HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/06/1992CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
Mayor — Jay C. Kun
Mayor Pro Tem — Phyllis E. Papen
Cou idknan — John A. Forting
Counciknan — Gary H. VNemer
Counciknan — Gary G. Miller
City Council Chambers
are located at:
South CoastAir QuWfty II?wmgr9r mt astrtctAuditorium
21865 EastCoioley a*
Please retain tomwoIng,eathgor rm in in
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992 Terrence L Belanger
Acting City Manager
Andrew V. Arczynski
City Attomey
MEE 1NGTIME: Closed Session - 5:00 p.m. Lynda Btxgm
Regular Session - 6:00 p.m. C4 Clerk ,
Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating;, to each item crred to on;this agenda
are on file in the Gfftce of the City Zlerk and are available for public It sPadiarr if � have questions
regarding an agenda (leer, please contact.the'City Clerk at (714) M "24. Vduring business hours.
Ma CHv at Dfamnnd Bar uses AEC YCLED naner and ancouraoss 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.
1. 5:00 P.M.
CLOSED SESSION:
Litigation - G.C. 54956.9
Personnel - G.C. 54957.6
Next Resolution No. 92-55
Next Ordinance No. 5 (1992)
2. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
ROLL CALL:
Mayor Rim
Councilmen Forbing, Miller, Werner,
Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Mayor Rim
3. COUNCIL COM1MENTS: "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
4.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Items raised by individual
Councilmembers are for Council discussion. Direction may be
given at this meeting or the item may be scheduled for action
at a future meeting.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following items listed on the
Consent Calendar are considered routine and are approved by a
single motion.
5.1 SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1.1 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - October
8, 1992 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Hearing Room, 21865
E. Copley Dr.
5.1.2 PLANNING COMMISSION - October 12, 1992 - 7:00
p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.1.3 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - October 20, 1992 - 6:00
p.m, AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
5.2.1 MEETING OF AUGUST 18, 1992
5.2.2 ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 25, 1992
5.3 WARRANT REGISTER - Approve Warrant Register dated
October 6, 1992 in the amount of $721,034.86.
5.4 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES - Receive &
File Regular meeting of August 13, 1992.
OCTOBER 6, 1992
PAGE 2
5.5 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES - Receive & File
5.5.1 MEETING OF JULY 23, 1992
5.5.2 MEETING OF AUGUST 27, 1992
5.5.3 MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 10, 1992
5.6 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES - Filed by Bruce Wallace September 1,
1992.
Recommended Action: Reject request and refer matter for
further action to Carl Warren & Co., the City's Risk
Manager.
5.7 NOTICE OF COMPLETION - On May 19, 1992, Council awarded
a contract to Excel Paving Company for Golden Springs
Dr./Sylvan Glen Rd. Drainage System for a total amount of
$29,956.50. The installation was completed on August 19,
1992.
Recommended Action: Accept work performed by Excel
Paving Company and authorize the City Clerk to file the
Notice of Completion.
5.8 APPROVAL OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN PARCEL NO'S 10
AND 11 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 18722 LOCATED AT 2747 DIAMOND
BAR BLVD. - This lot line adjustment is for construction
of a SpeeDee Oil Change and Tune-up project. The Lot
Line Adjustment has now been submitted to the City for
approval.
Recommended Action: Approve the attached Lot Line
Adjustment, authorize the Interim City Engineer to sign
the amended map and direct the City Clerk to process the
Adjustment for recordation.
5.9 APPROVAL OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN PARCEL NO. 1 OF
PARCEL MAP NO. 15375 AND PARCEL NO. 1 OF PARCEL MAP NO.
2151, LOCATED AT 3302 S. DIAMOND BAR BLVD. - This Lot
Line Adjustment is between Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 15375
and Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 2151 for construction of an
Arco AM/PM Mini -Mart. This Adjustment has been submitted
to the City for approval.
Recommended Action: Approve the attached Lot Line
Adjustment, authorize the Interim City Engineer to sign
the map and direct the City Clerk to process the map for
recordation.
5.10 RELEASE OF $10,000 BOND SECURING THE SETTING OF SURVEY
MONUMENTS FOR TRACT 47722 - The City received a letter of
request from Frank Piermarini, Owner/Developer of Tract
47722 for release of a $10,000 monumentation bond. The
tract contains 13 lots for proposed single family
residences at Diamond Knoll in "The Country."
OCTOBER 6, 1992
PAGE 3
Recommended Action: Release the $10,000 subdivision bond
for Diamond Knolls related to setting survey monuments.
6. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, ETC.
6.1.1. PROCLAIM THE MONTH OF OCTOBER, 1992 AS "ESCROW
MONTH."
6.1.2 PROCLAIM OCTOBER 16-18, 1992 "ANNIVERSARY OF WORLD
SUMMIT FOR CHILDREN."
7. OLD BUSINESS:
7.1 SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR "THE COUNTRY" - The City
previously authorized completion of a study to evaluate
the feasibility and cost of constructing sanitary sewers
for a portion of "The Country" presently utilizing an on-
site sewer system. The City is now ready to proceed.
Recommended Action: Accept the feasibility study as
presented and conduct a community workshop to discuss
possible formation of a sewer district in the area.
7.2 RESOLUTION NO. 92 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AUTHORIZING PAYMENT OF A
REWARD FOR INFORMATION LEADING TO THE CONVICTION OF
GRAFFITI INSCRIBERS ACTING WITHIN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
- The proposed resolution sets forth payment of a reward
for information leading to the arrest and conviction of
graffiti inscribers. The amount of the reward is
determined on a case-by-case basis by the City Council
but may not exceed Five Hundred ($500.00) dollars. Since
State law provides that any person who has willfully
damaged property by inscribing graffiti can be held
liable for costs of damages as well as the amount of any
reward paid, there should be no cost to the City for this
program.
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 92 -XX
authorizing payment of a reward for information leading
to the conviction of graffiti inscribers.
7.3 REHABILITATION OF GRAND AVE. FROM THE EASTERLY CITY LIMIT
TO GOLDEN SPRINGS DR. - Grand Ave. between the easterly
City limit and Golden Springs Dr. is in need of pavement
rehabilitation. Existing pavement must be analyzed and
evaluated in order to determine the most practical and
economical approach for roadway improvements. Based on
the findings of the pavement evaluation, plans and
specifications for the subject project will be designed
accordingly. Staff has received and evaluated twelve
proposals for said design. Continued from August 4, 1992
Recommended Action: Award a design services contract to
Dwight French and Associates in the amount not to exceed
$45,700.00.
OCTOBER 6, 1992 PAGE 4
7.4 AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF HERITAGE PARR
COMMUNITY CENTER - On August 4, 1992, Council authorized
staff to solicit bids for construction of the Heritage
Park Community Building. Staff advertised and received
bids from twelve companies. Bids were opened and
publicly read on September 3, 1992.
Recommended Action: That the City Council deem Clayton
Engineering to be the lowest responsible bidder and award
a contract for construction of the Heritage Park
Community Building to Clayton Engineering, the lowest
responsible bidder, in the amount of $657,400.
8. NEW BUSINESS:
8.1 INTERIM ORDINANCE NO. X (1992): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ADOPTING AN INTERIM
ZONING ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CALIFORNIA
GOVERNMENT CODE 65858(a) AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF - Pursuant to Government Code Section 65860
zoning must be consistent with General Plan land use
designations. The City's General Plan creates an
agricultural land use designation which restricts the
number and kind of land uses in an agricultural zone.
The interim ordinance would establish a list of more
restrictive uses for the agricultural zone and establish
a Conditional Use Permit process for all uses within the
zone.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council adopt an Interim Ordinance establishing an
agricultural zone.
9. PUBLIC HEARING: 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as matters
can be heard.
9.1 ZONING CODE AMENDMENT 92-2 (HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE
(HMO), ORD. NO. 14, 1990) AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENT 92-3
(COMMERCIAL -MANUFACTURING (CM) ZONE, ORD. NO. 15, 1992) -
The intent of Zoning Code Amendment No. 92-2 is to
establish permanent standards for hillside development.
Zoning Ordinance No. 92-3 incorporates revisions to the
established list of land uses permitted with the
Commercial Manufacturing Zone. Draft Ordinance(s) have
been prepared and are undergoing review by the Planning
Commission. Revisions to the draft ordinances are
scheduled for Planning Commission public hearing review
on October 12, 1992. Continued from September 1, 1992.
Recommended Action: Continue the Public Hearing on these
items to the October 20, 1992 meeting.
10. ANNOUNCEMENTS:
11. ADJOURNMENT:
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
TO: CITY CLERK
FROM: �c_ CCl/F, h k DATE: // -� Z—
ADDRESS: PHONE:
ORGANIZATION: wA/E'_ -
AGENDA #/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
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL ')RA):r
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AUGUST 18, 1992
1. CLOSED SESSION: 5:00 p.m.
Personnel - Government Code 54957.6
Litigation - Government Code 54956.9
No reportable action taken.
2. CALL TO ORDER: M/Kim called the meeting to order at
6:04 p.m. in the AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr., Diamond
Bar.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of
Allegiance by M/Kim.
ROLL CALL: Mayor Kim, Mayor Pro Tem Papen,
Councilmen Miller and Werner. Councilman Forbing was excused.
Also present were Acting City Manager Terrence Belanger;
Assistant City Attorney William P. Curley III; Community
Development Director James DeStefano; Interim City Engineer
George Wentz; Director of Community Services Bob Rose and City
Clerk Lynda Burgess.
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Red Calkins, 240 Eagle Nest Dr.,
spoke regarding graffiti and reminded Council that they once
considered adopting an ordinance to provide a $500 reward for
information leading to arrest and conviction of anybody
engaging in an act of graffiti. He suggested that the City
reconsider such an Ordinance. He further expressed thanks to
staff for their efforts in expediting graffiti removal.
Al Rumpilla, 23958 Golden Springs Dr., spoke in defense of
CC/Burgess in regard to the flyer distributed throughout the
City opposing the General Plan referendum effort and stated
that he knew she was not in any way involved with the flyer.
He further expressed concern about the changes made in the
order of items on the agenda as well as the "speaker" cards.
Michael Goldenberg, 1859 Morning Canyon Rd., stated that he
had spoken regarding impending rate increases by Jones
Intercable and was still awaiting the contact promised by
M/Kim and ACM/Belanger.
Max Maxwell, 3211 Bent Twig Ln., thanked CC/Burgess for filing
the signatures on the referendum presented on August 10 and
stated that the Council would determine whether to rescind the
General Plan or accept the Plan as is and then set a date for
an election. He asked the following: 1) why were the Grand
Avenue apartments approved; 2) why was Grand Avenue opened; 3)
why did the City purchase 4 acres of land for $400,000 without
explanation; and 4) why was a new development passed without
a General Plan being in place. He further stated he and his
group is reviewing the General Plan text and would submit a
list of changes to the City.
Clair Harmony, 24139 Afamado, asked how much the General Plan
campaign cost and who reviewed and authorized the ad. He also
AUGUST 18, 1992 PAGE 2
asked what relationship, if any, did the publicly -sponsored
advertisement have to do with the flyer that was distributed.
He then commented on the flyer and suggested that the City
request the Attorney General to investigate printing and
distribution of it.
Frank Dursa, 2533 Harmony Hill Dr., stated that he felt that
the three trash haulers currently doing business in the City
are capable and that the City's franchise should be given to
the one most competitive while allowing the other two to
operate.
Andrew Van Houston, 1847 Acacia Hill Dr., stated that after
qualifying and asking for his grading permit, he was denied
because of the referendum. He pointed out that he owes
considerable sums of money on the land and may end up in
foreclosure if his permit is not approved.
Dan Buffington, 2605 Indian Creek, stated that he had been
planning to have an addition built on his house, however, he
was denied a permit due to the referendum. He further stated
that the building of South Pointe Middle School and the high
school in north Diamond Bar would be delayed due to lack of
permit issuance as a result of the referendum. He related a
previous conversation with Mr. William Gross, chief circulator
of the referendum, offering to drop his opposition to Mr.
Buffington's project if Mr. Buffington would buy his home.
Tom VanWinkle, resident, asked for clarification as to whether
or not permit issuance had been halted. He stated that the
reason for the referendum was because his group was unhappy
with language in the General Plan and indicated that he hoped
that the City and citizens could discuss their differences in
order to deal with inadequacies in the Plan.
4. COUNCIL COMMENTS: ACM/Belanger stated that the City
previously approved and funded an aggressive graffiti removal
program whereby complaints are forwarded to the City's
contractor, Boys Club of San Gabriel Valley, for removal.
C/Miller stated that he had previously proposed a reward to be
offered to anyone turning in persons convicted of placing
graffiti within the City. He requested Council concurrence to
direct staff to prepare a proposal for implementation of a
reward system.
C/Werner stated that since the City is paying for removal of
graffiti, perhaps local organizations could donate the funds
for the rewards.
C/Miller stated that he had looked into that concept and was
informed that the City could go after the individual or his or
her parents to repay up to $10,000 in costs incurred for
restoration of the damaged area.
MPT/Papen asked staff to look into joining the "WE TIP"
AUGUST 18, 1992 PAGE 3
hotline and indicated that cities can purchase "WE TIP"
program signs.
She further stated that the cost of the graffiti removal
program has increased 2 1/2 times in the last three years and
that the City is presently spending approximately $2100. She
asked that staff work with the courts in having persons
required to perform community service work on graffiti removal
rather than the City paying for it out of its General Fund.
ACM/Belanger stated that these directions would be brought
back to Council at the second meeting in September.
In response to Mr. Rumpilla's comments regarding the flyers
circulated opposing the General Plan Referendum, ACM/Belanger
stated that he had assured both Mr. Rumpilla and Mr. Harmony
that the City had absolutely nothing to do with the creation
or distribution of the flyer. Further, the use of Ms.
Burgess's name on the flyer was for usage of the postcard
attachment by persons wishing to have their names removed from
the petition.
C/Miller stated that the first time he saw the flyer was in
Mrs. Burgess' office and that he was not involved with it in
any way.
In response to Mr. Rumpilla's complaint regarding the shifting
of Public Comments with City Council Comments on the Agenda,
M/Kim explained that the Council was experimenting with ways
to avoid debates between the Council and the public.
In regard to the complaint by Mr. Goldenberg regarding Jones
Intercable, M/Kim apologized for not responding, however, he
did not remember the specific request.
ACM/Belanger stated he should have made certain that Mr.
Goldenberg received a response and apologized that it had not
happened; however, he would contact Mr. Goldenberg directly to
discuss the matter. As to the comment indicating that the
City has too many staff members, he stated that the staffing
level is currently 24 employees, which has remained constant
for the past two years. The City is looking forward to the
addition of a Transportation Planner funded from Proposition
A monies to deal with transportation and transit issues and
what their effects are on the City.
In response to C/Werner's request for information regarding
cable television rates, ACM/Belanger stated that the federal
government, at the urging of the cable television industry,
pre-empted state and local governments' involvement in setting
rates for local cable companies several years ago. As a
result, the City's ability to influence changes in rates
charged by the cable company is limited to how much pressure
the City can exert on the company toward controlling
increases.
AUGUST 18, 1992 PAGE 4
In response to Mr. Gross' comments regarding the issuance of
permits, ACA/Curley stated that the General Plan Referendum
Petition was considered formally filed on August 17, 1992.
Once the City Clerk determines that the petition is official,
the General Plan is then effectively suspended. California
law, both by statute and by case law, indicates that if a City
does not have a General Plan, there is a very narrow
opportunity for permits to be issued, which is limited to only
those relating to interior or non -expansive improvements.
Regarding the newspaper ad supporting the General Plan,
ACM/Belanger stated that it was published to apprise the
public of the process used in development of the Plan and to
advise them of the adoption by the City Council. The booklet
mentioned was intended to provide a draft of the Plan as it
was at the time of distribution to let all members of the
public know the City's progress.
C/Miller requested Council consensus to direct the City
Attorney to explore all available options to expand the amount
of permits issued as limited by the Referendum for a report at
the next meeting.
Following further discussion, it was agreed that a special
meeting would be scheduled for Tuesday, August 25, 1992 to
discuss the matter.
C/Miller requested consensus to direct staff to: 1) meet with
the Boy Scouts regarding acquisition of Tonner Canyon; 2) meet
with Senator Frank Hill and Assemblyman Paul Horcher to
determine if conservancy or other funds are available to
acquire the property; 3) upon determination of available
funding sources, direct staff to bring back the necessary
documents for approval for a bond issue for the remainder of
the funds to be placed on the first available ballot to fund
the acquisition of Tonner Canyon; and 4) form a committee
composed of the proponents of the "Save Tonner Canyon" group
and other interested members of the community whose task would
be to present the validity of the acquisition to the community
through public meetings and other presentations.
Following discussion, ACM/Belanger stated that staff would
research and prepare a report for future Council discussion.
ACM/Belanger commented on concerns raised regarding the
following: 1) Grand Avenue Apartments --the applicant
originally proposed the development to the County either prior
to incorporation or while the County was still handling
Planning functions for the City. The applicant had an
approved project and had posted a significant bond and when
ready to commence building, was informed that she would have
to begin all over again. The Planning Commission approved the
project following the applicant's re -submittal; 2) Grand
Avenue opening from San Bernardino County --the opening of the
street was never an issue as case law indicates that agencies
cannot barricade major regional streets. The issue was
AUGUST 18, 1992 PAGE 5
whether the County of San Bernardino was responsible for
mitigating the impacts on the streets of Diamond Bar once
Grand was opened. Mitigation measures were negotiated and
agreed upon between the City and the County of San Bernardino;
3) purchase of four acres of Water District land --this
purchase was primarily intended to expand the City's capital
asset base; 4) documents requested by Mr. Maxwell --he would
make sure they were available and indicated that he had not
been aware that Mr. Maxwell had not already obtained the
correct copies; 5) conversion of D.B. Golf Course to shopping
mall --this was an idea proposed and rejected during
development of the General Plan. The issue has been dead for
at least 18 months.
C/Werner stated that he felt that the problem with the General
Plan had more to do with how the process was conducted rather
than the contents of the document itself. Further, Council
needs to become more sensitive to the process and to public
input.
ACA/Curley stated that staff can ask for the Attorney
General's help in regard to the flyer; however, he was not
sure of their capabilities to respond.
Following discussion, Council recommended that staff contact
the Attorney General's office for an opinion on how the
referendum will impact the General Plan and not on the flyer
that was distributed.
In regard to Mr. Dursa's inquiry on the trash issue, C/Papen
asked who leaked the information regarding negotiations.
In response to C/Werner's request for an update on the status
of negotiations with Western Waste, ACM/Belanger stated that
staff met with Western Waste representatives several times at
the direction of the subcommittee and that the subcommittee
has been kept informed of the progress. As a result, a sub-
stantial form of the agreement was negotiated. Representa-
tives from Western Waste met with the subcommittee to resolve
all final issues and prepare a general agreement but there are
still some issues to be resolved at the subcommittee level.
C/Werner stated that he did not feel that this information was
confidential.
In response to Mr. Van Houston's comments regarding his
grading permit, ACM/Belanger stated that it had not been
denied but rather that the permit had not yet been issued and
that after the special Council meeting on August 25th, there
will be a better understanding of the problem.
C/Miller stated that Council is trying to listen to the
community and changes made in the agenda is not intended to
preclude the community from being involved.
C/Werner felt that everyone should be ashamed for the behavior
AUGUST 18, 1992
PAGE 6
displayed during past meetings.
C/Papen stated that in regard to Mr. Goldenberg's inquiry into
Jones Intercable rate increases, the only way the City can
control a cable company is through the franchise agreement.
The agreement for Jones will be presented for renewal within
six months to a year and staff will prepare for negotiations
by compiling all complaints received by the City. Further,
she will ensure that Mr. Goldenberg is notified when the
franchise agreement is scheduled for public discussion.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Werner moved, C/Miller seconded to
approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Items 5.4
and 5.5 which were removed due to the filing of the General
Plan Referendum. With the following Roll Call vote, motion
carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEN - Miller, Werner, MPT/Papen, M/Kim
NOES: COUNCILMEN - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - Forbing
5.1 SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1.1 Concert in the Park - Aug. 19, 1992 - 6:30 -
8:00 p.m., Shout (60's Music), Sycamore Canyon
Park, 22930 Golden Springs Rd.
5.1.2 Planning Commission - Aug. 24, 1992 - 7:00
p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.1.3 Parks & Recreation Commission - Aug. 27, 1992
- 7:00 p.m., AQMD Hearing Room, 21865 E.
Copley Dr.
5.1.4 City Council Meeting - Sept. 1, 1992 - 6:00
p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.2 WARRANT REGISTER - Approved Warrant Register dated
August 18, 1992 in the amount of $208,387.56.
5.3
TREASURER'S REPORT - JUNE 1992 - Received and
filed.
5.4
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN PARCEL NO. 1 OF PARCEL
MAP NO. 15375 AND PARCEL NO. 1 OF PARCEL MAP NO.
2151, LOCATED AT 3302 S. DIAMOND BAR BLVD. -
Tabled.
5.5
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN PARCEL BETWEEN PARCEL
NO. 10 AND 11 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 18722 LOCATED AT
2747 DIAMOND BAR BLVD. - Tabled.
5.6
APPROVED THE FOLLOWING CONTRACT, ENTITLED: IPS
SERVICES, INC. - 1993 SLURRY SEAL PROGRAM - AREA 3,
in an amount not to exceed $159,873.30 with a
contingency of $12,000.
5.7
APPROVED THE FOLLOWING CONTRACT, ENTITLED: BREA,
CITY OF - RECREATION SERVICES - Approved extension
of the contact for Recreation Services with the
City of Brea in the amount of $266,265.
RECESS:
M/Kim recessed the meeting at 8:05 p.m.
RECONVENED:
M/Kim reconvened the meeting at 8:20 p.m.
AUGUST 18, 1992 PAGE 7
6. OLD BUSINESS:
6.1 PRESENTATION REGARDING STATE OF CALIFORNIA BUDGET CRISIS
AND ITS EFFECT ON THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - Following
presentation of a video on the State budget crisis
prepared by the League of California Cities and
explanation of the impacts on the City by ACM/Belanger,
C/Miller moved, MPT/Papen seconded to suspend all Council
travel except to Sacramento to negotiate with the State.
With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEN - Werner, Miller, MPT/Papen, M/Kim
NOES: COUNCILMEN - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - Forbing
MPT/Papen announced that interested groups or individuals
may borrow the video tape simply by contacting City Hall.
In addition, she requested that Jones Intercable offer
CSPAN and CALSPAN and asked the community to write to
Jones as well as our representatives in Sacramento
telling them that the services local government provide
to the people are ones that should be left in place, the
funding should be there as a top priority because this is
where the quality of life is.
6.2 FEASIBILITY OF MEDIAN ISLANDS ON GOLDEN SPRINGS DR.
BETWEEN BREA CANYON RD. AND THE STATE ROUTE 57 FWY.
OVERPASS - At the June 11 and July 9, 1992 Traffic and
Transportation Commission meetings, the Commission was
provided with the preliminary layout of the proposed
medians along Golden Springs Dr. Pros and cons were
reviewed and evaluated.
ACM/Belanger requested that this matter be continued to
the meeting of September 1, 1992.
At the recommendation of ACM/Belanger, this was continued
to September 1, 1992.
7. NEW BUSINESS:
7.1 COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE FOR SENIOR CITIZEN ISSUES -
CSD/Rose reported that there appeared to be several
issues regarding senior citizens which would best be
handled by a City Council subcommittee working with
members of the community as well as Parks & Recreation,
Traffic & Transportation and Planning Commissioners.
Following discussion, C/Werner and M/Kim were appointed
to serve on the subcommittee.
8. PUBLIC HEARING: 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as matters
can be heard.
8.1 Adopted the following Resolution, No: 89-97G, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND
AUGUST 18, 1992 PAGE 8
BAR AMENDING THE CITY'S CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE FOR
DESIGNATED CITY PERSONNEL.
