HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/11/1992BREA, CALIFORNIA
CONFERENCE ROOM I - THIRD LEVEL
BREA CIVIC S CULTURAL CENTER
BREA CITY COUNCIL. - JOINT MEETING
DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL - 6:00 P.M.
AUGUST i l e 1992
(Preliminary - Will Be Considered for Approval 8/18/92)
CALL TO ORDER - The special Joint meeting of the Brea City Council and
the Diamond Bar City Council was called to order by
Mayor Ron Isles at 6:00 p.m. in Conference Room E,
Level Three, Brea Civic & Cultural Center, Number
One Civic Center Circle, Brea, California.
ROLL CALL - PRESENT: Mayor Isles, Mayor Pro Tem Dunlap, Council Members Nelson,
Parker and Wedin
r
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT - Assistant City Manager O'Donnell, Development Services
Director Cutts, Traffic Engineer Siecke, City Planner
Bartlam, Senior Planner Trevino, Associate Planner
Lawson and City Clerk Rhine
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - Jay Kim, Mayor
Phyllis Papen, Mayor Pro Tem
John Forbing, Councilman
Terry Belanger, Acting City Manager
James DeStefano, Community Development Director
George Wentz, Interim City Engineer
Mayor Isles announced that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss 3lutua'
matters and concern+ with regard to transportation issues and Tonner Csnyon
development.
Jay Kim, Mayor of the Ctty of Diamond Bar, stated his pleasure at being invited.
He stated that Councilmen Gary Werner and Gary Miller had expressed regret at not
being able to attend.
Brea's Traffic Engineer stated that the Four -corners Study and the 57 Freeway
Transportation Study go together and are pertinent to the agencies of Los
Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside and Orange Counties. He added that SLAG had
agreed to fund $60,o0o on the Four -corners Study which will gather information
about existing systems that are being proposed for the four counties so that
everyone would be dealing with the same database. An RFP is now being written
for that study.
Mr. Siecke discussed the North State Route 51 Freeway Transportation Study, Phase
II, stating that Phase I had been completed in 1991 and had identified joint
I
issues in routing. At that time we had hoped that our study would impact Orange
County Transportation Agency's long-range transit plan to phase in a northerly
commuter rail but this did not happen. We are now looking at: a 10-20 year (�
timeframe before this happens. It is our intent to get a jump on that and
expedite their planning with a Preliminary Technical Study on key issues related
to the northern extension. The purpose of Phase II would be to continue
developing attention to north Orange County, provide technical information
allowing an opportunity for interchangeable systems in Orange and Los Angeles
Counties, service other than passenger service (maintenance stations for the
landfill), increase the market area served in Orange,,Los Angeles, Riverside and
San Bernardino Counties, enhance rail service in 5ast Los Angeles, impact
Caltrans District and their Study to assure rail alignment into the 57/60 Freeway
interchange, identify viable routes throughout the corridor to avoid future
problems and take advantage, of opportunities, provide information to the four
counties to encourage extension and focus joint support for the rail extension.
Mr. Siecke identified the scope of work as project management, objectives,
station locations, data that justify higher levels of service, technology that
Is relevant to hill alignment, non -passenger use during off-peak hours, and
connections from North Orange County to Los Angeles rail service.
Mr. Siecke stated that the City of Industry is getting ready to build a station
on Brea Canyon Road at the Union passenger rail line and expressed the need fer
substantive information to integrate our system with them, He added that the
North State Route 51 Freeway Transportation Study, Phase 11, would cost $300,000
and SLAG had agreed to pay 80% of this cost using Federal funds and provide a
local match of SCAG staff services for the balance. This means there is no
expense to local agencies. A wide base of support had been received from Chino
Hi Is, Fullerton, Yorba Linda, Placentia and possibly La Habra. Orange County
and the Los Angeles Transportation Commission are also interested, thus
establishing a strong intergovernmental link. He announced a meeting on the 19th
of August with SCAG and OCTA traffic modelers to bring a common understanding.
Councilman Parker expressed SCAG's interest to take study specifics and build
them into their Master Study. Councilman Wedin added that SCAG is updating their
regional mobility plan and will want to move fairly quickly as their plan must
be done by Summer 1993. Warren Siecke said that the Policy and Technical
Advisory Committee would select the consultant and the consultant would contract
with SCAG.
Mayor Kim expressed his desire to move forward and was supported by Mayor Pro Tem
Papen.
Councilman Wedin suggested that the two Councils work out a strategy to keep
contacts open with LAIC, OCTA and SCAG. He suggested an ongoing contact system
and pointed out the ability to bring together substance to multiply County
information. It was suggested to send an excerpt of this meetin's minutes to
those agencies with a cover letter, invite them to come in and tai k with us, do
something like a resolution, work out a contact system/action plan. The purpose
was to identify ways to connect the future system by dialogue with the key
players. The possibility of a transportation workshop was discussed and it was
felt appropriate to hold a workshop to share the data of the study which would
8/111/92
then mobilize action. The Traffic Engineer said that this would be about mid-
year 1993.
ly, Mayor Pro Tem Papen asked that the City of Corona not be left out of those
interested border cities.
The Diamond Bar City Council was applauded for their very supportive and
responsive actions with regard to a future rail system that is mutually
supportive to North Orange County.
Prior to discussing agenda items, Terry Belanger, Acting City Manager of Diamond
Bar, reviewed their City's General Plan Land Use Map which had been approved on
July 14, 1992. He announced that they had received a referendum petition against
the approval, but the plan will remain in effect until a possible election. He
noted the "green" area on the map to the south of Diamond Bar which covers about
3,000 acres within their sphere of influence. He stated that most of this area
is owned by the Los Angeles Council of the Boy Scouts of America. The area has
been given an "agricultural" land use designation. Staff and the Planning
Commission had recommended the agriculture use to be a special planning area with
a variety of uses and a density of one unit per acre. After the public hearing,
the Council abandoned the special use zone and it would now take a general plan
amendment to change the agricultural land use.
Councilmen Wedin questioned the transit issue as compared to roadways. Mr.
Belanger stated that the general plan was general and would allow for a variety
of transportation types to be considered in terms of placement through the
canyon, if at all. This would include any type of rail system. He stated that
the two-way road that is currently being used for recreational purposes had the
potential of becoming a major transportation carrier as had happened with Palos
Verdes and Carbon Canyon Road if it connects.
Mr. Belanger explained that their conversations with the Boy Scout Organization
indicated that they own the property fee simple and there are no reverters; and
at this time they did not know what they wanted to do with their property. They
own about 3,200 acres and the Boy Scout Camp occupies about 700 acres. He added
that any restrictions may be ecological as about 80% of this, area was
superimposed by Los Angeles County as a wilderness area. The City of Diamond Bar
had not done a title report. A meeting with them is planned on September 8 to
discuss their intentions.
It was determined that there were multi -county utility Issues which could result
in a piecemeal situation. Mr. Belanger said that their intent had been to
attempt to plan this area on a reasonable and rational basis, but they will have
to postpone any action pending the referendum. Mayor Kim added that in their
area fifty homes are directly impacted by ionner Canyon.
Mayor Pro Tem Dunlap said that the SOI Study had shown that the area is heavily
impacted by the oil industry and is not wholly "pristine."
8/11/92
Councilman Parker felt that it behooves both cities to work closely to get
something we want and talked about the SOI Vision Document. Mr. Belanger said �-
that they were familiar with the SOI Study and wanted to see a planning
designation in their area that would invite this process.
The Development Services Director reported that the Vision Document was Phase I
of the process, and Phase II will be on a portion of property within our northern
boundary owned by Santa Fe Energy Company,
Since many issues would meed to be put on hold, it was determined to move forward
with the issues of trails and hillside protection. The Development Services
Director described the formation of a committee to study trails through our City
that interconnect with the surrounding area. Mr. Belanger said that this would
be consistent with their intent as they hoped to hook up with Chino Hills trails
and the Schabarum Trail which goes through the Scout area. He indicated that
they would mirror whatever was established with our group. Councilman Wedin
suggested that this may be a way to communicate with the Boy Scout Organization.
Councilman Wedin reported on the good standing that Councilman Nelson has with
the Boy Scouts, having received the Silver Beaver Award.
Councilman Parker suggested a joint meeting with the Boy Scout representatives
and our two cities to assist any future planning.
