the concern that the irrigation is ran on a separate line so that it could be disconnected and hooked up at a future date and make sure no hose ... or anything are connected to those same lines is something that we should look at. We have done a water study use in the past, it is not available today, we know there are some plans to get it closer to this area, I think we should require that the public does know how close that will be and if it is even a viable option. There are certain things that we could do that would make it possible in the future. Yes. Councilman Werner Those are comments that are consistent with my thinking in terms of the dry lines. I would suggest to staff then that when we bring this matter back that we have additional recommendations on those points. Then the other point I wanted to raise, as part of the mitigation monitoring program is to pin down a time period for the grading aspects and the revegetation aspects of the project. There are three specific projects proposed, they could easily be done as three individual projects under independent time frames. My understanding is based on what Mr. Mills has indicated that it would be his group that would be developing this property over a period of 10 or 12 years, 10 to 12 units per year and of course, Dr. LaPeters owning a portion of the project, representing maybe, well under that ratio, one years worth of development, but it might be over a period of 10 years too. I don't know. I would like to be able to pin down a time frame for the grading and the revegetation of the site and that has not been addressed in the EIR and I think it helps to define the significance of the impact from this project. If construction is going to take place over a period of 15 years, one of these projects going every five years, that might have a lesser impact or it might have a greater impact, I guess it depends on how close it is to existing neighbors. Or, would the more preferable approach be to have the entire site graded at the same time. But on the same token that provides or results in financial impacts and we want to make sure the project is successful. I also want to see something in writing here indicating the developer will be prohibited from off-site, moving dirt off-site. I believe that this is a balanced project as proposed. Is there an engineer here to confirm that? 76 Male Speaker That is correct. Councilman Werner Okay. And that is based on all of the best designs and estimates up to this point. I want to make sure that is in writing and there will be no off-site exportation or importation of heavy trucks driving through the streets. Male Speaker Councilman Miller, excuse me Werner, it should be pointed out that if this project is approved it is contemplated that 48487 and 47851 would share and exchange dirt. Councilman Werner I understood that and that would be part of the on-site that I am looking at as one project, from that standpoint. Will they be taking dirt over Country streets? Male Speaker Yes, they would. No. Councilman Werner It will entirely on your own property, all of that transportation. Then Council I would like to get clarified and specified in writing. I think that is it for now. Male Speaker I have one more furtherance of that issue of the dirt, also that we have noted that there has been a problem of parking off-site on these construction problems. That parking be restricted to the on-site parking, not only for equipment but for the automobiles of the employees working on the sites. Councilman Werner Can I get back to a question. Regards to the phasing and it wasn't answered yet this evening 77 if there is any possibility I would like to see whether out of the three projects what would be the most likely scenario for development. Which would go first, second and third. I am just at a loss to know where that is at this point and I would like to pose the question to the developers. Mr. Mills Thank you for giving me the opportunity to respond to that. It would be our anticipated result that assuming all three tracts were approved in the same frame, that the tract 47851 would be the tract that would be begun to be prepared in conjunction with the tract of Dr. LaPeters. Those two tracts require dirt to be balanced between them. The additional factor that involved them is that his tract requires the sewer pump station that we will be building on our tract, and if we begin the process by starting the westerly tract, that leaves him stranded there with no sewer capacity and kind of dead in the water. So our expectation would be to start the easterly tract. I would anticipate that we would be grading the development out basically at the same time, and within, I heard my engineer partner and our engineer talking in that mumbo jumbo that I don't understand back there, but they were saying that they thought the grading once it was begun, probably would extend no more than over a 9 or 10 month period. And I would certainly welcome the opportunity to have Mr. Welliman respond to this phasing concern because I know that we do have an answer to how we would prefer to proceed. Thank you sir. Council Mr. Mills you say that the project would be graded in its entirety. Does that mean all three tracts. Mr. Mills That would be my anticipation, unless we have some mandate from the Council to do otherwise. in Councilman But, the development would occur on the easterly tract first. Sales and development. Mr. Mills Probably even the initial grading. I don't mean to say that they have to move dirt the same day on both tracts, but it would seem to me that while we have the equipment there and while we are in the process, we would start the process going on both tracts, and while we are talking about phasing and the number of houses I didn't mean to imply that we probably would not sell a house on the westerly tract and a house or two on the easterly tract if that is what the market conditions warranted. Unless we had some other dictate from the Council. But, we certainly anticipate starting with the easterly tract. Madam Chair I would like to suggest that the Council do propose a phasing plan since 51 and 87 balance on-site as a unit, that those would be one phase and that 50 would be continued as a separate phase. If there is Council concurrence, I would like to instruct the staff to. Councilman Werner What would that accomplish if the phases are done one right after the other. What Mr. Mills indicated is that the construction equipment will be there and if he finishes Phase 1, meaning the two easterly tracts, in six months he will move it over and do Phase 2. Madam Chair But it could also mean that they grade and build 51 and 87 and sell those properties before they even start to touch 50. Councilman Werner Is that what you are suggesting, that there be...? 79 Madam Chair That is what I am suggesting that Council consider that we don't need to decide tonight, but we would feel comfortable in not grading the whole 160 acres at one time and leaving it open. Councilman Werner I could find myself supporting a concept that would, I guess, put some time restrictions on when Phase 2 would be initiated subject to the development of Phase 1. Is that what you are suggesting? Male Speaker I think that leads into the main question that was asked earlier, and I though we were going to identify that as a definitive phasing schedule so we know that we aren't going to have 40 or 50 units on at one time and I would hate to see that we graded them and now we are forced to build 50 at one time and then everybody has major problems because of that. That there is a definitive building phasing program on this project and I think the applicant has prior stated that and come up with some sort of an agreement of how that is to be accomplished. Madam Chair I would like to refer staff to the resolutions on 8785, 47851 on Exhibit B -1A, item #11, it refers to model home landscaping. I don't believe this a model home subdivision type of project so I would think that should be excluded. I would like to see a consideration for requiring front and rear landscaping prior to notice of completion on the project. On the report from the Department of Public Works, item 24, item 11 is where it refers to the street names in a 9 mile radius which is inconsistent with item 11 on the other project. Item 24b regarding the 150 foot slope, I believe this needs to be addressed, so I would like to see it addressed prior to approval. I would rather not approve the project and have this issue not addressed. Then, I have a serious question on 48487 and that is the impact of the grading of this NO project on the vacant parcel that is not being discussed tonight. It seems to be that road should be lower, those pads increased and I would like to staff address that issue. Any other comments from Council. Councilman Just that the issues I wanted staff to address are applicable to all three tract maps, not just 850. Councilman Yes, I have one more. On condition 4 of 47850 I believe it is repeated in each, it indicates a mitigation monitoring program outlined within the master EIR would be prepared or is required to be prepared by the developer and submitted to the city for approval 30 days prior to the issuance of the grading permit. It would seem to be that would be something that we would be approving at a time of the development, the mitigation monitoring program and all we have right now, according to this condition, is the outline and we need more specificity. Can staff elaborate on that. What was your thinking in terms of getting it before the grading permit is issued? Male Speaker The thinking was that we would have more knowledge than we do now, we would have more detailed knowledge as a result of the refined plans and studies that would be coming our way, once tentative approval was given. And we thought we would be unable to provide a specific detailed Mitigation Monitoring Program right now, because we just don't have that detailed information. Councilman What additional information are you going to have at that time? The final maps, the ... Male Speaker Yes. Councilman Werner Well that is all going to be a function of the Monitoring Program that is listed in the EIR today, which is outlined. It seems to me that these are raising the points that we should know enough about to put that Monitoring Program together right now. In some cases, there might be need for more specific studies on the part of the engineer and of course, reserve those for a later date. I would like to see the Monitoring Program brought to a more complete state at the time our approval. Okay, and leave what ever has to, based on the need for more information, until a future date, prior to the grading permit. One other point that was initially raised in the discussion and that was the costs on the city for providing all of the staff assistance necessary to accomplish this project. Those costs are all developer responsibility costs, are they not? Male Speaker Not entirely. This project was presented to the city under the old fee structure and it is not a cost-effective structure. That is why the Council chose to adopt a new fee structure beginning in August of last year. All of the consultants that the city must hire in order to process this project and adequately review its impacts are borne by the developer in terms of the costs. Councilman Werner An additional condition that all staff costs be the responsibility of the developer. Madam Chair The City Attorney would like to address the issue. City AttorneX I will discuss the matter with Mr. Werner after the meeting. M Councilman Werner Seriously. Male Speaker Councilman Werner to give you an indication, there are some additional projects that the City is now engaging in reviewing that are under the new fee structure and those projects are being reviewed on an hourly rate basis. So whatever the cost is for review is borne entirely 100% by the developer and not by the community. This particular project just happens to be one that was processed, began several years ago under the old fee structure. Councilman Werner But if the developer were to be in agreement with the new fee structure would that be a problem for the city? My feeling is that 1 recognize the fact that there is a new fee structure that is in effect, but the project does have substantial impact on staff time and costs. City Attorna Part of the costs, for example in terms of the Mitigation Monitoring Program, the developer is going to have to provide the where with all to ensure that those things are accomplished on the developers ticket, the city is not going to pay for that, whether that is staff time or consultants, you name it, everything from arborists to biologist is part of the Mitigation Monitoring Program, inspection requirements all the rest of it will be picked up under the new fee structure. In terms of the processing of the project from the date it was first presented to tonight, those fee structures weren't in place. I suppose if the developer agrees to pay we could politely ask him. Councilman Werner I would like to ask the developer. Madam Chair Not this evening. All right. 91 (Background conversation which can not be heard) All right. Thank you. Councilman Werner Okay, so we will get a response at our next meeting. Madam Chair Councilman Miller Councilman Miller Yes I would address a question to the City Manager. Having received community input and the questions that need to be addressed to Council by staff and the questions posed by Council, when would you suggest that this be brought back to City Council with responses? City Manager March 3. Councilman Miller I move that we continue this hearing to March 3. Councilman Werner Second. Madam Chair All those in favor. Councilmen Aye. Aye. Madam Chair On March 3 public hearings would not start before 7:00 p.m. so it will be on the Agenda that day whether it is the first item ... we have other business to conduct prior to that. We won't know until that Agenda is prepared, but it will not be before 7:00 it will scheduled for the 3rd. The Agendas are posted at the library and City Hall. Or you could call City Hall to find out specifically. With that, I would like to move on to. Male SQeaker Mayor and Council, excuse me please, but one thing that the Council may wish to direct the consultant to implement and that is timely response to the questions that they are responsible for and the delivery of products that they are responsible to provide to this city staff. Many of the issues that you have raised are going to require review by internal staff, external consultants, coordination with another developer for the remnant piece, etc. and we obviously will do our best as a staff to meet your request for a March 3 hearing, but we can not do it and adequately respond if the materials are delivered late. Madam Chair I hope that the consultant understands the significance and developing consultants will have their reports in a timely manner. Thank you. Madam Chair Item 5.1. Male Sneaker Mayor Pro tem, Members of the Council, Item 5.1 is second reading of an ordinance amending the City's Zoning Code pertaining to admission charged parties. A public hearing was conducted at the last meeting on the item, staff would recommend for second reading by title, waiver of full reading, reading by title only and adoption of ordinance number 1 RM 1992 and title it Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar. End of this side of tape. Tape 3 (Continued) Male Speaker ...Chapter 22.76 to the Los Angeles County Code as heretofore adopted, pertaining to admission charged parties in residential zones. Madam Chair Is there a motion from the Council? Councilman So moved. Councilman Second. Madam Chair Discussion? Madam Chair Will the clerk call the roll. Clerk Councilman Forbing. - Aye Councilman Miller - Aye Councilman Werner - Aye (Unable to understand name)... - Aye Madam Chair Item 6.1. 0. toddlers and senior citizens as I understand it, and one of the major problems is inadequate parking and of course, I am concerned here to see that there will also be increased traffic. What I really would like to talk about is this half of a basket ball court. I don't know what a half of a basket ball court is, but I guess you would like to be the team that had that half, you would have a better chance of winning. Also, I wasn't under the impression that you were going to remodel the building, I thought your were just going to take down the building and put up a new one. What I really would like to ask relates to that half of a basket ball court. Remember there is going to old people and young people there and the senior citizens are going to be there 5 days a week. I would like to ask that you get some data on the current use of that basketball court and consider deleting it if isn't used to whatever your standard would be and add that $8,000 into the building for the senior citizens that would help as much as possible. Thank you. Madam Chair Thank you Mrs. Brusk. Questions from Council. Male Speaker Did you wait this entire evening to speak to this issue. I apologize. Madam Chair If you will take the microphone please. Donald Sizemore My name is Donald Sizemore. President of Diamond Bar. I was curious. They are going to put a park -n -ride. They are going to widen Pathfinder and put a Park -n -Ride in there also. Does the transportation department have any plans when they do this of putting up the sound walls along that section of freeway in there? I know this is a big issue in the city and I would like to see some kind of. You know we have a nice Park -n -Ride at the other end of town there and it is used quite often. They should also have some idea that this bringing more traffic in. Lets put a little pressure on Caltrans or California Department of Transportation to put the sound walls when they put the Park -n -Ride in. They are doing it all over the state so let's put a little pressure on them to do it. Madam Chair We have been working on the sound wall issue in the City and one of the problems is that the state continues to change the rules as to when you qualify, it use to be that they would say that when you reached a 65 decibel level that the sound wall is mandated. Now they are saying that you have to a 24 hour average of 65 decibels. SO we are still working on that, the sound walls are needed all over the state and there is a limit to the amount of funding available for that. Madam Chair Mr. F ... hart would you like to speak specifically to the Pathfinder widening? Mr. F? I was going to talk about the sound walls. As a part of the HOV improvement program on the 57 freeway, the City Council whole-heartedly as well as Supervisor Dana as well as Senator Frank Hill's office have all gone on record stating that if the HOV project becomes reality, because of the additional lane, the sound walls must be in place as a mitigation factor. Madam Chair Could you come to the microphone quickly please. Jack Titowsky Jack Titowsky and I am a resident of Diamond Bar and I am also an employee of the Boys and Girls Club of San Gabriel Valley and when we are talking about the sound walls and the need for sound walls all over California. As a person who spent last Sunday, painting the center wall of the San Bernardino Freeway, commonly referred to as the Raymond Curve into Los Angeles, which was innodated(sp.) with graffiti, I think that this mad rush KE to have sound walls built in every community, I think that this mad rush to have sound walls built in every community I think the effects of graffiti on a community like Diamond Bar have to weighed heavily when we talk about the necessity for having sound walls, because they are prime targets for roving bands of graffiti writers and I think Diamond Bar as it is situated it would be a prime target and they would do more to lessen property values in the city of Diamond Bar than many of these projects that we are talking about the reckless developments. So I caution people about thinking that we automatically need these sound walls, there are worse things than having high sound levels on the freeway. Thank you. Madam Chair Thank you. Lets return to discussion of the Heritage Park Grant. Council have any questions for staff? No. Do I hear a motion. Male Speaker I move we adopt resolution 9202. Male Speaker Second. Madam Chair All those in favor. Council Aye. Aye. Aye. Madam Chair Opposed? The Motion carries. Do we have any announcements to make? If not, the meeting is adjourned. End of Tape 1 Council Meeting 1-21-92 Male Speaker The staff conclude the presentation on this item and follow-up with any additional information that we feel is necessary to aid in the discussion and respond to any questions or issues that the Council may have. Madam Chair Thank you does Council have any questions for the staff. Mr. Werner. Mr. Werner Thank you Madam Mayor Pro tem. Mr. DeStafano the project that is the proposal, the subject of this hearing which was recommenced for approval by the Planning Commission is that the same project in your presentation that you refer to by SETAC as being 2/3 of the Design. Mr. DeStafano No sir. Mr. Werner Is there a design contained in this EIR that I could turn to, that you could refer me to that would be that 2/3 design alternative? I was looking through these, couldn't quite put my finger on it. Madam Chair I have it marked at 5-76. Mr. DeStafano It is on a couple of different pages and it is summarized on page 1-9 as alternative 4 c and it appears graphically on page 5-76. 