M/Kim declared the Public Hearing open.
There being no testimony offered, M/Kim closed the Public
Hearing.
C/Miller moved, C/Werner seconded to adopt Resolution No.
89-97G adding the positions of Accounting Manager, Senior
Engineer and Transportation Planner and changing the
title of Director of Parks & Maintenance to Director of
Community Services. With the following Roll Call vote,
motion carried:
AYES: COUNCILMEN - Miller, Werner, MPT/Papen, M/Kim
NOES: COUNCILMEN - None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - Forbing
9. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Michael Goldenberg expressed concern
regarding the franchise with Jones Intercable in that no
company should be allowed to have a monopoly. He further
expressed disapproval regarding the number of employees hired
by the City.
ACM/Belanger explained that the City no longer contracts for
engineering and planning functions and that staff had been
hired for these duties but that the number of employees had
not changed in over two years. Further, the City employs only
one person part-time.
C/Miller again encouraged citizens to call him whenever they
have concerns to express.
C/Werner also welcomes citizen contact and announced that his
telephone number is 860-1757.
MPT/Papen stated that she can be reached at 396-5668 and
reminded interested parties to contact City Hall to borrow the
video tape regarding the State's budget crises.
10. ADJOURNMENT: with no further business to conduct,
C/Werner moved, MPT/Papen seconded to adjourn the meeting to
Tuesday, August 25, 1992 at 7:00 p.m.
ATTEST:
Mayor
LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk
1.
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL JAVING
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
AUGUST 25, 1992
CALL TO ORDER: M/Kim called the meeting to order at
7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E.
Copley Dr.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of
Allegiance by M/Kim.
ROLL CALL: Mayor Kim, Councilmen Forbing, Miller
and Werner. Mayor Pro Tem Papen was excused.
Also present were James DeStefano, Community Development
Director; Andrew V. Arczynski, City Attorney; Bob Rose,
Director of Community Services and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk.
Acting City Manager Terrence L. Belanger was excused.
RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION: CA/Arczynski requested that
M/Kim recess the meeting for an Executive Session prior to
commencing the meeting pursuant to the provisions of
California Government Code Section 54956.9c for the Council to
discuss whether or not to initiate litigation. M/Kim recessed
the meeting at 7:05 p.m.
RECONVENE: M/Kim reconvened the meeting at
7:20 p.m. CA/Arczynski reported that the City Council took no
action during the Closed Session.
2. OLD BUSINESS:
2.1 GENERAL PLAN REFERENDUM - STATUS OF PERMIT ISSUANCE -
CA/Arczynski reported that a Referendum petition had been
filed with the City Clerk seeking to place the General
Plan on the ballot for determination by the public. The
validity of the petition signatures and all other
technical requirements had yet to be determined by the
Clerk's Office but determination was anticipated soon.
The effect of the petition was to suspend the operative
effect of the General Plan leaving the City with no Plan
and no authority to take discretionary action with
respect to proposals presented to the City, i.e., tract
maps or other types of projects. Government Code Section
65567, dealing with General plans states "No building
permit may be issued, no zoning map, no subdivision map
and no open space zoning ordinance adopted, unless the
proposed construction, subdivision or ordinance is
consistent with the local open space plan." By
definition, the City has no Open Space Plan; therefore,
those kinds of projects cannot be found to be consistent
with something that does not exist. If a literal
approach to the Government Code were used, it would mean
that the homeowner whose roof has been damaged, whose
water heater exploded, or whose backyard is falling into
his neighbor's yard would be unable to pull a permit. It
was staff's recommendation that the City adopt a policy
during the interim period when the validity of the
General Plan process is undergoing scrutiny, that health
AUGUST 25, 1992 PAGE 2
and safety types of permits be issued by the City. This
would include permits for roofs needing replacement or
repair, water heater replacement, bad sewer line
replacement, etc. and completion of projects previously
under way. Although a Court could take a literal
interpretation of the statute, it was staff's opinion
that the Court would likely rule in favor of the City on
health and safety reasons; however, there is no
guarantee. With respect to the issuance of other kinds
of permit applications such as subdivision requests,
requests for lot splits, lot consolidations, requests for
building new structures where none exist presently,
grading permits, oak tree permits, issues of a more or
less discretionary nature, it was the opinion that the
Court would overturn those permits. The City is subject
to litigation from all sides of the spectrum, but it was
felt that the safest, prudent and practical approach is
to permit the issuance of building permits, plumbing
permits and related entitlements for those types of
developments that need to continue to be processed for
repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, remodeling of
existing structures and code enforcement kinds of things.
In regard to permits for patio covers, pools, spas, room
additions, etc. in excess of those presently within the
envelope structures, it was believed that the Court would
hold that no permit should be issued.
C/Werner asked if the planning review process would
continue and what would happen to those projects granted
discretionary approval.
CA/Arczynski stated that in regard to projects presently
in the pipeline, it is difficult for staff to adequately
analyze and review them since there is no General Plan to
refer to. Staff will not stop working with applicants,
but their projects will not come up for hearings by the
Planning Commission for approval. With regard to those
projects presently under construction, there is no
answer, but it is felt that the Court would uphold
issuance of a permit. If a person has discretionary
approval, but has not yet pulled a building permit, the
recommendation would be to not issue the permit.
In regard to C/Miller's question as to whether a permit
would be valid if someone had previously pulled a permit
but construction had not begun, CA/Arczynski stated that
it would be recommended that the permit be withdrawn.
In response to C/Forbing's question as to whether tenant
improvements in a retail strip center would be permitted,
CA/Arczynski stated that it would be based on the same
reasons used for a partially constructed home or
structure. He further stated that there is a substantial
risk in going forward with a limited amount of permits
issued knowing that the statute states "no permits."
AUGUST 25, 1992 PAGE 3
M/Kim stated that State Law allows the General Plan to be
amended four times a year and that if anyone disagreed
with the Plan, Council could amend the section in
disagreement without the filing of a referendum.
C/Miller stated that the Council cannot amend the land
use designation for Tonner Canyon because it was zoned
Agricultural which means that houses cannot be built on
it. In addition, Tonner Canyon is only in the City's
Sphere of Influence, not within the city limits.
With regard to C/Forbing's question, CA/Arczynski stated
that the State Constitution provides the right of
referendum with regard to legislative acts and courts
have held that the adoption of a General Plan, Element or
amendment is a legislative act. Since there is no
process for conducting referenda on General Plan
approvals, which by law are done by Resolution and,
therefore under case law are required to follow the
general guidelines applicable to the conduct of a
referendum on an ordinance. The law says that if a
specific number of signatures are filed on a petition on
a prima facie basis, it suspends the operative effect of
the action that is being subjected to referendum. The
City Clerk has a detailed, lengthy analysis to conduct
and will determine within the next ten days to two weeks
whether or not the referendum petitions submitted meet
the requirements of law. If they do not, the General Plan
will be again be in effect.
In response to C/Forbing's question as to whether the
City can eliminate the need for a special election,
CA/Arczynski answered that an election is required by the
Constitution and by the State Elections Code. The only
thing the Council can do is to set the election date for
as early as possible not less than 88 days after the
petition has been certified. He explained that a Public
Hearing would be scheduled for September 1, 1992 to
consider requesting the State Office of Planning and
Research to again extend the City's General Plan.
Regarding questions concerning the effect of the
referendum should the voters support it during an
election, CA/ Arczynski stated that preparation of a new
General Plan would need to begin as soon as possible.
Statutes indicate that the Council may not adopt within
one year a document that is substantially similar to the
one subjected to referendum and successfully voted on by
the public. This would mean waiting a minimum of one
year from the date of the vote, due to the fact that the
majority of the General Plan is acceptable to the public.
Sherry Rogers, resident, asked how the referendum will
affect South Pointe Middle School.
CA/Arczynski stated that school districts are not
AUGUST 25, 1992
PAGE 4
necessarily required to ask the city for approval with
regard to instructional facilities and alike. They are,
however, required to obtain City approval for grading
activities but may choose to ignore the City's grading
standards and proceed with grading. However, if this is
done, all responsibility and liability regarding the
grading would belong to the school district.
Mrs. Rogers further stated that she was outraged that the
petition was presented the way it was. Her husband
signed the petition based on the fact that he had been
told that thousands of homes would be built in Tonner
Canyon unless enough signatures were put on the petition.
Bart Porter, owner's representative for Country Hills
Towne Center, stated that a conditional use permit had
been approved in February or March for the Center and
asked if CUP's are subject to referendum. He stated that
the grocery store in the center is currently involved in
a million dollar refurbishment of the interior and
exterior remodeling is awaiting design review. Further,
a restaurant has indicated an interest in moving into the
Center; however, they may withdraw their interest if they
cannot build.
Clair Harmony, 24139 Afamado Ln., asked that the city
attorney release a full and complete legal opinion for
review, including citing of codes, case history and a
clear delineation of legal opinion. He further suggested
that the Council get a second opinion to do their best to
meet the public interest and provide for the general
health and welfare of the City.
Fred Janz, resident, stated that his daughter had signed
the petition based on the fact that she had been told it
was to stop building in Tonner Canyon and had nothing to
do with the General Plan and felt that the referendum
should be thrown out due to the misleading information
used.
Lydia Plunk spoke in opposition to the referendum.
Laura Zingg, 23675 Bower Cascade, stated that she is in
the process of adding a second floor to her home to
coincide with the replacement of the roof and requested
an opinion whether or not she could proceed with the
project at the time.
Greg Hummel, 23239 Ironhorse Canyon Rd., stated that he
was a member of the General Plan Advisory Committee and
was in opposition to the referendum and stated that the
objections accurately reflect what the General Plan says.
Thomas Nicholson stated that he had applied for a permit
for construction of a tennis court on private property,
AUGUST 25, 1992 PAGE 5
but the permit was denied. He further stated that during
the previous week he had spoken with the staff and was
told that plans had been reviewed and the permits were
ready to be pulled, however, on Thursday when he went to
pull the permits he was denied. He stated that it was
his opinion that permits should be given for pools, spas
and tennis courts. He further felt that although the
City Attorney has stated that the Council should only
issue permits for health and safety issues, the City
should take a risk and issue other permits.
Max Maxwell, 3211 Bent Twig Ln., proponent of the
referendum, spoke on why the petition was circulated and
indicated that he had heard that there is a proposed 300+
housing project in the Sandstone Canyon area by Arciero
and REM.
David Craig, 227 N. Pintado Ln., stated that when he was
circulating the referendum petition, he was told that the
General Plan is deceiving. He requested clarification of
the "Agricultural" designation.
Charles Copp stated that he currently had a project
pending and that he felt that the referendum petition was
foolish.
Bob Burton, 1200 S. Diamond Bar Blvd., real estate agent,
stated that he has been working with Burger King to
construct a restaurant by D.B. Honda and that due to this
petition, he could lose the restaurant. He further
indicated that the Council should move forward and ignore
the petition.
Bob Buchanan, 23721 Monument, stated that he signed the
petition, but now feels that he was duped into it, as he
thought he was signing a petition in regard to a project
in Tonner Canyon. If he had known it would stop the
General Plan he would not have signed it. He then asked
what the homeowners' rights are if the General Plan is
passed and they disagree with any one aspect of the plan.
Curtis Malins, 3810 Locust St., Chino, stated that he is
a pool contractor who has submitted plans currently
awaiting plan check and that he had a crew scheduled for
this week to begin construction of a swimming pool but
due to the petition he is unable to get permits and
therefore his employees are unable to work.
Kathleen Wong, 828 Del Sol Ln., stated that the
referendum was not an attempt to deceive anyone and that
Mr. Miller is wrong for saying that the circulators lied.
Red Calkins, 240 Eagle Nest Dr., stated that he had been
approached to sign the petition and that no one ever
asked if he was a registered voter nor did they take the
AUGUST 25, 1992
PAGE 6
time to explain anything to him. He further stated that
he is supportive of the General Plan.
Bill Tinsman, resident, offered to show the video tapes
that he has shown people asking for Council to listen to
their requests.
Dan Buffington, 2605 Indian Creek, stated that the
Council was elected to do what is best for the City and
asked that they do what is best.
Dave Heaps, 1374 Rolling Knoll Rd., stated that, due to
health problems, he is installing a pool in his home but
due to the referendum, this project will have to be put
on hold. He asked that the Council find a way around
this dilemma.
Ken Anderson, resident, stated that development in his
area has caused an increase in traffic accidents and that
the petition had nothing to do with Tonner Canyon but
with life here in Diamond Bar.
Mike Bennett, representing a small developer with a
permit pending, asked Council to differentiate between
large housing developments and the impact of issuing a
permit for a pad in a mature shopping center.
Jack Kowtowski, 1856 Kiowa Crest, stated that he wants to
save Tonner Canyon and Diamond Bar. He further stated
that he has a problem with a retaining wall above his
home and doesn't want to see anyone else have a problem
like his.
Eileen Ansari, 1823 Cliffbranch, stated that she signed
the petition because of the transportation corridor and
that she wants to keep the City a green area. She
presented photographs of the problems experienced by Mr.
Kowtowski as well as other local problems.
Bill Gross, 21637 High Bluff Rd., stated that he was
concerned for the City and that the Council should be
blamed for the problems that have arisen. He then went
on to discuss the reasons for the petition.
Frank Piermarini, 2559 Wagon Train, suggested that the
Council allow staff to give permits to those who wish to
build pools, etc., and argue the other points out later.
With no further comments offered, M/Kim closed Public
Comment.
RECESS: M/Kim recessed the meeting at 9:02 p.m.
RECONVENE: M/Kim reconvened the meeting at 9:12 p.m.
AUGUST 25, 1992 PAGE 7
2.1 GENERAL PLAN REFERENDUM - STATUS OF PERMIT ISSUANCE
(Cont'd.) - CA/Arczynski recommended that Council direct
staff to issue limited building permits for certain types
of improvements to minimize the City's risk in the event
of litigation. He further stated that this process
should continue until review of the Referendum petitions,
as well as the upcoming request for extension, has been
completed. If the Referendum is certified and placed on
the ballot, then the limited permit issuance will
continue until an election takes place.
In response to M/Kim's question regarding the City
obtaining a second legal opinion, CA/Arczynski stated
that the Council is free to obtain as many opinions as
they feel necessary but that he previously consulted with
a large variety of sources on this matter in addition to
speaking with the Office of Planning and Research. The
Government Code Section in question is 65567 and there is
no case law interpreting this particular section.
Further, issues under the Elections Code are clear that
the filing of a Referendum suspends the General Plan.
At the request of C/Werner, CA/Arczynski explained that
the City can begin work on the preparation of an Open
Space Element; however, that process could take much
longer than the process currently under discussion. The
Open Space Element would have to be substantially
different than that contained within the current General
Plan.
CDD/DeStefano further added that preparation and adoption
of an Open Space Element could take between three to six
months, depending on what the plan is, how it is received
and how it is brought through the public process prior to
Planning Commission review and City Council adoption.
C/Miller suggested that staff be directed to look into
the matter for further discussion on September 1st and
that Council accept staff's recommendation so that
something can be done immediately.
C/Forbing asked for a consensus of the Council to approve
the City Attorney's recommendation to issue permits for
projects within existing structures that do not interfere
with open space. He pointed out that at the next
meeting, Council will consider approval of an application
to request an extension of the General Plan from the
State.
In response to C/Werner's question as to the City's risk
in issuing permits for pools, tennis courts, etc. on
existing lots, CA/Arczynski explained that there are two
degrees of risk involved: 1) The risk that someone would
file a lawsuit over issuing a building permit to install
a new roof is unlikely, but if someone did, the Court
AUGUST 25, 1992
PAGE 8
would probably uphold the permit; 2) the risk increases
if permits are issued for projects outside the envelope
of existing structures such as grading, swimming pools
and tennis courts.
CDD/DeStefano, responding to M/Kim's question about
applying pressure to the State to grant an extension,
stated that the State has never been requested to deal
with an issue like this before. The State previously
issued an extension in February 1992, the City complied
with the State's conditions and requirements and has
adopted a General Plan. The issue is that the effective
use of the General Plan has been suspended as of August
5th. Staff will be asking for an extension of time on a
document no longer in use --the old General Plan prepared
by the County years ago. It is unknown what the State
will do but whatever happens will set a precedent for all
cities.
C/Forbing moved, seconded by C/Werner to accept the City
Attorney's recommendation to issue permits within the
building envelope and direct staff to make a
recommendation at the September 1, 1992 meeting to
request the State to extend the previous General Plan.
In addition, direct staff to prepare an updated report
for the September 15, 1992 meeting to consider expanding
the scope of permits, if necessary, based on the response
from the State. Further, direct staff to explore more
options to keep business operating as efficiently as
possible.
Following discussion, motion carried by the following
Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN - Forbing, Miller, Werner
NOES: COUNCILMEN - M/Kim
ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - MPT/Papen
CA/Arczynski explained that in regard to the issue raised
by Mrs. Rogers, it would be beyond the scope of the
Council's direction to issue wholesale grading permits,
but that staff will work with the school district to the
extent possible, short of issuing permits; however, the
school district does have alternatives.
In regard to Mr. Porter's inquiry regarding the
Conditional Use Permit issued in February or March for
the Country Hills Towne Center, CA/Arczynski explained
that he was not aware of the full extent of the CUP but
if it deals with intensifying uses within the envelope,
then it would be permitted to continue. If it is to
build an entirely new structure, then it would not be
permitted. In regard to the Alpha Beta's renovation, to
the extent no discretionary approvals are needed, then it
would be acceptable. In regard to the new restaurant,
AUGUST 25, 1992 PAGE 9
staff will work with the applicant to the extent
possible, but no permits will be issued.
Regarding Mrs. Zingg's concern over the addition to her
home in conjunction with a new roof, CA/Arczynski stated
that the new roof would be acceptable but the room
addition would not.
In response to Mr. Harmony's statement, CA/Arczynski
explained that the Council could draft an entirely new
General Plan but that would not deal with the current
problem of the Referendum, a process which cannot be
stopped at this point.
In regard to Mr. Janz' comment that the Referendum should
be invalidated, CA/Arczynski explained that he is sorry
that Mr. Janz' daughter signed the petition under what
she now considers false pretenses, but once a petition is
filed, a signature cannot be removed. He recommended
persons concerned about the way in which petitions were
circulated should put their concerns in writing to the
City Clerk.
In regard to the issue over construction of tennis
courts, CA/Arczynski reported that permits for tennis
courts cannot be issued at this time.
As to Mr. Maxwell's comments regarding approval of the
Diamond Bar Associates' project in "The Country" prior to
the adoption of the General Plan, CA/Arczynski explained
that the project was filed as a vesting map long before
the General Plan process began and State law clearly
authorizes the developer to proceed.
Regarding discussion concerning tax assessments on all
Diamond Bar residents for a road in Tonner Canyon Road,
CA/Arczynski stated that no general tax assessment could
be levied; however, a benefit assessment district could
be created to assess only those persons directly
benefiting from such improvements and that those persons
would be given notice of a hearing prior to any
assessment being levied.
Regarding Mr. Craig's comment that the General Plan is
deceptive in that the agricultural zoning for Tonner
Canyon would allow cattle, CA/Arczynski stated that under
the Constitution and State law, an individual owning a
piece of property has the right to some beneficial use of
it or the government must buy the land. Diamond Bar is
not in a position to buy Tonner Canyon. The agricultural
designation is what has been in place by the County for
a long time and the Council's decision to continue that
designation is merely to maintain the status quo.
CDD/DeStefano further pointed out that the Council made
AUGUST 25, 1992
PAGE 10
it very clear when discussing the Land Use Element of the
General Plan, after receiving significant public
testimony, that the Planning Commission recommendation to
develop a Specific Plan to allow residential and
commercial development was not in the best interests of
the City. The Council wanted the area designated
agricultural to provide only those land uses which are
currently permitted. The agricultural designation allows
for cattle grazing, commercial recreation and open space.
Regarding the transportation corridor, CDD/DeStefano
stated that the Circulation Element indicates the
possibility of a future transportation corridor. The
section says that the City will participate in local and
regional transportation related planning and decision
making and identify a transportation corridor through
Tonner Canyon. It further states that the environmental
impacts of transportation facilities within the corridor
must be minimized and benefit the City. The City will
further require that any proposed transportation
facilities be explicitly demonstrated as acceptable to
the City.
Regarding Mr. Cobb's comments, CA/Arczynski stated that
his project will continue to be reviewed and staff will
work with the applicant, but no permit will be issued at
this time.
In regard to Mr. Tinsman's comments regarding a proposed
project in Sandstone Canyon, CDD/DeStefano explained that
throughout the General Plan process, there was
significant opportunity for community input. The Land
Use Map was transmitted in its draft state as of May 26,
1992 to all businesses and residents in the City. At the
time the Planning Commission reviewed the General Plan,
they reviewed land use changes requested by approximately
twelve developers and development of Sandstone Canyon was
included. The Commission recommended that the Council
consider some form of development within the Canyon.
Staff has received an application for Sandstone Canyon
for a planned development in the area and the project has
a lengthy process to go through prior to being considered
at the public level.
Regarding Mr. Anderson's comments, CDD/DeStefano
explained that most of the development of the Country
Hills Towne Center grew out of the County's development
policies. It appears as though removal of the carbon
deposits in the area near Fountain Springs and D.B. Blvd.
is due to the fact that a gas station was previously
located there. Staff will look into the matter to
ascertain whether the conditions of approval are being
complied with.
Regarding Mr. Kowtowski's concerns about the residence
AUGUST 25, 1992 PAGE 11
constructed right above his own, CDD/DeStefano stated
that shortly after C/Miller was elected, he and C/Miller
researched the matter to determine what permits were
issued and which were not. Questions raised by Mr.
Kowtowski need further staff review and he recommended
that staff be directed to undertake an analysis of the
entire permit process for homes being proposed or under
construction. He further suggested that the concerns
raised by Mrs. Ansari be dealt with similarly.
3. ANNOUNCEMENTS: None offered.
4. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct,
M/Kim adjourned the meeting at 10:18 p.m.
ATTEST:
Mayor
LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk
I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Mayor Pro Tem Papen.and Councilmember Forbing
FROM: Linda G. Magnuson Accounting Manager
SUBJECT: Voucher Register, October 6, 1992
DATE: October 1, 1992
Attached are the Voucher Register dated October 6, 1992. As
requested, the Finance Department is submitting the voucher
register for the Finance Committee's review and approval prior to
their entry on the Consent Calender.
The checks will be produced after any recommendations and the final
approval is received.
Please review and sign the attached.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
VOUCHER REGISTER APPROVAL
The attached listing of vouchers dated October 6, 1992 have been
audited approved and recommended for payment. Payments are hereby
allowed from the following funds in these amounts:
FUND NO.
FUND DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
001
General Fund
$606,511.46
112
Prop A Transit Fund
26,281.81
115
Int. Waste Mgt Fund
196.81
138
LLAD #38 Fund
18,936.81
139
LLAD #39 Fund
18,686.18
141
LLAD #41 Fund
4,650.34
227
Traffic Mitigation Fee Fund
9,747.80
250
CIP Fund
36,023.65
TOTAL ALL FUNDS
APPROVED BY:
Linda G. Magriusbn
Accounting Manager
-ZZ-R-�
Terrence L. Belanger
ming City Manager
$721,034.86
�/,��>
Phyll s E. Papen
Mayor Pro Tem
John A. Forbing
Councilmember
t v
RLN WN 1:32 104152
.............
QUO
iNT
-.- ---- -------------------
BUCH pyTOO.
---------------
E174"09
-
PON,
-
> 7 A f AN"
-----------------------------------------------
AMINI DIVE
�ef?Ei �, z t
B .;-- c LqS
+0140910924
1 2MI
ORO
Moo
Pis!
MU snalps
7110
1201AM1125
WAA
*131
1356
703
TO Mal
292)
-�x 21 Wak
9AW
WAASM NO
2 3RnA gv>x
MH
1vu
v 14
Sannn"AMA
2Z N
*129,439021?