Councilman Forbinq also felt that the trails committee would be a good place to
start the process as it could identify those areas where we would have forever
open space. He spoke of a potential impact at the northeast corner of the
property under discussion in that there is discussion of a potential water (lake)
reservoir which would cover about 1,500 acres and may have a downstream impact,
Councilman Wedin stated that Ken Witt, who lives in Brea, is Chairman of the
Board for the water district, and perhaps we could meet with him and his senior
management staff to talk about this matter. Perhaps they could come to a meeting
with Chino Hills, Diamond Bar and Brea.
H11-1 S i d,_,e P,,r„g•i o
The Development Services Director reported that Brea is getting information from
surrounding cities for a hillside ordinance implementing the latest technology.
Jim DeStefano described their interim hillside ordinance which they hoped to make
a permanent policy. He said that their first project of 13 lots utilizing land
form grading had been completed. It mimics the natural environment with no
angular cuts, more softening and requires a creative engineer and contractor.
They would be happy to transmit a copy to Brea`s planning staff. He added that
it did protect the ridgelines, Mayor Isles described a clustered hillside
development on the Ridge Route somewhere near Castaic Lake which perfectly fit
the hillsides.
The Assistant City Manager stated that he had kept notes for follow-up and a
report would be put together for a future meeting. Councilman Forbing stated
4
8/11/92
LWI
that they will meet with Chino Hills in September, so possibly October or
November would be a good time for another meeting.
Mayor Islas recognized the good working relationship between Brea and Diamond
Bar, as well as with Yorba Linda and thanked the visiting Council and staff for
their continued interest and support.
7140 p.m. - Mayor Isles adjourned the meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
299.2.
Donna M. Rhine, CMC
City Clerk
The foregoing mintues are hereby approved this 18th Jay of August, 1992.
8/11/92
NORTHERN INTERCOUNTY RAII, EXTENSION STUDY
BACKGROUND
In 1991, the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) adopted a Long Range Transit
Systems Plan and Development Strategy which includes an urban rail system that would
ultimately include a link along State Route 57 (SR57) corridor to Brea. The strategy adopted
by OCTA raises two specific concerns for Brea, Diamond Bar and other cities whose residents
and businesses are served by SR57.
There is no planned extension of the rail system to Los Angeles County via the SR57 corridor.
The focus of the study is on connections to the Los Angeles Green Line at Norwalk.
Service to the north Orange County area is not expected to be available for 10 to 20 years. The
implementation plan envisions construction of the initial urban rail system extending 27 miles
southerly from Fullerton to Irvine and probably from Fullerton to Norwalk via the I-5 corridor
within 10 years.
Also, in 1991, the cities of Brea and Diamond Bar conducted the North State Route 57 Transit
Systems Qpp=nities and Options Study. One recommendation of the study was to pursue
extension of the Central Orange County Fixed Guideway northerly to an interface with planned
commuter rail in east Los Angeles County. This intercounty connection would provide direct
rail access into Central Orange County for commuters originating in Riverside, San Bernardino
and Los Angeles Counties, thereby relieving some demand in the State Route 57 (SR57) corridor
between State Route 60 (SR 60) in Los Angeles County and State Route 91 in Orange County.
Brea and Diamond Bar are pursuing incorporation of a northern intercounty alignment that
generally continues north in the SR 57 corridor from Fullerton, over the hills to a location in
the vicinity of SR 60 in Diamond Bar. This route would be approximately 11 miles long with
up to eight stations, depending on the precise alignment and the land uses adjacent to the
alignment. Further extension of the system study to the SR 30 corridor in San Dimas has been
recommended by SCAG.
Brea and Diamond Bar are proposing a Preliminary Technical Study to provide preliminary
technical information on the key issues related to the northern extension, including:
1. Regional Traffic Flow and the Need to Alleviate Traffic Congestion in the SR
57 Corridor. Traffic congestion in the SR 57 corridor has progressively worsened
over the last decade. Further development in the region, particularly in San
Bernardino and Riverside Counties, will result in increased regional demand in the
SR 57 corridor.
2. The technology studies for the OCTA Study are too focused to adequately
address future technology needs and constraints in other areas of Orange
County. The selection of rail technology based on the design and demand of the
Central County system may not adequately serve needs for extensions in other areas.
The ability of technologies to operate on steeper grades and to maintain travel
speeds, should be considered in the technology selection process.
3. Opportunities for rail maintenance facilities outside the Central System and for
joint use other than passenger service should be considered in the selection of
technology. The potential to combine maintenance stations with compatible land
uses such as landfills or other under -developed parcels can also be considered.
4. The alternatives for Los Angeles connections focus on the I-5 corridor. The
focus of transit planning in Orange County over the last 15 years has been a band
centered on I-5. A Northern rail extension would begin to address transit needs in
the SR 57 corridor, and substantially increase the market area served in Orange, Los
Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties.
5. A northern intercounty rail extension may substantially enhance Orange County
rail services and east -west services in Los Angeles County. Connections to
planned east -west rail services in east Los Angeles County would benefit commuters
destined for locations in either central Orange or Los Angeles Counties and could
help reduce traffic impacts on existing east -west freeway connections.
6. Caltrans District 7 is studying reconstruction of the SR60/SR57 interchange.
Identification of needed rail right-of-way should be incorporated in Caltrans efforts
to ensure that a rail alignment is protected for the future.
7. Route identification is necessary to identify northern extension alignments that
are feasible, serve markets in the SR 57 corridor effectively and enhance
connections with rail services in east Los Angeles County.
8. The cities in north Orange County, east Los Angeles County, northwest San
Bernardino County and Riverside County need additional information on the
northern extension. The various cities along the alignment of the northern
extension will need to work closely with their elected officials, business communities
and other community leaders to solicit awareness and support for the rail extension.
PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK
The proposed scope of work will include the following tasks:
TASK A PROJECT MOBILIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
This task includes project mobilization, project management and quality control. Activities
include attendance at meetings; documentation of meetings and phone correspondence; progress
reports; and consultations with outside agencies.
TASK B DEFINITION OF PROJECT OBJECTIVES
Identify the specific regional and local goals and objectives of the proposed intercounty rail
extension. This will address service objectives, local and subregional markets and
interrelationships with regional transit systems including Orange, Los Angeles, San Bernardino
and Riverside Counties.
TASK C ROUTE IDENTIFICATION
Identify feasible alignments for the northern rail extension between the Central Orange County
Fixed Guideway terminus in Fullerton and a terminus of the extension in the vicinity of San
Dimas.
TASK D IDENTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE STATION LOCATION
Identify possible station locations along the intercounty northern rail extension alignment, based
on land use information and aerial photographs from Task C and on the preliminary demand
information from Task E. Preliminary station locations will be identified based on existing and
planned activity centers along the alignment.
TASK E REVIEW OF EXISTING TRAVEL DEMAND DATA
Develop preliminary estimates of demand for the extension, based on existing resources.
This task will also include refinement of linkages to regional and subregional transit systems (rail
and bus) in the OCTA Strategy report, based on assumed implementation of the northern
intercounty extension.
TASK F DEFINITION OF OPERATING AND TECHNOLOGY PARAMETERS
Preliminary operating and technology parameters will be identified, in order to develop
conceptual level construction, operating and maintenance costs for the northern intercounty rail
extension. Specific technological considerations relevant to the selection of a specific alignment
will be identified.
In the development of the appropriate technology for the rail system for the northern extension,
consistency with the Central Orange County system, which is planned to be an elevated
guideway with light rail technology, will be maintained. Other technologies able to operate on
steeper grades would also be considered in the technology selection process. This task will also
evaluate potential technological opportunities and constraints of the northern extension for
potential joint use of the guideway to transport goods. This presents a possible opportunity to
use the guideway facility for the movement of solid waste material to the Brea Olinda Landfill
during periods when the guideway is not in passenger service. This potential joint use will
require evaluation of system technology parameters to ensure that the structure, tracks, operating
and control systems and other elements can accommodate vehicles loaded with and hauling
wastes or freight.
TASK G EVALUATION OF CONNECTIONS TO LOS ANGELES RAIL SERVICES
Develop planning level data for the comparative analysis of the northern intercounty extension
with the Norwalk extensions being considered by the OCTA.