2 Mr. Werner Okay. The one on 5-76 shows nothing on the southerly parcel, at least in my copy. Mr. DeStafano That is correct. Mr. Werner Is that what their recommendation was? Is that the 2/3 alternative? Mr. DeStafano Yes. I want to make it clear the SETAC's preference, remembering that they are a conservation and environmentally oriented body, specifically established for review of these kinds of projects, their preference was to keep the acreage as it presently exists and no development at all. Mr. Werner I understood that there preferred project was the no project alternative. Mr. DeStafano Yes. Their second project was shifting and preserving 47850. Mr. Werner Would you be able to explain why the property development was shifted off of that portion of the site? Is there something more significant on that site? Mr. DeStafano Yes. There are a variety of riparian habitats that exist adjacent to tract 47850. In the valley of the property, the ridge between the Diamond Ridge project and this tract. They felt that this was the most sensitive part of the canyon. It had the largest grouping. The trees that they felt more appropriate to save, it fed into Tonner Canyon and they felt it was the most 3 appropriate part of the canyon to save and that is why they really preferred that if alternative 1 wasn't chosen that alternative 2 be utilized in order to push development away from that canyon. Mr. Werner Okay, and alternative 1 being the no project alternative. Mr. DeStafano Yes. Mr. Werner Okay. I have no more questions at this point. Madam Chair Any other questions of Council staff? If not, then I would like to call on the proponent. Cecil Mills Good evening honorable Mayor Pro tem, Council. We thank you for giving us the opportunity to present our project. My name is Cecil Mills. I am here on behalf of Diamond Bar Associates, the proponent of tract 47850 and 47851. To my right is Dr. Al LaPeter who will introduce his portion of this joined presentation in a moment. I think for the benefit of the Council and all those assembled here, that it might be well worth my taking a couple of moments to historically put this project in perspective. It began as a 50 acre purchase of land from Transamerica by Diamond Bar Associates on what is now been included within 47850 and with that purchase we received two proposed development plans, one which called for 35 lots and the other for 42 and we anticipated at the time that we began this process that we would be seeking to obtain approval on some format that was compatible with those maps which he had inherited with the purchase of the property. We hired a local engineering company, asked them to do some investigative work, found out that they were contained within those original proposals, flaws that made it apparent that it n would be violaceous to proceed with those maps. We undertook to commission of preparation of new maps and prior to the time that map was completed and just about the time it was completed, an additional piece of property that was owned by Transamerica came to our attention that we had been unaware, prior to that time, was available for purchasing. We then purchased that remaining piece of property. We then had the entire U-shaped piece of property that loops around Dr. LaPeters' property and the 20 acre parcel that is not included in this presentation. In the process of finding out about land form grading and other hillside damage mitigation measures, we retained Hunsacker Engineering to do a study for us, ultimately ending up retaining them, terminating the services of our prior engineer and these maps which we now present to you arose out of those efforts. Tract 47850 and 47851 are totally separate tracts, totally independent of Dr. LaPeters tract, 48487, except that it appeared to us that it would unnecessary and unwise for us to be duplicating each others efforts and we joined together solely for the purpose of presenting the items through the same time frame, same processing which enabled us to share in some of the documentation that was prepared, the EIR and some of the engineering work, but other than that the Diamond Bar Associates has no interest in Dr. LaPeters' tract of a financial nature, nor he in our tracts. Tract 47850 which includes the original parcel that we purchased now requests approval of 57 lots. 47851 requests approval of 48 lots with that, I would like to introduce Dr. LaPeter and at the conclusion of his remarks, we would ask Lex Williman to come forward and make a presentation to the Council from an engineering standpoint. I would ask leave of the Council either at the conclusion of this meeting, to be allowed the additional opportunity to comment and address any concerns that I may have, once the Council has had an opportunity to state a position on it. And if the Council in its wisdom determines that the matter can not conclude this event, I certainly would ask to be heard at the conclusion of the subsequent meeting. Dr. LaPeter. Dr. LaPeter Thank you Judge Mills. My name is Al LaPeter and I live at 3020 Windmill Drive in Diamond Bar. I have been a resident of Diamond Bar for over eight years and I come tonight wearing two hats. I wear one hat as a homeowner in the community and I wear 5 another hat as the developer. I am a native Californian and I was born in Los Angeles in 1945. And if I might just share a few thoughts as to what I have observed in the last few decades in Southern California, I think we can all agree that in most and many parts of the Los Angeles area are life-style has changed. It has not improved in many areas and it has changed quite a bit. I know when I drive to my office on the freeway and I am stuck in traffic and I have to put up with the traffic jams, the sig -alerts, etc. I say to myself, why can't it be like it was in the 50's. Why is it like it is. Why couldn't we have just stopped bringing people into Southern California in 1950. Ridicilous thought, but again, it goes through my mind once in a while. I venture to say that if that had happened most of the people in this room probably would not be here and we would not be in Diamond Bar. I can remember coming to Diamond Bar before it was a City in 1964, almost bought a home here, and I was really impressed it was very very sparse, there wasn't much here and I am sure the people that lived in Diamond Bar in 1964 probably said at that time lets stop letting people into this city, lets stop development. I am not so sure that we have that right. There is a reson why people come to Southern California and live in Los Angeles, opportunity, life- style, benefits. Having lived in Diamond Bar for over 8 years, I can tell you the reason I love living in Diamond Bar because it is one of the best, if not the best community in the Los Angeles area. I am not sure that as a homeowner, if it was five years ago, ten years ago, thirty years ago, I would have the right to say no more people in Diamond Bar, lets shut the door. I guess that analogy would be like being on an ocean going liner. It is starting to sink and people get in life rafts and the ship is going down and I get in a life raft and it is half full and say listen no more people in this life raft, that is it, I am closing the door, I don't want it overcrowded. We are talking about a project and if I may speak as a developer it is going to add 120 homes to Diamond Bar. We are talking anywhere from 300 to 500 more people that want to live in this community. I have a feeling they have a right to. I have a feeling that people should be allowed to live in this community. My concern and I live, my home is on this project now, the 20 acre parcel. My concern is if it were going to have development that it be done in an orderly fashion, that we think about the environment, that we think about ecology and that we think about the area that we live in, it is our home. Two of my children have been born in Diamond Bar, they go to school, I I$ am raising a family here and it is important that if we are going to have development that it is done properly One of the reasons that I was very happy to be able to join forces, if you will with JCC, in the development stage is to be sure that it was done right. To be sure that we had something to be proud of, because I live there. We have spent a lot of time on this, I think the city's input has been invaluable. The project that we had here three years and the project that we have today is totally different. We are not talking about an area that can be parkland it is a private community. It is not an area that, unless people live in The Country and they are not going to be walking through. We are not talking about an apartment project like we have on Grand and I feel the same way as a lot of people have expressed. We are not talking about low rent housing, we are not talking about building a prison, we are talking about building beautiful homes and allowing a few more people to enjoy what we have been able to enjoy and will continue to enjoy. I hope the Council will weigh everything, will look at everything with an open mind and realize that we have with the city's input have tried very, very much to make this a project that we can all be proud of so that in three years from now in a meeting, somebody is not going to say, well look at the crummy project that people put together. Look at the apartment building that we don't like and we have been very, very keen to our community and I say I live here and we are proud of what we have done. And if I could have Lex Williman come up here, our engineer. Lex Williman Mayor, members of the City Council. I am the Planning Director with Hunsacker and Associates with an office at 10179 Hunkicans in San Diego. If I could just take a few minutes, there is a couple of exhibits that I would like to have put up that I would like to speak to. While Dave is putting together those, as staff has already indicated, and Judge Mills and Al LaPeter have gone through a little of the history. The reason we are involved in this project is the original projects as submitted in the County of LA were designed at that time to meet the County standards. The City subsequently incorporated and at the time they changed their standards. One of the most significant changes in the standard was the hillside grading ordinance. What we did, in our involvement, the City and some of the city staff and even some of the Planning Commissioners went to a seminar in Santa Monica on hillside grading, land form grading, put on by Morris Shore. We have worked with Morris Shore on other projects throughout the community. In Diamond Bar we were involved in Peremenes. We did the design. It is nice to see it actually on the ground. We can see what we did right and maybe we can do it a little better next time. We are also involved in a project called Talega in San Clemente. Five thousand acres of land form grading. We have the experience to do the job, not only from the conceptual, but to actually put it on the ground. Let me just take one minute and I will put up the Exhibits. Male Speaker What pages are those in the EIR show we can show them on the screen? Those exhibits you are showing the Council are going to be discussing? Lex Williman I don't know what page numbers they are. Male Speaker Can you flash that on which every one he is going to talk about on the screen so everybody hear as well as home can see it. No, can you get the book. Male Speaker Mr. Van Nort the operator has the top exhibit, which is the conceptual landscape plan and I will get the second exhibit for him shortly. Lex Williman Okay. The exhibit you have on the screen is the same exhibit here. And the reason I put up two exhibits is that I want to do a quick comparison of the projects that were originally submitted in the County of Los Angeles and what we have done today. Now these concepts were created in working with staff, listening to SETAC. There were four separate public hearings. We went to those hearings, we listened to what they had to say and we tried to incorporate in every incidence a mitigation, they created mitigation and we tried to go even 8 beyond what they asked for. The first exhibit, three projects, this is 47850, this is part of the Diamond Bar Associates project, this is Al LaPeter's project 47851 to the east. The old project what the other engineer was proposing was a number of crib walls in order to create pad areas, a number of crib walls along here intruded in some oaks along this area. There were crib walls proposed in here. There was also a number of very large fill slopes proposed here, here and here. 47851 again, crib walls at the entrance. They essentially graded this whole area flat which is absolutely contrary to the existing topography out there. Al LaPeters project essentially is a ridge. There really has not been a great deal of change, other than any slopes that we are creating, we are doing what is called land form grading and I will explain what that is in a moment. The idea behind hillside grading it to take a project and incorporate the project with the existing terrain, the existing environment. If you are gong to impact it, put it back in a way that looks natural, replicates the natural. How do you do that. There is two ways. There is the actual grading portion of it and there is the landscaping portion of it, hydrology. In this particular project what we have done very specifically, is along the edge here, where the old project proposed a large mass of fill and lots along the edge, we have eliminated the lots and created natural slope areas in there. What is called day lighted the cut. What that means is that you simply instead of creating a fill down the hill you day light a pad along so that the natural contours come up, the natural vegetation comes up to the pad. The other thing we have done is we have eliminated all crib walls in all three of the projects. There are no crib walls, retaining walls proposed within the project. Council I am sorry to interrupt your flow. But for members of the audience can you also identify on the large screen there, is it the light green area that you are indicating is going to be a natural area. Lex Williman Yes. This area here all these here, here and there and all of this is the natural areas. So essentially, all of the light green areas are to remain natural and will remain ungraded. 6 What we used with this project is contour grading techniques. And what does that mean, it is a nice sound, a nice term. What it means is that on slopes, (it is very hard to read but) that we are grading, we ungulate them both vertically and horizontally to recreate the natural. We don't do the hard engineered look. Manufactured slopes come in at a tangent, what that means is instead of having a hard angle, it rounds into it, so that it looks like it belonged there, it was part of the natural. Down drains, we hide those, instead of running them straight up and down, which is your typical engineering practice of the past, what we do is we hide those with burms. We also rock line them so that they look natural. Also included as a part of that is that you landscape it. The landscaping, especially your tress, follow drainage areas, typically. So what we do is we concentrate the trees and the replanting along these drainage wells. As a part of this project, there are a number of geotechnical problems associated with all three of the sites. 47850 has a layer of bentonite, I don't know if you are familiar with bentonite, but it is a clay, it is a very, very slippery clay when wet. There is also problems with out -of -slope bedding. What that means is that the slope of the rocks, are actually coming out of the existing natural slopes, what that creates is a situation where you have long term creek. We also have a situation where there are a number of slides that will have to be repaired, here and in this area right here. Now what we have done to mitigate the problems, geotechnical problems is we have proposed some very drastic measures. On 47850 we are actually proposing filling the slope. The reason for doing that is the bentonite. Bentonite has to be stabilized in order to develop the site. It can be done technically. What does that do to the canyon? It becomes a problem. SETAC was concerned about it. Well, in the original plans, it was hard engineered, we were going to have concrete line drainage channels. We felt it was inappropriate. What we propose in working with the landscape architect, is go in and recreate the habitat. Recreate the oak wood lands in that area. We can do that by undulating a natural stream through there, we can replant the trees at a 4 to 1 ratio. We are going to cluster both oaks and walnuts. Replant any walnuts at a 4 to 1 ratio along the natural slopes in here, create a natural stream in here and actually recreate repairing habitant through that area. In working and through the public hearing process and Planning Commission there was some concern that there are at the bottom of our project, right here, about 7 fairly large oak trees. We looked 10 at that very hard from a geotechnical standpoint, because our intent was to try and save as many oak trees as possible. What we did, we have come up with a solution where we can go ahead and buttress the backside of this and not, well actually we will do a shear key on the back side of this and not have to buttress this area in here, where we are proposing fill. We would actually leave it natural and save the oak trees. We are also proposing on all three tracts to create what we call Urban Pollution Basins. One of the big issues that SETAC was concerned about was drainage, run-off. From a couple of standpoints, one is with the development are we going to get an increase in run-off to Tonner Canyon, specifically, because of the impacts existing oak trees and habitat down below. We did a complete analysis and has been included in the EIR and what the analysis found was that through certain techniques you can mitigate the flows off the site in the developed state to those of the natural stage. You do that by creating detention basins. Actually what we found in doing the calculations, that there is almost no difference in the flows coming off the site after it is developed, as it now stands, from the natural state. The Urban Pollution Basins will function in two ways, it will act as a deciltation(Sp) basin for any run-off and erosion we get up stream. The other thing it will do is it will capture off-season run off. In other words, your nuisance water from irrigation, from washing your car, will keep that from going into the canyon. It actually will help mitigate an existing problem that you have right now. (I wanted you to put that exhibit back up. Thank you.) in here. You actually have flows coming off from the existing development here, to the west, now flow down this canyon. You are getting erosion at the bottom of the canyon. I have been down in the canyon. I have walked it, seen what is there. We did that as part of trying to prepare the best possible design for the city and answer the SETAC's concerns. There is water coming down there. There is a cistern at the head of the canyon that fills up and then flows out. What happens there is you are getting non -seasonal water coming down there. You are also getting erosion. We intend to correct that. So actually development of this project will help that particular situation. On the other projects, 47851 which is the project to the east we are proposing filling in the canyon here. SETAC did not find this canyon particularly important. There are not a great number of oaks and the oaks are of a size, basically of a scrowbow(Sp). Again, what we are planning on doing, is replacing those oaks and in the 11 area behind, I mean between 47851 and 487, there is a number of lots along here. What we are proposing to recreate along here again, is a riparian habitat. We are actually going to create a natural, not gunite(Sp), but a natural area back there. It will be planted with trees and shrubs that are native, that can live in there. The trees that we do replace will be from seeds, gathered from the area to recreate the habitat for the property. We are not going outside the area, so that the species there are native to the area. The street alignments that we have taken to get into the more of the hard physical facts of the site. The street alignment is what we tried to do is follow the natural contours. Street alignment tends to be a determining factor in how the site is going to be graded, what the thing is ultimately going to look like, and how it will conform to the existing landform. The previous project, for all intents and purposes, ignored the natural landforms, and that is not to criticize what they done. They did what was normally done at the time. I mean that was how you did it. Well, times have changed and we do it differently now. We look at the landforms, we try to conform to that. Where we do have to do grading, we try to do landform grading, recreate a natural look. We replant with natural species. If there is shrub oak out there we put the oak back. If there is chaparral out there, we put the chaparral back in conformance with the wishes of SETAC, what we normally do with our plans anyway. This is part of the natural process. One of the big things in terms of the hillside is that the city in the past, one of the biggest concerns that was expressed to us was the massing of units down hills. In other words, having a road, having a slope come down and having a house, having a three, four story element come down the hill. That was construed to us to be very negative. The staff did not want to see it, the city did not want to see it. It was one of the reasons for promoting and ultimately adopting the hillside management ordinance. In order to keep from doing that, what you have to do is create pads, which we have done. Sometimes that creates a little more grading, but what you get in the end is a project that looks natural, fits in. You can recreate the natural environment. You don't have the massing problems that you have with units coming down the hill. The other thing as a part of the project we are going to be retaining all of the trails. There are some trails out there. We may be relocating some of them down further towards Tonner Canyon, but the trails will be retained. The project has been designed to conform with the existing 12 country. In other words, the road sections will be the same as The Country. The same CC&R's will be adopted, hopefully, as a part of this project, once it is approved. In every way, it is and will be an extension of The Country as it now exists. As far as the EIR. SETAC, staff and Planning Commission ultimately decided that the alternative to was the best compromise. SETAC specifically said that they did not want to hold this project up. They were not against development, per se and as a result, they specifically incorporated mitigation proposals which we have included in this design. Which was alternative 2 in the EIR. The EIR has indicated that alternative 2 does mitigate all significant impacts to a level of insignificance with the mitigation as proposed. All of those mitigation are included in the conditions of approval for the project. The project alternative, which is alternative 2, does conform to the underlying zone. It is proposed that a density of .75 dwelling units per acre which compares favorably to The Country. We did an analysis of the adjacent Country tracts. They had an approximate density of .83. It is actually a little more dense. The average lot size was 1.3 acres. The minimum lot size essentially half an acre, 2,100 square feet. The minimum pad size, we were specifically told, that the project proponent wanted to have was 10,000. Well the average, I don't think there is one that is 10,000, they are all bigger than that. I think the average is about 16,000. The project, as designed, we believe and I think staff and Planning Commission obviously believes since they recommended 4-0, believe that this project conforms to the Hillside Management Ordinance. It does incorporate again all of the mitigation proposed by SETAC. What I would request, of the Council tonight is that they also find it in conformance, certify the EIR and recommend approval, or actually approve these three tracts. They are individual tracts and we would like to have them approved as individual tracts. I guess that will conclude by presentation. We have a full range of experts here to discuss any questions you may have, either being geotechnical, traffic or landscaping and they would be happy to answer any questions you may have. Madam Chair Questions from the Council. 