1 TYKA t� 141L
19133
006
MC
MQMYKAW�q
19".66
402 HJUM
1 2MIA
M1
006
HMO
Chumput HpadvW
WN,
u 7EASY RM
2 TMA :i, _4
sw is
13M
7ASs
! a: once Nint Pont
211.0
*110 45391,11
2 3whA M. �71
1310
1108
2,151
mbrup MAntTant
S09SAO
E R
Are ppl17u Glut bipg
*01-4@901218
1 3ROO
?W
WR6
5013
iailt-Cit!- Hail Kitchen
Mt
�Gua packficl 1
QN-4316011
1 IBM
1910
limb
U24
70C 0) Dam
ON
-----------
1 TMA
Ono
1w9b
E13
Emp 'rez M1748
"IRM
3
MAO
I SltW
lail
1M6
:1-3 i, r e fr. 'R e tj r p d CC k.
35M-
Di 4ENMR ---------
O.to
29P. Con 2.
BO ej
ON403 41N
2 3RUF
MR
16M
TEEOUWIO12
i 3RUA Wn:;
ON30
1IN6
3A319
OP096 atch
57.17
YENDU ----------
57.117
TA Wo 11K
,ANR
WAS
PV�Tlqv
---------------
BVEH PH oval.
--------------
F04014
AKIO
YINVWN
ADAT DAN
----------------- -----
2REA
lb@b
3m"—QFm8Q
SM ni;
-------
An, Wtv 0,
Resm
f.12
I
4L --------
27
-y
MN
Mob
171
Basnalorumies
57.88
IFAL RE VLXN.R
6 7. H
AM,
W-4112121
4
TRY
WH
ME
pw-,,
R.0 0/221i?
Mr
CA
Rilb
R�;,-d VW'i2-2
7 6. 2
S
Mij 7 r
l'nr
t
t -, '3
1006
45S
mampt Mainta-lar"ce
7b8 i6
WHA
0120
0106
W
Anyor malmera-a
AMC
2703.23
An Dc
cownM
+,,P!-4F..l-4M
1
3t"6A
PiV,3r
1r!v,,
1
31ME
Vol
W6
MT&m9nV9?
VMNp
AN 119: 1302 MI
A2
F a E, 3
E 9
----------
BATCH ONAW.
---------------------------------
EYRUDS
:QC Q
-----------------------------------
A ON v WN
-------------------------------
AMDUNT DAIS
VFO, Nana
OYD
4 100
Ono
it 15
Mou9nOM
OM
--
OMATIVI!
1 THDA
19M
l@R6
do- khe"OW"t
M2 K
�,PE VENDA ---------- t
2.
16mss
1101 "ITS vsol
A WMA
1020
1116
SnAl 17 8122
1 At 13)
ATI DO YNDU
MMAS
01-AMMU
MIA
?W32
M06
M HUM
WeNNAKOe
H.0
,Di nq D, E 4 OU R --------t
2.. 6?
IMA W153
1711
AM
SW
47 Bnolm
108,87
Q MMA ?
1913
IM
SIM
3pc R-nalms
412.53
W1435FIM
3 31MA WAH
?911
AM
YM
Rao Saches
it A
MI -35M20
SPO A :A 141
Mul
IM
TIO
S"Pups
2H.K
-TA', 31;5 VF'DORN
70 -en
Denut Rgnd - ME 1
:S IL
4
NG
WAMM92
1 MOM
67/33
R/A
1093
cunw2m2nimPo2,2,}t
9158AO
--;tc
�od Bar 5.;sipess -Acc ,3311 S" S;rc
OMOOM210
2 MMA
MI
10706
OrMamanke0aint
179.08
VaUR
MA)
DOW Bu WAY
Cash
tomAllullel
1 E 006
10/11
11166
Tases for CC Council
11.33
IM -4800225
1 ENU
IWO!
W6
QQT Q
IM
03146301100
1 3NO67
ivil
10M
Famed Evehoes
Me
=119306315
1 2INSF
18731
!,M6
UT Mfg
1212
lv?l
RN6
&MAW;
Sao
4 ll??LF
laiK
lVe-6
f-ir Pool Cars
8.64
+
L
t
f
+
DA
h ........
W
quo A,
A
42CNNT MAW
-- --------- -- ---
9MCM PIMP".
----------------------------------------
Awbov
0 ilk
-------------
KA IF fAN
--------------- ------------
N A
a
� I - ,act i
02�310451
2 31115
Mil
lilt
RR poor FAV -s
2 i. �'4
-A, DOP
a
4 10 z
31.0h8
Oil
104H
1HU2
S-52asRudy4h!
1,31wo
UF -421412 4192
2 SHUA M 52
spu
10106
REN
M Ms SMn Bugs
919M.)
San 6a". Planning
i"LIA
3106',d�.tiv
i6'01 U111'ii .
AM010T ----
0,23
TUTAL DUF VENDOR ---------
Fakman irc.
pown
"MMads
2 Too? ham/
lum
NWA
w"Ins
808
i WA 5017
0913
AM6
575? _
Sun! as
7612
t
2 wohn MIMI
ohm
its
MUM
sM 0;
23. U
SHAS W W
1530
lum
545H
solos
17, A
wimp MIT/
Me
AM
52ou
Motes
331
2 3126o 011139+
MR
Wh
AM
MUM ps"Wonp
21USSS
3 Mho
@910
1016
Mnh
40 - Pans I Mapt
38.57
3HHB
09no
Woh
MAN
FYI - parks I Mast
3322
P/3o
- L"t", Mar
ik So
tri 4[i 7'... 1J
wring
2122
-23;0
1 4G6
91H
Rieb
SAW
F"PI So Gait
15.07
2 51.U"sB
W6
M64
Sn hwev Tema
4901
4 1 OUR OMM
9910
1016
WIM
hao"Tmpa
22148
ti!24
iAA6
6 -. 8 7 o
FnIks I 'ast
i7.9
3'="80?
Nno
17 76
4"M
FAI -Parks I Mast
W 52
0 i - 4 3 10 - �3 i
Maint
+W -46t 2:310
0133
M6
UWA
AM - on out
it 401
001wW318
2 U24B
Wo
10M
Myna
Nei - Ren Mt
16.03
t
i
a r
MN AN: 1352
1VID92
011 L C
H E R E S
S 7 E
P�,i,.Thk
----------------------
BMEM Phi
--------- -----------------------
q y
---
..'t.
--- --------------------
AMDJ.N , DO: E
-- -----------------
x x a o..
0xviz
!A a
Q01AMA311
1
5AM
SUN
1',. 6
, qn&
All pnos & Wt
>
+'921--,11A: 31`@
2
3147
WN
A B
61562
F&I pirnm
21 W
F
M-47MUS
Kgms
0530
M6
w?9447YO
ho Ma7l Pirming
Q61432141pw
1
WOE
mvp
Alto
W-�s il'�11
�X, �a—,
J
h
4
3usbo
M39
lots
PACIMA&M
61 W
WOO 23081010
5
3RUR
x9nh
18%
SGAN
WWT02 4
.72
Ii2&68
0i^33
iMb
5ifi61@
%ev8l:w-1;592.4
631
QN-sols Alit
1
31up
PAR
M
MUM
2512
Cj�jE NDUR
.f2
e
E
+u 1 „-.-217;
I
33t0l
0111s)ik`6
cm E, c - r, I p i.,.
QN-4313025
1
3U36B
ON33
M06
W7
DUE v --"DJ - --------
E m:alif rii
6TE
ONSM3 12S
23HUD
VIR.
lvii",b
2';.19
5!E callf,7rnia
biE
"NAMAUS
3
31UR
H/P
10,6
S"S7
VE;ULP - ---------
-14.S7
QW41911132
2
TOMB
010
1@R6
Fmionta',
MIS
WAL RE ANDA
82435
t
RA AU Qf Mum,
V
I c
P; 4
VOOR 15,
001
Ply,]
AXPAT PALO&!
---------
Mcm Gunn,
----------- ---------
ANGDA
----------
:000
------- ---------------------------
0 mc p Wli%
---------------------------------------
AMANT DAN
---
ia" Muni
+
o
1�; e6
P1ng"2PRE i "PU - 5`,
,'5,
CAL DR YOUR ----V
lit)
0,'J -
1 oaks
010
M86
137
kundsimAt"S
219)
WhR
rat
A16
33A
& 1 A, p3amer
IM. 36
tD,:.AL D'E
3. -';t6,26
WI—RA 4�e-�
I
OW
Mob
cover Enz
KIM00
prove, juk
z JIND
013
IM
X11 i6100
Til AL r;iE ---------
fl7.0
Whr
MR
1?m5
A SOS - WE 8
J IA L DUE Y L' UR --------
6.674,A
9 -2.1. A
3mu5
obw
lum
6mk
1:4hrOMPROW
Moe
OIAL DIjE V.'ADUR
S
318;963 e1j!04
09/38
7j,+2
Tral!Fr H,Itc�
100.03
!QL MA YB"R
WU
lops Hinnianpr
0/32
1?!?6
245 .A
-",3
29.A
?gal
11106
Wh
KINIAM92-114
:32.63
TUTAL DiIE VENDOR --------
62.24
we Duat
MIA31612@1
2 3R863 NOW
1318
Woo
Mahn
42.%5
WMB W42
MI
M06
&OWTS
9151
J'A' 24 VtNDON --------i
142.26
TAW
. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . t6; 9,2
WN A.
tii 1010
ANLF DEE
110 EM CH PO � 1 ;F; 2. A Q MA
--------------------------------------
--- ------------------------------- I ------- ------ ----- -------------
104 4011"Ut 0;:.
W-0 it NO T."i'AT
RabUsh A2 1 KIN
for 4.=':4191.' 1 TIAT
too! VMS? 1 3AW
W-4319110 1 T 1967
*111"Slytzh 1 KIM
Sv-i7pil's Tnr, 7 T a, 0 4
1 3RIg
lurnwe Scremurks :Yvane
W-USE120? 6 31MC HINIS
Tn!51;d val"ev ni -, .i3
06-21321W 7 MY
IN141004111 6 It=
hVI Mons NOW bhon,
fav -0901101 2 31962
QW43900H i WE
MIMS SSP
C S L,-
'b, & Kev
011069801?
Hkmpsu.
1 3ROF INNS
2 30HE 1UPIS
"ennip-gs Epqs7rana
WP462@0121 1 9
RIM
BY21
1116
qSA0"rI"qw":
UM)
'eq. -n
il !-t6
-'ITC;iPcont
428. 1
0901
1116
ormaymn"
MM
list
LL16
Irwasput
499.1s
013e
to eb
23w. 59
MA
ME
WaNcut
;863)
AN30
1016
TOM
WAr
INA
UAL of 4SUR
1 S4. 0
1WRI
Wo
215
Rnreum SmAys
MAI
M2
MR&
WHO
PAHI4N92 14
191H
lwu
doom
4 sAPPM
S215
TuTAL EUF
leb.M
010
=6
21A
Op"Imer
247.56
Wo
M6
Is
Inox We
461,S9
T -7A , v END 0 R -
--------
? o) 9. 1 5
W!
loci
0455
On Phnnuit
Py-hIv
No Ak
IN91
AM
40%
Ear ANUFunt
Pp -mg
lZIN
DUF VEIN"fi-IR
----------
?44,'
W34AR6
WMI
Mwe
los?
iiTAL DbEYI-NPAIR
--------- !
113.52
Mi3o
3,,sTriru4uq92
2102
Qlik ',i,!E Vv'.NDiiR
-----------
'?8.''2
Rlil tl�': 13:K R 3
i -
coilz.11 t v- ':�pr i f c nzE
Oe! -x41.2 i b 10
2`49. 191 . 11
v
f I i 2 ,";i - I -. i C"
i
^- 1 ,
' Q4
I
"D T P. -�j
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - — -
PATCH
- - - - -- - - - - -
PC, N
- - - - - - - - - -- - -
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - -
- -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
A I E
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
3.'735. 22
T �1., ...........
Pon, c
!40Y s
011p!;nk
D,,' Cat2 6? --Miller
3 ,.l
•''-',5r.T
1
31 WC
L
11, w�
S.S25b7
12
3 Ob.,
4i
19(61:
N7 2 2 2
3
3
M, 30
19/96
T (i 1
23
f 1-
1 'Vhf:
14
3 R?6'=
38
1?/e6
930 M2 2 1
.6
294.1,
3 1 4'we`j S - ".", (6
3
312 t
?'9 y
iMb
D OF VF O)OR ---------
= iTIr5tailizont
Pr ,IV
1
4
3 1 6"
0.) 30
1.6!65
9382842218
CH - Yl" ip!K5'-ll l5t r i p i ng
231.16
09/2a
NAR', 7
4 N, �8c 219
2, M. 62
424�
+88i-45.5-5515
7 a
6
UTAI
3y a p c. s
?,c 8.53
17.24
t: A D'TiE VENDOti ----------
4'061.n
...A.
Den
3 8
!V6
9998902222
59.99
31 ip6r
ep ar K - 8 5
!99. 26
iG pia "'EV.11IR ---------
26
i -
coilz.11 t v- ':�pr i f c nzE
Oe! -x41.2 i b 10
2`49. 191 . 11
v
f I i 2 ,";i - I -. i C"
i
^- 1 ,
' Q4
I
o95,1Y
76
3.'735. 22
T �1., ...........
Pon, c
!40Y s
011p!;nk
•''-',5r.T
1
31 WC
L
11, w�
S.S25b7
3 Ob.,
4i
19(61:
N7 2 2 2
3
144.43
M, 30
19/96
YN M221 5
lijrsrStr p im3 s
i, r9I,41
+2a:-4555-5526
2
3 R?6'=
38
1?/e6
930 M2 2 1
294.1,
3 1 4'we`j S - ".", (6
3
312 t
?'9 y
iMb
Q3228x221'
= iTIr5tailizont
+N61 -45S". -SS-4
4
3 1 6"
0.) 30
1.6!65
9382842218
CH - Yl" ip!K5'-ll l5t r i p i ng
231.16
09/2a
10125
4 N, �8c 219
Iq t r i n i n q / M a r k in g
116.04
+88i-45.5-5515
091 R
10i06
9;;822922:18
S i on In sta I !a t i on
17.24
SjonInventory
3 8
!V6
9998902222
59.99
�`6
g r +
NN AN 1132 W1152 9 i �R
vull NAn-E VEHO A
A'Ec,luNT 9;111.".TFNC BATCH PK NEAS. ECRGOT MCA AMMON
--------------- ---------- --------------------------------- -- -------------------- I ---------
L'A !^l'iIptv 1-ACAQ---c
. W .-V Jou.
29118 MM 1IMN224
We AN WNW
09111 19/96 4UM2217
9900 Am nPlOnA 505"r3mil
ELI? IN96 MHOM TgAmapahnn
mat ims Own2mu wwWAnnvy;
0, A WH UNUM puneRNA"g
lost A% 3ANNAw R; " "D QW5
91A Mob 951UH33 PdAT"hwul
�3130 AM 93120723Q W118i MO.
19M 0196 A HUM cubAn9ersiuvalk
@3130 10116 932N@2246 StmoDany
1910 1: 36 ?NtH2227 1 jit"IteMBRenval
@530 RRb PAWAA "unaorml
MR 1N96 YAMM? Opemmog
9WR IUM 9MMU2'»., pard_tee
19M ION6 WNW is,mp!'AbatE-Tent
Mt!@Rb WNW krwhswhan
HnO M6 WNW A Sume
M8 1ON6 MR201
* + * +
,!A -T WE
0.14
0 19
01.91
11 K W
TWO
60%34
R9.83
LAW
nam,
2"nnli
4,00,17
P. 45
355.17
WhSl
?44.91
so M,
do "�S
3,MS
2A@3.19
52.5.5
AUL Mw VaMR ----n ghmn
26A
'UTAL VWAR
n 4. v R
fit - J MW
14
TAJ
WI—VIS Th
1
100C
Ow-WITM26
16
0 TIOZ
I K -Y 1401
17
11142
Iff-JIMS06
A
1167
WSMIT
1
RINK
i .11191
�-- - S I i" 4
:
3 1, -'r --', 7
PA 15
1
WASC
*11VISRSIVIA
1
34102
1 0403
1
AIMAQ
'11PHASISH
1
1 116C
4311 101�09
1
3422
MPOW 1210
1
1 HOT
19010SHOW
1
RIMAC
My SAW?
2
1 RK
1001ASIS-021
1
31MAE
WK43314311
1
total
L'A !^l'iIptv 1-ACAQ---c
. W .-V Jou.
29118 MM 1IMN224
We AN WNW
09111 19/96 4UM2217
9900 Am nPlOnA 505"r3mil
ELI? IN96 MHOM TgAmapahnn
mat ims Own2mu wwWAnnvy;
0, A WH UNUM puneRNA"g
lost A% 3ANNAw R; " "D QW5
91A Mob 951UH33 PdAT"hwul
�3130 AM 93120723Q W118i MO.
19M 0196 A HUM cubAn9ersiuvalk
@3130 10116 932N@2246 StmoDany
1910 1: 36 ?NtH2227 1 jit"IteMBRenval
@530 RRb PAWAA "unaorml
MR 1N96 YAMM? Opemmog
9WR IUM 9MMU2'»., pard_tee
19M ION6 WNW is,mp!'AbatE-Tent
Mt!@Rb WNW krwhswhan
HnO M6 WNW A Sume
M8 1ON6 MR201
* + * +
,!A -T WE
0.14
0 19
01.91
11 K W
TWO
60%34
R9.83
LAW
nam,
2"nnli
4,00,17
P. 45
355.17
WhSl
?44.91
so M,
do "�S
3,MS
2A@3.19
52.5.5
AUL Mw VaMR ----n ghmn
26A
'UTAL VWAR
n 4. v R
MR
1+ 6 42 j
SmArunrun
ii--A'up - ---------
4.514.A
1 �t;. -5 S'
KObC OWIM?71-+3
WhR
*02048RMS
3 1 W
WOM 3, 1r ONA70f
laff!
155A8 MUM MUM.-
7,�T;L P�.-L�?AILD OJUNT
76,0
r v a 1 a z 0 1 a a P
RA WO !?A MW2
Inup Nuz yyyv:
AIMT PSITENS BUCH Mamma. 34,14 :1 MO E
--------------------- -- ----------------------- --------- ----------------
'�-vp
OISHOW S 1557 &A AM
I - S. -I i - S T. -I i Tonc top IUK 201
v; 12 hAP AR MM WA
Abe
M1421CAHJS S 3MG
�.itt�e 3Fd Hi-jLie I-Itti-,PPI
WJ-43A-112,'� 8 Mac g1'144 Ono AM 46,, ?
Lo
QW4310 2130 1 MW 691? U/06 29
2 31?90 0910 lemb
7
ij i T
2210
2 31016D
09/3?
1�ieb
3794
OE0201ol
1 MHO
1.''35.63
H"'21
I1'o'jte6
37'.5
iW-322 PtO
I 3UND
I3,3.44
1910
Mb
316
RAS
i MUD
:006
too
t3i
347
"aripcsa Horticultural
mariprsi
6W
"N"WINO
1 SUND
UWA
AM
1046
3M
ON-KISHO
2 HOW
NMI
@910
it
493
ONA321HO
2 31885O
MUS
Ma
Ma
3 Nd
5220
1 71HAD
Ei!418
BM
10j26
3;93
+M-4322 5320
2 MOO
v 3 i 14 1, 4,,
"'Mt
R/h
3?9a
2 =3
954168
f9al
1VO6
IM
ONWHAMI
2 DIM
@0918
Hot
1M
3MA
7
ij i T
"i; AL Dij R ----------:
1.''35.63
! T
uHAL
3malunInV es
I3,3.44
RAS
:006
145,:5
'Clik v,--,NOLR - -
181.x,8
Pygo"AAM,
6W
Sna
1"Ou"Aulowy
5.83
_aAvaqv Nip,
loux
! wompe Not.
436. )b
.awnwa0v MaInt.
81.84
aid; c a rlm !taint
1,032.82
vanas mant.
A9.94
La"Marle MAA.
1, so 7 ��
NIX.............. 042
POW vs!"WO 2MCH p! 14A! SAUmn WAY A our W�, A, � i, !,.N f E
---------------------------------------- --------------- -
V. _Ilc i - IGN !
S wool 191�1 1311 it 4 2�� Wawa" WO, 118103
i *,L JR - --------- 8.4,.4.81
Now. S�
1 Ac'. Marina RaiumNant L 0",
'.'iyjd %F,..
31?"65
ME on, Evy M Q 7 W,
+011"610 090 2 3"51
Myers. "`.YAP -.,L-
+011AW1 AN 3HAD
1111"510428? i 31tod
OVASS3 Who 1 POOL
patin ','ere7f1 s F7REHFalth
f2mQUO-103 1
Pac TRI
W-4090025 1 loco
------ - - --
o9i3;,#
!�/fib
a? Xl
71jr4L DduE vf.ND3R ---------
�_ a. tO
1WR
lum
7!v
AN Coptem Rpmb
UW
1UTAL E�I;E ;ILEZIUR ----------
43a.O
6102
89/33
la/ab
PURW5
!U7; -',L D�;E VODUR
6 7 1 qb
Hal
Lei a
9250b
mcOmm:01002
H&H
@9123
D
92W6
9a 1 t.-)
09/3.3
Ai t,
%,' A,'
L,
0@1
1846
9-
7.P8,33
kiun =: e
41.b1
E -ff VE END 0 R --------
7,549-94
?9 30
ills
C&I Tow Sn", 7
84A
U',AL V-0UR --------
84.92
4. 4
. . . . . . . . . .
t
CH PD.
T
--- ----------------------------- --- --------- -------- ----- — ------- -----------
+t'v" 4211? -4[2? 5 'oo
D
71,blir
I rTin it* e ;r F r, t
i'c
3n': i 4e
r a r 7 4? r j A r C, -4
2 3i;N�O
A PA A T
3 31106pl
1E1f1
0ira PI.VQ
4
4SR?6D
T: is A!D AMulAT
1 6
6
al -.1 Pin PIas�lf
h
2,1T-9;
L'Al f
2 3R96D
6
`Ai DA VE-NDOR --------- r
i'c
3n': i 4e
r a r 7 4? r j A r C, -4
2 3i;N�O
t'? S 91 7195
b ?i ) 2 E! p T 5 0 C.q 2,555.3"
U T 'AL "IEND 0
A PA A T
0ira PI.VQ
T: is A!D AMulAT
al -.1 Pin PIas�lf
h
2,1T-9;
E r, t r -R,- a r a o r,
`Ai DA VE-NDOR --------- r
19 %2
2?
3 6 ;lel
A Dup - - - - - - - - --
4.124, 6
F� t C r'. p 40 t 9 9 3
7,4#y.-'3
y901, 9'
AM,1344 ----.
4,'74,41
ri I A, P.I.El -------
�,oCAI;qvat,? Ra'ir lln it
4
rf-)Sralibrate Radar !.nit
=S.O
Ratar Urit
6,15
:7 3 V EN 'D Ol R --------- I
2it 1-�
r eT.. - A wa
i4t) !A
PEIDOIN" ---------
t'? S 91 7195
b ?i ) 2 E! p T 5 0 C.q 2,555.3"
U T 'AL "IEND 0
+++
, 1 -
,, o
a tp
n 7. + k +
W is: 12: A 111 VN 2
0 d
A E R RES:STER
FAA
.............
VEND 0.
----------------- ---------------------------
OUCH Pon Moo.
WNUDA
WGIc
-- - ----
DY545 W"
--------------------------------------------------------
Ai.r'IJNT Db, � E
- --- -
2
31h,
Mi
W&
WN MOW MWA-2
----------
to AN 0;
TIN
1516
MOUR ?M9M
'14 - --------
e-.
001"IMW 3
MUD
HIM
RM
Sol 71&
9041501ap.