ENT STA
Contact was made with SCAG and they have offered to fund the majority of the study which is
expected to cost about $300,000. Eighty percent would come from federal funds with the local
match being provided by SCAG staff services. Thus, the outlay of funds by local agencies is
expected to be minimal.
SCAG encouraged the involvement of other agencies. To that end, we have received
commitments for participation from the City Managers of Chino Hills, Diamond Bar, Fullerton,
Placentia and Yorba Linda. La Habra is also considering participation. OCTA and Orange
County are also supportive.
At this time, we are awaiting direction from SCAG as to the specifics of packaging the funding
application and input from Orange County Environmental Management Agency regarding the
scope of work.
7/30/92
d\j rc\ 118
Joint Study Session Issues:
Brea & Diamond Bar City Councils
The following list of topics represent a summary of major planning issues regarding
Brea's SOI and its counterpart SOI in Diamond Bar. Within each of these topic areas
are various sub -issues or ideas that might be appropriate for discussion during the joint
study session.
1. Land Use Compatibility
• Compatibility of land uses in Brea's SOI with Diamond Bar's SOI will be critical,
especially as they relate to environmental externalities such as traffic, noise, etc.
2. Open Space
• Ideal would be for planned open space in Brea's SOI to adjoin open space in
Diamond Bar's SOI - - coordinated Open Space Elements of respective General
Plans could help accomplish this
• Both cities should encourage and facilitate State acquisition of park lands
3. Hillside Preservation
• Coordination of Hillside development/preservation policies, especially at or near
common boundaries, will be critical (Brea staff is currently preparing a Hillside
Ordinance for review by the Planning Commission and City Council)
4. Infrastructure and Public Services
• Providing roads, water, sewer, and public safety services may require joint
agreements or other cooperative efforts
5. "Artificial" Boundary
• The ridge top, or some other physical feature is probably a more logical boundary
between communities than the current "artificial" boundary
• Perhaps we could designate a more logical "planning boundary" to help define a
"special cooperation zone" area that transcexds both SOIs
6. Environmental System
• The entire canyon area functions as one system (not respecting the County line)
• Brea is "downstream" and development policies in Diamond Bar's SOI may have
significant impact within Brea's SOI (e.g., "blue -line" streams, drainage, wildlife,
etc.)
7. Trails
• Committee recently formed in Brea to deal with Trail issues
• Trails needs to be viewed in a more regional context, providing linkages of trails
throughout this sub -region
• National Park Service provides free technical assistance toward helping multiple
jurisdictions develop comprehensive plans for a sub -regional trails system
• Trails can be multi -modal: pedestrian, bicycle, equestrian
• Trails need to be considered within context of open spaces and parks
• Open Space Element of General Plan might be updated to expand on the Trails
issue
AGENDA
Brea City Council
Diamond Bar City Council
Joint Meeting
August 11, 1992
6:00 p.m.
I. Call to Order/Roll Call
II. Welcome and Introduction
A. Mayor Ron Isles
B. Mayor Jay Kim
III. Intercounty Rail Extension Studies
A. Identification of Mutual Concerns
B. Four Corners Study - Confirm Participation
by the Cities of Diamond Bar and Brea
C. Route 57 Corridor Transportation Study Phase II
IV. Sphere of Influence
A. Identification of Planning Efforts to Date
1. Brea
2. Diamond Bar
B. Issues of Mutual Concern
1. Trails
2. Hillside Protection
3. Environmental Baseline Study
V. Other Items of Concern
VI. Adjournment
JRCIsv
jrc.102
BREA, CALIFORNIA BREA CITY COUNCIL - JOINT MEETING
CONFERENCE ROOM E - THIRD LEVEL DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL - 6:00 P.M.
BREA CIVIC & CULTURAL CENTER AUGUST 11, 1992
(Preliminary - Will Be Considered for Approval 8/18/92)
CALL TO ORDER - The special joint meeting of the Brea City Council and
the Diamond Bar City Council was called to order by
Mayor Ron Isles at 6:00 p.m. in Conference Room E,
Level Three, Brea Civic & Cultural Center, Number
One Civic Center Circle, Brea, California.
ROLL CALL - PRESENT:
ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT -
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR -
Mayor Isles, Mayor Pro Tem Dunlap, Council Members Nelson,
Parker and Wedin
None
Assistant City Manager O'Donnell, Development Services
Director Cutts, Traffic Engineer Siecke, City Planner
Bartlam, Senior Planner Trevino, Associate Planner
Lawson and City Clerk Rhine
Jay Kim, Mayor
Phyllis Papen, Mayor Pro Tem
John Forbing, Councilman
Terry Belanger, Acting City Manager
James OeStefano,'Community Development Director==
George Wentz, Interim City Engineer
Mayor Isles announced that the purpose of the meeting was to discussI-nhutual
matters and concerns with regard to transportation issues and Tonner Canyon
development.
Jay Kim, Mayor of the Ctty of Diamond Bar, stated his pleasure at being invited.
He stated that Councilmen Gary Werner and Gary Miller had expressed regret at not
being able to attend.
Brea's Traffic Engineer stated that the Four -corners Study and the 57 Freeway
Transportation Study go together and are pertinent to the agencies of Los
Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside and Orange Counties. He added that SCAG had
agreed to fund $60,000 on the Four -corners Study which will gather information
about existing systems that are being proposed for the four counties so that
everyone would be dealing with the same database. An RFP is now being written
for that study.
(North State Route 57 Freeway Transportation Study Phase II
Mr. Siecke discussed the North State Route 57 Freeway Transportation Study, Phase
II, stating that Phase I had been completed in 1991 and had identified joint
1
8/11/92
issues in routing. At that time we had hoped that our study would impact Orange
County Transportation Agency's long-range transit plan to phase in a northerly
commuter rail but this did not happen. We are now looking at a 10-20 year
timeframe before this happens. It is our intent to get a jump on that and
expedite their planning with a Preliminary Technical Study on key issues related
to the northern extension. The purpose of Phase II would be to continue
developing attention to north Orange County, provide technical information
allowing an opportunity for interchangeable systems in Orange and Los Angeles
Counties, service other than passenger service (maintenance stations for the
landfill), increase the market area served in Orange, Los Angeles, Riverside and
San Bernardino Counties, enhance rail service in East Los Angeles, impact
Caltrans District and their Study to assure rail alignment into the 57/60 Freeway
interchange, identify viable routes throughout the corridor to avoid future
problems and take advantage of opportunities, provide information to the four
counties to encourage extension and focus joint support for the rail extension.
Mr. Siecke identified the scope of work as project management, objectives,
station locations, data that justify higher levels of service, technology that
is relevant to hill alignment, non -passenger use during off-peak hours, and
connections from North Orange County to Los Angeles rail service.
Mr. Siecke stated that the City of Industry is getting ready to build a station
on Brea Canyon Road at the Union passenger rail line and expressed the need for
substantive information to integrate our system with them. He added that the
North State Route 57 Freeway Transportation Study, Phase II, would cost $300,000
and SCAG had agreed to pay 80% of this cost using Federal funds and provide a
local match of SCAG staff services for the balance. This means there is no
expense to local agencies. A wide base of support had been received from Chino
Hills, Fullerton, Yorba Linda, Placentia and possibly La Habra. Orange County
and the Los Angeles Transportation Commission are also interested, thus
establishing a strong intergovernmental link. He announced a meeting on the 19th
of August with SCAG and OCTA traffic modelers to bring a common understanding.
Councilman Parker expressed SCAG's interest to take study specifics and build
them into their Master Study. Councilman Wedin added that SCAG is updating their
regional mobility plan and will want to move fairly quickly as their plan must
be done by Summer 1993. Warren Siecke said that the Policy and Technical
Advisory Committee would select the consultant and the consultant would contract
with SCAG.
Mayor Kim expressed his desire to move forward and was supported by Mayor Pro Tem
Papen.
Councilman Wedin suggested that the two Councils work out a strategy to keep
contacts open with LATC, OCTA and SCAG. He suggested an ongoing contact system
and pointed out the ability to bring together substance to multiply County
information. It was suggested to send an excerpt of this meeting's minutes to
those agencies with a cover letter, invite them to come in and talk with us, do
something like a resolution, work out a contact system/action plan. The purpose
was to identify ways to connect the future system by dialogue with the key
players. The possibility of a transportation workshop was discussed and it was
felt appropriate to hold a workshop to share the data of the study which would
8/11/92
then mobilize action. The Traffic Engineer said that this would be about mid-
year 1993.
