Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06/15/1993
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Mayor — Gary G. Miller Mayor Pro Tem — Phyllis E. Papen Councilman — John A. Forbing Councilman — Gary H. Werner Councilman — Dexter D. MacBride City Council Chambers are located at: South CoastAir Quality Management DistactAuditonum 21865 East Copley Drive MEETING DATE: MEETING TIME: JUNE 15, 1993 6:00 p.m. Terrence L. Belanger City Manager Andrew V. Arczynski City Attorney Lynda Burgess City Clerk Copies of staff;reports or other written documen#a#ion relating to each itsn refe[red to n. this agenda are on file in the Office of the City Cierk and are available for public inspection If you have. questions regarding an agenda item, please contact. the City Clerk at (899) 86Q 24,09 during business hours. The City of Diamond Bar uses RECYCLED paper and encourages you to do the same. THIS MEETING IS BEING BROADCAST LIVE BY JONES INTERCABLE FOR AIRING ON CHANNEL 12, AND BY REMAINING IN THE ROOM, YOU ARE GIVING YOUR PERMISSION TO BE TELEVISED. Next Resolution No. 93-43 Next Ordinance No. 3(1993) 1. CLOSED SESSION: 5:00 p.m. Litigation - Government Code 54956.9 Personnel - Government Code 54957.6 2. CALL TO ORDER: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: INVOCATION: Christian Fellowship 6:00 p.m. Mayor Miller Pastor Ron Winkler, Diamond Bar ROLL CALL: Councilmen MacBride, Forbing, Werner, Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Mayor Miller 3. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 3.1 General Plan Public Hearing - June 16, 1993 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 3.2 Parks & Recreation Commission - June 24, 1993 - 7:00 p.m. - AQMD Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 3.3 Planning Commission - June 28, 1993 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 3.4 Concert in the Park - June 30, 1993 - 6:30 to 8:00 p.m. - "E1 Toro Marine Corps Band" - Sycamore Canyon Park, 22930 Golden Springs Dr. 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS: "Public Comments" is the time reserved on each regular meeting agenda to provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the Council on Consent Calendar items or matters of interest to the public that are not already scheduled for consideration on Council. 5. COUNCIL COMMENTS: Items raised by individual Councilmembers are for Council discussion. Direction may be given at this meeting or the item may be scheduled for action at a future meeting. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR: 6:45 p.m. or earlier - The following items listed on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and are approved by a single motion. 6.1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 6.1.1 Regular Meeting of May 18, 1993 - approve as submitted. 6.1.2 Adjourned Regular Meeting of May 19, 1993 - Gen. Plan Pub. Hear. - Approve as submitted. JUNE 15, 1993 PAGE 2 6.1.3 Adjourned Regular Meeting of May 26, 1993 - Gen. Plan Pub. Hear. - Approve as submitted. 6.1.4 Adjourned Regular Meeting of June 2, 1993 - Gen. Plan Pub. Hear. - approve as submitted. 6.2 WARRANT REGISTER - Approve Warrant Register dated June 15, 1993 in the amount of $381,226.03. 6.3 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - 6.3.1 Regular Meeting of April 26, 1993 - Receive and file. 6.3.2 Special Meeting of April 29, 1993 - Receive and file. 6.3.3 Regular Meeting of May 10, 1993 - Receive and file. 6.4 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES - filed by heirs of Stephen Wills, May 19, 1993. Recommended Action: Reject request and refer matter for further action to Carl Warren & Co., the City's Risk Manager. 6.5 ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS PERTAINING TO GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 2, 1993: 6.5.1 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 1993, FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES. 6.5.2 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 2, 1993, WITH THE SCHOOL AND UDEL ELECTIONS TO BE HELD ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 23302 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE. 6.5.3 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO CANDIDATES STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 1993. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolutions calling an Election for Nov. 2, 1993, requesting JUNE 15, 1993 PAGE 3 consolidation with L.A. County elections and adopting regulations for candidates. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Will begin precisely at 7:00 p.m. 7.1 ORDINANCE NO. XX(1993): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR EXTENDING THE TERM OF AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE NO. 2-A(1992) PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858 AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -'The City Council approved the extension of Interim Ordinance No. 2(1992) July 7, 1992 thus extending the life of the ordinance originally adopted on June 2, 1992. The interim ordinance allows applicants to apply for the display of otherwise prohibited signs including, but not limited to banners, streamers, inflatables and flags. The duration that permitted temporary signs can be displayed cannot exceed 60 days in a year. This is the final extension opportunity of this Ordinance. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council open the Public Hearing, receive public testimony and approve for first reading by title only Ordinance No. XX (1993) extending Interim Ordinance No. 2-A(1992). 7.2 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT ON CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1993-94 - The City Council, at the May 18, 1993 meeting, approved the Engineer's Report and adopted Resolution No. 93-34 declaring the City's intention to levy and collect assessments for District No. 38. The Council also set June 15, 1993 as the Public Hearing date on the levy of the proposed assessments on assessable lots within this District for Fiscal Year 1993-94. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council open the Public Hearing, receive public testimony and adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX levying an assessment on Landscape Assessment District No. 38 for FY 1993-94. 7.3 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT ON CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 39 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1993-94 - The City Council, at the May 18, 1993 meeting, approved the Engineer's Report and adopted Resolution No. 93-35 declaring the City's intention to levy and collect assessments for District No. 39. The Council also set June 15, 1993 as the Public Hearing date on the levy of the proposed assessments on assessable lots within this District for Fiscal Year 1993-94. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council open the Public Hearing, receive public testimony JUNE 15, 1993 PAGE 4 and adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX levying an assessment on Landscape Assessment District No. 39 for FY 1993-34. 7.4 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT ON CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1993-94 - The City Council, at the May 18, 1993 meeting, approved the Engineer's Report and adopted Resolution No. 93-36 declaring the City's intention to levy and collect assessments for District No. 41. The Council also set June 15, 1993 as the Public Hearing date on the levy of the proposed assessments on assessable lots within this District for Fiscal Year 1993-94. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council open the Public Hearing, receive public testimony and adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX levying an assessment on Landscape Assessment District No. 41 for FY 1993-94. 7.5 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AND ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JULY 1, 1993 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 1994 INCLUDING MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS, SPECIAL FUNDS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR ACCOUNTS, DEPARTMENTS, DIVISIONS, OBJECTS AND PURPOSES THEREIN SET FORTH. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX approving and adopting a budget for Fiscal Year 1993-94. 8. OLD BUSINESS: 8.1 CONTRACT WITH COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FOR PARATRANSIT SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993-94 - The City will continue to provide paratransit and dial -a -ride services for eligible elderly and persons with disabilities. The services are provided and administered by the L.A. County Department of Public Works and to ensure continuation, the City needs to secure an agreement with L.A. County for FY 1993-94. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council approve the Paratransit Services Agreement and direct the City Clerk to forward the agreement to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works for execution. 8.2 RIGHT TURN RESTRICTIONS AT ROLLING KNOLL AND GRAND AVENUE, AND COUNTRY VIEW AND GRAND AVENUE - The City Council directed staff to install "no right turn" signs on Grand Avenue at Rolling Knoll Road and Country View Drive between the hours of 4 and 7 p.m., Monday through Friday, for a 90 -day trial period. JUNE 15, 1993 PAGE 5 Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council approve either: 1) installation of double right turns from Diamond Bar Blvd. to Grand Ave. and reduce restrictive hours from 4 to 6 p.m. or 2) installation of double right turns from Diamond Bar Blvd. to Grand Ave. and place "no right turn on red" signs at Rolling Knoll and retain the "no right turn" sign at Country View. 9. NEW BUSINESS: 9.1 AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR ANNUAL LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE OF EIGHT CITY PARKS - On May 4,. 1993, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 93-30 directing the City Clerk to advertise for bids for annual landscape maintenance of the City's eight parks. Bids were received from three qualified contractors and were opened and publicly read on June 8, 1993. Bids ranged from a low of $102,600 to a high of $149,556. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council award the contract for annual landscape maintenance of Diamond Bar's eight City parks to Accurate Landscape and Maintenance Corporation, the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $102,600. 9.2 LETTER OF AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF BREA TO PROVIDE RECREATION SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993-94 - The City of Brea, as a contractor, has provided recreation services in the City of Diamond Bar for the past two years. Under terms of the existing three-year contract, cost and revenue adjustments may be made to the contract upon mutual written consent. The attached proposal from the City of Brea provides for a 14% increase in participation, a 22% increase in revenue and only a 5.5% increase in net costs. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council approve the Recreation Services Agreement for FY 1993-94, with projected' expenditures of $309,877 and projected revenues of $211,435, and authorize the Mayor to sign the letter of agreement. 9.3 QUITCLAIM BY TRANSAMERICA REALTY SERVICES TO THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON PROSPECTORS ROAD WEST OF GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE - Transamerica Realty Services has offered to quitclaim to the City a strip of land located along the south side of Prospectors road west of Golden Springs Drive. This strip is in an area between Prospectors Road and Lots 3, 4, 9 and 10 of Tract No. 26203. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council accept in fee the strip of land located along the south side of Prospectors Road, west of Golden Springs Drive and authorize payment for outstanding tax amounts due, not to exceed $2,000. JUNE 15, 1993 PAGE 6 9.4 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE RECONSTRUCTION/REHABILITATION PROJECT BETWEEN BREA CANYON ROAD AND GRAND AVENUE IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS - Golden Springs Drive, between Brea Canyon Road and Grand Avenue, is in need of pavement rehabilitation and/or reconstruction. The existing pavement for Golden Springs Drive has been analyzed and evaluated in order to determine the most practical and economic approach for the roadway improvements. Based on the findings of the pavement evaluation, plans and specifications for the project have been prepared. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX approving plans and specifications for the Golden Springs Drive reconstruc- tion/rehabilitation project. 9.5 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SETTING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993-94 FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 9 OF TITLE 1 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE, UNDER PROTEST - In addition to the Appropriations Limit submitted for City Council review, staff requests the Council to approve adjustment factors used in the calculation of the Appropriations Limit. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council: 1) approve the use of the California Per Capita Income percentage increase for use in calculating the FY93-94 Appropriations Limit; 2) approve the use of the City of Diamond Bar population growth percentage in calculating FY 93-94 Appropriations Limit; 3) adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX establishing the protested FY93-94 Appropriations Limit at $12,275,495. 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS: 11. ADJOURNMENT: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO APPMON THE CITY 99VNQZL Rhe2aRD=NG AQFrMD2� =z�rt �v. DATE: TO: City Clerk FROM: J / i'," 2 ADDRESS :�j-- r F ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: S I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item: Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written a ve. NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: r 15-- 1`3 TO: City Clerk / FROM: ADDRESS: Z's GAJ C, LS„/L/ U6, ORGANIZATION: .qTTRTF.rT D //AP.4/ 4 /(J I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address wr i tter� above - j/ Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: 3 TO: City Clerk j FROM: ADDRESS: Z,3 �� I S ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address aa written•above. S NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: TO: City Clerk FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: % �_ r : , - 7, I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as ss--w-ritten above. '- _ , l ,• -_ `.rl _ _.ter .� .k�r._,a _. Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. $ Z DATE : /,-$— o d.tJE i9�3 TO: City Clerk Q FROM: /!/o�i�ft / •/L��G�"�L ADDRESS: �,3�2 �Q1L/.rJ� /�.c90� G 4P. ORGANIZATION: ,, JJS yKpf SUBJECT: ND /[ /�ai�7' %v.ZJ �Pocci.�� ,�,�ecc�o��r�e>/✓/.J @ (�.�4,�0 CJs I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and 4dadress as wr'tten above. ure NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: TO: Citv Clerk FROM: U10301:4*xv ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: 9 1 1 A hr -)n I P, 6 -JI) r.'0� I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. S NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: TO: City Clerk FROM: A (" )` 14"11 L tL ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: I/ SUBJECT: �1 / �i i1/ o I expect to address the Council on the Council Minutes reflect my name and a9 %-%' -) /1r/� 11 AS's eject agenda item. Please have the ss dap; written jabove . S NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognised and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: �q TO: City Clerk j FROM: f r ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: 0 SUBJECT: /I%G �I itis end 4-ui71 S'iG31U 02 I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDINe AGxinjuA ITEM 140. DATE: (� /i 5 TO: City Clerk FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: , I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognised and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: TO: City Clerk j yj FROM: L% D �L�" 1444 L- ✓� ADDRESS: a 2 C / '1 Uy ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: Lo /K./C9% %U1�/V S /�/Iz� I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and adds as written abaue. ture NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognised and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. DATE: TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. City Clerk I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my nam d address/a� wr'tten ab . cjk&16— X ' S ic:nature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: /s- 13 TO: City Clerk FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: 5 i -'Z TO: City Clerk FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: �?l_ ' �v,�'�'s ,- I expect to address the Counci on the subject agenda item. Please have Council Minutes reflect my name and addres!,.`As- writt)mj-*ove. S' ature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognised and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. F,/ DATE: / TO: Ci(tyy Clerk FROM: j O�, ADDRESS: ` A�� 3 ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address written above. A/ l _ S NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. V8LUNTARY REOUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK 1 f FROM:.�r Its S DATE: % /S ADDRESS: 02 � �-1C� C 1id� - PHONE: V� � s %'c CL ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: �— �y �I 2 d I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item name and address as written above. Signature Please have the Council Minutes reflect my DATE: TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL RE G NG AGENDA ITEM NO. -� DATE: - TO: City Clerk FROM: G� M ADDRESS: C' "T ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: ��`� l �- CC c I expect to address the Council on the Council Minutes reflect my name aTj" 16ject ess as ve the NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: / -5-- /--�; TO: City Clerk FROM: ADDRESS: �� <� C C �tlfl�f✓ ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: C C r I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as writ above. Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: TO: City Clerk FROM: 1 ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: K S I expect to address the Council on t Council Minutes reflect my name and 7— 'F J u L-�em. Please have the en above. v Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: 1/,S -1,v3 TO: City Clerk FROM: ADDRESS: 5 -- ORGANIZATION: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. r DATE: T0: ity Clerk FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: 7iy1//ire l I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: TO: City Clerk FROM: I� I }{ �� �� -4- �%'� j A-1 e IoJ ADDRESS: C� 7 D e - CLO P—R1{ Kh ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: / �- �� R ! J 11 CO rvt M e A; / �l� ��1 C �IJ SS l I I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. PHILLIP CUNNINGHAM, 2, with his mother, Michelle Houston, in hospital. Photo by JOHN HAYES T Great-grandmother helps save boy, 2 By STEVE SCAUZILLO and ALEXANDRA MATISOFF DIAMOND BAR Emergency Fire Department dispatcher Kent Gil- mer's words told the story. "The baby is breathing now" the 911 operator said into the phone, shortly after instructing the great-grand- mother of 2 -year-old Phillip Cunningham in cardiopul- monary resuscitation. The boy was pulled unconscious from a backyard swimming pool Thursday morning. Paramedics credited Gilmer for his cool -handed in- structions to the boy's great-grandmother, Ernestine Bel- lezza, who successfully administered CPR. "I held his little nose and just gave him a little puff," she said. "And then he took a big breath and his lips, which had turned blue, started getting their color back," SATURDAY, MAY 29, 1993 RESCUE ■ Continued from Al said Bellezza during an interview at Huntington Memorial Hospital in Pasadena yesterday. Phillip, wearing his super -hero pajamas in the pediatric wing of the Pasadena hospital, is expected to recover fully from the near - drowning. Bellezza said seeing her great- grandson revived was a tremen- dous relief. It was the best feeling that I ever had," she said. Gilmer said it was the first time in his career he was called on to help revive a near -drowning vic- tim. "I was happy to help the child out," he said. County paramedic Al Cid said ` the great-grandparents probably would not have performed so well without Gilmer's instructions. "The dispatcher calmed her down and told her what to do," he said. The accident occurred at 11:29 a.m. Thursday, when the toddler was riding his tricycle around the backyard swimming pool at the Di. amond Bar home of his great- grandparents. "He was playing on his three. Tum to RESCUE /Ails "f was right there in the den beside the pool, looking out, and when I didn't see him go around again, I started calling for him and I ran out there," she said. Anthony Bellezza, Phillip's great-grandfather, came running from the other side of the house and jumped into the pool to re- trieve Phillip. Ernestine Bellezza, who is a reg- istered nurse, dialed 911 as her hus. band gently massaged Phillip's back to try to get him to breath. Following the instructions of the 911 dispatcher, Ernestine Bellezza began administering CPR to Phil- lip, who was not breathing, but had a pulse. Phillipr had a small amount of fluid in his lungs but was not un- der water more than two minutes.' The Bellezzas said they never leave their great-grandson unat- tended, and that Phillip had never ridden his tricycle so close to the Pool's edge before. "It was just a matter of a split second when he fell in," Anthony Bellezza said. Michelle Houston, Phillip's mother, sat on the floor of her son's hospital room yesterday, looking both concerned and relieved for her son. Phillip; with a large bruise on his left check, was making the rounds back and forth from his great-grandparents and back to his mother's arms. Houston, an Army officer sta- tioned in Louisiana, had left Phillip with her mother and grandparents, the Bellezzas, for a few weeks while she got settled after a transfer to thu M n_n_ . - _ e 1 CAL 0 • N ' A City of Brea June 10, 1993 Bob Rose, Director Community Services CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177 Re: Letter of Understanding for Recreation Services to City of Diamond Bar in 1993-94 Dear Bob, This correspondence shall serve as the official "I -ester ofUnderstanding' 5eeein 1993-94. the City °f Brea and City of Diamond Bar for the provision of Recr submitted according to the guidelines established i us negotiation meetings and d-9.5 Agreement for iscussions Services ("Agreement" hereinafter) and per Pn`no Enclosed you will find the City of Brea's 1993-94 Recreation Services proposal, Exhibit 435 from "A"; in the amount of $309,877, which monthl includes a revenue payments eof823 for the projection $25 lMay 1, 1993 participant fees. The proposal requires Y Pay through April 30, 194 period of services, The Maeord'n 1june 9tto ensure the $309,8?7 proposal deducted and future monthly payments adjusted ac g y figure is maintained. Per negotiations, both agencies have agreed to the following: The City of Brea agrees to: . 1 Mge, supervise and administer the provision of youth and adult sports �r programs, along with a wide variete ms oPvtne Agement. coact classes as stated in the proposal and per the The City of Diamond Bar agrces to: t $ 16, 778 to pay for equipment and supplies for 1. Include in its 1993.94 budge the youth and adult sports Programs 2, Budget an amount sufficient to provide a maintenance staff person to assist and provide program support as needed. 5W Kathy Wiser City Council Burnie Dunlap G1eruft G. Puker Caney Nelson I� Counci!►nan tos�ncl�7M°n CounctJu'oman Mayor Mateo* Pro 714,990 Civic do Cultural Center . Number One Civic Center Circle • Brea, California 92611-5738 714r990 -760Q FAX -- Page Two 3. Compensate the City of Brea for all costs of vacation compensation tia a and sick leave accrued by employees in the event resignation or termination occurs during the May 1, 1993 - April 30, 1994& m. of the. proposal. 4. Compensate the City of Brea for all 'Ncn�orandum of Understanding," salary and benefits, and increases that may occur during the term of the 1993-94 provision of services. This "Letter of Understanding" shall operate it conjunction with the provisions of the Agreement except where inconsistent, in which event this "Letter of Understanding" shall govern. All other terms of the Agreement shall remain :n effect during the term hereof. Each party to this" Letter of Understanding" acknowledges that no representation, statement or promise by any party t which is not embodied herein or in the Agreement shall be valid and/or binding. Any modification of this "Letter of Understanding" shall be effective only i it is in writing and signed by both parties. If you find these terms to be acceptable, please cause the enclosed copy of this "Letter of Understanding" to be executed below where appropriate, by you, or another authorized representative of the City of Diamond Bar and return said copy to the undersigned. This "Letter of Understanding" shall become effective as of the date it bac_omes fully executed by the City of Brea and City of Diamond Bar. Thank you for you: cooperation. We look forward to providing the Diamond Bar community with quality and responsive recreation programs and services. Very truly yours, Burnie Dunlap Mayor CITY OF BREA City of Diamond Bar agras to the foregoing terms. City of Diamond Bar TO:dw:leisure`%rose cc: Frank Benest, City Manager Date AS A TOKEN OF OUR DEEP APPRECIATION FOR YOUR GENEROUS DONATION. THE DIAMOND BAR HISTORICAL HEREBY JUN -14-1993 09:19AM FRC!l 94 TO 919093513117 P.02' rt 1J'h,-•.',`L!r�:?�, fir''~-'� 1 •t., , { w YLV r kw CITY OF DIAMOND BAR NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING AND AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ) The Diamond Bar tMeetingcouncil atwill the SouthaCoastclosed AirSession Qualityt 5:00 p.m. and a RegularDr., Management District Auditorium, located at 21865 E. Copley Diamond Bar, California at 6:00 P.M. on Tuesday, tion are listed on the attached agenda. Items for considera I, LYNDA BURGESS, declare as follows: I am the City Clerk in the City of Diamond Bar; that a copy of the Notice for the Regular Meeting of the Diamond Bar City Council, to be held on June 15, 1993 was posted at their proper locations. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoingwas is etrthisnllthrdayt of that this Notice and AffiCalifornia. June, 1993, at Diamond Bar, ty Burgess, Cit Clerk City of Diamond Ba, MINUTES OF THE CITY OF COUNCIL '.), REGULAR MEETING OF T18 1993 OF DIAMOND BAR APr MAY , 1. CLOSED SESSION: 5:00 P.M. Litigation - Government Code 'i4956.9 Diamond Bar Assoc. v. C.-ty City v. County of Los Arngeles Personnel - Government Code 54957.6 No reportable action taken. 2. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Miller called the regular meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. in the AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by M/Miller. INVOCATION: The invocation was presented by Dr. Robert Wiley Jr., Northminster Presbyterian Church. ROLL CALL: Mayor Miller, Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Councilmen Forbing, Werner, and MacBride. Also present were Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager;Andrew V. Arczynski, City Attorney; James DeStefano, Community Development Director; Bob Rose, Community Services George Wentz, Interim City Engineer and Lynda Burgess, Y Clerk. 3. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, ETC. 3.1 Proclaimed May 16-22, 1993 as "RAIL SAFETY WEEK." 3.2 Proclaimed May 1993 as "FIRE SERVICE MONTH" - accepted by Fire Captain Lockhart. M/Miller presented 3.3 Certificates of CommendatioAl Flores and Dale Mueller commendations to Karla Adams, in recognition of completing communications training at the Los Angeles County Sheriff Department Citizen's Academy.- 3.4 Proclaimed May 20, 1993 as "FOOTHILL TRANSIT DAY Accepted by Marylou MacGinnis. _ 3.5 Presentation by the Diamesented thd Bar e City Council Commerceer of with a Cathy Cook, President, presented check for $1,500 for the picnic canopy at Carlton J. Peterson Park. 4. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 4.1 General Plan Public Hearing - May 19, 1993 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. m., AQMD 4.2 Planning Commission - May 24, 1993 - 7:00 p. Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 4.4 General Plan Public Hearing - May 26, 1993 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 28165 E. Copley Dr. 31, 1993 - City 4.5 Memorial Day Observance - Monday, May Offices closed. M/Miller, referring to item 10.3, expressed concern that an incomplete draft Property Maintenance Ordinance was placed on the agenda. MAY 18, 1993 PAGE 2 C/MacBride reported that the Code Enforcement Subcommittee recommended that the draft ordinance not be considered at this time because the Subcommittee had not hhad the Cityt unity to adequately review the document, n or ey completed his review of the provisions of the Ordinance. on Werner statedrequested edatod t foorCouncil's review before being presentthe the agenda f Planning Commission. CM/Belanger apologized for the inappropriate transmittal of the incomplete Ordinance form. It was intended that the City Council would only receive a letter report from the City Attorney indicating his recommendation on the way to treat these kinds of policies, and an oral report from the City Council Subcommittee. C/Werner, responding to M/Miller's request to withdraw the item from the agenda, suggested that the Subcommittee be allowed to present their status report to the City Council, especially since the Ordinance had already been distributed to the public. In response to M/Miller's inquiry, C/Werner explained that MPT/Papen distributed the Ordinance to a member of the public on May 6, 1993, which included a memo indicating ed that he [C/Werner] publicly opposed the Ordinance and opcitation . C/ giving the Code Enforcement Officer osition to the Ordinance Werner clarified that he is not in opp and that he had not even 9 3 memo. it until May 11, 1993, five days after theL May , MPT/Papen confirmed that portions of the draft Ordinance wasp distributed, both by herself and the Subcommittee,to individuals for review and comment to allow an opportunitythe provide input to the Subcommittee. She explained taken that from position taken by C/Werner, as she had quoted, public record when the item was before the Council in 1990, in which no action was taken and the matter was tabled. It was not the intention of the subcommittee to present the Or to the public in its present condition because some of the issues had not yet been properly addressed and had not been approved by the subcommittee. The item should cep when itbe pulled ros the agenda, and brought back, and p p Y ready for public forum. C/Werner pointed out that the intent of the status report by is to make the City Council aware of what is being prepared the Subcommittee. It would be a disservice to the community and to the subcommittee, not to at least receive some public T/apn had input tonight. He reiterated his concern that ositioneto an made untrue public statements regarding his opp Ordinance that is incomplete. C/MacBride, in response to M/Miller, stated that the Subcommittee is not satisfied with the draft ordinance andtit should not have been put on the agenda. However, Subcommittee would appreciate community input to develop an ordinance that protects property values and a high quality of MAY 18, 1993 5. PAGE 3 life in the community, with the understanding that it is in an incomplete form. M/Miller withdrew item 10.3 from the agenda, allowing the public an opportunity to respond to the issue during Public Comments. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Oscar Law, 21511 Pathfinder, asked how the City could be holding workshops to revise a Genera Plan that was invalidated by the courts. He expressed his opposition to the draft Property Maintenance Ordinance for the too restrictive and should not be following reasons: It is allowed to become law; the Code Enforcement officer that those ven too much police power; the Ordinance suggests without money should leave the community; however, it should be noted that 25% of the community is on welfare and social security; the City Council seems to be representing theirown e interests and not the interests of the community; and sin the community has CC&R's, the Ordinance is not needed. C/Werner suggested that those people desiring to speak on the draft t Property ccanrdinance contact them should o obtain feedbsubmit their acks so that Nick Anis, 1125 Bramford Court, expressed concern that it is costing the community a fortune to appease a select group of citizens who are against City government, staff and the City Council. He reviewed a list of expenditures, totaling $484,925 dollars, that the community must pay for the actions of Citizens Against Diamond Bar." It would be more beneficial to use the funds for improvements needed throughout the community. Ed Hilden, concurring with Nick Anis, statedThe t aintentco l ints against the Councilmembers are petty. the "Citizens Against Diamond Bar" is to take over power or to dissolve the current government. Martha Bruske indicated that she would contact a Councilmember regarding her comments on the draft Property Maintenance Ordinance. Eileen Ansari, 1823 S. Cliffbranch, referring to an article in the Orange County Register dated May 7, 1993 which indicated that the Brea City Council successfully received funds to add 1,000 acres to Chino Hills State Park, urged the City to explore ways ableoineJuneeofome 1994ftohpreservelllion certainhat openl ll be made available areas. Frank Dursa, 2533 Harmony Hill Dr., read the following letter into the record: "Diamond Bar City Council, d like to -say regarding There are severaissuelashings I well as the City's the general planCity's inab 1ty to obey MAY 18, 1993 PAGE 4 the law. First, lets take the inability to obey the law... 1. The hearings to revise the General Plan are a ertinfarce. r what We have no General Plan. Diamb n O der ofd Bar isotheaSuperior Court, is known as Ordinance No. 4, y by virtue of a judgment rendered on February 27, 1993, by the Orange County Superior Court on behalf of the Los Angeles Superior Court. The hearings may be a good place to begin, but, I think we should comply to the law, the Order of the Court. "Lets just start over. The following 2. We do not have a General Plan. and may be in projects are in violation of Ordinance NO. 4, UNIT at the violation of the Law: The RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM CHANGE FOR old post office, approved in April 1993; The TONNER CANYON, adopted October 1992; The HILLSIDE MANGEEto ORDINANCE, adopted December 1992 and any permits pursuant SION AGREEMENT FOR TRACK MAP T that ordinance; the SUBDIVIt; he 31977, commonly known as "Gold Rush Drive othersmen YELLOW BRICK ROAD project, as well as many "3. Finally, on the General Plan issue, I want to know how you intend to pay back, the $500,000.00 that you have wasted on the General Plan? Do you intend to to itr a °hthe for $100,000.00 each? How are you going repay citizens, the four years you have spent refusing to listen and to do what you have been elected to do? "All anyone is asking the City to do is obey e law. if the City would "just start over" and satisf�actorily complete a General Plan, we would be able to goon not the things we need to do. The City is wasting all the y, LawIf the residents. When will the City learn to Obey the elected representatives of our City cannot he theiraws of while doing the will of the people and obeying of the way. the land, then they should resign and g out Tom Van Winkle" M/Miller, noting that it was 7:00 p.m., stated that remaining Public Comment would be received following the Public Hearing rom agenda items as a response to varius complaintswaiting onguntil elate eif nthe apare often plicants that they p evening, which is quite costly to them Clair Harmony stated that the rights of the citizens, under the Brown Act, are being violated. $. PUBLIC HEARING: Scheduled to begin precisely at 7:00 p.m. OF 8. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 93-XX:AMOND BOAR T DENYING THEION CITY IAPPEAL COF OF THE CITY OF DI CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. AND A 1, AMENDING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 494-1, AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 92-6, AN APPLICATION TO CONSTRUCT MAY 18, 1993 PAGE 5 A CHILDREN'S PLAYIFIED�AS CARL' S JR.,EXISTINGQUICK AT SI 141SE RESTAURANT IDENT DIAMOND BAR BLVD., AND SUSTAINING CDD/DeStefanoHreported Oth t Carl N OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION - appeal regarding Karcher Enterprises, Inc. filed an app the Planning conditions of approval set forth by Commission for addition of a children's outdo k service area with supervisory seating to an existing q approval, restaurant. The Planning Commission, in their approv 1, added a condition that required the applicant rtoo ro use de additional off -Bite parking spaces for the p P because the proposed play area would increase the already existing parking deficiency. The applicant feels that the conditions are overly burdensome and were equivalent to a denial. He recommended eappeal 1 of conditions the Council do t Resolution No. 93 -XX denying PP of approval and upholding the Planning Commission's decision. M/Miller opened the Public Hearing. Mike Callahan, representing by Carl Karcher Enterprises, Inc., explained that the applicant, early on in the process before the Planning Commission, disagreed with the mathematical analysis used to calculate the number of needed parking spaces. Based upon his calculations, my a 40 parking stalls are needed. The play area to attract families with small children, which ill thncrease sales and the amount of landscaped area. e the con - en gv half of their the following reasons for appealing ditions set by the Planning Commission: which should business goes through the drive-through, which stalls decrease the need for the number oarkithe play required; no one has expressed disapprovalcurrently have ground during the Public Hearings; they allow employees to park off-site informal agreements to during the noon hour; the condition is more burdensome than the application itself; and the condition is economically infeasible and tantamount to a denial. Al Rumpilla, t portion of the a8 Golden genda nda h d been disturbed interrupted Public Commeecause the nt p portion forward, stated that by moving the Public Hearing p the Council has oobligation minut s before all t elCounciltheir right to speak for RECESS: M/Miller recessed the meeting at 7:18 p.m. RECONVENE: M/Miller reconvened the meeting at 7:27 p.m. M/Miller pointed out that item #8 of the agenda indicat : es that Public Hearing items will begin at 700 p.m.. and City has received numerous complaints, by PP ues on the agenda, individuals who desire to address iss on time. Public that Public Heahear Comments will be d following the Public Hearing item MAY 18, 1993 PAGE 6 Tom Ortiz, 3308 Hawkwood, stated that he had never seen a parking problem at Carl's Jr. at any time during any of his visits. Oscar Law expressed support for allowing Carl's Jr. to construct the playground round area without the parking condition set forth by the Planning Commission. en Ave., expressed support for Bill Tinsman, 1014 Cap since they.have already Carl's Jr.'s request, especially the lunch hour. made an agreement for parking during Martha Bruske, 600 S. Great Bend, pointed out that since the competing restaurant was allowed to put in a play area, then so should Carl's Jr.. Don Schad, Joe Larutta (2546 Sunbright Dr.) and sax Maxwell also expressed support of Carl's Jr.,s reqe Frank Dursa, 2533 Harmony Hill, stated that since Cart' Jr. cooperated with the City by removing their sign, s City should cooperate with them. CM/Belanger reported that the request was approved by the Planning Commission, but that Carl's Jr. had submitted an appeal to modify one of the conditions of that app Ken Anderson, 2628 Rising Star Dr., stated that though is a good idea, parking is a problem that the play area ods in the City. it is important haunts many neighborho to have adequate parking for any facility. CDD/DeStefano, at the request of CM/Belanger, explained that the CUP is processed under the jurisdiction of the L.A. County Planning zoning Code as it was adopted by this City in April 1989. The issue of how the use was computed and the number of spaces required 4 as years en with this code well beyond the City of incorporation. the issue before the Council is to MPT/Papen stated that ncil show determine if the Courovaler e ofle thProject, Commission's conditioned app reement for requiring to parking to secure a spaces becauseitten they currently have six off-site par g P a shortage of spaces. CA/Arcyznski explained that the facility is currently below standard under the Code requirement. he play There are creates an additional under -parking p re ar provisions in the CPD zone that indicate that all parking does not have to be on-site and can be in another location within 400 or 1,000 feet depending on the typn of parking. In order to do this, a reasonable rovisio that the must be provided to the City indicating applicant does actually a lly s conditionhose pstating that aces. The Planning Commission has p MAY 18, 1993 PAGE 7 aces must be provided, within the necessary eP requirements of the code. The entire project is before the entire the City Council, and if so desired, application can be denied or modified as necessary. stated that, should the Council determine ine CDD/DeStefano that additional parking spaces were not required, project would not berequired to zone oallowsthrough for variance wide proceeding because the sole fluctuation in development standards at discretion of the decision making body. Lydia Plunk, 1522 Deerfoot Dr., a Planning Commissioner, indicated that the applicant agreed to the conditions at the Planning Commission meeting, and that the Planning Commission would not have granted them substandard parking. at the applicant did not actually Mike Callahan stated th condition when the Planning agree to the parking Commission approved the project as a Consent Calendar item. His firm disputed the analysis done load for building official that determined the occupancy the restaurant. Section 3302A of the Uniform need lis Code, which is the baseBui s for determining parking ambiguous and subject to the whim of who does the le to mathematical calculations. It is un,bcreatingpao ason such a condition on such a small prroe ject economic burden. He requested that coeneda t who drive amended to indD be icate that Carl's Jr. employ the noon time vehicles to work, must park off-site during meal period. With no further testimony offered, M/Miller closed the Public Hearing. CDD/DeStefano, in response to C/Werne inquiry, explained that the formula for calculating the number parking spaces is based upon the occupant load determined by the building official, which is the prescribed methodology within County code. The Planning Commission, recognizing that there are four major areas (thedining rosed oom, the counter, the kitchen area, and the concluded play area) being used within this facility, although the project would require 54 parking that, prescribed formula, only 46spaces spaces based upon the x of which could be off-site. would be required, Si Mike Callahan, in response to C/Werner, stated that he feels there is a perception of a shortage of parking at the restaurant on the part of the City staff. The spaces in front of the restaurant and along Diamond towardBar Blvd. fill up first, but there are usuallyspaces the back of the parking lot. He explained that the condition imposed creates a burden for the following reasons: it requires them to pay for these parking stalls, assuming that someone will even permit the use of the spaces; in MAY 18, 1993 PAGE 8 ditions that might be imposed by order to meet all the con the Community Development Director, the title on the property, which is leased by the applicant, must be clouded; and the title with i h20 years r orrelse it mustube be clouded for a term recorded against the title. MPT/Papen noted that there are two park -n -ride lots a block from the facility, and that the applicant should be able to verify that all the employees are not parking in the lot. Many of the fast food restaurants are rking expanding, taking away landscaped areas or pstalls stalls. Referring to the 39 or 40 parking recommended by the DBIA, she requested clarification if the calculations used are the same throughout all the community or if it has been revised for application. She then noted that there is nothing in the resolution indicating that Carl's Jr. would have to secure a written agreement for parking for 20 years. Bob zirbes, President of the DBIA, stated that, since the Architectural Review Committee of the DBIA reviewed tthe s Carl's Jr. proposed project about six asking ago, i was difficult to recall how the number o tunity to review the derived without first having an opp drawings and notes made during the, discussion. CDD/DeStefano stated that among the parking permit provisions of the County Code, there is a statement that discusses leasing of parking and facilitiesecificpreeuirer q a period of 20 years. There is nota spaces shall be ment that indicates that these Pb t lthere are specific provided for a 20 year period, statements that indicate ad ti se togetherhat there toshould ensure thatltsuch p that bind the parking remains available. CA/Arczynski stated that section (i) of chapter 22.56 indicates that parking must be available within 400 feet for patrons, and 1,320 feet for employees, and section (j) indicates that if there arthenasomef acilities guaranteesfmust period of less than 20 ye provided that those cspaces are e lof for theuse, t County the lease be recorded inthe off i Recorder, and that it demonstrate the ability to provide the required numberofsPoCethro through such an f the lease is terminated. Many applicants m 9 accommodating process. The Planning Commission was vthe six off-site in their request in requiring only spaces. C/Werner asked if there is a remedy to provide relief if the applicant cannot secure all of the additional parking spaces. at the request of CM/Belanger, explained CDD/DeStefano, rivately held, in which each that Gentle Springs is p MAY 18, 1993 PAGE 9 property owner owns a portion of the street to the centerline. There is an area of available parking between the two driveways existing on Gentle Springs, and the property owner, that would normally owned by accommodate 3 or 4 cars. In response to C/Foerinth amended per inquiry, if condition D could be P applicant's request, or show there are six parking spaces on Gentle Springs, he stated that such an amendment cothat uld be accommodated with the applicant's understanding such parking document would be required between the parties. on to C/Forbing, explained that if in respP the Council to sustain the there is a consensus among then staff should be appeal either wholly or partially, directed to prepare the appropriate resolution for presentation at the next meeting, or the mattecould be r continued to a date certain to permit the applicant to produce whatever documentation aocatedisposes of the issue of where the parking may be inquiry regarding the In response to C/Werner's inq y pe cannot be applicant's relief if the parking p attained, CA/Arcyznski stated that the applicant can file for an amendment to the CUP. C/Werner indicated that the applicant has not produced any proof suggesting that there has been a good faith effort to resolve the parking issue. He inquired if the applicant could have parking on Gentle Springs, or if it is required to remain open as an easement. CDD/DeStefano stated that it appears to be generally These designed to allow cars to park at this location.art of the three or four spaces were not counted as p occur total parking spaces the Codre pre immedi immediately off scribes site, but t hese on-site, and in the private street. MPT/Papen pointed out that the use of City streets, or for parking is contrary to every private streets, ro ect in this discussion held on every single etween two driveways, community. To allow parking is not reasonable where business goes in and out, planning for the protection and safety of the people using that street. siShe then milar such quested a comparison on standards used for C/Forbing, pointing out that it is the responsibility of the applicant to prove to City staff that they have met provision for off-site employee parking before the p suggested that the Council direct receiving their permit, 'te the resolution making the the City Attorneyto rewri D to be brought back to the Council change in conditionapproval. at the next meeting for app Mike Callahan, in response to M/Miller, stated that he MAY 18, 1993 5. PAGE 10 roach taken by the City Council. concurred with the app ark off-site is a The fact that his employees already park good indication of good faith on their p Motion was made by C/Forbing, and seconded by C/MacBride ion to direct the City Attorney to rewrritthsed beso y tthe making the change in condition D, suggest applicant, to be brought back to the Council at the next meeting for approval. C/Werner, noting that Mr. Callahan i d i at d d of the that T -Re employees are already parking tent of the motion. iLL explained that the applicant's appeal requested C/Forbing p the condition D to be deleted or amended to require that applicant make provision for off-site employeeparking is during noon time meal period. Since the acre of this already doing so, then he is already taking condition. pointed out that the reason they currently have MPT/Papen p without the expansion, is three or four vacant spacesking three or four cars off - because they are already p site. Their parking lot would be full if the employees were parking on-site. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: PUBLIC COMMENTS (Cont'd): Forbing, MacBride, M/Miller Werner, MPT/Papen None Al Rumpilla, 23958 Golden Springs Dr., expressed concern that citizens' right to speak are being suppressed and that citizens have as many rights as developers. The last five agendas have been conveniently rearranged. Clair Harmony stated that the L.A. County Planning Commission approved, on June 14, 1978, the Brock home subdivision on Pathfinder adjacent to Sandstone rCoannyo1e lin building restrictions on highudensitynuseloflclusife tering of of exchange for allowing homes in the tract itself, Wildlife not to eroeertiesowere dtosbeyset 1DU/AC. The surrounding p p aside for future park use. He then displayed the tract maps, from the County, illustrating the land dedicated for sold future park. He statedrthEstatesat Brockto Mr.tMillerrontDecembers and o others behind the Coun y 27, 1990, which were resold to RnP 45 days y t written hen City Harmony then referred to a letter dated5eptember 13, 1991, Manager Van Nort to Jan Dabney, which indicated that, upon analysis of the restrictions of the subject tracts, the City Attorney advised that the dedications of right to prohibit the construction of MAY 18, 1993 PAGE 11 residential units are valid and enforceable against any development request which may be subthetCitycouncilthe thas the Instead of plowing into the canyon, authority to accept the park dedication. M/Miller requested that the matter be forwarded to legal counsel. led he Don Schad stated thVe•fsince eMarch v1993ewith lover 1 t 15 deer vicinity of Grand A killed since January 1993. He reqalong Grand Ave. "Deer Crossing" signs be installed along rov'ding the He thanked C/Werner and C/MacBride for p preliminary comments made on the Property Maintenance Ordinance. He stateciizensthat hewasGeneral modifiedn, which was because of developed by caring to special interest groups. He then h Mr. Douglas Wheeler, Council to join in the meeting with Mr. but view a critical and importanto area of SandHe stone Cedyan� no one was able or willing petition of 1,400 signatures against the development of Sandstone Canyon. George Barrett, 1884 Shaded Wood Road, requested that his time to speak be given to Mr. Harmony. Clair Harmony, continuing with his suggestions regarding Sandstone Canyon, stated that the Council can acenpa ace, park dedication, keeping the 60 plus acres as op P nor a disregard for and that there would not ro erttarights involved with this individual or corporate p P Y ro ect has lower issue. The proposed Sandstone Canyon p J He expressed standards than those approved by the County. which is concern that the Council has become dictatorial, e, as well evident in the draft Property Maintenanceas in the Graffiti Ordinance. Barbara Beach Courchesne, 2021 Peaceful Hills Rd., expressed concern that the draft Poprty Maintenancet ordiir nance lacks th legal safeguards and deprivesrights, specifically the section Amendment Constitutional under "Right of Entry." Responding to comments made by Mr. Anis, she stated that every citizen has a right to voice his/her opinion and to seek legal redress if one feels the City is not responsive to citizen rig James Roberts, 829 Silver Fir Rd., stated thatSseDiamond Yhis Bar citizens need to stop the dictatorial opP e City Council. Ave., expressed concern that code Bill Tinsman, 1014 Capen Property Maintenance Ordinance wat enforcement through the those ed only occur for the less community of "The CountrfY�rbecause tunate ait t is unenforceable qn that area. The CC&R's should not be forced upon citizens who chose not to buy in locations with CC&R's. MAY 18, 1993 PAGE 12 Frank Dursa, 2533 Harmony Hill Dr., opposed to the draft e Ordinance, stated that such an Property Maintenanc City more money to employ one or two ordinance will cost the full time code enforcement nnotf knowrs. The the lawscandeordinances enforcement officer does and often makes mistakes in his enforcement. 