13 Council One question, I am not sure it would be addressed to you, Lex or Judge Mills, but tract 47850 is listed as 73 acres, just under and in Mr. Mills presentation, he indicated that he initially purchased a 50 acre parcel and I was curious to know if. Well, it seem as if that particular parcel is contained as a part of tract 47850. Is that a correct assumption first of all? Lex Yes, but I wasn't involved at the time, I will have to defer to Judge Mills. Judge Mills That is accurate. It is contained within 47850 and if we could have the display of the tract back on the screen, I will show you the portion. This property came basically here as I recall, without reviewing that map, did not include any of this other area. Council Okay. So the westerly portion was the original 50 acres and it is on that, that you indicated there were two development plans for 35 and 42 lots. Judge Mills That is accurate. Council With the addition of the extra 20 acres, or 22 acres, you have done consolidated it and come up with a larger lot development plan? Jude Mills We came up with a plan that we thought flowed better and was more practical for the area and we were able to and did ask for an increase in the number of lots on that size due to the change and configuration and increase in acreage. 14 Council Can you share with us the date that you added that 22 acres, roughly? Jude Mills It seems to me that it has been going on forever, but I know that in April it will be 3 years since I met with Dr. LaPeter the first time and at the time that I met with him we had begun conversations about purchasing that land, not finalized them and one of the things is because I wanted to make certain that we were able to work out a cooperative arrangement with him, in terms of the reciprocal easements and so forth, before we purchased the property. So it is my belief, if you will not hold be too tightly to it, that we purchased the remainder proper approximately a year or 14 months after we, and about 18 months after we initially started looking at the property that was 47850, because we did have an option on that piece of property for a period of time, six moths or so and we exercised that and it was approximately a year later that we purchased the other property. Council Okay. I may have more questions about it later on. Jude Mills Thank you. I will be happy to try to answer them. Council I have one question, while you are there please, Judge Mills. The area you indicated on the map was pretty much the entire area that the lots are on currently, is that correct. Judge Mills Yes sir. Council So the additional acreage is that you added really does not encompass a portion that you 15 are using for the lots. Judge Mills That is correct. Madam Chair During the break, we saw many people coming up and looking at the table models. Would you take a second to explain them, so that if we have another break, people would understand what they are looking at. Lex The model closest to the Council, furthest from the audience, is the project area as it now exists in the natural state. The model that is closest to the audience is actually the project that was originally proposed. It is not the one that is before you tonight. This is the one that was submitted in the county and has since been modified and it appears to you as alternative 2 in the EIR. This model is not the alternative 2. The alternative 2 would be the exhibit that was up on the screen. They are distinctly different. That is the project as originally submitted in the County. The one that was unacceptable. Madam Chair Thank you. Any other questions. With that, I would like to open the public hearing and I have some forms from people who said that they would like to speak to this issue. If you would like to be called on I am going to go through the ones that have presented the slip first and then we will open it up for additional comments. I would like to ask Jack Bass of the Pomona Valley Audubon Society. Male Speaker Madam Mayor, just one question while Mr. Bass walks to the microphone. The public input that we are getting now, this is addressed even to the City Attorney or Planning Director. Is this public input that will be part of the EIR process, which will require response. lb Male Sneaker I would say yes. Male Speaker Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, as indicated by Mr. DeStephano, part of the discussion, I assume will be environmental issues and what not. In order to try to keep the record as clear as we can, particularly with respect to the responses, any specific questions or issues that a member of the public might have about an environmental issue, specify as clearly as possible and then either at the end of this evening, or at the end of the hearing, whenever that may occur, at that point, the staff or the proponent would have the opportunity to respond specifically to those. Because often times it takes some digging through 400 pages of the EIR in order to respond to a particular question and it is difficult to simply get involved with a speaker at that time. Madam Chair Go ahead sir. If you would state your name and address please. Jack Bass My name is Jack Bass. My residence 13232 12th Street in Chino. I am a consultant of National Audubon and I am responding to a call from our local chapter, known as Pomona Valley Audubon Society. Our members express concern that their own City Council here in Diamond Bar would be able to protect the natural resources and especially SEA 15, ...County. So it is understandable that our local chapter got calls to respond to the updated EIR. Because our members, as you can imagine, are not generally aware of SECWA matters and so after our preliminary staff review, by our legal staff, which as you can imagine is quite trained in addressing the validity of EIR and SECWA matters. I offer initial response, was sent to your office and asked that it be entered into the administrative record. I want to briefly comment on some of the matters that were raised before I summarize for the public and for you. My main substance, first, a lot of talk was about 17 recreating natural slopes and there is no factual basis in the National Audubon's opinion that the natural slopes can be recreated. Example, the EIR does not mention it, but there is a rapidly declining rare species called arboreal salamander that is exclusively found in the 700 plus natural black walnuts to be reduced. So, once you kill those salamander, as it will be, by extensive grading and filling proposed, how can you recreate them in the under story another natural supposedly structures suggested by the project proponent. Even though they hold out to the general public that the manufactured slope and especially the open space by prairie and channel between the middle parcel and the easterly parcel can be recreated due to the closeness of the proposed residences, obviously things like the deer and mammals that are normally shy are not going to avail themselves of that open space and the very sensitive nesting rafters that normally would nest in the trees destroyed will not avail themselves of recreated reforestation. The main subject of my talk, I want to practice by saying that the local chapter representing your city members, your city residences applauded your new tree preservation ordinance which you know as you zoning ordinance amendment 91.5 which was approved by the Planning Commission. It is the recommendation of National Audubon and our local chapter that you pass upon this ordinance prior to the approval of this project and any other project to make sure that the maximum protection is afforded this collection of natural woodlands, that are so precious and rare and found only in a few selected counties in Southern California. Audubon has particular objections to the failure of the proponent to providing bonding to assure that the reforested trees species will be watered beyond year two when the bonding expires according to the EIR. Proponent leaves the watering of beyond year two of the reforesting areas to the homeowners and Audubon questions whether the homeowners can be trusted to water and sustain the woodlands, which belong to all of us beyond year 2. Nothing is said in the EIR quite in conflict with Fish and Game Regulations in Migratory Bird Treaty Act, regarding the migratory birds that are going to nest, arc nesting on the ground or very near the ground and all these areas subject to cut and fill. In particular, US Code 16, Title 16, Conservation, Section 703 protects migratory nesting birds in those situations and there have been no mitigation proposed in your updated EIR to protect them so that proponent and consultant and these agencies can expect to be in violation of that federal protection, as well as corresponding Fish and Game Codes, if they do not mitigate the grading components of alternative 2, if approved by the City Council. In our legal staffs professional opinion, it is very muddled as to what the superior alternative is. Even though SETAC goes out of its way to identify the 2/3 reduced density on the track 47850. In our opinion, consultant tends to muddle it and hide the fact that what SETAC recommends is the SECWA required environmentally superior alternative. It muddles it in this way, it says that because the geological constraints, which consultant just spoke to you about, they would not be able to do that in a environmentally sensitive project, unless they conducted a massive grading. What they failed to show and what is required under SECWA is why they could not go ahead with the 2/3 reduction on that tract and demonstrate on why they could not, i.e. because it is feasibly or monetary infeasible to do it, that is even extensive grading would be required to mitigate the slippage and non-severity of the underlying strata, they are obligated under our state law to tell you why monetarily they are not able to go ahead with that environmentally superior project. Another major flaw our legal staff pointed out to us, is that the apparent environmentally sensitive alternative, the one agreed upon by SETAC and the one I just spoke about, the 2/3 reduction on the westerly parcel, the EIR does not specifically and clearly tell the public why they are rejecting that and going for alternative 2, which they are calling design alternative. SEC requires specifically, that the public has to be told very specifically why the environmentally superior project is rejected, so the public has an opportunity through your SECWA process to adequately respond to that and also the third flaw that our legal staff found was that there is such a lacking of environmental consequences and such an omission of discussed and planted animal species that you the decision makers are not given enough information to tell the environmental consequences of your action if you go ahead and approve alternative 2. That particular case in Appellate Court was decided by our sister chapter, San Bernardino Valley Audubon Society, that is why I am so knowledgeable about it and the lawyers are so knowledgeable about it. And I want to just summarize, try to give you a magnitude, an ideal of the magnitude of what has been omitted regarding plants and animals and I will quickly conclude. They have not Since they I have told you what migratory birds are going to be killed during the grading process, they have not told you the cougars are in (or what is known as the mountain lions) Tonner 19 Canyon and not only do the SECWA guidelines require wildlife movement studies, that is actually tracking animals to see what projects possible impacts may be, but they are also required by a legal case determined by another one of our sister chapters, Marble Mt. Audubon Society v. R? which basically told us that the project proponent, basically in this case cause he is admitting the wildlife studies, cannot arbitrarily assume that project will interfere in or block wildlife studies. They are obligated in two fashions to do a study which they have not done and especially National Audubon and the local chapter are especially and extremely troubled by the failure to address the cougar wildlife movement. These consultants could have picked up the phone and in five minutes called the Regional Office of Fish and Game to find out what is happening with the cougars, because there happens to be an ongoing study right now with about 2/3 of completion, which could have easily told them. We are especially extremely troubled because we have a saying in the Laura v. County of Orange case which was recently decided, V. Davidson, the consultants and the proposed developer were all in part held liable, each one of them in prorata fashion for a cougar attack on a young girl and part of that case was decided because there was an inadequate study of the project which was basically a park in the EIR studies. Liability factor is not only required now by the courts, these consultants were obligated to tell you, the decision makers, about cougar movement, so that you would have an idea about what safety factors your residences are up against when you place a project like this virtually on the edge of Tonner Canyon, the migratory path of cougars which is known by the Fish and Game. In summary, we agree with SETAC's feelings that the 2/3 reduction of the westerly proposal is environmentally best and environmentally sound way to go if you, the decision makers, decide you want a balance between the land owners right to build on their property, weighed against the environmental factors. If we are not considering the land owners right then we would side with SETAC's original proposal and that is a no alternative and certainly at this time, National Audubon and Pomona Valley Audubon is recommending a no project alternative until you send us back to rectify these glaring SECWA violations and I believe that, or my final remarks is you should send this to (I don't know if you have a SECWA lawyer or not) quickly test out to see the actual basis for what I have said and the legal cases I have cited are all in the reference letter that I sent you. I don't know if you KC have that at this time. But that is our decision both the National and Pomona Valley Audubon Chapter. Thank you. Madam Chair Thank you Mr. Bass, your testimony and the written correspondence will be entered into the record and I know the issues raised will be addressed. Next, I would like to call on Grace Lynn. Grace Lynn I am Grace Lynn Tomino at 01 Steeple Chase, Diamond Bar. I would like to address three points cause of this project. As a residence of The Country, we are the ones who are indeed impacted by this project. Number one is the Urban Pollution Catch Basin has to be build in order to catch the rain and irrigation water and each year it has to be cleaned and accumulated waste has to be removed and shipped away and the costs is unknown to the homeowners of The Country. Eventually, they are the one who has to share the burden and the cost. But I don't know if the residents in The Country are aware of this point and number two, there are three more parcels located adjacent to this property and they may follow the steps in the future and build another 100 homes. So, we are looking at this project, but you have to foresee into the future. We will have more houses, it is going to take this as a symbol and number 3 is the traffic load for the gate. One hundred twenty houses means an increase of 20% traffic load for the Diamond Bar gate, if they take this gate and that means the increase is 40% instead of 20, because we have two gates now in The Country. And then if there is another parcel developed in the future, then you could foresee the traffic load for this gate. In case of an emergency evacuation this will be a great constraint and dangerous for the people living inside the gate, so I wish these three points could be addressed more clearly and then the ambiguity solved more properly. Thank you. Madam Chair Thank you Ms. Lynn. Ray Dougherty. 