Mayor Pro Tens Papen asked that the City of Corona not be left out of those
interested border cities.
The Diamond Bar City Council was applauded for their very supportive and
responsive actions with regard to a future rail system that is mutually
supportive to North Orange County.
Sphere of Influence Study
Prior to discussing agenda items, Terry Belanger, Acting City Manager of Diamond
Bar, reviewed their City's General Plan Land Use Map which had been approved on
July 14, 1992. He announced that they had received a referendum petition against
the approval, but the plan will remain in effect until a possible election. He
noted the "green" area on the map to the south of Diamond Bar which covers about
3,000 acres within their sphere of influence. He stated that most of this area
is owned by the Los. Angeles Council of the Boy Scouts of America. The area has
been given an "agricultural" land use designation. Staff and the Planning
Commission had recommended the agriculture use to be a special planning area with
a variety of uses and a density of one unit per acre. After the public hearing,
the Council abandoned the special use zone and it would now take a general plan
amendment to change the agricultural land use.
Councilman Wedin questioned the transit issue as compared to roadways. Mr.
Belanger stated that the general plan was general and would allow for a variety
of transportation types to be considered in terms of placement through the
canyon, if at all. This would include any type of rail system. He stated that
the two-way road that is currently being used for recreational purposes had the
potential of becoming a major transportation carrier as had happened with Palos
Verdes and Carbon Canyon Road if it connects.
Mr. Belanger explained that their conversations with the Boy Scout Organization
indicated that they own the property fee simple and there are no reverters, and
at this time they did not know what they wanted to do with their property. They
own about 3,200 acres and the Boy Scout Camp occupies about 100 acres. He added
that any restrictions may be ecological as about 80% of this area was
superimposed by Los Angeles County as a wilderness area. The City of Diamond Bar
had not done a title report. A meeting with them is planned on September 8 to
discuss their intentions.
It was determined that there were multi -county utility issues which could result
in a piecemeal situation. Mr. Belanger said that their intent had been to
attempt to plan this area on a reasonable and rational basis, but they will have
to postpone any action pending the referendum. Mayor Ki■ added that in their
area fifty homes are directly impacted by Tonner Canyon.
Mayor Pro Tem Dunlap said that the SOI Study had shown that the area is heavily
impacted by the oil industry and is not wholly "pristine."
8/11/92
189
Councilman Parker felt that it behooves both cities to work closely to get
something we want and talked about the SOI Vision Document. Mr. Belanger said
that they were familiar with the SOI Study and wanted to see a planning
designation in their area that would invite this process.
The Development Services Director reported that the Vision Document was Phase I
of the process, and Phase II will be on a portion of property within our northern
boundary owned by Santa Fe Energy Company.
Trails Study
Since many issues would need to be put on hold, it was determined to move forward
with the issues of trails and hillside protection. The Development Services
Director described the formation of a committee to study trails through our City
that interconnect with the surrounding area. Mr. Belanger said that this would
be consistent with their intent as they hoped to hook up with Chino Hills trails
and the Schabarum Trail which goes through the Scout area. He indicated that
they would mirror whatever was established with our group. Councilman Wedin
suggested that this may be a way to communicate with the Boy Scout Organization.
Councilman Wedin reported on the good standing that Councilman Nelson has with
the Boy Scouts, having received the Silver Beaver Award.
Councilman Parker suggested a joint meeting with the Boy Scout representatives
and our two cities to assist any future planning.
Councilman Forbing also felt that the trails committee would be a good place to
start the process as it could identify those areas where we would have forever
open space. He spoke of a potential impact at the northeast corner of the
property under discussion in that there is discussion of a potential water (lake)
reservoir which would cover about 1,500 acres and may have a downstream impact.
Councilman Wedin stated that Ken Witt, who lives in Brea, is Chairman of the
Board for the water district, and perhaps we could meet with him and his senior
management staff to talk about this matter. Perhaps they could come to a meeting
with Chino Hills, Diamond Bar and Brea.
Hillside Preservation
The Development Services Director reported that Brea is getting information from
surrounding cities for a hillside ordinance implementing the latest technology.
Jim OeStefano described their interim hillside ordinance which they hoped to make
a permanent policy. He said that their first project of 13 lots utilizing land
form grading had been completed. It mimics the natural environment with no
angular cuts, more softening and requires a creative engineer and contractor.
They would be happy to transmit a copy to Brea's planning staff. He added that
it did protect the ridgelines. Mayor Isles described a clustered hillside
development on the Ridge Route somewhere near Castaic lake which perfectly fit
the hillsides.
The Assistant City Manager stated that he had kept notes for follow-up and a
report would be put together for a future meeting. Councilman Forbing stated
8/11/92
that they will meet with Chino Hills in September, so possibly October or
November would be a good time for another meeting.
Mayor Isles recognized the good working relationship between Brea and Diamond
Bar, as well as with Yorba Linda and thanked the visiting Council and staff for
their continued interest and support.
7:40 p.m. - Mayor Isles adjourned the meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
22-2- 4�
Donna M. Rhine, CMC
City Clerk
The foregoing mintues are hereby approved this 18th day of August, 1992.
Mayor
8/11/92
5
21660 EAST COPLEY DRIVE - SUITE 100
DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765-4177
714-860-2489 - FAX 714-861-3117
SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Diamond Bar City
Council will hold a joint special meeting with the Brea City
Council on Tuesday, August 11, 1992, at 6:00 p.m., for the
purpose of a discussion of Sphere -of -Influence and transportation
issues.
SAID MEETING will be held in Conference Room E, Third
Level, Brea Civic & Cultural Center, Number One Civic Center
Circle, Brea, California. The public is invited to attend.
FURTHER INFORMATION may be obtained at the Office of
the City Clerk or by calling (714) 860-2489.
DATED: August 10, 1992
/s/ Lynda Burgess
Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
Fax to Press: August 10, 1992
JAY C. KIM PHYLLIS E. PAPEN JOHN A. FORBING GARY G. MILLER GARY H. WERNER
Mayor Mayor Pro -Tem Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember
RECYCLEDPAPER
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR )
I, TOMMYE A. NICE , Deputy City Clerk of the City of Diamond
Bar, California, hereby certify that on August 10, 1992, I caused
to be posted a Special Meeting Notice a copy of which is attached
hereto and by reference made a part of this certificate.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed at Diamond Bar, California this 10th day of August,
1992.
/s/ Tommye A Nice
TOMMYE A. NICE
Deputy City Clerk of the
City of Diamond Bar
21660 EAST COPLEY DRIVE - SUITE 100
DIAMOND BAR, CA 917654177
714-860-2489 - FAX 714861-3117
T E L E C O P Y
DATE: /O 2
TIME:
TO:
C O V E R S H E E T
Name: r�" �) > >f'r/ rl <. / i/?ar4 �✓% �q�
Agency:
Telephone No.:
FAX No..
FROM:
Name: IU��hl,5r iV�cc�
Division:
NUMBER OF PAGES: (Including Cover Sheet):
COMMENTS:
JAY C. KIM PHYLLIS E. PAPEN JOHN A. FORBING
Mayor Mayor Pro -Tem Couoailmember
RECYCLED PAPER
GARY G. MILLER GARY H. WERNER
Councilmember CouncHmember
H..
21660 EAST COPLEY DRIVE - SUITE 100
DIAMOND BAR, CA 917654177
714-860-2489 • FAX 714-861-3117
SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Diamond Bar City
Council will hold a joint special meeting with the Brea City
Council on Tuesday, August 11, 1992, at 6:00 p.m., for the
purpose of a discussion of Sphere -of -Influence and transportation
issues.
SAID MEETING will be held in Conference Room E, Third
Level, Brea Civic & Cultural Center, Number One Civic Center
Circle, Brea, California. The public is invited to attend.
FURTHER INFORMATION may be obtained at the Office of
the City Clerk or by calling (714) 860-2489.