6, COUNCIL COMMENTS: C/MtherWalnut/DiamondeBarhTheaterrful performances put on by C/Forbing reported that the Economic second ittee ill to conduct a morning meeting during eek of al ideas meet with the proveess thece economic climateto uss in the community. and ways to imp is In response to comments o adedt at that Conthatwere strue, trng freedom of speech, he p feo le to explained the Council would not permit the same ten p P continually make statements each meeting. He then that the $500,000 spent by the City to prepare a General City Plan was in responseto State theLaw mandatinth n his a eve ary must have a General rather an outline to define the long term specific plan but the majority of the The reason character of the City. people bought in Diamond Bar was for its appearance and ambiance. There are thereaarenmany citthe izenstwho efeel that deteriorating, and The draft Property oint, there needs to be some control. Maintenance ordinance is merely the C n oAttorney line tand lwrPtten in and it will be reviproveded ylegal terms so that it can be Constitutionally -app submitted to thePlanning.insistssion for a that our neighborsma All of us has a 9 their property. He pointed out that the Tree Orownercto go suggested by Don Schad would require a property to City Hall to buy a permit to trim or change any tree on He then explained that it must also be private property. understood that bonds for the preservation of open monies, and the repayment Of such bonds comes from State comes from taxpayers. The Council is not opposed to trying to get Tonner Canyon listed in a bond measure, re, buteis against taking land that does not belong He expressed conbcounhthbefore thetat the lCity Councilnneventhough the continually g discuss the issue. People need to Council may not legally Commission express their concerns and comments at Planning hearings. C/Werner indicated that hfeels a lot of morganizationlng of has to do with the processs involved in the ed. He to meetings and items totbProie=tysMaintenance tordinance lis concern with the draft p that he felt the ordinance should come council There needs input before going to the Planning Commission. to be more effort on the pat rthe Subcommittee o poblemsnow d p City, identify the concerns an and the costs the Cityowellitnappearsin ethatcsomehow code enforcement. Furtherm , MAY 18, 1993 PAGE 13 ovision of the County Code, dealing with foundation prThe requirements of code enforcem, foaCouncildadoption, the Subcommittee should bring backk, f the L.A. County Building Code Chapter 99 that provision ohat have s of code enforsomthtie deals with the issueatthe City is not successfully tested in the courts, pulling items from left unprotected. He then articulaated rlytW en there are members the agenda unexpectedly, P speak on the item, of the public in at waiting to sp nor does it does not do well for the credit of this Council that serve the City's interests. Furthermore, it appearset run its the General Plan Revision workshop process matter is brought to full course and, hopefully, opportunity to take this forumCouncil will have the opp , the Counc the momentum building up in the workshop sessions and deal with the issues that haven't yet been dealt with. he MPT/Papen suggested that the Council continue with o council of the last few meetings, of starting procedure, m., and continue Public Comments at the business at 7:00 p. are end of Council business btoadiscussuse ritems ontthecagendas Who must unfairly wait h property owners of the She then stated that she met with the pro P reserve, and 75 acres in the canyon that some would like to preserve, at a they have 2.itmillioned their offer to sell dollars. She statedheir her willingness cost of $12.5 mi to place a bond measure shouldnacquithe relthisf75 acres. at However, decide if the City ort that they at this point, no one has indicated to acquireuopen space in would like a bond measure p this community. She then asked each individual and evevery organization is write letters Franklin politan Transit Executive Officer White, Chof thethat� Countythe following critical Call for Authority (MTA), urging Projects within the City hef5D7ifreewayond afunded: from the interchange #356 - Carpool lane on t Project #357 - carpool to the San Bernardino County line; 7 lane on Route 60 through the interchange out to Brea Canyon Road; and Project #359 - carpool lane efts are approved, If these prof down to the 57 freeway. sometime around 1995 to on Grand construction would start 1998. For those living Ave., she asked that a separate letter be pawritten to the MTA completed in the year of urging the funding of Prod y to the synchronization of lights on Grand Furthermore,om wouldalso be San Bernardino County ort were sent to the MTA urging beneficial if letters of Supp which is modification of the 57/60 funding for Project #382, e that would bring the carpool lanes through the interchange interchange and add a new on ramp to the 60 freeway eliminating the necessity of crossing three lanes of traffic. iff M/Miller stated that he was informed bthatethis he rmeeting was Department, before the meeting began, not going to be disrupted. teto trydtohalsolbeltsto fairtothose suppress the audience bu MAY 19, 1993 PAGE 14 individuals who have complained in the past that they must wait hours before they can discuss their items. Public Comments will be continued at the end of City business. Also, the Council had informed the audience that the draft Property Maintenance Ordinance was not ready for public review, and it was unfair to assume that members of the Council, who had not reviewed the ordinance, had agreed with it. He then stated that a music video is being distributed to the schools to educate the children on the Graffiti Ordinance. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR: MPT/Papen stated that she would abstain from item 7.1., Minutes of April 20, 1993, because she was not present. She made the following corrections to those minutes: page 5 should indicate her absence and page 12 should indicate a 4-0 vote. C/Werner stated that he would vote "no" on item 7.6 of the Consent Calendar. Motion was made by C/MacBride and seconded by C/Forbing to approve the Consent Calendar as amended. Motion carried unanimously by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: MacBride, Forbing, Werner, MPT/Papen, M/Miller NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None 7.1 APPROVED MINUTES 7.1.1 Regular Meeting of April 20, 1993 - as submitted.. (MPT/Papen abstained from this approval.) 7.1.2 Regular Meeting of May 4, 1993 - as corrected. 7.2 APPROVED WARRANT REGISTER - dated May 18, 1993 in the amount of $238,404.34. 7.3 RECEIVED & FILED PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - 7.3.1 Regular Meeting of March 8, 1993. 7.3.2 Regular Meeting of March 22, 1993. 7.3.3 Regular Meeting of April 12, 1993. 7.4 REJECTED CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES - 7.4.1 Filed by Lavinia Rowland April 27, 1993 - referred matter for further action to Carl Warren & Co., the City's Risk Manager. 7.4.2 Filed by Trung Ly April 29, 1993 - rejected referred matter for further action to Carl Warren & Co., the City's Risk Manager. 7.5 EXONERATED BOND FOR GRADING ON PARCELS 1 THROUGH 4 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 13041 (COUNTRY HILLS TOWNE CENTER) IN THE AMOUNT OF $101,780. 7.6 EXONERATED GRADING CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT FOR MAY 19, 1993 r-ftt�,a t:) CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX ON TRACT NO. 51079 (800 S. GRAND) IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,000. (C/Werner voted "No.") 7.7 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 93-31: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY SEWER MAINTENANCE DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO ACCEPT, ON BEHALF OF SAID DISTRICT A TRANSFER AND CONVEYANCE OF SEWER IMPROVEMENTS KNOWN AS PRIVATE CONTRACT NO. DB -91-47722 IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FOR FUTURE OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND IMPROVEMENT, AND AUTHORIZE THE TRANSFER AND CONVEYANCE THEREOF. 7.8 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 93-32: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP NO. 23629, FOR A SUBDIVISION OF ONE PARCEL (FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUMS), INTO TEN PARCELS, (WITH FOUR OF THE PARCELS DIVIDED INTO UNITS A AND B) AND LOT A WITHIN THE WALNUT BUSINESS CENTER, LOCATED AT 20418 WALNUT DRIVE. 7.9 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 93-33: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LL -93-003 TO ADJUST THE LOT LINE BETWEEN LOT NOS. 66 & 67 OF TRACT 33636 AT 1343 AND 1344 RED BLUFF LANE, WALNUT. 9. OLD BUSINESS 9.1 LANDSCAPING ALONG THE PROPOSED METAL BEAM RAILING ON THE NORTHERLY SIDE OF GRAND AVENUE - MPT/Papen excused herself from discussion of this matter due to a potential conflict of interest. Senior Engineer David Liu reported that the Council directed staff, at the April 20, 1993 meeting, to evaluate various landscaping options along the proposed guardrails on the northerly side of Grand Ave. A landscaping plan delineating existing utilities and landscaping was prepared. Adequate landscaping of turf, hedges and street trees exist along the northerly side of Grand Ave. The City could consider additional landscaping behind the sidewalk area in the vicinity of Grand and Rolling Knoll; however, the area behind the walk of the sidewalk belongs to individual property owners. With the addition of guardrails and existing landscaping layout, pedestrian access can adequately be maintained but restricted. Furthermore, the growth pattern of plantings should be considered because some plantings may, in time, reduce the effectiveness of the railings, and other plantings produce dense willowy branches that can lay down in front of a vehicle. He recommended that the Council consider limiting construction to no more than 2,000 lineal feet of guardrail with no additional landscaping. MAY 18, 1993 PAGE 16 C/Forbing stated that the direction to staff on April 20, 1993 was for a landscaping proposal to mitigate the visual impacts of the guardrail. A staff recommend- ation of no landscaping behind a bare metal beam is improper and staff should once again be directed to bring back a landscaping proposal. M/Miller suggested that Council approve the 1,700 lineal feet because a specific length of guardrail was not approved at the April 20, 1993 meeting. C/Forbing, referring to the Minutes, stated that the motion was to approve staff's recommendation for the guardrailing, awarding the contract to C & W Fence Company in an amount not to exceed $33,000 and provide a contingency amount of $13,000. We now need a landscaping proposal to determine if we want to put landscaping behind the railing. M/Miller pointed out that 1,700 lineal feet of guardrail will go to the top of the last residential lot where the cul-de-sac is located. The Council should specifically accept the 1,700 lineal feet because 2,000 lineal feet is not necessary, and direct staff to come back with an appropriate landscaping plan. CM/Belanger suggested that staff be directed to bring the matter back to the Council at the next meeting with direction that a specified number of lineal feet be identified for the guardrail, to include a landscaping plan. The Council concurred. Nina Goncharo, 23631 Gold Nugget Ave., asked if the City would plant taller trees from the existing wall up 500 feet to help mitigate noise. She expressed support for the Property Maintenance Ordinance because, with the opening of Grand Ave., many have had trouble selling their homes and, as a result, have leased them, which has created a problem with neglected properties. C/MacBride encouraged residents to call the City if they have an opinion regarding the plantings immediately adjacent to the guardrails. M/Miller stated that it is the consensus of the Council to continue this item to the next meeting, with direction to staff as previously stated. 9.2 AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR SUPPLEMENTAL GRAFFITI REMOVAL - CSD/Rose reported that the City Council directed staff, at the January 19, 1993 meeting, to solicit bids seeking a contractor to supplement the Boys & Girls Club of San Gabriel Valley for graffiti removal in the City. Three contractors submitted bids, the lowest of which was $16,590 ($30 per site) by Graffiti Control Systems. He reviewed the benefits of the contract as MAY 18, 1993 PAGE 17 indicated in the staff report. He recommended that the Council award a contract for supplemental graffiti removal to Graffiti Control Systems. In response to C/Forbing, CSD/Rose confirmed that if the graffiti problem slows down in the City, perhaps as a result of the City's program of educating youth, the contractors would only be paid based upon when they are called. Motion was made by C/Forbing and seconded by C/MacBride to award a contract for supplemental graffiti removal to Graffiti Control Systems, the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $16,590 ($30 per site). Motion carried unanimously by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Forbing, MacBride, Werner, MPT/ Papen, M/Miller NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None 10. NEW BUSINESS: 10.1 LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS, FY 1993-94: CM/Belanger reported that item 10.1.1, 10.1.2 and 10.1.3 were related and could be approved in one motion. 10.1.1 RESOLUTION NO, 93-34: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FILED PURSUANT TO SECTION 22623 OF THE CALIFORNIA STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE WITH RESPECT TO THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38; AND DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR CERTAIN LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE WITHIN SAID DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993-94; AND FIXING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OF OBJECTIONS HEREON. 10.1.2 RESOLUTION NO 93-35: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FILED PURSUANT TO SECTION 22623 OF THE CALIFORNIA STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE WITH RESPECT TO THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 39; AND DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR CERTAIN LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE WITHIN SAID DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993-94; AND FIXING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OF OBJECTIONS HEREON. 10.1.3 RESOLUTION NO 93-36: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FILED PURSUANT TO SECTION 22623 OF THE CALIFORNIA STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE WITH RESPECT TO THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41; AND DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY MAY 18, 1993 PAGE 18 AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR CERTAIN LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE WITHIN SAID DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993-94; AND FIXING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OF OBJECTIONS HEREON CM/Belanger reported that the Engineers Report reflected no increase in assessments in any of the districts named and that it was proposed that the assessments remain at current levels. He recommended adoption of the Resolutions and direction to the City Clerk to advertise the Public Hearing for June 15, 1993. Motion was made by C/Forbing, and seconded by C/MacBride to adopt Resolutions 93-34, 93-35, and 93-36. AYES: COUNCILMEN: Forbing, MacBride, Werner, MPT/Papen, M/Miller NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None 10.2 RESOLUTION NO. 93-37: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR CITY-WIDE STREET TREE MAINTENANCE IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE AND TO RECEIVE BIDS - CSD/Rose reported that the City is about to complete its first year of City-wide street tree maintenance with a private tree maintenance firm. Though the service provided by the current firm, West Coast Arborists, has been excellent, in order to get the best possible price for the scheduled maintenance of about 1,954 trees during fiscal year 1993-94, it is necessary to take the contract out to bid. He recommended approval of plans and specification for city- wide street tree maintenance. Motion was made by C/Forbing and seconded by C/MacBride to adopt Resolution No. 93-37 approving plans and specifications for city-wide street tree maintenance and directing the City Clerk to advertise and receive bids. Motion carried unanimously by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Forbing, MacBride, Werner, MPT/ Papen, M/Miller NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None 10.3 RESOLUTION NO. 93-38: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE PARTICIPATION IN THE LOS ANGELES URBAN COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN LOS ANGELES COUNTY AND THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - CDD/ DeStefano reported that the City has, for the past three years, participated in the CDBG program as administered in concert with the Community Development Commission of MAY 18, 1993 PAGE 19 L.A. County. If the City desires to continue with the L.A. Urban County Program, it must execute a Cooperation Agreement by May 21, 1993. The agreement will be for a three-year funding cycle, July 1, 1994 to June 30, 1997. He recommended approval of participation in the Los Angeles Urban County Community Block Grant Program. In response to C/MacBride, CDD/DeStefano stated that funds were allocated this year to the following: child care programs at the YMCA; installation of ramps for disabled individuals and other Americans With Disability Act requirements at parks; installation of ramps at various intersections throughout the community; funds to other local service organizations providing benefit to low and moderate income individuals; and for creation of the improved Heritage Park/Community and Senior Citizens Center. Motion was made by C/MacBride and seconded by C/Forbing to adopt Resolution No. 93-39 approving participation in the L.A. Urban Community Block Grant (CDBG) Program and authorizing the Mayor to execute the Cooperation Agreement. Motion carried unanimously by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: MacBride, Forbing, Werner, MPT/ Papen, M/Miller NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None 10.4 REPORT ON ACCESS TO POMONA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT HIGH SCHOOL SITE - CM/Belanger stated that the Council received a report from the City's liaison City School Committee, made up of C/Werner and C/Forbing, giving the status of discussions related to access to the recently - acquired Diamond Ranch High School site to be located generally in the northeasterly area of the Tres Hermanos Ranch. The California Department of Education has indicated to the Pomona Unified School District (PUSD) that a secondary access road to the site, preferably from the west, should be constructed to assure an acceptable level of safety related to traffic flow and emergency evacuation. Deepsprings Dr. was identified as the probable westerly access. Recent discussion with PUSD indicated that the secondary access road issue may have some flexibility which may not have existed when original discussions occurred. The PUSD indicated that the State is willing to consider a secondary access, for approval of the High School site, approximately 250 to 300 feet south of the now designated access point on Chino Hills Parkway. There may continue to be some desirability to explore a westerly access to the high school site to open up access in a more direct fashion to folks living within Diamond Bar. He recommended that the City continue to explore various options that may be available to fund the construction of a westerly access to the Diamond Ranch High School. MAY 18, 1993 PAGE 20 C/Werner suggested that the Traffic & Transportation Commission explore options that might be available based upon the topography, existing access points and future access needs. The Council concurred. CM/Belanger, in response to C/MacBride, explained that the State's position is a mandated position that PUSD is required to find a secondary access that would deal with the issue of traffic safety as well as emergency access. MPT/Papen expressed concern that it has been nearly two years since the voters passed a bond measure to build the school and the site has not yet been approved nor has there been any construction. Furthermore, PUSD indicated that they need $10 million more to purchase the land and $3 to $5 million more for the access road. Many people feel that the City should not fund a School District project with City funds. There is also concern that Diamond Bar residents would have to use the freeway to get to the school. She suggested that the public needs a full report on the status of the construction of the high school. C/Forbing reviewed the construction schedule for the high school and explained some of the difficulties associated with the topography of the area. He explained that grading should be completed by the first of 1995 and construction is anticipated to be finished around 1996. There has only been discussion regarding generating funding from the Pomona School District, not the City. Gary Neely, 344 Canoe Cove Dr., indicated that the general consensus of the citizens is that another tax increase is not wanted, and that the general fund should not be used to pay for a $15 million road. Another concern was how residents of Diamond Bar will get to the high school. Two alternatives were considered: run a road parallel to the 60 freeway off of Golden Springs Dr.; or an access from Deepsprings Road. He indicated that, with the help of the City, the Booster Club will coordinate the ground breaking ceremony, and anyone interesting in helping can attend a meeting on May 24, 1993 at 7:30 p.m. at Diamond Point. Sue Sisk stated that the community should have access to the high school by the time that the school is in operation. There have ben articles in the Windmill to try to keep people informed. Don Schad pointed out that there should be two access points to the school so it is not another situation like South Pointe. 11. ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/MacBride reminded the public of the scheduled General Plan Revision Public Hearing at 7:00 p.m. at the AQMD Auditorium. MAY 18, 1993 PAGE 21 MPT/Papen, concerned with the Sacramento budget cuts, recommended that people talk to their Assemblyman or State Senator about the significant issues occurring in the next few months that will affect the kind of service levels that can be provided in the City. M/Miller stated that, for the record, he received a letter from Mr. Al Rumpilla. 12. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. to May 19, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. for the General Plan Public Hearing. Attest: Mayor LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk MIIIUZZO u r Wnz C:ITt COUNGYL ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR �F MAY 19, 1993 1. CALL TO ORDER: M/Miller called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. in the AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by M/Miller. ROLL CALL: Mayor Miller, Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Councilmen Forbing and MacBride. Councilmen Werner arrived at 7:30 p.m. Also present were Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; James DeStefano, Community Development Director; and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: M/Miller explained that the purpose of the Hearing was to take testimony on the Land Use section of the General Plan. Following presentations by the General Plan consultant team on nine specific issues as well as receipt of public testimony, the Hearing will be continued to May 26, 1993. M/Miller opened the Public Hearing. CDD/DeStefano reported that this was the first in a series of hearings to review and consider adoption of a General Plan, which is a statement of goals, policies and implementing programs to guide long-range physical development of the City as required by State Law. It represents the community's view of its future and serves as the "blueprint" to define the long term charm-'---- He introduced the following members of retained by the City in March 1993 to fi GZ draft General Plan: Michael Jenkins, s :l from Richards, Watson and Gershon; C 'Beland Associates to develop General P: Daniel Iacofano, of Moore, Iacofano E Cilitate the public workshop process; aCp�,d✓ Austin Faust, to assist in the Circulatio CDD/DeStefano further stated that five community workshops were conducted with residents to identify key planning issues and discuss potential General Plan policy options. The document presently before the City Council represents suggested changes resulting from the workshops to the draft General Plan dated July 14, 1992, which has a previously certified and recorded EIR, and incorporates all of the mandatory elements of the General Plan required by State Law. Discussion will focus specifically on the Land Use Element, which designates the general distribution and intensity of land uses, and discusses issues of housing, business, industry, open space, education, public buildings, and any other category of public or private uses envisioned 20 years from now. MAY 19, 1993 PAGE 2 Michael Jenkins explained that Elections Code Section 4055 provides that when any enactment, including the adoption of a General Plan, has been repealed as a result of a referendum, the same enactment cannot be adopted for a period of one year. As interpreted by the California Supreme Court, the Council may not enact an identical measure from the rejected provision and must give consideration to the concerns raised in the referendum petition. Staff appropriately commenced a process of review and reconsideration of the entire General Plan adopted by the Council last year, to be responsive to the issues raised during the referendum process, and to adopt, ultimately, a document that contains substantive differences from the originally adopted plan. Daniel Iacofano stated that a total of five community workshops were held; the first two of which identified the issues. The second two workshops addressed policy options with an attempt to build on the issues identified in the first workshops and the fifth workshop considered possible policy and language changes that could be considered by the Council at some later point in the Public Hearings. A summary of comments received during the workshops were attached to the staff report for the Council's review. CDD/DeStefano explained that staff, in order to facilitate the most productive workshop possible, conducted an extensive outreach program by placing full-size display ads in all local newspapers, including the Walnut Highlander, placed several hundred display posters throughout a variety of businesses within the community, provided notices to every interested member of the community on the General plan mailing list, published 40,000 copies of the public service announcements, and created a public service announcement for cable television. Dale Beland reported that the initial direction identified by the Council, in terms of the focus of the revision process, was as follows: the amount and type of future residential development; open space preservation; reduction of traffic congestion on local roadways and the Tonner Canyon Transportation Corridor. However, discussion during the workshop process was not limited to those four areas. He then generally described the reasons for the current suggested revision to the draft General Plan, which are organized in a series of nine statements indicated in the staff report. M/Miller reiterated that public testimony will be received on each individual item, followed by Council comment, until all nine issues have been discussed. Testimony will then be received on any concern regarding overall land use issues, followed by testimony on any issue of the General Plan for those unable to attend future Public Hearings. Dale Beland then read each statement: MAY 19, 1993 PAGE 3 1. Add the following statement to the Introduction, page 3: Utilizing the GPAC process, public hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council and following adoption of the initial version of the General Plan, the City Council added a community workshop process to encourage participation in further plan revision prior to public hearings." Barbara Beach-Courchesne, 2021 Peaceful Hills Road, pointed out that the concerns that eventually lead to the referendum process were the result of deletions, omissions and revisions to the original GPAC draft. Though the workshops were helpful, they only dealt in general kinds of concepts, and more specificity was needed. ,Tames Roberts, 829 Silver Fir, suggested that the public be given the original GPAC document for review. Max Maxwell suggested that the introduction specifically indicate that there was a referendum process and include the procedure followed. He expressed concern that there were only nine issues summarized after 14 hours of community workshop discussion. The issues are general and do not address the concerns specifically. Perhaps it would be beneficial to review the document line by line so specific language can be changed. Dale Beland explained that the nine items are stated in a general way as an attempt to portray the big picture, to be gradually worked to a fine-tuned state of parallelism and consistency so that open space policy is supportive and not contradictory with development policy, and in turn supportive and not contradictory to the transportation policy. It would be a much more effective process to do a general systems approach, and then, if needed, follow a linear approach. Nick Anis, 1125 Bramford Court, referring to the concern expressed that the General Plan, as recommended by GPAC, was revised, pointed out that the normal procedure for preparing any final document involves deletions, revisions and omissions to the draft document. Perhaps it would be beneficial if individuals would submit their suggested language to the City for their consideration. Todd Chavers, 23816 Chinook, pointed out that workshop participants were not really shown how to develop their thoughts into the appropriate language. If this hearing process is the way to create language changes, then it should revert to a smaller setting to create those language changes, or provide a vehicle for people to provide those language changes. C/Werner suggested that the document reflect what happened in terms of the referendum and the recision. He offered the following language: "Utilizing the GPAC process, public MAY 19, 1993 PAGE 4 hearings for the Planning Commission and the City Council and following adoption of the initial version of the General Plan, members of the community filed a referendum resulting in the recision of the initial version of the General Plan. Subsequently, City Council added a community workshop process to encourage additional community participation in furthering plan revisions for adoption." Wilbur Smith, 21630 Fair Wind Lane, suggested that the opening remarks clearly state the legal interpretation of the process. In response to M/Miller's inquiry, a majority of the audience raised their hands indicating their support for incorporating C/Werner's suggested language to the document. The Council concurred as well. 2. Delete the statement on page 4 which reads, "The middle portion of Tonner Canyon, representing the City's sphere of influence, contains significant open space and biological resources, but has also been proposed for a regional bypass roadway." and replace it with the following statement: "Diamond Bar's sphere of influence (3,591 acres), a portion of Tonner Canyon, contains significant open space and biological resources. It is part of a three -County regional open space system. The Firestone Boy Scout camp and cattle grazing have been the only intrusive usage; however, regional circulation studies by professional traffic engineers (Parsons, Brinkerhoff) have proposed a transportation corridor." It is also suggested that the statement, "Tonner Canyon (the City's Sphere of Influence) has been proposed as the location for a regional bypass roadway which would connect State Route 71 through route 57." on the bottom of page 4, be deleted as well. Wilbur Smith expressed concern that the document does not identify that there is an area within Tonner Canyon designated as SEA 15 by the State and the County. Furthermore, indicating that a transportation corridor has been proposed contradicts the County's SEA designation and is not relevant to the City's authority. Such language may create a problem for the City in the future. Dale Beland stated that he has just been informed that he has misstated the status of the Parsons, Brinkerhoff study in that it was not a proposal but a general feasibility and alternatives analysis. The results of the analysis were placed in the document for reporting purposes indicating that there is an inherent potential conflict between the SEA and other concerns regarding regional transportation. He suggested that the last statement proposed for addition be modified to read, "...however, regional circulation studies by professional traffic engineers (Parsons, Brinkerhoff) have included a general feasibility and alternatives analysis of a proposed transportation corridor." MAY 19, 1993 PAGE 5 M/Miller stated that the first part of the statement should also be amended to read, "Diamond Bar's Sphere of Influence (3,591 acres), a portion of which is in Tonner Canyon..." Dale Beland explained that State Law and General Plan guidelines mandate that a community include within its General Plan consideration of its logical planning area, which typically includes its sphere of influences. This wording is attempting to respond to that mandate. Don Schad, 1824 Shaded Wood Road, stated that the designation of SEA 15 was established by competent people who recognized the merits of the environment. The area should be preserved forever and considered as a State park. The Tonner Canyon roadway should be deleted from the General Plan until consideration is giving to utilizing the 60 freeway to its maximum potential. Don Gravdahl, referring to the statement, " The Firestone Boy Scout camp and cattle grazing have been the only intrusive usage..." pointed out that, at one time, there was a transportation corridor in that area that was used from Brea, through Brea Canyon, cutting across Tonner Canyon to the Boys Republic and into Pomona for use of the swimming pool. Nick Anis stated that it may be appropriate to mention in the document where the road begins and ends, and include the condition and size of the road. Norman Beach-Courchesne, 2021 Peaceful Hills, pointed out that Section C of the Physical Mobility issues indicates that a Tonner Canyon Road would only relieve traffic for five years before Grand Ave. returns to its present condition. The outlying communities need to be told to route their traffic elsewhere. Max Maxwell suggested that the document not just mention the Parsons, Brinkerhoff report but the other reports, such as the Soguel Canyon study, and they should all be seriously studied before inclusion in the General Plan. The document, as written now, is too general and slanted toward the issue of constructing a road. All facts should be presented and included in the document, or mention of the road should be omitted. Nick Anis pointed out that if the Tonner Canyon road is not built, then an estimated 35,000 more cars over the next five years will travel on Grand Avenue. He expressed support of including language for an environmentally -sensitive road for Tonner Canyon. Audrey Hamilton, 1429 Copper Mountain Drive, concurred that without the Tonner Canyon road, traffic within the City will be at a total standstill. She pointed out that the State built an offramp on the 57 freeway obviously expecting a road MAY 19, 1993 PAGE 6 to continue through Tonner Canyon. Todd Chavers suggested including the statement "sponsored by the three Counties" after the word "study" to avoid the appearance that the City is either pro or con for the road.. He also suggested that the wording "regional circulation studies" remain and that the firm of Parsons, Brinkerhoff's name be omitted since it may not be appropriate to list their firm in our General Plan. Furthermore, the last sentence should be amended to add "...transportation corridor(s) to resolve existing and projected future traffic congestion." He then pointed out that the introduction will be treated as an executive summary and should probably be dealt with last since it is most likely the only part of the General Plan that 90% of the people will ever read. James Roberts suggested that the statement be amended to read, ..of Tonner Canyon, contains significant open space, biological resources and natural resources.... The Firestone Boy Scout camp and cattle grazing have been the only environmentally intrusive usage..." He then stated that any transportation corridor will and does alter the ecosystem negatively. Bill Noyes, 23107 Bent Oak Road, expressed support of a road through Tonner Canyon in an environmentally safe nature, which will help immensely in relieving traffic congestion in Diamond Bar. MPT/Papen, referring to the sentence "part of a three -County regional open space system", indicated that the use of the word "open space" is inappropriate because the City's definition of open space refers to land that is deed - restricted, and this area is not deed -restricted, but vacant land zoned agricultural. Also, it is not clear whether "the three -County regional open space" refers to our sphere of influence or Tonner Canyon. Furthermore, for consistency, the number of acres in Tonner Canyon in all three counties and the number of acres in the SEA should be indicated as well. She concurred that since there is already a road in Tonner Canyon, then the Boy Scout camp and cattle grazing are not the only intrusions. The major issue seems to be how to compatibly develop the vacant land in our sphere of influence. C/Werner stated that the paragraph does not really identify issues, but rather creates issues. It is important to identify the significance of a sphere of influence, and identify the kinds of influences and control the City might have while it is not in the City, versus the influence and control we might have when it is in the City. He requested clarification of whether the entire 3,591 acres within our sphere of influence is within a portion of the Tonner Canyon area, and if Tonner Canyon extends beyond that area into other Counties. Upon hearing that Mr. Beland intends to provide a map at the next meeting that graphically identifies the SEA, MAY 19, 1993 PAGE 7 Tonner Canyon, sphere of influence, etc., C/Werner suggested that all those relationships be clarified in this paragraph as well. There should be an additional reference that the City is not just dealing with three counties, but with multiple jurisdictions, and if the General Plan identifies a particular direction as to how we intend to handle the traffic issues, then it should also indicate that we plan to influence those other jurisdictions to do likewise. He agreed that the firm of Parsons, Brinkerhoff should be deleted from the document, but that it be footnoted with reference as to the availability of the documents, and clarification if there was more than one firm who conducted the studies referenced. Also, the introduction should contain a list of identified issues that will be dealt with in more detail later in the General Plan, or provide for a future study for those issues. C/MacBride indicated that he concurred with Mr. Chavers' suggestions to insert the statement "sponsored by the three Counties" after the word "study", eliminate the Parsons, Brinkerhoff reference, and add the statement "...transportation corridor(s) to resolve existing and projected future traffic congestion" to the end of the paragraph. C/Forbing suggested that the discussion move on to the remaining issues because, at this point, the first three issues are too general and it is very difficult to separate the ideas to determine if the revisions go into Land Use or Circulation since it applies to both. He requested the consultants to redo the first three sections, adding more specificity based upon the comments brought out by the public on the next 7 sections. C/Werner stated that the term "significant" is also very vague and needs to be more specific as to its meaning and reference. Barbara Beach-Courchesne requested that the issue of restriping Grand Ave. to six lanes be revisited because it will invite more traffic, not discourage it. San Bernardino needs to manage their own traffic problems. Referring to the terms "open space" versus "vacant land", she suggested that other possible definitions should be considered as to what open space means for our City. Max Maxwell pointed out that there has not been any discussion regarding the City's intent to attempt to annex the sphere of influence in Tonner Canyon for future development. He concurred that discussion of the General Plan in detail should occur first and then come back and review the Introduction. Don Schad stated that the existing transportation corridor in Tonner Canyon was primarily a wagon trail to haul feed for cattle. The Scouts have paved some of the road to make it more accessible to bring in supplies for the children. The offramp mentioned was caused by the influence of Shell Oil MAY 19, 1993 PAGE 8 Company so that they could get their rigs and apparatus in and out of the area. He then inquired if the consultant can provide a map of SEA 15 indicating the area that it encompasses. Martha Bruske suggested that the City investigate how Chino Hills plans to handle their traffic problems in their General Plan to see if it will be detrimental to Diamond Bar. Wilbur Smith stated that traffic conditions in the City need to be addressed before ever contemplating a Tonner Canyon road. The issue is not really Tonner Canyon but how to mitigate traffic. CM/Belanger pointed out that this particular issue, as presented, probably belongs in #2 on page 4, as a circulation issue and not in #1 on page 4, as a land issue. There are changes in the Circulation Element that relate to this issue of a roadway in the sphere of influence area, and if those comments had been included with this statement, then there would have been a little more relationship between policy and an overall issue statement. C/Werner suggested that there needs to be discussion at some point addressing the fact that SEA 15 has been identified historically, and how the City will deal with it. 3. Delete the subtitle "Disposition of Remaining Open Lands" and replace with "Determination of Deed Restriction Status." Also delete the existing Issue Analysis statement and replace with "There is a need for clar- ification and confirmation of existing deed restrictions which affect vacant land proposed for development. Past confusion resulting from Los Angeles County transmittal of development entitlement must be resolved." Add a new subtitle "Open Space Definition and Preservation" and have the General Plan define and stipulate what is meant by the term "open space." At this point, in terms of land use development issue, the suggested language is first to describe as follows "There are many different types of open space. Natural types include undisturbed hillsides, ridges and canyon bottoms. Man-made open space can range from graded hillsides that appear 'natural' to active recreational areas such as parks and golf courses. The City must determine which lands will be defined as 'open space' which would preclude devel- opment and thereby require acquisition of private property rights. Techniques and tools used for open space acquisition range from out right purchase to transfer of development rights, or exchange of entitlement to shift allowable development to non -open space areas. Other options involve use of benefit assessment districts, grants from other agencies, and conservation groups, etc." The succeeding Issue Analysis would read "There is a need to define and map selected MAY 19, 1993 PAGE 9 ,open space, within the City and to implement a feasible open space acquisition program." Barbara Beach-Courchesne suggested that the Issue Analysis be amended to read "There is a need for clarification and confirmation of original map restrictions which affect vacant land proposed for development." and following the word "resolve" , add "Open Space considerations need to be on a site by site basis." The original GPAC specific recommendations need to be reinstated in our General Plan, specifically but not limited to Sandstone, Tonner and Sycamore Canyons. Max Maxwell suggested that the terms "the need to" be replaced by a more definitive term such as "are". Dale Beland stated that the action statements that have been requested appear in item 8, based on the definition of "need" and "intent" in item 3. Max Maxwell stated that the General Plan should specifically indicate that the aforementioned canyons will be preserved. RECESS: M/Miller recessed the meeting at 9:18 p.m.. RECONVENE: M/Miller reconvened the meeting at 9:29 p.m.. Audrey Hamilton requested clarification as to what is meant by "benefit assessment districts". Dale Beland explained that the purpose of the wording is to illustrate some of the tools available to the City should an open space acquisition program be chosen. A benefit assessment district specifically refers to the idea of establishing the objective of acquiring either open space or a new lighting or road improvement, and identifying how that benefit or improvement is shared by abutting properties, and using that determination of cost and benefit to establish a means of funding that cost by spreading the cost among those who benefit. The inclusion of such wording does not commit the City as a policy. Larry Aguilar, 2611 Sutters Mill Dr., suggested that the development of a sports complex be considered, perhaps on the open land located on the corner of Golden Springs and Grand Ave., to address the need for adequate practice and playing fields. MPT/Papen suggested that the words "selected open space" in the Issue Analysis be amended to read "deed -restricted open space". C/Werner stated that the Issue Analysis needs to be more explicit indicating that it is more directed to future park sites, density restrictions, etc. rather than just indicating "There is a need for clarification and confirmation of MAY 19, 1993 PAGE 10 existing deed restrictions..." It is already known what the map restrictions are in terms of densities as a result of transfer of density or park dedications. Mike Jenkins, in response to MPT/Papen's inquiry, explained that if there was an irrevocable dedication in a map, then that dedication would remain valid today and could be looked to as open space. The statements in the subject Issue Analysis are broad and could be made more affirmative. M/Miller pointed out that many restrictions that are map restrictions are not deed restrictions. The law states that map restrictions can be eliminated by submitting a new map. The language in the Issue Analysis simply allows the issue to be raised. Dale Beland suggested that the words "clarification and confirmation" be amended to "identification and inventorying". C/MacBride expressed concern that the more specific the General Plan document becomes, the less flexible and the less ability one has to meet changes in the future. Don Schad concurred that there should be established land uses since there is very little land left for development, but perhaps not cast in stone so that they become inflexible. The remaining areas left for development are rugged and wild, such as Sandstone, Upper Sycamore and Tonner Canyons. The original GPAC recommended these areas to be left as open space. Max Maxwell requested that the General Plan indicate that the City Council cannot remove a deed restriction without a vote of the public at a primary election. All deed restrictions should also be indicated on the map in the General Plan. M/Miller explained that a deed restriction is usually restricted through CC&R's and the Council cannot override a CC&R restriction without a general vote of the homeowners' association that has control over it. A map restriction requires a subdivision hearing to assure that an issue or issues of concern have been mitigated. Dale Beland, in response to C/Werner, explained that, regardless of the restriction placed, a cloud is put into the title of the property so that a title search will indicate the different types of restrictions placed on the property. The General Plan document cannot be used as a means of eliminating restrictions on subdivision maps for open space purposes, but can only state an intent to designate it as open space. In order to actually eliminate the restriction, there would have to be a public process in which the Council would have to take a formal action to return the property to the property owner. Max Maxwell stated that he feels that all restrictions on open space, undeveloped property should be spelled out specifically MAY 19, 1993 PAGE 11 in the General Plan. Dale Beland, in response to C/Forbing's inquiry as to the difference between a deed restriction and a map restriction, explained that his use of the term deed restriction refers to any restriction that would appear on a title report of a parcel of property which discloses that there is some type of a cloud placed on that property from some source. That deed restriction could have resulted from a subdivision map, from a private conveyance, or some other restriction. C/Forbing inquired if there is a legal restriction on the development of a property in which a map restriction, for some reason, never got translated into the deed. Dale Beland stated that there would need to be further investigation as to why the restriction on the map did not make its way on to the title. C/Forbing pointed out that it is important that the Issue Analysis state that there is a need for "clarification and confirmation" to be done before any development process of the open space. Max Maxwell expressed concern that many restrictions established over many years are being removed by the City Council. The General Plan should specifically state the map and deed restrictions on remaining open space. C/MacBride suggested the following amendment to paragraph 3: "There is a need to identify, clarify and create an inventory of existing maps and deed restrictions which affect..." Gary Neely, 344 Canoe Cove Drive, stated that he is aware of an individual, very active in developing undeveloped land in this community, that has a complete itemization of every vacant land in Diamond Bar. Aside from Tres Hermanos and the Boy Scout property, there is not a lot of vacant land in the City, and, to his recollection, the City has already paid for an itemization of deed restrictions on all the vacant land. He further stated that he does not concur with permanent deed restrictions because it is too difficult to predict future needs for the benefit of the community. The decision would have to be made on a case by case basis. He suggested that specific comment on this matter be postponed until strategy 1.5.1, page 8, is discussed. 