21 Ray Dougherty My name is Ray Dougherty and I live at 3010 Las Brisas Condominium project. We have just heard The Country explaining that they don't want their roads or their gates used for passage way from this project and I would like to voice my objection as a homeowner in the Las Brisas project for any use of our private road, we bought into this community with a private gate type community and it is our understanding that some thought is being given to using this road as a way of getting from the project down to Diamond Bar Blvd. and I would like to voice objection for the use of the road for that purpose. Madam Chair Thank you. William Gross William Gross I would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight, I know it was heart warming to hear the developer talk about the concern about the.. Madam Chair Mr. Gross would you state your name and address please. William Gross Okay. William Gross, 21637 High Bluff Road, in Diamond Bar. It was heart warming to hear about the need from our people to be able to move into Diamond Bar. I think the developer took..., at the same time it helped us sell some of these 500 homes for sale. Currently, there are plenty people in Diamond Bar who would like to help sell their house. I also think when the developer's consultant talks about his concern for the environment and land from grading, I think it is pretty clear that the National Audubon Society, that it is a joke to say that they are going to recreate the natural environment that has become the Country of Diamond Bar. We moved here only five years ago and there are many hills that are no longer available. The hills on Grand Avenue and the 60 freeway are about to developed, that process is outside the City of Diamond Bar and this is one of the last largest areas you control, at City Council people, on top of which it would be the only approval of 22 encroachment in a significantly environmental area in 12 years. Even during Pete Schabarum's reign, I doubt you would see a project this size being approved, it was impossible. The fact of the matter is this gets down to two things, money and politics. The only reason why the developer is pushing for this alternative, after the SETAC clearly recommended no project and clearly recommended 2/3 reduction of the west side, is because they want to make more money. I am hear to speak about the process. I have been involved, along with Judge Mills, for the last 3 or 5 months, a portion of the process to get here tonight. I would like to speak to four major issues. First, the notice process. I got the and to correct the City Manager, I went to Diamond Bar City Hall personally with the City Clerk and asked for copies of the mailing list that the developer prepared to notice the people in the surrounding homes. The City Clerk informed me and signed the paper saying that was prepared by the developer for use of the City, not by the City. It was not prepared according to the secretary in the City Hall, but it was provided by the developer and represented as being accurate. I personally, at my own cost, mailed out the 155 labels that I got off that list. You know the 155, 33 were returned over a 30 day period, no forwarding address about 20%. Stands to reason, personally I am on that list, because I purchased my home two years ago and I wasn't on the list. In fact the previous two homeowners appeared. It stands to reason that other people besides the 30 that were returned simply threw it away as not being the current homeowner. It also stands to reason that some people like me got lost in between the Pennysaver and all the other junk mail we get as residents in Diamond Bar. So, less than half of the people in the area were given the opportunity by mail by the city to get notice. In direct contrast to the City Manager, that was the direct words from the secretary and I had her sign the mailing list when I got it and mailed it at my personal expense. The second thing I would like to talk about is the concern I have as a citizen that in order to feed the project we have to vote with our ... citizens in Diamond Bar. It is clear to me in six months that there is no reason at all to support this project from a political point of view. What I would say is, that as City Council people it is your responsibility and your obligation when you took office to understand the sentiment of your citizenry and I respect the right of the homeowner to build or land owner to build his property. I don't think anyone would question building 40 homes. The issue is building 23 120 in a significantly environmental area and by an easement road that goes through one of our backyards. I would also say one reason people don't come to these meetings is frustration. The first Planning Commission meeting that I went to lasted to midnight. We listened to four hours about land form grading and I respect the fact that they would discuss it into detail, I don't mean to put it down, but the process does not lend itself to people who have families or have jobs at night to come to a City Planning meeting. I would also like to know the reason why there are less people here tonight than otherwise would be, is the confusion of this particular process. First of all, the Planning Commission meetings have been a disaster. Even the developer will share with you some frustration... End of this side of tape. 23 Meeting of 1/21/92 Tape Continued First minute of the tape is hard to transcribe. And I think the City Council would remember that the reason why this was not attended two weeks ago was because of error, but when people make changes in plans like I did to be here two weeks ago, then it is changed, I am committed enough to be here, I would suspect other people who would have gladly had the opportunity to attend and speak their peace at that time. The press in direct to contrast to what the City Manager says, is not notified of meetings we have. In fact, at the City Planning Commission, Mr. DeStephano specifically said that we do not close our gates to the Highlander, in reference to my concern that the Highlander was putting the wrong date forward rather than the correct date at the Planning Commission meetings. So, it is not a fact that the city supports local publicity at meeting like this. I would also say that it very frustrating to the citizenry when the local press is told by City Planning Commissioners before they approve the project that "it is approved." In the headline of the Diamond Bar Highland that week was "Developer gets the go ahead in the project", which was not true as of that time. It was merely back room discussion by Planning Commission members. It was not their formal approval. The other reason I would say people don't come to these meetings is the frustration I have endured. I spoke to a couple of members that were here tonight, who were also at Planning Commission meetings. Who went to the first one and were surprised to find out this was still going on. Their sense from the Planning Commissioners in their discussion and their sense from the testimony received was that there was no way this project could go forward, yet still here we are tonight. A lot of people have been frustrated. I have not and I will be here for every meeting this project has. But is clear to say that we have a large turnout tonight. At the first City Council meeting I saw on t.v. you were all discussing we need to get more people here tonight. I hope the answer isn't to propose lousy projects. But, I would say that we do have a tremendous turnout of people who are concerned tonight and the late hour has still left many people here interested. The third major point I would discuss is the planning process. You need to know as City Council's members that your Planning Commission is 24 not working. Now, I was embarrassed as a citizen, I don't want to say for you, because I could understand the logistics and I can understand the you are volunteers and I can understand that you are committed. I was embarrassed to find out that the apartment project that is going up is without knowledge of our City Council. That is the beginning of the problems that go on currently. I can tell you that personally I went to the first Planning Commission meeting that I was aware of in September, and I got up and said I never received notice you have the wrong address and I still never received notice for the second hearing. And I specifically spoke to Mr. DeStephano and gave him my address. I specifically spoke in the microphone and gave my address. There has been no attempt to help people discuss this project at all. I would also say that our city planning department as in previous testimony by the developer, has spent hundreds if not thousands of hours developing this project, and my question is in an era of tight budgets, in an era of you cutting back on city services, who is giving you the authority to spend the money, or allow to be spent without your authority, hundreds or thousands or dollars that has no public support and we will get to that later. That is money, time and effort that nobody here is asking to be spent. The other thing I would say about access is the last City Planning Commission meeting where it was brought up, we finally did have a large turn out of people and our City Attorney, his input that night was, well it is not a public hearing so we are not allowed to let people speak tonight and here we have on one hand city representatives saying they want to solicit input and on the other hand we have city paid employees, theoretically employed by our tax dollars, telling us when we had 100 people here that we didn't have the right to speak that night, and I think that is wrong. Actually, the Planning Commission did over his objection, allow us to speak and I want to thank, I think it was Clair Harmony was the one who personally allowed that to happen. Finally, point three of the Planning process I would say it is disgraceful to think that the Planning Commission was here about a month ago and vehemently threw out that easement and if they were told, I think and this is just my opinion and they are welcome to discuss it, that the project could only be approved with the easement, I believe they would have voted it down. That is how tremendous the objections were that night. What we are calling now an easement, but really is, I believe a conspiracy or a project or behind the rooms deal, with our Planning 25 Department to help get a project with golf courses in Tonner Canyon and the ultimate destruction of the entire Tonner Canyon area. It is ridiculous to think that in the Planning Commission they would spend hours discussing two or three walnut trees, in the top left hand corner, to find out that our Planning Department's real intent is to we don't mind killing those trees, move this house to the right, we are going to put a road down the side of your project, and by the way you are going to pay for it and the other residents are going to pay for it. This Planning Commission has been completely out of control on the subject, there is a hidden agenda, I am not sure what it is, I know what I think it smells like, but I am not sure what it is. But clearly we have a Planning Department that has some hidden agenda and you are not being privileged to that or you are part of it. The fourth and final major point I would have is that the public is against this project. Your citizenry, the people who voted you in are clearly against this project. First I would say based on the attendance this evening, anybody here that is in support of the project is welcome to come up and speak. There has not been a long line to support the project, of people who are not specifically, financially benefiting from this project. Second, I would like to present to you that I have 250 signatures signed on a Petition against this project from people in Diamond Bar. I will be presenting it tomorrow to the city because I finally just got them at this late hour and I would like to xerox them and have the names and addresses and phone numbers, but 250 of your citizens have already... I am not a paid politician, 1 have a business to run. A lot of volunteers have other things to do, and spent the time to get 250 names on a Petition against this project. The third thing I would say is the General Plan and I think this is what binds you as a City Council today. I have been presented with the planning of zoning law and as its regards are opportunity as a city, to implement a General Plan. The requirement is the City we have a General Plan adopted within 30 months and I know you are well aware of it. I know you are well aware of the process. Part of the specifics that also say that the city is not subject to the requirements if all the following requirements are met, meaning it is not subject to the city proposed General Plan if there is a reasonable probability that the land used or action proposed will be consistent with the General Plan proposal being considered or studied, or which will be studied within a reasonable time period. It also says that only if there is little or no probability of substantial detriment to 26 or interference with the future adopt a General Plan if the proposed use for actions ultimately inconsistent with the plan. What that says is that you have to consider where the General Plan is headed. Now you have representatives here tonight and I know personally from representatives of the meetings that the General Plan of this project proposed for Diamond Bar, our General Plan, not Pete Schabarums, is one house per 2.5 acres. That is what is in the proposed General Plan if you read it today for this contract. That is what the General Plan Committee as recently as last week voted specifically to improve. In order for you to improve this project, you have to believe that the General Plan will be amended to go back to Pete Schabarum's era of one house per one acre, instead of the current Diamond Bar proposed General Plan, one house per 2.5 acres. That is the ... of Diamond Bar speaking to you. We would support, on that standard then about 40 to 50 homes. Not 120 and if that means the developer can't make money now than that is what it means. It means you have paid for the land and that is just what it means, it is considered bad business. The last point I would make is the SETAC report does not say that they support this project. It says 1) we support no project. Now 2) if they had to support one we would support one down -sizing the left portion by 2/3. Now 3) if you are not willing to do that we will consider approving a project with these guidelines. It does not at all, the SETAC report, as ... EIR report, does not support this project. It is nothing but slick talk otherwise. In conclusion, I would say the reason why we became a city and I look at the four of you and the reason why you all campaigned for Cityhood was for local control. This project needs Peter Schabarum's criteria. One house to one acre in that area is exactly what Peter Schabarum would have been able to support and would have happened before we were city. It would have gone through LA County process and probably would have been approved. The reason why each of you supported Cityhood, the reason why each of you were elected, one way or another, is because you supported local control here in Diamond Bar. Your citizens do not support this project or anything close to that and I hope you will keep in touch with your citizens' discretion and vote against the project. Thank you. Madam Chair Thank you Mr. Gross. At this time I want to announce we are going to take a five minute 27 break. I have two more people who want to speak. We do plan to probably continue the meeting to next Thursday night at 7:00. If you can not come back next week, please take the microphone early so we can be sure that we hear your testimony. Also, my comment that the Audubon's society written comments are acceptable and if you need to go home and you are watching t.v. and you want to write a letter to the City Council this week, those comments would be included in the EIR also. So we are going to take a five minute break at this time. .............. Male Speaker (no introduction) The black walnuts and oaks. The blacks are not marked for size, but they are a dominant species so therefore, they grow very densely and in some places you can't even see through the woods. This type of development is inconsistent with good land utilization. The black walnuts are the dominant tree, please look up the term dominant pertaining to growth of trees. There is also one entire acre of purple sage to also be removed. Zane Grey would roll over in his grave. I submitted a tree ordinance on June 1, 1989 with the desire to have a means of protecting and preserving this city's areas of living trees, plants and animals. By March 20, 1990, nothing had been done and upon calling our City Manager, Mr. Van Nort was advised to write him a letter regarding this problem, I did and he responded immediately with a directive to the Planning Department to implement this in a timely manner, of which I am most grateful and I am so grateful. Thank you again. By October it was still in the basket and several calls later to the planners, was told that there were more important items to take care of first. It finally surfaced in December, 1991 and again on January 13, 1992, but is still not before this body. Mr. Van Nort please give it a boot in the roots and get that thing in here. I would hope that this is not a deliberate stall of the tree ordinance so massive projects could go freely ahead. I do not know. There is no concrete guideline for replacement, sizes and responsibilities of maintenance even if the developer does replant. Also, irresponsible planning for water run-off from roofs, streets, patios in any area permanently covering the ground by utilizing by so called Catch Sumps, thereby percolating into subterranean water systems and carrying street pollutants, oil, gas and other known substances, which ultimately will destroy the ground water. Every overflow will drain into Tonner Canyon destroying vegetation and wildlife and as much as this is the head waters, will find its way to the City of Brea. Would there be any losses? Could be SEPAC 15 is cautioned against this procedure, primarily due to the sensitive nature of this Tonner Canyon waterway and all it encompasses. Only 72 hours were spent for an EIR study for the entire 160 acres. I have been in this canyon, in this area many times and every time I go in there I discover something I have never seen before. Only 72 hours were spent for the entire 160 acres of which to build 120 homes to 6,000 to 10,000 square feet, will produce an area approximately 25 to 30 acres resulting in massive amounts of water gorging down Tonner Canyon completely unchecked, possibly measured in the acre foot range. How about destruction? How about children? The ecological balance of this area is so sensitive that it is impossible to define. The developer has indicated that he would replant with nursery stock. This may work due to the hormones created by the original black walnut trees. As an example, nothing will grow around a black walnut tree, except one plant. I have only found this one plant in that area it is called a hairy fridge pod. It is a beautiful little plant about 4 feet high and it grows during the period that the black walnut is dormant and they occupy the same site, yet they are 180 degrees apart in seasons. I think it is incredible. What size pods are they going to use 2 inches, 6 inches, nothing has been specified. This project is money versus environment and neither have ever been compatible. So, where do we the citizens fit in. We are loosing our country atmosphere that for many of us remember had moved her for in the first place and that is why we voted for Cityhood so we could control our destiny, heritage and a way of life. Have we the citizens lost our city? Three reliable sources have informed me of yet another area to also be destroyed. Our most beautiful sandstone canyon by a group known as RMP. Citizens, wake up. An area a day. So now I am having difficulty determining who is the frying pan. Fryer or stove. The citizens, City Council or the developers. Our first earth day, many of the city officers, and citizens collectively planted 500 trees, what a great day. Of course, we were a city then and what happened to the theme, trails and parks. A project of this magnitude would take two to three years to plan but only a few minutes to make the citizens angry should be brought before the citizens for a more compatible conclusion early, so they could decide. The owner/developer indicated to the Planning Commission that they would take the city 29 to the Supreme Court if necessary, to do as they please. Are these people holding a shot gun to our city government and the citizens? The citizens are the city. I hope our administration is also. The Supreme Court interprets the constitution but the people make it. This is our brass plate don't loose it. Please listen to an interpretation of our Ninth Amendment by Thomas Jefferson. It is called the right to protection against laws of common heritage. To wit, against open access, exploitation and depletion of common property, resources or species against deterioration of an asset of the common heritage as a result of modification of natural condition through wilful design and neglect, against loss of any part of the common heritage which transcends the borders of nations, space and the universe against human transformation of the environment that may cause a loss of wilderness and primeval nature. It is essential for an individual to retain contact with his biological origins and to maintain a sense of continuity with the creation that endowed him with his own inalienable rights. These shall not be denied by government. Thank you. Madam Chair Thank you Mr. Chad. I would like to ask that if we can to let address the EIR and the impact development. There are many people who want to speak and I would like to give everyone an opportunity. Tom Van Winkle. Tom Van Winkle Good evening Mayor Pro tem, ... Council, Audience. There has been some good people speak tonight and it is kind of nice seeing a lot of turn out to, isn't it? I would like to talk a little bit about some things that overall concern each and everyone of us. I would like to kind of give some definitions. I have heard a lot of people ask, what is the General Plan. Well, the General Plan is the constitution of the city, if you will. The rule book. It is a tool for city officials in making their decision on land use, zoning, density, things like that. It is the voice of the people. I have also been asked what is GPAC, a lot of people don't know. Well, GPAC is the General Plan Advisory Committee. It consists of city staff and residents from our own Diamond Bar. They are there to give input as a team working together to make this document, the General Plan. The state of California gives 30 months to complete 30 this document called the General Plan. We have been a city since April, 1989, 33 months, we are three months overdue. I realize we are in an extension period, but we are still three months over due. I went to the GPAC meeting on Saturday, the 18th of this month and I found out some good things and I found out some bad things that need to known. We are about 1/3 through that book and at the present rate we have been going, it will be March, April at the best, that they will have it ready for public hearings and approval. Public hearings and approval could take us right into the end of summer or even fall. I ask you what is the rush. How can you guys pass these major developments, the issues like the one hear tonight, right over hill on this hillside, without considering the will of the people. Or having a complete General Plan to help you make decisions? On Saturday at the GPAC meeting, there were a lot of things that were done. A golf course that was in jeopardy did get removed from the book, one of the areas that was up to be rezoned, residential areas, was removed from the book, we never could find out why it was there to begin with, but it was there. And another issue that was discussed was this one tonight, hillside density and they did reconfirm that they want hillsides to be one unit per 2.5 acres. They also talked about multiple family dwellings being cut down from 40 to 16 units per acre. I think it is pretty clear that the people of Diamond Bar want open spaces, low density, country living. I think they are screaming their little heads off trying to tell you that. I would like to give this paper to the City