DATED: August 10, 1992
/S / L - L 4 l'7C:(�Cr 8C,>'C�'-s
Lyr�da Burgess, Citwy Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
Fax to Press: August 10, 1992
JAY C. KIM PHYLLIS E. PAPEN JOHN A. FORBING GARY G. MILLER GARY H. WERNER
Mayor Mayor Pro -Tem Councilmember CouncUrnember Councilmember
RECYCLED PAPER
■.■■
d■■.■
.-�■■ice
CALI FOR N I A
City of Brea
SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Brea City Council will hold a joint
special meeting with the Diamond Bar City Council on Tuesday, August 11, 1992, at 6:00
p.m., for the purpose of a discussion of Sphere -of -Influence and transportation issues.
SAID MEETING will be held in Conference Room E, Third Level, Brea Civic
& Cultural Center, Number One Civic Center Circle, Brea, California. The public is invited
to attend.
FURTHER INFORMATION may be obtained at the Office of the City Clerk
or by calling (714) 990-7757.
DATED: August 6, 1992
«\.pmt.*
CITY OF; BREA
D.
city Clerk
City Council Ron Isles Burnie Dunlap Carrey Nelson Glenn G. Parker Wayne D. Wedin
Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Councilman Councilman Councilman
Civic Br Cultural Center -Number One Civic Center Circle -Brea, California 92621-5758.714!990-7600•FAX 7141990-2258
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR )
I, TOMMYE A. NICE , Deputy City Clerk of the City of Diamond
Bar, California, hereby certify that on August 10, 1992, I caused
to be posted a Special Meeting Notice a copy of which is attached
hereto and by reference made a part of this certificate.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed at Diamond Bar, California this 10th day of August,
1992.
-TOM-MY-TOM-MYC A. NICE
Deputy City Clerk of the
City of Diamond Bar
21660 EAST COPLEY DRIVE - SUITE 100
DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765-4177
714-860-2489 - FAX 714-861-3117
SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Diamond Bar City
Council will hold a joint special meeting with the Brea City
Council on Tuesday, August 11, 1992, at 6:00 p.m., for the
purpose of a discussion of Sphere -of -Influence and transportation
issues.
SAID MEETING will be held in Conference Room E, Third
Level, Brea Civic & Cultural Center, Number One Civic Center
Circle, Brea, California. The public is invited to attend.
FURTHER INFORMATION may be obtained at the Office of
the City Clerk or by calling (714) 860-2489.
DATED: August 10, 1992
L daBurgess,City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
Fax to Press: August 10, 1992
JAY C. HIM PHYLLIS E. PAPEN JOHN A. FORBING GARY G. MILLER GARY H. WERNER
Mayor Mayor Pro -Tem Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember
RECYCLED PAPER
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AREA
VISION DOCUMENT
April, 1992
BREA CITY COUNCIL
Ron Isles
Burnie Dunlap
Carrey J. Nelson
Glenn G. Parker
Wayne D. Wedin
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
Councilman
Councilman
Councilman
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
Section
1:
A Vision for Brea's Sphere of Influence Area . . . . . . . .. . 1
Section
2:
Creating the Vision . .. . . . . . . .. .. . . . . .. .. . .
. 4
Section
3:
Evaluating the Vision .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ..
. 5
Section
4:
Achieving the Vision . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . .. ...
15
Section
5:
Next Steps - Implementing the Vision .. .. .........
17
Section
6:
In Closing .. . .. . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . .. .. ...
19
Appendix A:
Appendix B:
Appendix C:
APPENDICES:
Roster of Participants .. .. .. .... .. .... .... . A-1
Fact Cards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1
Sample Idea Cards ...... .. .... .. .. .......0-1
i April, 1992
SECTION 1: A VISION FOR BREA'S SPHERE OF
INFLUENCE AREA
The people of Brea look northward to the hills of the Sphere of
Influence (SOI) area and see many things. Today, we view a
landscape of rolling hillsides with scattered oil production activity.
We know that Tonner Canyon and its special environment lie
beyond the visible south slopes.
We value the large expanse of open space, yet recognize that
others own this land.
Tomorrow may bring change.
This major unincorporated land area of 7.4 square miles is Brea's
"Last Frontier. If all of it is annexed, the City's size will increase
by roughly 70 percent. Clearly, what happens to these 4,762 acres
will have a major impact on the City of Brea and our residents --
and we care!
If the City of Brea does nothing, this land will remain undeter-
mined as to future use. Since it is currently outside the City limits,
the City will have no direct control until property owners request
annexation. Rather than wait for such requests, or reacting, the
City Council decided to take proactive steps to assure that City
goals for the SOI area would be addressed.
The City Council initiated a process by which the people of Brea
could formulate goals for the SOI. The size of the area and the
complexity of planning and environmental regulations preclude
preparation of a plan defining a map of future land uses. There-
fore, the Vision was conceived as a means to illustrate Brea's
hopes for the future. It also serves to define Brea's intentions and
its expectations of property owners.
1 April, 1992
But what is this Vision? What do Breans want for the SOI area,
and how does this relate to the existing city?
This Vision says that we want:
❑ Something special for this area which is better than
"business=as-usual;
lt f key en space areas of the SOI based
❑ Preservation o y o P
upon definable criteria;
❑ Careful and Creative
development
evelop es phase e disturbed por-
tions of the SOI as current
❑ Respect for natural ridge lines. If we put something
where it can be seen, it should be worth viewing;
❑ Reduced environmental impacts and financial costs of
public improvements which may be necessary; and
trus in-
❑ Preservation and enhancement ortan part of heritage.Brea'she oil and l
dustries heritage - an p
In order to achieve this Vision, we are willing to give:
❑ Mixed-use density for development where appropriate,
instead of traditional subdivisions and commercial malls;
❑ Density bonuses and transfers as ways to place odevelop-
ment where appropriate, concentrate it away
sensi-
tive environmental habitats, and create useable open
space areas;
❑ Alternative designs for public improvements, such as
streets, parking, and other facilities;
❑ Easements to permit operation of oil fields which have
historical significance; and
❑ Tax exempt and other financing where it is appropriate
and in the best interests of the City of Brea -
es es describe the Vision -making process and the
The following p g
principles which will form the Vision.
2
April, 1992
F�TL'RE
R•R•E•A
3
0
• O
_a
April, 1992
L l
f
�
�1
J o,
a
04
F�TL'RE
R•R•E•A
3
0
• O
_a
April, 1992
In early 1991, the City Council directed staff to begin a planning
process to seek direction - - a Vision - - for the future of the SOI.
City staff and selected consultants were assembled as a "Core
Team" to design the process.
This process was based upon community involvement. Over 100
Breans, from all segments of the community (including property
owners), were appointed by the Council or volunteered to serve as
"Community Designers."
Assisted and supported by the Core Team, they participated in two
workshops on November 15/16, 1991, and January 11, 1992. The
City Council, comprising the "Lead Team," also participated in
these workshops in an overview role. -
City of Brea
Sphere of Influence
Vision Building Process
C� <+m oa.�ly CMrNb
DEVELOP a PC EVALUATE
VISIONS 'P VISIONS o� D-
1
4
April, 1992
SECTION 2: CREATING THE VISION
The first workshop was held to "Create the Vision." During this in-
tensive weekend event, Community Designers toured the SOI
area, reviewed background information, considered values and
concerns about the future, and defined a series of over 250 "idea
cards."
These cards represent mini -visions for the future of the SOI area.
They were carefully retained, sorted, and reviewed by the Core
Team for further refinement of ideas.
The excitement and commitment of the Community Designers to
shape Future Brea are clearly reflected in their idea cards, which
are included throughout this document.
VWON 6wour WORM4
iLzA eat
?�npdg2 tlN�OU � 1 H 'OV'"=� 1tM'WR I I�f�tJffi
ICC4G►t0 •_ • — � � o
4fTIIMNfn •_— •�- �
►sty p
�1
�� � L� A FALILITATOf�
5 April, 1992
SECTION 3: EVALUATING THE VISION
Continuing the concept of vision -building by consensus, the Com-
munity Designers reconvened in a second Workshop on January
11, 1992. This session focused on the task of reviewing proposed
planning principles as constructed from their idea cards.
The Designers were asked to consider these principles as the
framework for the Vision. As a tool to help with their review, a
series of conceptual land use sketches were prepared. Eight repre-
sentative locations within the SOI were selected to illustrate alter-
native open space/development concepts with a range of
development intensities. These visual descriptions of alternatives
helped the Designers focus the Vision.