4. Revise the language to land use development on page I-8 to read, "Diamond Bar should proactively and aggressively work with, and lobby adjacent and regional agencies, to develop regional circulation solutions that directly benefit Diamond Bar local access needs. Local community residents should be involved in the discussion of such needs." MAY 19, 1993 PAGE 12 Wilbur Smith agreed that the statement, "The City may choose to continue to absorb through traffic..." should be deleted, but that the rest of the statement should be amended to read, "The City depends on other agencies, such as the State, to take appropriate measures to relieve regional congestion which would ultimately free local roads for a predominately local use," and be made a part of the document. Audrey Hamilton expressed support for the suggested amended language as indicated in paragraph 4. MPT/Papen, referring to the last sentence in paragraph 4, inquired how the participants of the workshop intended for the local community residents to be involved in the discussion of local traffic needs. She expressed concern with having local residents participating at the interregional agency level. Dale Beland explained that discussion had focused on the need to identify local concerns about local access by tapping local resident expertise and willingness to address those issues. There was no discussion about the process that might be most appropriate. C/Werner, appreciating the comments made by Mr. Smith, suggested that the two points be merged somehow. MPT/Papen stated that she prefers the statement as written in paragraph 4, except for the last sentence, because the City does not have the resources to make appropriate measures to relieve regional congestion which would ultimately free local roads for a predominately local use. C/Forbing, concurring with MPT/Papen that the last sentence is inappropriately placed, suggested that the Introduction include a comment that Diamond Bar is the local community, and that local residents are involved in the discussion of local needs. The verbiage presented in paragraph 4 was written by a traffic engineer serving on the Traffic Commission. It best states what the Traffic Commission is involved with in working on regional circulation needs. The community provides input to the Commissions on things that are needed. C/Werner suggested that the statement, "The City's vision is to reserve its streets for local traffic" be placed back into the document. The Council concurred. Don Schad expressed his opinion that the statement, "Local community residents should be involved in the discussion of such needs" should remain in the paragraph for emphasis. Gary Neely pointed out that if regional problems aren't resolved, then local traffic will never be reserved for local people. He then stated that he felt the last sentence should remain if for no other reason than for public relations. MAY 19, 1993 PAGE 13 MPT/Papen suggested that staff be directed to come back with new verbiage, taking into consideration the concerns mentioned regarding conflict issues. Dale Beland displayed two graphic land use maps, one dated July 14, 1992, which was part of the General Plan, and the other dated May 12, 1993, which attempts to incorporate suggested changes to that land use policy definition. The intent is to respond to a very strong direction from -workshop participants to reexamine the permitted buildout intensity of existing single family detached residential areas, and adjust it on the policy map so that it accommodates what is built now, but does not provide the potential for tear down and rebuilding to a higher density. 5. Revise strategy 1.1.B to read "Designate existing developed single family detached residential parcels in areas of greater topography as low density residential (RL) on the land use map. The maximum density and such low density residential areas will be 3.0 DU/gross acre or existing density, which ever is greatest."; redefine strategy l.l.l.c to read "Designate existing single family detached subdivisions in flatter areas as low medium residential or RLM on the land use map. Maximum density and low medium density residential areas will be 5.0 DU/gross acre." Wilbur Smith stated that he did not recall discussing 5.0 DU/ acre at the workshops. He inquired if it would be appropriate to define the minimum lot sizes permitted in the City, the pad sizes, the setback requirements etc., somewhere in this section. Dale Beland explained that the level of detail and the definition of standards for setbacks, etc. is almost universally not addressed in the General Plan, but more properly belongs in the development code or zoning code. CDD/DeStefano explained that, upon Incorporation, the City decided to adopt the County of Los Angeles Planning and Zoning Code as its development tool. With the adoption of a General Plan, the City will need to reexamine that code and craft one specifically for ourselves, implementing the policies contained within the General Plan. Max Maxwell suggested that the original GPAC recommendation for an RH density designation of 2.5 in hillside areas, with a slope density relationship, be reinstated in the General Plan in those areas previously spelled out on maps that are part of City record. He then requested clarification if the Diamond Ridge area is now zoned to fit the existing zoning or the existing level of development. CDD/DeStefano explained that the Diamond Ridge area has zoning classifications of R-1 8,000 square foot lot designation and MAY 19, 1993 PAGE 14 R-1 10,000 square foot lot designation. However, the majority of that area has been developed at about 3 DU/acre, which is indicative of development in most of Diamond Bar in what was once our hillside areas. The existing zoning reflects about 6 DU/acre and the existing land use reflects about 3 DU/acre. The General Plan of July, 1992 indicated a 6 DU/acre designa- tion, but the proposal presented today reflects a 3 DU/acre designation. Max Maxwell then inquired why the 2.5 DU/acre on hillsides, which was designated by GPAC, which was eliminated by the Planning Commission last year, is no longer on the map. C/Forbing, upon hearing from CDD/DeStefano that GPAC originated with approximately 30 members in 1989 and ended with seven members in March of 1992, suggested that since there have been five workshops recently held and 18 previous public hearings, it may be time to get rid of any discussion of an original GPAC plan since it is representative of only seven individuals. Max Maxwell requested that hillside areas in the City be designated low density housing with a 2.5 DU/acre on hillside areas with a 15% slope. Barbara Beach-Courchesne suggested that today's standards reflect the original 1 DU/acre Master Plan designation for the City. The reason why there is sometimes a 2.5 and 3.0 DU/acre is because developers were allowed to cluster. C/Forbing pointed out the estimated population in the year 2,000 for the City of Diamond Bar, as indicated on the front page of the real estate section in the LA Times in 1962, was 102,000 people, which did not include Area A. Today, Diamond Bar has a population of 56,000, including Area A, which is half the estimated population. The City is so far down -zoned from what was originally Master Planned by TransAmerica. Don Schad expressed indignation at C/Forbing's statement regarding GPAC. He then stated that the original GPAC's recommendation, that anything under 15 degrees would be 1 DU/2 1/2 acres, and anything up to 2 degrees would be 1 DU/5 acres, be included in the document. He concurred that 3 DU/acre is in line with the rest of the community in general, and that section l.l.l.c should be deleted. M/Miller stated that deleting section l.l.l.c is not possible because it applies to existing buildout of existing neighborhoods. Gary Neely, referring to the 1982 General Plan developed by members of the community, pointed out some of the land use designations indicated on the displayed land use map. He stated that he concurred with the consultant's recommendation on strategy l.l.l.b and l.l.l.c, but that he does not recall MAY 19, 1993 PAGE 15 discussing 5.0 DU/acre in the workshops, only 3.0 DU/acre. He then suggested that strategy 1.1.1.d, which refers to high density residential, be changed from 16 DU/acre to 12 DU/acre since density bonuses are given. M/Miller, noting the late hour, stated that discussion for tonight will be concluded, following Council comments, and will be continued May 26, 1993. C/MacBride suggested that the phrase "areas of greater topography" in 1.b, the second line, be amended to a phrase that better describes the intent. C/Werner requested the consultant to explore the possibility of having a maximum 16 DU/acre density designation with those density bonuses, thereby leaving flexibility under zoning to determine under what circumstances we would want to establish lower or maximum densities of 16 DU/acre. 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS: 4. ADJOURNMENT: Public Hearing Auditorium of California. Attest: Mayor None offered. At 10:55 p.m., M/Miller declared the continued to May 26, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. in the the AQMD, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk I . 2. MINUTES OF THE CITY ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE MAY 26, 1993 COUNCIL L)RACITY OF DIAMOND BAR PT CALL TO ORDER: M/Miller called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. in the AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by M/Miller. ROLL CALL: Mayor Miller, Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Councilmen Werner and MacBride. Councilman Forbing was excused. Also present were Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; James DeStefano, Community Development Director and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk. PUBLIC HEARING: M/Miller explained that the purpose of this Public Hearing was to continue to receive public testimony on the Land Use Section of the General Plan. The testimony received will be forwarded to City staff to continue the Public Hearing to June 2, 1993. CDD/DeStefano introduced the following members of the consultant team, retained by the City in March 1993 to further develop the draft General Plan: Michael Jenkins, special legal counsel from the law firm of Richards, Watson and Gershon; Daniel Iacofano, of the firm Moore, Iacofano and Goltsman, utilized to facilitate the public workshop process; Terry Austin, of the firm Austin Faust, to assist in the Circulation Element; and Dale Beland, Cotton/Beland Associates, for development of General Plan policy issues, is not present tonight because of an emergency family medical situation. The document before the City Council, as a result of the workshop process, represented suggested changes to the draft General Plan dated July 14, 1992, which has a previously certified and recorded EIR, and incorporated all of the mandatory elements of the General Plan required by State Law. Discussion will focus specifically on the Land Use Element, which designates general distribution and intensity of land uses, and discusses issues of housing, business, industry, open space, education, public buildings, and any other category of public or private uses envisioned 20 years from now. The first public hearing was held on May 19, 1993 and continued to this evening to further discuss the Land Use Element, open space related policy, and to present the Circulation Element. The Circulation Element is a document that correlates closely with the Land Use Element and identifies the general location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, and other local public utilities and facilities within the City. The focus of the plan is to identify and evaluate circulation needs of the City with regional demands and mandates. As a result of the workshop process and consultant staff team review, suggested revisions in the form of specific text changes have been provided to the City Council as well as members of the public. Notices for this series of public hearings were published in the Tribune and the Bulletin in accordance with State law, and published notices were provided MAY 26, 1993 PAGE 2 within the Diamond Bar/Walnut Highlander and the Windmill. Also, Public Hearing notices were mailed to about 300 people on the General Plan mailing list, and posters were provided announcing both the workshop process and the Public Hearing process. All documents have been available at City Hall and the County Library for review. Daniel Iacofano stated that the Council opened the Public Hearing last week dealing with the proposed revisions of the General Plan document, dated July 14, 1992. The revisions discussed were based on comments and responses made at the proceeding community workshops, held April 21, 24, 28 and May 1, 12, 1993. He suggested consideration of land use items remaining from the last Public Hearing be continued and, in regard to item #8, that time be set aside to allow staff to introduce additional maps and graphics regarding some of the critical issues on the Sphere of Influence, Tonner Canyon, Soquel Canyon, and the SEA 15 area. After comments from the community and the Council have been addressed, Terry Austin will give a presentation in an effort to clarify and focus some of the discussion related to circulation. Discussion at the last Hearing left off with the strategy 1.1.1.c, under item #5, Revision to Land Use, referring to page I-9 in the draft General Plan. He stated that he will read all the items to be deleted, and then read the suggested additions or revisions to the text. The following summarization will only include the suggested additions or revisions to the text, followed by the discussion that ensued: 5. Redefine strategy 1.1.1.c to read "Designate existing single family detached subdivisions in flatter areas as low medium residential or (RLM) on the land use map and the maximum density of low medium density residential areas will be 5.0 DU/gross acre." CDD/DeStefano reviewed the revised land use map to clarify exactly which areas are affected (changes from the RLM category of 6DU/AC to the RL category of 3DU/AC) by this proposed revision. He made the following comments: the densities that exist within the major single family neighborhoods on the northside were reexamined, and the areas highlighted with a darker black line show where the changes would occur; two other significant areas that changed in designation are the areas north and south of the Pomona freeway and east of Diamond Bar Blvd.; the area on either side of Golden Springs, basically adjacent and across the street from the golf course area also changed in designation; the single family residential neighborhoods at the intersection of Grand Ave. and Diamond Bar Blvd. would be changed; generally the area between Mountain Laurel and Pathfinder on the west side of Diamond Bar Blvd. is another significant area of change; another change occurs in the area south of Colima generally west of Brea; and the remaining large area which this occurs in is in the southern -most portion of the City, generally known as the Diamond Ridge area, generally east of MAY 26, 1993 PAGE 3 Brea Canyon Road or southeast of Diamond Bar Blvd. The second area of change that is part of this same category is the remaining single family neighborhoods previously designated as allowing up to 6DU/AC. It was suggested that those neighborhoods, which exceed approximately 3.5DU/AC (highlighted in light orange) to about 5DU/AC (highlighted in a darker orange) , be capped to a 5DU/AC maximum, which include the following areas: area generally west of the 57 freeway, north and south of Sunset Crossing; the westerly portion of the City, south of Colima; north of the Pomona freeway, east and west of Brea Canyon Road; and the area in the southern portion of the City generally surrounding the Country Hills Shopping Center. M/Miller opened the Public Hearing. Gary Neely, 344 Canoe Cove Dr., inquired if the changes already made will be reflected in a later report. M/Miller explained that staff is receiving the input and those changes and input will all be reflected in a more finalized document for review at a later date. C/Werner requested staff to include in the staff report a brief summary of those items discussed the previous week. MPT/Papen stated that, to her recollection, several Councilmembers had requested that Mr. Neely's comments be brought forward as an item for discussion. It was Council's consensus to agendize those comments at some time during our public meetings, however, discussion at this point is on item #5, 1.1.1.c. Max Maxwell stated that he feels discussed rather than one item. to remain focused on the topic because of personal projects, he one issue, but he will submit concerns. that the whole page should be Upon the request of M/Miller at hand, he explained that, is not prepared to focus on a document addressing his Greg Hummel, 23239 Iron Horse Canyon Rd., inquired if changing the zoning designation affects property values. C/Werner requested a legal response to the inquiry because there is a question of whether there is a perceived valuation deprivation. Michael Jenkins explained that the determination whether a specific designation results in a devaluation of property is not a legal issue but rather a speculation, and the answer to that question would depend entirely upon the circumstances. Where the zoning designation or the General Plan land use designation corresponds with the existing pattern of development, it is fair to assume that it would have a neutral effect on value because it is simply reflective of existing MAY 26, 1993 PAGE 4 circumstances. The purpose of the General Plan Land Use designation is to establish the designation for the long term that is most suitable for the property and the neighborhood in question based on the City's long-term planning goals. There- fore, there is nothing illegal if it results in the devalua- tion of property. The only problem, in terms of the law, would be a situation where the City gives a piece of property a designation that allows for no development or no economic use whatsoever. Greg Hummel, disappointment by the small public turnout, stated that it is not a reflection of the inadequacy .of the Council because he has seen the extensive announcements and advertising of this meeting throughout the City. C/Werner, noting that there is no wording to provide for grandfathering, suggested that the phrase ..the maximum density of such low density residential areas shall be 3DU/AC or existing density, whichever is greatest." be included in item l.l.l.c, as well as for item l.l.l.d, which reduces it from 16DU/AC to 12DU/AC. He then expressed concern for the use of the phrase "flatter areas" and suggested that another definition be used in regard to the geographic characteristics to distinguish one land use designation from another. C/MacBride recalled that staff had indicated at the last meeting that they would assist in either eliminating those terms, in item l.l.l.b, or better defining them, to distinguish those categories. Staff can carry that through into this item as well. C/Werner suggested that, since existing neighborhoods are being dealt with, it would also be helpful to refer to the infrastructure which may be very well designed to accommodate a certain density. Daniel Iacofano stated that it is staff's suggestion that items #6 & #7 be dealt with together as a package of discussion since they are closely related to each other. 6. Delete strategy 1.3.4, on page I-12, and add, "In preference to the approval of new commercial development, encourage the retention, rehabilitation, refurbishment and/or expansion of existing business establishments which generate sales tax revenues to the City where consistent with other provisions of the General Plan and Development Code." 7. Add a new strategy 1.3.7, on page I-13, to read, "The City would undertake an economic development action plan to target revitalization of existing commercial uses and selected new retail uses needed to expand the range of goods and services available to local residents and to generate needed sales tax revenue. The economic development action plan should address goals, set MAY 26, 1993 PAGE 5 priorities and identify strategies to achieve effective revitalization." Daniel Iacofano explained that built around the comments an community workshops about development concept within the both suggested revisions were 3 concerns received from the strengthening this economic General Plan. Greg Hummel suggested that the last sentence be deleted from item #7 because it is redundant to state what they need to do. James Roberts, 189 Silver Fir, suggested that the term "in preference to the approval in item #6 be replaced by the term "before preference of the approval", so in context, alternatives would be used before a new site is put in. Gary Neely, referring to the suggestion made to delete the last sentence in item #7, stated that it seems important to lay out the parameters of what the economic action plan would do, other than just to have a plan. He also suggested that since half the businesses in Diamond Bar are being run out of town, it may be appropriate to insert some kind of verbiage that encourages some kinds of in-home businesses. There are creative ways to make in-home businesses more profitable which in turn creates more disposable income that benefits our local strip centers. C/MacBride concurred that it may be appropriate to recognize, facilitate and encourage the extensive craft industry, and other such in-home businesses, that exist in Diamond Bar without impinging upon the remainder of the community's activities, being careful about zoning infractions. He then reported that the Council Sub -committee on Economic Strategy and Resources had scheduled a meeting for June 10, 1993 at 7:00 a.m. to focus on the revitalization, the retention and the substance of existing businesses in Diamond Bar, and to solicit comments and suggestions from the overall business community in the City. MPT/Papen suggested that those types of in-home businesses, which can be described as telecommuting, would be better described under the Transportation Management Plan and the Circulation section of the General Plan since it is not a land use designation. She then expressed concern that the statement "in preference to the approval of new commercial development" in item #6, suggests that the City turn down the vacant land property owner in preference to revitalization of existing projects. As a City, we should not distinguish and differentiate between those two, nor do we have that authority and right to do so. The original statement of "encouraging the revitalization and keeping our business sections alive and healthy", should be one of our primary targets. C/MacBride concurred. MAY 26, 1993 PAGE 6 C/Werner pointed out that the City's Zoning Ordinance pro- hibits home occupation as a land use in a residential zone. It would seem appropriate to put the issue into the Land Use Element and the Circulation Element so that there is internal consistency. He inquired into what concerns were expressed at the workshops that created a need to reevaluate the existing wording. Daniel Iacofano explained that there was a lot of concern at the workshops regarding the flight of businesses from Diamond Bar and/or the failure of businesses to meet the rents being charged in existing commercial establishments. Community participants wanted to emphasize the retention aspect, as well as the City's opportunity to offer support to those local businesses and/or investigate the reasons they are having difficulty. There was also a desire to see the existing commercial centers thrive before new commercial development was approved. M/Miller suggested that the language be modified to read "encourage the retention or rehabilitation," replacing the "in preference". CDD/DeStefano, in response to a comment made by MPT/Papen, stated that there was no suggestion made at the workshops to create a Redevelopment Agency or any other type of new public entity. The discussion acknowledged that there is a lot of sales tax leakage occurring in surrounding communities and there is a desire to retain that to help pay for additional services and programs that the community desired. There were also contrary opinions which questioned the development of more land when there are vacancies in the City that need to be filled. C/Werner requested additional technical background data than has already been provided to assist in making a reasonable decision. He requested information regarding the City's commercial base, in terms of the acreage relative to the residential capacity of the community, that would provide a proper balance between commercial and residential land use. He inquired if reducing the density would be a detriment to the commercial land use in the future. Some existing commercial locations die because they are improperly located, i.e. the old Post Office site, and if the City were to implement the policy suggested in item #6, it would suggest that the City should have provided assistance to a dying commercial site because of its poor location. The suggested policy does not include guidance to zoning decisions to determine where good commercial land uses should occur. Not all of the commercial sites designated by the County to be a good location, will remain a good location forever. The wording is too restrictive. The Council concurred to direct staff to remove the clause, in item #6, "In preference to...", taking into consideration the MAY 26, 1993 PAGE 7 comments made. Martha Bruske requested that in-home businesses not be included in this area because, though she does not have a concern with telecommunication type businesses, there are some in-home businesses that create a lot of concern. C/Werner requested staff to develop a policy or a set of policies dealing with home occupations. MPT/Papen suggested that such a policy would be more appropriately placed under the Zoning Ordinances rather than the General Plan. CDD/DeStefano, in response to C/Werner's concern, stated that, from a planning perspective, there would not be an inconsistency problem between what is indicated in the General Plan and our current codes because State Law allows a period of time in terms of changing zones and creating a development code in order to implement the General Plan document once it is adopted. Greg Hummel, objecting to the use of the old Post Office site as an example of a commercial piece of property in transition, pointed out that it should never have been designated as a commercial site due to its location adjacent to high density residential and its poor location to circulation in the City. It is not a good example to use for the purposes of watering down the specific wording of the General Plan simply to maintain flexibility in the future. The specific language of the General Plan should be retained to send a clear message of the City's intent. The Council concurred to retain the last sentence in item #7, "The economic development action plan should address goals, set priorities and identify strategies to achieve effective revitalization." 8. Replace the language in strategy 1.5.1, page I-14, with "Establish and maintain a public record of best available information concerning development restrictions on existing vacant land. Require potential developers to provide a title report or other acceptable documentation of deed and/or map restrictions as part of the development application process. Add strategy 1.5.3 to read, "To define "open space" lands as vacant undeveloped properties to be retained for purposes of visual amenity, environmental resource protection and fire slope stability hazard abatement. Such open space land will require public acquisition or private owner dedication for public ownership. Recreational facilities, both active and passive, which incorporate undeveloped land, are not included in this definition." Add strategy 1.5.4 to read, "Requiring the City to develop an open space program which will identify and acquire preserve open MAY 26, 1993 PAGE 8 space land consistent with community needs and financial capability and include a full range of feasible techniques. Add strategy 1.5.5 to read, "Recognizing the significance of Tonner Canyon environmental resources, support further definition of the extent and the intensity of such resources to provide needed additional information." CDD/DeStefano explained that strategy 1.5.1 deals with the issue regarding deed restrictions and map restrictions. An open land survey was conducted for the General Plan dated July 14, 1992 of all remaining vacant lands within the City and it was determined whether the properties had deed restrictions, or map restrictions, or other restrictions prohibiting devel- opment in some form. A list was provided, contained within the document, that identified each parcel by specific number. The language suggested for strategy 1.5.1 tends to reinforce the statements that are within the existing document as well as existing policy. Referring to the graphic prepared by Cotton/Beland, he illustrated the following areas that were questioned at the last meeting: the area represented as our Sphere of Influence; the property owned by the Boy Scouts, identified in blue; the area identified in yellow is the area identified in documents as the SEA #15; and the location of the 57 freeway. He then referred to a map, presented to the City a couple of years ago, which was part of the Parsons Brinkerhoff feasibility study regarding Soquel Canyon/Tonner Canyon, that also identifies the recent addition to Chino Hills State Park, as well as the Boy Scout area. In response to CM/Belanger, CDD/DeStefano stated that the SEA graphic representation, indicated in the graphic prepared by Cotton/Beland, was received in 1989. The original proposal of the SEA was based on a study conducted in 1986, commissioned by the County of Los Angeles, which determined that 62 areas within the Los Angeles County confines would be subject to this SEA strategy. The Diamond Ridge area and the area at Brea Canyon Cut-off and the 57 freeway, where there are now some industrial/office type buildings, was also once part of the SEA. The Diamond Ridge portion was removed from the SEA in 1979, and the office portion was removed in about 1978. James Roberts suggested that some ecological integrity be defined in the open space areas, along with the environmental acknowledgements. Gary Neely stated that the citizens, when developing the citizens General Plan in 1983, decided that clustered development was preferred in exchange for open space. He pointed out those areas negotiated for clustering and the open space dedicated in exchange. He suggested that the statement, found in strategy 1.5.1 of the GPAC version of the General Plan, which reads "...It is the City's policy not to renegotiate these prior commitments unless, after a separate Public Hearing, it is so deemed that doing so would benefit MAY 26, 1993 PAGE 9 the community." be included as part of the paragraph in item #8. Jan Dabney, 671 Brea Canyon Rd., representing Arciero & Sons and RnP Development, Inc., who own approximately 300 acres in the City, stated that he has a copy of the original citizen's General Plan of 1983, the EIR, and the real zoning map approved by the County after 1983. He reviewed those areas indicated by Mr. Neely as open space and demonstrated, by referring to the zoning map of Los Angeles County adopted by the City upon Incorporation, the actual zoning designation at that time. Though there was a community supported plan adopted by the County in 1983 there was not a zone change to bring this ownership into compliance with the General Plan. Had the County entered into a zone change, there most probably would have been litigation because of the absolute rendering useless of these properties. He read the last page, implementation of the General Plan dated 1983, 4th paragraph, which reads, "...Effectuation of many osals such as acquisition and development of local parks and lan pestablishment of a trail system will require action programs to be undertaken by various public agencies or formation of a special district. Suchprograms will depend heavily upon enthusiastic community support. This support demands that the plan be readily available to and understood by the residents and property owners of Diamond Bar." He then pointed out that these major landowners have spent tens of millions of dollars to help this community. C/Werner questioned if, during the development process, it is inherently considered an agreement when the landowners, as a quid pro quo for a density transfer, grant a restriction back to the County and if that agreement would remain valid when jurisdiction changes from County to City. Jan Dabney explained that there are all sorts of deed restrictions and map restrictions. For example, there was a density transfer for the 178 lots developed at Pathfinder, in which the Pathfinder Homeowners Association acquired control of 31 acres. There are four other underlying maps that have exactly the same type of restrictions (involving Bramalea, Brock, Pathfinder Homeowners Association, etc. . However, these set aside areas or deed restrictions aren't entirely predicated on density transfers. To determine if it is a density transfer, simply count the units and look at the map. Some specific restrictions on additional maps have nothing to do with the density of that specific site, but the access and the probable developability of the site. Property, in the early development in Diamond Bar, was not worth much, and if a developer had to spend a lot of money developing it, it was set aside until some future consideration. In the late 1970's and early 1980's, the statutes indicated that developers would be paid for excessive donation of land. Therefore, every developer who had a piece of land who couldn't afford to develop it, was willing to try to set it aside for a park or MAY 26, 1993 PAGE 10 some use to excessive donation. Many of the restrictive usage and languages put on properties within the City resulted from that statute. Each time there was one of those future park site dedications, there would be language included that read, "We reserve unto ourselves the right to utilize the property. " The law indicates that if the property is actually dedicated, then it has to be accepted by the City or agency. On each one of these contested restrictions, there was no exception. The limitations on acceptance are as follows: dedicating street right-of-way or public access or transit facilities, is open indefinitely, unless there is a vacation of those specific driveways on the property; there is three or five years to accept dedication of navigable waters, specifically the ocean coast line and bay line, and if it is not accepted, then it returns back to the owner; and if asked to reserve a specific use within a General Plan that is outside your normal dedication, whether it be a school site, a park, some future community center, etc. the City or agency must buy the land within two years in some cases, with a maximum of five years or it returns back to the owner. In the case of the Pathfinder development, there was a density transfer on their property; however, the County did not implement all the aspects of the law because there were financial responsibilities associated with that. The secondary aspect on these properties zoned open space indicate that money should be set aside to acquire it. He stated that a reasonable offer was made, around November of 1992, by both owners of the Sandstone Canyon, to the conservatory to acquire the property; however, no response was made to that offer. Greg Hummel suggested that the City hire a high-powered consultant to determine exactly what is, and is not, the truth and the law, and to determine the City's rights and the details of transition from the County to the City. He stated that he supports Mr. Neely's suggestion to add the wording from the original GPAC General Plan. He then requested some representation of these tens of millions of dollars that the developers claim to have poured into the City in benefit of the general community of Diamond Bar. Audrey Hamilton, Copper Mountain Dr., expressed concern that the language in strategy 1.3 defines any open and undeveloped land as open space, which will require public acquisition or private owner dedication. Such a policy would require a lot of money from the City, or cost the City a lot of money in court battles. In regard to the phrase, "supporting further definition of the extent and intensity of such resources to provide needed additional information," she requested clarification as to how the significance of Tonner Canyon environmental resources was to be determined. C/Werner, referring to strategy 1.5.1, made the following suggestions: there needs to be a better definition of the phrase "best available information;" and replace the phrase "require potential developers to provide" with "On all MAY 26, 1993 PAGE 11 applications for subdivision and development, require the submission of a title report or other acceptable documentation of deed and/or map restriction." MPT/Papen, referring to strategy 1.5.1, stated that the term "public record" should be modified because it seems to require Diamond Bar to have a registrar -recorder to keep documents for public record. C/Werner noted that it would only become pertinent when someone is proposing development, unless the City were to have an active acquisition campaign. Daniel Iacofano explained that the intent behind this language revision was to try to bring some added clarity that the City would at least require the potential applicant, on the event of their application to the City, to make sure that information was forthcoming, and in so doing, begin to compile that on-going record in the course of those applications. C/Werner recalled that another point of view offered at the workshop was to get this information so that the City can be in a position of acting on deed restrictions in the form of open space, dedications or other land use restrictions, rather than making a reference into this General Plan. If there was an application before the City, it would become obvious if there was a restriction. In response to the language suggested by Mr. Neely, " renegotiate these prior co... It is the Cit s mmitments unless City,s lra s not to public hearing, separate it is so deemed that doing so would benefit the community" C/Werner stated that, in his opinion, he sees nothing wrong with such a process. MPT/Papen pointed out that such a policy _is alreadythe ic and the law. Currently, a new map must be filed ithere eare restrictions on properties that are not developed, and there must be public hearings. She then expressed concern regarding the language indicating that it is the City's policy to not renegotiate. It is not a matter of public policy but a matter of law. Michael Jenkins explained that, if the property has been dedicated to the public, the map would indicate, "Development Rights have been dedicated to the County of Los Angeles for a specified parcel," whether for open space or whether the development rights have been dedicated to the public. In regard to the development of other portions of the subdivision, the City Council must take an action at a public meeting, not necessarily a public hearing, in order for that restriction to be lifted. If, however, it was in connection with a new map application, clearly it would be done in the context of a public hearing. It is up to the City what procedure to follow. The City could decide that subdivision requests on map applications, with map restrictions on property dedicated as open space, must come before the City MAY 26, 1993 PAGE 12 Council, and then require the City Council to publicly take a formal action to remove that restriction. City could accept the map application wi hlternativelythe contingency that the City Council, in the course of public hearings, cannot legally approve that map without simultaneously lifting that restriction. Either way, it will be in front of this Council at a public hearing. It is entirelya whether the Cit wants to Policy matter Y put, into the General Plan, the criteria that will be imposed. There are properties in the City that have been subjected to restrictions on development on subdivision maps and those restrictions are enforceable by the City. Those properties cannot be developed unless the City Council lifts those restrictions. Those properties can properly be designated as open space in the General Plan. However, before giving a particular property that designation, one would want to examine the map restriction itself, the exact language of the restriction, to be certain that it was in fact dedicated, and dedicated for that purpose. Essen- tially, as indicated by MPT/Papen, it is a general statement to what is already required by the law. C/Werner pointed out that if there is a consensus with the wording, "On all applications for subdivision and development, require the submission of a title report or other acceptable documentation" then there should be no problem with clearly stating what we are already required to do. MPT/Papen inquired if there is a map restriction, and the property was offered for dedication but it was not accepted, then is the restriction on the map invalid, as indicated by Mr. Dabney. Michael Jenkins stated that, ordinarily, those dedications would be irrevocable offers of dedication whether they have been accepted or not. MPT/Papen expressed concern with having language that would apply only to maybe five parcels in the whole community. There are other map restrictions, but this language specifically calls out a remnant parcel that is restricted to 1DU/AC. The language should not be so site-specific and limiting. C/Werner requested staff to provide further information regarding time limits on offers of dedication. RECESS: M/Miller recessed the meeting at 9:25 p.m. RECONVENE: M/Miller reconvened the meeting at 9:37 p.m. C/Werner stated that if a restriction is lifted, then there should be commensurate public benefit exchange. MPT/Papen suggested that the first sentence in strategy 1.5.1 be deleted, replacing it with C/Werner's suggested language, MAY 26, 1993 PAGE 13 which reads, "On all development, require the sapplications for subdivision and ubmission of a title report or other acceptable documentation" because it seems to be covered in strategy 1.5.4. The Council concurred. MPT/Papers suggested that the words, "deed restricted" be added to the first sentence in strategy 1.5.3, to read, "Define open space lands as vacant, deed restricted..." and removing the second sentence since, if it is deed restricted, the public does not have to acquire it. The Council concurred. Michael Jenkins suggested that staff give further consider- ation to a broader definition of what is meant by open space. it may be that there are economically beneficial uses of land which constitute open space, which we may want to define as open space, which are not deed restricted land, such as a golf course or a cemetery. C/Werner also requested staff to provide wording regarding the issue of going through the public hearing process to lift a restriction and the issue of commensurate public benefit. He then inquired how the terms "open space" and "vacant" are defined. Vacant land may be misconstrued as a potential open space land. MPT/Papen pointed out that the distinction has been made for a year and a half that open space is deed restricted vacant land and parks, etc. are public properties. The reason the words "deed restricted" have been suggested is so that it is consistent with the other discussions in the first chapter. She then stated that she concurs with strategy 1.5.4 as is. However, in strategy 1.5.5, she expressed concern that only one resource, "environmental," is being acknowledged and there are other resources, such as ecological, natural, municipal, Public, recreation, etc. The word should be deleted so it is open to all the resources within that land. C/Werner, referring to the comment made by stated thatMr. Roberts, , in order to alter the designation in Tonner Canyon SEA, a conscious effort must be made to identify whether or not there are special environmental resources there. It is worth more analysis from staff's standpoint. C/MacBride suggested that the entire strategy be deleted. MPT/Papen stated that Tonner Canyon is not in the City of Diamond Bar and currently, our Tonner Canyon Sphere of Influence is zoned Agricultural. A Specific Plan, or another document of the Sphere of Influence, should and could be developed, but not incorporated into this document at this time. C/Werner stated that there needs to be reference in the General Plan to the portion of Tonner Canyon that spills into the City. MAY 26, 1993 PAGE 14 MPT/Papen suggested that the language be modified to read, "recognizing the significance of Canyon." the SEA," deleting "Tonner C/Werner suggested "Recognize the environmental character- istics of Tonner Canyon to the extent that they have been identified as a significant ecological area and prior to any development..." M/Miller stated that there should not be any mention of "development" in the statement. The Council concurred with MPT/Papen's suggested wording, "recognizing the significance of the SEA," deleting the words "Tonner Canyon." Gary Neely stated that he felt it important to include the statement "It is the City's policy not to renegotiate these map restrictions, deed restrictions, development restrictions, unless, after public hearing, there is some kind of consensus by the elected officials in our community that there is a benefit to the community," in the strategy if for no other reason than to make a point to the community. Barbara Beach Courchesne requested that the word "map restricted" be used instead of "deed restricted" because there is so much vacant land as opposed to open space because of the words "deed restricted." Don Schad stated that he concurred with the language in strategy 1.5.5. He requested to show some slides of the area; however, the Council decided that it was important to stay with the agenda at hand. 9. Revise the adopted Land Use Map as follows: add designation to Tres Hermanos Ranch area to reflect the new High School site being considered for that area; and revise the map to reflect the proposed reduction in land use intensity for the existing single family subdivisions. CDD/DeStefano stated that the 880 acre site of the Tres Hermanos Ranch area needs to be reflective of the decision to Place a high school within the property, as well as the City of Industry's desire to place a reclaimed water lake there. The entirety of the site should be changed from its Specific Plan designation to one of Agricultural, which reflects the existing use and the existing zoning. In response to C/ Werner, he stated that the following roadways are illustrated: the existing Chino Hills Parkway and Chino Ave. with an additional linkage between the Diamond Ranch High School and Deep Springs Rd., with a future road, to be part of the Circulation Element discussion. MAY 26, 1993 PAGE 15 C/Werner, concerned with only illustrating the one alterna- tive, pointed out that there may be another alternative route which would serve as a secondary local access to Diamond Bar. He then requested that the connection between Chino Hills Parkway and Grand Ave. be shown on the map. CDD/DeStefano, in response to C/MacBride's inquiry if the map shows a secondary road just below the freeway right-of-way, stated that there is no intention to indicate a secondary access point for a future road linking the high school in that general area down to Golden Springs, which has been discussed previously by individuals. The line seen by C/MacBride is to identify the land use designation. Gary Neely stated that it is the position of the Diamond Ranch High School Booster Club to see a secondary road on the map, coming from Golden Springs, paralleling the 60 freeway, straight back to the school, because it seems that such a road is just as viable in present planning as the shorter road. It may be that both roads are needed. He requested that the Possible road be added, along with some verbiage, in the Circulation Element, clarifying where the road is to be aligned on the map and describing the road as being built in an environmentally -sensitive matter, it in the document. defining include the 1,200 acre The map should also Of include the Potable water lake proposed by the City Industry, which does reach up into an area in our City. Don Schad suggested that the Cit -unction colleges, cover specific programsln in nscientificlt watthe er reclamation management and utilization for humanity. The water could eventually be purified so that it can be utilized. He inquired when he could show his slides because it depicts the areas discussed. The Council agreed to follow the agenda. C/MacBride inquired if the lake area shown on the map is a definitive sketch of the proposed reclaimed water area, or if there is a more exceptional description of the lake available. CDD/DeStefano explained that the City has known for some time that the City of Industry was interested in developing such a facility when they agreed to cooperatively develop a Specific Plan concept for the area. The specific location of that reclaimed water lake is conceptual, schematic at best, and the school district site does not indicate a very specific location for the high school boundaries. C/Werner suggested that the lake be removed from the map since it is not there, nor has it been discussed. Gary Neely stated that he would prefer that the lake remain on the map and be more accurately described as was in the Conceptual Specific Plan that the City paid $250,000 for. He MAY 261 1993 PAGE 16 then displayed a map from the Boyle Engineering Report done for the City of Industry,s Urban Development Agenc descriptive of what a 120,000 -acre-foot lake would looklike, which he feels should be included in the land use map. If there is a discussion of a Tonner Canyon Scenic Highway, it should be understood that the road cannot be run through the dam, and that the alignment is limited. We have to pursue a vision of a future of our community that includes evaluation of all the projects in a concise manner. CDD/DeStefano, in response to M/Miller, stated that the Tres Hermanos Concept Plan cost the City $75,000. Daniel Iacofano reported that agenda item #10 leads into the Circulation Element for the draft General Plan. Terry Austin, the Traffic Engineer and Consultant, has an introductory comment or overview to help focus p anredared clarify some of the discussion on these points. Terry Austin reported that it was evident from the workshops that there was no consensus on certain aspects on circulation. The first two draft changes recommended, items #10 and #11, contain minor formatting. The third recommended change, item #12, addresses the key circulation issues on how to deal with traffic from outside the community using the roadway system. Because there was no consensus on the issue, we felt it appro- priate to make specific recommendations on ways to get more specific on this very important aspect of the Circulation Element. The City Council concurred to continue discussion on the Circulation Element to the next meeting. Greg Hummel, referring to strategy 1, 5.51 suthe following wording, "Recognizing the significance ofgested the Tonner Canyon SEA environmental resources, support of the extent and the intensity of such r cchr sources tolaid lin the preservation of these vital resources." Motion was made by C/MacBride, seconded by C/Werner to place a Closed Session on the agenda to discuss pending litigation. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: NOES: COUNCILMEN: COUNCILMEN: MacBride, Werner, None MPT/Papen, M/Miller ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Forbing Motion was made by MPT/Papen, seconded by to Closed Session. Motion C/Werner to adjourn vote: carried by the following Roll Call AYES: NOES: COUNCILMEN: COUNCILMEN: MacBride, Werner, None MPT/Papen, M/Miller ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: Forbing MAY 26, 1993 PAGE 17 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS: None offered. ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION: meeting at 10:25 p.m.to Closed Session RECONVENE: adjourned discusson the Litigation, Government Code Section 54956.9. RECONVENE: M/Miller reconvened the meeting at 10:45 P.M. and announced that no reportable action had taken Place during Closed Session. 4. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further busconduct, M/Miller adjourned the meeting to ,Tune 21n1993 ato t 7:00 p.m. Attest: Mayor Lynda Burgess, City Clerk M'NWES OF CITY ADJOURNED REGUL" METINGx OF THE COITY OF DIAMOND BAR JUNE 2, 1993 q� 1• CALL TO ORDER: at 7: O M/Miller called the meeting to order p.m. in the AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Mayor Miller. ROLL CALL: Mayor Miller, Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Councilmen Forbing and MacBride. Councilmen Werner arrived at 7:40 p.m. Also present were Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; James DeStefano, Community Development Director and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: CDD/DeStefano reported that the Public Hearing process began on May 19, 1993 for adoption of the draft General Plan. The Council received testimony on proposed revisions related to land use and open space policy, and then continued the Public Hearing to May 26, 1993 to further discuss the Land Use Element, open space related Policy, and to begin discussion of the Circulation Element. That Public Hearing was continued in order to accommodate further public testimony on the Circulation Element. The issues related to Diamond Bar's traffic circulation are significantly impacted by regional traffic. One of the major issues within the Circulation Element is the need to deal with traffic from outside the community using our roadway systems. He then introduced the following members of the consultant team, retained by the City in March of 1993 to further develop the draft General Plan: Michael Jenkins, special legal counsel from the law firm of Richards, Watson, and Gershon; Daniel Iacofano, of the firm Moore, Iacofano, and Goltsman, to facilitate the public workshop process; Terry Austin, Austin Faust, to assist in the Circulation Element; and Dale Beland, of the firm Cotton/Beland Associates, for development of the General Plan policy issues. Terry Austin stated that one of the key issues from the workshops was that the City has a significant problem with respect to through traffic. There was a lot of discussion at the workshops on a Tonner Canyon Road and how the issue of the Road should be handled in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The Tonner Canyon Road is not a facility that is on any arterial highway plan of the three counties, and there is concern as to what extent that roadway can be featured in our General Plan. The City of Brea has a policy adamantly opposing that roadway. Ideally, we should have a General Plan that does not rely on the roadway, nor does it preclude it. Staff has attempted to focus through traffic, looking at on the issue of specific policy that will aid in dealing with that through traffic problem, without necessarily having a lot of testimony for or against a Tonner Canyon Road. In the suggested revisions, items #10 and #11 deal with formatting changes, and item #13addresses the issue of through traffic. Staff has laid out some policy directions in an attempt to be more specific with this issue, taking the JUNE 2, 1993 PAGE 2 information received from the discussion in the workshops, from staff's evaluations of the testimony, and staff's evaluation of the current General Plan. following three policy options in item #13; He reviewed the 1. A Local Regional Program - Encourage the County and the State to make regional improvements to solve the additional through traffic problem. Implement strategies to minimize neighborhood traffic intrusions. 2• The Peripheral Corridor - A proactive stance indicating a desire to have a conceptual corridor included as part of the General Plan, recognizing that the conceptual corridor shown is not totally within the Sphere. The corridor would be City or the that could scenic a conceptual alignment e limitedaccess robably no more than 4 lanes, with lited accessthat Of traffic for its size. ould carry a lot memorandum of understanding with Chino Hills tandb the County so that it is included in their plan. There would be some joint fee program to study such an alignment, finding, and to include some strict environmental guidelines with respect to how those particular studies viewed this alignment. 3. A programmatic approach indicating a land use circulation phasing to try to establish a joint powers authority with the neighboring City of Chino Hills that will land use and circulatmonitor ion such that we do not overload our system with external traffic. Develop a milestone program to obtain agreement as to how much development occurs in each City in conjunction with certain actions regarding transportation capacity. There are State legislative guidelines that dictate how development is to occur in relation to overloading Grand Ave., since Grand is part of the Congestion Management Program Street System; therefore, there are some reasons for Chino Hills to work with Diamond Bar to look at some such program suggested. Terry Austin stated that staff felt that these three options were the type of policy directions that could lead to a more specific wording of this important part of the Circulation Element. At the risk of being inconsistent, staff further recommends that item #13, with respect to the high school site, be general. More information is needed before a line is drawn on a map, because once drawn, it is often very difficult to remove it. In response to MPT/Papen's inquiry regarding the inconsistent recommendations with respect to Tonner Canyon and the high school, he explained that if option #2 were desired, the City could evaluate the possibility of putting a line on a map that assures a greater say on how thingsroceed to with respectto Scho School, tkind is felt roadway. p However, with respect it would be more appro- JUNE 2, 1993 PAGE 3 priate to include the objective in the Circulation Element, to be implemented when a specific project comes to the City for evaluation. MPT/Papen, in regard to the statement that Brea adamantly Opposes a roadway through Tonner Canyon, stated that as a member of the Council Subcommittee on Transportation, she had the opportunity to meet with Brea's City officials and staff, and though they are very concerned about the construction of another 4 or 6 lane highway dumping traffic on the 57 freeway at Brea's city limits, they have indicated that they are not opposed to an alternative transportation method. There has been discussion about seeking Orange County to bring up a light rail line from the John Wayne Airport Irvine Center into the Anaheim transportation corridor up the 57 freeway and out Tonner Canyon as an alternative. Terry Austin, concurring with MPT/Papen, stated that Brea is also looking at Soquel transit corridor and other possi- bilities, which could be included in either option #1, or option #4 indicating that there are some transit corridor studies made that would benefit the City of Diamond Bar. M/Miller opened the Public Hearing. Don Schad presented nine slides pertaining to the Tonner Canyon Corridor illustrating the type of terrain that will be disturbed in its natural ecological area. It may be possible for an arrangement to be made with the Boy Scouts to manage this canyon as a natural park rather than to destroy it for a scenic roadway. Wilbur Smith, 21630 Fair Wind Lane, expressed support for Option #1 and opposition to option #2. There will not be a solution to the traffic problem until the City, the County and the State address the problems associated with having two freeways merging into one at our City limits. He made the following comments regarding the Circulation Element: the criteria used, based upon the capacity ratio indicated on page V-10 item C, should be uniformly met throughout the Southern California area; the most important criteria for the evaluation of roads is not the volume but how long it takes to get from point A to B; the General Plan does not address specific ways to improve the local conditions; the only suggested solution, projected to the year 2000, was to put a roadway through Tonner Canyon, and other possible alternatives were not even considered such as Carbon Canyon, expansion of the 60/57 freeway interchange; strate 1.1., which calls for the identification of this transportati n4corridor through Tonner Canyon implies that it is something that the City can unilaterally implement, which the City cannot do; it is impossible to minimize the environmental impacts because the mere construction process in Tonner Canyon will destroy it; a roadway through Tonner Canyon is not consistent with SEA #15; JUNE 2, 1993 PAGE 4 there is no projection of future traffic conditions based upon things that could be easily accomplished such as the Pathfinder Bridge; and the current and projected traffic conditions in Diamond Bar do not justify destruction of Tonner Canyon. In response to MPT/Papen,s statement that the Pathfinder Bridge project is indicated in Chapter 5, page 20, item 7, Mr. Smith explained that the projections made, which tend to sub- stantiate the need for an alternate roadway, did not take into account changes which are currently in existence, which may result in the projections to be totally different where the need for a road through Tonner Canyon may be diminished. Norman Beach Courchesne, 2021 Peaceful Hills, suggested that CalTrans be requested to eliminate the on/off ramps at Grand Ave. which will change the traffic patterns coming on Grand. Gary Neely, 344 Canoe Cove, disagreed with the statement related to Brea,s opposition to the Tonner Canyon Rd. being built. After talking with some of Brea,s Council members, it appeared that they were in more opposition to a particular alignment which would basically take all the traffic off the surface streets from Diamond Bar and Chino Hills and dump it into Brea. The Parsons/Brinkerhoff Report indicated 8 different alignments for the potential construction of this road, and concluded that the best alignment would utilize the southern terminus where the existing Tonner Canyon connector is to the 57 freeway in Orange Count 57 freewa Y• This goes under the 57 freeway, connection at the y, where Brea Canyon Road would not take all the traffic off of the surface streets of Diamond Bar and Chino Hills and dump it on Lambert and their surface streets. He expressed support of option #2 and the need to place a line on the map. The City has 5 roadways that currently have a traffic volume that exceed the capacity of the road segment. The Parsons/Brinkerhoff Report took into account proposed projects and concluded that if a Tonner Canyon Road is not built, the number of volume to capacity jumps from 5 to 28 road segments. If the road is built, it drops from 5 to 3 road segments, and if Grand Avenue is striped to 6 lanes, it drops to zero. If Tonner Canyon Rd. is built, it would take 35,000 cars a da of streets in Diamond Bar. The question sf not if thesurface rroad should be built, but rather how to build it so the Canyon is built in an environmentally -sensitive manner, defining the term "environmentally sensitive". In regard to the high school road, he suggested that a dotted blue line be drawn to represent the road, realigning the road in such a manner that it would correspond and not preclude the development of the proposed lake. Todd Chavers, 600 Box Cove P1., pointed out that all the options presented eventually lead to the same place in that at some -point, the pressures to develop will force us into JUNE 2, 1993 PAGE 5 building a road to support traffic demands. Options #1 & #3 Postpones the inevitable discussion of a road; however, when the pressure of the traffic becomes intolerable, the County or State will look at the situation without accepting input from Diamond Bar. It is better to attempt to control our destiny, rather than to ignore the situation along with the environ- mental and ecological system issues. He offered to have a traffic engineering workshop to explain the fundamentals and terms indicated in the Circulation Element. Don Gravdahl, 23988 Minnequa, expressed support for both Options #2 and #3 to work with the regional communities to provide fees for expansion of their growth, and to look at the Possibility of a light fixed rail or mono rail as a peripheral corridor. Barbara Beach Courchesne expressed support for option #1 because it addresses specific problems in the City and looks beyond Diamond Bar for solutions. The City needs to become assertive, or perhaps aggressive, in making surrounding communities assume some of the responsibility for the problems being created. If they won't build a road, then the City should demand money to allow us to build it. C/Forbing stated that he feels strategy 1.1.4 covers all three of the options, and allows for the community, he future, to make changes and evaluations as changes ocur tAs changes are made to the freeway by CalTrans, there is no way of knowing what is actually going to be needed through Tonner Canyon. MPT/Papen, knowing how long it takes to implement the trans- portation plan, and that the squeaky wheel gets the grease, stated that it is important that we participate actively in local, regional, and state-wide discussions. How money is spent and what area of the five County region it gets spent on, depends on need and political preference, which is one of the reasons for Incorporation. She expressed concern that options #2 & #3 mention specifically doing things with other jurisdictions who are not present in participating in these discussions. If a decision is made on how a program is to be implemented, it will be hard to get agencies to buy into them. She stated that she would support option #2 only as a conceptual alignment corridor, without the specific line on the map, because there is no accountability for the slope, terrain, cost, etc. There is a need to look into alternative means of transportation. C/Werner stated that it is important that the City recognize the existing problem, as well as the need to for solutions tomorrow, recognizing that this is not alasingle jurisdictional issue or a single jurisdictional solution. The long range options should be as flexible as possible, so that the feasibility of building the road is not diminished. There JUNE 2, 1993 PAGE 6 could perhaps be technologies available to us in the future that we cannot foresee at this time. It is important to address this issue by identifying the issue, and committing to a set of policies that direct our City in the future to take some specific actions leading toward a solution, without being committed to a particular line of the map. M/Miller, understanding the necessity of the road and the necessity of being environmentally sensitive to Tonner Canyon, stated that it is important to have further information analyzing the location of the road before indicating a line on the map. C/MacBride, referring to the comments made by Mr. Neely regarding his reference to the Parsons/Brinkerhoff study and the comments made by Mr. Chavers that we should attempt to control the City's destiny as indicated by option #2, stated that he believes that strategy 1.1.4, at this juncture of discussion, meets adequately all the concerns expressed. Wilbur Smith suggested that the City approach the State about improving the 57/60 freeway interchange which will improve the traffic flow throughout the whole San Gabriel basin. The State is more apt to spend money to solve traffic problems over a wide area rather than to build a road in which Diamond Bar is the primary beneficiary. When deciding which option is the most appropriate, one must consider if the option can be implemented. MPT/Papen, at the request of M/Miller for an update on our local current freeway system, explained that the Council has been working to achieve the things he has talked about. The discussion regarding Tonner Canyon and these traffic studies focuses on the City's current condition as well as its condition in the year 2010. Currently, in the Los Angeles County, there is a Call for Projects that will be funded and built in the next four years in which there are 8 or 9 projects, in that list, that would benefit this City directly. Three of those projects relate to HOV lanes and if HOV lanes are built, probably around 1996, with the design we think will be approved, there will be no exit from the HOV lane at Grand Ave. Furthermore, the City has requested $95 million to make improvements in the interchange, but even if it is approved this year, the soonest funds could be received would be the year 2000. Aggressive action does need to be taken; however, so far we have only received around 50 letters of support from the citizens supporting $95 million of funding from the State. The City is working hard toward resolving the issue, but there is a need to go beyond these measures and look toward some alternative corridor between Diamond Bar and Chino Hills to handle the growth. C/Forbing pointed out that Chino Hills is still expecting to construct an additional 10,000 homes and even with the JUNE 2, 1993 PAGE 7 expansion of Rte. 71, they will still need to go through Diamond Bar to get to the 57 freeway. The only way to benefit Diamond Bar is to keep those people off our streets and do some long range planning with Chino Hills and Brea. Gary Neely suggested that the developers of the Tres Hermanos area be asked to help fund the construction of particular segments of the road, as well as fund the reconstruction of Grand Ave. 3/4 of a mile to bridge this lake as part of their project. He then pointed out that strategy 1.1.4 indicates that the road only goes through the Sphere of Influence, that it does not have the northern terminus, and that it will go through the easterly portion of the Sphere of Influence; thus, verbally drawing the line on the map, at least through this Sphere of Influence. Dale Beland stated that the proposed revision in item #10 is to delete the paragraph on page V-16 because of its high level of detail. The proposed revision in item #11 suggests that Exhibit V-4 be added on page V-19 of the Circulation Element, to illustrate a Master Plan of Circulation to amplify and clarify policy which is implicit now in Table V-6. Both items #10 and #11 are basically housekeeping matters, based upon consultant recommendation, which do not involve major policy decisions. Staff is prepared to move forward on item #12, the discussion of the revision of strategy 1.1.4 and submit a draft based upon the testimony received tonight. Item #13 suggests a revision of strategy 2.2.2 on page V-23, pertaining to integrating the development of Tres Hermanos to Diamond Bar through the roadway system, to read, "Ensure that the proposed high school site within the Tres Hermanos Ranch property is physically integrated into the community for Diamond Bar by appropriate roadway alignment and design." MPT/Papen, referring to the suggested revision in item #10, suggested that there still should be some discussion addressing future development in Diamond Bar under Physical Mobility because there is an Issue Analysis and a Conclusion. Dale Beland explained that it was suggested to delete those statements because they implied a level of detail and absoluteness which is inappropriate. Staff could modify the language to achieve a more general statement, sending the message but avoiding unreal detail. The Council concurred. Todd Chavers suggested that the section be revised, not deleted, because it is important to show the order of magnitude of the problem being addressed in the General Plan. In response to C/Werner, he explained that there are two set of numbers and discussions occurring in the section, which anticipates the traffic on our system without addressing what is happening in a regional sense. It is important that we put in a threshold that would impact our ability to develop because someone else is putting trips on the system and JUNE 2, 1993 PAGE 8 bumping this perceived ceiling. In response to C/MacBride, he explained that the Circulation Element adequately addresses the need for the land use plan we have for the City, and the additional capacity is there but only because we are somewhat willing to share with the region at large. The analysis done for the General Plan in the Circulation Element and the Traffic Model takes a 2010 SCAG population and employment figures, converts it into travel demand and traffic numbers, and places it on the street in a pattern similar to the travel demands we have today. This is the method used to achieve the growth projections in the environmental analysis indicating that there is a need from a regional perspective. statement needs to be subjective because it has already bThe een thoroughly analyzed in the MEA, and we know it to be true us and the entire region. for Gary Neely, representing the Diamond Point Booster Club and referring to item #13, encouraged the Council to not lose the concept of putting a line on the map for access to the high school. He illustrated a possible westerly access to the school and emphasized the desire by many residents to have a long term commitment in the General Plan that verbally includes both a short road access from Deep Springs, as well as westerly access that comes directly off of Golden Springs, south of the 60 freeway, paralleling the 60 freeway to the high school, coming out of the development and back toward the City. Don Schad concurred that there is a need for two roads accessing the high school to avoid a situation such as the one occurring at South Pointe Middle School. Todd Chavers concurred with the need to put a line on the map, avoiding the residential streets, to set the tone for the specific plan effort. There is most likely a way to create the connection to the high school through the property along the 60 freeway so that it provides local benefit to access not just the high school but to serve as a commercial or collector type function that could be paid for by development in Tres Hermanos Ranch. Eric Stone, 22401 Darrin Dr., though not opposed to the suggested access that would cross his property to benefit all of Diamond Bar, expressed concern that a widespread down - zoning of the property in that area would be unfair and would constitute a possible taking on the part of the City. C/Werner, referring to item #10, concurred with the appropri- ateness of putting in some subjective wording that would refer to the issue of future development in Diamond Bar. He further noted that his comment to item #11 relates to item #13 and suggested that if there is more than one alternative route for access to the high school, then it would be appropriate to have a supplemental exhibit(s) in addition to Exhibit V-4 JUNE 2, 1993 PAGE 9 identifying alternative options for access to the high school. MPT/Papen, concurring that two road accesses are needed, stated that since there was no formal action taken on the Specific Plan and the three alternatives presented, it may not be appropriate to put lines on the map without having input from the property owner and without development of the entire parcel and the land use designation. C/Werner pointed out that there is value for identifying, for residents of the neighborhood, the potentiality of a collector road or access road to the high school for planning purposes. With nothing indicated on the map, it could be misconstrued, from property owners in the area, that nothing was ever planned. Perhaps the potential access can be identified with a circle or an arrow. MPT/Papen pointed out that there is also a possibility of a road from Tin Dr. up to Pantera through the undeveloped land to the Tres Hermanos property. M/Miller stated that he concurred with the statements made by C/Forbing and C/MacBride that the language in strategy 1.1.4 adequately meets all the concerns expressed. CM/Belanger, in response to MPT/Papen's suggestion to delete the wording "easterly portion," explained.that the easterly portion of the Sphere of Influence was suggested because it was felt to be a more appropriate area for the location of a possible regional transportation corridor in the future, taking into consideration the surrounding communities. It is staff's recommendation that ambiguity as relates to the Sphere of Influence not be left in the General Plan. M/Miller suggested that strategy 1.1.4 be modified to read, "...Sphere of Influence are which recognize and prioritized environmental sensitivity." C/Werner suggested that strategy 1.1.4 be amended to indicate, "...proactively work with adjacent jurisdictions." CM/Belanger, in response to C/Werner, stated that there will not be a designation placed on the map because the purpose of the language is to have each of the agencies proactively involved in looking at this type of regional transportation corridor alternative and at some future time make a determination where it will be. He then reported that Mr. Chavers has provided an outline for a definition determining "environmentally sensitive" as it relates to a transportation corridor, which will be provided to the consultant team to look for a way to incorporate it into the document. Dale Beland, in response to C/Werner's inquiry regarding the meaning of the word "insure" indicated on page V-23, item #13, JUNE 2, 1993 PAGE 10 explained that the intent of the term "insure" is a policy commitment that, in any future consideration of development of the high school or Tres Hermanos Ranch Property, etc. the appropriate roadway alignment and design would be implemented. RECESS: M/Miller recessed the meeting 9:15 p.m.. RECONVENE: M/Miller reconvened the meeting at 9:24 p.m.. MPT/Papen, referring to page V-14, suggested that, with the impending start of the Metrolink in 12 days, the document should indicate that it has already occurred, instead of planned, and it should read, "The Riverside to Los Angeles Metrolink Commuter Rail System operates along the Union Pacific Line and the closest station serving the City of Diamond Bar is at Brea Canyon Road just north of the City boundary." The Council concurred. Don Schad stated that it is important that the General Plan address the wilderness areas that are still in its natural state. Each one of these canyons have individual botanical or wildlife characteristics that are unique to each area. Wilbur Smith made the following comments: the General Plan seems to be responding to special interests who could profit by development of Tonner Canyon; the traffic problems are being over -stated in order to find general support for a road; the data does not substantiate a catastrophic traffic situation; though criteria is established, there is no basis for judging that criteria relative to other communities; the General Plan does not address the fact that the reason it is pleasant to reside in Diamond Bar is because of the low density housing pattern and sense of open space caused by the hills and canyons, which is what we should be trying to retain; the General Plan does not specifically indicate that Tonner Canyon is within SEA #15 and that there are legalities associated with SEA #15 by both the County and the State; it does not say that the City will act in accordance with the letter and the spirit of those legalities; the failure to recognize these legalities is the direct result of lawsuits against the City; and this General Plan is nothing more than a regurgitation of the EIR written for the JCC properties, with the same wording, thought processes, insensitivities to the environmental and the geological aspects. MPT/Papen pointed out that the Council did address the issue of the SEA at the last two meetings and added a map that delineates the SEA, changing strategy 1.5.5 to specifically reference the SEA as well as other areas. Discussion ensued between M/Miller and Mr. Smith regarding the fundamental due process of an application. M/Miller explained that the Council had, from the onset, expressed concerns regarding the JCC project; however, the applicant must be JUNE 2, 1993 PAGE 11 allowed to present his project and an opportunity to prove that the City's concerns have no basis in fact. Discussion further ensued regarding the lawsuit filed by the Citizens to Protect Country Living vs. the City Clerk. Concerned with Mr. Smith's statement that he did not believe that the City Clerk was not influenced by the Council, C/Forbing, C/Werner, MPT/Papen and M/Miller each informed Mr. Wilbur that, for the record, no communication took place with the City Clerk during the submission of the Referendum petition nor during her review or final decision. MPT/Papen, referring to strategy l.l.l.d., medium density residential housing land use, page I-9, stated that it has been suggested that the Council consider a RM zone with a maximum density of 16DU/AC for already developed land in those categories indicated, and add strategy 1.1.l.e for undeveloped lands in this same category with a maximum density of 12DU/AC. She inquired into the legality of putting different housing densities on the same land use designation. Michael Jenkins stated that he sees no legal problem with establishing different density designations, or two separate categories of high density residential with two separate density designations, recognizing current densities so as not to render those currently developed properties nonconforming, while at the same time declaring a lower and different density designation for properties to be developed in the future. It is a policy matter that a lower density is more appropriate for that type of development. MPT/Papen requested further information regarding the require- ment to allow density bonuses, through low and moderate type housing and such, that can bring the 12DU/AC up to 16DU/AC. Michael Jenkins stated that he will need to evaluate it further and will bring back a response to the Council later. CDD/DeStefano, in response to C/Werner's concern, stated that, in staff's opinion, Mr. Smith's comments regarding the City's failure to recognize certain issues does not represent a liability in terms of the General Plan presently being contemplated for adoption. He requested further time to review the statements made in further detail. The City Council concurred. C/MacBride inquired if it would be more appropriate if the General Plan included a vision statement. CDD/DeStefano pointed out that the General Plan itself is a vision statement. Some General Plans may have a summary of that vision and it may be appropriate to begin this policy document with such a statement. JUNE 2, 1993 PAGE 12 Dale Beland, concurring with CDD/DeStefano, stated that, based upon what has been discussed at this hearing and at the workshops, there seems to be a need to consider that type of addition to the document. Staff will draft such a statement, to be included in the draft Plan, if so desired. The Council concurred. C/MacBride, noting that the final General Plan document must produce four major changes, suggested that a map also be included that would show the regional impacts of deep concern to this community that will impact the City in 'the future. We have a responsibility to show major impacts beyond our specific borders. Gary Neely inquired when it would be appropriate to discuss his specific written requested revisions to the General Plan that he previously submitted. MPT/Papen stated that one of the issues, regarding multifamily housing and the change of zoning, was just discussed. The other issues raised seem to fall into three categories: a University of California; the MWD lake; and the development of Tres Hermanos Ranch. However, since the land use is desig- nated as Specific Plan, the request to add verbiage to the General Plan on decisions that have not been formally made would not be appropriate at this time. Gary Neely state that since this is to be a 20 -year plan, the growing needs of the community and the region must be addressed, regardless of current funding situations. He then stated that not all of the changes submitted to the Council dealt solely with the three topics summarized by MPT/Papen and he would like an opportunity to discuss them at an appropriate time. Dale Beland, in response to C/Werner's request for the consul- tant's review on the points submitted by Mr. Neely, stated that they would appreciate further time to evaluate Mr. Neely's recent submittal, which is quite extensive. Given the burden of the workshop process, there has not been an opportunity to deal with the previous submittals in a level of detail now requested. C/Forbing, noting that the designation of the Tres Hermanos Ranch was changed from Specific Plan to Agricultural, stated that any discussion of a University or any other use would seem to be inappropriate in an Agricultural zone. Likewise, a potential lake in an adjoining County does not have much to do with our General Plan. C/MacBride explained that the Council is indicating that provisions have been made in the General Plan so that if this dream becomes reality, the zoning ascribed to this area will allow the Council to consider it. Until such time as it is JUNE 2, 1993 PAGE 13 much more nearly in fruition, it is not appropriate to predicate it now in this document. Gary Neely stated that he feels the citizens of this community are being short-changed by not taking advantage of opportun- ities that are available. The document, though well written, does not go far enough and does not paint this community in the best light possible. Don Schad emphasized the importance of the Tree Ordinance. He then stated that the University and lakes recommended by Mr. Neely is a good vision because the college developed could be a College of Science, particularly to water reclamation, purification, and distribution. 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS: M/Miller stated that he will be attending a meeting with the Mayor of Walnut and the Director of Lanterman dealing with the MRF. C/MacBride suggested that the General Plan include an intro- ductory sentence to get the message across that, "Virtually every government program, every government service, must, be paid for by taxpayer dollars." C/Werner inquired when staff will present the Council with the revised material, and how the process will proceed from this point. CM/Belanger stated that staff is, and will continue to, make changes to the text of the General Plan as it exists today, based on the comments made at these Public Hearings and the workshops as well as the comments submitted. Staff will incorporate all these revisions into a complete draft document that will come before the Council's review within the next two weeks. An adoption proposal for a General Plan for the City will then be presented at the meeting of July 6, 1993 for the Council's review. The Planning Commission will not need to review the document if the differences that might be incor- porated into this new General Plan document cover items and topics that were discussed previously by the Planning Commission when reviewing the previous iteration of a General Plan. In response to C/Werner, he stated that a memorandum has been prepared by the City Attorney for the City Council which will be provided. Michael Jenkins, in response to a comment made by MPT/Papen, stated that various portions of both the land use and housing elements contemplate that a density bonus could be granted which would thereby exceed the 12DU/Ac that was referred to in the new high density areas. MPT/Papen requested that the issue be placed for discussion as to whether or not the Council would take that kind of action. JUNE 2, 1993 PAGE 14 C/Forbing reported that there is an Economic Development breakfast scheduled for June 10, 1993 at 7:00 a.m. at the Diamond Bar Country Club. ADJOURNMENT: M/Miller adjourned the meeting at 10:30 p.m. to June 9, 1993 at 7:00 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 Papeen and Councilmember Forbing FROM: Linda G. Magnuson gccounting Manager SUBJECT: voucher Register, June 15, 1993 DATE: June 10, 1993 Attached is the Voucher Register dated June 15, 1993. As requested, the Finance Department is submitting the voucher register for the Finance Committee's review and approval prior to its 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 June 15, 1993 has been audited approved and recommended for payment. Payments are hereby allowed from the following funds in these amounts: FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION 001 General Fund 125 CDBG Fund 138 LLAD #38 Fund 139 LLAD #39 Fund 141 LLAD #41 Fund 250 Capital Imp Project Fund TOTAL ALL FUNDS APPROVED BY: Linda G. Mag on Accounting Ma ager ',Terrence L. Belanger City Manager W-1 Cali) z0y $248,108.01 1,378.00 583.37 13.76 4,087.17 127,055.72 $381,226.03 Phyll s E. Papen Mayor Pro Tem John A. Forbing Councilmember ++t CitY of Diamond Aar +++ RUN TIME: 11:11 06/11/93 V 0 U C H E R R E 6 I S T E R DUE THRU.............66/15/93 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. A('.COUNT PRO].TI-NO BATCH PO.[INE/N0. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION --------------------------------------------------------------- APA Planners Bookstore APAPianner +111-4211-233 3 3/615A ARA/Cory Refreshment Svcs ARA '401-4191-2325 5 30615A AT 1 T ATIT t/11-4191-2125 2 38615M American Storaqe LTD AmerStorag }111-4191-2141 1 316158 Area D Emergency Svcs. AreaD +111-4441-2315 1 30615A Armentrout, Phil Areentrout 0/1-4441-4041 1 30615A Assoc Enviro Professional AsocEnvPro 081-4211-2315 1 3S615D Averbeck Co Insurance Bkr Averbeck 011-4811-7211 1 36615A a6/1-4811-7210 2 36615A 0/1-463-7201 3 366154 Bank of America BankofAeer '411-4130-2325 5 3661SN '4/i-4630-2325 6 366ISM '4/1-4091-2310 5 36615M *011-4091-2395 1 3661SH P 46 1 i + PREPAID + + ANGIMT DATE CHECK ----------------------- 16116 16115 3 copies -Ping Come Guide 67.85 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------) 67.85 16/18 16/15 346128 Meeting Supplies 42.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------) 42.11 16/10 16/15 May-LongOistance Phne Svc 1.57 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------} 1.57 /6//8 16/15 July rent -2 storage unit 153.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------> 153.11 16/18 16115 D92-94-14 Dues Fy 1993-1994 2,683.61 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------} 2,643.60 16/08 16115 6162 Emerg Coord.4/13 119,6/3 575.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------) 575.11 16119 06/15 Membership Dues FY93-94 61.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------> 61.01 16118 16/15 95484 FY93-94 Blanket Bond 154.51 86/0 16/15 95466 . FY93-94 Bnd renvl CClrk 1//.0 16118 16/15 96139 FY93-94 Bnd renvl Mayor 351.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------) 614.50 16110 16/15 Mtq-CMgr 5/4 35.21 16/11 66/15 PY,B1SContractMtg5/5-CMgr 16.63 66/11 16/15 Fuel -City Vehicle 7.31 66116 16/15 Misc Bank Charges -May 13.26 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 74.46 ttt City of Diamond Bar '#' RUN TIME: 16:88 86/18/93 V 0 U C H E R R E G I S T E R DUE THRU.............46/15/93 VENDOR NAME VENDOR Ill. ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION California Contract CCCA }881-4898-2328 2 38615M Chrosa Copy ChrosaCopy 081-4218-4228 11 38b15A P 46 2 f } PREPAID + f AMOUNT DATE CHECK ------------------------ 66/18 86/15 Videos -City at Risk 46.88 86/15/93 8888871241 TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----> 48.88 10TA1 DUE VENDOR -------) 8.88 86/88 86/15 A57348 188 leroch prnts gen pin 311.13 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------) 317.13 Clayton Enqineering Inc,. ClaytnEngr }258-4318-6415 84693 3 30615A 81/1489A 86/88 86/15 2312 Her Prk Coe Ctr Const 65,781.13 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------ -) 65,781.13 Clayton Enqineering Inc. ClaytnEngr +258-4318-6415 84693 5 38615A 8111469A 86/68 86/15 2337 Her Prk Coss Ctr Const 68 829.59 Community Industries CGRAIndust 081-4W8-2188 3 31615T 1881-4555-5583 2 30615A DB Country Club DBCountryC 081-4895-42.68 1 36615H David Evans 1 Assoc. DavidEvans '881-2318-1811 7 366158 Dept of Transportation Dept Trans '881-4555-5587 2 31615E Diamond Bar Business Asoc OBBusAssoc 081-4896-2148 3 3861SA TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------ 68,829.59 86/89 86/15 PhotoC.opySvc-Apr 1 May 81.64 86/88 86/15 Litter Abatesent-May'93 839.44 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 928.48 86116 86/15 Balnce-Economic Mtq 6118 269.94 86/15/93 8848821246 TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ---) 269.94 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----) 1.0 86/88 86/15 85-3797 ProfSvc-DBMed-FER 91-84 2,855.81 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------> 7.,855.88 86188 86/15 126858 Signalsllightnq-Maint-Apr 763.95 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----> 783.95 86/18 86/15 Annual Rent Pymnt FY93-94 78,00.88 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----) 18,888.81 ++r itv of DL aeond Bar +++ RUNTIME: 18:88®6/1#/93 VOUCHER RE6ISTER DUE THRU.............#6115/93 VENDOR HANE VENDOR ID. ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.11NEiNO. ENTRYIDUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Diamond Bar Petty Cash PettyCash +041-4434-1184 3 386158 1001-4030-2325 4 306158 +881-4214-2325 1 316158 *001-4316-2325 2 30615B *001-4514-2325 1 386158 Diana Cho L Associates DianaCho *250-4318-6415 04693 1 30615A EasiFile EasiFile 001-451#-620 4 386158 011IS65 Enteneann-Rovin Co. Entensann *601-4494-2116 5 3461SB FIA Federal Credit Union FIACreditb *881-2111-1#19 2 30615" Federal Express Carp. FedExpress 061-23#1-1110 11 31615" ;181-2300-1011 11 31615H *001-2300-1010 12 3061511 Fleet Call F1eetCall 011-4491-2130 2 316158 6 1 6 Trophy Co. 61STrophy 001-4351-1216 3 386158 61/1521 WE 3 * t PREPAID + + AMOUNT DATE CHECK 86/89 #6115 Sapplies-City My? 3.16 66/89 86/15 Meetinos-City Mqr 5.26 66/69 86115 Meetings -Ping 32.56 86/89 #6115 Meetings -Parks 26.41 06/69 46/15 Meetings -Public Yorks 26.88 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----__} 96.01 86/1M #6115 Prof Svcs-CDBS Req -Her Pk 525.40 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 525.84 16118 86/15 39111 Equip -2 EASI Files 1,966.99 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----} 1,966.99 06116 86/15 122262 Badge/case-City Atty 63.81 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------> 63.81 16116 #6115 Payroll Deductions -PP 11 1,118.0 86/15/93 0880021243 TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ---} 1,118.10 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------} 1.44 16/11 16/15 498582/85 Express Nail -FPL 92-19 11.34 16114 46115 498582/45 Express Mail -FPL 93-06 14.22 06/11 16/15 498582/85 Express Mail -FPL 92-34 16.44 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----} 42.44 #6/18 16/15 333111 May 2 -ray radio svc 158.55 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------} 158.55 16/09 66/15 8814 Awrds-City Tract Meet 194.49 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------} 194.49 +++ try of D i a a o n d 9 a r t++ RUN TIRE: 1/:1/16/16193 VOUCHER REGISTER DOE THRU.............16/15/93 VENDOR NAW VENDOR ID. ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.IINE/NO. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION GF 04 14/1-4151-2371 GFOA +111-4151-2315 GTE California HI1-4191-2125 GTE California N11-4441-2125 GTE California NII -4444-2125 GTE California +111-4211-2321 PAGE 4 t t PREPAID t + AMOUNT DATE CHECK GFOA 2 31615E I1/15LI 16/19 16/15 FundBalance-Pablictn 69.14 GFOA 1 346159 GTE 1 316159 GTE 1 316158 GTE 1 316158 GTE 4 3161SN Gateway to Imagination GatewyIs +111-4351-1211 2 316158 Godoy, Ana +111.-3414 Grainger 1111-4311-1211 Nose Depot +111-4311-1211 263 2 316158 Grainger 4 346158 01/1566 HoseDepot 5 36615C 19/1549 16/19 16/19 1617 Tools 1 Equip 44.41 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------) 44.44 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 69.11 16/19 16/15 1355546 Annual sembersip fee 425.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------> 42S.N 16/19 16/15 Monthly phone syc-May 1,951.45 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------> 1,951.45 16/19 16/15 Phone Svc -Ever Prep 36.34 TOTAL DUE VENDDR------) 36.34 16/19 16/15 Modus Svcs. 16.38 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------> 16.36 46/1i 16/15 Cross Ref Directory -Ping 61.61 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------) 61.a1 16/16 16/15 2155539 Books - Tiny Tots Progras 24.51 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------) 24.51 16/19 16/15 2725 Rec Refund -Forfeit fee 21.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----) 21.11 16/19 16/15 444/432245 Supplies-Strapping,Steel 17.46 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------> 17.46 HoseDepot 5 36615C 19/1549 16/19 16/19 1617 Tools 1 Equip 44.41 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------) 44.44 +++ 1 t y of D:aaand Bar +++ RUN TIME: 18:81 86/1/193 V 0 U C H E R R E 6 I S T E R DUE THRU.............16/15/93 VENDOR MANE VENDOR ID. ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-MO BATCH PO.LINE/ND. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DfSCR1PTI0N ICMA Retirement Trust -457 ICMA *881-211/1817 2 30615A 1181-4830-8888 1 306159 +881-4838-090 2 34615y +181-4141-1890 2 306ISM +881-41584890 2 346ISM }801-42184190 2 36615M +881-4311-098 2 3061511 *8014510-8198 2 306159 Image IV Systems Inc. Image4Sys +181-4891-210 2. 34615C +081-4191-210 1 34615C Impressive Sr_reenvorks Impressive +181-4358-1201 b 306150. Inland Valley Dly Bulletn IVDB 1401-4210-2115 14 36615C 1411-4140-2115 3 30615C +881-4441-2115 2 38615C 1411-4144-2115 1 31615C Inland Valley Dly Bulletn IVDB +881-4448-2115 5 31615C 1411-4848-2115 4 30615C +141-4448-2115 6 3161,5C J H Signs +061-4351-1211 Juanieo, Maitheresa +001-4358-1211 JHSigns 4 36615C Juanieo 5 31615C 16/18 06/15 Def Comp Contrib-PP14,11 16/18 86/15 Contract amount -TLB -June 16/10 06/15 June Cafe Contrib-CNgr 16/10 06/15 June Cafe Contrib-CClk 16/11 16/15 June Cafe Contrib-Fin 16/10 06/15 June Cafe Contrib-Ping 16110 16/15 June Cafe Contrib-PIN 46/14 16/15 June Cafe Contrib-Engr TOTAL PREPAID AMOW --> TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------ -) 06169 86/15 11412E 86119 86115 114129 06189 86115 2966 16/89 46/15 dc36640 06/19 16/15 dc31167 46149 46/15 dr36385 16149 46/15 dc363$A 1619 06/15 dc37663 46/9 46/15 dc37682 16/9 16/15 dc37665 16149 46/15 86876 66/19 16/15 Maint-Kanica-3/28 t 4/28 Maint-Konica-4/28 i 5/1 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------> TShirts-Adult Sprts Ards TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------) CCnc1 Pub Hearing -Gen Pin Notice Pub Hear Ord t2 Bids notice -Tree maint Bids notice -City Parks TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------) Pub Hzng Matce-levy LAD39 Pub Hrng Notce-Levy LAD41 Pub Hrng Notce-Levy LAD36 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --- ---) BannrsConcert-Prks/TTots TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----) Brad gowns-TTots Prog TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----) PA6E 5 + 1 PREPAID + + AMOUNT DATE CHECK 211.41 66/15/93 8/88821244 400.88 06/15/93 8880821244 696.90 86/15/93 0/88621244 463.31 86/15/93 8800821244 163.21 86/15/93 800821244 542.95 06/15/93 110087.1244 311.53 86/15/93 8888821244 967.79 06/15/93 /880021244 3,769.66 I." 146.43 39.61 165.84 225.28 225.24 99.75 54.63 34.88 31.88 216.14 316.94 326.61 326.61 972.56 324.75 324.15 244.00 241.14 t+t C:tv o' D i a a o n d Aar +++ RUN TIME: 11:11 16/1/193 V 0 U C H E R R E 6 I S T E R PR6E 6 DUE THRU.............06/15/93 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. t t PREPAID t 1 ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/N0. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DE,WlPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK K E V Blueprint Service KIVBluePrt +111-4211-2211 1 30615C 15119 06/15 53623 Xerox Paper -Blueprint 41.36 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------} 44.36 Kaiser Permanente KaiserPera 011-4111-1191 4 3/615 16/19 16115 July -Cafe Mcbride 43.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 43.11 Kobata i Associates Inc KobatalAss 1111-4556-5511 5 31b15C 44/1444 16/19 16/15 Landsc Arch Svcs -SR61 1,711.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 1,171.11 L.A. County -Sheriff's Dep LACSheriff 1111-4411-5411 2 3661.53 16/19 16115 12.716 ContrSvc-311-31 Helicop 311.71 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------) 311.71 L.A. Cty-Fire Dept LACFire t1/1-4421-541? 1 316154 46/49 16/15 142 Contr5vcs-FY93-94 PatBase 7,359.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----) 7,359.11 LA Cellular Telephone LAC,elluIar +111-4131-2125 1 316153 16119 16/15 Cell Svc-CMgr-May 44.71 11$1-4441-2125 2 36615D 46109 16/15 Cell Svc-EaergPrep-May 39.62 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------> 81.53 LA County Agriculture Cao LACAgric +111-4555-5518 5 31615C 1649 16/15 1858) YeedAbateaent Svcs 1,517.56 1111-4555-5518 9 39615C 16/19 16/15 16593 YeedAbateaent Svcs 756.18 +111-4555-5518 1/ 31615C 1649 16/15 186/J YeedAbateaent Svcs 756.18 101-4555-5518 7 316150 16/19 16/15 18613 YeedAbateaent Svcs 837.96 +111-4555-5518 4 31615C 16/19 16115 1862) YeedAbateaent Svcs 713.68 1111-4555-5518 6 36615C 1619 16/15 1863J. YeedAbateaent Svcs 713.66 +111-4555-5518 8 31615C 16/19 16/15 1864) YeedAbateaent Svcs 616.18 TOW DUE VENDOR -------> 5,911.12 LA County Agriculture Coo LACAgric +141-4541-5519 1 316150 /6/19 16/15 1658) Pest Control -141 746.18 TOW DUE VENDOR -- ---> 716.16 +*+ City of Diamond Bar +++ RUN TIME: 11:11 66111/93 V O U C H E R R E 6 I S T E R DUE THRU.............86/15/93 PAGE 7 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. 16/09 16/15 SpecSvcs-SPMP FPL92-19 3,181.62 * * PREPAID i f ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-ND BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ENTRY/DIIE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK Landscape West LandscapeW 16/99.16/15 SpecSvcs-SPMP FPL92-30 464.14 1001-4629-4921 il41-4541-5581 2 3#615C 16/49 16/15 114276 Landsc saint -May LLAD 241 3,211.68 *141-4541-2211 2 3$61sC 16/19 16/15 11344 Irrig repair labor/parts 11.86 *141-4541-2211 1 38615 86/19 86/15 14341 Irrig repair labor/parts 144.15 Special Svc -DO citizen 1,632.06 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------> 3,367.63 League CA Cities Housing LeaqueHous *#';.'-4811-2338 3 3861571 46/18 16115 Reserv-ExecFarue-MacBride 218.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------) 216.11 League of Ca. Cities League *881-4811-2338 2 38615M 16118 16115 Conf-ExecForus-MacBride 168.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------) 168.81 Leighton and Associates Leighton +811-2311-1112 1 366150 16/69 16/15 76466 Beo5vcs-E493-126 469.58 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------> 489.51 Lewis Engraving Inc. LewisEngra +181-4351-1281 7 3/6150 86/19 86/15 13291 Desk Plate 2x6 MSldnbrg 16.55 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----> 16.55 Marina Contractors Inc. MarinaCont *881-4556-55§a 7 386158 81/1537 16189 16/15 6339 LablFquip-Fry0proj 274.32 *111-455b-5511 9 3/615D 81/1537 16/19 0F; TRO/5 Plntq/Irrig-Frwy 64 Proj 3,262.97 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------> 3.5', - Markman Arczynski Hanson MarkmanArc feel -2381-1118 7 38615E 16/09 16/15 SpecSvcs-SPMP FPL92-19 3,181.62 *eel -2389-1619 6 30615F 16/19 /6/15 SpecSvcs-SPMP FFL93-16 1,464.64 *881-2388-1611 9 366ISF 16/99.16/15 SpecSvcs-SPMP FPL92-30 464.14 1001-4629-4921 1 31615F 86/69 66/15 Retainer -May 5,586.61 +861-4820-4621 2 366ISF 96/19 16/15 Special Svc-DNAssoc 21.19 f001-4926-4921 3 36615F 16/99 06/15 Special Svc -Glen Litiqatn 278.11 *601-4820-4821 4 3#615F 06/99 06115 Special Svc -DO citizen 1,632.06 TOTAL D11E VENDOR --------> 12,6135/ Mitchell Pest Control Inc MitchellPe *011-4555-5509 5 30615D 66/19 16/15 12873 InsptAdvise-Heritge Prk 60.08 *191-4555-5509 4 39615D 06/19 16/15 12200 Treatment -Spray trees 325.10 +001-4555-5589 3 30615D 06/19 16/15 12201 Treatment -Spray trees 511.08 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------> 665.66 Y 0 l a 1 D 11 a r * t RUN TIME: 11:11 /6/11/93 V 0 U C 4 F_ R R E 6 I S T E R DUE THRU.............16115/93 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH P0.IINE/40. ENTRY/DUE INVOTCE DESCRIPTION Mobil Mobil *111-4891-22" 1 30615F *111-4211-2311 3 39615H 1/11-4311-2311 6 31615M 1111-4311-2311 4 31615H }111-4311-2311 3 36615A Mobil Mobil 1/11-4211-2211 2 3$615M Moore Iarofano Goltsaan Mooreiacof *111-4211-4221 12 31615D Myers, Elizabeth MyersE *111-41+1-4111 2 3/6150 1111-4211-4111 4 31615D fill -4211-4111 5 3/6150 Nev Castle Construction NeVCastle fill -3413 1 306ISM PERS Health Benefits PERSHealth 001-2111-1113 1 306ISM '"1-41914181 1 34615M Pac Tel Cellular PacTel 1111-4131-2125 2 31615M Pacesetter Municipal Svcs Pacesetter 1/11-4221-5211 2 316150 f"1-23"-1111 5 31615E 081-2311-1111 6 31615E 1111-4221-5211 1 306ISD PANE 8 f f PREPAID f f AMOUNT DATE CHECK -------------------------------------- 10/19 16/15 K1889991 Equip Maint-Ford Tempo 415.15 ®6111 16/15 k4888985 Fuel -PIM 14.34 16/14 16115 k1889625 Fuel -PIM 21.65 16/11 16115 k189119/ Fuel -PIM 33.51 16/11 56/15 k1896261 Fuel -PIM 32.61 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------> 516.14 16/11 16/15 k1888952 Maint-Ping Vehicle 47.11 10TAL DUE VENDOR -------> 47.11 46/19 16115 93-123512 Consultant - General Plan 9,234.59 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------> 9,234.59 16119 16/15 93611 Min-CCncl-5/18 381.11 16/19 16/15 93611 Min -Ping -5124 661.0 16/19 16115 93dbil Min -GP -Pub Hearng 5/26 321.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----> 1,361.11 16/11 16/15 Overpyent Electric Permit 11.81 IOfAL DUE VENDOR -----> 11.81 16/11 16/15 Health Press -June 7,752.14. 46/15/93 1141121245 46/11 16/15 Admin Fees -,lune 38.13 16/15/93 11/1/21245 TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----> 7,791.17 10TAL DUE VENDOR ------> 1." 16/11 16/15 May Cellular Svcs-CMgr 91.83 TOTAL 011E VENDOR -----> 91.83 16/19 16115 2485PC Pin chk Svcs - May 12,135.61 16/19 16/15 2123PC Pin chk secs FFL93-38 111." 16/19 16/15 2124PC Pin chk Svcs FPL93-113 111.11 16/19 16/15 311401 Bldg Insp Svc - May 11,617.31 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------> 23,872.91 +*+ City of D i a a o n d Bar *t* RUN TIME: 14:10 86/18/93 V O U C H E R R E 6 I S T E R DUE THRU.............66/15/93 VENDOR NAME VENDOR IO. ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/N0. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION Pacesetter Municipal Svcs Pacesetter +181-4191-2141 2 31615M Payroll Transfer PayrollTr }881-1.121 2 36615M Pomona Valley Humane Soc. PVHS +111-4431-5413 1 386151 Repro Graphics Reprograph +111-4131-2111 1 31615E +111-4351-2111 1 31615E Richards Watson i Gershon RichardsWa +181-4121-4121 5 3461SM RonKranzeriAssoc C.E. Inc RKA *181-4551-5223 2 31615E +811-4551-5223 1 31615E *881-4551-5221 4 38615E San Gabriel Valley 56VMAA *181-4351-5311 3 31615E San Gabriel Viy Tribune SGVTribune 081-4211-2115 11 31615E *111-4218-2115 12 38615E 081-4141-2115 6 38615E 1811-4841-2115 7 31615E PAGE 9 * t PREPAID AMOUNT DATE CHECK 16/14 16115 June Rent 1/2 Ste 198 4,01.87 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----) 4,861.67 16/11 16/15 Payroll Transfer -PP 11 38,281.88 16/15/93 8188888811 TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----) 38,200.16 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------> 6.0 86/19 16/15 931/425088 Animal Contrl Svc - June 4,137.