47A2
M1 -IM -111 8
12ND
1905
ism
HA a4l
4%WqADH2n4
W-19
QMMMAM 9
54165
1790
HM
SAT Mv
Mon -Me 0-45o
11
Tl,,T,,)L NE VENDUR -------- >
1A.;2
'.chub :0.
Ah".3b
WIS 451 ly 1
1907
OWN
N;@6
L55193
Rehod Mau
-j7A4
11)E VENhp,
37.44
S;nrv�?j ia-ren
QW-hpa-1612 2
WAD
HE@
Wh
2N212
E590? TuHulval
X70A�
WS 4515 Alto
M32
NQ6
517
Sion for Ranh Withal
15917
luTAL 7n.!E -VENDuR ----------
i 9.V
SMpr 1 Ne
MaphAte
Qo "446 Qrs 1
3063
4Y/3a
lce6
LA94
P:F7. 3.1,ole5
41.i4
ir hudy
prWay
thl"Uh2uh 1
MW
2950
IV: i6
544
MyraqAPKA,
MI A3
W14.21110 2
3UMD
1900
ism
low
RsMawNruan
7615
M TIT: 1131 100152
.............
2
VADM NME
VENDOR lu.
AUG"! FRITKNO
PMCH W DFAM
---------------
Alukk
Twuz
ZRAN
---------------------------------------------------
TAK
---
0, N
K"no
1ph
C04 Whawe Bax
4192
1 Al MA VS%R
0,2
kd"M M i
1950
flAs
BAS
MS.
'R
sewl
Hot
046
M91
1
vivo
OLEO
W6
2 5 A, P"
-2 i
lot,
IT31
WS
11 vd"R
11,H
13 1126
1@161
9012
10M
2, It. H
A!- M;E =, CCR
2 63
7
21un
Coo
luK
pwq�� All"
pf :AMR --------
231M
2 D
1 .- -2l?_
3? 867
0/3e
It/6
1 91 2
an--.- all usijrirof jre
stardarall
i
3iN,44)
Ono
1116 W
1Q,
2
SRMD
0918
1046 K
w5t,58A3
- ---------
31115.0
"l; t n p I S
ON 04 M 2
3WbF
Wo
1006 5M
aw E"WeAmbe
3A A2
iUTk :P.-!)-.�R
16.92
d B a
3 2 1
E �
Zvi Z
VOLK IN
AYAW RNOTh'S
-------------- --- -----------------
BUN P11 MEAD.
10%1�
:Q2&
slip O�k
------------------------
N,
-------
i rb
Al r: are-sma en
1 301�
via?
Wo
OWWWA 001ya"r
W 10.4
.3 FU at
Ann-,
"WARAUS
1 Nos!
1; P
Rib
17.2it
2)
AM
W, 1 4 3a 2tl.q
3 300
R06
�
R -i6
-? 2 4 1
Fi
W,1-4,e3y-231e
2 INUF
9PR
101H
VAP
Ful DO mpr
_8,W
4 WE
?45
R06
26"3
NO TAV Mg,-
! h 1)
6i/3�
10 h
2 4 �55
8 PAVE
All
10:36
WKS
1W Pass Mast
",:F VENDOR
12 2-,-
.41
3 31115
till
lun
WX
TW
V/24!92
n. „n,'_OAQ
DgP VEON
Q1411025
2 VINE
i 3
146
"Wi Taskm
1.923.4
om—T3776
2 MIKE
Wh
AW to
am-'AIME
704)
01 34 nx
2 3ARF
CWR
Ala
hAnNown!
chl"W456
3 3 ARE
WO
156
awl No sml
+x+2,-=3,.9 212L
1 31686E
0920
1PH
"or T?mmsl
ISMAS
OMANW26
2 31ZUE
0943
lbob
owl %m1WqS
115AS
OT43mlwh
3 3112N
Ono
1WA
imp"Imptnup
"WAO
Qt'�) 1 - - 43M -217'c
I Ztr,E
y9i35
A/?,6
Via?,-svl-,nvre
NL11)
"W"Roub
2 stur
th3o
Rns
fewlK072
34 1 HA
7,N R ----------
19 O'
vly 'Ott r Di -it
4v' atPTDIS
2, 2
2 1W
01?
Hub
------------ ; 76. 71?, 76
----------------
R�,1------}J.q-
f 4 4
:;l= v D 1 a ;
a 1 j 8 a r * 4 +
DIP 3;2 9d1 ;4
*- R p E 3
: - - E i
Fos
D7.«.............2
W13
ASINT pla"ThNs
-------------- I ---------------------------------------------------------
BAMM PURFAQ.
FAYMI :OF>
- ----------
----------------- - ------------
N, T 'I Al E
---------------------
i'ilr,.jt "Vii o,w7, DiO
436 dMIA,
2 3RM7
ad» 1206
w9n-LA10"!
14 of
01 ;kWUR
NANM
0t a,4 - 2 -1,
i IMP
MA Rib
.4 fli, i!"h r 5 -
2 242:
69 g9:QS 6bn+2
2 31HR ank
svp 1916 MY
Mly sus444up
MAN
QW. RE KNDBR
7p2nbcl-.
7049El.
!26J
gum lom 2353 2;a2
har
61K
TOOL §sVbDIA --------
6i8.65
------------ ; 76. 71?, 76
----------------
R�,1------}J.q-
13:22 IVOP�2 v 0 2 2 n A Q R F 6 1 5 T E lot
I A R
PUIR � E T E A m pmaD "V61 Run�aM
TOfAL pr�v box, MENT MY, RI 15F Dpm?
----------------------------------------------------- -------------------------
2419! S900.11
OWLAD :39 Fani
Mumm MA Fm F 934YA
-S-
14ULAD n! Fona
Qqv upe
------------ --------- ------------ ------------ --- ----- -- --
AS!, NEW wixhl
d.
r
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
AUGUST 13, 1992
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Chavers called the meeting to order at
6:40 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management
District Room, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond
Bar, California.
ROLL CALL: Commissioners: Ury, Cheng, Beke, and Chairman
Chavers. Vice Chairman Gravdahl was absent.
Also present were Associate Engineer David Liu,
Administrative Analyst Tseday Aberra, Sergeant
Rawlings, and Contract Secretary Liz Myers.
MINUTES:
July 9, 1992 C/Beke requested that the minutes be amended on
page 5, fifth paragraph, to indicate "marking the
crosswalk would not necessarily improve the safety
reasons."; and page 8, seventh paragraph, to
indicate "two-way left hand turn lanes".
Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by C/Ury and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY approve the Minutes of July 9,
1992, as amended.
COMMISSION C/Ury stated that he had been under the impression
COMMENTS: that the issue of improving medians was in a
preliminary stage, and not a final action.
CONSENT CALENDAR: Chair/Chavers requested item C be pulled from the
Consent Calendar to allow for public comment.
C/Ury requested item B be pulled from the Consent
Calendar. He will be abstaining from voting on the
matter because he lives on the indicated street.
Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by C/Ury and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve items A, D, and E of
the Consent Calendar.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Ury, Beke, Cheng, and
Chair/Chavers.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Gravdahl.
Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by
Chair/Chavers and CARRIED to approve item B of the
Consent Calendar.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Beke, Cheng, and
Chair/Chavers.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Ury.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Gravdahl.
August 13, 1992
Pace 2
Installation AE/Liu presented the staff report regarding the
"No U -Turn" request, b
signs Tu Grand/ installed by
resident, that "No U -Turn" signs be
Grand Ave, and Cleghorn Drive.
Cleghorn Followin
g investigation, staff has determined that
the Grand Ave./Cleghorn Dr. intersection is the
safest and most perceptible location in
U-turn and left -turn maneuvers for the travelling
motorists. It is recommended that the Commission
deny the request to install "No U -Turns" signs on
Grand Ave. and Cleghorn Drive.
NEW BUSINESS:
Fixed Route
Deviation
Transit Prog.
Stan Granger, residing at 2300 Gold Nu
stated that because of the traffic gget Ave.,
difficult for the residents to it is very
from Cleghorn Drive. Most motorists getting 0n
nGrand Athe
left turn lane on Grand Ave. are making U-turns
rather than making a left turn onto Cleghorn Drive.
He presented theCommission and staff with a map
indicating the pattern being
motorists. He noted that motoriss areavelled even coming
Off of Diamond Bar Blvd. onto Grand Ave. and making
a U-turn at Cleghorn Drive.
AE/Liu, in response to C/Ury, stated that staff did
not observe the pattern as indicated by Mr.
Granger. Most traffic
shopping center versus is coming out of the
Diamond Bar Boulevard.
C/Beke noted that if the U-turns are prohibited at
the Grand Ave./Cleghorn Dr., then motorists will be
forced to travel further on Grand Ave. to make
their U-turn.
Motion was made by C/Ury, seconded by C/Beke and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to
accept saff,
recommendation to deny the request for "No UtTurns
signs on Grand Ave./Cleghorn Drive.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
Ury, Beke, Cheng,
Chair/Chavers.
None.
None.
VC/Gravdahl.
and
AA/Aberra reported that Mr. Steve Keen and Mr.
Gerald Smith, of UMA Engineering, Inc.
present a summarll
ization of the Phase I report, of
the Fixed Route Deviation Transit Program, and
introduce what Phase
This matter was preseII of the study will entail.
nted to the Commission prior
to Old Business items at the request of UMA
Engineering, Inc.
August 13, 1992
Page 3
Steve Keen stated that UMA Engineering, Inc. has
studied an array of options before coming up with
the recommendation for a Fixed Route Deviation
Transit Program. The study scope of Phase I was
looking to gage support for transit o Diamond Bar,
identify the potential markets that transit could
serve, evaluate the various route lay out options,
and the financing for the preferred route lay out.
Phase II would be more of a detail design of the
transit system. He then made the following
summarization of the study scope: there is a
strong support for a transit service in Diamond
Bar; 48% of the ridership market is
trips, and 52$ is for shopfor school/work
For
trips; with
any system developed, most of the ridership will be
generated from the main roads in Diamond Bar; it is
recommended that the transit system not be
considered outside of Diamond Bar because the work
locations, of those residents working outside of
the City, are scattered, thus having no transit
market; the school/work trips require very
reliable, on time, direct and fast service, that
can
can beva moregflexible, but relher fare; the iable/service trips
that
should have a lower fare; of the rou elcoptions
considered, he recommended two different systems -
one for the peak periods (7:00-9:00 a.m. and 4:00-
7:00 p.m.) and one for the off peak periods (9:00
a.m.-4:00 p.m.); he reviewed the various loop route
Options, and stated that he
for
the off peak period, and optional for rs Olthelpeak
periods: the average cost for both options added
together is $797,500; there is a Proposition A
reserve of $400,000 for 1991/92, and $485 O
oo for
1992/93; if Diamond Bar were to join the Pomona
Valley Transit authority in running this system,
Diamond Bar would then qualify for Proposition A
discretionary funds of between $30,000 to $90,000 a
year; the fare box is in the range of $10,000 to
$50,000; the estimate funds available, on a three
Year average, is $658,000 to $758,000, with
Proposition A and the fare box; the estimated funds
available, on a three
Proposition A funds, Proposition C fundear s (1992/93]
and the fare box is 1 million dollars; modifying
Option 1, of the peak period, by using only two
dial -a -ride vans, and option peak
1, of the off
period, by using only one van on the dial- f ride,
would reduce the total cost of the system to
$635,000, which would be affordable using
Proposition A funds; another alternative, if Bial-
a -ride proves unsuccessful in the peak periods,
would be to eliminate the van during the peak
periods and use four buses, thus costing $725,000;
August 13, 1992
Page 4
in regards to utilizing the
future Commuter Rail and a
commuter rail station
on Grand
Ave.(1994/95), he suggested that Diamond Bar first
determine the demand, and then determine if Diamond
Bar has a role in taking people to the commuter
rail station; and he suggested that, if this system
does get going, Diamond Bar
Transit. join the Pomona Valley
Chair/Chavers noted that just because transit is
supported, it does not necessarily mean that it
will be used. Furthermore, the main issue at hand
is not ridership and routes, but rather if it makes
financial sense to go forward.
C/Beke stated that the study shows that two thirds
of the people feel transit is needed, but only one
third of the people will use it, sometimes. The
fare box revenues will not even be 5� of the
Operational costs. It appears that Proposition A
funds are about to be used to run empty buses to
connect to empty trains.
Gerald Smith stated that one of the aspects of
phase two will be a recommendation of a
set of
service standards. If the scenario depicted by
C/Beke is accurate, then it will be
that Diamond Bar take the service off. recommended
A member of the audience, a resident, stated that
she ii
s n support of a transit system. She
ointed
out that the park -n -ride users would also support
such a system, and that children could use the bus
to go to movies and other activities, if the system
runs into residential areas.
The Commission approved the recommendation to
receive and file this
OLD BUSINESS:
report.
Diamond Bar
Boulevard/
AE/Liu presented the staff
Fountain Springs
report regarding
request to investigate the intersection of Diamond
Bar Blvd. the
and Fountain
Springs Road. and
investigation, staff believes Based upon
the
distance can be improved significantly by modifyiht
the existing wall and ng
trimming the cedars presently
in place. Furthermore, it is
believed that the no
Parking on the northside to be more
the
important than
restriction on the south side of Fountain
Springs. Staff
recommended that, based on the cost
and impact on Diamond Bar
Blvd. traffic, additional
design modifications should be
made only if the
Proposed modifications do not
prove adequate. It
August 13, 1992
Page 5
is recommended that staff complete a detailed cost
estimate to improve the sight distance on the Long
Property, that the curb on the north side of
Fountain Springs Road from Diamond Bar Blvd. to
Rising Star be authorized to be red, and that the
south side of Fountain Springs Road between the two
drives be red curbed.
C/Beke stated that the Commission had requested
staff to also investigate a right turn lane in,
narrowing the bike lane, and pulling the stop line
out as much as ten feet.
AE/Liu explained that ICE/Wentz is currently
working with theproperty owner, with the
intentions of modifying the existing wall. If the
recommendations made by staff do not fulfill the
concern expressed by the residents, then the
modifications on Diamond Blvd., as suggested by the
Commission at the last meeting, will
investigated. be
C/Beke stated that the existing problem is that
motorists need to get further out into the
intersection to see oncoming traffic. If this can
be accomplished by other means, why go through the
expense of lowering the wall.
AE/Liu stated that staff intends only to do the red
curbing at this time, as an interim solution.
Fred Scalzo, President of the Diamond Bar Chamber
Of Commerce, stated that they oppose the extent
that the red curb is to be painted. Red curbing,
passed 40 feet on the north side of Fountain
Springs, from the stop line on Diamond Bar Blvd.,
or passed the driveway on the south side of
Fountain Springs, removes a substantial number of
parking spaces. He indicated that the most
effective solution to the safety problem may be a
traffic light, if it is so warranted.
C/Beke noted that staffs original recommendation
had been to paint only 50 feet of the curb red.
The property owner of the business complex, Dr. Cho
Opposed the extent of the proposed red curbing.
Sgt. Rawlings noted that the Fountain Springs
intersection has had 9 traffic collisions in a 28
month period of time, or an average of 1 every
three months, but that Grand Ave., between Cleghorn
and Gold Nugget has had 14 traffic collisions in a
slightly longer period of time. The problem may
August 13, 1992
Soundwall on
Grand Ave./Gold
Nugget
Page 6
not be as serious
as originally
Furthermore, red curbingstated.
passed a few feet would
Probably not relieve
may occur at this intersection fic collisions that
Ken Anderson pointed out that 7
Of those 9
collisions on Fountain Springs have Occurred tinfthe
last year. He noted that the original request was
for 50 feet of red curbing.
Motion was made by C/Ury, seconded b
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to deny staff's y Cmend and
made this meeting, and to re recommendation
to the motion made previously request
tthe staff
tog adhere
meeting. Y , 1992
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
Ury, Beke, Cheng,
Chair/Chavers.
None.
None.
VC/Gravdahl.
and
AE/Liu presented the staff report for the request
to construct a soundwall on
Nugget Avenue. Following Grand Ave. at Gold
not recommend the cons ruction of tao soustaff ndwall doesorguardrails on Grand Ave. at this time,
outlined in the staff report.for reason
It is recommended
that the residents increase their slo e
landscaping via planting of trees p area
Cypress on Grand Avenue. such as Italian
Nina Goncharov, residing at 23631 Gold Nu
stated that she feels that the Cit Nugget,
Protect the citizens from trafficy hazards. to
requested (and received) a co She
the study conducted by staff. Py of the results of
following COmments: She then made the
hazards the noise levels, trash, fire
and safety concerns make the area
unlivable; home values have decreased
$100000
since Grand Ave. opened; the estimated cost for,
the
construction of the soundwall seems inflated; and
the City may be liable if someone gets hurt.
Chair/Chavers requested AE/Liu to have the City
Attorney provide staff with a written statement as
to the City's actual liability in this situat'
C/Ury
along
Grand
fire
i f
ion.
n ormed Ms. Goncharov that the residents
Grand Avenue own the slope that back ups to
Ave., and that they could plant trees, and
retardant bushes t
concerns. o mitigate some of their
A
August 13, 1992 Page 7
Stan Granger, who owns a lot with a slope backing
up to Grand Ave., stated that he does not have as
much problem with noise as Ms. Goncharov, however,
he is concerned with the traffic safety. He
suggested that a guardrail be considered, or that
the speed limit be reduced, before someone is
killed.
Chair/Chavers, in response to Ms. Goncharov's
concern that the Commission does not understand the
extent of the resident's problems, explained that
the Commission is only an advisory body to the City
Council. Staff has indicated that the City
currently does not have the financial capability to
construct a soundwall and/or a guardrail. The
Commission is trying to deal with this issue
technically, with the hopes of coming up with an
interim solution to alleviate the concerns
expressed.
C/Ury noted that a soundwall creates a corridor
which is likely to increase the speed traveled down
Grand Avenue. He stated that he may be willing to
consider a guardrail as an alternative.
C/Cheng concurred that a soundwall may encourage
motorist to increase speed, and that she is willing
to consider a guardrail. She pointed out that
property values may have decreased not so much
because of the opening of Grand Ave. but because of
the overall market.
C/Beke stated that an $80,000 guardrail is not
warranted for one or two accidents. The solution
to the problems mentioned could e nd that y the
the
property owners. He suggested
neighborhood band together for some sort of an
assessment district to build a wall.
Nina Goncharov inquired if the Commission would be
willing to put, in writing, that it is the
residents problem, and that the City does not have
funds at this time.
Chair/Chavers stated that discussion of this
meeting will be in the minutes, which is made
available to the public. He then stated that
soundwalls, constructed on hills, notoriously do
not work well because sound travels laterally. He
is not opposed to a guardrail, and landscaping, if
the community is willing to band together to
finance it. A garden type wall may solve the
problems mentioned.
August 13, 1992
Page 8
Motion was made by C/Beke to accept staff's
recommendation denying construction of a soundwall
or guardrail, and to suggest to the property owners
to investigate planting or landscaping on the
slope.
The Motion failed for lack of a second.
Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by C/Ury and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to accept staff's
recommendation to not build a soundwall at this
time.
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
Ury, Beke, Cheng, and
Chair/Chavers.
None.
None.
VC/Gravdahl.
Chair/Chavers suggested that, since the City has
had a lotof discussion
should be encouraged too
hillsides, perhaps p Y
explore this as an avenue of a joint effort.
Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by C/Ury and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to direct staff to work with
the property owners to encourage them to increase
landscaping on the slope.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Ury, Beke, Cheng, and
Chair/Chavers.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Gravdahl.
Motion was made by C/Beke to accept staff's
recommendation to deny the installation of a
guardrail.
The Motion failed for lack of a second.
Sgt. Rawlings stated that it has been suggested
that a guardrail may be beneficial for the slope
areas between Rolling Knoll and Cleghorn.
Chair/Chavers noted that a guardrail, installed
behind a curve, is dangerous because it can
ricochet a car right back into traffic.
Motion was made by C/Ury, and seconded by C/Cheng
and CARRIED to deny staff's recommendation that
construction of a guardrail is not appropriate at
this time, and to direct staff to get with the
property owners to discuss developing some sort of
August 13, 1992
page 9
NOES:
participation program, and discuss technical
ABSTAIN:
options of what can be done.
ABSENT:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: U r y, C h e n g, a n d
Chair/Chavers.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Beke.
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Gravdahl.
Funding traffic
AA/Aberra reported that the matter, regarding the
for funding traffic signals on private and
signals on
& private
policy
public street intersections, is brought before the
intent of item #3,
public
intersections
Commission to clarify the
Existing Residential Subdivision, as presented in
the staff report, prior to presentation to the City
as
Council. Based on the criteria presently
signal such as the one proposed for
stated, a
Diamond Bar Blvd. and Shadow Canyon Drive would be
funded by the City. This differs from staff's
is
understanding of the intent. It recommended
at street intersections either
that signals private
be based on a pro -rated basis or be funded 100% by
the applicant.
Chair/Chavers confirmed the Commission's intentions
the
on the issue, as it is stated in the Minutes of
He inquired if the policy
April 9, 1992 meeting.
developed by the Commission would create a funding
conflict.
AE/Liu stated that, as of this date, the City has
the JCC development,
not collected any money from
is development that will be contributing
which a
their fair share towards the traffic signal at
from
Shadow Canyon and Diamond Bar Boulevard, nor
"The Country".
Motion was made by C/Beke, seconded by C/Ury and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to deny staff's recommendation
and to affirm the Commission's previously stated
position, as indicated in the Minutes of April 9,
1992, that a residential subdivision street,
whether they be public or private, intersects a
public highway, a traffic signal will be paid for
100% by the City.
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
Ury, Beke, Cheng, and
Chair/Chavers.
None.
None.
VC/Gravdahl.
Au ust 13 1992
Page 10
NEW BUSINESS:
Warrant Analysis AA/Aberra reported that, at the May 21,
1992
for crossing Commission meeting, staff was requested to
guard services establish a standard which will be utilized to
determine the public street that are warranted for
crossing guard services. It is recommended that
the Commission continue to utilize the CalTrans'
criteria to warrant crossing guards. Furthermore,
it is recommended that the Commission concur with
staff's recommendation to review and evaluate,
annually, the locations where crossing guards
currently serve in the City of Diamond Bar.
Chair/Chavers stated that the Commission had
requested that a new criteria be developed, that
would satisfy the community, to determine when
crossing guard services should be authorized.
C/Cheng, concurring with the need to develop a new
criteria, suggested that parents could be asked to
participate in the costs for crossing guards.
Motion was made by Chair/Chavers, seconded by
C/Cheng and CARRIED to deny staff's recommendation
to continue to utilize CalTrans' criteria, and to
direct staff to revisit the issue of crossing guard
warrant criteria, developing a new criteria that
will tighten our standards, then begin to evaluate
annually the locations where crossing guards
currently serve in the City of Diamond Bar.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: U r y, C h e n g, a n d
Chair/Chavers.
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Beke.
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None.
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Gravdahl.
Install 25 MPH AE/Liu presented the staff report regarding the
signs on request, by Mr. Hsieh, to install 25 MPH signs on
Summitridge Dr. Summitridge Drive at Leyland Drive to remind
at Leyland Dr. traffic of the speed limit in the area. It is
recommended that a 25 MPH speed limit sign be
installed on Summitridge at Leyland Drive to warn
traffic of the speed limit in the residential area.
Chair/Chavers stated that he does not recall
discussing Pantera Drive, as indicated in Mr.
Hsieh's letter, nor does he understand what is
stop)�refer ed to S aff'sas recommendation dation downhill slope
wnot bus
be
stop)".
answering Mr. Hsieh's question.
August 13, 1992
Page 11
Motion was made by Chair/Chavers, seconded by C/Ury
accept staff's
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to
as presented, with the added caveat
recommendation,
that staff investigate Mr. Hsieh's letter, and that
Mr. Hsieh be contacted to assure that his concern
Staff is to get back
is being properly addressed.
with the results of the
to the Commission
discussion.