After extensive small group discussion, a set of seven planning
principles evolved:
❑ DIVERSITY,
❑ SUSTAINABILITY;
❑ ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY;
❑ ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY;
❑ MOBILITY,
❑ CULTURAL/HISTORICAL ENHANCEMENT; and
❑ PHASING.
The Core Team has added Implementation Actions to further
define and detail these principles as presented on the next pages in
this Document.
Not all of the Designers agree with the content of all of these prin-
ciples; however, they support the planning process and endorse the
concept of the Vision for the SOI.
6 April, 1992
PRINCIPLE # 1: DIVERSITY
Planning for the SOI area should facilitate "diversity"- - a range
of different kinds of land uses. These should include natural and
undeveloped open space; residential, commercia4 institutional,
and employment centers.
The large size (7.4 square miles) and varied physical charac-
teristics of the area can easily accommodate such diversity.
Over time, the total SOI area should evolve as a mosaic of smaller
pieces, carefully fashioned into the desired Vision for the whole.
Implementation Actions:
1-A:
Provide mix of land uses, including natural open
space;
1-B:
Define permanent open space areas based upon
environmental criteria;
1-C:
Provide a mixture of housing types (cluster, at-
tached, detached units, etc., with inclusion of af-
fordable housing);
1-1):
Incorporate flexibility in the planning process to
recognize different size and timing of use
proposals; and
1-E:
Include commercial development adjacent
Orange Freeway (Route 57) and other locations
where appropriate.
�NYi'1"L '�1yfRSl'rj�
w
7 April, 1992
PRINCIPLE # 2: SUSTAINABILITY
Future use of the SOI should incorporate self-sustaining design
wherever possible. While recognizing that this concept involves
larger, regional -scale policies, the size of the SOI provides an op-
portunity for application.
Implementation Actions:
2-A: Encourage housing development patterns which
reduce traffic into and out of the area;
2-B: Design multi-purpose public facilities for police,
fire, recreation, and schools to consolidate func-
tions and avoid duplication of costs;
2-C: Optimize use of reclaimed water where feasible;
and
2-D: Encourage use of resource -efficient design tech-
niques, such as solar energy cells.
FU FIRE
B - R -E - A
COh1 Ipe#L WAnOL ft A
V12NOMOTE A
SELF COKfAWED
WAAU I
April, 1992
PRINCIPLE # 3: ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY
Since most of the SOI area is privately owned future development
activity (including annexation to the City of Brea) will be initiated
by the private sector.
Long-range fiscal and economic planning must be based upon the
concept of free-standing feasibility. Private development must not
create costs for existing Brea residents.
Implementation Actions:
3-A: Encourage collaborative efforts among the
property owners, as well as the City of Brea, to
ensure comprehensive planning for the SOI;
3-B: Implement financing mechanisms for open space
acquisition, including transfer of development
rights or other "trade-offs" in order to protect
environmental assets;
3-C: Consider options for financing appropriate
public/private infrastructure in an equitable
fashion; and
3-1): Respect private property rights, while recogniz-
ing public commonwealth rights, to define fair
market value.
� � * • i ,:rte-^.
RSCAUl25' RI61H�5
"�' /.►iii ,i'i".�►. -. �
9 April, 1992
PRINCIPLE # 4: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
The SOI area contains many natural environmental assets which
must be protected from adverse impact. These include natural
ridgelines, significant vegetative habitats, "blue line" streams, and
sensitive wildlife species.
Appropriate mitigation of environmental impacts may include
establishment of special habitat conservation areas to protect
sensitive species.
Implementation Actions:
4-A: Enhance and implement an open space system of
natural habitat areas throughout the SOI which
connects with the Carbon Canyon Regional
Park, Chino Hills State Park, and the City's local
park network;
4-B: Utilize non-traditional design standards for
streets, hillside grading, etc., where development
quality and public safety are not affected;
4-C: Avoid adverse impacts to existing natural
ridgelines;
4-1): Incorporate naturalized landscape treatment for
the Olinda/Alpha-Olinda Landfill when it is
closed in 2013;
4-E: Maintain significant views to and from the SOI;
4-F: Require quality landscaping, including native
and drought -tolerant plants, as well as water fea-
tures where appropriate;
4-G: Support State purchase/acquisition of permanent
open space lands; and
4-H: Coordinate and participate in establishment of a
regional trail system for the SOI.
F U T U R F
B•R•E•A
10
April, 1992
PRINCIPAL # 5: MOBILITY
The size and location of the SOI area require that future plans
include consideration of mobility as a priority.
This goal seeks to improve existing transportation modes (auto,
bus, High Occupancy Vehicle lanes, car pools, etc.) while
encouraging future mass transit opportunities.
Implementation Actions:
5-A: Connect SOI area with existing Brea by means
of trails and open space linkages;
5-B: Design Tonner Canyon Road as a scenic road-
way with adequate buffering to maximize
environmental compatibility;
5-C: Maintain the rural character of Tonner Canyon
Road by avoiding connection to regional
arterials in Los Angeles or San Bernardino
counties;
5-D: Implement innovative street design options;
5-E: Avoid impacts to Brea Canyon Road;
5-F: Support appropriate use of high-tech transit
modes, such as remote parking facilities, shuttle
pods, etc.;
5-G: Support more efficient use of existing transporta-
tion systems;
5-11: Study landfill access routing pursuant to
Memorandum of Understanding between City
and Orange County;
5-I: Require Transportation Demand Management
planning for all new development; and
5-J: Implement the Strategic Transportation Action
Plan as approved by the City Council, including
future Light Rail corridor/stations, park'and ride
facilities, and possible people movers.
11 April, 1992
PRINCIPLE # 6: CULTURAL/HISTORICAL
ENHANCEMENT
Brea's rich history should be reaffirmed by the establishment of an
appropriate "cultural/heritage" center.
Implementation Actions:
6-A: Include a cultural/heritage center/museum or
park in future plans for the SOI;
6-B: Explore ways to preserve some historic oil field
areas while permitting continued oil production;
6-C: Emphasize locational significance of Brea as a
"gateway" between Orange and Los Angeles
counties; and
6-D: Provide a variety of cultural, educational ac-
tivities that enhance connectivity to the rest of
Brea.
•p¢C3y[�1l'b C�MM�N►T''S
* 64nA+t
...
i 1
12 April, 1992
FU" URE
B•R•E•A
PRINCIPAL # 7: PHASING
Utilization of the 7.4 square mile SOI area will require long-
range, incremental planning and implementation.
It is important to recognize the need to facilitate consideration of
the 'pieces" while avoiding 'piece -meal" decision making.
Implementation Action:
7-A: Initiate inter -governmental planning/coordina-
tion program with the City of Diamond Bar, and
Counties of Orange and Los Angeles;
7-B: Facilitate coordination with property owners;
7-C: Assess need for commercial development to
help provide tax base for desirable end results;
and
7-D: Provide for incremental review of SOI by sub-
areas as defined by ownership patterns and other
common features.
13
April, 1992
FL;�i�t�RE
B•R•E•A
14
April, 1992
SECTION 4: ACHIEVING THE VISION
The excitement of the Vision -building process now faces the chal-
lenge of implementation -- where do we go from here?
If the Vision is to become more than just a beautiful dream, it
needs:
❑ Broad circulation and further input among the citizens
of Brea and all other persons interested in the future of
the SOI;
❑ Strong and sustained support over the next several
years; and
❑ Continued definition and detailing as more precise
information becomes available.
In its current form, this Vision Document serves as a guide to
property owners, governmental agencies, citizens' organizations,
and developers.
This is the policy foundation for all future City of Brea actions
which may affect or be related to the SOI properties.
Interested citizens can review the Vision principles and understand
City policy for the future of the SOI area.
Property owners can utilize this policy statement to guide their
plans which may include:
❑ Requests for annexation to the City of Brea;
❑ General Plan Amendments;
❑ Subsequent Specific Plans, Environmental Impact
Reports, open space acquisitions, Development Agree-
ments, subdivision maps, etc.
The implementation processes for future development proposals
will be essentially the same, even though they can be characterized
as collaborative or individual based upon number of ownerships.
For example, several property owners within a sub -area or areas
may decide that their individual plans share common dependence
upon new roads, facilities, and services, consequently, they may
opt to collaborate and submit a joint proposal for annexation, a
General Plan Amendment, and other desired approvals.