Attorney. It kind of outlines the planning and zoning laws, it is government code and there are some things in there, particularly, Section 5360 that might change his opinion on what he just said. I realize that you don't have to go by the General Plan until it is approved. But there are provisions in there that if you haven't done everything possible in a timely manner, that there are things that come back on you. I am wondering if a timely manner is three months over due. I am wondering why this is. A City Council person is an elected official of the city. They should listen to the people and they should take appropriate steps to do the will of the people. Their purpose is to represent the 53,000 plus people of Diamond Bar. On the other hand, a politician listens only to themselves. They only do what is necessary to get more power or a better position so that they can move on to Congress or State Assembly and my question is tonight are you the Diamond Bar City Council or are you a politician? I would like to see all these projects, 31 simply placed on hold until we get a General Plan that can help you make the proper decision. The will of the people. I would like to hear discussion on this tonight and I would like to see a Diamond Bar City Council take appropriate action. Thank you very much. Madam Chair Mr. Larry Booth Larry Booth Larry Booth, 3839 Castle Rock Road, the old suburban tract, first houses there. Matter of fact, the very first house in Diamond Bar from Brea, backing up to Brea Canyon Road. My family moved to Anaheim in 1946. I watched it grow. I moved out here to Diamond Bar because of the wide open spaces, the wildlife that is still there. I raised a son here. I became a widower here. I don't want anymore development. I have worked for the City of Anaheim and watched it destroyed. Where all the hills and the wildlife have disappeared. There are no more oaks there. I have lots of oaks right outside my house where I am at right now, that I can enjoy looking at every day. I was in a battle of this nature. I currently own 70 acres down in Orange County. I tried to fight a radio station. I never got any notification, as I never got any notification of this. And there was six of land owners that didn't get notification and we hired attorneys to fight. But all that seem to come out of it was mitigation. That favorite word mitigation. So the project can go on. That is all mitigation means. It is another way of getting the damn development in. Madam Chair I think somebody hit a ... or something if you will hold on just a second. Mr. Booth From what I heard, I like SETAC's original response, number 1, no development. I have heard a lot of people here talk, I think it is a good idea to have our General Plan in place before we make decisions on projects like this. We can't afford to let this project go in because this is the beginning of another Anaheim. It is the beginning of Tonner Canyon 32 and the loss of Tonner Canyon. I have walked over there, the wildlife and everything else. It is just fantastic to walk through there. I think that Diamond Bar should think about annexing all the way to the County line. Because Orange County certainly has different ideas, than I think what the residents in Diamond Bar have for Tonner Canyon. A multi- lane roadway going through there and everything else. I say we stay with what SETAC said, number one, no project. Thank you. Madam Chair Thank you Max Maxwell. Max Maxwell Max Maxwell, 3211 Bent Twig Lane, Diamond Bar. A lot has been said tonight and I still don't see any change yet. I went to all the Planning Commission meetings, I stood up there I have talked to the people. The first meeting I asked for notification, I asked for why you are ram-roding this job through, which means this development. I got no response. The people that spoke, Mr. Chad, Mr. Gross and others, the people sitting on that side of the table kept their mouths shut. They did not even respond to what was being said at this meeting. It was like close your eyes we don't to listen to you. There is no reason for this hearing tonight, there is absolutely none. It is totally unnecessary. The reason is the Planning Commission didn't do their job. They have not listened to the city, the people. I really don't like our City Attorney and City Manager, over there, commenting on everything someone else says and tells we are going only by the law. I think you have problems if you use that attitude, because there are a lot of people out here in this audience that are ready to pursue the law against the city and other people in this development. I heard the gentlemen speak about the threat of whose doing who, whose doing what. You will get a law suit. You have already churned up a whole bunch of them. I say complete the General Plan, set the rules. Let us all know what you are going to do. Adopt this acreage 2.5. Get Don Chad's through, the ordinance. I have seen his letters. I know exactly the stall tactics that have been used. I think if that think get passed after this thing it is no good. It is for this project, and he has tried two years, as long as you people have 33 formed a city and have been running it. What is the problem folks? Is there more money in here or is there something else going on that we don't know about? I am having a little problem with that, I will be honest with you. I want to make a statement here about the easement that was supposedly flashed over real quick. That was a big issue at the last meeting. I understand, if 1 am correct, and I want to make sure it is on the record, and I want it publicized that this easement is not going to happen and that no road will be there, but I have a real problem with that. I live where I see the surveyors flags stuck out there. Why did the developer have to pay $6,000. Dr. Buffington showed me himself where he was required to pay for an easement analysis, I am sorry, the road analysis as a fire route for land he don't even own. He showed me that piece of paper. What is going on. I heard the City Manager, I am sorry the engineer, whoever it was, and I have expressed my opinion before you can't get any information out of the city. He said that this road would come up and down the hill, somewhere along the statement along here, that the developer is going to pay for half of it. I knew who was going to pay the other half and the other side down, but he said it would come out through Sugar Pine. As you know, there is 91 condos in there, private -gated secluded area and nothing has been said really about that. I hope that is written out and defined as being out, and that there never will, ever be an easement or road through a condo, between a condo, between The Country and Diamond Ridge, or down the back side. You know this gentlemen that has presented this proposal tonight to build this Diamond Bar Associates project, they have a very nice set up there, as far as homes. The only problem I am really seeing is that they are tearing the country side apart and they got too many darn homes there. They have gotten around to the people before this happened, two years ago. If you have to, I will bring in their names and I will show you where he has told them, now it is not written on paper, but they told us there is nothing but a park going over there and about 20 homes. What made the change from then to there and where did this easement come from, from the City. He don't even want that easement. I don't want it. It is in my backyard. I paid a good sum for my view, my privilege of living in a quiet area. So, I want to make one statement here, I will read off my paper so I won't get it all messed up. I would still like to continue, If I may. It is about half a page. For the record, I want you to send this back to City Planning Commission. You tell them they 34 better listen to the people before it comes back to your people. I want it written in this proposal, contract, or whatever you call it, whatever it takes. I am going to ask you to be quite, I am having a little trouble thinking right here. That there never will be a road or an easement from Diamond Bar to Tonner Canyon, up and down the hill, approximately a mile and a half and that the gate and the end of Hawk Wood be defined as permanently closed, except for fire access, which already exists up there, you don't need another one down the hill. I believe if you look at the plans, as the road is designed at the end down there, there is better access than we got right now. I think that is it. I do have one statement about the traffic. No one has mentioned it tonight. In one of the EIR, on page 35-2 with the bottom paragraph, it says that existing street network, regional access road race. I will try to read some of that, it is a little confusing because they are talking about freeway access and so forth. But, they are talking about the vehicles 170,000 per day [update traffic volume from the 1987 publication of California State Highways]. Who are we kidding there folks. We opened up Grand Avenue at both ends. We have had improvement and development in our city and Chino Hills and all that out there is drawing tons of cars right down Diamond Bar Boulevard. No one can get out of their houses. No one can do their development or get in and out of their development, and you are asking to pass this thing, this is about the EIR, it is written right here. Without having an up -dated traffic report, this is not very proper. Please check your facts and listen to what the people have to say tonight and most will probably be back next week to observe that you people follow the rules. Thank you. Madam Chair Samuel Cho Samuel Cho Good evening members my name is Samuel Cho. I live at 3208 Hawk Wood Road. Only six ... down from tract number 47850. This is my first time to attend public hearing because I have been informed by my neighbors, but I didn't get a notice for this public hearing. Do we have a General Plan for the city of Diamond Bar which adopted by you or the City? 35 You don't. Okay. Why do we have to rush to get approval of this project without guidelines or bible, whatever you say. As far as I know it is The Country. I was so interested about The Country, because this is a very nice neighbors and it was said very nicely because it was developed by the top of the reach up to each mountain or whatever you call it, a hill. I saw this plan tonight. There are three different tracts getting involved with this project. Two tracts have been developed by the Diamond Bar Associate and other Walnut which is developing 15 custom lot by Dr. LaPeter. I really appreciate what the Dr. LaPeter's proposal because it looks to me that it was part of The Country. But the other two lots which is developed by the Diamond Bar Associate, there is not The Country. This is a tract home lot. The way I look. My knowledge in The Country it was developed average one lot per 2.5 acres. But as I see today, it is one lot per 1.28 acres, which is almost half. I heard about tonight there is a grading involved with this project. As you see, is this topographic model proposed this one. As the other gentlemen said this is not the present proposal. But it looks to me that the 57 lots is the same as the other one. It involves a 1.89 million cubic yard grading, if I heard correctly 1.89 million cubic yards. Do you know how much volume it is? Anyone know in the audience about this volume? This volume is 189,000 truck loads. Each truck load carry almost 10 yards. There is a couple ...has been gone ...to this plan. Mitigation and justification... you could do it. Okay we could build a mountain, we could build a building, all that, the way I look at it during the break time I saw that the easiest thing... For instance, 47850 tract there is a two ridge of the mountain there. But there is no mountain, just flat. I would like if it is possible to stop. So the conceptional landscaping plan on screen, if it is possible could we see the grading plan on screen. Okay this is the conceptional landscaping plan, we have seen this by the planner and I would like to see the proposal, whatever the final grading plan, which have two different color, which I think is three different color. One is existing, one is a cut and one is fill. That was the conceptional landscaping plan. No there is, if you see your report it shows the cut and fill grading plan. Madam Chair Possibly 5.6. or 3.16. Here. 36 Samuel Cho I am sorry this is the slope. Here we are. What I am trying to point out on tract on left hand side is almost cut and fill entire lot, almost 90% which is major grading. When we talk about major grading do we have to discuss about ...and trees, birds and mountain lions. We talk about this but when we talk about this major grading of 80% of the entire lot, the birds, trees, shrubs, streams, whatever, you name it, this is going to, we can not talk about it because it is gone already. When we get the grading permit from Coastal Line Grading permit, they do not allow more than 6 feet, the way I understand that. But this is more 20 feet or some where in the valleys maybe 30 feet. This is not grading plan this an entire mountain removal. Do we have a strong answer as Mr. Maxwell mentioned about access from the Diamond Bar Boulevard to Tonner Canyon Road? Maybe Tonner Canyon Road, maybe down the road, maybe 20 years later we are going to have a problem ... When we have the secondary access that gives us lots of traffic. Can we handle those traffic now a days? Lets look at a major street, Grand Avenue, because we have been fighting with the San Bernardino County not giving up the all right, that we gave up. Grand Avenue has been passed through the Chino. Every since then, during the traffic hours, peak hours, you can not move there, especially into the section of Diamond Bar Blvd. and Grand Avenue. Diamond Bar Blvd. also during the peak hours is just terrible. Pathfinders overpass at the 57 freeway, we have only two lanes for 57. During the peak hours it is terrible. Okay. I am not politician or politics I don't want to get involved on that. But when we talk about the private sector and public I am sure Diamond Bar Associates has purchased this lot with lots of money and the Dr. Al Lapeter also paid certain money for this land. I don't know when he purchased it. But it is not right not to develop his lot, because it is his private lot to develop his own lot. But we should have some guidelines, that means we should adopt a General Plan. Without the guidelines, without the bible what could we do. Nothing but a mess. I strongly suggest that this project has to be postponed or hold this project until we adopt a General Plan. Thank you. Madam Chair Joe Ingram 37 Joe Ingram Joe Ingram, 21647 High Bluff Road, Diamond Bar. Well this is my second meeting and so I have learned a little from my honorable judge and the rest of you and first I should praise you, you folks are doing a wonderful job, staying awake, staying with us, then I should knock you down. ]Number one, okay, if the engineer for this project indeed walked around like he said, on the bottom, the first thing he would have talked about was the deer manure, because there is an awful amount of deer down there and also through that bottom there is a creek, of which an awful amount of animals feed off of. Okay, the oaks and the rest of the trees are all done there. I am not Yule Gibbons, okay, by many means. But I have walked that canyon lots of times and there are coyotes down there on that hill that they plan to level, which is another surprise, we learn something each day. The only way they are going to fix that hill, that we are looking at is to level it. Just like that gentlemen said. So they can take 189,000 dump trucks and have fun, I guess. But, there is a coyote den that is on that hill, that is there every fall and is back again in the spring time, in this case it is a little off this year and is right now on that hill. In the summertime it is on the opposite hill and they migrate that way each time. That other gentlemen talked about the animals. If anybody has walked down in there they will see coyotes, they will see deer. There is more deer walking around... Male Speaker Mr. Ingram. I beg your problem. I was just informed we have a mechanical problem here and we are burning something up and we have been instructed that rather destroy this entire facilities sound system that it might be advantageous at this time to continue the meeting. Mr. Ingram But, I haven't had a chance to praise you at the end yet. It is a joke. You want me to talk next week. I would sure appreciate it. I apologize for the inconvenience, but I have been instructed that it would in the best interest. I think the coyotes will be there next week too. So we can continue. Thank you. Madam Chair Thank you. We had one more speaker, Mr. Cliff Mckye. Can you return next week. Thank you very much. Is there anyone here tonight who can not return next week that would want to make some comments to the Council. Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of the proposal? All right. If not, I am going to continue. the Council Meeting to 7:00 p.m. Tuesday, January 28, and at this time I would like to close with Council comments. Any comments. If we look a little stoned faced, it is because we are trying to listen to all of you and not prejudge what our decisions are going to be. So we will see you all next Tuesday night. Thank you. Meeting dismissed. MPT/Papen With that I would like to back up a minute, when I was talking about the nesting seasons I want to refer staff to comment #2 and comment #5 in the letter from Michael Brandon & Associates January 24, 1992 which recommends that the draft EIR add information in the potential presence of cougars but that the sites specific wildlife movement study is not necessary and then item 5 has to do with the nesting and the grating situation. I would also with the consent of the Council to make it clear to staff that they delete from further discussion the rose?? easement from Diamond Bar Blvd. to Tonner Canyon Road via Sugarpine so that the issue is settled for those folks that are here. Any objection? C/Werner I support that. MPT/Papen Staff is directed in that matter. Recess: M/Papen recessed to a five minute break. Reconvened: M/Papen reconvened. MPT/Papen This Council has had a policy of continuing our meetings if the hours go past 11:00 p.m. and we have two other items on the agenda besides this one. I am going to ask fellow Councilmembers if they would provide to staff a list of questions that need further discussion and then I am going to continue the public hearing to a date that we will decide on and there will not be any decision made this evening as far as we can tell. I think there is too many unanswered questions still and so we are going to have to continue it. The discussion will continue, we are going to close the public hearing tonight, we have taken everyone's testimony we are going to give our Council responses and a list of questions to respond to, close the public hearing and then we will bring the item back for resolution at some other time for Council action. I would like to ask C/Miller would you like to start with your questions to staff? C/Miller We have had a response from Michael Brandon & Associates we received today to various questions that were posed to the City and I want to make sure these have been adequately addressed and reviewed by staff and come back with a formal response from staff. Also the comments to the master EIR that we received, it was on the overhead projector, the items that were not addressed by the City Attorney I would like to have any questionable items addressed and will address that publicly. On the conditions of approval, let us start with Tract #47850, Item #6, deals with covenants, conditions and restrictions, my question is are these CC&Rs consistent with the CC&Rs with the Country such as fencing requirements in front of houses, they require landscaping front and rear, certain requirements like that. We have discussed earlier and I saw conditions setback requirements which went beyond the requirements of the Country requiring a minimum 40 foot separation between dwellings and a concern that I have is that there is no floorplan repetition this is a custom project and in a custom community and I think that the character of that needs to be carried through. A question was raised on Item #7, urban pollutant basins, how those are to be maintained in the future and whose to � the burden of that maintenance cost. Item #9, talks about construction activities being between 7 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. I again would suggest we make that coincide with the Association they have certain close down days for Holidays and such and one issue that is going to come up that wasn't addressed is most of this heavy machinery typically they try to maintain it at night and that is not allowed in the association yet they have no control over it, so that maintenance hours are also between those hours. Item #10, it dealt with landscaping and irrigation and again that does comply with the Country's requirements. Item 201 talks about two parcels that were requested to be out parcels, Planning Commission requested they would designate building restriction areas. I would like to have that addressed to the applicant and staff to have those handled as deed restrictions dedicated to the homeowners association and perpetuity be considered open space and the property of the homeowners there. Item 21, talks of retaining walls, I have a concern with that means there is no retaining walls specified on the grading plans or any plan whatsoever and I would hate to see as will come back in