STATUS OF
AA/Aberra reported that item E, Golden Springs
before the City Council
PREVIOUS ACTION
Drive Name Change, went
August 4, 1992. Staff was directed to contact the
Council
ITEMS:
property and business owners again the
the item will cobefore the
and inform them that
first meeting in September of 1992.
Council on the
right Nnstalled.Turn On Red"
AE/Liu
lreported m C was recently'o
sign,
COMMISSION
stated that the
AA/Aberra, in response to C/Bekeuested,that the red curb
req
COMMENTS:
dominium Association
Bar Blvd. be
on Silver Hawk Drive at Diamonof Agenda
removed, as indicated in item 2, Future
Items.
Chair/Chavers commented if any cities have used
as a means
textured concrete to create crosswalks
to slow down motorists.
Motion was made by C/Cheng, seconded by C/Beke and
ADJOURNMENT:
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn at 9:26 p.m. °
September 10, 1992.
Respectively,
David G. Liu
Secretary
Attest:
J. Todd Chavers
Chairman
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
JULY 23, 1992
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Ruzicka called the meeting to order at
7:07 p.m. at the AQMD Hearing Room, 21865 East
Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
ALLEGIANCE: C/Schey.
ROLL CALL: Commissioners: Medina, Schey, Vice Chairman Plunk,
and Chairman Ruzicka. Commissioner Whelan was
absent.
Also present were Administrative Assistant Kellee
Fritzal, Parks and Recreation Director Bob Rose,
and ,Ian Stwertnik, Contract Class Coordinator for
the City of Brea and Diamond Bar.
MINUTES: Motion was made by VC/Plunk, seconded by C/Medina,
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Minutes of
June 25, 1992. C/Schey abstained because he was
not present at the June 25, 1992 meeting.
OLD BUSINESS:
Heritage Park Chair/Ruzicka inquired if staff was able to contact
Community Bldg. Mr. Quartucy, Diamond Bar Lively Seniors President,
to inform him of the Heritage Park Community
Building agenda item.
PRD/Rose explained that the meeting with Mr.
Quartucy was postponed until next week. Staff will
present an update, to the seniors.
AA/Fritzal stated that staff has forwarded the
Commission's concerns and issues, on this proposed
project, to the architect. She briefly reviewed
the design modifications made: the kitchen and
office will remain in the same location; the shape
of the office may be converted to a square; the
roof height of the community activity room has been
lowered by approximately 4 feet; the archway may
also been designed to a straight walkway; and a
fire sprinkler system will be installed. Bids will
be going to the City Council in August. The
building is projected to be completed around March
or April of 1993. In response to Chair/Ruzicka,
she stated that the modifications made have reduced
the original costs of the building, however, the
exact amount has not yet been determined.
Chair/Ruzicka inquired why the office was not moved
to the other side of the park, where it would be
more accessible, and the whole park could be seen.
July 23, 1992 Page 2
AA/Fritzal explained that the office is so located
for security reason. A staff member should be able
to see every room, the entrance way, and the
parking lot, from the office. The building will
not be reserved out to anyone without having a
staff member present. There will also be a staff
member outside of the building, when there are
functions going on outside. The public phone will
be maintained at it's present location, by the
bathrooms.
AA/Fritzal, in response to C/Schey, stated the City
has purchased two large storage boxes, for Heritage
Park, to be used until the new storage room is
completed. Staff is in the process of working with
the School District to relocate the Tiny Tots.
Chair/Ruzicka suggested that staff present a sample
of the schedule of use at the presentation to the
Senior Citizens so that they are aware that they
have ample opportunity and access to the building.
He further requested that a copy of the current
status report be sent out to the organizations in
town, especially the Diamond Bar Improvement
Association (DBIA), and the Lively Senior Citizens.
Senior Citizens Staff recommended that a Senior Citizen Sub -
Sub -Committee Committee be formed to meet with staff to discuss
the mission and goals, and a meeting with local
seniors should then be arranged.
VC/Plunk requested to be able to remain on the sub-
committee. She suggested that a meeting be
arranged during one of the Thursday study session
meetings.
Chair/Ruzicka stated that since the General Plan
has now been passed, it may be appropriate for the
Commission to go back to two meetings a month, with
respect to the Needs Assessment and the Parks
Master Plan.
AA/Fritzal suggested that, if it is acceptable, the
Senior Citizens sub -committee could meet on August
13, 1992 at 5:00 p.m., before the study session
meeting.
VC/Plunk stated that she had a request, from the
community, that a Chess Club might be appropriate
for the less active Senior Citizens.
VC/Plunk and C/Medina volunteered to serve on the
Senior Citizens Sub -committee.
July 23, 1992 Page 3
NEW BUSINESS:
Policy, Programs AA/Fritzal stated that it is requested that the
& Priorities Commission determine a procedure for adding
Matrix programs, policy, or procedures to the matrix, to
be done at Commission meetings, or by contacting
staff.
Chair/Ruzicka suggested that if a Commissioner has
an idea, staff should be contacted so that it can
be placed on the agenda as a discussion item.
C/Schey inquired if it would be more appropriate to
have the Commission suggest priorities, with staff
setting up the dates for review, or should staff
suggest the priorities for review. He noted that
some of these items, by necessity, are going to
need to be sequential to the Master Plan Needs
Assessment.
Chair/Ruzicka suggested that each Commissioner
prioritize the items, under each category, and
submit it to staff, so that staff can develop the
Commission's consensus. It would also be helpful,
during the Commission's presentation to the City
Council, to have the dates when a project is
completed.
AA/Fritzal requested that the Commissioner's
prioritization list be submitted to staff by August
3, 1992. Staff will have the status, the Council
action, and the listed dates and priorities, for
the Commission's review at the next meeting.
VC/Plunk requested staff to review those projects
that have been completed, or are in the progress of
being completed.
AA/Fritzal reviewed the matrix and presented a
status report.
C/Medina suggested that the City Maintenance Yard,
at Sycamore Canyon Park, if properly improved,
could be used for certain recreational activities,
such as Volleyball courts. The Commission
concurred to request staff to do a feasibility
study.
AA/Fritzal, in response to Chair/Ruzicka, stated
that staff is tentatively planning to present the
RFP, for the Parks Master Plan, to the City
Council, at the August 4, 1992 meeting.
July 23, 1992 Page 4
INFORMATIONAL
ITEMS:
Recreation PRD/Rose presented the staff report, on the
Program Recreation Program Update. The summer recreation
Update program has been a big success. He then introduced
Jan Stwertnik, who is the Contract Class
Coordinator for the City of Brea and the City of
Diamond Bar.
Jan Stwertnik stated the response to this program
has been outstanding. She then reviewed her
function as coordinator, and gave an update of the
contract classes. Mrs. Stwertnik stated in her
opinion the key to a successful contract class
program should have 4 ingredients: 1) a wide
selection of classes to appeal to a diverse
population; 2) good quality instructors; 3) good
facilities; and 4) customer care. The Recreation
program offers over 125 classes which is doubled
from last summer's program. Some of the most
popular classes consist of Tennis, gymnastics,
adult dance and karate. She also stated there has
been 1,346 participants so far in the summer
program generating $53,568.00 in revenue and still
have August to go.
PRD/Rose, in response to C/Schey's inquiry,
explained that the contract with the instructors is
a 60/40% split, with 60% going to the instructor,
and 40% to the City. The arrangement is
successful.
C/Schey, interested in the mathematics and musical
programs, noted that such classes are a good way to
unofficially supplement some of the cutbacks in the
public schools. He suggested that the program be
expanded to include reading or writing classes as
well.
ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/Schey noted that the new equipment at Stardust
park is a great success. He complimented the
recreation staff on the successful operation of the
4-5 year old T -ball program.
VC/Plunk informed the Commission that the Oak as
the City tree was declined. She also stated that
there is a petition to rescind the General Plan.
Chair/Ruzicka requested that two portable pitchers
mounds be installed at Peterson Park.
July 23, 1992 Page 5
ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by C/Schey, second by C/Medina and
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting at 8:14
p.m.
Respectively,
/s/ Bob Rose
Bob Rose
Secretary
Attest:
/s/ Joe Ruzicka
Joe Ruzicka
Chairman
MINUTES OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
AUGUST 27, 1992
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Ruzicka called the meeting to order at
7:02 p.m. at the AQMD Hearing Room, 21865 East
Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
ALLEGIANCE: C/Whelan.
ROLL CALL: Commissioners: Schey, Whelan, Medina, Vice
Chairman Plunk, and Chairman Ruzicka.
Also present were Administrative Assistant Kellee
Fritzal, Parks and Recreation Director Bob Rose,
Recreation Supervisor Marla Pearlman, and Contract
Secretary Liz Myers.
MINUTES:
July 23, 1992 C/Plunk requested that the Minutes of July 23, 1992
be revised to include a more thorough summary of
the presentation made by Mrs. Jan Stwertnik.
Chair/Ruzicka made the following corrections to the
Minutes: accurately reflect that C/Whelan was
absent and C/Medina was present; properly reflect
the correct spelling of Mr. Quartucy; and the two
portable pitchers mounds at Peterson Park was a
request.
The Commission concurred to forego approval of the
Minutes until the next meeting.
Chair/Ruzicka informed the Commission that he must
excuse himself from the meeting early. He stated
that he received a phone call from a citizen
inquiring why the recreation program does not offer
trips for adults to such places as Las Vegas, San
Diego, etc., as was told to her by someone at City
Hall. He stated his concern that there is someone
at City Hall dismissing such inquiries. He will
give staff the name and number of the individual
who had called so that staf f can contact her and
give her the correct information.
Chair/Ruzicka stated that the Diamond Bar
Improvement Association (DBIA) wants to be involved
in the opening day ceremony of the Heritage Park
Building by planting the Redwood tree, and by
participating in other matters. The DBIA has
requested a listing of all of the furnishings that
will be necessary to make the building operative,
so that they might participate financially in
furnishing that building, and possibly putting a
name plate on those items donated. He suggested
that, when such a list is compiled, it be sent to
the DBIA, and other organizations in town who might
also wish to participate.
August 27, 1992
OLD BUSINESS:
Page 2
C/Whelan pointed out that one of the elements of
the Adopt -A -Park Program is a fund raising program
where people can donate toward certain aspects of
the community.
Chair/Ruzicka requested that this be made an item
for the next Adopt -A -Park sub -committee meeting.
Senior Citizen Chair/Ruzicka referred the Commission to the memo
Sub -Committee regarding the Senior Citizen sub -committee. The
Senior Sub -committee, VC/Plunk and C/Medina, met
with staff on August 13, 1992 to discuss the
parameters of the group, as presented in the staff
report.
VC/Plunk stated that the sub -committee has found
approximately 20 churches in Diamond Bar, or in the
vicinity of Diamond Bar, that serve our senior
citizen population. The majority of these groups
have suggested that the City develop a
questionnaire, to be passed on to the senior
citizens, as a method of determining what program
can be provided that they would need.
C/Medina suggested that some of the leaders of
these groups be invited to attend an open forum to
allow them an opportunity to give input.
PDR/Rose informed the Commission that the City
Council has also established a senior citizens sub-
committee. The next step will be to have the two
sub -committees meet and perhaps join the two
efforts together.
C/Plunk stated that the Heritage Park Apartments,
which has a senior center, on site, that holds 105
people, has welcomed us to meet there.
Policy, Programs Chair/Ruzicka stated that the Commission has
and Priorities received a matrix of the Commission's Policy,
Matrix Programs and Priorities, as well as a compilation
of items discussed at the last meeting.
C/Plunk stated that the matrix was difficult to
follow, thus making it difficult to prioritize the
items. She stated that she preferred the items to
be prioritized into categories.
C/Schey concurred that some items seemed to be
redundant, and that the listing was difficult to
follow. He stated that he prioritized the items in
three levels: A - in progress item with the highest
August 27, 1992 Page 3
priority that should be tended to immediately; B -
ongoing items that are important, and should be
pursued; and C - items that should be tracked and
pursued as time and opportunity avail itself.
C/Whelan stated that the intent of the priority
list was to enable the Commission to determine
which capital improvement project should receive
immediate attention when addressed by the City
Council. He stated that he would prefer to use the
original matrix system, as opposed to the priority
list, and include an additional section for those
programs that are self funding.
Chair/Ruzicka stated that it is important that the
tasks be separated into categories so that the
Commission is able to track it's progress. The
method used should be kept as simple as possible.
PDR/Rose explained that the purpose of the revised
list was to allow the Commission an opportunity to
see the items sequentially prioritized into one
list. Staff will prioritize the items in what ever
manner the Commission desires.
C/Whelan stated that, in his opinion, the number
one priority is to find a way to fund a Needs
Assessment to help set our priorities.
Chair/Ruzicka concurred that the Needs Assessment
and the Parks Master Plan are high priority items.
He noted that the general consensus of the
Commission is to continue to use the matrix
separating the items into categories. The
Commission is to prioritize the list, dated March
20, 1992, and submit it to staff. He requested
staff to bring the results back to the Commission
at the next meeting.
Parks Master The City Council reviewed the Request for Proposal
Plan (RFP) at their August 4, 1992 meeting, and declined
to send the RFP. Staff is preparing various
alternative methods in the development of the
Master Plan. It is recommended that the Commission
arrange a Parks Master Plan sub -committee meeting
to review the alternative methods.
C/Whelan stated that he has been in contact with
Dr. Grossneck, the assistant professor of
recreation at Cal Poly Pomona, who made the
following comments: if it is to be an on-going
school project, the quality may not be as good as
desired because there will be people coming on and
off throughout the project; contact the Urban
August 27, 1992
Page 4
Planning at Cal Poly; contact someone working on a
Masters thesis to develop a Needs Assessment and a
Parks Master Plan; and a lot of students now do the
work for money as opposed to an internship. There
is school interest in helping the City develop a
Parks Master Plan and a Needs Assessment.
Chair/Ruzicka stated that he has been in contact
with Professor Boling, at Mount SAC, and Professor
Holmen, at Cal Poly Pomona, who will be getting
back in contact with him, with additional
information. He stated his concurrence with the
City Council- that a Master Plan and Needs
Assessment can be done, in house, with the proper
guidance. He stated his concern on being able to
get a decent size survey to determine the needs
assessment, so that the recommendations to City
Council are not based upon a couple of hundred
people.
PRD/Rose, in response to C/Schey's inquiry as to
why the City Council declined to send the RFP,
explained that the City Council was concerned with
the estimated cost of $60,000 to develop the Parks
Master Plan and the Needs Assessment. The goal is
for the Commission and staff to solicit assistance
from local colleges and to secure input from as
many people in the community as possible to assist
in the process.
C/Schey stated his concern that the arbitrary
dollar amount was the roadblock to finding out what
the scope could have been. A portion of the funds
might have been able to come from Landscaping and
Lighting Districts.
C/Schey stated that if this project is going to be
subject to environmental review, then it would be
appropriate to receive some direction from the
Planning Department.
AA/Fritzal stated that the Planning Director, James
DeStefano, and the City Manager, Terrence Belanger,
will be involved in the formation of a Master Plan.
The Commission concurred to begin meeting the
second and fourth Thursday at 7:00 p.m., starting
September of 1992. The first meeting of the month
is to be focused on developing a Master Plan.
C/Whelan stated that he will attempt to get someone
from the recreation department at Cal Poly to
discuss the guidelines for a Needs Assessment.
August 27, 1992 Page 5
PRD/Rose indicated that staff will try to have a
consultant, who has worked on a Parks Master Plan,
present at the next meeting. Staff will also bring
an example of a Parks Master Plan and a Needs
Assessment.
Chair/Ruzicka stated that the Parks Master Plan
sub -committee is willing to meet any time that
staff is available.
Pomona Unified
Staff conducted a meeting with the Pomona Unified
Joint Use
School District staff to discuss a Joint Use
Agreement
Agreement. It is recommended that the Commission
Status
receive and file the report.
PRD/Rose reported that the meeting, scheduled today
with the Pomona Unified School District personnel,
has been postponed until the first week in October
of 1992, because they did not feel prepared to
discuss any of the items. Based upon the
information given by one of the contacts, it is
possible that the formal joint use agreement may be
completed before the end of the year. In response
to C/Plunk, he stated that the goal is to have the
percentage of classes offered, closer to the
percentage of the population, within a year.
Chair/Ruzicka excused himself from the meeting at
8:02 p.m.
LA County Safe
AA/Fritzal presented the staff report regarding
Neighborhood
Proposition A - Los Angeles County Safe
Parks Act Report
Neighborhood Parks Act. If the proposition is
approved, the City will receive specific project
funding of $1,470,000 for the development of
Pantera Park; and $570,000 in discretionary funds
for the development and maintenance of existing
parks. It is recommended that the Commission
endorse the package of the Los Angeles County Safe
Neighborhood Parks Act.
C/Whelan suggested that a schematic plan, or a wish
list, be developed for Pantera Park as a way to
help get support from the community. We need to
establish a liaison, in town, to get out and talk
to the civic groups. He suggested that the senior
citizen groups be contacted to get them involved in
getting endorsement from the community.
Motion was made by C/Schey, seconded by C/Whelan
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY for endorsement from the
Parks and Recreation Commission for passage of the
Los Angeles County Safe Neighborhood Parks Act.
August 27, 1992 Page 6
INFORMATIONAL
ITEMS:
Extension for PRD/Rose presented the staff report regarding the
Recreation extension of contract for Recreation Services
Contract Update between the City of Brea and the City of Diamond
Bar. The contract is for a three year term and
includes a 90 day termination clause. He pointed
out that the City of Diamond Bar has begun bringing
in-house part of the programming that was
previously under contract to the City of Brea,
saving approximately $8,000 in the reduced
administrative overhead charges.
Update on AA/Fritzal reported that the Peterson Park
Peterson Park concession stand should be completed by Thursday of
Concession Stand next week. The building has recently been painted
& Heritage Park all one color. Staff is currently working on
Community Bldg. establishing the criteria for use of the concession
stand. She also reported that the City Council
approved the plans and specifications for the
Heritage Park Community Building for bidding at
their August 4, 1992 meeting.
Recreation
PRD/Rose introduced Marla Pearlman, the new
Program
Recreation Supervisor for the City of Brea who will
Update
conduct the recreation program for the City of
Diamond Bar.
RS/Pearlman thanked VC/Plunk and C/Schey for their
help at the youth baseball picnic. She reported
that the Summer Recreation Program is coming to a
close, and that there were 1,882 participants,
generating $88, 736.53 dollars. The brochure for
the Fall recreation program will be out the first
week in September. She then gave a brief overview
of the recreation programs, as presented in the
staff report.
C/Whelan requested a report that includes the costs
of the programs, along with the revenues generated.
COMMISSION
C/Whelan requested staff to investigate the
COMMENTS:
possibility of developing contract fine arts
classes as an after school program for the
community. Community businesses could be asked to
help fund such a program.
AA/Fritzal, in response to C/Medina's inquiry,
explained how the City participates, and assists,
in the Ranch Festival.
August 27, 1992
ADJOURNMENT:
Attest:
Js/ Joe Ruzicka
Joe Ruzicka
Chairman
Page 7
C/Plunk stated Mayor Pro Tem Papen has requested
letters of support, for SB1718, to go to Governor
Wilson at the State Capital in Sacramento. she
also stated that the Anniversary Committee has met
and is beginning plans for next year.
Motion was made by C/Whelan, seconded by C/Schey
and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting at
8:26 p.m.
Respectively,
/s/ Bob Rose
Bob Rose
Parks and Recreation Director
CALL TO ORDER:
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE:
ROLL CALL:
OLD BUSINESS:
CITY OF nTnMnW" Ano
MINUTES OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
STUDY SESSION
SEPTEMBER 10, 1992
Chairman Ruzicka called the meeting to order at
7:15 p.m. at City Hall, 21660 East Copley Drive,
Diamond Bar, California.
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
Chairman Ruzicka.
Commissioners: Schey, Whelan, Vice Chairman Plunk,
and Chairman Ruzicka. Commissioner Medina was
absent (excused).
Also present were Administrative Assistant Kellee
Fritzal, and Parks and Recreation Director Bob
Rose.
Parks Master Chair/Ruzicka stated that the purpose of this
Plan meeting is to discuss the development of a Parks
Master Plan. He requested an update to the General
Plan referendum.
PRD/Rose explained that the City has requested the
State to grant an extension of the time to develop
a General Plan. The State has not yet given a
response. The Parks and Recreation Elements are
not expected to change significantly. Therefore,
it would be viable to continue using the General
Plan as the foundation to formulate the work we do.
The Commission concurred.
Chair/Ruzicka stated that the Commission has
received, from staff, an explanation for the steps
to a Master Plan. The Master Plan sub -committee is
in the process of enlisting the help of some
experts in the field from the local educational
institution.
PRD/Rose indicated that pieces of the Parks Master
Plan may be going out to a consultant at some later
date. Staff is currently meeting with two
consultants who are assisting staff in delineating
those areas, of the Parks Master Plan, that could
be completed by staff/Commission, completed with a
consultants assistance, or best completed entirely
by the consultant. The information, attached to
the steps to a Master Plan inventory, includes this
delineation from one Consultant. He reported that
the steps to a Master Plan have been outlined in a
simple format. The first step is to start with an
Inventory Analysis of existing facilities within
the City, which includes open space, and
programming, and to determine their condition.
Then we review the specific standards set by the
State, the National Parks and Recreation
September 10, 1992 Page 2
Association, and other boards, as to what should be
in parks, and, how many acres, of developable land,
should be available for active space, and passive
space. The next step is to determine what the
residents feel they need. This is accomplished
with user groups, neighborhood meetings, and
surveys, coupled with random surveys that will
determine what people will actually participate in.
We compare what we have, to what we need, then
apply those with the standards, develop an
implementation strategy for meeting the gaps, and
develop a financing mechanism for each of the
strategies we hope to complete. The Inventory
Analysis also includes the projection of
population.
Chair/Ruzicka reported that the sub -committee, at
their last meeting, also discussed the idea of task
assignments. It was suggested that VC/Plunk and
C/Medina work together in determining the Inventory
of Sites/Facilities, both within the City, and
those facilities around the City that could be
considered for City use. An inventory of all the
parks in the City can be obtained through staff.
He explained that it will not be necessary to have
a second meeting every single month, but rather to
meet when we have accomplished the tasks assigned.
VC/Plunk stated that, because the Parks Master Plan
is a huge task that will require a lot of the
Commissions time, it may be necessary to meet more
often.
C/Whelan pointed out that the sub -committee will
continue to meet often, however, it will require
more time than two weeks for each Commissioner to
accomplish the tasks given out.
AA/Fritzal explained that since the agenda for the
regular meeting has been light, there is an
opportunity to discuss the Parks Master Plan during
the regular meetings. Staff will be meeting with
the sub -committee, as well as with each
Commissioner doing these tasks.
Chair/Ruzicka reported that C/Whelan volunteered to
do research on the Program Inventory, and it was
suggested that C/Schey do the Current Standards.
He stated that he will be available to coordinate,
and help gather information.
September 10, 1992
Page 3
PRD/Rose, stated that both consultants felt that
the telephone survey was .an important method to
obtain information from the community. It was
suggested that this gathered data be compared to
some of the information obtained from the
neighborhood, and user group meetings, to give it a
balance so that all of the future strategies aren't
based on slanted view of what the needs for parks
are. The final step, the Implementation/Strate-
gies/Financing, pulls together the overall
document. Once it is adopted by the City Council,
it will be the blueprint for our future, and
establish the priorities of what we want to
accomplish. It will serve as a method to get
things accomplished, and to obtain the necessary
funding.
AA/Fritzal suggested that the Commission may want
to review the existing information found on page 2-
N-1 through 2-N-18, of the Master Environmental
Assessment.
C/Whelan noted that the Steps to a Master Plan
indicate that the majority of the tasks should be
completed by a consultant.