15 April, 1992
For single ownership situations, the City will require a property
owner to submit plans and environmental information for the
entire sub -area including his/her property.
The City of Brea recommends collaborative planning among
property owners as an effective and efficient way to implement the
Vision for the SOI. This approach will offer significant savings in
time and energy. In addition, it is expected that the grouping of
properties will allow more opportunities for sound planning and
better utilization of planned infrastructure and services.
In either case, the City would require:
❑ A pre -application package consisting of a detailed
project description, statement of discretionary actions
requested from the City, an environmental checklist/
initial study, appropriate legal description of property
and maps/exhibits, and an affidavit defining the in-
volved property owners.
❑ City staff will review this package for informational
adequacy and then meet with the applicants to describe
any additional data needs for processing.
❑ After staff review, a formal application package will be
accepted for more careful assessment.
A key part of this assessment will be a recommendation for ways
to optimize the fit between the Vision Principles (as stated in this
Document) and the proposed project. City staff will also analyze
the characteristics of the project with respect to the Implementa-
tion Actions.
This review will conclude with written comments listing_informa-
tional requirements and assessing conformance to the Principles.
❑ Further processing will follow established City proce-
dures.
SECTION 5: NEXT STEPS - IMPLEMENTING THE VISION
From inception, the Vision Project has recognized the need for
"partnership" implementation once the Community Designers'
Vision was defined. The realization of their dreams for the SOI
will depend upon the active involvement and willing cooperation
of those who own the land and those who want to use or conserve
it.
Accordingly, the City has defined several tasks which it can
initiate as part of this Vision implementation:
❑ Inter -City Coordination:
The City of Brea will seek to establish a working relationship with
the City of Diamond Bar for discussion of common issues affect-
ing the SOI area. The purpose of this effort is to anticipate con-
cerns about annexation policy; plans for open space, trails, and
related concerns; and future infrastructure.
This inter -city coordination between the gateway cities of Brea
and Diamond Bar will greatly ease potential problems associated
with the resolution of issues between Orange County and Los
Angeles County which are relevant to the SOI area.
❑ Vision Core Team:
Recognizing the need for continued liaison with property owners
and citizens who have a stake in the future of the SOI, the City
will assign key staff members as the Vision Core Team: Consist-
ing of participants in the Vision process to date, they will facilitate
further consideration of implementation plans and processes.
❑ Regional Trail System Plan:
" Implementation of the Vision requires coordination of planning for
trails both within and outside the SOI. The City will assign key
staff members to organize a strategy for Brea participation in the
implementation of a regional trail system complementing the SOI.
❑ Open Space Acquisition Study:
The City Council recognizes the public interest in potential acquisi-
tion of open space within -the SOI. As a means of facilitating
public discussion and reviewing available land appraisal data, the
Council will direct City staff and key commissions to study this
17
April, 1992
issue. They will be asked to report their findings and recommen-
dations for Council consideration.
❑ Hillside Management Ordinance:
Vision principles require careful management of the SOI hillsides.
City staff will research available examples of hillside management
ordinances used in other cities with a similar environmental con-
text and propose an appropriate ordinance for Brea to adopt.
In addition, the City identified the need for data to support future
plan review.
❑ Environmental Baseline Analysis:
At present, only limited information describes the existing biologic
and geologic characteristics of the 4,762 acres within the SOI area.
Additional field surveys, analyses, and mapping efforts are neces-
sary to supplement this information and to provide adequate data
for future detailed plans and programs.
This data will include confirmation of existing sensitive or
endangered species. In addition, it will describe existing
landslides, active traces of the Whittier Fault, tar seepage areas,
and compressible soils within the SOI.
As owners request City approvals, the City will require an environ-
mental baseline analysis. This work will be conducted by profes-
sional consultants under City staff direction, and will be prepared
on a sub -area basis (see map, page 14).
An important product of this task will be the definition of "undis-
turbed" areas as priority open space. "Disturbed" areas which
have been physically impacted by past use or development
activities will also be defined. It is anticipated that mitigation of
environmental impacts associated with necessary oil field remedia-
tion may be feasible via a "mitigation bank" within the defined
undisturbed areas.
The completed environmental baseline will become a key resource
of great value to the City and property owners.
SECTION 6: IN CLOSING
The City recognizes that the Vision which is ultimately achieved
may vary somewhat from this description. 'Future circumstances
will require some flexibility. However, such changes or variation
will require significant compliance with the basic principles of the
Vision Document.
The Community Designers have completed their assignment. The
responsibility for implementation now rests with the citizens of
Brea and with the SOI property owners.
And as this presentation of the SOI Vision closes, we need to con-
sider... "Just whose Vision is it, anyway ??"
If Breans champion this Vision throughout the next several years
and nurture it carefully, it will thrive and help create a Future Brea
full of aspiration and achievement.
t7w. GI t.S Y1510N
'0 s
w
19
April, 1992
APPENDIX A: ROSTER OF PARTICIPANTS
The City of Brea expresses its sincere appreciation to those who served as participants in the Vision
Project:
COMMUNITY DESIGNERS:
Jay Bach
Bruce Flamenbaum
Susan Perlson
Norma Jean Baker
Greg Gallaugher
Bev Perry
Glenn Balch
Teresa Hampson
Russ Peterson
Jack Bath
Ron Hart
Majorie Rasmussen
Leonard Bayless
Clark Hatch
Joan Robb
George Basye
Claude Hause
Bill Robb
David Behoteguy
Greg Hoffman
Ken Ryan
Allison Benson
Bob Holman
Dick Sader
Mary Alice Blaydes
Davis Hopkins
Don Schad
Will Bowan
Bruce Inman
Ronald Schafer
- Mike Bridges
Harold Ivy
Phil Schwartze
Susie Burki
Carl Johnson
Louis/Sciarrotta
- Jack Camp
Stephen Kaas.
Edgar Seal
- Jon Carley
Gary Kain
Steve Sewell
Dennis Chapman
Darshan Kaushal
Ron Shenkman
Clif Chum
Ron Keith
Bob Short
- Carl Clausen
Eddie King
Clay Smith
Richard Cox
Alvie Kracik
Susie Sokol
Elaine Cox
Helen MacKain
Constance Spenger
Tom Craig
Bill Madden
Loralee Sulick
Connie Davies
Ray Madsen
Terry Swindle
Diane Taylor (Buttonwood)
Pat Davis
Gail Marcoux
Vince Mariner
Diane Taylor (Buckthorn)
Jim Day
Sharon Dean
Dave Martin
Chris Terrance, Jr.
Rick De La Mora
Jim Martinez
Gary Terrazas
Harry Delkeskamp
Mike Maxfield
Al Tremayne
Forest Dickason
Jim McDowell
Pat Tremayne
Bob Draeger
Mark McKnight
Bud Walker
Tom Duncan
Margie McMillan
Alan Walsh
Bob Eckes
Jeffry,Monaghan
Bob Wettlin
Dave Engwall
Kathleen Nelson
Dave Widup
_
Joe Falco
Sherry Norman
Martha Jane Wolking
Rich Fanning
Jane O'Brien
Nancy Wright
Karl Fanning
Pat O'Connell
Jim Ferris
Mary Jo Parker
APPENDIX A: (Continued)
RESOURCE CORE TEAM:
City Staff: Frank Benest, City Manager
Tim O'Donnell, Assistant City Manager
Jim Cutts, Development Services Director
Rad Bartlam, City Planner
Jay Trevino, Senior Planner
Alan Lawson, Associate Planner
Rachel Lenell, Administrative Intern
Jennifer Lilley, Administrative Intern
Rex Wixted, Community Services Director
Pat McCarron, Maintenance Services Director
Sue Georgino, Redevelopment Services Director
Cindie Ryan, Acting Communications and Marketing Manager
Warren Siecke, Traffic Engineer
Sam Peterson, City Engineer
The City also acknowledges the tremendous contributions of a multitude of other City staff
members. Their organization and dedication to this process epitomize the concept of team spirit.
Without their help in areas such as group recording clerical support, event planning and setup,
video and other graphic support, this process could not have been accomplished.
Consultants: R. Dale Beland, AIA, AICP; CottonBeland/Associates, Inc.
Lead Consultant and Facilitator
J. Todd Stoutenborough, AIA; LPA, Inc.
Architect
Mark S. Rogers, J.L. Webb Planning, Inc.