numerous retaining walls appear all of the sudden. Item 22, phase boundaries, that has been addressed as a concern and I believe a Council concern from ones I have talked to that we have a specific phasing map that we know when each project is going to be graded, if it is going to be a 10 or 12 year period we want to know how many per year and what sections per year and we have something that we can hang our hat on. On some of the culdesac lots that were in question the size of the lots and the separation I would like to see a proposed building envelope on those lots so we know how those are going to be developed in conjunction with the other lots contiguous to it. Also a restriction on architectural control of breaking up the massive structure so you don't have a lot of massive two story buildings with two story walls contiguous to each other that we break the massive buildings through catalevers, offsets, popouts, various architectural programs would that be a condition also. On subdivision, Item #1, there is a existing heliport pad there and the conditions that I read earlier said that it was an agreement that that maybe located, I would like to see that in agreement because it is required by the fire department that that shall be located elsewhere. Item #10, discusses detailed on-site lighting plans, normally in the Country there are no street lights, that should be analyzed and be considered part of being made a requirement of this project, I would hate to have this project annexed in the association and being one of the only places in there that has street lights, so that should be looked at. Item 21d, talks of slope banks in excess of five (5) feet shall be seeded with native grass, I want some reference in there also to appropriate tree and shrub planting on those slopes. Item 23b, talks of gross-stability of a 150 foot high fill slope and unstable lope shall be redesigned and stabilized using slope reinforcement. I think there needs to be some sort of determination what the geologist is referring to I would hate to have gunite slopes or other slopes like that just because they could not be stabilized any other way so I think we need an answer on how those are to be stabilized or options of various methods of stabilization. Item 26, refers to public/private street I think that should be changed to just private streets. Item 35, talks about permission from effective property owners prior to final map for easements on a blue line stream bed, I think we need to determine if permission was withheld by any individual, how does that affect this project? Item 37, talks of sewage pumps and the question was raised on who is to maintain those or if those are accepted by the County. Item 38, talks about capacity of sewer lines on the system to this project if they are adequate and I think that is something I would like to see determined. I would hate to see us approve a project and then find out that down the road a mile or two that we don't have adequate capacity and that throws us into another issue so that is something that should be very easy to answer we should address that. Item 48, talks of stop signs, I would like to see that any requirement for signs or such would be the same as the Country standards, they use a different type of a stop sign then we normally would use on our public streets so that we would be in compliance with what they use. Subdivision on Item lo, it says a nine (9) mile radius to determine street names, I think that is incorrect don't you want to within the City of Diamond Bar that we are not repititous of streets but nine (9) mile radius isn't that going a little too far cause one map called for a nine (9) mile radius and another map condition called for within the City of Diamond Bar. So we need to make the maps be consistent within the three conditions. Item 32, was the revokable easement and that is history as far as I am concerned at this point. The question was raised by many about the uneven beding plains and they didn't specifically state, they knew there was a soils problepi they di n't what it was that and the layers of(bittenitand just have staff to come back to Council `ani e and sure those are properly addressed inthe soils report..and howthati-s going to be, they said problems I don't think that is going to be an issue but have it addressed publically so those questions have been answered. There has been question on impact on the Country gates, I think staff should come back with what impact fees are being charged against this project for various sidewalk improvements that are off-site, signal improvement and other improvements that these people are being required to fund also so that the community is made aware of that. The questioned was answered by the applicant about the slope easements contiguous to it. I will turn it over to the next individual at this point. MPT/Papen On that same project 47850, there has been some discussion of some statements made by the developer that regardless of how many homes are built on that track the whole slope is going to have to be rebuilt and I would like to have at some point to report from the staff as to whether or not that those statements are accurate or if there is other alternatives. I have a couple of other things as I review through the EIR correspondence there is a letter from the Department of Water Resources that recommends the use of reclaim water for irrigation purposes in order to free fresh water supplies for beneficial uses. I would like to require we have a dual system, require these lots so that the landscape irrigation is done with reclaim water at some time in the future when we could get it piped in that they have the capacity to switch over. Secondly, there is a letter response from the school district that takes exceptions to the applicant's answering question 12 and would like to have a report from staff that the school district is satisfied with the finalization of that. The applicant did suggest that they would be willing to modify their frontage, some the proposed lots have less than 100 feet of frontage. I would like to require that they have a minimum of 125 feet on the ones where they are straight. The ones on the culdesac I have concerns that the radiuses are too small to provide adequate setbacks and driveways and it looked to me that if the culdesacs were extended those radiuses could be enlarged and I would think somewhere in the range of 60-65 feet or whatever staff could work out appropriately on the radiuses of the culdesac would improve the project substantially. C/Werner you want to go and I then I'll pick up when no one else does. C/Werner The mitigation monitoring program is attached as a condition of each of the projects I would like to address points in the mitigation monitoring. #1 with regards to the biological resources, section 3.7, at provision to 7A-1 that would provide for a mix of relocated newly planned and newly planted trees as we discussed earlier that is involving the black walnuts same thing would apply to the Caifornia Live Oak species that there be a mix among the trees replanted including potted trees and relocated trees. I would like to know what the specifics are that are proposed by the arborists, I had rather not see the mitigation monitoring program be left without any specific standards in there, I would like to see more specific. There is an issue on the EIR dealing with reclaimed water and I pose this issue to the Council. The EIR indicates that it would be desirable for water conservation purposes however, there is no reclaimed water line currently available. The question is what provisions is the developer making if and when the reclaimed water line is made available. The other question is whether the developer should have any obligation or responsibility for a portion of that water line brought to this project, I pose that to the Council. Water conservation is an important issue we are talking about a lot of slopes on this property and it would seem to me that the success of the mitigation program is going to be largely dependent upon the landscaping taking root and being properly nourished. Is there any support on the Council to have the developer place on the developer responsibility for a portion of the reclaimed water lines brought to the site? C/Miller I think we should address the issue where is going to be available, when is it going to be available and how is going to be available. I think we need to provide for it whether we require dry lines or something for future hook-up, I think that should be looked at and responded to by staff. I think the concern that the irrigation is run on separate lines so it can be disconnected and hooked up at a future date and make sure that no hose ribs or anything connected to those same line is something that we should look at. We have done a water study use in the past, it is not available today, we know there are some plans to get it closer to this area, I think we should require that the public does know how close that will be and if it's even a viable option, but there are certain things that we could do that would make it possible in the future, yes. C/Werner Those are comments that are consistent with my thinking in terms of the dry lines. I would suggest to staff then that when we bring this matter back that we have additional recommendations on those points. The other point I wanted to raise is part of the mitigation monitoring program is to pin down a time period for the grading aspects and the revegetation aspects of the project. There is three specific projects proposed that could easily be done as three individual projects under independent time frames. My understanding is based on what Mr. Mills has indicated that it would be his group that would be developing this property over a period of 10 or 12 years, 10 to 12 units per year and of course Dr. LaPeter is owning a portion of the project representing I don't know maybe, well under that ratio, one years worth of development but it might be over a period of ten years too. I don't know. I would like to be able to pin down a time frame for the grading and the revegetation on the site and that hasn't been addressed in the EIR, I think it helps to define the significants of the impact from this project. If construction is going to take place over a period of 15 years, one of the projects going every 5 years that might have a lesser impact or might have a greater impact, I guess it depends how close it is to existing neighbors or would the more preferrable approach be to have the entire site graded at the same time but on the same token that provides results in financial impacts and we want to make sure that the project is successful. I also want to see something in writing here indicating the developer will be prohibited from moving dirt off-site. I believe this is a balanced project as proposed. Is our Engineer to confirm that? PD/DeStefano That is correct. C/Werner That is based on all of the best designs and estimates up to this point I want to make sure that is in writing and there will be no off-site exportation or importation of heavy trucks driving through the streets. PD/DeStefano C/Werner it should be pointed out that if this project is approved it is contemplated that 48487 and 47851 would share and exchange dirt. C/Werner I understood that, it would be part of the on-site that I am looking at it as one project from that standpoint. Will they be taking dirt over Country streets? PD/DeStefano Yes, they would. C/Werner It will be entirely on your own property, all of the transportation. PD/DeStefano Then Council I would like to get that clarified and specified in writing. C/Werner I think that is it for now. C/Miller I have one more furtherance of that issue of the dirt also that we have noted that there has been a problem of parking off-site on these construction problems that parking be restricted to on-site parking not only for equipment but for automobiles of the employees working on the sites. C/Werner Can I get back to a question regards to phasing and it wasn't answered yet this evening. If there is any possibility I would like to see whether out of the three projects what would be the most likely senerio for development. Which would go first, second and third and I am just at a lost to know where that is at this point. I would like to pose the question to the developers. Judge Mills Thank you for giving me the opportunity to respond Developer to that. It would be our anticipated result that assuming all three tracks were approved in the same time frame that the Tract 47851 would be the tract that would be begun to be prepared in conjunction with the tract of Dr. LaPeters. Those two tracts require dirt to be balanced between them, the additional factor that involves them is that his tract requires the sewer pump station that we will be building on our tract and if we begin the process by starting the westerly tract that leaves him stranded there with no sewer capacity and kind of dead in the water. Our expectation would be to start the easterly tract, I would anticipate that we will be grading the development out basically at the same time and within I heard my engineer partner and our engineer talking and that mumbo jumbo that I don't understand back there but they were saying that they thought that the grading once it was begun probably would extend over no more than a nine or ten month period and I would certainly welcome the opportunity to have Mr. Williman respond to this phasing concern because I know we do have an answer to how we would prefer to proceed. Thank you sir. C/Werner Judge Mills, you say the project would be graded in its entirety. Does that mean all three tracts? Mr. Mills That would be my anticipation unless we have some mandate from the Council to do otherwise. C/Werner But the development would occur on the easterly tract first? Mr. Mills Yes. C/Werner Say all is in development. Mr. Mills Yes and probably even the initial grading, I don't mean to say they have to move dirt the same day on both tracts, but it would seem to me that while we have the equipment there and while we are in the process that we would start the process going on both tracts and while we are talking about phasing the number of houses I didn't mean to imply that we probably would not sell a house on the westerly tract and a house or two on the easterly tract if that is what the market conditions warranted unless we had some other dictate from the Council. We certainly anticipate starting with the easterly tract. MPT/Papen I would like to suggest that the Council do propose a phasing plan since 5.1 and 8.7 balance on site as a unit that those would be one phase and that 5.0 would be continued as a separate phase. If there is Council concurrence I would like to instruct staff to. C/Werner What would that accomplish if the phases are done one right after another. What Mr. Mills indicated is that the construction equipment will be there and if he finished phase one, meaning the two easterly tract in six months will move it over and do phase two. MPT/Papen It could also mean that they grade and build 5.1 and 8.7 and sell those properties before they even start to touch 5.0. C/Werner Is that what you are suggesting that there be. MPT/Papen That is what I am suggesting that Council consider that we do need to decide tonight but I would feel comfortable in not grading the whole 160 acres at one time and leaving it open. C/Werner I could find myself supporting a concept that would I guess would put some time restrictions on when phase two would be initiated subject to the development of phase one. Is that what you are suggesting? C/Miller I think that leads into the main question that was asked earlier and I thought we were going to identify that as far as a difinitive phasing schedule so we know that we are not going to have 40 or 50 units on that one time and I would hate to see that we graded them and now we are forced to build 50 at one time and then everybody has major problems because of that, that there is difinitive building phasing program on this project and I think the applicant has prior stated that and come up with some sort of an agreement on how that is to be accomplished. MPT/Papen I would like to refer staff to the Resolutions on gS15�4a-a5 and 47851. On Exhibit B1A, Item #11 it refers to model home landscaping, I don't believe this is the model homes subdivision type of project and so I would think that should be excluded. I would like to see a consideration for requiring front and rear landscaping prior to notice of completions on the project. On the report from the Department of Public Works, Item #24. Item #11 is where it refers to the street names within a (9) nine mile radius which is inconsistant with Item #11 on the other project. Item #24B regarding the 150 foot slope, I believe this needs to be addressed but I would like to see it addressed prior to approval. I would rather not approve the project than have this issue not addressed. I have a serious question on 48487 and that is the impact of the grading of this project on the vacant parcel that is not being discussed tonight. It seems to me that roads should be lower, those pads increased and I would like to see staff address that issue. Any other comments from Council? C/Miller Just that the issues I wanted staff to address are applicable to all three tract maps not just 850. C/Werner On condition four of 47850 I believe it is repeated in each. It indicates the mitigation monitoring program outlined within the master EIR would be prepared or is required to be prepared by the developer and submitted to the City for approval thirty days prior to the issuance of the grading permit. It would seem to me that would be something that we would be approving at the time of the development the mitigation monitoring program and all we have right now according to this condition is the outline and we need more Specificity. Can staff elaborate on that, what was your thinking in terms of getting it before the grading permit is issues. PD/DeStefano The thinking was that we would have more knowledge than we do now. We would have more detailed knowledge as a result of the refined plans and studies that would be coming our way once tentative approval was given. We thought we would be unable to provide a specific detailed mitigation monitoring program right now because we just don't have that detailed information. C/Werner What additional information are you going to have at that time. The final maps? Specs? PD/DeStefano Yes. C/Werner That is all going to be a function the mitigation monitoring program that is listed in the EIR today, which is outlined. It seems to me that these are raising the points that we should know enough about to put that monitoring program together right now. In some cases there might be need for more specific studies on the part of the Engineer. Of course reserve those for a later date. I would like to see the monitoring program brought to a more complete state at the time of our approval and leave whatever has to based on the need for more information until a future date prior to the grading permit. One other point that was raised in the discussion and that was the cost on the City for providing all of the staff assistance necessary to accomplish this project. Those costs are all developer responsiblity costs are they not? PD/DeStefano Not entirely, this project was presented to the City under the old fee structure and it is not a cost effective structure that is why the Council chose to adopt a new fee structure beginning in August of last year. All consultants that the City must hire in order to process this project and adequately review its impacts are born by the C/Werner I can appreciate that. If the developer were to be in agreement with the new fee structure would that be a problem for the City? My feeling is I recognize there is a new fee structure in effect but the project does have substantial impact on staff time and costs. CA/Arczynski Part of the costs for example in terms of the mitigation monitoring program, the developer is going to have to provide the where with all to insure that those things are accomplished on the developers ticket. He is not going pay for that whether that is staff time or consultants, you name it everything from arborists to biologist is part of the mitigation monitoring program, inspection requirement and all the rest of it will be picked up under the new fee structure. In terms of the processing of the project from the date it was first presented to tonight those fee structures were in place, I suppose if the developer agrees to pay we could politely ask him. C/Werner I would like to ask the developer. Discussion C/Werner O.K. so we will get a response at our next meeting? developer in terms of the cost. C/Werner I will recommend that all staff costs be the responsibility of the developer. MPT/Papen The City Attorney would like to address the issue. CA/Arczynski I will discuss the matter with Mr. Werner after the meeting. C/Werner Seriously? PD/DeStefano C/Werner to give you an indication there are some additional projects that the City is now ingaging in reviewing that are under the new fee structure and those projects are being reviewed on a hourly rate basis, so whatever the cost is for review is born entirely 100% by the developer not by the community. This particular project just happens to be one that its process began several years ago before the fee schedule. C/Werner I can appreciate that. If the developer were to be in agreement with the new fee structure would that be a problem for the City? My feeling is I recognize there is a new fee structure in effect but