AA/Fritzal explained that the report is simply the
consultants recommendation. Staff will be
determining what actions are better accomplished by
staff in order to reduce the costs. However, one
of the items that a consultant may be used for is
for the "as built" plans for existing parks, and
"future phasing" for parks.
C/Whelan requested that the document state
"staff/Commission" wherever it indicates "staff",
so that the accountability does not fall entirely
on staff.
Chair/Ruzicka reiterated the intent to have one
regular Commission meeting a month, to include the
Parks Master Plan as an agenda item. Additional
meetings will be scheduled, as needed.
ANNOUNCEMENTS: PRD/Rose reported that staff has just received
information that one of the youth soccer
organizations, in Diamond Bar, has written a
petition that their participants support the fact
that the Parks and Recreation Department could use
additional resources in their endeavor to serve the
City. The statement is apparently a result of
their frustration of trying to find facilities for
practice. He stated that he will be attending
their Board meeting, Wednesday, October 7, 1992, at
September 10, 1992 Page 4
7:30 p.m., at Oak Tree Lanes, as a representative
of the City, to hear what they have to say, and to
present the options available. Specifically the
information regarding the upcoming Safe Park Act
Prop A, in November of 1992, for potential funding
of Pantera Park, of 1.4 million dollars, and
$540,000 of discretionary funds to be used for the
parks.
C/Whelan suggested that the organization be sent a
letter inviting them to discuss the matter at the
next Commission meeting.
Chair/Ruzicka requested that the item be placed on
next month's agenda.
C/Whelan stated his concern that there is a feeling
in the community that Peterson Park is a girls
softball park, and that the City built a concession
stand because of the things they did. They do not
realize that it was phase three, of the plan for
Peterson Park. There may be a feeling within the
community that if enough of a concern is raised,
the City will find a way to pay for something to
have it built. The community needs to know of the
priority list, and that as funds are available,
field upgrading will be done.
C/Schey pointed out that the Commission has to put
their energy into the Parks Master Plan to
establish the goals for the entire City.
ADJOURNMENT: Hearing no objection, Chair/Ruzicka adjourned the
meeting at 8:20 p.m.
Respectively,
/s/ Bob Rose
Bob Rose
Secretary
Attest:
/s/ Joe Ruzicka
Joe Ruzicka
Chairman
ACV/CARL WARREN & CO.
Insurance Adjusters
Claims Administrators
P.O. Box 25180
Santa Ana, CA 92799-5180
(714) 740.7999 FAX: (714) 740-7992
TO: City of Diamond Bar
Attention: Tommye Nice
L,Vw�X�;t — / o%/y
Date: Sept. 11, 1992
Re: Claim: Wallace vs Diamond Bar
. Claimant: Bruce Wallace
D/Event : 8-17-92
Rec'd Y/Office: 9-01-92
Our File: S 71686 AB
We have reviewed the above captioned claim and request that you take
the action indicated below:
CLAIM REJECTION: Send a standard rejection letter to the claimant.
L:] CLAIM INSUFFICIENCY: In accordance with the telephone conversation
of , 19 , a notice of insufficiency must be mailed
to the claimant no later than , 19•THIS MUST BE
MAILED TO THE CLAIMANT WITHIN 20 DAYS OF RECEIPTOF THE ORIGINAL
CLAIM IN YOUR OFFICE. DO NOT SUBMIT A "REJECTION" LETTER. See
Government Code Sections 910 and/or 910.2 and or 910.4.
b AMENDED/SUPPLEMENTAL CLAIM: Send a standard rejection letter to
the claimant, rejecting this additional/amended claim.
LATE CLAIM RESPONSE: Return the original claim material to the
claimant, advising that the claim is late and that their only
recourse is to file a written "Application for Leave to Present
a Late Claim". (Retain copies in your file.) THIS MUST BE MAILED
TO THE CLAIMANT WITHIN 45 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THE CLAIM IN YOUR
OFFICE. DO NOT SEND A "REJECTION" LETTER. See Government Code
Section 911.4.
[] APPLICATION REJECTION: Reject claimant's "Application for Leave
to Present a Late Claim". See Government Code Section 911.8.
TAKE NO ACTION: Defer any written response to the claimant
pending our further advice.
Please provide us with a copy of the notice sent, as requested above.
If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned.
cc: S.C.J.P.I.A.
very truly yours,
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHOf(IjY
FROM CITY OF TO: CARL WARREN 6 CO. _ t -•
m r 1801 Park Court Place ! i ,; ;�• u
Bldg. E., Suite 208
Santa Ana. CA 92701
REPORT DATE_
TIME OF REPORT
O A M U P M
A. - COMPLETE FOR ALL ACCIDENTS
DATE & TIME OF ACCID NT LOCATION
Zo-7yo POLICE TO WHOM REPORTEDi
G9 � 1reL �:����J17r.
MON. DAY YEAR TIME OAM PM fQN1ov1 4Y C�- fzy -
B. - COMPLETE ONLY IF CITY CAR OR EQUIPMENT IS INVOLVED
VEH.NO. YEAR MAKE MODEL OWNER
U R PO
HER
C. - COMPLETE ONLY IF OTHER PROPERTY IS DAMAGED
D. - COMPLETE ONLY IF SOMEONE IS INJURED
NE
USED WITH
PERMISSION YES❑ NOIJ
E. - COMPLETE FOR ALL ACCIDENTS
DESCRIBE INCIDENT - STATE FACTUAL POINTS ONLY - DO NOT GIVE OPINIONS AS TO FAULT, NEGLIGENCE OR LIABILIITV
Y P rc' 1 d? Cl 7 r P.2 iA yl al��t r S II C Cull L4.,; et sy pct n
gj
WEATHER CONDITIONS UNNY ORAINY OOVERCAST OWINDY DESCRIBE
�I WAS CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR OTIFIED ? OYES ONO BY WHOM ? _
1 /jv'(4 ce— f2..k%( �f Lj DATE TIME _
/`! REPORT PREPARED B
USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF NEEDED.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO. 5
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992 REPORT DATE: September 22, 1992
FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer
TITLE: Notice of Completion for Golden Springs Drive/Sylvan Glen Road .Drainage Systems.
SUMMARY: The City Council, on May 19, 1992, awarded a contract to Excel Paving Company for Golden
Springs Drive/Sylvan Glen Road Drainage System for a total amount of $29,956.50. The installation was
completed on August 19, 1992.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council accept the work performed by Excel Paving
Company and authorize the City Clerk to file the proper Notice of Completion.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report
_ Resolution(s)
_ Ordinances(s)
_ Agreement(s)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
_ Public Hearing Notification
Bid Specifications (on file in City Clerk's Office)
X Other Notice of Completion
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed _ Yes X No
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority
3. Has environmental impact been assessed? _ Yes X No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes X No
Which Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes X No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
IEWED BY:
Terrence L. Belanger George A. Wentz
City Manager Interirq City Engineer
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Notice of Completion for the Golden springs Drive/
Sylvan Glen Road Drainage System
ISSUE STATEMENT
File and submit for recordation a Notice of Completion for the
Golden Springs Drive/Sylvan Glen Road Drainage System
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council accept the work performed
by Excel Paving Company and authorize the City Clerk to file the
proper Notice of Completion.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
This process of filing Notice of Completion has no financial impact
on the City's 1992-93 budget.
BACKGROUND
The City Council, at their regular meeting of May 19, 1992, awarded
the contract for the installation of the Golden Springs
Drive/Sylvan Glen Road Drainage System to Excel Paving Company, the
lowest responsible bidder. The construction contract amount,
including change order items, was $30,625.90.
DISCUSSION
On August 19, 1992, Excel Paving Company, completed the installa-
tion of the Golden Springs Drive/Sylvan Glen Road Drainage System
and the contractor will complete the punch list items (landscaping)
by end of October. The work is in accordance with the plans and
specifications prepared and approved by the City.
Prepared By:
David G. Liu
?ETFD113 RE00EW9 9Y
ANC WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO
QF Cicy ,)f Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley Drive, STE 100
Diamond Bar, CA 91765 — 4177
ala,ess
ATTN: City Clerk
'tae
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
Notice pursuant to Civil Code Section 3093, must be filed within 10 days after completion. (See reverse side for Complete requirements.)
Notice is hereby given that:
t. The undersigned is owner or corporate officer of the owner of the interest or estate stated below in the property hereinafter described:
y
2. The full name of the owner is City of Diamond Bar
3. The full address of the owner is Suite 100. 21660 E Copley nr THamnnd Rarer, rA 01 765-41 77
4. The nature of the interest or estate of the owner is; In fee.
(It other than fee. strike "In fee" and insert. for example. "purchaser under contract of purchase," or "lessee')
S. The full names and full addresses of all persons, if any, who hold title with the undersigned as joint tenants or as tenants in common are:
NAMES ADDRESSES
None
6. A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was completed on August 19, 1992 The work done was:
Golden Springs Drive/Sylvan Glen Road DrainageStCID
7. The name of the contractor, if any, for such work of improvement was Excel Paving; Company
(If no contractor for work of improvement as a whole, insert "none".) ( ate of Contract)
8. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the city of Diamond Bar
County of Los Angeles State of California, and is described as follows: Go Lien Springs Drinze/
Sylvan Glen Road
9. The street address of said property is DTourz
(If no street address has been officially assigned, insert "none".)
Dated: September 23, 1992
Verification for Individual Owner
Signature of owner or corporate officer of owner
named in paragraph 2 or his agent
VERIFICATION
I, the undersigned, say: I am the Interim City Engineer the declarant of the foregoing
("President of', "Manager of", "A partner of', "Owner of", etc.)
notice of completion; I have read said notice of completion and know the contents thereof; the same is true of my own knowledge.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on , 19_1 at California.
(Date of signature.) (City where signed.)
(Personal signature of the individual who is swearing that the contents of
the notice of completion are true.)
NOTICE OF COMPLETION— 0LCCTT5 FORM 1114—REV 6.74 (Cncetlasx 3) 8 of. type or larger
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO. J G�
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992 REPORT DATE: August 5, 1992
FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer
TITLE: Approval of Lot Line Adjustment Between Parcel No.s 10 and 11 of Parcel Map No. 18722 located
at 2747 Diamond Bar Boulevard.
SUMMARY: This Lot Line Adjustment is between Parcels 10 and 11 of Parcel Map No. 18722 at 2747
Diamond Bar Boulevard, for construction of a Spee Dee Oil Change and Tune -Up project. The Lot Line
Adjustment has now been submitted to the City of Diamond Bar for approval.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council (1) approve the attached Lot Line
Adjustment; (2) authorize the Interim City Engineer to sign the amended map; and (3) direct the City Clerk
to process the Lot Line Adjustment for recordation.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report
Resolution
Ordinances(s)
_ Public Hearing Notification
_ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office)
X Other: Certificate of Compliance
Agreement:
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed _ Yes _ No
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 415 vote?
Majority
3. Has environmental impact been assessed?
X Yes _ No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission?
_ Yes X No
Which Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report?
X Yes _ No
Report discussed with the following affected departments: Planning Department
REVIEWED BY:
4W• `lam
Terrence L. Belanger
City Manager
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer
SUBJECT: Lot Line Adjustment Between Parcel No.s 10 and 11
of Parcel Map 18722.
ISSUE STATEMENT
Approve the Lot Line Adjustment Between Parcel No.s 10 and 11 of
Parcel Map 18722 located at 2747 Diamond Bar Boulevard in the City
of Diamond Bar.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council (1) approve the attached
Lot Line Adjustment; (2) authorize the Interim City Engineer to
sign the amended map; and (3) direct the City Clerk to certify and
process the Lot Line Adjustment for recordation.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
Approval of the Lot Line Adjustment will not have any impact on the
City's Fiscal Year 1992-93 budget.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
This Lot Line Adjustment was submitted in order to adjust the
position of the lot line running east/west between Parcel No.s 10
and 11 of Parcel Map No. 18722.
A Spee Dee Oil Change and Tune -Up building is being proposed for
construction on the west side of Parcel 11 and the remainder of the
Parcel will contain parking spaces. An existing cinema and
communal parking is located on Parcel 10.
It became necessary to reconfigurate the lot line between these two
parcels due to parking allocation and set -back requirements as
required by Conditional Use Permit No. 91-12. In addition,
Landsing Pacific Fund, the owners of this entire shopping center
are intending to sell Parcel 10 to Spee Dee oil and to do this, the
proposed Spee Dee structure and required parking spaces need to be
confined on one legal Parcel.
Prepared by:
Anne M.Garvey
EXHIBIT "A"
(LEGAL DESCRIPTION BEFORE ADJUSTMENT)
BEING ALL OF PARCELS 10 AND 11 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 18722, IN THE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
AS SHOWN ON THE MAP FILED IN BOOK 247, PAGES 28 THROUGH 31,
INCLUSIVE, OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA.
PARCEL 10 - CONTAINING 112,783 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS.
PARCEL 11 - CONTAINING 41,110 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS.
LOD SGR`
EmWM/92 MAR M N BROOKS, L.S. 5831
ft Sol
�. 11836.00 (649)
�EOF MARCH 24, 1992
9969-uce-11636(649)/8
EXHIBIT "B"
(LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS AFTER ADJUSTMENT)
PARCEL 1
BEING ALL OF PARCEL 10 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 18722, IN THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN
ON THE MAP FILED IN BOOK 247, PAGES 2`8 THROUGH 31, INCLUSIVE, OF
PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY.
TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 11 OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO.
18722 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 11;
THENCE, ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINES OF SAID PARCEL 11, THE
FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES:
1) NORTH 49'12042" WEST, 159.00 FEET;
AND 2) NORTH 40°47118" EAST, 23.64 FEET;
THENCE, TRAVERSING THE INTERIOR OF SAID PARCEL 11,
SOUTH 49°12'42" EAST, 159.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF
SAID PARCEL 11;
THENCE, ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE, SOUTH 40°47'18" WEST,
23.64 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID PARCEL 10 DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 11;
THENCE, ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINES OF SAID PARCEL 10, THE
FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES:
1). SOUTH 49°12'42" EAST, 166.00 FEET;
AND 2) SOUTH 40°47'18" WEST, 22.64 FEET;
THENCE, TRAVERSING THE INTERIOR OF SAID PARCEL 10, THE FOLLOWING
TWO (2) COURSES:
1) NORTH 49°12142" WEST, 166.00 FEET;
AND 2) NORTH 40°47'18" EAST, 22.64 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 112,783 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS.
9968-L16-1 1836(649)IB
PARCEL 2
BEING ALL OF PARCEL 11 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 18722, IN THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN
ON THE MAP FILED IN BOOK 247, PAGES 28 THROUGH 31, INCLUSIVE, OF
PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY.
TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 10 OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO.
18722 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 11;
THENCE, ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINES OF SAID PARCEL 10, THE
FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES:
1) SOUTH 49'12'42" EAST, 166.00 FEET;
AND 2) SOUTH 40°47118" WEST, 22.64 FEET;
THENCE, TRAVERSING THE INTERIOR OF SAID PARCEL 10, THE FOLLOWING
TWO (2) COURSES:
1) NORTH 49°12'42" WEST, 166.00 FEET;
AND 2) NORTH 40°47'18" EAST, 22.64 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID PARCEL 11 DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 11;
THENCE, ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINES OF SAID PARCEL 11, THE
FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES:
1) NORTH 49°12'42" WEST, 159.00 FEET;
AND 2) NORTH 40`47'18" EAST, 23.64 FEET;
THENCE, TRAVERSING THE INTERIOR OF SAID PARCEL 11,
SOUTH 49012'42" EAST, 159.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF
SAID PARCEL 11;
THENCE, ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE, SOUTH 40°47'18" WEST,
23.64 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 41,110 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS.
9968-L B -11836(649)B
Sip U1ND Spq`
N Bgoo�-�io�
Exp. 9/30/92
* No. 5831
9TFOF CAl1f0�
ILYif B OOKS, L. S . 5831
11836.00 (649)
MARCH 24, 1992 orz,
REVISED JUNE 22, 1992
EXHIBIT f-cvo
BEING PARCELS 10 AND 11. P.M. NO. 18722, P.H.B. 247 / 28-31.
j
IN THE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
COUNTY OF
LOS ANGELES.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
N0, P. X11. 92 - 92
SCALEI
1- 60•
-,,—C/L
FOUNTAIN
SPRINGS
ROAD _
TO DIAMOND BAR BLVD.-�-
N 49.12'42'W 345.00
O W
0 •
3
e
0 "I
PARCEL 2
m
o
N 49•12'42'W
of r
�_0
41 . 110 S.F.
~
e
..
1
m
p
eo.00
l;r
7
rt-L�
.p
N
tJ
Iz
OLD LOT LINE
-
H
Ci
, `)
m
9.12'42" E 165.00
o
0
r
n
p
r
20.0
166.00
n
n
a
o
r
NEW LOT LINE
W'LY COR.
N 49.12'42'W 186.00
49012 -42-E 159.00
z
PARCEL 11
NEW LOT LINE
_/S
.Y
b
W
cu
(
�
o
N 49.12'4 2'W 159.00
a
`
^ 0
_
110.84
48.1
10
r n io
OLD LOT L INE
P.O.B.
a
S'LY COR.
z
PARCEL II
o
W
b
m
n
;,
PARCEL 1
r
W
b
r
112.783 S.F.
z
± O
0
r
z
VN 49.12'42-W
12212' .0042'W
63.13
N 49.
o
�
-i�
0
N 49012-42-W
126.92
i�
�
i
m
to
o
n ~
W
^
W
z
r
~
Az
0
z
11
N 49.12'42-W 81.8i
N 49.12'
>zls�a2
REVISED: 6122192
THE
KEITH
COtIPAN I ES
2995 RED MILL AVE. COSTA MESA. CA. 92626
(714) 540-0800
EXHIBIT "D1,,"
BEING PARCELS 10 AND it. P.M. N0, 18722. P.M.B. 247 / 28-31.
IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
LOT LI NE ADJUSTMENT N0, P. M. 92 - h2
SCALE: 1- 50'
,,.,- C/L FOUNTAIN SPRINGS ROAD _
TO DIAMOND BAR BLVD.
PROP. BLDG. I I PARCEL 2
OLD LOT
LINE 2
NEW LOT LINE
NEW LOT LINE
o IN OLD LOT LINE I \
Q � .
I `
PARCEL 1
EX. BLDG.
(CINEMA)
I
10
I
I
EX, PRIVATE ZQ,
DRIVEWAY
FIRELANE
9 13
e
L -
THE
KEITH
COMPANIES
2995 RED HILL AVE. COSTA MESA. CA. 92628
EXHIBIT "C"
BEING PARCELS 10 AND 11. P.M. NO. 18722, P.M.B. 247 / 28-31•
IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
LOT L I NE ADJUSTMENT NO, P. K 92 - A2
SCALE: 1" 60'
C/L FOUNTAIN SPRINGS ROAD _
TO DIAMOND BAR BLVD.
N 49012'42"W 34
11ZJ V •
CD
\' ��
N •
z
N 49012'42"W 126.92
9
PARCEL 1
112.783 S.F.
122.00
N 49° 12' 42"W
W
s
to MOT
PARCEL 2
0
O
:0
N 490 12' 42-W
"';
41.1 10 S.F.
60.00
�o
M
I z
OLD LOT LINE
o �
490 12' 42" E 166.00
t
20.00
166.00 —
P
fn
W'LY COR.
N 49.12'42"W 186.00
PARCEL 11
M
NEW LOT LINE
e
M O
N �
r
�o
NEW LOT LINE
a
a�� •
S 49°12'42-E 159.00
z
W
m
11ZJ V •
CD
\' ��
N •
z
N 49012'42"W 126.92
9
PARCEL 1
112.783 S.F.
122.00
N 49° 12' 42"W
N 49012'42"W
63.13
D �
W ^ W
m m
� O �
O
ID e
zi n z
109.25
.•n9.e•a7-u 81.80
LA
3
0
O
:0
o
a.
M
fn
10
`r
M
e
M O
N �
NEW LOT LINE
S 49°12'42-E 159.00
z
W
m
N 49°12'42"W 159.00
oo
118448.1
0.
o Bio
OLD LOT LINETF)
P.O.B,
S'LY COR.
r a
PARCEL II
z
O
n
w
1 ')
m
L.
,U
°
0
w
z
N 49012'42"W
63.13
D �
W ^ W
m m
� O �
O
ID e
zi n z
109.25
.•n9.e•a7-u 81.80
LA
EXHIBIT .•p.. _
BEING PARCELS 10 AND 11' NpMBAR.�000NTY�OF.LOSM.B�ANGELES2247 /8 31
IN THE CITY OF STA E OF CALIFORNIA
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT N0, P. K 92 - 112
SCALE: �' = 60• CSL FOUNTAIN SPRINGS ROAD _
_ TD DIAMOND BAR BLVD.
9
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO. S ` j
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992 REPORT DATE: August 5, 1992
FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer
TITLE: Approval of Lot Line Adjustment Between Parcel No.1 of Parcel Map No. 15375 and Parcel No. l
of Parcel Map No. 2151, located at 3302 South Diamond Bar Boulevard.
SUMMARY: This Lot Line Adjustment is between Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 15375 and Parcel 1 of Parcel Map
2151 at 3302 South Diamond Bar Boulevard, for construction of an Arco/AM.PM mini -mart. The Lot Line
Adjustment has now been submitted to the City of Diamond Bar for approval.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council (1) approve the attached Lot Line
Adjustment; (2) authorize the Interim City Engineer to sign the map; and (3) direct the City Clerk to process
the map for recordation.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report
Resolution
Ordinances(s)
_ Public Hearing Notification
_ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office)
X Other: Certificate of Compliance
_ Agreement:
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1.
Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
_ Yes _ No
by the City Attorney?
2.
Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote?
Majority
3.
Has environmental impact been assessed?
�X Yes _ No
4.
Has the report been reviewed by a Commission?
_ Yes X No
Which Commission?
5.
Are other departments affected by the report?
X Yes _ No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
Planning Department
(IJ1iIICVAy:able �
i'
Terrence L. Belanger
City Manager
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terry L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Lot Line Adjustment Between Parcel No -1 of Parcel
Map 15375 and Parcel No.1 of Parcel Map 2151.
ISSUE STATEMENT
Approve the Lot Line Adjustment Between Parcel No.l of Parcel Map
15375 and Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map 2151 located at 3302 South
Diamond Bar Boulevard in the City of Diamond Bar.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council (1) approve the attached
Lot Line Adjustment; (2) authorize the Interim City Engineer to
sign the map; and (3) direct the City Clerk to certify and process
the map for recordation.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
Approval of the map will not have any impact on the City's Fiscal
Year 1992-93 budget.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
This Lot Line Adjustment was submitted in order to adjust the
position of the lot line running north/south between Parcel No. 1
of Parcel Map No. 15375 and Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map No. 2151.
An Arco/AM.PM mini -mart building and associated parking spaces are
being proposed for construction on Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 2151. An
existing office building and communal parking is located on Parcel
1 of Parcel Map No. 15375.
It became necessary to reconf igurate the lot line between these two
parcels due to parking allocation and set -back requirements as
required by Conditional Use Permit No. 92-5. Parcel 15375 is owned
by Metro Diamond Bar Properties and Parcel 2151 is owned by
Atlantic Richfield Company. Should Atlantic Richfield wish to sell
Parcel 2151 in the future, the proposed Arco/AM.PM and required
parking spaces need to be confined on one legal Parcel.
Prepared by:
Anne M.Garvey
pursued based the overall effects of the effluent in the area and
the desirability of placing the entire area on a sewer system.
The estimated construction cost for the project is $ 1,785,000. We
estimate an additional cost of approximately $ 250,000 for other
incidentals as part of the initial estimates. This would place the
average cost per parcel at approx. $ 13,750.
Staff recommends that a workshop (townhall meeting) be conducted
inviting all residents who may be affected to the meeting. This
would be an opportunity to discuss such issues as formation of a
district, petition requirements and the general process, anticipat-
ed costs, funding options, assessment approaches, etc. We
recommend that a workshop be set within the next 30 days.