Land Planning/ Computer View Analysis
Robert Y. Takata, ASIA; Takata Associates
Landscape Architecture/Design
Terence Austin, Austin -Faust Associates
Traffic/Transportation Planning
Daniel S. Iacofano, Ph.D., Moore Iacofano Goltsman
Citizen Participation/Facilitation
Alfred Gobar, Ph.D., Alfred Gobar Associates
Economics/Feasibility
Eldon Gath, Leighton and Associates
Geology/ Environmental Constraints
David Levine, Michael Brandman Associates
Biological Habitat Assessment
APPENDIX B: FACT CARDS
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
ORANGE COUNTY
BREA
r
m c
E � YORBA LINDA
FULLERTON�-?.<PLACENTIA
• The study area, comprised of 4,762 acres, or 7.4 square miles, is
located in northern Orange County and is presently
uniacorpomted but within the City of Brews sphere of influence.
• North of the study area is property within Los Angeles County
and predominantly owned by the Boy Scouts of America and
Shell Oil Company.
• To the east of the study area is the Carbon Canyon area and newly
incorporated city of Chino Hills.
• Communities to the south of the study area include Yorba Linda,
Fullerton, and Placentia.
• Brea, like all Southern California communities, also falls within
the jurisdiction of SLAG and AQMD (see glossary).
north
Jurisdictional Boundaries
• Presently, Lambert/Carbon Canyon Roads, Valencia Avenue,
c°e fib• and Brea Canyon Road are the only public streets in the stud)
area. Tonner Canyon Road and Valencia Avenue, north of
o� Lambert are private sbMels.
• Studies have been conducted regarding the connection of
Tonner Canyon Road through the Boy Scout Reservation inti
ue�O1' the City of Diamond Bar. However, no specific plans have
been prepared.
proact Boundar • The Orange Freeway (Route 57) interchange at Turner
u4 %'�•�" Canyon provides freeway exits for only northbound traffic an
Tomer cg^�' freeway entrance for only southbound traffic.
L•• 'ter • The City of Brea, and this study area, lie within an area of thO
p, region that provides critical transportation links to and from:
r Orange County, Los Angeles County, San Bernardino Count,
'DO d and Riverside County, to some extent.
J G9^
• The heaviest commute patterns through this area involve
b V southbound traffic from Los Angeles and San Bernardino
Counties into and throughout Orange County in the morning
d hours, and the opposite patterns in the afternoon and evening
m m hours. This commute pattern is to a significant degree serve(
by three main highways: Orange Freeway, Lambert/Carbon
g e Canyon Roads, and Imperial Highway.
0
north
taxa „ ,Oe,al TransportatiodCirculation
B-1 April, 1992
APPENDIX B (Continued)
• Adjacent to the sphere of influence area are significant open space
areas. These areas are natum', as in the Chino Hills State Park,
and semi -developed, as in Carbon Canyon Regional Park. These
resources account for approximately 11,000 acres.
• The Firestone Boy Scout Reservation lies within the northern
portion of the study area and within portions of Los Angeles and
San Bernardino Counties. In. total, it consists of almost 3,000
acres, 1,000 of which are devoted primarily to scout camping
activities. And, even though the Scout Reservation is currently a
valued open space asset, it is under private ownership.
Accordingly, it may not always remain in its entirety net an open
space resource.
• Open Space "trail" linkages provide an opportunity to connect
Brea and the sphere of influence to the rest of the region. For
example:
- The Proposrd Diamond Bar Trail connects Telegraph Canyon
north to Las Angeles County via the proposed expansion of Chino
Hills State Park.
- The Proposed El Cajon Trail originates from Carbon Canyon
Regional Park and links the Telegraph Canyon Trail to the Sanaa
Am River Trail.
The Fullerton Trail is proposed to on cast est through Brea,
u c , connecting Carbon Canyon Regional Park, Craig Regional Park
in E
and lis Coyotes Regional Park.
1.
Y - Possible mail linkages might include a mute through Sequel
Firestone Boy Scout Reservation Canyon, and via a Southem California Edison road that extends
nonh through the Firestone Boy Scout Reservation.
-- Carbon Canyon Regional Park
_J
J00.orth Chi- Hills Stme Park
Out t° r`•lal Park/Open Space Open Space -
n,ren Landfill
Im< eo .a.al
B-2 April, 1992
• Olinda - Olinda Alpha landfill is 523 acre in area, or
approximately 10 percent of the entire SOI study arca.
a The landfill is owned and operated by the County of Orange
Integrated Waste Management Department.
• This is categorized as a Class III landfill which means that only
„ Pro ee) t Bound.,
municipal -type solid waste materials may be deposited here.
Hazadous or other toxic types of materials must be transported to
other landfills.
C"
• An expansion plan for the landfill has been approved by the
County of Orange. Than plan would expand the landfill in a
Lambert Rd. L...`
^
vertical direction and would extend its operation to the year 2013
srpo
ao.
aper el L•
Gy^'
• Approximately 5,000 tons of solid waste is deposited at this
p Nw o.
r
landfill daily.
?
m
V
Dn ; s
mis
• c
c
� Y
n,ren Landfill
Im< eo .a.al
B-2 April, 1992
APPENDIX B (Contineud)
• Commercial oil production in the sphere of influence area is a
rich pan of Brea's legacy. The Chandler Oil Company drilled
in Termer Canyon as early as 1882. By the tum of the
century, there were significant oil fields in the Olinda and
Brea Canyon areas and several oil companies.
• Ongoing oil production is still an important part of the local
economy. Oil wells,tanks and related structures occur on
approximately 32 percent of the land area in the sphere of
influence. This amounts to over 1500 acres of land devoted to
Oil production activities. The remaining 3200 acres within the
SOI remains relatively natural and "undisturbed". It is
estimated that over 400 oil wells exist within the SOI areas.
• Once deposits have been depleted, wells will be capped, the
production equipment removed and the oil field may, after
any necessary clean-up, or "remediation," be redeveloped.
• The abandonment, remediation and eventual redevelopment of
old oil fields is a slow, complex and expensive process.
• The number of existing oil wells which would be kept in for
future production is not easily estimated. This depends on the
economy, land values, the price of oil and cost factors
involved with oil well abandonment and remediation of oil
well sites.
J0.1-SA-6Petroleum Production
t•.r ue .ea.l
-FaulVault Trace
r There is surface tar seepage in certain parts of the study area
This naturally occurring phenomenon is not new and is generally
caused when subsurface pressures drive tar or oil up to the earth's
surface. In fact, it is reported that early settlers of the Pomona
and Santa Ma valleys came to Brea Canyon to cut chunks of the
oil -soaked earth for use as fuel and for water -proofing roofs.
r Landslide stability is a major issue within the project area. There
are hundreds of landslides that will need to be stabilized or left as -
is with sufficient setback as a safety factor.
a Perhaps the most significant geotechnical issue within the SOI
study area is seismic activity. The Whittier Fault runs directly
through the study area in a general east -west direction. This fault
has the capability of rupture of ground surface during an
earthquake. in addition to the Whittier Fault, several minor, or
secondary faults are present in the areaWith sufficient setback
from these fault zones and adherence to applicable building codes,
development of certain land uses could still occur. So, while
these faults do not necessarily preclude all development, they do
present a constraint to development.
"•rtn
Seismic/Geologic
B-3 April, 1992
APPENDIX C: SAMPLE IDEA CARDS
j
1-1L AfskS _
V/fes• �y�q �{��`` ��j,
4T1��TYVI �7'�.��T�i'TI"'�c -,
C�I43R. CaeRBAG'� A,� '� N� Q4 ON
,�-7� pEc.�/EyUPL�TY t No P
V LIQ
vok
�� ioQp co T�NNr R cfiml Gk
<, 6T Afi�AN3i
�tylu,At�+t-
WOVA6 Wiwi
p(y��{{ll,'((��rr11 p��wF tPuttt�t,Mo-NEY ,�
REAT
flbAtz I AuNca
v • ,li 411t1'SEL''bi
To A Wz 00 ro M I N I NNE
COtJ5M ��hL?�ftNb, : is 1 .�
h �.;�Rr'E w/ Mtrt'ttfC'�
'cs —FAOLTeS CUM To
�a MIK SAL w/
�' lAt1 ADL, �,• _ �� ' ;�.�,%�
April, 1992