the project does have substantial impact on staff time and costs. CA/Arczynski Part of the costs for example in terms of the mitigation monitoring program, the developer is going to have to provide the where with all to insure that those things are accomplished on the developers ticket. He is not going pay for that whether that is staff time or consultants, you name it everything from arborists to biologist is part of the mitigation monitoring program, inspection requirement and all the rest of it will be picked up under the new fee structure. In terms of the processing of the project from the date it was first presented to tonight those fee structures were in place, I suppose if the developer agrees to pay we could politely ask him. C/Werner I would like to ask the developer. Discussion C/Werner O.K. so we will get a response at our next meeting? C/Miller I would address the question to the City Manager having received community input and the questions that need to be addressed to Council by staff and the questions posed by Council, when would you suggest this be brought back to City Council with responses? CM/Van Nort March 3, 1992 C/Miller I move that we continue this hearing to March 3, 1992. C/Werner Seconded. MPT/Papen All those in favor? C/Werner I. C/Miller I. MPT/Papen On March 3, 1992 public hearings would not start before 7:00 p.m, so it will be on the agenda that day whether it is the first item or we have other business to conduct prior to that we will not know until that agenda is prepared, but it will not be before 7:00 p.m. it will be scheduled for the 3rd. The agendas are posted at the Library and City Hall or you could call City Hall to find out specifically. PD/Destefano One thing the Council may wish to direct the constultants to implement and that is timely response to the questions that they are responsible for and the delivery of products that they are responsible to provide to this City staff. Many of the issues that you have raised are going to require review by internal staff, external consultants, coordination with another developer for the piece etc. and we obviously will do our best as a staff to meet your request for a March 3 hearing but we cannot do it in adequately respond if the materials are delivered late. MPT/Papen I hope the consultant understands the significants and developing consultants will have their reports in a timely manner. MPT/Papen I am going to ask Cecil Mills if he would like to come forward and Mr. Mills is one of the applicants on this project so I am going to give him longer than 5 minutes to respond to the comments. Then I am going to close the public hearing to the floor and limit it to Council comments and then we will proceed from there. Mr. Mills Thank you madam Mayor and Members of the Council had substantial remarks and I am going to reduce them significantly in the interest of time. At the beginning of our last meeting, C/Werner and C/Miller asked me some questions relating to our original acquisition and the dates and times and how we came into posession of the various tracts and I answered those questions to the best of my ability at that time. I did however make some mis- statements and I would like to very briefly correct those if I could. They will display for me , this is a diagram of the property, this property here is that which is owned by Diamond Bar Associates, this parcel here is the tract that is owned by Al LaPeter. In 1985 one of my partners initially contacted or was contacted by TransAmerica Development Co. who I will refer to as TADCO asked if he wished to purchase 35 lots that they had projected for this portion of the property. This is difficult to read but it consists of three 20 acre parcels, there was approximately a seven acre piece that was out of it right in that area which is the 53 acres I referred to last week. C/Miller existing trees, no we are not trying to say all of them perhaps, but a certain amount of existing trees and you have the time based on the facing of the project and we could transplant some of those trees right back on site to these impacted areas that there by the seed dropped from a tree that is acclimated to that area we're just transplanting it in that area. I have seen it done before and it does mitigate visual impact, environmental impacts tremendously from the onset. Mr. Mills I think that is a viable alternative, at the same time depending on the time schedule. There is a possibility of if this goes tomorrow the project is a problem if it goes six months, a year or further down stream or maybe two years before the landscaping actually takes place one can borrow from that gene pool on site and start contract growing. C/Miller Well, that's a requirement SETAC. Mr. Mills I understand that. C/Miller So that has to be done and based on what we are hearing from the developers and the magnitude of the grating project we have here and the process that we are going to go through to get to final map and I think that most likely will allow us adequate time if we move expeditiously to locate certain trees that would be transpotted to accomplish that. I think that MPT/Papen is trying to imply reasonableness in what her suggestion is not that everything is going to be picked up and moved and there is not going to be a problem cause we know that can't happen, arborists would have to specify which trees were healthy, which ones could be moved and to have a high percentage rate of being able to exist once they have been transplanted because it doesn't do any good to transplant a tree to die and a certain amount I we are likely to lose but I think that is a relatively small percentage if it is done properly. Mr. Mills We have a comfort level in terms of researching that as well. C/Miller I don't think that has any impact on whatever decisions made by this Council, I think that's something that could go hand in hand with the rest of the process so that doesn't necessarily have to be answered in advance either. al(,3o �rA�rw�r<d. l�n� 1)as19a. Comments on MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Tracts 47850, 47851, 48487 General Outline ■ Statement in Environmental Impact R ■ Comment p Report ■ Question Written answer from Council would be helpful ful ■ Mitigation Measures Subjects Addressed ■ Diamond Bar Liability ■ Biological/ Environmental Impacts ■ Geological Impacts ■ Financial Concerns Diamond Bar Liability EIA Statements: ■ Pa e 3.1-20 Paragraph 1 B-1 "using landform grading techniques found in the new City grading standards." ■ Page 31-20, Paragraph _1B-1 "adequate safety based upon soils engineering criteria and excavated and recompacteds adopted by the City of Diamond Bar.... per recommendations of the Soils Engineer." ■ Pa,�e 31-20, Paragraph 1 B=3 "Grading Plan approved by the City Council" ■ Pa e 3.1-21 Paragraph 1 B-5 "All newly graded slopes shall be designed and constructed per the specifications of the Soils Engineer and approved by the City Engineering Dept." ■ Page 31-21, Paragraph 1 C-1_ "A qualified Soils Engineer shall confirm in render the that the proposed safe grading for tentative tracks 47850, 47851, from known geologic instabilities" Diamond Bar Liability (cont.) Questions: ■ Do these approvals and recommendations make Diamond Bar City a partner in this development to the extend that the City is liable for losses or damages due to geological or structural failures? ■ Has the City communicated to the developer its plans and recommendations sufficient for him to do a cost analysis and thereby estimate the return on his investment? If so, have they been published? ■ Are the City Engineering Departments capable of making technical recommendations and monitoring the construction progress considering the geological stability problems continually referred to in the EIR? ■ The developer proposes to achieve acceptable margins of safety based upon standard soils engineering practice (page 3.1-21, 1C-1). Is this adequate considering the geological stability problems? Diamond Bar Liability (cont.) Mitigation Measures: ■ Require the developer to provide the funds such that Diamond Bar can hire a nationally known construction firm to perform the following tasks. a. Generate all plans identified in the EIR to be used by the developer. b. Monitor the construction progress of the developer. c. Analyze the geological characteristics of the project by computer simulation. d. Develop a scale model of the project and test it under conditions of a 100 year rain. e. Test the stability of the soil at 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% completion of the grading process. f. Notify the City whenever the contractor deviates (time, activities) from the EIA. g. Review and verify all design calculations made by the developer. Biological /Environment Impacts EIA Statements: ■ Page 3.7-31, Paragraph 2 "This represents a significant impact to the existing animal life because the cleaning, grubbing, and the grading of the site will either chase the existing animals away, or kill them during the construction." ■ Page 3.7-31, Para raph 3 "The immediate loss of existing habitat represents a significant impact, requiring mitigation ■ Page 3.7-35,14ra raph 7 B "This change will represent a significant impact to the wildlife species which currently live and forage on the project sites" ■ Page 3. 7-31, Paragraph 7 B-2 "Maintenance of each related open space area if each lot will then be the responsibility of the property owner" Comment ■ The developer does not identify mitigation procedures to minimize the number of animal habitat removed (killed, chased away) or to reintroduce it into the area. ■ He proposes to reconstruct the shrub and other vegetation on the newly graded site but presents no specific plan nor guarantees success of this effort. Mitigation Measures ■ Require the developer to quantify the amount of shrubs and other vegetation that are present after three years and provide irrigation as he does for the Black Walnuts and Oak trees. This will increase the possibility of the animal habitat returning to the area. Geological Impacts Statements: ■ Page 3.1-20, Paragraph 2 "To overcome structural problems associated with colluvium, the applicant proposes to excavate all identified deposits of colluvium and recompact the excavated material" ■ Page 3.1-20, Paragraph 3 "To overcome areas of geologic instability, areas subject to creep and landslide, the applicants propose to buttress the unstable slopes through the use of fill material excavated from other areas of the sites." ■ Page 3.1-20, Paragraph 1 B "The need to stabilize site areas which are not now geologically stable" Comment ■ The above references to structural problems and geologic instability indicate moderate or high risk for this project and the statements imply that recompacted colluvium may be used to buttress the unstable slopes. Since both fill and colluvium have undesirable structural characteristics, it is questionable that this is the best way to solve the fundamental geologic instability problems. Questions ■ Gopher tunneling activity in the compacted fill could cause serious erosion problems. How will this be minimized? ■ The EIR makes no statement about the existence or design of retainer walls. How will the movement of compacted fill be prevented? ■ Where will the excavated colluvium be deposited and what will replace it? Mitigation Measures ■ Do not use recompacted colluvium as fill to buttress the unstable slopes. ■ Use retainer walls as an additional margin of safety where ever the potential for erosion or the damage from erosion is greatest. Financial Concerns Questions: ■ Does the city have sufficient information about the developer and the project to determine that both are financially sound? + Source and amount of developer's financing? + Expected return on developer's investment? + What is the expected ratio of total cost per property to the construction cost for the house? + How would the city be affected if the developer goes bankrupt? + What are the expected costs to the city to monitor this development? • 1 ' M � qC ' .• !. . *VO�• P.M.1528,a PAIL 1 , 20,02 AC '' 9 PARCEL 2, ZG,OB AI , i -•': pARCC L S. P, co- PARCCL. to. ki AC• ` ��ecsa •' 4 • JA . Irl • lid �0 • ; c/' � • '�i ' i i ; Qa pl I i, .►P A QAa PIPPp 1 .,2:6 19 l' (4 ' • • 'fzrt�Gey�rJ" ♦ • ♦ � ♦ � v� • • ♦ Ib •AI I . lr �• 1� ♦I l •� /A OGS I •� �i 13 • � ♦ , iso;: .,,. ,, �' '735.24' �� 3� • `•. /-/3.30, F LNAID . . _. .. , • •�aCALE+ / "•• X44' ZMA)M D SA9 , GA . t. L• - TOTAL P. 02 .��n...�l�ol..� Cec�l� rn�` IL�J �e G �►�`���'s es J.C.C. ENTERPRISES, INC. 22330 HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD • SUITE 212 TORRANCE, CALIFORNIA 90505 Dear: (213) 37552567 We are underway with the planning for the development of the vacant property directly across the canyon from you. The proposed development will contain approximately forty homes in the $700,000 to $1,000,000 price range which we feel will be compatible with and compliment the existing homes in the area. There exists a common boundary line between our properties roughly along the bottom of the canyon. The bottom of the canyon lies well below and to the rear of the developed portion of your property. Preliminary studies indicate that there are some advantages, considering geology and drainage, in filling the bottom of the canyon to a depth of twenty to thirty feet. This would create some potentially usable area for horse facilities or other uses on both sides of our common property line. To do this it will require your permission to grade and fill upon your property. It would also require the same permission of some of your neighbors who also have a common boundary line with our property. No permanent easements or encumbrances would result from this work and, of course, the work would be done at no expense whatsoever to you. It is essential that this grading concept either be incorporated or abandoned early in our planning stages. We recognize the difficulty of gaining the mutual cooperation of a sizable number of individuals unless there is a substantial inducement. We are thus prepared to offer each affected homeowner $10,000 to execute the enclosed "Permission to Grade". Please review the enclosed agreement. A representative from our office will be in contact with you in the near future. Thank you for your courtesy in this matter. Very truly yours, J.C.C. ENTERPRISES, INC. Jack C. Cameron, President JCC :tlh J.C.C. - DIAMOND BAR 22330 HAWHORNE BOULEVARD • SUITE 212 TORRANCE, CALIFORNIA 90505 (213) 3752567 NEWSLETTER - February '89 Hi Folks!! Just a note to thank all of you for your cooperation during our recent meetings. I hope all of you had a fine holiday and that 1989 will be the best year ever for each of you. Progress is being made on all fronts in our efforts to develop our property in 'The Country" area. Our engineers have completed their analysis of the grading revisions we discussed and have prepared a preliminary map for us which contains fifty three homesites. I'm sure you have all noticed the tractors working and they are clearing brush so that we can have a new topo map prepared. Thanks again! If you have any questions or concerns please call me at (213) 375-2567 or leave a message on my machine at (213) 320-5887. Very truly yours, Cecil J. Mills CJM:tlh iamond Bar country Estates Association June 26, 19.89.. The Honorable Cecil Mills 2265 Sepulveda Way Torrance, Ca., 90501 Re: Development of the "Back.Country" Dear Judge Mills: 22615 Lazy Meadow ' Drive Diamond Bar California 91765 (714) 861-4114 This is to inform you and your associates with JJC that the Diamond Bar Country Estates Association Board of Directors, at their June 21, 1989 Executive Session meeting, passed the following motion. MOTION by Mr. Donald Greeley and 2nd by Mr.. John Klopp for the Board of Directors to support the original TADCO Settlement Agreement and JJC Development Enterprises, Inc.`s effort to develop the area known as the "Back Country". Also, to look favorably upon a proposal for annexation of this area by the Diamond Bar Country Estates Association. Vote 5-0, passed. If there are any questions regarding this matter, please feel to contact me at (714)861-4114. Sincerely, �lCxt_�.rZi 4 GARDNER, General Manager DIAMOTM BAR Ca NIRY ESTATES ASSOCIATION JG:sp 4 V 13 iamond Bar stateb ountry Estates Caentry��E A Association March 21, 3.990 DIAMOND BAR ASSOCIATES, INC. 2265 Sepulveda Way Torrance, Ca., 90501 22615 Lazy Meadow Drive Diamond Bar California 91765 (714) 861-4114 FAX (714) 861-2968 Dear Sirs: This is to confirm that DIAMOND BAR COUNTR, ESTATES ASSOCIATIOM's Board: of Directors has . gone on record as supporting Diamond, Bar Associates, Inc's., development in thearea referred to as•"The Back Country". If your company wishes to publish our r.upport of your development, please consider this letter permission to do so... Sincerely, Ll DONALD GREELEY, President for the Board of Directors DIAMOND BAR COUNTRY ESTATES ASSOCIATION S 4, Cub Scout, Scout, and Explorer programs Los Angeles Area Council �I att�ir Boy Scouts of America 2333 Scout Way, Los Angeles, California 90028 Telephone: (213) 413-4400 Board of Honor Leona Gerak Bob H Jimmt Chair Georg, Advisory Chair Rober Franc Coundl Chaima Ray 6 First Vlo Rlcha Second John Coundl r John Deputy t Roge Vice Ch, Thom Jack John Rona W Josal Jame Henn Brum Lilly l Wilda J. Ha Liam Henn Mich:. Keith Dana ',,t 3 1 Dr. Jamas rf Jack'. Ruth is'.>he , Wilda n A , R. Peul 5t. Arr,e Wllllen-tN.l>..nei .,., $Uba`lHr+rnb. Frankiin F I.P Donaw r Hv ,, Jr f Treaswer sam':al P i. i Assistant i�reasu e' Elden Hasrnt sr:ar ProaMenr Edward Vice President i�&Velorynent Richard B. Frans Vk-o President, Admrnlstration 6 Chlel Findndal Onccer Thomas A. Kolin Vice Presrdenv Field .Service George Randall Lilo Msmbers or the Board Leonard K. Firestone D. Loring Marlett Edward Mills Jimmy Stewar: inmadlale Past Chairmen William A. Simpson '89 DonaldF. Wnght'88 Jack R. Attwood'87 William A. Daegling'86 Of. James M. Rosser'85 Robert E. Wycott'84 George F. Moody '83 Paul M. D'Arq '82 Francis L. Dale'81 R. Paul St. Amend, M.D.'130 Donald W. Crocker *79 Lee R. Sollenbarger'78 Peter J. Pltchess '77 John M. Russon'76 E. L. Shannon. Jr. '74.'75 Arthur D. MacDonald 72, 73 John P. Pollock 71 April 24, 1990 To Whom It May Concern: The Firestone Scout Reservation is owned and operated by the Los Angeles Area Council, Boy Scouts of America. We are aware of the pending project by Diamond Bar Associates, Inc. for the proposed residential development being sought under Tentative Maps No. 47850 and 47851. our representatives have reviewed the proposed development maps, landscaping plan and environmental concerns of the proposed project with the developers, Diamond Bar Associates, Inc. we do not find anything objectionable about the proposed development. We do believe that the substantial natural buffer zone provided in the plan and the proposed natural wildlife preserve area in the lower canyon(s) will enhance the entire area. JLS/ if 04/24/90 ping C imittee A gift to the Los Angeles Area Council Trust Fund supports Scouting beyond one's lifetime. tx�leeiovllrr � A JAW fit, 1 , 2o.oz AC % ' : •�- 9 PAACa L. 2, 20.08 AC.. : PARCH G 3. GD �{C. w �' • Ake.joy". •, :'=:: PARAC. : - OL 5 •.•.• � • r•...- ' $G. l4 AC . PA9C6 L. 6, 20.06 AC. - �rco5s -s •1. •; ••, w . Ar - Of, + •r•• y ww• 0.0 '�• •� _ !..,, . • c & 9422" log 'Z• : I � 4P'a; I � 2:6 • 11 1 f , 4 r q ; °. QattG` p6, � 't � f I b „ 11 I of • w• • AW i7v' 3! SOWAW OR LAAO s c,�►e.E• � "-• 600' D7IO D SA9 , GA. TOTAL P.02 4 City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 Attention: City Counsel and Robert Van Nort City Manager ORIGINAL January 28, 1992 Reference P E T I T I O N S Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 In a December 30, 1991 letter to the City Manager, Mr. Van Nort, the Board of Directors of Las Brisas Homeowners Association expressed its OPPOSITION TO ANY PUBLIC ACCESS VIA SUGARPINE, THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY, to adjoining property or project. It has come to our attention that easements are being considered in connection with Tenative Track #47850 which would permit the future construction of a road that might join our existing_ private_ street, SUGARPINE. Since we have been assured by city officials that no such PUBLIC ACCESS via Sugarpine is planned, we question the necessity of such easements in connection with this tentative tract consideration. Enclosed are a number of petitions by resident of our community which state: "I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC". continued..... Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 January 28, 1992 page 2. "I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas" Additional residents petitions will be submitted shortly. Your attention to our concerns is requested. OR THE BOARD` AS BRISA HOr Kathy Mey Encl s es OF DIRECTORS EOWNERS ASSOCIATION PresidA/ht r TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE, OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. Sig ature i 10 Ad Print Name Unit Address Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar, -California 91765 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the A above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. i ----------- ------- -- -- --- - nature~ -------------------.------ Print Name d1.4 —^---Unit Address — 7,41 Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post OM- �e Box 4735, Diamor(i uar �.al�fo*nia 917F5 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. Signature —Print—Name Unit Address Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Lar, California 91765 r TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PIN.F, within Las Brisas. 