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------> 4,137.11 16//9 16/15 6214 Business Crds-Nelson 27.15 16/19 16/15 6214 BsCards-Barloe/Goldenberg 11.22 TOTAL DTR: VENDOR -------> 97.37 46/11 16/15 Legal Svcs-GenPln Amend 8,776.68 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------) 4,776.61 16/19 16/15 1259 EngSvcsPlnChk-LLAdj93-181 341.18 16/19 16/15 1261 Engrng Svcs Plan Check 441.47 16119 16/15 1261 Engrng Insp thru May/93 2,471.21 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------> 3,252.67 46/19 16115 EntrFee Track/Field Meet 211.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------> 748.11 16/19 46/15 SSVT1974 CCncl-Pub Hrng-6P 97.89 16/19 16/15 S6VT2139 CCncl-Pub Hrng-temp sign 54.52 16/19 86/15 Scvt 2171 Bids -Parks 32.22 16/19 16/1S Sgvt 2869 Notice of Bids Tree Paint 31.96 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------> 215.61 Y 0: 01aa„nC gar fff ROW TIME: 14:0116/1//93 VOUCHER REGISTER DUE THRU.............16/15193 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/N0.NTRYIDUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION San Gabriel Vly Tribune S%Tribune 1111-4141-2115 9 31615E 1111-4141-2115 11 31615E 4111-4141-2115 11 31615E Seigworth, Harold L. SeigYorth 4111-4556-5511 11 31615E Sir Speedy SiTSpeedy 4111-4891-2111 6 31615E 4111-4191-2111 1 3661SH So Ca Assoc. of Code SCACEO 4111-4211-2325 2 31615D Southern Ca. Edison SCE2 {138-4536-2126 4 30615E Southern Ca. Edison SCE2 4001-4555-2126 1 38615F Southern Ca. Edison SCE? 4141-4541-2126 2 31615E Southern Ca. Edison SCE2 4139-4539-2126 3 3%ISF State Compensation Ins Fd Statecosp 4111-4191-1163 1 38615A PAGE 1/ 4 PREPAID f f AMOUNT DATE CHECK 16/19 46/15 SGVT2/32 Pub Hr; - LLAD 136 495.61 16/19 16/15 SGV12033 Pub Hrq - LLAD 239 633.36 16/19 16/15 S8VT2134 Pub Hrg- LLAD 141 661.61 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----> 1,169.16 16/19 16/15 13811 LndscConsltnt-UrhnForest 611.0 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 16/19 16115 11114 Supplies -Envelopes 116.24 16/11 16/15 11664 Stationary supplies 45.95 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------> 164.19 16119 16115 Ntg t Seeinar - Flores 21.54 TOTAL DUE VENDOR------�--> 21.51 16119 16115 Electric-LLAD 138 155.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------) 155.11 46/19 16115 Electric -Traffic Control 1,443.91 TOTAL DILE VENDOR -------) 1,413.91 16/19 16/15 Electric-LLAD 141 13.36 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----) 13.36 16/19 16115 Electric-LLAD 139 13.16 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----) 13.16 16/11 16115 CIGA Fees Lst Qtr 29.33 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -----> 29.33 +++ ::ty of D ! a a 0 1 d Bar ff+ RUN TIRE: 14:41 /6118/93 V O U C H E R R E 6 I S T E R DUE THRU.............06/15/93 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. AC.CUTN1 PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO LITE/N0. ENTRVIDUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION Thompson, Jack ThompsonJ 1881-4556-5588 11 38615E Time Out Personnel Svr.. Time0ut 1881-415/-4111 2 3161SH UltraSystems Engineers Ultrasyste 1181-2388-1111 8 3161St 1111-2388-1811 9 3061SE 1181-2391-1111 18 31615E United Reprographics Inc UnitedRepr 1111-2314-1116 4 3661SF United States Postal Sery Postmaster 1111-4195-2128 1 3161514 Unor.al Unor.al +411-4211-2311 2 31615E 1181-4431-2311 4 3161SF Walnut Vly Yater Dist VVVaterDis 1138-4538-2126 3 31615F Walnut Vly Water Dist VVVaterDis 1181-4556-2126 1 3661SO Vest Coast Arborist Inc. WCArbor 1111-4555-5519 6 31615E PAGE 11 1 + PREPAID 1 1 AMOUNT DATE CHECK -------------------------- 16/19 86/15 45476 LndscConsltnt-Urbnforest 5,181.81 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------> 5,188./4 16118 16/15 931323 AcctC)k Temp Svcs -Finance 613.61 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------> 619.64 16/19 16/15 83-1-124 Prof Svc FER9241 5,174.15 16/19 16/15 /3-1-124 Prof Svc FER92-62 21381.75 16/19 16/15 031-124 Prof Svc FER92-14 657.44 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------) 6,212.94 86/19 66/15 114964 PhotoCopyMap-DeAss vs Cty 69.26 TOTAL DUE VENDOR — ---) 69.26 16/11 16/15 Postage -Summer Newsletter 2,198.51 16/15193 11/8/21242 TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ---> 2,198.51 TOTAL DLR: VENDOR -------) 1.18 16/19 86/15 411766 Fuel -Ping 22.0 16/19 16/15 611283 Fuel-CMgr 13.32 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------> 35.32 16/19 16/15 Yater Usage-LLAD 136 427.64 TOTAL DUE VENDOR ------) 427.64 16/14 16/15 Yater Svcs-Rte61 L 61dnSp 115.11 TOFAL DUE VENDOR ----) 14S.N 16/19 16/15 7128 Emerg Tree Removal TOTAL DUE VENDOR ++t City of D i a a o n d Har +tt RUN TIME: 14:14 16/11/93 V O U C H E R R E 6 I S T E R PASE 12 DUE THRU.............16115/93 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. # t PREPAID t + ACCOUNT --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROJ.TK-10 BATCH PO.LINE/N0. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK YMCA YMCA ti?S-4215-2355 1 306ISF 0149 16/15 COBS Reiab-Apr Chldcare 1,376.11 TOW DUE VENDOR --------} 1,376.11 Zellerbach Zellerbach 001-4151-1211 2 31615F 12/1569 16/19 16115 36234 Computer Paper 73.59 }111-4191-1211 2 31615F 61/1569 16/19 16/15 36234 Copy Paper 566.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------} 659.59 TOTAL PREPAID ---------> 54,166.34 TOTAL DILE-------------> 327,159.73 TOTAL REPORT --------} 361,226.13 +++ City of D 1 a a o n d Bar +++ RUN TIME: 11:61 66/16/93 V O U C H E R R E 6 I S T E R FUND SUMMARY REPORT DUE THRU.............66/15/93 FUND 661 General Fund 258 C.I.P. Fund 141 LLAD 141 Fund 138 LLAD 138 Fund 139 LLAD 139 Fund 125 CDO6 Fund MAL ALL FUNDS IISBURSE 6/L 61E WILL POST ME HAS POSTED TOTAL DIRECT PAY REVENUE EXPENSE REVENUE EXPENSE 248,118.61 64,679.36 127,155.72 4,187.17 583.37 13.76 1,378.66 381,226.63 64,679.36 PASS 1 FUTURE TRANSACTIONS REVENUE EXPENSE ---------------------- 31.61 183,991.84 127,655.12 4,687.17 583.31 13.76 1,318.86 31.81 317,115.86 -�6Ldc� 6-/.5-y_3 Mayor Miller, Mayor Pro -Tem Papen, Council members and fellow Diamond Bar residents, My name is Judy Kimbrell. I live at 1520 Bluff Ct., Diamond Bar. I have 3 children that attend Quail Summit Elementary School. Our sub -division is located N/E on Grand and is bordered by Summitridge Dr. and Longview Dr. Quail Summit is the assigned elementary school for the children in our area. There are 175 homes in my sub -division. I am very negatively impacted by the No Right Turn signs at Rolling Knoll and Country View. With 3 children involved in Scouts, AYSO soccer and Little League Baseball we are very often in the area for practices and meetings which are held at Quail Summit School or Paul Grow Park. The turn restrictions are forcing me to go back out onto Diamond Bar Blvd. (the opposite direction that I need to travel) and adds more traffic to an already congested street. These signs also hinder any efforts to form carpools, which would help reduce traffic congestion, between residents in the Quail Summit area and our sub -division. The City Council and the Traffic & Transportation Commission with it's "distribution" of the surveys concerning the No Right Turn signs has stacked the results in favor of the residents in the Rolling Knoll/Quail Summit area. The surveys were distributed to ALL of the residents in the Quail Summit area. Yet only those people that wrote a letter to City Hall from other areas about the signs received a survey. This is not fair! My neighbors and I have valid reasons to be in this area and yet we were not even given a survey! We most certainly understand the frustration and sacrifices that residents on Rolling Knoll, Quail Summit Dr. and Country View Rd. face. We have all had to deal with the changes that Grand has brought. One positive result of Grand is the traffic signal at Rolling Knoll itself. Residents in the Rolling Knoll area however have not been the only ones that have had to sacrifice. With the completion of Grand, we have all had to make sacrifices. Our backyard backs up to Grand and we are not able to open our windows due to the constant traffic noises. Even with the windows closed the noise is very noticeable. Turning onto Grand from our sub -division is dangerous to us and our children due to the excessive speed of cars heading down Grand. Many cars either run through the red light or skid completely into the intersection. We also experience many backups and delays on Grand while driving the children to school. We are having to deal with the realities of Grand everyday. Every taxpayer has a right to use the roads that their tax dollars help build and maintain. We feel that the No right turn signs are unfair and don't take into consideration the majority of residents that live up Grand and have valid reasons to be in the Quail Summit area during that time of the day. Therefore we are askingthat the 4J, JvA6' �� r Lf-, r-+ signs be removed for the benefit of tax paying citizens. Anyone that does any driving during this time of night is well aware that there is a positive correlation between the way traffic is flowing on the freeway and the number of cars that travel on Grand and Diamond Bar Blvd. Lets get the citizens of this community to organize and work towards getting the state's priority for funding freeway improvements increased, build Tonner Canyon Rd. and enforce the current speed limits and stop signs that already exist in the Rolling Knoll/Quail Summit area. r 42 � J C/Plunk suggested that condition #16 be amended to indicate "...the said property owner is required by the City to provide such access", and condition #19 should be amended to indicate "for Sunday services or large special events" to replace the statement "between the hours of 600 to 1400 hours". Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by Chair/ Flamenbaum and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Resolution of Approval for CUP 93-2, as amended. Finding CITY OF DIAMOND BAR reported MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Conformity of APRIL 26, 1993 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Flamenbaum called the meeting to order at Air Management a strip of 6:11 p.m. at the South Coast Quality District Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Plan for Prospectors Road and Bar, California. PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by ALLEGIANCE: Chairman Flamenbaum. ROLL CALL: Commissioners: Plunk, Vice Chairman Meyer, and at Chairman Flamenbaum. Commissioner Li arrived 6:19 p.m. and Commissioner Grothe arrived at 6:57 p.m. Also present were Community Development Director James DeStefano, Planning Technician Ann Lungu, Deputy City Attorney Craig Fox, Interim City Engineer George Wentz, and Contract Recording Secretary Liz Myers. CONSENT CALENDAR: Chair/Flamenbaum indicated that staff has item 2 be from the Consent recommended that pulled Calendar. Chair/Flamenbaum requested item 3 to be Minutes of Apr. 12, 1993 pulled from the Consent Calendar as well. C/Plunk requested the Minutes of April 12, 1993 be amended on page 5 to indicate that "The Foothill Presbyterian Hospital had possibly 60 landings recorded in one year, but that the information will be checked." Motion was made by Chair/Flamenbaum, seconded by vC/Meyer and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Minutes of April 12, 1993, as amended. Resolution of ICE/Wentz stated that the words "grading permits" Approval for on page 6, condition item #14, should be changed to of the CUP 93-2 state "building permits." The remainder conditions are satisfactory as written. C/Plunk suggested that condition #16 be amended to indicate "...the said property owner is required by the City to provide such access", and condition #19 should be amended to indicate "for Sunday services or large special events" to replace the statement "between the hours of 600 to 1400 hours". Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by Chair/ Flamenbaum and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to approve the Resolution of Approval for CUP 93-2, as amended. Finding ICE/Wentz reported that Transamerica Realty in Conformity of Services has offered to quitclaim it's interest of draft General a strip of land located along the south side Tract Plan for Prospectors Road and Lots 3,415,9, and 10 of Golden Springs Drive. The acquisition No. 26203 west of April 26, 1993 Page 2 of property property in question may potentially benefit the City in maintaining an easement for public improvement purposes along with the previously established utility easements and the future widening or intersection improvement. This item was brought before the City for preliminary discussion about 18 months ago, in which there was discussion that the City might reconvey the property to the adjacent property owners at a later date based partly upon some possible encroachments within that easement. It was believed that it was worthwhile to obtain that property to eliminate any sliver of property between the City's existing right-of-way and another ownership. At this point, the only cost to the City would be any back taxes that exists from nonpayment, which is estimated to be about $1,700 dollars. Chair/Flamenbaum pointed out that the City might be able to obtain the property for less money if ownership reverts back to the County. ICE/Wentz stated that it is felt that $1,700 dollars is not a significant expense for having the land available to the City for any future widening to that particular street, or other improvements done in the right-of-way. The Public Hearing was declared opened. Max Maxwell, residing at 3211 Bent Twig, suggested that, since there is not currently a traffic problem in that area, the City should set the matter aside until a proposal for obtaining the property at a lesser price is received. He then pointed out that this subject area would make a good back entrance to a commercial center, which at one time, the City had considered making the Golf Course into a commercial center. Hearing no further testimony, Chair/Flamenbaum declared the Public Hearing closed. VC/Meyer noted that the right-of-way is substandard. He recommended moving forward with the acquisition of the public right-of-way because it may be used in the future. He then suggested that page 2, paragraph 4.b., be amended to properly indicate that the property is located on the south side of Prospectors Road west of Golden Springs. Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Plunk and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to recommend to the City Council the approval of the acquisition of the real April 26, 1993 CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS: General Plan Amendment 92-2; DA 92-1, 2, and 3; Vesting TT Map 51407, CUP 92-8 & OT 92-8; ZC 91-2 & OT 91-2; TT Map 51253 & CUP 92-12; OT 92-9; SP Master Plan; & EIR 92-1 Page 3 property along the south side of Prospectors Road west of Golden Springs 'Drive. ROLL CALL: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Li, Plunk, VC/Meyer, and Chair/Flamenbaum. None. None. Grothe. Hardy Strozier, Project Manager, reported that this is a continued public hearing regarding the following items: South Pointe Master Plan Environmental Impact Report No. 92081040; General Plan Amendment; 3 Development Agreements; Vesting Tentative Tract 32400 Arciero); tentative Tract 51253 (Patel); Vesting Tentative Tract 41407 (RnP); 3 Hillside Management Ordinance Conditional Use Permits; 3 oak Tree Removal Permits. The proposed project is located in the southwestern area of the City, encompassing an area of approximately 171 acres. The project site is comprised of a number of existing parcels and ownership interests, generally described as being situated westerly of the Orange Freeway and Brea Canyon Road, easterly of the corporate boundaries of the City, and northerly of Pathfinder Road and the existing residential area. The four applicants are RnP Development, Inc., Arciero and Sons, Inc., Sasak Corporation, and the City of Diamond Bar. The staff report includes a series of procedures recommended by staff, as well as responses, or the location of those responses, to Planning Commission questions raised at previous meetings. There is also a response to questions submitted by VC/Meyer and by C/Plunk. Furthermore, a cougar biological study has also been included which responds to a concern regarding cougars in the project area. Hardy Strozier. then presented the conclusion to the slide presentation given at a previous meeting. The first few slides illustrated an overview of the project area, for the benefit of those who were not present during the first slide presentation, which attempted to bring forth the data from the EIR, in summary photo form. The remaining slides shown focused upon cross section, "A" through "G", attempting to get inside the project and describe what is occurring with the grading plan and land use plan. The following is a summarization of that slide presentation: April 26, 1993 Page 4 Cross Section ."A" - Illustrates the 57 freeway along Brea Canyon Road area. o There is a 155' foot setback from the edge of Brea Canyon Road to the back of the first building, and an elevation difference of approximately 50 feet from Brea Canyon Road to the slope of the first home, which illustrates why there is very little noise impact with the proposed project. The maximum depth of cut is 97' feet. o The location of the existing Sandstone Canyon stream is illustrated. The depth of fill is 82' feet. o The South Pointe Middles School is illustrated. There is an elevation change of 40' feet between the finished pad of South Pointe Middle School to the Arciero finished pad. The Master Plan provides for pedestrian access from the Arciero Tract to the school site. The depth of cut on the school pad is 42' feet. Cross Section "B" - Illustrates a little bit northerly of cross section o There is still the 120' foot setback from Brea Canyon Road, however, the proposed Arciero Tract at this location is 75' feet higher than existing Brea Canyon Road, and the 57 freeway is around 5' feet higher than Brea Canyon Road. The depth of cut is 65' feet, and the depth of fill is 70' feet. It also illustrated the location of the existing stream at Sandstone Canyon. o There is about a 40' foot elevation difference between the Arciero finish pad and the finish pad of the school. The depth of cut is 70' feet at the school building pad. Cross Section "C" - Illustrates the north to south direction, cutting through the Arciero Tract. o There is a 75' foot tall hill between the existing residential units, or Garazon Place, and the proposed Arciero tract. o The depth of cut at this location is 60' feet. The design allows a portion of the hill to remain as a set back buffer between the existing residential, Garazon Place, and the proposed tract. o The transition between the proposed residential and the office/commercial is illustrated. The depth of fill at the point April 26, 1993 Page 5 of the commercial area is 40' feet. There is a 120' foot setback proposed between the commercial structures and the residential structures. o The continuation of the residential pad moving into the proposed South Pointe park area is illustrated, showing the location of street "All . Street "A", at this location, is at grade with the commercial area. The slope falls off from street "A" down towards one of the Homeowners Association's ownership parcels. o There is a 55' foot set back between street "A" and the property line of the Homeowners Association open.space parcel. Cross"Section"D" - Illustrates beginning from the 57 freeway moving westerly, cutting through the commercial area, then through the RnP, and then the Patel property. o Brea Canyon Road, at this location, is at grade with the proposed commercial property. It is also about 5' or 6' feet higher than the 57 freeway, still having ample visibility from the freeway on to the commercial property. o The depth of cut at this location is 111' feet, which is approximately in the middle of the commercial area. o The depth of fill at the existing stream is 66' feet. Half of the commercial area is in the canyon, and half is in the cut area where the hill exists. Preserving some of the slide slopes and some of the canyon area would eliminate approximately 1/2 of the proposed 30 acre commercial area. o The park site, moving across the commercial area, is illustrated, locating street "A" on the southerly portion of the park, as suggested by staff. The park site and the commercial site are pretty much at grade level, making them assessable to one another. o Depth of cut in this area is 60' feet. There is a 320' foot open space separation between the edge of street "A" and the f irst home on the RnP tract. It illustrates how half off the park is flat and usable, and how half the park is usable but in a passive open space environment. The first home of the RnP tract is separated, from a noise standpoint, from the active park site. o Moving westerly from the RnP tract into the Patel tract, illustrating the location of Morning Sun, there is a 20' foot cut on the April 26, 1993 Page 6 Patel portion. The Patel tract has a blue line stream, and around 50 Oak Trees associated with it. Cross Section "E" - Illustrates north to south through the Homeowners Association ownership, which is located on the west side of the property cutting through the Peaceful Hills property. o There is approximately an 80' foot setback between the existing homes and the proposed homes, which generally relates to the setback characteristics of the RnP and the Patel tracts at that location. The typical existing grade in depth of fill in this area is about 46' feet. o The existing residential Peaceful Hills tract is located at an elevation of 980' feet. There is an approximate 165' foot grade differential between the home that overlooks the HOA open space area and the first home of the RnP tract. There is an 111' foot setback difference between the property line of the Peaceful Hills nearest home and the property line of the nearest home proposed at the RnP tract at this location. Cross Section "F" - Illustrates from the Peaceful Hills subdivision crossing north, northwest to a point near Morning Sun Drive in the Patel tract. o The existing residential Peaceful Hills is at an elevation of 930' feet. o The proposed grade at RnP is 810' feet, and there is an 180 foot grade differential. o There is no view line obstruction between the existing residential and the proposed residential. There is a 90' foot property line setback between the RnP property and the Homeowners Association property. There is a 165' foot setback between the first home at Peaceful Hills and the first home at RnP. Cross Section "G" - Illustrates from Peaceful Hills north, northeast through the Arciero tract and through the commercial site. o There is a 320' foot setback between the first existing residential home on Glenthorpe Drive, and a 100' foot elevation difference between the first home at Glenthorpe Drive and the first home at the Arciero tract, whereas the Arciero tract would be at a higher elevation. April 26, 1993 Page 7 The depth of cut at this location is 103' feet. o The beginning of the commercial property is from Glenthrope Drive to the edge *of the residential property. The depth of fill of the commercial site is 73' feet. o The parks site in relationship of the commercial site is illustrated, with street "A" located on the southside. It is a flat pad. The depth of fill at the park site is 69' feet. There is a 100' foot elevation higher to the existing homes at Peaceful Hills to the park site. The setback is over 100' feet. Hardy Strozier concluded the slide presentation, which also concluded staff's presentation of the various elements of the Master Plan, and the technical elements of the proposed grading concepts. It is staff's recommendation that the Planning Commission invite the three developers to present their respective projects within the proposed South Pointe Master Plan area. Sasak and RnP have prepared alternative tentative tract maps for the Commission's review, which were included in the March 22, 1993 staff report. Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 7:05 pm. The meeting was reconvened at 7:20 p.m. Chair/Flamenbaum, referring to the South Pointe Master Plan booklet attachment "B" of the Jan. 25, 1993 meeting, requested more information regarding the transfer of land. Hardy Strozier stated that the City owns about 8 acres of residual slope easement property located along Brea Canyon Road, 2.5 acres of existing Larkstone Park, and 5 acres of the former Water District property, totaling about 15 acres to be dedicated to the developers. The developer is proposing to dedicate a 28 acre park site, and another 10 to 15 acres of commercial property, totaling 38 to 43 acres that will be dedicated to the City. The City will end up with a net 15 to 20 acres more useable property with this Master Plan in it's various transactions. The City also gets land back from the School District, in which the City will transfer that land to RnP, who in turn will transfer commercial acreage and park acreage to the City. Jan Dabney, 671 Brea Canyon Road, consultant for RnP and Arciero on the Master Plan, explained that April 26, 1993 Page 8 he was hired by RnP, January of 1991, to meet with the City on the development of their 78 acres. They met with the City, and individually with the Council members, to propose an empty pallet for the Council to outline the desires of the community on RnP's ownership. The following concerns were addressed by the Council: environmental issues surrounding the canyon; the School District's capabilities to proceed with the construction of a Middle School; the proposed Arciero tract; and concerns on what would occur with this 171 acres undeveloped, and it's impacts on the surrounding community. After viewing the project for 6 or 7 months, it was recommended by the then City Manager that a Master Plan or a Specific Plan be developed, allowing for the best utilization of the entire property. The Master Plan was predicated by a market analysis which addressed many of the concerns raised by the public such as the devaluing of the adjacent properties, the general development of the residential aspect and enclaves, the sizing of the lots, and vacancies. The first consideration of the overall aspects of the Master Plan was the cost of the land, and the economics of _ the marketing of the properties. The planning _ aspects of the location of the commercial, the park, street "A", the aesthetics of the project, and all the accesses have been serious studied. If a street is to be realigned, one must consider the dramatic impact it would have on the entire project. Another major consideration of the Master Plan was a density analysis. It has always been the intent to have this Master Plan be the least dense development, as far as actual lots per acre, in the entire area, and to create a recreational area that the children could enjoy. He then reviewed the following densities of the existing developments: Tract 27141 has a gross area of 75 acres, with 228 single family detached residential units, and a gross density of 3.04 DU/acre; Area 1, homes surrounding Morning Sun, has a gross area of 7.7 acres, with 24 single family detached units, a gross density of 3.12 DU/acre, and an average lot size was 10,800 square feet, the biggest lot being 15,390 square feet, and the minimum lot being 8,260 square feet; and Area 2 has a gross area of 32.5 acres, with 117 units, a gross density of 3.6 DU/acre, with an average lot size of 9,450 square feet; Area 3, surrounding South Pointe Middle School, consists of 109 acres, with 290 units, for a gross density of 2.65 unit, and an average lot size of 12,760 square feet, with a minimum lot of 7,100 square feet (There was not any dedication of park or open space in the development of these April 26, 1993 Page 9 specific project); Area 4, the Pathfinder Homeowners Association, has a gross area of 89.93 acres, with 173 single family detached residential units, which includes 36.9 acres of dedicated open space, and an improved 1.65 acres developed park within the community, with a gross density of 1.92 DU/acre, and an average lot size net development of 10,400 square feet, with a minimum lot size of about 6,600 square feet. The Pathfinder Homeowners Association was a density transfer from the two open spaces set aside to allow the cluster development under County zoning. VC/Meyer inquired of the difference between gross density and net net density. Jan Dabney explained that the net net number is derived from the actual lot, excluding the street, parks, dedicated open space, and calculates the intensity of the development and not density. There are three density configurations: gross density which includes the street; net density which includes all the park and open space, but excludes the street; and the net net density that excludes everything but the true lot. CDD/DeStefano confirmed that the density provisions in the City's Zoning ordinance are based upon gross density. Jan Dabney then reviewed the following densities of the proposed developments: Area 5, the RnP development, has a gross area of 61.6 acres, with 90 single family detached residential units, which includes the dedication of 2.5 acres of open space and 28.05 acres of park, and has a gross density of 1.46 units per acre, with an average lot size of almost 12,000 square feet, a maximum lot size of 18,700 square feet, and a minimum lot size of 9,000 square feet; Area 6, the Arciero development, has a gross area of about 41 acres, with 91 single family detached residential units, which includes 14.1 acres of dedicated open space, and a gross density of 2.23 units per acre, with an average lot size of 9,200 square feet, a maximum lot size of 17,200, and a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet; the combined area of Arciero and RnP is 102 acres with 181 single family units, with a gross density of 1.77 units per acre over the Master Plan; the Patel property, depending on the final proposal, goes from 1.77 to 1.85 average density across the Master Plan. April 26, 1993 Page 10 Jan Dabney stated then that all concerns have been considered and evaluated. An analysis, completed about two years ago to determine the feasibility of leaving a portion of the canyon open, concluded that doing so would not really be a benefit to the City because it would still require the removal of the top of the hill, the removal of the vegetation, and the buttressing of the existing slides. This Master Plan, as presented, was developed to blend the various aspects desired by the City. The park configuration was laid out to break up the commercial from the School District, and the commercial from the residential development, and to provide an excellent buffer between the existing development on top of Peaceful Hills and the commercial. The location of street "A" serves to provide for some protection in case there is a condition of slippage. Those opposing the project seem to be 1 part politician, 1 part environmentalist, and 5 parts "not in my back yard".. Those on Morning Sun have indicated that they are opposed to the development because they have a substandard street. However, in reality, Morning sun is not a substandard street, and though there is no sidewalk built in the right-of-way, they do enjoy the use of 12 feet of the County's property instead. If this project was not to be approved because of the sidewalk, which is about an $18,000 cost, the owners of the property would probably be willing to resolve this single issue. VC/Meyer inquired if the developers met with the Pathfinder Homeowners Association to explore the possibilities of improving their existing open space property for additional passive recreational, and exploring possibilities of allowing public access to the area. Jan Dabney stated that, in his opinion, the concern that the Pathfinder Homeowners Association had, regarding the enhancement of their property and the passive area around there, was that they preferred not to give up anything in their fight to stop the project. If in fact the project does develop, they would probably then give some consideration to those mitigations. VC/Meyer inquired if it would be possible to provide public access to the Homeowners Association's open space for passive recreational use. He also inquired if part of the ancient landslide is within the Pathfinders Homeowners Association's open space area. April 26, 1993 Page 11 Jan Dabney stated that the open space area does lend itself nicely to passive recreational aspects. The ancient landslide appears to stem from Mr. Schad's house down to the park. VC/Meyer requested a preliminary engineering feasibility study of moving road "A" northerly against the Arciero project. Jan Dabney stated that locating the road on the northerly side, adjacent to the Arciero tract, saves some of the Oak trees, but it -does not yield as much of the canyon as anticipated because a 2:1 slope would not be allowed within the City due to that specific the hillside considerations to grading avenue. If there was no improvement to the Street "A" canyon whatsoever, the true location for of the property would be on the southern end it has the least intrusive impact on the because canyon coming from that direction. He then pointed out that the private property owners involved in o1of this Master Plan have a developmentpotential 452 dwelling units, but only approximately 200 :4 units are being proposed. Furthermore, almost 50% of the entire RnP and Arciero ownership, within the residential development, is being transferred to either passive or recreational park facility or open space. Jan Dabney, in response to VC/Meyer's inquiry regarding the closures of Rapid View and Larkstone, stated that, strictly from an engineering point of view with no consideration to City policy, every street should be connected to lessen the impact on every specific neighborhood. It is not desired having just emergency access to Morning Sun because of the associated fire hazards, even though the minimum fire department standards are met by having emergency access only to Morning Sun. Upon the request of C/Grothe, Jan Dabney showed the slide illustrating the location of the development as compared to the location of the existing canyon. About 1.4 million yards of dirt will have to be cut to create that commercial strip center, regardless if any of the dirt is put in the canyon. The tree count does go down on the easterly side of the specific canyon, but the tree size appears to be more significant. C/Grothe suggested that, as an alternative to what has been proposed, a portion of the dirt be put on the east side of the canyon to gain back a fair amount of the commercial pad, and then placing the April 26, 1993 Page 12 rest of the dirt on the center of the development creating a hill in the middle, with Brea Canyon and the school on either side. This mimics the general topography of the City, which are hillsides, and mitigates the problems associated with lights, and sounds from the freeway. Though this configuration would eliminate a lot of the park, it also reduces grading and cutting down into the canyon. The road would be designed at the base, wrapping around with some access roads into the housing development, and no homes would front that road. Jan Dabney pointed out that most of the Councilmembers urged them to consider a strong, large, active recreational community. Having a smaller commercial development, and leaving a portion of the canyon, was considered, however, if the commercial development becomes too narrow along Brea Canyon Road then terrible marketing constraints develop. One of the considerations of this project is the huge traffic generator immediately before us. The traffic count on the 57 freeway is dramatic to this project. C/Grothe stated that the developers have a responsibility to build a project that resembles the rest of Diamond Bar. Most of the -development in Diamond Bar does not have such gigantic flat pads and development, but rather terraces up and down hills. Jan Dabney pointed out that the mountain, for the development in the Pathfinder Homeowners Association, was completely cut off flat, and the entire cut was put in the original Sandstone Canyon headwaters. we are very sensitive to this specific neighborhood, more so, historically, than people have been in the past. C/Grothe stated that he has been requesting potentials and possibilities for the last 6 months demonstrating why the shopping center would or would not work. It is important to remember that what is hot in retail building and construction today may change in two to three years. It is short sighted to do planning based upon sales tax revenues. There is a need to review the options to determine if the project presented is the best project to be proposed. Jan Dabney pointed out that the one thing not changing is the City's declining revenue versus service costs. He explained that many of the things being suggested through mitigation have April 26, 1993 Page 13 already added over $5,000 per lot for the planning function, and $7,500 per lot for tree mitigation for Mr. Arciero's project. If the wheel is reinvented at this point, from a conceptual point of view, it would add a substantial amount of money to the cost of the development. After 2,000 man hours on this project, the plan presented today is very sensitive to the community needs. C/Plunk requested Mr. Dabney to compare this project to the approximate 200 unit project turned down by LA County a few years back. She then suggested that there be consideration made to assure that the commercial center is not a size that would only hold dry cleaners and pizza parlors. Chair/Flamenbaum inquired if there has been a survey conducted on the San Diego horned lizard, as referred to in the EIR. Hardy Strozier stated that the survey has been conducted which indicated that the horned lizard is not on the site. The written results of the survey will be given to the Commission when it is received. Furthermore, the Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc. have contended that there are no cougars present in the canyon. Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 9:08 P.M. The meeting was reconvened at 9:20 p.m. Frank Arciero Jr., of Arciero & Sons, 950 N. Tustin, Anaheim, made the following comments: they have researched and studied various different designs to the project to try and mitigate the potential problems; the site is unique in that one is confined in certain areas; staff has been available to answer any of the Commission's questions up to this point; the project presented, and denied, before the LA County Planning Commission was for a 120 unit seniors development; when the School District expressed an interest in buying part of the property, they returned to the County's Commission with an R-1 development, but because the City, at that time, was ready to incorporate, the project was put aside, and he decided to wait until after incorporation to present a project; the City called him a year later to discuss master planning the entire area; 3 1/2 years later, we are still trying to discuss the master plan; and an EIR was circulated and approved allowing him to move the dirt, and he has the funding and the mechanism to move the dirt today; April 26, 1993 Page 14 and he has not moved tl to be in good standing to VC/Meyer's inquiry Rapid View access to explained that origii Larkstone Drive and Rai of opposition and co would create a lot of View. During the coui came forward and sl proposed today, with Brea Canyon Road to i The design for South P e dirt because he has wanted with the City. In response -egarding the history of the his site, Mr. Arciero Jr. ally there was access to id View, but there was a lot icern that the development traffic going through Rapid se of mediation, the School ggested the configuration :he primary access being on zclude an emergency access. )irate Middle Schccl hn�- haPn completed and approved by the State architect. Though access to the school from the project has been cut off, a pedestrian access will be created through a walkway so that the children can take access to the school via a path. Hardy Strozier confirmed that the Arciero development will generate 30 trips a day, which is not a significant number of new trips for a local collector. VC/Meyer inquired if Arciero's project could be redesigned to provide access to Rapid View. Frank Arciero Jr. stated that the redesign may be feasible but research would be needed to determine to what extent, taking into consideration the School constraints. In response to Chair/Flamenbaum, he stated that there is no present impediment for them to move that dirt at this point, with the exception of obtaining a Fish and Game Permit, which is not a problem. The dirt has not been moved at this time because he would prefer to work with the City. He then corrected that the amount of dirt generated by this plan is no more than 4.5 million cubic yards of dirt, as opposed to the 9 million that was mentioned. In response to C/Grothe, Frank Arciero Jr. stated that though he does not yet have the grading permit to move the dirt, he could work something out with the school district to do the grading, if needed. James Budke, President of Budke Design, 5 Wrigley, Irvine, representing Mr. Patel, made the following comments regarding the proposed project: there are 6.7 acres with an average slope of 12% to 15%; there is a 136' feet of elevation change from the lowest point to the highest point; there is a portion of blue line stream, of about 300 feet, on site; there are 53 coast live oaks to be removed; there are 23 lots proposed; there will be 145,800 April 26, 1993 Page 15 1. i cubic yards of cut; the on site fill is 8,790 cubic yards with an.export of about 58,000 cubic yards; the deepest cut occurs on lot #16 of 41 feet; the highest fill on the site is on lot .#.1.4 for. approximately 50 feet; the minimum lot size is 8,000 square feet; the minimum pad size proposed is 6,000 square feet; the largest lot is 16,700 square feet; the average lot is 10,200 square feet; and the density is 3.43, which is comparable to the surrounding neighborhood. He then presented several alternatives to the site, as indicated in the staff report, that have been laid out responding to comments made by the Commission, staff, and members of the audience. He then presented a slide presentation illustrating a brief overview of the alternatives for Mr. Patel's site, as presented in the staff report. Concept #4 is the preferred proposed alternative. Chair/Flamenbaum, noting that Concept #4 completely disenfranchises those residents that live in that area from the City, in terms of any physical connection, stated that, in his opinion, it is an error not to directly link those people with the City. James Budke explained that the decision not to provide for a direct link came from his client, who is responding to a lot of comments addressed to him by many of the residents on Morning Sun. In response to Chair/ Flamenbaum, he stated that the gross density is 3.43, and the draft General Plan calls for a zoning of RPD 10,000-6U. Chair/Flamenbaum pointed out that the draft General Plan currently indicates that 3DU/acre is allowed in that zone. C/Grothe thanked the applicant for his efforts in drawing a number of alternatives, illustrating what a number of the suggestions made would look like. C/Li inquired if Mr. Patel has definitely decided to be part of the Master Plan process. He also inquired what is meant by a blue line stream. James Budke indicated that Mr. Patel is definitely part of this Master Plan. In regards to the blue line stream, he explained that the term blue line ;. comes from it's actual, physical depiction on a USGS topography map. At one point in time, this stream was a much longer, and larger stream. The water found in the stream now generally is runoff from the south slope landscaping and lawn April 26, 1993 Page 16 irrigation. Once it is designated as a blue line stream, then it is always a blue line stream regardless of the size. Hardy Strozier explained that the federal agencies use the USGS quad as a first indicator of a navigatable water way of the United States, and Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act, requires a dredge and fill permit within the navigatable water way. Following this, a stream bed alteration permit is also required from the California Park Fish and Game. C/Li stated that, if by the City Council, gutter not be used services. this project is to be approved he would prefer that cop and in any of the storm drain In response to VC/Meyer, James Budke confirmed that all existing oak trees, which are mostly clustered, will be removed and replaced according to the City's 2:1 ratio policy. He also indicated that, at this time, no consideration has been made to designing an architectural feature with the trees on a valley rather than on a slope. It is Mr. Patel's intent to pay in lieu fees rather than providing any recreational space- VC/Meyer, referring to Concept #4, inquired if consideration has been given to the problem that all municipal service delivery is to be made out of the City. Hardy Strozier stated that staff has considered this and has recommended that the access be through to Morning Sun, and that there be a maximum of 21 dwelling units. VC/Meyer expressed his concern that the residents on the cul-de-sac will experience a major change in it's existing lifestyle when the street at the indicated location is introduced. He suggested that a full range of design options be considered, including clustering, to try to save some of the open space, and that there be consideration to a common recreational area. James Budke pointed out that Concept #4 does not have a through street to that cul-de-sac. We have tried to be as sensitive as possible to the residents on Morning Sun in that regard. There is flexibility on the site, and there was an attempt to consider a variety of options, and constraints. April 26, 1993 Page 17 Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 10:40 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 10:50 p.m. Chair/Flamenbaum suggested that the Commission focus on the concept of the draft General Plan. He reminded the audience that the Commission does plan to meet again Thursday, April 29, 1993 to allow additional time for public comments. VC/Meyer suggested that, since the Commission, in essence, has made closure on the environmental document, the public may prefer to focus on the land use issues of the canyon rather than the environmental issues. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the Public Hearing opened. Sherry Roberts, residing at 2660 Broken Feather, responding to some of the comments made by C/Grothe, pointed out that "trashing" the canyon is a matter of opinion, and in her opinion, building a beautiful school, adding beautiful home equivalent iv lent to the existing homes, and adding a park "trashing" the canyon. She then presented a video, produced by students from South Pointe Middle School, depicting the conditions existing at the school today, which include overcrowded portable classrooms, dangerous traffic conditions in the morning and the afternoon, overcrowded lunch time conditions, and problems occurring when it rains. She stressed the urgency of building a school immediately. The developers have a right to develop on property owned by them. Vinod Kashyap, residing at 21452 Chirping Sparrow Road, made the following comments: the schools in Kenya, Africa are in better condition than South Pointe Middle School; the developers should not be required to redo the entire process for the benefit of one Commissioner; he too pays taxes therefore. his voice should carry as much weight as the Pathfinder Homeowner's Association; he moved to Diamond Bar because he wanted his children to get a good education in a good environment; and the children should take precedent over the interests of a few selfish people. An York Lee, residing at 20724 Gernside Drive, submitted a letter for the record indicating his support for the construction of the school. The school project should be separated from the rest of the proposed project so that it's construction is no longer delayed. April 26, 1993 Page 18 Max Maxwell concurred that a school is needed, and suggested that the school project be separated from the rest of the proposals. Concerned that there is no General Plan, he requested a letter confirming why the EIR has been separated from the rest of the project, if the Planning Commission did actually recommend it's approval to the City Council, and if it is possible for the Planning Commission to approve the entire project without it ever going before the City Council. George Barrett, a resident, concurring that a school should be built, stated that, in his opinion, the school is being held hostage to get the rest of the project approved. He pointed out that other citizens oppose the project, not just the Pathfinder Homeowners Association, and that other schools in Diamond Bar suffer from similar conditions as those present at the South Pointe Middle School. This project will only bring on additional traffic, compounding horrendous traffic conditions already present. Dr. Gorman made the following comments: it may be illegal to finalize an EIR without an approved General Plan; he is planning on conferring with the LA County Planning Commission to determine if Oak trees 8" in diameter with a girth of about 2511, and if heritage trees of 20" in diameter, can be removed; the biology and the geology portion of the draft EIR is faulty; he saw 8 or 9 cougar tracks, a few weeks ago, in Sandstone Canyon; the canyon is a transit corridor for cougars between Tonner Canyon and to the west; and, in his opinion, the project is being forced through. Barbara Beach Cushane, residing at 2021 Peaceful Hills Road, made the following comments: the EIR concludes that the noise impacts could not be mitigated beyond a significant level, which is contrary to Mr. Strozier's comment that the project will not create a noise problem; the proposed homes will interfere with the existing view; this project dramatically and negatively affects the quality of life of the homeowners; there are other scientists, just as accountable as the developer's scientists, that disagree vehemently with the conclusions brought forth; it is quite true that she does not want the project in her backyard.; originally, this land was zoned open space, or a possible park, as is indicated in the tract map; it was the City, after incorporation, that rezoned that land and allowed this project to be considered tonight; the Pathfinder's Homeowners were told that the land April 26, 1993 Page 19 would not be developed; she thanked C/Grothe for his comments made, and indicated that they too are waiting for answers to questions asked last November of 1992; and she pointed out that school quality has nothing to do with brick and mortar. CDD/DeStefano, upon the request of C/Plunk, explained that there has been no zone changes in that area since the City incorporated, and that the zoning for that area is exactly as it was upon incorporation in April of 1989. The only thing changed was the adoption of the Land Use classification, with the approval of the General Plan in July of 1992, which of course has since been rescinded. Bill Tinsmen, a resident, expressed his concern that decisions are being made without a General Plan. He inquired if upon the approval of this development, and if the commercial center at Pathfinder and Brea Canyon is no longer vacant, and the business condition at the Albertson center suddenly improves, would the traffic conditions be such that the existing residents in Area "A" would be able to egress from their tract without needing another signal. He concurred that the condition of the school is horrendous but that the issue should be brought before the School District. The school issue should be separated for this development. Don Schad, residing at 1824 Shaded Wood Road, thanked the planners and the developers for the presentation made this evening. Hearing no further testimony, Chair/Flamenbaum declared the Public Hearing closed. Hardy Strozier, in response to a comment made by Mrs. Cushane, explained that the EIR indicates that the noise, from any point of the project, can be mitigated to levels that are adequate according to the City's noise guidelines. C/Plunk requested staff to respond, at the next meeting, if the South Pointe Middle School dirt can moved as indicated by Mr. Arciero Jr.. Following discussion, the Planning Commission concurred to continue the public hearing to April 29, 1993 at 7:00 p.m., understanding that VC/Meyer and C/Grothe cannot be present due to a conflict of schedules. INFORMATION CDD/DeStefano reported that the General Plan April 26, 1993 Page 20 ITEMS: process for revision has begun with two community workshops held, each having 25 people in attendance. representing various interests within the community. He also reported that the issue of reorganization will be on the May 10, 1993 meeting agenda. ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Grothe and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting at 11:45 p.m. to April 29, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. Re ective yry ,� James DeStefano Secretary Attest- Bruce Flamenbaum Chairman CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 29, 1993 <� CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Flamenbaum called the meeting to order at 7:11 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond ` Bar, California. PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by ALLEGIANCE: Community Development Director James DeStefano. ROLL CALL: commissioners: Plunk, Li, and Chairman Flamenbaum. Commissioner Grothe arrived at 9:00 P.M. Vice Chairman Meyer was absent (excused). Also present were Community Development Director James DeStefano, Associate Planner Rob Searcy, City Attorney Bill Curley, and Contract Recording Secretary Liz Myers. CONTINUED Hardy Strozier, Project Manager, reported that PUBLIC HEARINGS: staff's presentation of the various elements of the Master Plan, and the technical elements of the General Plan proposed grading concepts, concluded at the last Amendment 92-2; public hearing of April 26, 1993. The developers DA 92-1, 2, and 3; had also, during that meeting, presented their Vesting TT Map respective projects within the proposed South 51407, CUP 92-8 & Pointe Master Plan area. Tonight, staff would OT 92-8; ZC 91-2 & recommend that the Planning Commission consider a OT 91-2; TT Map consistency analysis of the proposed South Pointe 51253 & CUP 92-12; Master Plan to the City's General Plan, under OT 92-9; SP Master Ordinance #4, and then it is recommended that the Plan; & EIR 92-1 Commission review the Master Plan. Staff has reviewed the City's General Plan, under Ordinance #4, and concluded, in the January 25, 1993 staff report, that the South Pointe Project was consistent with the City's General Plan. Chair/ Flamenbaum, noting that the public had not finished giving testimony at the April 26, 1993 public hearing, stated that he had not anticipated discussing anything related to the General Plan this evening. C/Li suggested that the public first be allowed to address their comments to the Commission, then, upon conclusion of those comments, the Planning commission can then consider General Plan consistency. Chair/Flamenbaum suggested that the public also be allowed to comment about General Plan consistency. C/Plunk concurred with Chair/Flamenbaum. She then requested an executive session, pursuant to the Brown Act, regarding how this fits into the pending litigation, if deemed necessary. April 29, 1993 Page 2 Chair/Flamenbaum declared the opened. public hearing Max Maxwell; residing at 3211 Bent Twig, stated that he would like to hear staff's conclusion on how this project relates to the General Plan, especially since the General Plan is in the process of revision. He then stated that Dr. Beier was misquoted in the letter submitted by Pacific Southwest Biology Services, Inc., regarding the conclusions made concerning the presence of cougars in the Canyon, and that Dr. Beier will be sending a letter clarifying the proper information. He questioned why such a correspondence arrived following the review of the draft EIR. He then requested a written response from CDD/DeStefano regarding a question he raised at the last meeting concerning the status of the EIR. C/Li suggested that it would have been more beneficial if Mr. Maxwell had actually had that letter now to present to the Commission and the City so that the information can be verified. Max Maxwell explained that he recently received this information, and he will submit it to the City upon receiving it. Vinod Kashyap, residing at 21452 Chirping Sparrow Road, pointed out that the draft EIR has been available as an item of public record for some time now, and Mr. Maxwell had ample time to review the information. It appears Mr. Maxwell has been negligent in not studying the EIR, and waiting to this last moment to discuss inconsistencies for the purpose of perhaps delaying the project. Don Schad, residing at 1824 Shaded Wood Road, requested verification if the grading process for the project will take almost 10 years. This project is not consistent with the original General Plan, as recommended by the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC). The General Plan, which is currently under revision and is being used as a guideline, is totally inadequate for the following reasons: the land designation recommended by the GPAC was 1DU/2.5 acres, compared to 3.2DU/acre as indicated in the current draft General Plan, which is what this present project is based upon; the General Plan recommended by GPAC suggested clustered housing, but clustered housing has not been identified at all in this project, nor in the current draft General Plan; and the current draft General Plan was 3.2DU/acres or plus, depending April 29, 1993 Page 3 upon on geological factors, and GPAC's General Plan recommended preserving all natural wilderness areas to the extent possible so that there would be no islands leaving wildlife trapped. Ernid Gasowitz, 1644 Chapel Hill Drive, Walnut, stated that, in August of 1978, the Los Angeles Regional Planning Commission denied a request for a Conditional Use permit with the understanding that the area was unstable for this type of development, and assuring a group of property owners, called Emerald Hills at that time, that there would probably be no more development in the canyons. In response to Chair/Flamenbaum, he agreed to submit a copy of the article to staff. Vinod Kashyap pointed out that if Mr. Gasowitz was referring to the slip planes, that issue was addressed adequately at the last meeting. Hearing no further testimony, Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing closed. C/Plunk read the portion of the letter from Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc., as referred to by Mr. Maxwell. She pointed out that the information provided is general information. Max Maxwell clarified that there was no conducted survey west of the 57, as indicated, and that the Orange County Cooperative Mountain Lion Study did not come to the conclusions stated in the letter. CDD/DeStefano stated that the staff report provided to the Commission this evening is the same staff report presented to the Commission for the April 26, 1993 meeting, which is an updated version of the report provided to the Commission for the meeting of April 12, 1993. The reference discussion regarding the cougar issue from the Pacific Southwest Biological Service, Inc. was included in the April 12, 1993 report. In regards to Mr. Maxwell's inquiry regarding the status of the EIR, CDD/DeStefano explained that the EIR has not been certified, nor has the Planning Commission made a decision on the EIR for this project, but merely set aside the document in order to further study the project details. The Commission will be revisiting the EIR in the future, whether the project is denied or approved. Furthermore, the whole project, and the EIR, will be reviewed by the City Council. April 29, 1993 Page 4 Chair/Flamenbaum requested Hardy Strozier to review how it was determined that the project is consistent with the General Plan. Hardy Strozier referred the Commission to page 32 of the January 25, 1993 staff report which reviews a Goal and an Objective analysis through the General Plan as it relates to the proposed South Pointe Master Plan. CDD/DeStefano reminded the Commission that, at the time the January 25, 1993 report was prepared, the City did have an adopted General Plan, and that on March 16, 1993, the City Council rescinded that adoption. Hardy Strozier will be outlining the goals, policies, and strategies of what is now called the draft General Plan. Hardy Strozier, in response to Chair/Flamenbaum's inquiry, stated that he has not been part of the General Plan revision process. He then proceeded to read the January 25, 1993 staff report which outlined the project's consistency with the General Plan. It is staff's opinion that the South Pointe Master Plan is completely consistent with the draft General Plan. Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 8:07 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 8:18 p.m. Chair/Flamenbaum, referring to page 35, appendix "A" of the January 25, 1993 staff report, the Housing Goals, inquired how the City will be complying with the Housing Element for moderate to low incomes, as required by State law, if the proposed homes are estimated to sell for $350,000 to $400,000 dollars. Hardy Strozier explained that the State law requires cities to provide a broad range of housing opportunities, to include a certain percentage of number of housing units in the very low, low, moderate, and upper income categories. The law does not require that there be components of these four housing categories in every project. This project, which provides housing opportunities in the moderate and upper income categories, does meet those goals. Low, and very low income opportunities are usually provided in cities through the attainment of apartment projects, or affordable condominiums projects. April 29, 1993 Page 5 Chair/Flamenbaum inquired if it is feasible to require mixed housing in the commercial areas of this project. Hardy Strozier explained that such land use components are usually found in very urbanized areas because they have the land value that can afford those types of building improvements to go multi story. Such a situation, or land values, are not found in Diamond Bar today. If this were required on the commercial portion of the project, in staff's opinion, the project would be doomed to failure. CDD/DeStefano pointed out that the 34 unit town home project, at Golden Springs and Torito Lane, recently approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council, could be an example of a project that might fit into the moderate to low income category, based upon the product type and the anticipated price range. Furthermore, the Housing Element of the General Plan, strategy 1.1.1, on page II -20, does indicate that commercial/office developments, which propose residential components, should be considered but only where feasible and appropriate. Such a mix use concept would have to be determined on a case by case basis, and, as Hardy Strozier pointed out, those are most likely to occur in Diamond Bar's more urbanized areas. Hardy Strozier, in response to Chair/Flamenbaum, explained that the policy regarding the consistency of the project to the preservation and conservation of existing housing stock is inapplicable to the project. Chair/Flamenbaum, referring to one of the goals in the Resource Management Element, inquired how it was determined that grading, as well as the removal of all the trees, maintain the open space system which preserves scenic beauty and protects important biological resources. Hardy Strozier explained that, based on professional experience, it was felt that the Master Plan design has a very strong balance of open space uses, up to and including the preservation of a fair amount of existing natural areas, and that it also had a very efficient open space linkage system. From a master planning standpoint, it was felt that this is an exemplary design of a balancing of land uses, not dwelling on the total preservation or total development, but a fine mix. The Master Plan proposes an April 29, 1993 Page 6 overabundance of open space preservation when measured against the standards set forth in the General Plan and the local codes. Hardy Strozier then reviewed the following areas that have been preserved: there is a large existing open space expanse, Cross Section "G", that is being essentially preserved on the edges of the Arciero tract; there is approximately 60 feet of natural terrain in Cross Section "C"; there is an area off the edge of Brea Canyon Road, in Cross Section "B", that is very natural; and there is a large expanse of natural terrain adjacent to Brea Canyon Road and the Arciero Tract. Jan Dabney, 671 Brea Canyon Road, in response to Chair/Flamenbaum's inquiry as to what percentage of land mass will remain unscathed for preservation purposes, stated that under 200 of the 78 acres owned by RnP remains unscathed, and about 20% of the 40 acres owned by Arciero was set aside in it's natural state as it adjoins adjacent property. Jim Budke, representing Mr. Patel, stated that about 5% or less of the 6.7 acres owned by Sasak will be left in it's natural state. Chair/Flamenbaum, referring to the Physical Mobility Element, then inquired if the consistency findings would remain the same if Rapid View, Larkstone, and Morning Sun were opened. Hardy Strozier stated that the City traffic engineer and the consulting traffic engineer both have indicated that there would be very little relative benefit derived from opening Rapid view because very little traffic would be utilizing that street. By putting in street "A", from Brea Canyon Road, an unloaded collector is provided for school buses and other such traffic, providing a more efficient, shorter, and a safer connection to that school. Morning Sun would be the best choice for a secondary access point, which may be required for safety purposes, because it is less attractive due to the various curves in the road. Larkstone would be a more direct route, however, if one of the objectives is to discourage through traffic through residential neighborhoods, it would be safer and more consistent to close Larkstone, and to let Street "A" serve it. It is our plan to discourage the connection through Larkstone. CDD/DeStefano stated that the General Plan does have a specific clause that discusses the integrity of existing residential neighborhoods, and the April 29, 1993 Page 7 discouragement of through traffic. Opening Rapid View, which is a direct link to Colima, and opening Larkstone, which is a direct link to Colima as well as Lemon, would not be, in staff's opinion, consistent with the Goals as they have been written, and the vision as it was crafted through the various review processees of the General Plan. Rapid View and Larkstone have the potential to become another Morning Sun and Rolling Knoll/Quail Summit situation where it could become a cut through to avoid the intersection of Golden Springs and Brea Canyon Road, and to avoid the congestion of the freeway on ramp near the Jack in the Box facility. Chair/Flamenbaum inquired if the Sasak project, which projects no opening to the rest of the project, is consistent with the General Plan. CDD/DeStefano stated that the Sasak property, which is on the boundary line of Diamond Bar and Rowland Heights, and is on the boundary of the Walnut and Rowland Heights School District, would probably be inconsistent with the General Plan because it does not have access, or design orientation, towards these larger areas. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the Public, Hearing opened. Joyce Hill, residing at 1836 Shaded Wood Road, made the following comments: residents on Shaded Wood road overlook the canyon, and a wall will not help mitigate problems associated with construction; if the park is to be a noise mitigation measure, as indicated at the April 26, 1993 meeting, does that mean that the park will be higher in elevation than the commercial area; if the park will be that much higher than the commercial, than why is the hill being cut off since it is currently a noise mitigation measure for existing homes, not the proposed home; and should the project be recommended for approval since air quality standards will be exceeded, and health hazards will be present. Carolyn Elfelt, residing at 2119 Silver Cloud, emphasized how critical it is to get the South Pointe Middle School built immediately to help our children become healthy, happy, productive adults. Elizabeth Hodges, residing at 1604 Morning Sun, responding to the video shown at the April 26, 1993 meeting demonstrating the conditions at the South April 29, 1993 Page 8 Pointe Middle School, stated that though the condition of the school is a concern, the real issue involves the aspects of the project. Many of the schools in the area consist of portables, and many have traffic problems, making it the norm not the exception. Vinod Kashyap stated that because the problems associated with the South Pointe Middle School exist elsewhere, does not make it the norm. Children should not be taught to accept substandard conditions. Delaying the project, as some are attempting to do, hurt the children. The project should go forth expeditiously. George Barret, residing at 1880 Shaded Wood Road, pointed out that 900 of the schools are substandard, and most have the traffic problems associated with the South Pointe Middle School. Adding 200 more homes will not improve that traffic problem, but increase traffic and the amount of students in our already over crowded schools. There does not need to be a development in order to get the school constructed. The Walnut School District is aware of this and will be in court with Arciero on June 22, 1993.' Clair Harmony, residing at 24139 Alfamado Lane, expressed the following concerns: though the Hillside Ordinance was designed to preserve hillside, and the Oak Tree Ordinance was designed to preserve those trees, the City keeps issuing CUP's allowing developers an opportunity to get around those ordinances, thereby defeating it's purpose; the tract maps, related to the Pathfinder's Homeowners Association, indicate that those parcels are not to be built on, and have been dedicated as open space; such a dedication was a trade off for the density allowed for the Pathfinder development, therefore the project is actually developing double density over the permitted use of density, which is not consistent with the General Plan; and the Walnut School District has the responsibility to maintain it's facilities. Sherry Roberts, residing at 2660 Broken Feather, inquired if it is illegal for motorists to enter into the Quail Summit neighborhood. Chair/Flamenbaum explained that it is not illegal to enter into the Quail Summit neighborhood, but illegal to turn right on to Grand Ave. from Rolling April 29, 1993 Page 9 Knoll between the hours of 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 P.M. Monday through Friday. Sherry Roberts then expressed the following concerns: the access to the school is a safety hazard; another access to the school is needed besides the one coming off of Brea Canyon Road; and all of South Pointe Middle School consists of portables, and it does not have the equipment or facilities as other Middle Schools have that we compete with. CDD/DeStefano, in response to C/Li, stated that financing for the Middle School is in place, and the plans prepared by the School District have been approved by the State. The project is awaiting construction bid and a specific target date for actual construction activity. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the Public Hearing closed. Chair/Flamenbaum recess the meeting at 9:45 p.m.. The meeting was reconvened at 9:55 p.m.. Chair/Flamenbaum inquired if the Commission is prepared to discuss General Plan consistency. If the Commission is ready, he stated that he would prefer discussion not be brought to a closure since VC/Meyer was absent from the meeting, and C/Grothe missed a good portion of the presentation and discussion. C/Li stated that he feels that the Commission should continue on, at this point, and discuss General Plan consistency. C/Grothe stated that, since he did not arrive until 9:00 p.m., he would prefer to review the tapes of the meeting prior to his arrival before making a decision on General Plan consistency. C/Plunk stated that she feels that the proposed plan is generally consistent with the General Plan. She made the following comments: she would prefer to see Larkstone open; Morning Sun should not be affected solely by the traffic; one street servicing the School is not acceptable; the secondary road needs to be at a safe grade; the area has a public safety problem in it's current configuration, where wild land meets urban area in an interface, which is a similar condition that caused the tragedy from the Berkeley fire; it is a beautiful open space area, however, it is privately April 29, 1993 Page 10 owned and the responsibility of the developer; the conditions at South Pointe Middle School are substandard, and the traffic situation is worse than any other school in Diamond Bar; there is a concern whether the School meets earthquake standards; and there is a need to address, very specifically, the noise mitigation and the AQMD issues. Chair/Flamenbaum stated that he feels that the project is not completely consistent with the draft General Plan, though it is generally consistent. Though he would prefer to leave the canyon as is, weighing the pros and cons, he concurs that it meets the requirements and that it's benefits do outweigh it's detriments. There may be a concern that as a policy issue, the City may not be doing what is right in terms of managing our resources, however, it must be recognized those resources are not owned by the City. There does not seem to be an issue regarding cougars, the horned lizard, or the gnat catcher. The Middle School is a secondary issue as far as whether or not this project should approved, however, it's development is linked to the project, specifically regarding the dirt remaining on the site. C/Grothe pointed out that the project can be interpreted either way, to be consistent or inconsistent. For example, a CUP is needed for the Hillside Ordinance in order to make this plan work. However, the trade offs to the City is a permanent School, a substantial size park, and 10 acres of commercial land, which will increase the City's revenues thereby enhancing the quality of life. In order to preserve that area entirely, the options available are to either buy the property, pass a bond issue for the City to buy it, or get a conservancy to buy it. C/Plunk inquired if a motion of the Commission is necessary. DA/Curley stated that a motion would indicate a final action, therefore, a consensus of the Commission is preferred. Motion was made by C/Li, seconded by C/Plunk and CARRIED to direct staff to draft a Resolution that the project is generally consistent with the draft General Plan, to include the minor amendments mentioned. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Plunk and Li. April 29, 1993 Page 11 NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Flamenbaum. ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Grothe. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Meyer. The Planning Commission then concurred not to discuss the Master Plan tonight, but to continue that discussion to the meeting of May 10, 1993 at 7:00 p.m.. INFORMATION CDD/DeStefano reported that the next community ITEMS: workshop for the General Plan process for revision is scheduled for May 1, 1993 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. at Chaparral Middle School. He reported that a summary comment was presented to the participants of the community workshop at the April 28, 1993 meeting. Staff will provide a copy of those comments to anyone desiring one. ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by C/Li, seconded by C/Plunk and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting at 10:21 p.m. spqqti,very, ," _.James DeStefno Secretary Attest: Bruce Flamenbaum Chairmany CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMM15bluv MAY 10, 1993 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Flamenbaum called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by ALLEGIANCE: Chairman Flamenbaum. ROLL CALL: Commissioners: Grothe, Li, Plunk, Vice Chairman Meyer, and Chairman Flamenbaum. Also present were Community Development Director James DeStefano, Associate Planner Rob Searcy, Planning Technician Ann Lungu, Deputy City Attorney Craig Fox, Interim City Engineer George Wentz, and Contract Recording Secretary Liz Myers. MATTERS FROM Nick Anis, residing at 1125 Bramford Court, THE AUDIENCE: expressed his concern that information regarding Sandstone Canyon and the proposed project was misrepresented. Though he was told that the canyon was pristine, he stated that, after going into the canyon over the weekend, he found a substantial amount of trash and rubbish both in the canyon and in the stream. Furthermore, several firemen had indicated to him that they felt that Sandstone Canyon was the greatest fire risk in Diamond Bar and the surrounding area. Another misnomer is that there is a deed restriction, yet upon investigation, there is actually a map restriction. CONSENT CALENDAR: Minutes of Apr. 26, 1993 CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS: General Plan Amendment 92-2; DA 92-1, 2, and 3; Vesting TT Map 51407, CUP 92-8 & OT 92-8; ZC 91-2 & OT 91-2; TT Map 51253 & CUP 92-12; OT 92-9; SP Master Plan; & EIR 92-1 Chair/ Flamenbaum stated that a letter regarding Sandstone Canyon has been submitted by Mr. Anis. Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Plunk and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the Minutes of April 26, 1993 to the next meeting. The Planning Commission concurred not to hear any new items after 10:30 p.m. CDD/DeStefano reported that the South Pointe Master Plan project represents a comprehensive land use planning effort on approximately 171 acres of primarily undeveloped land. The proposed project is designed with a combination of residential, recreational, commercial/office, open space and educational uses. Approximately 80 residential acres are proposed for construction of approximately 195 single family homes, 31 acres are proposed for a future commercial/office space development adjacent to Brea Canyon Road, 28 acres are proposed for a public park site for both passive and active recreational uses, and 31 acres are proposed for the construction of a permanent South Pointe Middle School. The project would be May, 10, 1993 Page 2 developed over a ten year period. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Report and has directed staff to begin preparation of the appropriate resolutions recommending City Council certification. Because approval of the General Plan was rescinded n arch of 1993 by the City Council, or consideration will be undertaken in furtherancetof an amendment to the General Plan. However, Development Agreements, Tract Maps, and associated permits may proceed with reference to the Draft General Plan pursuant to the provisions of Ordinance No. 4 (1992). The Planning Commission concluded its April 29th public hearing by determining that the South Pointe Master Plan zoning regulations and development standards were consistent with the Draft General Plan. Staff was directed to prepare the appropriate resolutions for sion consideration. The future Planning Commis Planning Commission will now begin consideration of the Tentative Tract Maps. As noted within the South Pointe Master Plan development standards, 171 acre site has been divided into five land use enclaves. Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51407 (RnP) and Tentative Tract No. 51253 (Sasak Corporation) are located within Enclave 1, and Vesting Tentative Tract No. 32400 (Arciero & Sons) is located within Enclave 3. Each Tentative Tract map has been designed to development standards consistent with the Master Plan. CDD/DeStefano then reviewed the three subdivision specific proposals, as indicated in the staff report. It is staff's recommendation that the Planning Commission approve "in concept" the three proposed subdivisions, and direct staff to bring back revised resolutions for formal adoption at the next Planning Commission meeting. It is further recommended that the Commission undertake specific discussion of the Development Agreements in order to permit staff to finalize the documents for future adoption. The Development Agreement establishes the terms and conditions from which the development can proceed and provides the applicants with assurances based upon their commitment to timing and compliance with the agreements. The agreements incorporate a variety of land transfers and commitments by all par ties toward the successful completion of the proposed project. CDD/DeStefano then stated that the EIR will be brought back to the Commission for final consideration as part of the final resolutions for reviewat the time that the commission beginsto be , come to closure on this specific project forwarded to the Cityil. it is mission approveuncr the msouth that the Planning May, 10, 1993 Page 3 Pointe Master Plan development standards and major elements, and that the commission take action to approve Vesting Tentative Map No. 51407, Vetting Tentative Map No. 32400, and Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 with the draft findings and conditions contained within the attached resolutions, and that the Commission review the proposed Development Agreements. VC/Meyer suggested that, since the Sasak Corporation has presented a new iteration of the Tract Map, they should be allowed an opportunity to present their new proposal. Mr. Budke, representing Mr. Patel, reviewed the details of the proposed subdivision as follows: the recently submitted Tentative Tract Map is now in line with the City's zoning and ordinances, and meets all the criteria of the Master Plan; the adjusted 7.05 acre site is currently proposed as 21 single family units; street "B" and "D" is now a through street that goes to Morning Sun, and is 60 feet wide, and there is a short median; the map is a direct result of recommendations made by some of the Commission members; the average lot size is 11,821 square feet; the average pad size is 8,096 square feet; the largest lot, lot #4, has 20,962 square feet; the largest pad, lot #4, has 11,214 square feet; the smallest lot, lot #20, has 8,056 square feet; the smallest pad, lot #16, has 6,290 square feet; there is a lot line adjustment being proposed adjacent to lot #5, #6, & #7, and on the easterly side of lot #12 & #13, as an effort to make this a seamless development, which increases the overall density of this project by 15,300 square feet, and adds 1,750 square feet to the RnP site; the gross record density, at 6.7 acres, is 3.13 dwelling units per acre, which is almost exactly what is existing on Morning Sun; the adjusted gross density is 2.98 DU/per acre; the net net density provides an adjusted density of 3.07 DU/acre; the adjusted layout exports 10,400 less earthwork; there will probably be one graded contractor for the Master Plan project; and the maximum fill is 44 feet. Mr. Budke stated that generally, in their opinion, this proposed subdivision is now in line with the other two projects. They are looking for approval on this project and the entire Master Plan. VC/Meyer inquired if there was consideration made, in the current design analysis, to connect street "B" with Shepherd Hill. May, 10, 1993 Page 4 Mr. Budke pointed out that. a proposal having that connection was presented at the last meeting, however, such a design would require an easement for sewer and emergency egress access to the proposed cul-de-sac. This current design is in response to Chair/Flamenbaum's suggestion that the other proposal not be utilized, preferring the alignment now presented. VC/Meyer suggested that the street can still be aligned with Shepherd Hill by using the current configuration, and maintaining the concept of discouraging cut -through traffic through the entire project. There is an obligation to those residents living on the Morning Sun cul-de-sac to leave the neighborhood as it is currently, if at all possible. Mr. Budke pointed out that, with the current configuration, there are only five homes along Shepherd Hills and street "A" that will be affected. The only way to redesign it so that none of the homes are affected is to have a double ` loaded row of lots, which is detrimental froma marketing standpoint. it had been suggested by Chair/Flamenbaum to design it so that there would be a connection right at Shepherd Hills. vC/Meyer noted that the current design also has double loaded row of lots. If it is engineeringly feasible, the design should be modified, keeping all the utilities and sewer exactly as it is currently shown through a common easement between lots #1 and #21, but moving the street to the south. This modification may result in the loss of one lot, however, it is important to leave the cul- de-sac as is, without affecting existing residents. Mr. Budke stated that, from an engineering standpoint in terms of the impact on the RnP site, and sewer and drainage, it does not make sense to connect to Shepherd Hills. Our first choice was not to have a through street regardless. C/Plunk stated that it would appear that this current design is attempting to#get #the most while giving the least. If lots #5, #12, , which encroach on the RnP property, were removed, the proposal would be closer to the densities proposed by the other projects. The other two projects provide more buffer, such as the school site and the park site, offering relief to the local neighborhood. However, this project packs in May, 10, 1993 Page 5 more houses right up against the existing neighborhood, offering very little relief. Mr. Budke pointed out that the density of the project is 21 DU/per acre, which is less dense than the Arciero project, and very comparable in net net density to the RnP site. C/Li explained to Mr. Budke that the Commission is concerned that the proposal has double loaded row of lots, and that someone else's property must be utilized in order to substantiate the 21 homes. The other two proposals offer open space and other amenities, thereby offering relief to the neighborhood. Mr. Budke stated that this project has met all criteria that has been established. There is actually room to put as many as 24 lots on the site. There is no room on this 6.7 acre site to offer a school or a park. Jan Dabney, in response to Chair/Flamenbaum, stated that RnP has agreed upon the lot line adjustment, as long as it does not impact them dramatically, and that the layout would demonstrate harmony through the Master Plan. There has not yet been an opportunity to review the actual impact being proposed, however, we were pleased with the preliminary layout of the plan. Mr. Budke, in response to VC/Meyer, stated that they have concurred to construct $18,000 worth of sidewalks, off site, in the existing Morning Sun tract, only where necessary to get the children to the bus stop. C/Plunk suggested that there be a condition that approval must be received from the existing neighborhood prior to constructing curb, gutter, and sidewalks. The Planning Commission concurred. Jan Dabney, in response to Chair/Flamenbaum, explained that the plan for the Larkstone interconnection would allow it to be made into an immediate connection when desired. Two cul-de- sac's cannot come together because the bus would have to drive over the curb to get to the parking lot. C/Grothe requested clarification between the differing calculations as indicated on page 7, item 2.2, of the Cost Analysis, and page 10, the last May, 10, 1993 Page 6 bullet. He inquired if condition A is calculated at 10 acres or 15.5 acres. Hardy Strozier, in response to Chair/Flamenbaum, explained that Arciero's prior proposal, which was denied by the County, was atotally todayferent before concept than the one being proposed the Commission. AP/Searcy, in response to Chair/Flamenbaum's inquiry regarding last meetings concern that there was a possible misquote in the letter received from Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc., stated that staff was informed by the firm that they were not aware of anything in that letter that would be contradicted by anyone in their office. As of the time of this meeting, there has been no information from them stating that there would be any retractions. CDD/DeStefano, in response to VC/Meyer's concern, stated that, though the Commission cannot take definitive action this evening, it is staff's recommendation that very specific direction on the maps be given because some of the mitigation measures in the EIR may need to change as a result of that specific action. The Subdivision Map Act indicates that the subdivision should be compatible with the objectives, policies, guidelines, of the general land use and programs contained in the Master Plan. It is staff's opinion that all of these maps are consistent with that charge. Also, the City is currently operating under ordinance No. 4 (1992) which permits us to make these recommendations to the City Council, and to take definitive action on some other the other cases before the Commission this evening. Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 8:25 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 8:45 p.m. Dale Levandar, the author of the Fiscal Cost Benefit Analysis, stated that they have concluded that the site is good for a commercial retail complex, and that in all three alternatives, the City does not show anegative cashflow.he In response to C/Grothe's earlier question, explained that there is a typo on page 10, and it should have read "...based on 8% rate applied to a value of $435,000 dollars (43,560 square feet per computed at $10.00 per sq )•" addition to the pure economics of the situation, the projections contain some cost figures which May, 10, 1993 Page 7 over state the proportionate share. This is a cash flow projection, not a fair share approach. In response to C/Li, Dale Levander explained that the analysis shows the cash flow to the City during the development period, which is 10 years, plus on an annual basis beyond 10 years. The discounted cash flow assumes an interest rate of 6 percent. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the Public Hearing opened. Tom Van Winkle, a resident, advised the Commission to move cautiously on any portion of the project since the City has no General Plan. Don Schad, residing at 1824 Shaded Wood, made the following comments: the EIR should address the mitigation of "Valley Fever" (Coccidioidomycossia), which is caused by the prolong dust associated with the destruction of so much soil; the EIR is incomplete because the City does not have a compatible Tree Ordinance; destroying 97% of an established area is a significant impact, contrary to what is stated in the EIR; and there are trees in the canyon that are between 250 and 500 years old, with no indication that fire occurred. Barbara Beach Cushane, residing at 2021 Peaceful Hills, stated that the project not only affects the Morning Sun tract residents, but also the life of the Pathfinder community as well, in a very negative way. Chuck Bowler, a resident on Morning Sun, pointed out that sidewalks would need to be constructed on Morning Sun, Shepherd Hill, Chapel Hill, and Tameschaner because that is the route that the children take to the bus stop. He then suggested that the homes on Patel's site face Morning Sun, moving the other homes over so that there are backyards facing each other rather than one row of homes with two streets. The road on Morning Sun should be totally eliminated, and the traffic should be run back to Colima since the subdivision is part of Diamond Bar and not Walnut. Vinod Kashyap, a resident, stated that he was under the impression that the issue of the General Plan has been resolved. He then stated that, in his opinion, the needs of the entire community should take precedent over the needs of the Pathfinder community. May, 10, 1993 Page 8 Norman Beach Cushane, President of the` Pathfinder Homeowners Association,_ stated that they were promised that.this'site was to be 90 acres reserved for parks. He also stated, in response to a comment made earlier regarding the fire safety of the Canyon, that there was a fire in the area, but it was in their tract and no one had to be evacuated. VC/Meyer, referring to a HOA meeting that was to be held regarding the possible Seinquired whatthe existing open space areas for public use HOA's position was on that possibility. Norman Beach Cushane stated that this issue will be presented to the HOA at the end of the month when their annual meeting is scheduled. There is a concern, if the land is dedicated for public access to the property, regarding ownership, liability, and possible development, as is occurring now. Elizabeth Hodges, a resident, inquired if the County has given permission to pursue the construction of sidewalks since it is County property because it was her impression that the County Department of Transportation wrote strongly opposing a road being put on through Morning Sun, as is indicated in the Response to Comment section of the EIR. Hearing no further testimony, the Public Hearing was declared closed. Jan Dabney, in response to Chair/Flamenbaum's inquiry, stated that as long as any liability issues are resolved, they would not see a problem with potting the 2 inch oak trees to be removed and relocated to offer them to the community. Chair/Flamenbaum suggested that the Commission proceed as has been recommended by staff vC/Meyer stated that he listened to the tapes of the April 29th meeting and feels that he understands what went on. He suggested that, if the review process is to be taken in a linear progression, the Commission should first revisit concerns on any issues in the EIR, in order to get closure on it. Furthermore, since the straw vote, from the last meeting, on General Plan consistency, was only a 2-1-1 vote, the Commission should perhaps revisit that issue as well. If there is not a consensus on the o athrou h Plan conditions then of there is no need to g g May, 10, 1993 Page 9 approval of a tentative tract map and a development •agreement, and the project should be recommended to the City Council for denial The Planning Commission concurred to revisit issues of concern in the EIR. VC/Meyer stated that he does not concur with the findings in the EIR that the replacement of Oak Trees at a 2:1 ratio sufficiently mitigates covering up 97% of the trees to a level of nonsignificance. Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Plunk and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to direct staff to prepare overriding considerations on the removal of the trees. ROLL CALL: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Grothe, Plunk, Li, V C/ M e y e r, a n d Chair/Flamenbaum. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None. VC/Meyer stated that he would prefer that the Resource Management Plan also deal with the landscaping concepts, such as statements about the road, the architectural statement to be made to the medians, the architectural statement with the landscaping of the commercial facilities entry, hillside grading, etc., and to specifically locate that information in one location. CDD/DeStefano, noting that the material desired is already within the documents reviewed by the Commission, suggested that a specific section be added called, "Resource Management Plan" within the Master Plan's zoning regulations and development standards that would deal with all of these issues, or indicate where the information can be found. Also, the conditions recommended for approval can be grouped into a section within each resolution called "Resource Management Plan" which will make that specific issue more clear to the reviewing individual or agency in the future that will help implement the project. C/Grothe stated that he feels that the areas of contour grading, bench drains, and landscaping should be taken directly out of the Hillside Management ordinance and placed in the conditions. May, 10, 1993 Page 10 The Planning Commission concurred to place such information in the resolutions for the specific tract maps. CDD/DeStefano stated that staff will also add much more of the detail of the Hillside Ordinance, along with the conditions fluent through all the other documents, and group them into one section such as the "Resource Management Plan". VC/Meyer, concerned that there can be obstructions that reduce the clearance at the side yards, suggested that the side yard set back be modifid to a minimum of 5 feet and 12 feet to guarantee access to the rear yard. Also, the front yard set back can be determined based upon if the garage faces the street or if it is perpendicular to the street, so that the homes are staggered for aesthetic purposes. Jan Dabney stated that the intent of the 5 foot and 10 foot side yard set back was to provide the homeowners access to use their rear yards. If the Commission desires 10 feet at the side yard setback then it could be stated as "lo foot unobstructed", which is measured from the closest obstruction, rather than distance. C/Grothe stated that he would prefer that the conditions spell out exactly what the engineers standards are in regards to the street cross sections, sidewalks, landscaping, etc. ICE/Wentz stated that those conditions are normally tied into the tract map, and, if desired, that detail can be specified as part of the condition, but doing so can restrain us somewhat if we change our minds for engineering reasons. It was left with enough discretion at this time to give flexibility, yet still indicate what the street sections will be on the map. CDD/DeStefano stated that staff will develop additional language to tie this thought together, and place it in the Development Standards document, or where appropriate. VC/Meyer suggested that the Commission vote again on the consistency of the Master Plan document to the General Plan since all five Commissioners are now present. The Planning Commission then discussed the issue of the General Plan and it's revision. May, 10, 1993 Page it C/Grothe indicated that his opposition is not so much to development in the proposed area, but that he feels this is not the best Master Plan that has been proposed. Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded C/Plunk and CARRIED to find that the Master Plan document is consistent with the General Plan under Ordinance No. 4 (1992), with the following modifications: to direct staff to compile the Resource Management Plan with the concept of having all these references into one document; having a side yard setback of 5 feet and an unobstructed 10 feet; creating a staggered formula to vary the front set back from the property line to the nearest structure for the purpose of eliminating the straight run of the units through the streets. ROLL CALL: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Plunk, Li, VC/Meyer, and Chair/Flamenbaum. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Grothe. ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None. VC/Meyer stated that, from a design standpoint, it is better to provide as many access options as possible to help incorporate the rest of the project into the community, therefore, the EIR should indicated that Larkstone should be put through. Hardy Strozier, in response to C/Plunk's suggestion that the Arciero property be conditioned to indicate, "the secondary access to a public street, other than through the commercial or through Rapid View", in order to avoid cut through traffic, suggested that such a condition may be more appropriately located in the subdivision tract map resolution. Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by Chair/Flamenbaum and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY that the EIR documentation should be amended to show mitigation that Larkstone should be connected. ROLL CALL: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Plunk, Grothe, Li, V C/ M e y e r, a n d Chair/Flamenbaum. None. None. May, 10, 1993 Page 12 ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None. VC/Meyer stated that he is uncomfortable with the design submitted by the Sasak Corporation. Motion was made by C/Grothe and seconded by C/Li, to direct staff to work with the applicant for two weeks to redesign the plan to realign the street with Shepherd Hills. Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 10:05 p.m. to allow the applicant time to consider the request. The meeting was reconvened at 10:15 p.m. Noting the late hour of the meeting, C/Grothe withdrew his motion to allow the applicants of items 3 & 4 of the agenda to consent to a continuation. C/Li withdrew his second. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the Public Hearing opened for item 3, Variance 93-1, CUP 93-3, and Oak Tree Permit 93-1. Jake Williams, the property owner, stated that he does not object to a continuation, with the understanding that his matter will be placed first on the next meeting's agenda. Motion was made by Chair/Flamenbaum, seconded by VC/Meyer and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue item 3, of the agenda, to the next meeting of May 24, 1993. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the Public Hearing opened for item 4, Amendment to Conditional Use permit 91- 8. David Lee, the applicant's brother and representative, stated that they would prefer that their matter come before the Planning Commission tonight. Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Plunk and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to continue the matter to the meeting of May 24, 1993. vC/Meyer suggested that a member of staff explain to the applicant that there was a consensus of the Commission to continue the item. The Planning Commission then concurred to continue item 5 of the agenda, the Reorganization of the Planning Commission, to the meeting of May 24, 1993. May, 10, 1993 Page 13 C/Grothe then restated his motion to direct staff to work with the applicant for two weeks to redesign the plan to realign the street "B" with Shepherd Hills. Mr. Budke, the applicants representative, stated that they have worked with staff, and the current design is a product of their recommendation. The objection to the project, from the Commission, seems to be arbitrary, as does the recommendation to reduce the project to 16 lots. There have been 7 different layouts presented before the Commission showing alternates with lots on Morning Sun, and alternates with connections at Shepherd Hills. The design presented tonight fits all of the criteria, and adequately demonstrates the engineering problems associated with connecting to Shepherd Hills. There seems only to be an emotional concern for those residents on Morning Sun. He then stated that he was directed by Chair/Flamenbaum to do this specific layout. Chair/Flamenbuam stated that he never indicated that a particular road needed to be aligned in a particular spot, but that he indicated that he did not like the 24 foot wide easement, or the isolation of the tract from the rest of the community. C/Plunk reiterated the Commissions desire that the project be designed to be as considerate to the existing neighborhood as possible. The other projects are donating quite a bit in order to do their subdivisions, and there is plenty of buffer to the existing neighborhoods. C/Grothe withdrew his Motion. Jan Dabney stated that, with the restrictions that Mr. Patel has on his property, there are hardships in setting aside available open space. The map before us this evening is a vast improvement from what has been presented in the past. Moving the access road to Shepherd Hills creates a need for retaining walls which is not within the constraints of the Master Plan concepts, or the current approved Hillside Ordinance. Perhaps, as an alternative, Mr. Patel could be asked to donate something else to the community in lieu of giving up any open space. Motion was made by Chair/Flamenbuam, seconded by C/Plunk and CARRIED to continue the matter of Tract Map No. 32576 for two weeks to give staff the May, 10, 1993 Page 14 opportunity to review the map and to make appropriate recommendations. ROLL CALL: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Plunk, Li, nba Meyer, and Chair NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Grothe. ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None. ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None. Motion was made by Chair/Flamenbaum, seconded by VC/Meyer and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to direct staff to explore the possibility of having a Tree Relocation Program, to provide 2 inch trees to the community at a nominal cost, as a mitigation measure for the removal of the trees from the canyon, and to place it in the Resource Management Plan and the EIR, if appropriate. CDD/DeStefano stated that it is staff's recommendation that the Commission review the RnP Tract Map to ensure it's in compliance with the Master Plan, and to make any suggested changes. Staff will then fine tune the resolutions, and make any appropriate grammatical or spelling changes. vC/Meyer made the following statements: the findings in support of the EIR documentation should also indicate "by the recommendation of the Planning Commission" throughout the entire document; page 24, item E, should be modified to include Larkstone; and, if appropriate, include a condition, on page 2 of Attachment "B", to include the adjacent Homeowners Association in the landscaping district if they should happen to decide to participate in this project with respect to providing open space. CDD/DeStefano stated that, if so directed, the City Engineer and he will look at creating a specific condition to deal with the issue of the Homeowners Association. The Planning Commission so directed. ICE/Wentz pointed out that the boundaries of the district can always be amended by the City Council as part of the public hearing process, and, they can add a secondary district to incorporate their participation in the overall maintenance of that area. CDD/DeStefano, in response to C/Grothe's inquiry as to the specific percentage of improvements to be May, 10, 1993 Page 15 done by the developer, expl-ained that the developer will be contributing towards the project as is listed within the Conditions of Approval within the Resolutions, and the Development Agreements, subject to further negotiation between the developers and the staff, Planning Commission, and the conclusive comments of the City Council. The percentages indicated in the Fiscal Impact Report was done only for study purposes in order to complete the assignment. In response to C/Grothe's inquiry regarding the specific percentage of acreage for commercial land, CDD/DeStefano stated that there is to be about a 30 to 31 acre commercial center, in which the City's ownership will be between 10 and 15, which will ultimately be a business decision of the City Council. The land use decision before the Planning Commission is the issue of whether the 30 to 31 commercial center is an appropriate land use. C/Grothe then made the followings comments: a 3:1 Oak Tree replacement ratio should be indicated in items #11, #16, #17, & #18, or keep with the bigger variety of sizes; there should be language indicating that the developers can place the quantity of trees on or off site; staff should explore the possibility of getting the School District to use contour grading, put proper bench drains, landscaping, etc. on the hillsides, on the School District site dropping on to Arciero's property, and include their property in the Landscape Maintenance District; and grading for all three project should be done at one time. Jan Dabney stated that all the improvements, on the Arciero site, will be put on at one time. All the improvements to the commercial and the park site, can be done by RnP, tying into Larkstone, and then the remainder of the RnP project to the Sasak project would also be done all at one time because of the grading for the hydrolics. ICE/Wentz indicated that a condition can be included to indicate that the phases are to be done all at once. VC/Meyer suggested that page 3, in the RnP resolution, under "Grading", include a condition for bonding. Referring to the final grading plans as indicated in condition 12, he inquired what plans have been made if there are major modifications made after the geological investigation. May, 10, 1993 Page 16 ICE/Wentz stated that there is a paragraph on page four, before item #17, intended to deal with that particular issue, that indicates there could be an amendment to the lot configurations based upon their findings. If the proposed finals varied significantly from the approved tentative the whole process could be repeated, per the decision of the engineer's office. ICE/Wentz then made the following response to inquiries made by VC/Meyer: the definition of an urban pollutant basis, on page 6, is a detention basin; page 7, item 51, will be addressed by the Resource Management Plan; the intent of item 55, page 8, is that the issue of the access out to Morning Sun and Larkstone may ultimately be addressed through the City Engineer's office; item 64, page 9, the utilities will be undergrounded as part of a condition of this tract, and will be adjacent to this tract on Brea Canyon; page ten, item 7 should be relocated into the Resource Management Plan and it should cross reference the Hillside Management ordinance which talks about rip rap, muted tones, etc.; and the intent of item 19, page 12, is to try to reduce the impact of wildlife to the surrounding residential area when the grading begins. Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Plunk and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to direct staff to draft the Resolutions of Approval for RnP and Arciero tract, responding to the comments and corrections made. The Planning Commission then concurred to direct staff to make the Development Agreement consistent with the current changes. ANNOUNCEMENTS: CDD/DeStefano reported that the workshop for the General Plan revision process is scheduled May 12, 1993. The public hearings on the General Plan revision begin May 19, 26th and June 2, 1993. ADJOURNMENT: Motion was made by VC/Meyer, seconded by C/Grothe and CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY to adjourn the meeting at 11:20 p.m. Respectively, May, 10, 1993 Page 17 J4#s'DeStefano Seb+etary Attest:—, Bruce Flamenbaum Chairman CARL WARREN 81 CO. Insurance Adiusters Claims Administrators P.O. Box 25180 Santa Ana, CA 92799-5180 (714) 740.7999 FAX: (714) 740-7992 TO: City of Diamond Bar Attention: Lynda Burgess Date: MAY 27, 1993 Re: Claim: Wills vs Diamond Bar Claimant: Heirs of Stephen Wills D/Event: 12-07-92 Recd Y/Office: 5-19-93 Our File: S 72034 SWQ 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. [� CLAIM INSUFFICIENCY: In accordance with the telephone conversation of , 19 , a notice of insufficiency must be mailed to the claimant no later than , 19.THIS MUST BE MAILED TO THE CLAIMANT WITHIN 20 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THE ORIGINAL CLAIM IN YOUR OFFICE. DO NOT SUBMIT A "REJECTION" LETTER. See Government Code Sections 910 and/or 910.2 and/or 910.4. AMENDED/SUPPLEMENTAL CLAIM: Send a standard rejection letter to the claimant, rejecting this additional/amended claim. t-1 LATE CLAIM RESPONSE: Return the original claim material to the claimant, advising that the claim is late and that their only recourse is to file a written "Application for Leave to Present a Late Claim". (Retain copies in your file.) THIS MUST BE MAILED TO THE CLAIMANT WITHIN 45 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THE CLAIM IN YOUR OFFICE. DO NOT SEND A "REJECTION" LETTER. See Government Code Section 911.4. APPLICATION REJECTION: Reject claimant's "Application for Leave to Present a Late Claim". See Government Code Section 911.8. TAKE NO ACTION: Defer any written response to the claimant pending our further advice. Please provide us with a copy of the notice sent, as requested above. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, CARL WARREN & COMPANY (Adjuster) CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: June 15, 1993 REPORT DATE: June 10, 1993 FROM: Lynda Burgess, City Clerk TITLE: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS PERTAINING TO GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 2, 1993. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the California Elections Code, the City Council must adopt resolutions calling and giving notice of the holding of an election and requesting the Board of Supervisors to consolidate the City's election with the School and Udel Elections on November 2, 1993. In addition, the City Council must adopt regulations pertaining to the filing of candidates' statements. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the following Resolutions: 1. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 1993, FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES. 2. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 2, 1993, WITH THE SCHOOL AND UDEL ELECTIONS TO BE HELD ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 23302 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE. EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed _ Yes XX No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? — Yes — No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? —Yes — No Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? —Yes _ No Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED Y: Terrence L. Bela r City Manager City Clerk Terrence L. Belanger June 10, 1993 Page Two 3. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO CANDIDATES STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 1993. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. 93 TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: June 15, 1993 REPORT DATE: June 9, 1993 FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer TITLE: Quitclaim by Transamerica Realty Services to the City of Diamond Bar of property located on Propsectors Road west of Golden Springs Drive. SUMMARY: Transamerica Realty Services has offered to quitclaim a strip of land located along the south side of Prospectors Road west of Golden Springs Drive to the City of Diamond Bar. The strip of land is in an area between Prospectors Road and Lots 3, 4, 9, and 10 of Tract No. 26203. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accept in fee the strip of land located along the south side of Prospectors Road, west of Golden Springs Drive and authorize payment for outstanding tax amounts due not to exceed $2,000.00. 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: Plot Plan 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? X Yes _ No Which Commission? Planning Commission 5. Are other departments affected by the report? X Yes _ No Report discussed with the following affected departments: Planning Department REVIEWED BY: . v2aec—�--11 — TArence L. Beg r City Manager George A. Wentz Interim City Engineer CITY COUNCIL REPOKf AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: June 15, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Quitclaim by Transamerica Realty Services to the City of Diamond Bar of Property Located on the South Side of Prospectors Road West of Golden Springs Drive ISSUE STATEMENT: Should the City accept Transamerica Realty Services' offer to quitclaim a property located on Prospectors Road? RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accept in fee the strip of land located along the south side of Prospectors Road, west of Golden Springs Drive and authorize payment for outstanding tax amounts due not to exceed $2,000.00 FINANCIAL SUMMARY: The property described above holds an estimated tax defaulted status with penalties in the amount of approximately $1,850.00. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Transamerica Realty services has offered to quitclaim it's interest in a strip of land located along the south side of Prospectors Road west of Golden Springs Drive to the City of Diamond Bar. The property is located generally between Prospectors Road and Lots 3, 4, 9, and 10 of Tract 26203 and extends west from Golden Springs Drive to the Diamond Bar Golf Course. The attached Exhibits A and B illustrate the location and an aerial perspective is included. The property in question may be of benefit to the City for future widening or intersection improvements. Utility easements, exist over each of the properties and would need to be maintained. There are two properties (Lots 3 and 4) which have walls encroaching onto the subject property. Staff proposes to reconvey the portions of the properties that contain any encroachments to the adjacent property owners. The City would retain at least 3 to 20 additional feet. The final configuration would be determined as part of the reconveyance process. Acquisition of this property would eliminate any other potential ownerships. It would be beneficial to maintain an easement for public improvement purposes along with the previously established utility easements. on April 26, 1993 the Planning Commission approved a Resolution to acquire the property. PREPARED BY: George A. Wentz r -P -M IhT ) (c-'ap ca off) RIM -A . -.. . . .'� 0O 7CA10WLlAftA9PF'- DF. TWOA @t 46A 4:q*OLAM tD GIFT AP * A717 - 002 -oo+ 005 urt MAP OMP t 117 H 3M * M5 G11 -Y aF DIAMOND 540- t- - 24.1'' IN I WN 3 L�u►ieAa1 Gurb 10'S�� a Iry 6r— VIAMOND bAQO- 3AI"dQ S N I �id5 N 3a-1a�9 `�• `�'�'� CITY OF DTAMnUn nxu MEMORANDUM DATE: June 4, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Proposed City of Diamond Bar Budget -Fiscal Year 1993-1994 INTRODUCTION: I am pleased to transmit to you the Fiscal Year 1993-94 City of Diamond Bar Annual Budget. The FY 1993-94 budget has been prepared and developed utilizing the City Council's strategic priorities as an interlocking foundation. The 1993-94 Budget for the City of Diamond Bar is presented to you in this document. Proposed City General Fund appropriations total $8,432,345, a 4.6 percent decrease from the previous year's appropriations of $8,819,720. REVENUE OUTLOOK• The City general operating funds' resources are forecasted at $8,762,900 for 1993-94. This represents an decrease of 6.4 percent from the total operating funds' revenue estimated to be received during 1992-93 ($8,321,700). The City's major revenue source is the motor vehicle in -lieu tax. $2,500,000 is anticipated to received in FY 93-94, which is the amount that will be received in FY 92-93. The City's second largest, sales tax, is projected at $2,200,000, a 10 percent increase from 1992-93 estimated revenue. Sales tax revenue projections for 1993-94 are higher than those approved by the City Council for 1992-93, which is based on actual revenues. However, it is fiscally prudent to evaluate at least two quarters, before determining whether mid -year adjustments to the anticipated sales tax revenues should be undertaken. Property tax revenues, the City's third largest revenue source, reflects the impact of the State of California's taking of this uniquely local revenue source to fund statewide obligations. The expected FY 92-93 amount was to be $1,514,250 . That amount was reduced by $240,250, by the State. Again this year, the City's property tax is under assault by the State. The City could lose up to $250,000 in FY93-94 property tax revenue, if the State decides to take more property tax. The City's property tax litigation, with the County of Los Angeles, may conclude during 1993-94. If the City is successful in this litigation, City property tax revenues will increase, with appropriate 1993-94 budget adjustments being made at that time. The City has begun a program to rsoovor actual ovo ev tvz r2.__"j6&Acy, zoning, building, and engineering services, in accordance with AB1600 legislation. During 1993-94, under AB 1600 provisions, the City will institute a Development Impact Fee Program to assure that current development contributes to the funding of future public infrastructure improvements. The 1993-94 budget continues to anticipate the future basis for State subvention allocation revenue. At incorporation, the City's population was established at 74,115, which was based on a State formula that sets newly incorporated city's population at three times the number of registered voters at the time of incorporation. The City will continue to receive State per capita revenue subventions, based upon the 74,115 population number, through the 1996-97 fiscal year. The 1990 Federal Census has set the City's population at an estimated 53,500. As a consequence, the State formula population (74,115), compared to the Census population (53,500), provides the City an $800,000 General Fund subsidy and a $350,000 Gas Tax subsidy. Revenue enhancement decisions must be implemented over the next several fiscal years to eradicate the affects of the formula population subsidies. 1993-94 BUDGET SUMMARY: The City of Diamond Bar will conclude the 1992-93 fiscal year in a stable financial position. The proposed 1993-94 operating budget, being forwarded to the City Council is based upon existing levels of service. However, there is proposed an overall full-time staff reduction, with the Public Works Director/City Engineer position being contracted, an Administrative Assistant being added in Community Services and a clerical position being eliminated in the City Manager's Office. The City faces the reality of overall decreased expenditure levels in 1993-94. However, Public Safety appropriation will assure the same service level as FY92-93. Also, there will be a greater utilization of part-time personnel. There are modest increases in employee salaries and benefits. Predictably, there are general inflation - related increases to contract goods and services. Public Safety In terms of major functions, $5,940,125, or 70 percent of the opera- ting funds budget, is devoted to public safety, public works/ engineering, and community development. Allocated to public safety operations is 46 percent, or $3,839,275, of the operating funds. The 1993-94 appropriations for law enforcement services, through a contract with the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, total $3,745,750 compared with $3,610,190 in 1992-93. Traffic enforcement vehicles have been diversified to include motorcycles, as well as, the usual traffic automobiles. The SANE Program continues to be funded at a significant level. Monies have been appropriated for Emergency Preparedness services ($35,900), which includes the acquiring a mobile emergency operations center. include regional plan coordination, City plan revisions, neighborhood -based emergency plan preparation and completion of an Emergency Operations Center, including the installation of radio equipment. Public Works The Public Works Director/City Engineer position is being proposed to be accomplished through contract in FY 93-94. A contract Director/City Engineer is expected to provide operating efficiencies. Many engineering support services are being accomplished by contract. However, in order to provide more responsive client services, and to expedite City capital improvement projects Senior Engineer, Assistant Engineer, Administrative Assistant and Secretary postions will continue to be funded. The position of Engineering Technician is proposed to be upgraded to an Assistant Civil Engineer and the Administrative Analyst to Administrative Assistant. There is a proposed overall reduction in appropriations of 7.0% ($103,600) for FY 93-94. Community Services In FY 92-93, the Parks and Maintenance Department and Recreation Services functions were combined to form the Community Services Department. The department is staffed with a Community Services Director, a Parks Superintendent and a Maintenance Man. The reorganization resulted in operating efficiencies and reduction of operating costs. In May 1991, Diamond Bar entered into a recreation services contract with the City of Brea. The establishment of a City - operated recreation services has resulted in ever-expanding recreation programs and activities being offered throughout the community. One of the more exciting programs is the Concert in the Park series of Summer Concerts, at Sycamore Park.. In 1993-94, the Concert series will present eight concerts. Community Services management supports and administers the recreation services contract and staffs the Parks and Recreation Commission. Recreation services activities fees will generate an estimated $247,500 in revenue. An Administrative Assistant position is proposed to provide overall departmental support. Due to an increase in the recreation services contract, which is the result of expanded recreation services, there is a proposed increase of 11.9% ($192,085) for FY 93-94. Community Development The Community Development Department is comprised of planning, zoning, building safety and code enforcement. Building Safety services are provided through a contract with a private company. The contractor is paid a percentage of the building code fees collected. It is estimated that the cost Building Safety services will be the same as in FY 92-93 ($220,00). The preparation of the City's General Plan will be completed and adopted, in FY 93-94. A portion of the consultant's costs for the preparation and processing of the General Plan are included in the FY 93-94 Municipal Budget. The Community Development Department will be coordinating the preparation of the City's Economic Resource Strategic Plan, in FY 93-94. Also, Community Development will be revising the City's Development Code, to bring it into conformance with the General Plan. The total appropriation for the Community Development Department is $639,300, which is 6.7% ($42,812) less than the FY 92-93 appropriation. General Government The City General Government Account will decrease by $134,355. Appropriations have been made for computer equipment and emergency preparedness equipment ($12,000). Also, there is an appropriation of $25,000 for the preparation of the Economic Resources Strategic Plan. The expenditures for office furniture and equipment and computer equipment will allow the completion of employee work spaces and the information processing network ($15,000). Management Support The Management Support Services, which include the City Manager, Finance and City Clerk functions, will experience an overall increase in 1993-94, from $675,705 to $744,800. This is due to the budgeting of the Assistant City Manager for a full year. There is $35,000 appropriated to fund, the City's share of the 1993 City Council Election (consolidated with other public entity elections). The preparation of the municipal code for the City will be completed in FY 93-94, with an appropriation of $10,000 to complete the project. It is proposed that a Junior Clerk Typist position be deleted. Management Support is responsible for the Integrated Waste Management Fund. This fund accounts for revenues and expenditures, related to the management of solid waste collection and disposal, as well as, Source Reduction and Recycling Element implementation programs. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM The 1993-94 budget includes the third year of the City's Five -Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The CIP reflects projections of capital improvement needs for the next five years. Major projects funded in FY 92-93 which are under construction and due to be completed in FY 93-94 include: -Pathfinder Road Bridge Widening -Heritage Park Building Reconstruction -Grand Avenue Guardrails and Landscaping The Capital Improvement Program appropriations in 1993-94 are funding the third year of the five year, perpetual CIP. The total capital improvements appropriations will be $4,356,080. The funds to support the CIP come from a variety of sources including: Intermodal Surface Transportation Enhancement Act (ISTEA); Gas Tax; Proposition "A" (transportation); Proposition "C" (transportation); Proposition "A" (parks); Community Development Block Grant (CDBG); Traffic Safety (OTS); Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) grant; General Fund; Golden Springs Traffic Mitigation Fund; Grand Avenue Traffic Mitigation Fund; and Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District No. 38. The proposed capital projects to be funded in FY 93-94 include: Street Improvements -Grand Avenue Overlay (East City Limit to Golden Springs) -Golden Springs Overlay (Brea Cyn Road to Grand Avenue) -Diamond Bar Blvd Overlay: Phase I (Grand Ave to Brea Cyn) -Brea Cyn Rd (Fountain Springs to Cold Springs) -Citywide Slurry Seal -Phase IV -Diamond Bar Blvd Sidewalks CAPITAL IMPAOyLMENTS PROURAM (con i) Traffic Control Improvements -Pathfinder Rd @ Brea Cyn Rd (west) -Diamond Bar Blvd @ Fountain Springs -Diamond Bar Blvd @ Shadow Canyon -Golden Springs @ Prospectors (north) -Golden Springs @ Golden Prados -Golden Springs @ Carpio -Grand Ave Traffic Signal Synchronization _Parks Improvements -Pantera Park Design and Development -Peterson Park Athletic Field Lights -Handicap Access to Parks Facilities Retrofit (ADA) -City Parks Signage Retrofit -Basketball and Tennis Courts Resurfacing _Municipal Building And Facilities -Land Acquisition - Walnut Valley Water Dist. (Brea Cyn Rd) -Handicap Access Sidewalk Ramps (citywide) In addition to the capital improvement projects that the City is funding directly from City resources, there are two other projects of note. First, the Brea Canyon Road traffic signal at the SR60 westbound on ramp and off ramp is to be upgraded to allow for a phased and protected double lane lefthand turn, from Brea Canyon Road to the SR60 westbound on ramp. Second, the City and Southern California Edison will be jointly undergrounding the utility poles from Temple Avenue to Gold Rush Drive. The City will be committing its Rule 20 monies for the next seven (7) years ($430,000 existing and each year's thereafter) to fund the undergrounding construction. The undergrounding project total is an estimated $1,500,000. CONCLUSION: FY 93-94 MUNICIPAL BUDGET The City Council will be reviewing and adopting the Fiscal Year 1993- 1994 Diamond Bar Municipal Budget, in June 1992. The Municipal Budget reflects the proposed levels of municipal services and the manner in which those services are to be delivered; either by contract, or by city staff. The Budget also sets forth the revenue sources and an- ticipated revenue levels necessary to fund the proposed expenditures. However, the Municipal Budget is a dynamic revenue/expenditure plan. In short, the 1993-94 budget has been designed to have the flexibity to be modified, as changing circumstances may require. The City of Diamond Bar will continue to implement the community values that have been identified, through public participatory forums, e.g., Council, Commission, Committee, work sessions, community meet- ings and others. The City organization will continue to respond to and reflect the same high quality of services that is demanded by the public. Besides accommodating operating service demand, the 1993-94 budget addresses long term planning needs and plan implementation. The FY 93-94 budget proposes an ambitious capital asset revitalization, enhancement and expansion program, which provides for major projects of capital improvements to repair, revitalize, enhancement and expand the City's infrastructure and fixed assets. eoNeLusioN ��orit> Preparing and recommending a balanced budget to the City Council is always a difficult process, considering the limited financial resources and the wide variety of citizen requests. The demands for expenditure level increases, coupled -with the recessed economic environment, have made the preparation of this budget particularly challenging. The 1993-94 budget for the City of Diamond Bar continues the syste- matically sound and fiscally prudent approach of balancing the demand for high quality services and programs with the reality of resource limitations and availibility. The City Council should take justifi- able pride in the tremendous progress the City has made, over the four years of cityhood. All involved with the City look forward, with enthusiasm, to assuring that Diamond Bar continues to be an exceptional community, in which to live and work. To that end, it is my pleasure to convey to you the Fiscal Year 1993-94 Municipal Budget. 6 aprl., ar si�onn D��t AGENDA REPORT TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: June 15, 1993 FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer TITLE: Paratransit Services for Fiscal Year 1993-94 AGENDA NO. Y 1 REPORT DATE: June 10, 1993 SUMMARY: The City of Diamond Bar would like to continue to provide a paratransit and dial -a -ride services for eligible elderly and persons with disabilities in the City of Diamond Bar. The paratransit service is provided and administered by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. To ensure the continuation of the paratransit service in Diamond Bar, the City needs to secure a paratransit services agreement with the Los Angeles County for Fiscal Year 1993-94. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached Paratransit Services Agreement and direct the City Clerk to forward the original and two copies of the agreement to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works for further processing. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:X Staff Report Resolution(s) Ordinances(s) 2L 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? _ 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: N/A Rn1EB Terrence L. Belange City Manager r .IA A Geor e A. We tz' Inte m City En sneer CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: June 15, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Paratransit Services for Fiscal Year 1993-94 ISSUE STATEMENT To continue to provide paratransit services for eligible elderly and persons with disabilities in the City of Diamond Bar for Fiscal Year 1993-94. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached Paratransit Services Agreement and direct the City Clerk to forward the original and two copies of the agreement to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works for further processing. FINANCIAL SUMMARY The City of Diamond Bar's cost for Fiscal Year 1993-94 paratransit services is estimated to be $21,000. This service will be funded by the City's Proposition A funds. BACKGROUND The attached agreement proposes the continuation of the current paratransit services to the elderly and disabled persons in the City of Diamond Bar. The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works has provided and administered the paratransit services for Diamond Bar since the City's incorporation. DISCUSSION The paratransit services are available to Diamond Bar residents from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday thru Friday (a minimum 24-hour advance reservation shall normally be required), except on the major holidays. The City's jurisdictional share of the service includes the para -transit service provided, marketing, monitoring, and administration of costs. For Fiscal Year 1993-94, the County anticipates the City's cost to be $21,000. During the 1992-93 Fiscal Year, the City of Diamond Bar expended $16,800 for paratransit services. PREPARED BY: David G. Liu Tseday Aberra AGREEMENT PARATRANSIT SERVICES This AGREEMENT is between the COUNTY of LOS ANGELES, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY," and the CITY of DIAMOND BAR, hereinafter referred to as "CITY." RECITALS: A. COUNTY and CITY agree that it is in the public interest to continue to provide a paratransit dial -a -ride service for the eligible elderly (60 years and older) and persons with disabilities who reside in the unincorporated COUNTY areas of Hacienda Heights, Et Al., and the CITY through the 1993/94 Fiscal Year. B. COUNTY proposes to administer the service and to bill the CITY for the actual cost of CITY'S share of service, including COUNTY'S marketing, monitoring and administration costs. C. COUNTY may apply for and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority may grant a Proposition A Discretionary Fund bonus through its Subregional Paratransit Grant Program, hereinafter referred to as "BONUS," not to exceed 25 percent of COUNTY'S total cost of operating said joint service. -2 - IT IS, THEREFORE, AGREED: 1. COUNTY shall continue contracting paratransit service for the eligible elderly and persons with disabilities residing in the Hacienda Heights, Et Al., and Diamond Bar area as described in Appendix A and according to service requirements defined in Appendix B. 2. The term of this Agreement shall be from July 1, 1993 through June 30, 1994. 3. A) CITY agrees to allow COUNTY to provide service described in paragraph 1 and to designate COUNTY as the lead agency. B) COUNTY and CITY agree to finance their jurisdictional shares of the paratransit service at the contracted level of service during the term of this Agreement using their Proposition A Local Return funds. 4. CITY agrees to reimburse COUNTY the sum of operating costs of CITY'S share of the services, including COUNTY'S marketing, monitoring and administration, and less farebox revenue and BONUS, if applicable, and to pay COUNTY within -3- 30 days after the date of the invoice. CITY'S share of the operating cost of the service shall be computed based on the ratio of the actual number of eligible CITY riders using the service to the total number of riders per month of operation. The estimated CITY cost of the service for the Agreement period is $21,000. 5. If CITY'S payment is not delivered to the County office which is described on the billing invoice prepared by COUNTY within 30 days after the due date of said invoice, COUNTY is entitled to recover interest thereon from the date of the invoice at the rate of interest specified in the General Services Agreement executed by the parties to this Agreement currently in effect. 6. Notwithstanding the provisions of Government Code Section 907, if such payment is not delivered to the COUNTY office which is described on said invoice within 30 days after the due date of the invoice, COUNTY may satisfy such indebtedness, including interest thereon, from any funds of CITY on deposit with COUNTY without giving notice to CITY of COUNTY'S intention to do so. -4- 7. CITY shall review all project billing invoices prepared by COUNTY and report in writing any discrepancies to the COUNTY Department of Public Works (DPW) within 30 days of receipt of invoice. Undisputed charges shall be paid by CITY to COUNTY within 30 days after the due date of the invoice. DPW shall review all disputed charges and submit a written justification detailing the basis for those charges within 30 days of receipt of CITY'S written report. CITY shall then make payment of the previously disputed charges or submit justification for nonpayment within 30 days of receipt of DPW's written justification. Notwithstanding the provisions of Government Code Section 907, all written communications herein may be made by regular mail. 8. A) COUNTY agrees to submit proposed changes to service, within CITY'S jurisdiction, to CITY for its approval. COUNTY shall not implement such modifications within CITY'S jurisdiction unless approved by CITY. B) COUNTY agrees to implement any modifications to the service within CITY which is requested by CITY and that does not adversely affect service outside of CITY. -5- C) COUNTY agrees to modify the limits of the service area upon concurrence between COUNTY and CITY. 9. COUNTY or CITY may terminate this Agreement at any time during its term upon 45 days prior written notice to the other party without further liability. CITY agrees to pay its share of the cost of service up to the point of termination within 30 days of receipt of invoice from COUNTY. 10. COUNTY shall be excused from performance hereunder during the time and to the extent that it is prevented from performing in the customary manner by civil disturbances, forces of nature, fire, strike, loss of funding or commandeering of materials, products, plants or facilities by the Government, when satisfactory evidence thereof is presented to CITY. 11. The parties hereto have executed an Assumption of Liability Agreement approved by the Board of Supervisors on December 27, 1977, and/or a Joint Indemnity Agreement approved by the Board of Supervisors on October 8, 1991. Whichever of these documents CITY has signed later in time is currently in effect and hereby made a part of and incorporated into this Agreement as IM if set out in full herein. In the event that the Board of Supervisors later approves a revised Joint Indemnity Agreement and CITY executes the revised Agreement, the subsequent Agreement as of its effective date shall supersede the Agreement previously in effect between the parties hereto. -7 - ATTEST: LARRY J. MONTEILH COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Executive Officer - Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By By DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ATTEST: CITY OF DIAMOND BAR By By CITY CLERK MAYOR APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM: DE WITT W. CLINTON County Counsel By By DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY diamond.93 APPENDIX A Service Requirements Operating hours of service shall be from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Monday through Friday, except on the following six major holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. A minimum 24-hour advance reservation shall normally be required to schedule riders; however, same-day service will be provided subject to availability of capacity. Patrons shall be picked up not earlier than 15 minutes before and not later than 15 minutes after the requested pickup time. Group rides shall be emphasized and encouraged. Service shall be restricted to eligible elderly (60 years and older) and persons with disabilities and their escorts. Persons with disabilities are persons who by reason of physical or mental disabilities cannot reasonably use conventional transportation. CITY and COUNTY shall determine eligibility of patrons and COUNTY shall maintain appropriate records (i.e., Applications for Eligibility, Roster of Eligible Persons, etc.) and take any actions necessary to ensure that only eligible patrons use service. Service Area Service shall be provided in the area as identified on Appendix A. Additional service will be provided to medical facilities within Brea, Pomona and West Covina. diamand.93 TO: Terrence L MEETING DATE: June FROM: George A. MiN bre n1At 6bM $Ak AGENDA REPORT AGENDA N0. ,G �. Belanger, City Manager 15, 1993 REPORT DATE: June 9, 1993 Wentz, Interim City Engineer TITLE: Right Turn Restrictions at Rolling Knoll and Grand Avenue and Country View and Grand Avenue SUMMARY: The City Council directed staff to install no right turn signs on Grand Avenue at Rolling Knoll Road and Country View Drive between the hours of 4 and 7 p.m., Monday through Friday, for a 90 -day trial period. RECOMMENDATION: Approve (1) installation of double right turns from Diamond Bar Boulevard to Grand Avenue; and (2) Reduce Restrictive hours from 4 - 6 p.m.; or Approve (1) installation of double right turns from Diamond Bar Boulevard to Grand Avenue; (2) Place m right turn Qn: red signs at Rolling Knoll and retain the no right turn sign at Country View. 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) _ Other: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed —Yes X No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? Yes X No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? X Yes _ No Which Commission? Planning Commission 5. Are other departments affected by the report? X Yes No Report discussed with the following affected departments: Planning _ Department REVIE D BY: Terrence L. BelanGee A. Wentz City Manager 96 /0 Interim City Engineer CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: June 15, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Right Turn Restrictions at Rolling Knoll and Grand Avenue and Country View and Grand Avenue ISSUE STATEMENT No right turn signs were installed at Rolling Knoll and Country View where they intersect with Grand Avenue for a 90 -day trial period. Should the signs remain? RECOMMENDATION Approve (1) installation of double right turns from Diamond Bar Boulevard to Grand Avenue; and (2) Reduce Restrictive hours from 4 - 6 p.m.; or Approve (1) installation of double right turns from Diamond Bar Boulevard to Grand Avenue; (2) Place no right turn on red signs at Rolling Knoll and retain the no right turn sign at Country View. FINANCIAL SUMMARY Cost of sign maintenance. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION At the City Council meeting of February 2, 1993 staff was directed to install no right turn signs at Rolling Knoll and Country View between the hours of 4 and 7 p.m. Monday through Friday. The signs were installed on March 3, 1993. Staff was also directed to bring this matter back before the City Council after a 90 -day trial period to evaluate the effectiveness and local response to installation of the signs. Notices were placed in the local newspapers advising residents that this matter would be discussed tonight. Staff has receivednumerous telephone calls from residents. To identify and assess local reaction to the signs, the attached questionnaire was sent to all residents in the area. In addition, a petition was received from residents in the Longview area. Rolling Knoll & Longview June 15, 1993 Page Two The following is a summary of findings for the questionnaire, petitions and correspondence received. Immediate Area Outside Area Leave signs 151 -0- Remove signs 109 70 Modify signs 32 -0- Total 242 70 From the data, it can be concluded that 50% of residents in responding in the immediate area favor the signs. Several comments have been received expressing concern that the signs adversely affect numerous local activities at Quail Summit School. The hours of prohibition agree with our traffic data in terms of highest use (4:00 - 7:00 p.m.). Traffic does decrease after 6:00 p.m. The primary goal is to discourage "cut -through" traffic on a routine basis. Staff believes it would be prudent to pursue one of the two following courses of actions: Option I: 1. Install double right turn lanes on Northbound Diamond Bar Boulevard at Grand Avenue. One lane would be right turn only and one would have a thru option. This will increase the flow of traffic through the intersection and reduce the wait time and encourage drivers to use the intersection. 2. Allow the signs to remain but shorten the restriction hours to 4 to 6 p.m. Staff believes this to be viable based on traffic counts taken which indicate that the primary congestion occurs between 4 and 6 p.m. Option 2 1. Install double right turn lanes on Northbound Diamond Bar Boulevard at Grand Avenue. One lane would be right turn only and one would have a through option. Rolling Knoll & Longview June 15, 1993 Page Three 2. Remove the no right turn sign at Rolling Knoll and leave the no right turn sign at Country View. Install a no right turn on red sign on Rolling Knoll. In additional, staff would recommend the signal timing would be changed to maximize the green time on Grand Avenue and minimize the green time on Rolling Knoll between 4 and 6 p.m. For example: We could set the signal to provide a minimum waiting period by a vehicle on Rolling Knoll to 2 minutes and then only allow 10-15 seconds of green time for traffic on Rolling Knoll between 4 and 6 p.m. By doing this, drivers would wait an extended period of time (probably longer than if they were to use the Diamond Bar/Grand intersection) if they try to bypass the intersection. Unfortunately, residents in the immediate area would have restriction on their movements as would other residents. However, we believe that after a few signifcant "jams" on the local street, the number of vehicles will drop dramatically and use would decrease. Staff also believes that it would be prudent to conduct a signal timing and phasing study on Grand Avenue from the 57 Freeway to the easterly City limits. The cost would be less than $15,000 and could significantly enhance the flow of traffic on Grand Avenue. Staff realizes that this is somewhat of a "Catch 22" since improving traffic flow on Grand Avenue will make it easier to travel the route. However, the real concern is that the volume delays also penalize Diamond Bar residents and significantly affects their ability to travel during the peak hours. By improving the flow, this basically reduces the time or congestion and may encourage drivers to stay on the main arterials. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS: It is important to note that the Traffic and Transportation Commission believes that the current signs should stay in place. Prepared By: George A. Wentz CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS SURVEY ADDRESS: PHONE: My opinion about the "No Right Turn, 4:00-7:00 PM, Monday -Friday" signs on Rolling Knoll Road and Country View Drive at Grand Avenue Please check only one: Leave signs as presently posted. Remove signs. Modify Signs: (specify) COMMENTS: MAIL BY: MAY 5. 1993 RETURN TO: City of Diamond Bar Department of Public Yorks 21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 190 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 ClIry nr_ "IAMnMn PAD AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: June 15, 1993 REPORT DATE: June 9, 1993 FROM: Bob Rose, Director of Community Services TITLE: Letter of Agreement with City of Brea to provide Recreation Services for City of Diamond Bar for 1993/94 Fiscal Year. SUMMARY: The City of Brea, as a contractor, has provided recreation services in the City of Diamond Bar for the past two years. Under terms of the existing three year contract, cost and revenue adjustments may be made to the contract upon mutual written consent. The attached proposal from the City of Brea provides for a 14 % increase in participation, a 22 % increase in revenue and only a 5.5 % increase in net costs. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the Recreation Services Agreement for the 1993/94 fiscal year, with projected expenditures of $309,877 and projected revenues of $211,435, and authorize the Mayor to sign the letter of agreement. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification Resolution(s) Bid Specifications (on file in City Clerk's Office) Ordinances(s) X Other: Copy of existing three year contract. X 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: _ REVIEWED BY: Terrence L. Belanger Bob Rose City Manager Community Services Director CITY COUNCIL- RTP0111Z' AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: June 15, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Letter of Agreement with City of Brea to Provide Recreation Services for City of Diamond Bar for 1993/94 Fiscal Year ISSUE STATEMENT The City desires to continue providing quality recreation programming for the Diamond Bar community. A proposal from the City of Brea to provide recreation services for the 1993/94 fiscal year has been received, has been negotiated with Brea staff, and is prepared for City Council action. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the recreation services agreement for the 1993/94 fiscal year with projected expenditures of $309,877 and projected revenues of $211,435, and authorize the Mayor to sign the letter of Agreement. FINANCIAL SUMMARY Funds budgeted for the 1992/93 Recreation Services Agreement totaled $319,000. The budget for the 1993/94 Recreation Services Agreement has been submitted at $310,000. Total costs for 1993/94 are projected at $309,877, with projected revenues of $211,435. Costs will be paid in twelve monthly payments of $25,823. BACKGROUND The City of Brea, as a contractor, has provided recreation services in the City of Diamond Bar for the past two years. Under terms of the existing three year contract (Section B, Part 3, Letter d), cost and revenue adjustments may be made to the contract upon mutual written consent. Attached is a proposal from the City of Brea to provide recreation services for the City of Diamond Bar for the 1993/94 fiscal year. Features of the proposal include: 1. Increase in participation of 140 (from 6,688 participants to 7,628 participants) 2. Increase in revenue of 220 (from $172,932 to $211,435) 3. Increase in net cost of only 5.50 (from $93,333 to $98,442) 1 Recreation Services June 15, 1993 Page Two Surveys conducted of the Diamond Bar community show a high level of satisfaction with the services provided in the recreation program. The proposal for the 1993/94 fiscal year intends to maintain the high level of service, plus provide for the recreation needs of almost 1000 additional participants. Prepared By: Bob Rose, Director of community services REVISED 5/27/93 Diamond Bar Recreation Services Proposal 1993-1994 Personnel ....................................... $123,861 Overtime......................................... 1,165 Benefits - Full and Part-time ............................ 13,680 Holidays ........................................... 298 Training/Conferences/Workshops ........................... 726 Memberships ........................................ 485 Mileage.......................................... 1,616 Contract Classes .................................... 79,350 Athletics .......................................... 20,521 SUBTOTAL . $241,702 Administrative Fee (22%) ............................... 53,175 SUBTOTAL . $294,877 Liability Insurance .............................I...... 15,000 TOTAL .... $309,877 Revenue .........................................211,435 Net Cost ......................................... 98,442 12 Monthly Payments ................................. 25,823 pp2:leisure:dia 5-27-93 Diamond Bar Recreation Services Proposal Revenue Summary 1993-1994 Contract Classes .................................. $130,000 American Explorers .................................. 1,500 Youth Sports ..................................... $31,275 Baseball ........... $20,400 Basketball ........... $ 7,000 Track and Field ....... $ 3,875 Adult Sports ..................................... $ 48,660 Softball ........... $27,000 Basketball .......... $14,940 Volleyball ........... $ 6,720 Total Revenue ...... $211,435 pp2:leisure: dia 5-27-93 Diamond Bar Recreation Services Proposal 1993-1994 Recreation Supervisor 1,820 hrs/C/$18.16* $ 33,051 Community Services Specialist Contract Classes 1,248 hrs/D/$13.08* $ 16,323 Community Services Specialist - Athletics 1,040 hrs/C/$12.75* $ 13,260 Community Services Coordinator - Athletics 1,560 hrs/C/$10.02 $ 15,631 Administrative Clerk 11 1,560 hrs/J/$12.94* $ 20,186 Senior Community Services Leader 396 hrs/G/$9.01 $ 3,568 Senior Community Services Leader 2,065 hrs/C/$8.15 $ 16,830 Community Services Leader 717 hrs/Cl$6.99 $ 5.012 TOTAL $123,861 * These positions subject to memorandum of understanding effective July 1, 1993 ** Based on total number of hours Overtime Hours Contract Classes 35 hours at $19.621hr $ 687 Athletics 25 hours at $19.13/hr 47 TOTAL $ 1,165 BENEFITS Full Time PERS $ 4,144 Medicare $ 429 Flex Benefits S 7,731 TOTAL $ 12,304 Part Time Totals *** Medicare $ 1.376 TOTAL $ 1,376 *** Part-time staff subject to PERS benefits effective July 1, 1993. 