Following the meeting, a petition would need to be circulated for
the sewer district being formed.
Prepared By:
George A. Wentz
EXHIBIT ' A'
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LL -
IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAK COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
( LEGAL. DESCRIPTION )
I ARCO PRODUCTS COMPANY 1 8714-15-20 1 LOT 1 1
LOT 1
PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 2151 IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR,
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP FILED
IN BOOK 34, PAGE 84, OF PARCEL MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF PARCEL
1 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 15375, FILED IN BOOK 165, PAGES 55 TO 57, OF
PARCEL MAPS, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 2151
THENCE S31'33'51'W 173.16 FEET;
THENCE S6955'37"E 60.73 FEET TO A POINT IN THE WEST BOUNDARY OF SAID
PARCEL 1; OF PARCEL MAP NO. 2151;
THENCE ALONG SAID BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 2151
N11'58'4TE 180.99 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
AREA OF LOT 1 IS 33,893 SQUARE FEET (0.78 ACRES), MORE OR LESS.
THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION
SEWEE RUANGTRAGOOL CE 32132
i jji �l
SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEET'S
EXHIBIT 'A'
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LL
IN THE CRY OF DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
( LEGAL DESCRIPTION )
OWNER PARCELS I EXIT G PARCELS NUMBERS I NUMBERS
11 ARCO PRODUCTS COMPANY I 8714-15-24 I LOT 2 1
LOT 2
PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 15375 IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR,
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP FILED IN
BOOK 165, PAGES 55 THROUGH 57, INCLUSIVE, OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, EXCEPT THAT PORTION
MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 2151,
FILED IN BOOK 34, PAGE 84, OF PARCEL MAPS;
THENCE S31'33'51"W 173.16 FEET;
THENCE S60'5537' E 60.73 FEET TO A POINT IN THE WEST BOUNDARY OF SAID
PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 2151
THENCE ALONG SAID BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 2151
N11'58'4TE 180.99 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
AREA OF LOT 2 IS 104,670 SQUARE FEET (2.40 ACRES), MORE OR LESS.
THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION
SEWEE RUANGTRAGOOL CE 32132
ff r
I� No. 321132 r
T
g11�gZ
SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS
EXHIBIT ' B'
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LL -
IN THE CITY OF DIAAAOND BAF; COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES` STATE OF CALJFORNIA
OWNER EXISTING PARCELS PROPOSED PARCELS
AP NUMBERS REFERENCE NUMBERS
ARCO PRODUCTS COMPANY 8714.15-20 & 8714-15-24 LOTS 1 & 2
0 o R=1000' _
CD
o DIAMOND BAR BLVD-
10
ii
O
/' x —� 1 R =1050.00 io -
o :----- cu -4) o_ ° W � W L� 150.00 o n
w O CO fL :- fib- —66
a Nto t�O_0 Imp �-NUl
ci
N O O _M �1� t7lco'li�N '- ui II II II
`\
oc°acr-'J
rn
CD z
10-
rn O O
Ld
sf
a,- I /b 30) C14
.- L6 in -1 'oo f n o Q/ II II II
L6
I� co Lo b M co Loo
Q J
IA rn � ^ o
t�wL �o d b
Ncy
zco zcq toLu
II
°C C Iq
qmp
J
•- / p -
pc
Aj �► to o co \C��y -• -U /
M
• O O O
O0co LAJ
N tv (/II II II m
a _ o 2 a�� o M
z �Ld C4
W W
'CL
04W
Q b��/� o o a
(te�
W W Q OW""
II II II Z=� 3N
N
W 3J H 0 w
^O / z o� I w
to
bol
N / W I i
I W
-' 1 11 SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEET
1�=
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO. 5
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992 REPORT DATE: September 11, 1992
FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer
TITLE: Release of $10,000 Bond Securing the Setting of Survey Monuments for Tract 47722.
SUMMARY: The City received a letter of request from Mr. Frank Piermarini, Owner/Developer of Tract
47722. The tract contains 13 lots for proposed single family residences at Diamond Knoll in the Country. Mr.
Piermarini has requested that the City release the $10,000 monumentation bond.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the release of the $10,000 subdivision bond for
Diamond Knolls related to setting survey monuments.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:_xStaff Report _ Public Hearing Notification
_ Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office)
_ Ordinances(s) Other: Monumentation Certification Letter from
Hunsaker & Associates.
_ Agreement(s)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed _ Yes X No
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority
3. Has environmental impact been assessed? _ Yes X No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes X No
Which Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes X No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
REWIEWED B
errence L. Belanger G rge Wen
City Manager Interim City iffliineer
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Release of $10,000 Survey Monumentation Bond for
Tract 47722.
ISSUE STATEMENT
This report requests the release of a monumentation bond for
Diamond Knolls in the Country.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve the release of the
$10,000 survey monumentation bond for Tract 47722, Diamond Knolls
in the country.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
This recommendation will have no financial impact on the City's
Fiscal Year 1992-93 budget.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
On January 21, 1992, Frank Piermarini for Piermarini Homes signed
a subdivision agreement with the City of Diamond Bar for
development of Tract 47722. This agreement required Mr. Piermarini
to give a bond in the amount of $10,000 with a corporate bonding
company, securing the setting of survey monuments on the subject
Tract.
On September 2, 1992, the City of Diamond Bar received a letter
from Frank Piermarini's Engineer: Hunsaker & Associates stating
that all of the monuments required to be set per Tract No. 47722
have been set. They also stated that they had been compensated for
their services.
Prepared By:
Anne M. Garvev
RECEIVED CO"",M PaITY
Hunsaker & AN,1 �cihtes San Diego, Inc.
Planning • Engineering : Surveying • GPS
September 2, 1992
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
Public Works
21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 100
Diamond Bar, CA 92010
Attn: Ann Garvey
Re Tract No. 47222, Book 1186 pages 38-43 of Maps
Monument Bond Exoneration
Gentlemen:
All of the monuments required to be set per the above referenced
map have been set and we have been compensated for the services.
We therefore request that the monument bond be exonerated.
Very truly yours,
HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES SAN DIEGO, INC.
�oHiil ter.
Vice President
L. s. # 5669
Exp. Date 09-30-94
W.O.# 942-3
LK:dd
up:Cert.102
10179 Huennekens Street •San Diego, CA 92121 • (619) 558-4500 • FAX: (619) 558-1414
Offices: San Diego • Irvine • RiversidelSan Bernardino
David Harnmar • Jack, Hill
-
�'lrk.1"ivy
.': 7 INC.
September 14, 1992
City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
21660 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, California 91765
Dear Sir/Madam,
As President of Tri -County Escrow Association I am requesting a Proclamation
be issued by the City of Diamond Bar setting forth OCTOBER as ESCROW MONTH
for the calendar year 1992.
Tri -County Escrow Association is the local regional association of the
California Escrow Association dedicated to the education and elevation of
the Escrow profession. We would greatly appreciate any consideration you
could give to issuing this proclamation.
Sample wording is enclosed for your convenience.
Please contact me and advise if you can be of any assistance. I will be
happy to arrange to have the proclamation picked up when it is ready should
the City of Diamond Bar agree to issue one.
very truly yours,
AC, OW WEST, I y;
Pauletta Cohen, CSEO
1992 President
TRI -COUNTY ESCROW ASSOCIATION
1425 W. Foothill Blvd., Suite 140
0 Upland, California 91786 9 714/949-1434
WHEREAS, Tri -County Escrow Association, a regional association of
the California Escrow Association has been dedicated to the continuing
education and elevation of the Escrow profession through adherence to its
Code of Ethics for twenty six years; and
WHEREAS, the parent group, California Escrow Association, formerly
The Los Angeles Escrow Association, similarly devoted
and; its efforts since 1924
WHEREAS, Tri -County Escrow Association has faithfully pursued its
covenant to foster, promote and improve escrow education and service to its
members and to the public to elevate the standards of the Escrow profession,
NOW, THEREFORE, I/We
do hereby proclaim the month of OCTOBER as (title)
ESCROW MONTH
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I/WE have hereunto set my/our hand and caused
the Seal of
1992. to be affixed this day of
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.1.1
NO DOCUMENTATION AVAILABLE
P
September 27 - October 13
NO
VIGIL M
on the --y of
ANIVA f''.
MAMM
0
0 „ t PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR PROCLAIMING OCTOBER 16-18
World Summit for Children NATIONAL OBSERVANCE OF CHILDREN'S SABBATHS
AND THE COALITION FOR AMERICA'S CHILDREN
WHEREAS, 40,000 children die worldwide every day from
malnutrition and disease, and over 50 million of the deaths
during the decade of the 1990s are easily preventable with
today's technology;
WHEREAS, U.S. child poverty, infant mortality and
school achievement are among the worst of all industrialized
countries, with 40,000 children dying in this country every year;
WHEREAS, On 29 and 30 September, 1990, 71 world leaders
gathered at the United Nations for the World Summit for Children.
At that time, bold promises were made to ensure the well-being of
our children. We must now ensure that those promises are kept;
WHEREAS, RESULTS, The Children's Defense Fund's (CDF)
National Observance of Childrens Sabbaths October 16-18 and the
Coalition for America's Children join together 1) to bring this
message to the public, media and elected officials, and 2) to
hold leaders accountable for the promises made at the summit;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT PROCLAIMED that the City Council
of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby proclaim the weekend of
October 16-18 1992 as World Summit for Children Weekend.
Dear Linda,
I hope that this sample helps you. Thanks for your help.
Yours truly,
Beverly DIE 5_1_ co Regional coordinator
RESULTS - agrassroots hunger lobby
714) 861-6363
Printed on
Recycled Paper
AGENDA ITEM NO. 6.1.2
NO DOCUMENTATION AVAILABLE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO. % I
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992 REPORT DATE: Oct. 1, 1992
FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer/Public Works Director
TITLE: Sewer Feasibility Study for "The Country" subdivision
SUMMARY: The City of Diamond Bar previously authorized the completion of a study to evaluate the
feasibility and cost of constructing sanitary sewers for a portion of "The Country" presently utilizing
on site sewer systems. The City is now to determine how to proceed.
RECOMMENDATION: That City Council accept the feasibility study as presented and conduct a workshop
in the community to discuss the possible formation of a sewer district in the area.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report
_ Resolution(s)
_ Ordinances(s)
_ Agreement(s)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
_ Public Hearing Notification
_ Bid Specifications (on file in City Clerk's Office)
_X Other
Feasibility Study
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed _ Yes _ No
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority
3. Has environmental impact been assessed? _ Yes X No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes X No
Which Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes X No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
REVIEWED BY:
p`
rrence L. Belanger 0GeorqVA. WenTZ
City Manager Interi City E ' eer
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Feasibility of Sanitary Sewers in "The Country"
ISSUE STATEMENT
Should the construction of sanitary sewers be pursued in "The
Country"?
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council accept the sewer feasibility study and
conduct a community workshop in the neighborhood to discuss the
possible formation of a sewer district forthe purposes of con-
structing sanitary sewers in the the area being considered.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
Costs would be to the City if a district is formed.
ANALYSIS
The feasibility study has been completed by Dwight French &
Associates (DFA). Their conclusion is that it is feasible and
desirable to construct sanitary sewers for all 148 lots in the area
evaluated.
DFA reviewed all related data including the previously prepared
Kleinfelder report and identified all existing utilities in the
area. DFA considered three alternatives:
(1) Including only those homes under distress;
(2) Including all homes in the area;
(3) Including all homes but minimizing easement requirements; and
DFA recommends that all 148 homes be included should a district be
pursued based the overall effects of the effluent in the area and
the desirability of placing the entire area on a sewer system.
The estimated construction cost for the project is $ 1,785,000. We
estimate an additional cost of approximately $ 250,000 for other
incidentals as part of the initial estimates. This would place the
average cost per parcel at approx. $ 13,750.
Staff recommends that a workshop (townhall meeting) be conducted
inviting all residents who may be affected to the meeting. This
would be an opportunity to discuss such issues as formation of a
district, petition requirements and the general process, anticipat-
ed costs, funding options, assessment approaches, etc. We
recommend that a workshop be set within the next 30 days.
Following the meeting, a petition would need to be circulated for
the sewer district being formed.
Prepared By:
George A. Wentz
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO.
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992 REPORT DATE: October 1, 1992
FROM: City Manager
TITLE: Resolution No. 2 -XX Authorizing Payment of a Reward for Information Leading to the
Conviction of Graffiti Inscribers Within the City of Diamond Bar.
SUMMARY: The proposed resolution sets forth the payment of a reward for information leading to the arrest
and conviction of graffiti inscribers acting within the City of Diamond Bar. The amount of the
reward is determined on a case-by-case basis by the City Council, but may not exceed Five
Hundred ($500.00) dollars. Since State law provides that any person who has willfully damaged
property by inscribing graffiti can be held liable for the costs of damages as well as the amount
of any reward paid, there should be no cost to the City for this program.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2 -XX authorizing
payment of a reward for information leading to the conviction of graffiti inscribers within the City of Diamond
Bar.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification
X Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office)
_ Ordinances(s)
_ Agreement(s)
_ Other
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1.
Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
X Yes _ No
by the City Attorney?
2.
Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? MAJORITY
3.
Has environmental impact been assessed? 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:
REVIEWED BY:
XA��
Terrence L. Belanger
City Manager
TrButzlaff
Asto the City Manag r
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 92 -XX Authorizing Payment of a Reward for
Information Leading to the Conviction of Graffiti Inscribers
Within the City of Diamond Bar.
ISSUE STATEMENT:
Graffiti is not a victimless crime and costs cities thousands of dollars each
year to eradicate. Section 53069.5 of the California Government Code
provides that the City may offer and pay a reward for information leading to
the identity of, and the apprehension and conviction of, any person who
places graffiti or other inscribed material upon public or privately owned
permanent structures located on public or privately owned real property
within the City.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 92 -XX authorizing
payment of a reward for information leading to the conviction of graffiti
inscribers within the City of Diamond Bar.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
There are no known fiscal impacts.
BACKGROUND:
Graffiti on public and private property is a blighting factor which not only
depreciates the value of the property that has been the target of such
malicious vandalism, but also depreciates the value of the adjacent and
surrounding properties. Unless graffiti and other inscribed material are
removed promptly, other properties also become targets of graffiti
perpetrators with the result that entire neighborhoods, and the City in
general, is made a less desirable place to be.
During Fiscal Year 1990-1991, the City's graffiti removal contractor, the
Boys and Girls Club of San Gabriel Valley, removed graffiti and other
inscribed material from 323 locations throughout the City at a total
abatement cost of $12,277.00. In comparison, there were 546 occurrences of
graffiti reported in Fiscal Year 1991-92 which cost the City $17,190 to
abate. This is a sixty-nine (69%) percent increase in the number of graffiti
incidents over the preceding fiscal year.
Although the City's graffiti problem is relatively minor in comparison to
other communities in the East San Gabriel Valley, it continues to escalate
each year. To combat the increasing surge of graffiti incidents and to
prevent additional acts of vandalism, the City requires that graffiti be
removed by next business day unnn op 4M M111- LL t
may help keep the level of graffiti from becoming an enveloping "societal
mural" in our community, it doesn't deter it from reoccurring nor does it
penalize the graffiti offenders.
DISCUSSION:
The State of California has taken a proactive approach to graffiti prevention
and removal by prohibiting the sale of aerosol paint to minors and
establishing severe penalties for graffiti offenders. Specifically, Section
594 of the California Penal Code states that "every person who maliciously
(1) defaces with paint or any other liquid, (2) damages or (3) destroys any
real or personal property not his own, in cases otherwise than those
specified by state law, is guilty of vandalism." In addition, Section 594.1
(a) through (f) regulates the sale of aerosol paint and makes it unlawful for
any person to sell or give to any individual under the age of eighteen (18)
years, who is not accompanied by a parent or legal guardian, any aerosol
container of paint or other liquid substance capable of being used to deface
property.
The regulation of aerosol paint to minors and setting austere penalties for
persons responsible for inscribing graffiti upon public and private property
can be effective deterrents to the graffiti problem. However, staff proposes
to take these measures one step further by vigorously supporting the
apprehension, arrest and prosecution of individuals responsible for
inscribing graffiti.
The proposed resolution sets forth the payment of a reward for information
leading to the arrest and conviction of graffiti inscribers acting within the
City of Diamond Bar. The amount of the reward is determined on a case-by-
case basis by the City Council, but may not exceed Five Hundred ($500.00)
dollars. Since State law provides that any person who has willfully damaged
property by inscribing graffiti can be held liable for the costs of damages
as well as the amount of any reward paid, there should be no cost to the City
for this program.
The cities of Palmdale, Buena Park, Rancho Cucamonga, Walnut and Glendora
have adopted similar programs designed to combat graffiti through the payment
of monetary rewards. The City of Palmdale provides a $1,000 reward to the
individual or group who supplies information leading to the arrest and
conviction of a graffiti vandal. The City of Walnut offers a $500 reward to
individuals providing information to the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department
which leads to the identification and apprehension of graffiti inscribers.
The City of Glendora works exclusively through the anonymous "WE TIP" program
which provides cash rewards of up to $1,000 for information that leads to the
arrest and conviction of graffiti vandals.
Staff believes that the proposed resolution will be a valuable and cost
effective supplement to the City's existing graffiti removal program.
Moreover, because this program rewards individuals for providing information
that leads to the arrest and conviction of any person who willfully of
maliciously defaces property, it will increase the likelihood that these
vandals will be apprehended before they strike again.
PREPARED BY:
Troy Butzlaff,� As ant to the City Manager
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR AUTHORIZING PAYMENT OF A REWARD FOR
INFORMATION LEADING TO THE CONVICTION OF GRAFFITI
INSCRIBERS ACTING WITHIN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
A. Recitals.
(i) The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar has
heretofore determined that the inscription of graffiti on private
and public property diminishes land values, promotes gang
activities, and otherwise threatens the health, safety and welfare
of the citizens of Diamond Bar.
(ii) It is the intent of the City Council to
vigorously support the apprehension, arrest and prosecution of
those persons responsible for inscribing graffiti upon public and
private property within the City of Diamond Bar.
(iii) The City Council may, pursuant to California
Government Code Section 53069.5, offer and pay a reward for
information leading to the determination and identity of, and the
apprehension and conviction of, any person who places graffiti or
other inscribed material as defined herein upon public or privately
owned permanent structures located on public or privately owned
real property within the City.
(v) It is the intent of the City Council of the
City of Diamond Bar to hereby authorize the payment of a reward to
persons providing information leading to the conviction of graffiti
inscribers, as specified herein.
Draft Resolution - September 28, 1992
(v) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this
Resolution has occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Diamond
Bar does hereby find, determine and resolve as follows:
1. In all respects as set forth in the Recitals, Part A.
of this Resolution.
2. No person shall apply graffiti or any other inscribed
material on public and private buildings, structures, and places so
as to deface or mar any public or privately owned permanent
structure located on public or privately owned real property within
the City.
3. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar hereby
authorizes the payment of a reward in an amount to be determined on
a case-by-case basis by the City Council, and not to exceed Five
Hundred Dollars ($500.00), to the individual(s) who provide
information to law enforcement authorities concerning the identity
of any person who places graffiti or other inscribed material upon
public or private property within the City of Diamond Bar, if and
when such information leads to the conviction of the graffiti
inscriber. Every person who has willfully damaged property by
inscribing thereon graffiti as herein set forth shall be liable,
upon conviction thereof, for the amount of any reward paid pursuant
to this Resolution and Section 53069.5 of the California Government
Code.
Draft Resolution - September 28, 1992
4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this
Resolution.
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this
1992.
Mayor
day of
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
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Drat R-dudm - Septanber 28, 1992
, 1992,
ATTEST•
Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. 7
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992 REPORT DATE: October 2, 1992
FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer/Public Works Director
TITLE: Rehabilitation of Grand Avenue from the easterly City limit line to Golden Springs Drive
SUMMARY: Grand Avenue, between the easterly City limit line and Golden Springs Drive, is in need of
pavement rehabilitation. The existing pavement condition for Grand Avenue must be analyzed and evaluated
in order to determine the most practical and economical approach for the roadway improvements. Based on
the findings of the pavement evaluation, plans and specifications for the subject project will be designed
accordingly. Staff has received and evaluated twelve (12) proposals for the design services of subject project.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council award a design services contract to Dwight
French and Associates in the amount not to exceed $45,700.00.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification
Resolution(s) _ Bid Specifications (on file in City Clerk's Office)
Ordinances(s) _ Other
X Agreement(s)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
X Yes _ No
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote?
Majority
3. Has environmental impact been assessed?
_ Yes X No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission?
_ Yes X No
Which Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report?
_ Yes X No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
REVIEWED BY:
Jerence L. Belanger
Aretrng-City Manager
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Rehabilitation of Grand Avenue from the easterly City
limit line to Golden Springs Drive
ISSUE STATEMENT
The City proposes to rehabilitate Grand Avenue between the easterly City
limit line and Golden Springs Drive. To accomplish the improvements, it
is necessary to secure the services of a qualified pavement testing and
civil engineering firm to provide pavement analysis and design services.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council award a consultant services
contract to Dwight French and Associates, Inc. in an amount not -to -
exceed $45,700.00 plus provide a contingency of $5,000.00.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
A total of $450,000.00 has been budgeted for Grand Avenue at this time.
This project is funded by Grand Avenue Construction Fund. The proposed
fee is 10.2% of the total allocated project budget of $450,000.00.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
Grand Avenue, between the easterly City limit line and Golden Springs
Drive, is in need of pavement rehabilitation. To determine the most
practical and economical approach for restoring the street to full
function, the existing pavement on Grand Avenue must be tested,
analyzed, and evaluated prior to any pavement design work. It is
anticipated that the varied conditions of the existing roadway paving
may result in optional rehabilitation treatments (i.e., overlay, asphalt
rubber hot mix, etc.).
Staff proposes to complete the design for the entire section of Grand
Avenue from the easterly City limit to Golden Springs. This will
provide both a short and long term plan for improvements since the
limits of the project will be determined by the cost of construction.
Once the design is complete, staff proposes to bid the project and
recommend appropriate awards to the City Council based on available
funds and anticipated improvements.
On August 25, 1992, staff initiated a request for proposals to procure
a civil engineering firm for the design services for the project. A
total of twelve (12) engineering proposals were received and evaluated.
Based on project understanding and approach to design tasks, staff
invited five (5) firms for interview and further consideration. These
firms are as follows:
1. Dwight French and Associates
2. DGA Consultants, Inc.
3. UMA Engineering, Inc.
4. BSI Consultants, Inc.
5. Willdan Associates
A panel consisting of two (2) staff members, George A. Wentz and
David G. Liu, and two (2) Traffic and Transportation Commissioners, Don
Gravdahl and Don Ury reviewed all the proposals and conducted the
interviews with each consultant on September 30, 1992. Evaluation based
on demonstrated track record, adequate number of staff assigned to the
job, experience of team members, ability to work with City staff,
knowledge of local conditions, involvement with related projects,
ability to keep on schedule, ability to stay within budget and demon-
strated interest by the consultants were utilized.
Based upon their presentations and proposals, the selection committee
believes that the scope of work and related services from Dwight French
and Associates and DGA Consultants, Inc. represent the best choices.
Both Dwight French and Associates and DGA's proposals also include
aerial and field surveys which are not included by the other proposers
but will prove valuable to the City. Proposed fees from Dwight French
and Associates and DGA are $45,700 and $48,200, respectively. Staff
anticipates design to be complete within 3 months.
Prepared By:
David G. Liu
CITY OP DIAMONB DAI!
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992 REPORT DATE: September 30, 1992
FROM: Kellee A. Fritzal, Administrative Assistant
TITLE: Award of contract for the construction of the Heritage Park Community Building.