4 Signature Print Name Unit Address Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 r TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I 0 N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. Y, 4K - girl --------------------------- Print Name %,/ �?f�AG.9 C'�,e ---------- Unit Address --------Date---------- cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 r r, TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89`582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. --------------- Signature ------------- Print Name 292.0 --- --Unit Address Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Barg California 91765 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. �ignature--------- �j Print Name -/ s -n0_ Unit 1Address -- -Z _ _ Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. Signatu?e Print Name Unit Address -41 a --------Date------------ cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar; California 91765 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map 447850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE. within Las Brisas. 'L _ --'— ----------- -- Signat e _� Ol l _� off_ _�_��,�_ —Print Name _ Unit Address f a7-) C ------------------- Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box. 4735, Diamond ljar -California 91765 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE. GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUES) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. Signature Print Name T62 -6A I—A -rf'N Z- L -/'j Unit Address ---Z==?=2 �7 Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar- ralifornia 91765 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE, within Las Brisas. r -- J--r—p — -- — --+---------------- Signature N /C ✓ C-( J Print Name ----------------------------- Unit Address Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Mcp— Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE, on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. -- ------ -------------- Signature // ----------- Print Name ------ -O --- ----------------- UnitAddress --- / _- � ------------- —Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Oboe Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 I TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582' I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PIN -F, within Las Brisas. Signature Print Name Unit Address —Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 PAI TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Ilse Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY, ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE. within Las Brisas. Signature --�_—'Print Name 3 oils A LA -------__--__--------- Unit Address -2i_-92 Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar; California 91765 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. �1 �C--- s .CL Signature V 010- 9 L Q CAS _KE_Y Print Name "---_—•-- ova —4-1-4 Z L44)k 43 DiAM0.fLp 6AQ UnitAddress -- s--� —/ ------------ Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box. 4735, Diamond Ra-, r_alifornia 91765 r TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E 'r I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map 447850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUES) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. Signa ure �9_��r�� .,�-._��.�IZ_ __✓ �d/'s � ire ,r Print Name Unit Address Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar, .California 91765 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE, within Las Brisas. Signature Fib Print Name Unit Address Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. Unit Address Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 oil TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. Signature 07, b s o n- ----- Print Name 300o LQ Pq2 Unit Address I -Zi -92 Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 TO: Mr, Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. Signature Print Name Unit A dress Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. Signature ' 'S✓ice L �' Print Name '—J AtiUnit Address Address V' D e cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restric"d access/use of SUGAR PINE,�within Las Brisas. ignature Y —�—� ,f �..�,� —Print Nam Da ess� -- _ cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the Cit of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restri;/t d access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. Signature Print Name -Pp _ Unit A dress D t e M cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Pont Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 r TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted,-,access/use of SUGAR PINE, within Las Brisas. gnamure Pridt Name Unit Address Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar,; California 917&5 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. —_ -------------- Signatur V1- RO& /27-42z% Print Name_—_—.----_--_-- 2710 MAL146f # c Unit Address 1-2-7- y z — ------_---- Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4935, Diamond fir; California 9196.5 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE. GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the ty of Diamond Bar which would affect the private re ri ted access/use f SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. --------------- Signature Print Name -Jla0m�tl-,&L fi-LLZIG-a- a, kC-t E Unit Address Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Poet Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 r TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. Signature Print Name Unit Addr4iS4 Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Rar, California 9?765 r TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUES) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. Signature _R _ fz:ff Print Name Unit Address ^Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Of k* Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 TO: Mr. Robert Van Nort, City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 P E T I T I O N REFERENCE: Tentative Tract Map #47850 Conditional Use Permit No. 89-582 I am in OPPOSITION TO any attempt to provide ANY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY PUBLIC ACCESS THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY to the above referenced Tract or any other similar property. WE ARE A PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY. ANY PUBLIC ACCESS to or through Las Brisas WOULD DESTROY OUR PRIVACY, REDUCE OUR PROPERTY VALUE(S) ETC. I hereby REQUEST NOTICE on any project(s) being considered by the City of Diamond Bar which would affect the private restricted access/use of SUGAR PINE within Las Brisas. Signature Print Name Unit Address Date cc: Board of Directors Las Brisas Homeowners Association Post Office Box 4735, Diamond Bar, California 91765 HOW THE PROJECT BENEFITS THE COMMUNITY School rees A project like this with large homes is ideal. The school fees it will add are approximately 1.5 million, while typically these large homes may add maybe 70 to 120 additional children in our schools. That's a good return not only for our schools but for the children in our community. Property Taxes Medium size homes in the 2500 square foot range are a "breakeven" for the services required for that house (i.e. fire, police, parks, recreation, etc.). The homes in the project range from the 5000 - 10,000 square foot range and therefore all of them have the ra]2anfty to contribute positively to the city's fiscal health and, in turn, our community. economic Benefits to Diamond Bar The project will bring in 120 households with strong incomes. This additional income will translate into real benefits for the community businesses (i.e. local restaurants, jewelers, and the many specialty shops). We all know the economy is not strong and while this may not spur the National economy, a proiect like this does much to spur the economy in our community. economic Benefits to "The Country" There is a real benefit that you can calculate to "The County": Dues at $135.00 per month x 12 months x JZQ home sites equals $194.000.00 per year. There is also a one time benefit of $840.000.00 paid to "The County" treasury. enhanced image "The Country" has greatly added to the strong image of Diamond Bar. The project will, by enhancing the image of "The Country", also enhance the overall image of Diamond Bar. Lower than Average Drain on City Resources The project has a lower cnnnumptinn of _i y aervinea. The project is part of "The Country", therefore the city does not have to maintain the roads and the requirements for police protection are reduced due to the presence of "The Country" patrol guards. Significant environmental Area The project has been very considerate and in alliance with the environment. It is very important to the project to protect and preserve nature. A "Significant Environmental Area" does not require no development, only that the developer is very sensitive to the environment they build upon. DATE: TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCI.,, REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. City Clerk I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address awry t1gn 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: //Z9 / TO: City Clerk FROM: 5KAAk ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: 6bmro,,w44RM t SUBJECT: - I expect to address the Council on the subject agendG.. Council Minutes reflect item. Please have the my name and aq#ress a&,Oritten 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: O. DATE: TO: City Clerk FROM:' ef- Ile - ADDRESS : C ORGANIZATION: r— SUBJECT: '67- 1 expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and ad. ess as written above. ve. Sianature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended assist the Mayor recognizedlandntoring ensureat all correctersons spellingsng Of to addresssthe he names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: Alt TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name aM,&ddre/ss, as writtf above. i -101 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. iw 5V Orf r S a PP develoPew#�-�" VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGAR! NG AGENDA ITEM NO. S DATE: TO: City Clerk FROM: / ��%_> L� /,� 7-e ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: it J l A/ -i p iV 1� SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name addre s wr' to bove. t Si e NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address thk'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: I' ag'l� TO: City Clerk FROM: ADDRESS: a 39 RJ (.Latin ORGANIZATION: 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. S 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: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: I expect to ac Council Minutes rer.iect my name and address as written above. A .- VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. I - a 8 -qJ, City Clerk ells 3��v ��l• � -P- c, -rJrr#tti-e em- q �)l q �k4-a dfJ"r /f;y 5d -c icz-4-25 i . _NMIW.0 Signa 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 �t 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. REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: TO: city Clerk FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Pl�ase have the Council Minutes reflect my name and acid ss asK4ten I/ ove. �t 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: —:: �> TO: City Clerk FROM: _ FZ-tiv d /jA ADDRESS: / C ©�A'� �V-) 9 ORGANIZATION: _SQL r SUBJECT: �?'► ::::o rvov� o I expect to address the Council on t 4 Council Minutes reflect my name _A Pd (1bS ect a#ep a item. Please have the ,,aa ten above. C/- 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 � � `, 7 66 VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: / g�z 9 TO: Cit lerk FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the Council Minutes reflect my name and ac >j ect agenda item. Please have the ss as written above. /Slignature 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: TO: city Clerk FROM: t`- / ,ti ) t=i D ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: - L /7 /4 �f +R4�!.T5 q76,5,01479,5/ 4h y � �7 I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please nave Lae Council Minutes reflect my name andaddress as w itten 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: J �, 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 anc�-address ads written above. /� / \ � S 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: 7 TO: City Clerk 11 FROM:ADDRESS: z) '7 ORGANIZATION: 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. Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This toraddressis ttheed to Councilsist the are recognizedor landntorensureat all correctersonsspell Wishing names in the Minutes. palling of VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 DATE: : 2'. TO: City Clerk FROM: �` L �tf'iLCf ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: C --A I FZ CI SUBJECT: L' 1�5 t C c" /,-t /"1 I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written 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: TO: City Clerk , t, t, Tc, L FROM: J Q1 F i ADDRESS: l ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Pleas Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. sic4nature Wnmr.. All ...Qnra may attend meetings and address the City Council. This VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING i DATE: ?N ✓ lc/'i ,::�� %fir' c� /�c.SC� TO: FROM: �- ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: r 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. 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 { l f DATE: TO: City -2'`/ FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: �J �"' � •`� / /���i � �.`- C�'� 1�,;/Y� G, e n the subject I expect to address the Council o Ject agenda item. please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended assist iinrsthat tewishing to addres the Cuncilare recognzedand toenurecorrecspellingof names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO-- DATE: O.DATE: _ 15 — (A � O TO: City Clerk FROM: ' ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: 2 I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address�as wfi�t above. Signature Council. This NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the Cit arsons wishing form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons of to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCII; REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: TO: City Clerk FROM: -i ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: �— SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. :Tease have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written 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. 7.1 ..rJ'W! .J1. .. .. . AA.. r.....J r. i. .. .....J V...... v er ...1 r.... REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: TO: City Clerk FROM: A fA4 ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address a �.ss as writt�above. S 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: TO: City Clerk FROM: W c i bo r ADDRESS: a 1,6 10 != ORGANIZATION: S C l 1 SUBJECT: rl- - (, k I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. 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 recognised and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: TO: City Clerk FROM: 'lC ADDRESS: ��v� r,9 /f f j i �j/9�y�. l��yL y�% E 5� ORGANIZATION • f "R� G " i n 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. 5. 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: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE C;TY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. I expect to address the Council on t Council Minutes reflect my name and NOTE: All persons may attend meetiz form is intended to assist the Mayor to address the Council are recognize names in the Minutes. sub]ct ag nda item. Please have the iresT as w itten sabove. a address �t# City Council. This suring thall persons wishing ar to ensure correct spelling of VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: /Z2 SL9 2 TO: City Clerk FROM: L5 t - ADDRESS: 3OO / A J -,an,( B ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: /.2-0 U K 1 T -DJ V I expect to address the Council on the sub'ect agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and addrss as MrAten above. S NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and addrids 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: TO: City Clerk U FROM: 17 V w . ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: may'" 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. 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. 1 DATE. TO FR M: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCXL / k" rl REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. Pr U�^ n City C erk \� I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item d?leaa Council Minutes reflect my name and ad ss as itten a ove. Signature have NOTE: All persons may attend meetings annd address the City -/council- This form is intended to assist the Mayor in el uring 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 CI Y COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: TO: City Clerk Ile FROM: ! _ ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name/a- address �Jwritten above. U 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: ��� U t I' TO: City Clerk FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the Council Minutes reflect my name and ac )ject genda item. Please have the sswritten above. i,r//, ,�oignazure NOTE: All persons may attend �etings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognised and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. ,j VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. op DAT �GY(v TO: City C irk FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: %- C�`)✓I/� �7I� �� �� CTTRTF.C'T • �! / c�/i / ��v �.����\ / I expect to address the Council on the su 'ect a d ite Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and ad ss 9 r t en o S NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the 614*f 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. h DATE: �, , _ ,� TO: 'ty Clerk FROM: CAI� ADDRESS: '73V-) < ORGANIZATION:-����-' SUBJECT: I expect to address th Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written Above. s ictfiat 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. ORGANIZATIONO/ Cg, 90A—l� )Y/L.J SUBJECT: Ie.nk�-r1uT- `P2Ac--r5 �f` 79,5-1► y-79SZ I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written 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: TO: City Clerk ,, , n FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATIONO/ Cg, 90A—l� )Y/L.J SUBJECT: Ie.nk�-r1uT- `P2Ac--r5 �f` 79,5-1► y-79SZ I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written 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: TO: City Clerk FROM: ry ADDRESS: - 4 ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: -C t -J I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council, Minutes reflect my name and address as writt above. ia r-ure 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: TO: City Clerk FROM: ) ADDRESS: 2 L/ % L f,,,14 rZ p ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT:�� I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and dress as written above. Sianature 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: C7'� TO: City Clerk FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: h 4�' I T) I expect to address the Council on e subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name anVaddress as written above. 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:0 Z TO: City Clerk FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: I expect to address the Coihncil onAhe Council Minutes reflect my name d a, ubject ag4nda item. Please have the Ness as wr' t above. i SiqnAture 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. �jG DATE: (I Z$ C?-2— TO: ZTO: City�Clerk FROM: �I O %1 K �Yi ka, ADDRESS: (�65-5' e, (-oa gGa� Gpg � tits C VOLUNTARY REQUEST TOADDRESS T jilt'' ilt ttil E��IGII� fjorr�V-II 7, IM'Snnaa- a -o SiD� �� written above. (/ Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meeti gs 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: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. f - 8 2 - City Clerk f� L� Tl 72-& SUBJECT: 7_=V /� - �e 5 (/1%G I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and addx`e,--,,s,as �'U:i�,above./ 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: / — ,� b Ci,)— TO: TO: City Clerk FROM: U 2 V1iiU ADDRESS: & is 5 1 -01 Ayvx0ti1 V\ 61412_ i ORGANIZATION: C SUBJECT: T-e"—Twr sur -TrL:u 7, 4 -1k -Su, 41k� I � `i�-4S-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. 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: I `� 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 written above. ure 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 C Y COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO.1 'cI DATE: TO: City Cler-k� 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 a wr'tten above. 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: TO: City Clerk FROM: l� / ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject a enda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and addre s as mitten above. ,^t7�� 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: TO: City Clerk FROM: 4�1 ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: 'VI r4 I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name 4fid address as written 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.