SUMMARY: On August 4, 1992 the City Council authorized staff to solicit bids for the construction of the
Heritage Park Community Building. Staff advertised and received bids from twelve (12) companies. Bids were
opened and publicly read on September 3, 1992.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council deem Clayton Engineering to be the lowest responsible bidder
and award a contract for the construction of the Heritage Park Community Building to Clayton Engineering,
the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $657,400.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report
_ Resolution(s)
_ Ordinances(s)
X Agreement(s)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
_ Public Hearing Notification
_ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office)
Other
1.
Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
X Yes _ No
by the City Attorney?
2.
Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote?
MAJORITY
3.
Has environmental impact been assessed?
X Yes _ No
4.
Has the report been reviewed by a Commission?
X Yes _ No
Which Commission? Parks and Recreation Commission
5.
Are other departments affected by the report?
X Yes _ No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
Parks and Recreation Department
Community Development Department
JFWD a..
errence L. Belanger Kellee A. Fritzal
City Manager Administrative Assistant
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF HERITAGE PARK
COMMUNITY BUILDING
ISSUE STATEMENT:
On August 4, 1992 the City Council authorized staff to solicit bids for the construction of the Heritage Park
Community Building. Staff advertised and received bids from twelve (12) companies. Bids were opened and
publicly read on September 3, 1992.
RECOMMENDATION:
Award a contract for the construction of the Heritage Park Community Building to Clayton Engineering, the
lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $657,400.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
The Heritage Park Community Building is part of the 1992 Capital Improvement Program. The City has
available funding from a State Park Grant ($40,000), Community Development Block Grant ($340,900) and
General Fund monies ($300,000).
BACKGROUND:
In October, 1991 the City Council retained the firm of Wolff/Lang/Christopher Architects for development of
plans and specification for the construction of a community and senior center. The building plans were
developed through community workshops, input from the local senior organization, Parks and Recreation
Commission and City Staff. The proposed building is 3,942 sq. ft. The Community Building has been planned
to meet the needs of the community, including senior citizen activities, community-based activities, Tiny Tot
programming and other similar uses. The Building is planned to accommodate a variety of uses, on a
scheduled use basis throughout the day.
DISCUSSION:
On August 4, 1992 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 92-48 "Approving Plans and Specification for the
Heritage Park Community Building Construction, and to advertise and receive bids." Twenty-three companies
picked up plans and specifications. The bid opening was set for September 3, 1992 at 10:00 a.m. On
September 3rd, twelve (12) bid packages were received, opened and publicly read. Based upon the bid opening
the apparent low bidders were:
Irvine Engineering Corporation $467,884
Cal -City Construction, Inc. $590,000
Clayton Engineering Inc. $657,400
The apparent low bidder, Irvine Engineering Corporation immediately submitted a letter requesting their bid
be withdrawn, due to a mathematical error in the base bid. A miscalculation of $200,000 was purported to
have been made and the base bid should have been $667,884. The City Attorney indicated that the bid could
be withdrawn, pursuant to California Public Contract Code § 5103.
The apparent second lowest bidder's, Cal -City Construction, documents raised several issues related to the
responsiveness of the bid. Those items are:
Cal -City Construction filed a bid without securing documents from the City of Diamond Bar as
required in the Resolution and Notice inviting bids and also listed in the City's specifications.
A bid made without properly requesting the bid documents is not to be considered as a valid bid.
2. Notwithstanding issue number 1, Cal -City Construction did not post a valid bond, through an
admitted/rated insurance company in the State of California, as required in the City's
specifications 1-2, IA -6 and in the Standard Specifications for Public Works Constructions, 1991
Edition (referred to as "the Green Book")
3. Not withstanding issue number 1, Cal -City Construction submitted itself as sub -contractors for
both masonry and concrete work, they have verbally requested relief to change sub -contractors
on the masonry and concrete. Pursuant to California Public Contract Code § 4107 the Prime
Contractor may only subsitute a listed sub -contractor in special cirmcustances, with approval
from the City.
Therefore, based upon the above responsibleness issues, staff deems Cal -City Construction not to be a
responsible bidder.
Due to the rescission of Irvine Engineering and the lack of responsiveness of Cal -City Construction, Clayton
Engineering is deemed the lowest responsive bidder. Clayton Engineering's bid proposal was submittal in order
and complete. Staff conducted reference checks to insure that Clayton Engineering was the lowest responsible
firm. Staff contacted the Cities of Newport Beach, Bell, Huntington Beach and Anaheim to discuss the
performance of Clayton Engineering. All four cities highly recommended Clayton Engineering as responsible.
PREPARED BY:
Kellee A. Fritzal. Administrative Assistant
AGREEMENT
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That the following agreement is
made and entered into, in duplicate, as of the date executed by the City
Clerk and the Mayor, by and between CLAYTON ENGINEERING. INCORPORATED
hereinafter referred to as the "CONTRACTOR" and the CITY OF DIAMOND BAR,
California, hereinafter referred to as "CITY."
WHEREAS, pursuant to Notice Inviting Sealed Bids or Proposals, bids
were received, publicly opened and declared on the date specified in
said notice; and
WHEREAS, City did accept the bid of Contractor CLAYTON
ENGINEERING, INCORPORATED and;
WHEREAS, City has authorized the City Clerk and Mayor to enter into
a written contract with Contractor for furnishing labor, equipment and
material for the construction of HERITAGE PARK COMMUNITY BUILDING in the
City of Diamond Bar ("the project building" hereinafter).
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein
contained, it is agreed:
1. GENERAL SCOPE OF WORK: CONTRACTOR shall furnish all necessary
labor, tools, appliances, and equipment for and do the work for the
project. Said project to be performed in accordance with specifications
and standards on file in the office of the City Clerk and in accordance
with bid process hereinafter mentioned and in accordance with the
instruction of the Project Engineer.
2. INCORPORATED DOCUMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED COMPLEMENTARY: The
aforesaid specifications are incorporated herein by reference thereto
and made a part hereof with like force and effect as if all of said
documents were set forth in full herein. Said documents, the Resolution
Inviting Bids attached hereto, together with this written Agreement,
shall constitute the contract between the parties. This contract is
intended to require a complete and finished piece of work and anything
necessary to complete the work properly and in accordance with the law
and lawful governmental regulations shall be performed by the CONTRACTOR
whether set out specifically in the contract or not. Should it be
ascertained that any inconsistency exists between the aforesaid
documents and this written Agreement, the provisions of this written
Agreement shall control.
3. TERMS OF CONTRACT: The CONTRACTOR agrees to execute the
contract within ten (10) calendar days from the date of notice of award
of contract and to complete his portion of the project within one
hundred and eighty (180) calendar days from the execution of the
contract. CONTRACTOR agrees further to the assessment of liquidated
damages in the amount of tow hundred fifty ($250.00) dollars for each
calendar day the project remains incomplete beyond the expiration of the
completion date. CITY may deduct the amount thereof from any monies due
or that may become due the CONTRACTOR under this contract. Progress
1
payments made after the scheduled date of completion shall not
constitute a waiver of liquidated damages.
4. INSURANCE: The CONTRACTOR shall not commence work under this
contract until he has obtained all insurance required hereunder in a
company or companies acceptable to CITY nor shall the CONTRACTOR allow
any subcontractor to commence work on his subcontract until all
insurance required of the subcontractor has been obtained. The
CONTRACTOR shall take out and maintain at all times during the life of
this contract the following policies of insurance:
a. Compensation Insurance: Before beginning work, the
Contractor shall furnish to the CITY a certificate of insurance as proof
that he has taken out full compensation insurance for all persons whom
he may employ directly or through subcontractors in carrying out the
work specified herein, in accordance with the laws of the State of
California. Such insurance shall be maintained in full force and effect
during the period covered by this contract.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the
California Labor Code, every contractor shall secure the payment of
compensation to his employees. CONTRACTOR, prior to commencing work,
shall sign and file with the CITY a certification as follows:
"I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the
Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability
for workers' compensation or to undertake self insurance in accordance
with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions
before commencing the performance of work of this contract."
b. For all operations of the CONTRACTOR or any sub-
contractor in performing the work provided for herein, insurance with
the following minimum limits and coverage:
(1) Public Liability - Bodily Injury (not auto)
$1,000,000 each person; $2,000,000 each accident.
(2) Public Liability - Property Damage (not auto)
$500,000 each accident; $1,000,000 aggregate.
(3) Contractor's Protective - Bodily Injury $1,000,000
each person; $2,000,000 each accident.
(4) Contractor's Protective - Property Damage $500,000
each accident; $1,000,000 aggregate.
(5) Automobile - Bodily Injury $1,000,000 each person;
$2,000,000 each accident.
(6) Automobile - Property Damage $500,000 each
accident.
C. Each such policy of insurance provided for in paragraph
b. shall:
2
(1) Be issued by an insurance company approved in
writing by CITY, which is qualified to do business
in the State of California.
(2) Name as additional insured the CITY of Diamond Bar,
its officers, agents and employees, and any other
parties specified in the bid documents to be so
included;
(3) Specify it acts as primary insurance and that no
insurance held or owned by the designated
additional insured shall be called upon to cover a
loss under said policy;
(4) Contain a clause substantially in the following
words:
"It is hereby understood and agreed that this
policy may not be canceled nor the amount of the
coverage thereof reduced until thirty (30) days
after receipt by CITY of a written notice of such
cancellation or reduction of coverage as evidenced
by receipt of a registered letter."
(5) Otherwise be in a form satisfactory to the CITY.
d. The policy of insurance provided for in subparagraph a.
shall contain an endorsement which:
1) Waives all right of subrogation against all persons
and entities specified in subparagraph 4.c.(2)
hereof to be listed as additional insured in the
policy of insurance provided for in paragraph b. by
reason of any claim arising out of or connected
with the operations of CONTRACTOR or any
subcontractor in performing the work provided for
herein;
2) Provides it shall not be canceled or altered
without thirty (30) days' written notice thereof
given to CITY by registered mail.
e. The CONTRACTOR shall, at the time of the execution of the
contract, present the original policies of insurance required in
paragraphs a. and b. hereof, or present a certificate of the insurance
company, showing the issuance of such insurance, and the additional
insureds and other provisions required herein.
5. PREVAILING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance
with the provisions of California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7,
Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the CONTRACTOR is required to pay not less
than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar
character in the locality in which the public works is performed, and
not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday
and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of
Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has
determined such general prevailing rates of per diem wages.
Copies of such prevailing rates of per diem wages are on file in the
Office of the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, Suite 100, 21660 E.
Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California, and are available to any
interested party on request. CITY also shall cause a copy of such
determinations to be posted at the job site.
CONTRACTOR shall forfeit, as penalty to CITY, not more than
fifty dollars ($50.00) for each laborer, workman or mechanic employed
for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman or
mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages
hereinbefore stipulated for any work done under the attached contract,
by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions
of said Labor Code.
6. APPRENTICESHIP EMPLOYMENT• In accordance with the
provisions of Section 1777.5 of the Labor Code as amended by Chapter
971, Statutes of 1939, and in accordance with the regulations of the
California Apprenticeship Council, properly indentured apprentices may
be employed in the prosecution of the work.
Attention is directed to the provisions in Section 1777.5 of
the Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the
Contractor or any subcontractor under him.
Section 1777.5, as amended, requires the Contractor or
subcontractor employing tradesmen in any apprenticeable occupation to
apply to the joint apprenticeship committee nearest the site of the
public works project and which administers the apprenticeship program in
that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix
the ratio of apprentices to journeymen that will be used in the
performance of the contract. The ratio of apprentices to journeymen in
such cases shall not be less than one to five except:
a. When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint
apprenticeship committee has exceeded an average of 15 percent in the 90
days prior to the request for certificate, or
b. When the number of apprentices in training in the area
exceeds a ratio of one to five, or
C. When the trade can show that it is replacing at least
1/30 of its membership through apprenticeship training on an annual
basis statewide or locally, or
d. When the CONTRACTOR provides evidence that he employs
registered apprentices on all of his contracts on an annual average of
not less than one apprentice to eight journeymen.
The CONTRACTOR is required to make contribution to funds
established for the administrative of apprenticeship programs if he
4
employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any apprenticeable trade
on such contracts and if other contractors on the public works site are
making such contributions.
The CONTRACTOR and subcontractor under him shall comply
with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of
apprentices.
Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage
schedules and other requirements may be obtained from.the Director of
Industrial Relations, ex -officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship,
San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship
Standards and its branch offices.
7. LEGAL HOURS OF WORK: Eight (8) hours of labor shall
constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution
of this contract, and the CONTRACTOR any sub -contractor under him shall
comply with and be governed by the laws of the State of California
having to do with working hours set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter
1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of California as amended.
The CONTRACTOR shall forfeit, as a penalty to City, twenty-
five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman or mechanic employed in
the execution of the contract, by him or any sub- contractor under him,
upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each calendar day
during which said laborer, workman or mechanic is required or permitted
to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of said Labor Code.
8. TRAVEL AND SUBSISTENCE PAY: CONTRACTOR agrees to pay travel
and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required
by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in
the applicable collective bargaining agreements filed in accordance with
Labor Code Section 1773.8.
9. CONTRACTOR'S LIABILITY: The City of Diamond Bar and its
respective officers, agents and employees shall not be answerable or
accountable in any manner for any loss or damage that may happen to the
work or any part thereof, or for any of the materials or other things
used or employed in performing the work; or for injury or damage to any
person or persons, either workmen employees of the CONTRACTOR, of his
subcontractors or the public, or for damage to adjoining or other
property from any cause whatsoever arising out of or in connection with
the performance of the work. The CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for
any damage or injury to any person or property resulting from defects or
obstructions or from any cause whatsoever, except the sole negligence or
willful misconduct of CITY, its employees, servants or independent
contractors who are directly responsible to CITY during the progress of
the work or at any time before its completion and final acceptance.
The CONTRACTOR will indemnify CITY against and will hold and
save CITY harmless from any and all actions, claims, damages to persons
or property, penalties, obligations or liabilities that may be asserted
or claimed by any person, firm, entity, corporation, political
subdivision, or other organization arising out of or in connection with
the work, operation, or activities of the CONTRACTOR, his agents,
V_
employees, subcontractors or invitees provided for herein, whether or
not there is concurrent passive or active negligence on the part of
CITY, but excluding such actions, claims, damages to persons or
property, penalties, obligations, or liabilities arising from the sole
negligence or willful misconduct of CITY, its employees, servants or
independent contractors who are directly responsible to CITY, and in
connection therewith:
a. The CONTRACTOR will defend any action or actions filed in
connection with any of said claims, damages, penalties,
obligations or liabilities and will pay all costs and
expenses, including attorneys' fees incurred in
connection therewith.
b. The CONTRACTOR will promptly pay any judgment rendered
against the CONTRACTOR or CITY .covering such claims,
damages, penalties, obligations and liabilities arising
out of or in connection with such work, operations or
activities of the CONTRACTOR hereunder, and the
CONTRACTOR agrees to save and hold the CITY harmless
therefrom.
C. In the event CITY, without fault, is made a party to any
action or proceeding filed or prosecuted against the
CONTRACTOR for damages or other claims arising out of or
in connection with the work, operation or activities of
the CONTRACTOR hereunder, the CONTRACTOR agrees to pay to
CITY and any all costs and expenses incurred by CITY in
such action or proceeding together with reasonable
attorneys' fees.
So much of the money due to the CONTRACTOR under and by virtue
of the contract as shall be considered necessary by CITY may be retained
by CITY until disposition has been made of such actions or claims for
damages as aforesaid.
10. NON-DISCRIMINATION• No discrimination shall be made in the
employment of persons upon public works because of the race, color or
religion of such persons, and every contractor for public works
violating this section is subject to all the penalties imposed for a
violation of Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1 of the Labor Code in
accordance with the provisions of Section 1735 of said Code.
11. CONTRACT PRICE AND PAYMENT• CITY shall pay to the CONTRACTOR
for furnishing all material and doing the prescribed work unit prices
set forth in the base bid in accordance with CONTRACTOR's Proposal dated
September 3. 1992, for a total sum of Six Hundred Fifty -Seven Thousand,
Four Hundred Dollars ($657,400).
12. ATTORNEY'S FEES• In the event that any action or proceeding
is brought by either party to enforce any term of provision of the
Agreement, the prevailing party shall recover its reasonable attorney's
fees and costs incurred with respect thereto.
3
13. TERMINATION: This Agreement may be terminated by the City
upon the giving of a written "Notice of Termination" to Contractor at
least thirty (30) days prior to the date of termination specified in
said notice. In the event of such termination, Contractor shall only be
paid for services rendered and expenses necessarily incurred prior to
the effective date of termination.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents
to be duly executed with all the formalities required by law on the
respective dates set forth opposite their signatures.
State of California
Contractor's License No.
Date
By:
Title
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Title
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA
By:
Mayor
By:
Date
Contractor's Business Phone:
City Clerk
Emergency Phone at which
Contractor May be reached at any time:
7
CITY AP TUAMOIVD DAR
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.
TO: Terrence Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992 REPORT DATE: October 1, 1992
FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director
TITLE: Zoning Code Amendment 92-2 (Hillside Management Ordinance (HMO), Ord. No. 14, 1990)
and Zoning Code Amendment 92-3 (Commercial -Manufacturing (CM) Zone, Ord. No. 15, 1990).
SUMMARY: The intent of Zoning Code Amendment No. 92-2 is to establish permanent standards for hillside
development. Zoning Ordinance No. 92-3 incorporates revisions to the established list of landuses permitted
within the Commercial Manufacturing Zone. Draft Ordinances
() have been prepared and are undergoing
review by the Planning Commission. Revisions to the draft ordinances are scheduled for Planning Commission
public hearing review on October 12, 1992.
RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the City Council continue the public hearing on these items
to the October 20, 1992 City Council meeting.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:_ Staff Report
_ Resolution(s)
— Ordinances(s)
— Agreement(s)
Other
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
_ Public Hearing Notification
_ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office)
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote?
3. Has environmental impact been assessed?
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission?
Which Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report?
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
RE EWED BY:
Terrence L. Belanger
Assistant City Manager
James DeStefano
Community Devel ment Director
_ Yes X No
MAJORITY
XYes _No
X Yes No
X Yes No
City of Diamond Bar
Meeting Agenda For
October 6, 1992
1. 5:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION:
Litigation - G.C. 54956.9
Personnel - G.C. 54957.6
2. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
09/30/92
Page: 1
ROLL CALL:
Councilmen Forbing, Miller, Werner, Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Mayor
Kim
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS:
4. COUNCIL COMMENTS:
5. CONSENT CALENDAR:
5.1 SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1.1 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - OCTOBER 8,
1992 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley
Dr.
5.1.2 PLANNING COMMISSION - OCTOBER 12, 1992 - 7:00 P.M.
AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.1.3 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - OCTOBER 20, 1992 - 6:00 P.
M., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES -
5.2.1 MEETING OF A GUST 15, 1992
S s• -X -L:5 l r 9 �-
5.2.� MEE�Og' PTE ER 1, 1992
5.2.* MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 15, 1992
5.3 WARRANT REGISTER:
Approve Warrant Register dated October 6, 1992 in the
amount of $
5 4 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES:
Filed by Bruce Wallace September 1, 1992.
awaraed a contract to Excel Paving Company -for -Golden
Springs Dr./Sylvan Glen Rd. Drainage System for a total
amount of $29,956.50. The installation was completed on
August 19, 1992.
Recommended Action: Accept the work performed by Excel
City of Diamond Bar 09/30/92
Meeting Agenda For Page: 2
October 6, 1992
5.5 NOTICE OF COMPLETION - ON MAY 19, 1992, COUNCIL
Paving Company and authorize the City Clerk to file the
proper Notice of Completion.
X-6 APPROVAL OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN PARCEL
NO'S 10 AND 11 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 18722 LOCATED AT 2747
DIAMOND BAR BLVD. - This lot line adjustment is for
construction of a Spee Dee Oil Change and Tune-up project.
The Lot Line Adjustment has now been submitted to the City
for approval.
Recommended Action: Approve the attached Lot Line
Adjustment, authorize the Interim City Engineer to sign the
amended map and direct the City Clerk to process the Lot
7 Line Adjus me t re� a n� � , -AmlemrXAAZ
5.8 BO RELEASE. MONUMENTS FOR IERMARINI�'°�
Recommended Ac
6. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES
ETC
6.1 PROCLAMATIONS:
✓B:1.1 OCTOBER, 1992 AS "ESCROW MONTH."
6.1.2 QQRS WORLD SUMMIT
FOR CPILDREN o* AA& �f►�V�.1-Sq,ry_ r 1�bq,7t ly i�X.�¢.{G�ItG��
oe>kbe-e /4,-A 19 9 a d
7. OLD BUSINESS:
%1* i
7.1 SEPTIC SEWER SYSTEM IN THE COUNTRY
Recommended Action:
7.2 GRAFFITI PROGRAM -
Regarding C/Miller's suggestion of $500 reward for graffiti
and/or gang -related activities; C/Werner's suggestion to
involve community organizations; andq MPT/Papen's
suggestion that signs be posted re calling "We Tip" to
complain about graffiti. She also suggested that
individuals doing community service be used for graffiti
removal.
f Recommended Action:
7/3 REHABILITATION OF GRAND AVE. FROMTHE EASTERLY
-
CITY LIMIT TO GOLDEN SPRINGS DR. Grand Ave. between the
easterly City limit and Golden Springs Dr.,,.is in need of
pavement rehabilitation. The existing pavement condition
must be analyzed and evaluated in order to
determine the most practical and economical approach for
roadway improvements. Based on the findings of the
City of Diamond Bar 09/30/92
Meeting Agenda For Page: 3
October 6, 1992
7.3 REHABILITATION OF GRAND AVE. FROM THE EASTERLY
pavement evaluation, plans and specifications for the
subject project will be designed accordingly. Staff has
received and evaluated three ^ proposals for design
services of subject project. Continued from August 4, 1992
Recommended Action: es A
2101! k!0 exeted $53,0 am
7.4 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS FOLLOWING ADOPTION OF STATE
Budget -
Recommended Action:
C ---)6A-4 *P
NOW R=-- NO OF BIDS PN•' HERITAGE PARK COMMUNITY
CENTER CONSTRUCTION -
Recommended Action:
8. NEW BUSINESS:
8.1 POLICY FOR FUNDING TRAFFIC SIGNALS AT PRIVATE AND
PUBLIC STREET INTERSECTIONS - Recommendation from T & T
ja' Commission.
Recommended Action:
9 . P LIC HEARING: '7 � � . `� w R, , • � •�
9 .1 NGAMENDMENT OR Flr4"&1"5 - C _ .
1/
Recommended Action:
10. ANNOUNCEMENTS:
11. ADJOURNMENT:
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. b
TO: Terrence Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: October 6, 1992 REPORT DATE: October 2, 1992
FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director
TITLE: Interim Ordinance No. X (1992): An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar
adopting an interim zoning ordinance pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code 65858 (a) and
making findings in support thereof.
SUMMARY: The City Council adopted the General Plan on July 14, 1992. Pursuant to Government Code
Section 65860, all zoning must be consistent with the General Plan. In an effort to provide zoning consistency,
an interim ordinance is proposed for all parcels classified by the General Plan as Agricultural and zoned as A-2,
Heavy Agricultural Zone. The purpose of the Interim Ordinance is to bring the existing A-2 Zone (Section
22.24.120 thru 22.24.190 of the Los Angeles County Code) into compliance with the General Plan by reducing
permitted land uses. The interim ordinance would establish a list of more restrictive uses for the agricultural
zone and establish a Conditional Use Permit process for all uses within the zone.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt an Interim Ordinance establishing
an agricultural zone.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:_ Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification
Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office)
X Ordinances(s) -To be delivered Monday, October 5, 1992
_ Agreement(s)
Other
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
X Yes _ No
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote?
Majority
3. Has environmental impact been assessed? 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?
X Yes _ No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
VIE
Tdrence L. Belang r
Assistant City Manger
Y�V
J es DeStefano
Community Develo ent Director