1 Holidays (Not observed by Diamond Bar): Martin Luther King - 1 staff X 8 hrs X $18.16 = $145 1 staff X 8 hrs X $10.02 = $80 New Year's Eve - 1 staff X 4 hrs X $18.16 = $73 TOTAL SUPPLIES AND SUPPORT SERVICES Training/Conferences/ Workshops C.P.R.S. Conference: 3 staff at $145.00 each Food - 6 meals at $10.00 Parking - 3 at $7.00 S. C.M. A. F. Institute: 2 staff at $25.00 each Other: Contract Class Supervisors Meeting 3 X $10.00 Contract Class Meeting Hosted by Diamond Bar Inservice Training TOTAL Memberships C.P.R.S. 3 staff at $110.00 each S.C.M. A. F. 3 staff at $15.00 each L. E. R. N. 1 staff at $110.00 each TOTAL Mileage Administration 2,136 X $0.28 a mile. Contract Classes 2,136 X $0.28 a mile Athletics 1,500 X $0.28 a mile TOTAL F] $ 225 $ 73 $ 298 $ 435 $ 60 $ 21 $ 50 $ 30 $ 60 $ 70 $ 726 $ 330 $ 45 $ 110 $ 485 $ 598 $ 598 $ 420 $ 1,616 I. fa Projected Costs: American Explorers - $1,5000 X 90 % _ $ 1,350 Contractors: $130,000 X 60% _ $ 78,000 Community Services Specialist I Contract Classes/Marketing $ 16,323 Administrative Clerk II - Step J $ 20,186 Mileage - 24 miles/day at $.28/mile + $ 517 (May 1992 - February 1993 = $358) Overtime Hours: 35 hours at $19.62 = $ 687 Membership and Training: LERN and CPRS $ 220 Conference and Workshops: CPRS 1994 $ 172 Meeting Expense $ 90 CONTRACT CLASS GRAND TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 117,545 Projected Participation: 4,300 Projected Revenue: Classes $ 130,000 American Explorers $ 1.500 TOTAL REVENUE: $ 131,500 Adult Sports Contract Support (Officials, Artwork) K Basketball Officials Artwork Coed Volleyball Officials Set Up/Take Down On Site Coordinator Artwork Softball (Men and Coed) Officials Artwork 198 games X 2 officials/ $20 per game TOTAL 176 matches X 1 official/ $19 match TOTAL 396 games X 1 official/ $20 per game TOTAL Youth Sports Basketball Diamond Bar to provide supplies and equipment per budget submittal Baseball Diamond Bar to provide supplies and equipment per budget submittal Track and Field Meet Starter Announcer 4 TOTAL $ 7,920 60 $ 7,980 $ 3,344 $ 330 $ 627 $ 60 $ 4,361 $ 7,920 S 60 $ 7,980 $ -0- -0- $ 100 S 100 $ 200 Contract Support Total $ 20,521 Personnel Athletics $ 54,301 Mileage $ 420 Overtime $ 478 CPRS Conference/Memberships/SCMAF $ 377 ATHLETICS GRAND TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 76,097 Projected Participation: 3,328 Projected Revenue: Adult Sports $ 48,500 Youth Sports 31,275 Total Revenue $ 79,775 w Adult Sports (Basketball, Coed Volleyball and Softball) Basketball - 36 teams/year; 430 participants Coed Volleyball - 32 teams/year; 1,080 participants Softball - 72 teams/year; 320 participants Basketball Revenue (36 teams X $415/team) - $14,940 Senior Leader 33 wks X 8 hrs/wk = 264 hrs 264 X $8.15/hr Leader/Scorer - 7 hrs X 1 staff X $6.99/hr X 33 wks Officials 198 games X 2 officials/game at $20/game Artwork - Logo EXPENSES -BASKETBALL Coed Volleyball Revenue (32 teams X $210/team) - $6,740 Officials 176 matches at $19/match Set-up/Take-down 33 weeks at $10/wk On-site Coordinator 33 weeks X 1 official X $19 Artwork - Logo EXPENSES - COED VOLLEYBALL Softball Revenue (Men and Coed) (72 teams X $375/team) - $27,000 Senior Leader (Director) 33 weeks X 12 hours/week = 396 hours 396 X $9.01 hr Leader (Scorer) 33 weeks X 10 hrs week = 330 hours 330 hrs X $6.99/hr Senior Leader 4 weeks/season X 10 hrs = 40 hours 40 X 3 season = $8.15 Game Officials 12 games a day at $20/game = $240 $240 X 11 weeks X 3 seasons Field Prep - 264 field at $8.15 each Artwork Logo EXPENSES - SOFTBALL n $ 2,152 $ 1,615 $ 7,920 560 $ 11,747 $ 3,344 $ 330 $ 627 $60 $ 4,361 $ 3,568 $ 2,307 $ 978 $ 7,920 $ 2,152 160 $ 16,985 SUMMARY - ADULT SPORTS TOTAL TEAMS 140 TOTAL PARTICIPANTS 1,830 TOTAL REVENUE $48,660 TOTAL EXPENSES $33,093 Youth Sports (Basketball, Baseball, Track and Field) Basketball: 140 participants - 14 teams Youth Baseball: 408 participants - 34 teams Track and Field Meet: 900 participants Basketball - 4 years - 3rd grade Revenue - 140 players at $50 = 14 teams $7,000 Sign-ups 2 staff at $8.15/hr X 15 hrs Practices 10 wks X 3 days/wk X 4 hrs X $8.15 Coaches Training 10 hrs X $8.15 Skills day - 2 staff X $8.15/hr X 8 hrs Court Set-up/Take-down - 10 wks X 3 hrs/wk X $8.15/hr Officials 8 wks X 7 games/wk X $8.15 Scorer 8 wks X 7 games X $6.99 TOTAL EXPENSES - YOUTH BASKETBALL Baseball - 4 years through 7 years (T-ball/Coach Pitch at Sycamore) Revenue 144 players at $50 (12 teams, 12 kids/team) = $7,200 Coaches training 8 hrs X 1 staff X $8.15/hr Skills Day 2 staff X 6 hrs X $8.15/hr Field Preparation 2 hrs X 5 days/wk X 8 wks X $8.15 Games/Practices 3.5 hrs/day X 4 days/wk X 8 wks X 2 staff at $8.15 7 hrs/day X 8 wks X 2 staff at $8.15/hr Awards/Picnic 8 hrs X 2 staff at $8.15/hr Draft 2 staff X 4 hrs X $8.15 EXPENSES (4-7 YEARS) 7 $ 245 $ 978 $ 82 $ 130 $ 245 $ 456 $ 391 $ 2,527 $ 65 $ 98 $ 652 $ 1,826 $ 913 $ 130 $ 65 $ 3,749 Baseball - 8 years through 14 years (Team pitch at heritage) Revenue 264 players at $50 (22 teams, 12 kids/team) = $13,200 Coaches training 16 hrs X $8.15/hr Skills Day 4 staff X 4 hrs X 2 days X $8.15/hr Field Preparation 2 hrs X 6 days/wk X 8 wks X $8.15 Games/Practices 5 hrs/day X 5 days/wk X 8 wks X 1.5 staff X $8.15 12 hrs/day X 8 wks X 1.5 staff at $8.15/hr Awards/Picnic 8 hrs.X 2 staff at $8.15/hr Sign up date 6 days X 2.5 hrs X $8.15/hr 1 day X 6 hrs, X $8.15 EXPENSES (8-14 YEARS) TOTAL EXPENSES - YOUTH BASEBALL Youth Track and Field Meet Revenue 600 participants X $5 each (City meet) = $3,000 SGVMAA 350 participants X $2.50 each = $875 Staffing - 15 staff at 10 hrs 5 staff X $8.15/hr = 10 staff X $6.99 = Starter Announcer SGVMAA Meet - 2 staff x $8.15/hr X 10 hrs TOTAL EXPENSES - TRACK AND FIELD SUMMARY - YOUTH SPORTS TOTAL TEAMS 48 TOTAL PARTICIPANTS 1,498 TOTAL REVENUE $31,275 TOTAL EXPENSES $12,839 8 $ 130 $ 261 $ 782 $ 2,445 $ 1,174 $ 130 $ 122 S 49 $ 5,093 $ 8,842 $ 408 $ 699 $ 100 $ 100 $ 163 $ 1,470 SPORTS PROGRAM TOTALS TOTAL PARTICIPANTS 3,328 TOTAL REVENUES $79,935 TOTAL EXPENSES 1 $45,932 CONTRACT CLASS TOTALS TOTAL PARTICIPANTS 4,300 TOTAL REVENUES $131,500 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $124,255 • Diamond Bar Recreation Services Proposal 1993-1994 Athletic Supplies and Equipment Budget YOUTH BASEBALL Diamond Baseballs - 300 Soft Touch Balls - 200 Adjustable Batting Tees - 5 Umpire Broom - 3 Asco Canvas Bags - 10 Pro Mask - 1 Easton TK5 T -Bat - 10 Louisville 510 BB Bat - 12 Bolco Bases - 1 set Catchers Gloves - 2 Body Protectors - 6 Catchers Masks - 6 Batting Helmet (4 sets/ 16 helmets) Umpire Indicator - 4 Ice Packs - 5. cases First Aid Kits Hats: 264 Regular Youth 144 Small Youth Shirts - 408 Trophies/Plaques: 408 $3.40 each 32 $7.00 each Chalk - 35 bags 10 $2.35 each $ 705 $1.75 each $ 350 $17.95 each $ 90 $1.95 each $ 6 $9.35 each $ 94 $14.95 each $ 15 $16.25 each $ 163 $15.50 each $ 186 $100 each set $ 100 $50.00 each $ 100 $19.95 each $ 120 $9.95 each $ 60 $12.95 each $ 207 $1.65 each $ 7 $12 each case $ 60 $ 80 $5 each $ 1,320 $5 each $ 720 $5.10 each $ 2,081 $ 1,388 $ 224 $4.49 each $ 157 SUBTOTAL $ 8,233 TAX $ 638 TOTAL $ 8,871 YOUTH BASKETBALL Mini Basketballs - 6 $10.60 each $ 64 Jr. Basketballs - 6 $8.45 each $ 51 Flip Scoreboard - 1 $63.95 each $ 64 Possession Arrow - 1 $11.75 each $ 12 Stop Clock - 1 $29.95 each $ 30 Ice Packs - 2 cases $12.00 each $ 24 First Aid $ 50 Ball Bags- 2 $7.95 each $ 16 Shirts - 140 $5.00 each $ 700 Trophies/Plaques: 144 $3.40 each $ 490 14 $7.00 $ 98 Whistles/Lanyards: 4 $1.25 each $ 5 4 $.75 each $ 3 SUBTOTAL $ 1,604 TAR 124 TOTAL $ 1,728 ADULT SOFTBALL - 3 SEASONS Chalk - 40 bags $4.49 each $ 180 Softballs: Worth Grey Dot - 360 $4.00 each $ 1,440 Dudley SB12 LD - 144 $4.65 each $ 670 Bases - 2 sets $ 300 Plate Extensions - 3 $11.75 each $ 35 Rake - 1 $41.50 each $ 42 Pitching Plates - 2 $62.95 each $ 126 Ice Packs - 9 cases $12.00 each case $ 108 Awards: Shirts - 145 $5.50 each $ 798 Trophies - 9 $12.50 each $ 113 Trophies - 9 $10.50 each $ 95 SUBTOTAL $ 3,907 TAX $ 303 TOTAL $ 4,210 11 ADULT BASKETBALL -3SEASONS Basketballs - 3 Ice Packs - 3 cases Awards: Shirts - 80 Trophies: 6 6 $72.35 each $ 217 $12.00 each case $ 36 $5.50 each $ 440 $10.50 each $ 63 $12.50 each $ 75 SUBTOTAL $ 831 TAR $ 64 TOTAL $ 895 ADULT COED VOLLEYBALL - 3 SEASONS Volleyball - 6 $ 37.95 each $ 228 Net - 1 $155.00 each $ 155 Ice Packs - 3 Cases $ 12.00 each $ 36 Awards: Shirts - 80 $ 5.50 each $ 440 Trophies - 6 $ 10.50 each $ 63 6 $ 12.50 each $ 75 SUBTOTAL $ 997 TAX TOTAL $ 1,074 GRAND TOTAL OF SUPPORT SERVICES $16,778 pp2. Leisure: dia. s 5/27/93 12 RECREATION SERVICES AGREEMENT This Agreement is made and entered into this 18th day Of August, 1992, between the CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, a Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "DIAMOND BAR") and the CITY OF BREA, a Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "BREA"). A. Recitals. (i) BREA has heretofore provided DIAMOND BAR with certain recreational services. (ii) DIAMOND BAR now desires to again retain BREA to perform such services, including advice and assistance to DIAMOND BAR, DIAMOND BAR's City Council, Parks and Recreation Commission and staff, necessary to implement a recreational program in DIAMOND BAR, for a three (3) year period. (iii) BREA represents that it is qualified to perform such services and is willing to perform such services as hereinafter set forth. Now, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between DIAMOND BAR and BREA as follows: B. Agreement 1. Definitions: The following definitions shall apply to the following terms, except where the context of this Agreement otherwise requires: 1 (a) Project: The provision of recreation services described in Exhibit "A" hereto including, but not limited to, programs, policies, athletic programs, classes, and attendance at Park and Recreation Commission meetings as requested. (b) Services: Such services as are reasonably necessary to be performed by BREA in order to implement the Project. 2• BREA agrees as fgllows: (a) BREA shall forthwith undertake to implement the Project in accordance with Exhibit "A" hereto and all in accordance with Federal, State and DIAMOND BAR statutes, regulations, ordinances and guidelines, all to the reasonable satisfaction of DIAMOND BAR. (b) BREA shall, at BREA's sole cost and expense, secure and hire such other persons as may, in the opinion of BREA, be necessary to comply with the terms of this Agreement. In the event any such other persons are retained by BREA, BREA hereby warrants that such persons shall be fully qualified to perform services required hereunder. BREA further agrees that subcontractors retained by BREA shall be upon the consent of DIAMOND BAR. For purposes of this Agreement, the term "subcontractor" shall not include program or class instructors or sports event officials (i.e., umpires and referees). 2 3. DIAMOND BAR agrees as follows: (a) To pay BREA for the performance of the services required herein, a maximum sum of Twenty Two Thousand One Hundred Eight -nine Dollars ($22,189.00) per month, for the first twelve (12) months of the term hereof. Beginning with the second and third years of this Agreement, said sum may be adjusted upon mutual written consent, following a review of revenues collected and the costs to BREA of recreational services requested. Said sum shall cover the cost of all staff time and all other direct and indirect costs or fees, including the work Of employees, consultants and subcontractors to BREA. Payment to BREA, by DIAMOND BAR, shall be made in accordance with the schedule set forth below. (b) Payments to BREA shall be made by DIAMOND BAR in accordance with the invoices submitted by BREA, on a monthly basis, and such invoices shall be paid within a reasonable time after said invoices are received by DIAMOND BAR. All charges shall be in accordance with BREA's proposal either with respect to hourly rates or lump sum amounts for individual programs. (c) Additional services: Payments for additional services requested, in writing, by DIAMOND BAR, and not included in BREA's proposal as set forth in Exhibit "A". Charges for additional services shall be invoiced on a monthly basis and shall be paid by DIAMOND BAR within a reasonable time after said invoices are received by DIAMOND BAR. 3 (d) Any and all revenues collected by BREA from recreation program participants shall be tendered monthly to DIAMOND BAR in accordance with administrative policies and procedures established by DIAMOND BAR's City Manager, provided that BREA shall retain fifty percent (50%) of all such revenues exceeding an annual total, or "revenue goal", of One Hundred Seventy-two Thousand Nine Hundred Thirty-two Dollars ($172,932.00). Said revenue goal shall be effective for the first year of this Agreement, however, beginning with the second and third years of this Agreement, said sum may be adjusted upon mutual written consent, following a review of revenues collected and the costs to BREA of recreational services requested. 4. DIAMOND $M agrees to provide _Q BRE : (a) Information and assistance as needed to provide services identified in Exhibit "A" hereto. (b) All necessary supplies and equipment necessary to render services identified in Exhibit "A" hereto. (c) Copies of documents and other information, as available, which BREA considers necessary in order to complete the Project. (d) Such information as is generally available from DIAMOND BAR files applicable to the Project. (e) Assistance, if necessary, in obtaining information from other governmental agencies and/or private parties. However, it shall be BREA's responsibility to make all 4 initial contact with respect to the gathering of such information. 5. Ownership of Documents: All documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs and reports prepared by BREA pursuant to this Agreement shall be considered the property of DIAMOND BAR and, upon payment for services performed by BREA, such documents and other identified materials shall be delivered to DIAMOND BAR by BREA. BREA may, however, make and retain such copies of said documents and materials as BREA may desire. 6. Termination: This Agreement, or any program or service provided hereunder, may be terminated by either party upon the giving of a written "Notice of Termination" to the other party at least ninety (90) days prior to the date of termination specified in said Notice. In the event this Agreement, or any program or service provided hereunder, is so terminated, BREA shall be compensated at BREA's monthly rate as specified herein, or pro -rated program or service charges, as the case may be, pro -rated on the basis of a thirty (30) day month. In no event, however, shall BREA receive more than the maximum specified in paragraph 3(a), above, or Exhibit "A", as applicable, except as otherwise provided herein. 7. Notices = Designated Representatives: Any and all notices, demands, invoices and written communications between the parties hereto shall be addressed as set forth in this 5 paragraph 7. The below named individuals, furthermore, shall be those persons primarily responsible for the performance by the parties under this Agreement: TERRENCE BELANGER FRANK BENEST City Manager City Manager City of Diamond Bar City of Brea 21660 E. Copley, Suite 1001 Number One Civic Center Circle Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Brea, CA 92621 Any such notices, demands, invoices and written communications, by mail, shall be deemed to have been received by the addressee forty-eight (48) hours after deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid and properly addressed as set forth above. 8. Insurance: BREA shall neither commence work under this Agreement until it has obtained all insurance required hereunder in a company or companies acceptable to DIAMOND BAR nor shall BREA allow any subcontractor to commence work on a subcontract until all insurance required of the subcontractor has been obtained. BREA shall take out and maintain at all time during the term of this Agreement the following policies of insurance: (a) Worker*' Compensation insurance: Before beginning work, BREA shall furnish to DIAMOND BAR a certificate of insurance as proof that it has taken out full workers' compensation insurance for all persons whom it may employ directly or through subcontractors in carrying out the work specified herein, in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 6 In accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code Section 3700, every employer shall secure the payment of compensation to his employees. BREA prior to commencing work, shall sign and file with DIAMOND BAR a certification as follows: "I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of 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 the work of this Agreement" (b) Public Liabil = Ail$ property Damage: Throughout the term of this Agreement, at BREA's sole cost and expense, BREA shall keep, or cause to be kept, in full force and effect, for the mutual benefit of DIAMOND BAR and BREA, comprehensive, broad form, general public liability and automobile insurance against claims and liabilities for personal injury, death, or property damage arising from BREA's activities, providing protection of at least One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) for bodily injury or death to any one person or for any one accident or occurrence and at least One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) for property damage. (c) Genet Insurance Recuiremen All insurance required by express provision of this Agreement shall be carried only in responsible insurance companies licensed to do business in the State of California and policies required under 7 paragraphs 8.(a) and (b) shall name as additional insureds DIAMOND BAR, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents and representatives. All policies shall contain language, to the effect that: (1) the insurer waives the right of subrogation against DIAMOND BAR and DIAMOND BAR's elected officials, Officers, employees, agents and representatives; (2) the Policies are primary and noncontributing with any insurance that may be carried by DIAMOND BAR; and (3) they cannot be canceled or materially changed except after thirty (30) days' notice by the insurer to DIAMOND BAR by certified mail. BREA shall furnish DIAMOND BAR with copies of all such policies promptly upon receipt of them, or certificate evidencing the insurance. BREA may effect for its own account insurance not required under this Agreement. (d) Self -insuraIQ : For purposes of this Agreement, the term "insurance" shall include a self-insurance program as approved by DIAMOND BAR. (a) BREA shall defend, indemnify and save harmless DIAMOND BAR, its elected and appointed officials, officers, agents and employees, from all liability from loss, damage or injury to persons or property, including the payment by BREA of any and all legal costs and attorneys' fees, in any manner arising out of the acts and/or omissions of BREA pursuant 8 to this Agreement, including, but not limited to, all consequential damages, to the maximum extent permitted by law. (b) DIAMOND BAR shall defend, indemnify and save harmless BREA, its elected and appointed officials, officers, agents and employees, from all liability from loss, damage or injury to persons or property, including the payment by DIAMOND BAR of any and all legal costs and attorneys' fees, in any manner arising out of the acts and/or omissions of DIAMOND BAR pursuant to this Agreement, including, but not limited to, all consequential damages, to the maximum extent permitted by law. 10. Assignment: No assignment of this Agreement or of any part or obligation of performance hereunder shall be made, either in whole or in part, by BREA without the prior written consent of DIAMOND BAR. 11. Independent Contractor: The parties hereto agree that BREA and its employers, officers and agents are independent contractors under this Agreement and shall not be construed for any purpose to be employees of DIAMOND BAR. 12. Governincr LU: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 13. Attorney's Fees: In the event any legal proceeding is instituted to enforce any term or provision of the Agreement, the prevailing party in said legal proceeding shall be 7 entitled to recover attorneys' fees and costs from the opposing party in an amount determined by the court to be reasonable. 14. Mediation: Any dispute or controversy arising under this Agreement, or in connection with any of the terms and conditions hereof, shall be referred by the parties hereto for mediation.. A third party, neutral mediation service shall be selected, as agreed upon by the parties and the costs and expenses thereof shall be borne equally by the parties hereto. In the event the parties are unable to mutually agree upon the mediator to be selected hereunder, the DIAMOND BAR City Council shall select such a neutral, third party mediation service and said City Council's decision shall be final. The parties agree to utilize their good faith efforts to resolve any such dispute or controversy so submitted to mediation. It is specifically understood and agreed by the parties hereto that referral of any such dispute or controversy, and mutual good faith efforts to resolve the same thereby, shall be conditions precedent to the institution of any action or proceeding, whether at law or in equity with respect to any such dispute or controversy. 15. Term: The effective date of this Agreement shall be deemed to be May 1, 1992, and it shall remain in effect through and including April 30, 1995, unless sooner terminated. 16. Entire Agreement: This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the parties with respect to the subject matter herein. Each party to 10 this Agreement acknowledges that no representation by any party which is not embodied herein nor any other agreement, statement, or promise not contained in this Agreement shall be valid and binding. Any modification of this Agreement shall be effective only if it is in writing signed by the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first set forth above: =OB ATTEST:A21�2t� City Clerk 'OPP _gyp- 9 2— ATTEST: Approved as to Form WPNPJVRA'.�� CITY OF DIAMOND BAR C\1011\DBRECAG\D328.2A\326.23 11 4L'PN'A City of Brea June 10, 1993 Bob Rose, Director Community Services CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177 Re: Letter of Understanding for Recreation Services to City of Diamond Bar in 1993-94 This correspondence shall serve as the offciai "Letter of Understanding" between the City of Brea and City of Diamond Bar for the provision of Recreation Sen -ices in 1993-94. It is submitted according to the guidelines established in :he 1992-95 Agreement for Recreation Services ("Agreement" hereinafter) and per previous negotiation meetings and discussions. Enclosed you will find the City of Brea' $ 1993-94 Recreation Services proposal, Exhibit "A"; in the amount of $309,877, which includes a revenue projection of $211,435 from participant fees. The proposal requires monthly payments of $25,823 for the May 1, 1993 through April 30, 194 period of services. The May/June 1993 bridge payments will be deducted and future monthly payments adjusted accordingly to ensure the $309,877 proposal figure is maintained. Per negotiations, both agencies have agreed to the following: The City of Brea agrees to: I. Manage, supervise and administer the provision of youth and adult sports programs, along with a wide variety of special interest contract classes as stated in the proposal and per the terms of the Agreement. The City of Diamond Bar agrees to: 1. Include in its 1993.94 budget $16,778 to pay for equipment and supplies for the youth and adult sports programs. 2. Budget an amount sufficient to provide a maintenance staff person to assist and provide program support as needed. City Council Burnie Dunlap Glenn G. Parker Carrey Nelson Bev Aesy Kathy wiser Mayor Mayor Pro 7km Councilman Councilwoman Councilwoman Civic do Cultural Center • Number One Civic Center Circle, Brea; Caitfornia 92621-5758.7141990-7600 - FAX 714990-1 Page Two Compensate the City of Brea for all costs of vacation Qompensation time and sick leave accrued by employees in chc event resignation or termination occurs during the May 1, 1993 - April 30, 1994 ?errr of the proposal. 4. Compensate the City of Brea for all "Memorandum of Understanding," salary and benefits, and increases that may occur during the term of the 1993-94 provision of services. This "Letter of Understanding" shall operate in conjunction with the provisions of the Agreement except where inconsistent, in which event this "Letter of Understanding" shalt govern. All other terms of the Agreement shall remain in effect during the term hereof. Each party to this "Letter of Understanding" acknowledges that no representation, statement or promise by any party which is not embodied herein or in the Agreement shall be valid and/or binding. Any modification of this "Letter of Understanding" shall be effective only if it is in writing and signed by both parties. If you find these terms to be acceptable, please cause the enclosed copy of this "Letter of Understanding" to be executed below where appropriate, by you, or another authorized representative of the City of Diamond Bar and return said copy to the undersigned. This "Letter of Understanding" shall become effective as of the date it becomes fully executed by the City of Brea and City of Diamond Bar. Thank you for your cooperation. We look forward to providing the Diamond Bar community with quality and responsive recreation programs and services. Very truly yours, Burnie Dunlap Mayor CITY OF BREA City of Diamond Bar agrees to the foregoing terms. City of Diamond Bar TO:dw:leisurerose CC., Frank Benest, City Manager Date CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA NO. �- AGENDA REPORT TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager PORT DATE: June 8, 1993 MEETING DATE: June 15, 1993 FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer TITLE: Golden Springs Drive Reconstruction/Rehabilitation Between Brea Canyon Road and Grand Avenue need Of SUMMARY: Golden Springs Drive, between Brea Canyon fo�ad and Grand Avenue, is G den Springs Drive hasibeen analyzed and avement rehabilitation and/or reconstruction. The existing pavement evaluated in order to determine the most practical lands and specifications mical ach forfor the the project been prepared. way improvements - Based on the findings of the pavement evaluation, p RECOMMENDATION: Itis recommended that the City Council Project and authorize the plans and specifications of the Golden Springs Drive Reconstruction/Rehabilitation City Clerk to advertise the project for bids. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report X Resolution _ Ordinances(s) Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: _ Public Hearing Notification X Bid Specifications (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 X No 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? — Yes X No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? — Which Commission? Yes X No 5. Are other departments affected by the report? — Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: Te ence L. Belang eorge A. Wentz City Manager �� Interim City Engineer CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: June 15, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Golden Springs Drive Reconstruction/Rehabilitation Between Brea Canyon Road and Grand Avenue ISSUE STATEMENT Golden Springs Drive, between Brea Canyon Road and Grand Avenue, is in need of pavement rehabilitation plansr reconstruction. and specifications Bhave beenased on h des gned findingSand of the pavement evaluation,p completed accordingly. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution to approve the plans and specifications of the Golden Springs Drive Reconstruction/Rehabilitation Project and authorize the City Clerk to advertise the project for bids. FINANCIAL SUMMARY The Golden Springs Drive Rehabilitation/Reconstruction Project is estimated to cost $650,000, excluding n contingencies. The allocated edj ect budget is $630,000. d budget consists of $171,000 GasTaxFund$439000 Traffic Mitigation Fund, and $20,000 SB 821 Fund. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION Golden Springs Drive, between Brea Canyon Road and Grand Avenue, is in need of pavement rehabilitation/reconstruction. To determine the most practical and economical approach for restoring the street to full function, the existing pavement on Golden Springs Drive has been tested, analyzed, and evaluated. Based on the findings of the pavement evaluation, Hot In -Place Surface Recycling method followed by 2" asphalt concrete overly is proposed. Additionally, ther ve twilld bene area (10' reconstructedwwith 1 611 full etween del Avenue Gateway Center D depthasphalt concrete. Plans and specifications for the project have been prepared. The work to be performed under the specifications consists of the rehabilitation/ reconstruction of the existing road pavement, striping, and construction of tween 260 feet west of Adel Avenue and the SR 57 landscaped median islands be overpass. The project area includes approximately 1.44 miles of Golden Springs Drive. 1 Golden Springs Drive June 15, 1993 Page Two Key aspects of requirements placed upon the contractor includes: • Plan and schedule to be submitted at least fourteen (14) calendar days before start of work. re erred b the City. • Traffic control plans, asp p Y • Notification to utility owners and other public agencies. • Completion of all work within sixty (60) calendar days. • Liquidated damages of $500/day for non-performance. • Alternate bid items such as asphalt -rubber hot mix overlay. All customary insurance and bonds have been included. The contract and bid documents have been prepared in cooperation with the City Attorney. Staff has prepared a tentative schedule for the various project activities. They are as follows: Plans and specifications to City Council June 15, 1993 for approval and authorize City Clerk to advertise for bids July 12, 1993 Bid opening Award of Contract Notice to Proceed Start of Construction Completion of Construction Prepared By: David G. Liu 2 July 20, 1993 July 21, 1993 August 9, 1993 October 8, 1993 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA NO. AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council MEETING DATE: June 15, 1993 REPORT DATE: June 8, 1993 FROM: Linda G. Magnuson, Accounting Manager TITLE: Appropriations Limit - FY93-94 SUMMARY: Submitted for the Council's review and approval is the Appropriations Limit recommendation for tent factors usedscal Year 1993-94� In addition the Council is being asked to approve the adjustment the calculation of the Appropriations Limit. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the use of the California Per Capita Income percentage increase for use in calculating the FY93-94 Appropriations Limit. Approve the use of the City of Diamond Bar population growth percentage in calculating FY93-94 Appropriations Limit. Approve Resolution 93- , which establishes the protested FY93-94 Appropriations Limit at $12,275,495. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report X Resolution(s) Ordinances(s) — Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: _ Public Hearing Notification _ Bid Spec. (on file in City Clerk's Office) Other 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed X Yes— No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Yes_ No 3. Has environmental impact been assessed?— 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes— No Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? — Yes_ No Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: Terrence L. langer Linda G. Mag u n City Manager Accounting Manager CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: June 15, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: iations Limit, and approval of Limit adjustment Proposed FY93-94 Appropr factors. ISSUE STATEMENT: Government Code Section 7910 requires the City Council to formally adopt by resolution the Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 1993-94. In addition, Proposition 111 requires a recorded vote of the City Council regarding the annual adjustment factors being used in the calculation of the Appropriations Limit. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the use of the California per capita Income percentage increase for use in calculating the FY93-94 Appropriations Limit. Approve the use of the City of Diamond Bar population growth percentage in calculating the FY93-94 Appropriations Limit. Approve Resolution 93- , which establishes the protested FY93-94 Appropriations Limit at $12,275,495. DISCUSSION: As required by Government Code Section 7910, the City Council is Ming asked to formally adopt by resolution the protested App p riaLimit for Fiscal Year 1993-94. In addition, Proposition 111 requires a recorded vote of the ity Council regarding the annual adjustment factors which are being applied for Fiscal n n-resi de tial assessed valuatioon eriand the change ded are the percentage Year 193-94. The factors in the change in California per capita income. The price factor which may be used by the City could either be the percentage change in California per capita personal income or the percentage change in the local assessment roll due to the addition of local non-residential new construction. This fiscal year the California per capita personal income showed an increase of 2.72$. The non- residential new construction assessment valuation information is not currently available the County Assessor's Office. Due to the timimg factor, it is recommended that the City Council approve the use of the California per capita income change as a factor in the calculation of the Appropriations Limit for FY93-94. It is understood that an amendment to the appropriations limit could be done if necessary upon the receipt of the information from the County Assessor's Office. Page 2 - Appropriations Limit Report to use either Section 7901 of the Government he City r the increases within the Countye population increase with o In previous years, the L.A. County overall population percentage withinr. change has been higher than the increasthe wasC1t11$f aslopposedDamond ato This year the increase in the City's population pul tion the Countywide increase of .96%. Therefore it is recommended that the the population increase within the City be used. PREPARED BY: Linda G Magnuson CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA NO. AGENDA REPORT TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager REPORT DATE: June 9, 1993 MEETING DATE: June 15, 1993 FROM: Bob Rose, Director of Community Services TITLE: Award of Contract for annual landscape maintenance of Diamond Bar's eight City parks. SUMMARY: On May 4, 1993, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 93-30 directing the City Clerk to advertise for bids for annual landscape maintenance of Diamond dd Bar's June 8C1993az Bids Bids were from all ed from three qualified contractors and were opened and publicly of $102,600 to a high of $149,556. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council award the contract for annual landricape maintenance of Diamond Bar's eight City parks to Accurate Landscape and Maintenance Corporno lowest responsible bidder, in.the amount of $102,600. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: -X Staff Report _ Resolution(s) Ordinances(s) X Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: _ Public Hearing Notification _ Bid Specifications (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? MajorityeS X No 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? —Yes X No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? — Which Commission? YeS X No 5. Are other departments affected by the report. — Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: T Terre ce L. Belanger Bob Rose City Manager Community Services Director MEETING DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. June 15, 1993 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager Landscape Maintenance of Diamond Award of Contract for Annual Bar's Eight City Parks. ISSUE STATEMENT ed ing the On May 4, 1993, the City Council ado annuallandscape maintenance, Bance ofsolution No. 93-3o tDiamond City Clerk to advertise for bids three qualified contractors Bar's eight City parks. Bids were received 1993. Bids ranged from a low of and were opened and publicly read on June 8, $102,600 to a high of $149,556. RECOMMENDATION ncil award the contract for annual It is recommended that the City rCsueight City parks to Accurate Landscapf landscape maintenance of D the nd Best responsible bidder, in the amount o Maintenance Corporation, $102,600. FINANCIAL SUMMARY The current contract with Mariposa Landscape, Inc. is for $101,458 per year. ainten nce s for 102,600 The bid from Accurate Landscape and enfor not included in the current per year, and includes six contract for landscape maintenance o contract with Mariposa Landscape, Inc. Costs City parks are paid from the City's General Fund. BACKGROUND The new contract for annual t were anotiintenance of ncluded in thelcont Diamond ct witheight Mariposa parks includes six tasks that were n Landscape, Inc. These tasks are: 1. Overseeding of parks once each year 2. Fertilization of parks twice each year 3. Disease/Insect Control on an as needed basis 4. Weed Control of turf areas on antamenofdeachbasis k daily 5, Closure of restrooms at closing ark a ui ed with 6. Raising the American flag over each p q Pp Monday thru Friday. 1 a f lag pole Landscape Contract for Parks June 15, 1993 Page Two add-on items, the annual costs for the above six tasks would ti competitive a As 400. When included in this highly P minimum of $41, 1 142 to the annual cos Of the cost of these tasks has added only $ Had the contract process,year, the parks maintenance conlnCctbeen extendedforther1993/94 fiscal Therefore, the with Mariposa Landscape, o increase ($3,957). would have required a 3.90 cost -of -living it saves $2,815 new contract not on1 wouldlhave costincudes the six aditional task , to ext end the existing contract with compared to what it Inc. Mariposa Landscape Prepared By: Bob Rose Director of CO unit Services 2 DRAFT City of Diamond Bar Meeting Agenda For June 15, 1993 1. CLOSED SESSION: 5:00 p.m. Litigation - Government Code 54956.9 Personnel - Government Code 54957.6 2. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEIGANCE: Mayor Miller INVOCATION: Pastor Ron Winkler, Diamond Bar Christian Fellowship 06/09/93 Page: 1 ROLL CALL: Councilmen MacBride, Forbing, Werner, Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Mayor Miller 3. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES "ETC. 4. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 4.1 GENERAL PLAN PUBLIC HEARING - JUNE 16, 1993 - 7:00 P.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 4.2 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSIO- _ TTT1TTe ., . _ _ _ _ 7: 00 p.m. - AQMD Hearing Room 4.3 PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE ; UJoh A QMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Co] 4.4 CONCERT IN THE PARK - JUNE ; ��) �,03 :00 P.M. - "E1 Toro Marine Corl C-anyon Park, 22930 Golden Springs Dr. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS: 6. COUNCIL COMMENTS: 7. CONSENT CALENDAR: 7.1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 7.1.1 REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 18, 1993 - APPROVE AS SUBMI TTED. 7.1.2 ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 19, 1993 - GENERA L PLAN PUBLIC HEARING - APPROVE AS SUBMITTED. 7.1.3 ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 26, 1993 - GENERA L PLAN PUBLIC HEARING - APPROVE AS SUBMITTED. City of Diamond Bar 06/09/93 Meeting Agenda For Page: 2 June 15, 1993 7.1.4 ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 2, 1993 - GENERA L PLAN PUBLIC HEARING - APPROVE AS SUBMITTED. 7.2 WARRANT REGISTER - APPROVE WARRANT REGISTER DATED JUNE 15, 1993 IN THE AMOUNT OF 7.3 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES - FILED BY HEIRS OF STEPHEN WILL S, MAY 19, 1993. Recommended Action: Reject request and refer matter for further action to Carl Warren & Co., the City's Risk Manager. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Will begin precisely at 7:00 p.m. 8.1 ORDINANCE NO. XX(1993): INTERIM TEMPORARY SIGNS Recommended Action: 8.2 LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38 Recommmended Action: 8.3 LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0. 39 Recommended Action: 8.4 LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 - 8.5 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: ADOPTING FY 93-94 BUDGET Recommended Action: 9. OLD BUSINESS: 9.1 CONTRACT WITH COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FOR PARATRANSI SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993-94 - The City would like to continue to provide paratransit and dial -a -ride services for eligible elderly and persons with disabilities. The services are provided and administered by the L.A. County Department of Public Works and to ensure continuation, the City needs to secure an agreement with L.A. County for FY 1993-94. City of Diamond Bar 06/09/93 Meeting Agenda For 'Page: 3 June 15, 1993 9.1 CONTRACT WITH COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FOR PARATRANSI Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council approve the Paratransit Services Agreement and direct the City Clerk to forward the agreement to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works for execution. 9.2 REVIEW OF RIGHT -TURN RESTRICTIONS - ROLLING KNOLL & COUNTRY VIEW Recommended Action: 9.3 CALL FOR BIDS - PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS FOR DESIGN OF GOLDEN SPRINGS MEDIANS, GONA COURT TO CITY LIMITS - Recommended Action: 9.4 VERBAL REPORT REGARDING STATUS OF PROPOSED CITY OF INDUSTRY MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITY (MRF) AND SPEAKER FROM nI�p LANTERMAN? - TROY Recommended Action: 10. NEW BUSINESS: 10.1 AWARD OF PARKS MAINTENANCE CONTRACT - Recommended Action: 10.2 AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF BREA FOR PROVISION OF RECRE ATIONAL SERVICES FOR FY 93-94 - Recommended Action: 10.3 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY CO UNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 1993, FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX calling a General Municipal Election for November 2, 1993 and direct the City Clerk to notify the Los Angeles County Registrar -Recorder. City of Diamond Bar 06/09/93 Meeting Agenda For Page: 4 June 15, 1993 10.4 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY CO UNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 2, 1993, WITH THE SCHOOL AND UDEL ELECTIONS TO BE HELD ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 23302 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX requesting consolidation with the County of Los Angeles for conduct of the City's General Municipal Election November 2, 1993 and direct the City Clerk to notify the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and the Los Angeles County Registrar -Recorder. 10.5 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY CO UNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO CANDIDATES STATMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 1993. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX adopting regulations for candidates for elective office. 10.6 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY CO UNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS FOR CITY MEASURES SUBMITTED AT MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX providing for the filing of rebuttal arguments for City measures. 10.7 QUITCLAIM OF EASEMENT FROM TRANSAMERICA TITLE FOR PROSPECTOR'S ROAD - GEORGE Recommended Action: 10.8 PLANS AND SPECIFICATINS FOR GOLDEN SPRINGS OVERLAY - GEORGE Recommended Action: 11. ANNOUNCEMENTS: 12. ADJOURNMENT: City of Diamond Bar Meeting Agenda For June 15, 1993 1. CLOSED SESSION: 5:00 p.m. Litigation - Government Code 54956.9 Personnel - Government Code 54957.6 2. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEIGANCE: Mayor Miller INVOCATION: DRAPT 06/07/93 Page: 1 ROLL CALL: Councilmen MacBride, Forbing, Werner, Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Mayor Miller 3. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES ETC. 4. S HEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 4.1 GENERAL PLAN PUBLIC HEARING - JUNE 16, 1993 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 4.2 PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 2s, 1993 - 7:00 P.M., A QMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 4.3 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - JUNE 24, 1993 - 7: 00 p.m. - AQMD Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr., 4.4 CONCERT IN THE PARK - JUNE 30, 1993 - 6:30 TO 8:00 p.m. - "El Toro Marine Corps Band'- Sycamore Canyon Park, 22930 Golden Springs Dr. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS: OMMENTS : JA CALENDAR: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 7.1.1 REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 18, 1993 - APPROVE AS SUBMI TTED. 7.1.2 ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 19, 1993 - GENERA L PLAN PUBLIC HEARING - APPROVE AS SUBMITTED. 7.1.3 ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 26, 1993 - GENERA L PLAN PUBLIC HEARING - APPROVE AS SUBMITTED. 7.1.4 ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 2, 1993 - GENERA L PLAN PUBLIC HEARING - APPROVE AS SUBMITTED. City of Diamond Bar 06/07/93 Meeting Agenda For Page: 2 June 15, 1993 7.2 WARRANT REGISTER - APPROVE WARRANT REGISTER DATED JUNE 15, 1993 IN THE AMOUNT OF 7.3 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES - FILED BY HEIRS OF STEPHEN WILL S, MAY 19, 1993. Recommended Action: Reject request and refer matter for further action to Carl Warren & Co., the City's Risk Manager. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS: CL -,4, 7: 8.1 ORDINANCE NO. XX(1993): INTERIM TEMPORARY SIGNS Recommended Action: 8.2 LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38 Recommmended Action: 8.3 LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0. 39 Recommended Action: 8.4 IJMDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 - $ - S Ud qE.J . 9. OLD BUSINESS: 9.1 RESOLUTION N0. 93 A RESOLUTION OF CITY COUNCIL OF THEITY OF DIAMOND BAR UTHORIZING AND DIRECTING T CITY CLERK, ON BE F OF THE CITY DIAMOND BAR, TO EPT 1) THE VACATIO F A SEWER EAS NT AND 2) THE OF RING OF A RELOCATED WER EASEMENT L ATED AT 3302 SOUTHDIAMOND BAR BOULEV AND DIRECT THE ITY CLERK TO R RD THE RESOLUTION/ SEMENT DEED - Recommended Acti 9.2 CONTRACT WITH COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FOR PARATRANSI SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993-94 - The City would like to continue to provide a paratransit and dial -a -ride services for eligible elderly and persons with disabilities. The paratransit service is provided and administered by L.A. County Department of Public Works. To ensure the continuation of paratransit services, the City needs to secure a paratransit services agreement with L.A. County for FY 1993-94. City of Diamond Bar 06/07/93 Meeting Agenda For Page: 3 June 15, 1993 9.2 CONTRACT WITH COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FOR PARATRANSI Recommended Action: Approve the Paratransit Services Agreement. 9.3 REVIEW OF RIGHT -TURN RESTRICTIONS - ROLLING KNOLL & COUNTRY VIEW Recommended Action: m' 9.4 CALL FOR BIDS - PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS FOR ADESIGN OF GOLDEN SPRINGS - C)r-) „ (4 -tz Re ommended Action: 10. NEW BU ESS: 10.1 AWARD OF PARKS MAINTENANCE CONTRACT - Recommended Action: 10.2 AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF BREA FOR PROVISION OF RECRE ATIONAL SERVICES FOR FY 93-94 - Recommended Action: 11. ANNOUNCEMENTS: 12. ADJOURNMENT: �a 4 D. 0 ANNUAL BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 1993-94 GARY G. MILLER Mayor PHYLLIS E. PAPEN JOHN A. f"-ORBING Mayor Pro Tem Coundlmember GARY H. WERNER DEXTER 0. MAC BRIDE Coundimember Counciknember TERRENCE L BELANGER City Manager LYNDA BURGESS City Clerk CITY OF DIAMOND BAR BUDGET PHILOSOPHY AND OPERATING GUIDELINES 1. The City of Diamond Bar's budget is designed to serve four major purposes: • definition of policy in compliance with legal requirements for General Law cities in the State of California, Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASH) financial reporting requirements and audit standards, and fiscal directions of the City Council. • utilization as an operations quids for administrative staff in the management and control of fiscal resources. • presentation of the City's financial plan for the ensuing fiscal year, itemizing projected revenues and estimated expenditures. • illustration as a coastunications document for citizens who wish to understand the operations and costs of City services. 2. Departmental budgets will be originated within each department. 3. Where applicable, the department head will assign priorities to projects and activities in preparing program budgets for the department. 4. Department Heads are responsible for operating within their budget amount as approved by the City Manager and authorized by the City Council. 5. The City Council has the legal authority to amend the budget at any time during the fiscal year. The City Manager has the authority to make administrative adjustments to the budget as long " those changes will neither have a significant policy impact nor affect budgeted year-end fund balances. 6. Current year requirements of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) will be incorporated into the annual operational budget and defined as the capital budget. 7. Fund balances will be maintained at levels which will protect the City from future uncertainties. -1- GENERAL FUND REVENUES 1993 State Subventions 2,531,000 29% , Use of Money & Prop 205,200 2% Property Taxes 1,274,000 15% Fines & Forfeitures 19,0000% -1994 Transfer -In Oth Fds It, 846,70010% Current Svc Charge 759,500 9% Other Taxes 3,025,000 35% Total Revenues - $8,660,400 i GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES Public Safety 3,839,275 46' 1993 - 1994 Community Develop 639,3008% n & Support )7,850 7% Legislative 776,450 9% Interfund Transfers 290,000 3% Community Svcs 867,920 10% Public Wks/Engineer 1,461,550 17% Total Appropriations - $8,432,345 Cl T Y OF DIAMOND BAR Organizational Chart 1:; IL CITY AT T0111101 BY (Ceerr.erl CITY YAMMER [......0 DEVELOP Mao T YANM{YtNT GE RY10 {G A..I.r.n1 C11r Yen.I.r CITY COMMUNITY DfV{LOPM ENT of—I., CODE PUS"►UGLIC WORKS DIr.0 ler 10..1...11 ENGINEERING GAF■TY COMMUNITY •ERY IC[D D" .,.r ANIMAL FARES CLINK ■Nf ORCtYtMT CONTROL r0.nrr.cr! DATA ■UILOINGTRAFFIC rIM RECREATION _PROCEGEING AND SAP STY [ TRANS. lC.nleerl (F1re 01.er1c rl FINANCE PLANNING PUGLIC GNERIFP IS on KG r0onrncrl rConr.•eN PERSONNEL EMERGENCY Int►. RISK _MANAGEMENT rCon.r..rJ CITY OF DIAMOND BAR PERSONNEL SUMMARY FISCAL YEAR 1993-94 POSITION -City Manager 1 1 1 -Assistant City Manager 1 1 1 -Community Develop. Dir. 1 1 1 -Public Works Director 1 1 0 -Dir. of Community Services 1 1 1 -City Clerk 1 1 1 -Accounting Manager 1 1 1 -Assistant to City Manager 1 1 1 -Associate Planner 1 1 1 -Transportation Planner 1 1 1 -Senior Engineer 1 1 1 -Senior Accountant 1 1 1 -Supt.of Parks & Mtnce. 1 1 1 -Secretary to City Manager 1 1 1 -Administrative Assistant 1 1 3 -Deputy City Clerk 1 1 1 -Administrative Secretary 1 1 1 -Secretary 1 1 1 -Planning Technician 1 1 0 -Assistant Planner 0 0 1 -Engineering Technician 1 1 0 -Assistant Civil Engr. 0 0- 1 -Administrative Analyst 1 1 0 -Code Enforcement Officer 1 1 1 -Maintenance Worker II 1 1 1 -Clerk Typist 1 1 1 -Jr. Clerk Typist 0 Totals _1 25 _1 25 24 -Account Clerk 1 1 -Clerk Typist 0 0 -Comm. Serv. Leader 0 0 -Planning Intern 1 1 Totals 6 5 -5- 1 1 2 1 0r CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Personnel 1993-1994 Special Fund Admin 129 City Council 14% Finance 7% Community Sery 13% Comm Development 16% mc City Manager 17% ty Clerk 8% Public Works/Engr 14% CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 1993-1994 Personnel City Council Finance Public Wks/Engr Community Services City Clerk City Manager Comm Development Special Fund Admin. �4 �u 2.75 5 �5 4.65 3 6.2. 5 5.9 194.3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 -7- GENERAL FUND BUDGET -9- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR GENERAL FUND BUDGET F.Y. 1993-94 1992-93 City Manager City Council ESTIMATED RESOURCES Ad usted Recommended oved Property Taxes Other Taxes State Subventions Fines S Forfeitures From Other Agencies Current Svc Charge Use of Money & Prop. Transfer -in Other Funds Reserved Fund Balance Total Est Revenue APPROPRIATIONS City Council City Attorney City Manager City Clerk Finance General Government Community Promotion Planning Building and Safety Community Services Sheriff Fire Animal Control Emergency Prepardness Public Wks/Engineering Insurance Transfer -out Other Funds Total Appr"Wkwiorrs NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE 1,274,000 1,274,000 2,760,000 3,025,000 2,531,000 2,533,500 55,000 19,000 300,000 752,500 759,500 305,000 205,200 884,200 846,700 460,000 100,000 9,321,700 8,762,900 0 92,250 93,250 165,000 135,000 297,190 330,050 181,365 218,150 197,150 196,600 233,900 280,000 51,155 81,250 462,112 419,300 220,000 220,000 775,835 867,920 3,610,188 3,745,749 7,526 7,526 55,000 50,000 35,900 36,000 1,565,150 1,461,550 210,000 0 660,000 290,000 8,819,721 8,432,345 0 501,979 330,555 0 -11- REVENUE SUMMARY -13- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR GENERAL FUND ESTIMATED REVENUES 1993-94 Other Taxes: 1992-93 City Manager. City Council Sales Tax Estimated Recommended ` A roved Property Taxes: 1,183,000 1,183,000 Current Secured 91,000 91'000 Current Unsecured 2,780,000 3,025,000 Supplemental Roll Prior Year Property Taxes 300,000 Misc. Property Taxes 300,000 .Interest, Pen. b Del. 1,274,000 1,274,000 0 Other Taxes: 2,000,000 2,200,000 Sales Tax 100,000 t 50,000 Transient Occupancy 600'000 615,000 Franchise Property Transfer 60,000 60,000 0 Off Highway Tax 2,780,000 3,025,000 Subventions - State: 2,500,000 2,500,000 Motor Veh-in Lieu 10,000 7'000 Mobile Home In-Ueu 0 Cigarette Tax Homeowners Exemption 0 30,000 25,000 Off Highway Tax 1,000 2,531,000 1'500 2,533,500 0 Fines & Forfeitures: 45,000 6,000 General Fines 10,000 13,000 Impound Fees Narcotics Seizure parking Fines 55,000 19,000 0 From 08M Agencies• IntergovL Revenue 300,000 300,000 Current Svc. Charges: Building Fees: 111,300 117,300 Bldg Permits 11 11,800 Plumbing Permits ,800 18,200 18,200 Electrical Permits 8,500 8,500 Mechanical Permits 11,800 11,800 Grading Permits Industrial Waste Fee 19,500 19,500 Permit Issuance Fee -14- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR GENERAL FUND ESTIMATED REVENUES 1993-94 -15- 1992-93 City Manager < City Council Estimated RecommendedA owed Inspection Fees 7,800 104,500 7,800 104,500 Plan Check Fee 600 600 SMIP Fee Planning Fees: Environmental Fees 25,500 5,000 Adv. Planning Fees 4,500 1 �� Current Planning Fees 45,000 75'000 Miscellaneous Permits Engineering Fees: 42,000 50,000 Engr. Plan Check Fees 73,500 80,000 Engr. Review Fees 500 Engr. Permit Fees 500 Engr. Inspection Fees Recreation Fees: 12,000 22,000 Community Activities 117,000 71,400 Athletics 18,000 22,600ee F Programs 107,000 131,500 Contract Classes Special Event Fees 8,000 752,500 759,500 0 Use of Money: Interest Earnings 300,000 2.20 Returned Check Charges 200 5,000 Sale/Printed Material 5,000 Miscellaneous 305,000 205,200 0 Interund TmrWem 884,200 846,700 GENERAL FUND TOTAL 8.861,700 8,662.900 0 -15- EXPENDITURE SUMMARY CIN OF DIAMOND BAR GENERAL FUND OPERATING EXPENDITURE SUMMARY Fiscal Year 1993-94 City Councii City Attorney City Manager City Clerk Finance General Government Community Promotion Planning Building and Safety Community Services -Admin Paul C Grow Park Heritage Park Maplehill Park Peterson Park Ronald Reagan Park Starshine Park Summitridge Park Sycamore Canyon Park Recreation Services Sheriff Fire Animal Control Emergency Preparedness Public Warks -Admin Engineering Traffic & Trans Public Works Transfers Out GENERAL FUND TOTAL Personal Services $52,050 315,850 157,400 162,500 500 313,000 48,820 118,400 124,900 56,850 41,500 $1,000 1,400 2,300 1,000 11,500 4,000 2,550 6,300 20,000 5,000 Operating Professional xoenditures Services 5 12,800 40,450 3,100 230,400 52.250 10,550 8,400 12,700 17,450 15,500 19,500 12,900 5,300 19,850 19,600 72,550 18,749 5,000 6,700 4,000 800 45,500 $25,200 135,000 18,000 30,000 34,600 25,000 88,200 0Z 21,000 12,000 22,000 13,100 5,700 20,400 25,500 4,800 3,727,000 7,526 50,000 4,500 153,000 155,000 18,500 784,200 $1,391,770 $55,050 $649,049 $6,384,226 -18- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR GENERAL FUND OPERATING EXPENDITURE SUMMARY Fiscal Year 1993-94 Contract Capital Outlay Transfers Total Percentage Services 593,250 1.11% 135,000 1.60% 330,050 3.91% 218,150 2.59% 196,600 2.33% 3,000 280,000 3.32% 81,250 0.96% 5,000 419,300 4.97% 220,000 2.61% 220,000 67,520 0.80% 26.450 0.31% 13,750 38,450 0.46% 27,500 0.33% 41,500 0.49% 26,000 0.31% 11,000 0.13% 40,250 0.48% 45,100 0.53% 544,150 6.45% 328,400 3,745.749 44.42% 7,526 0.09% 50,000 0.59% 17,500 9,000 36,000 293,600 0.43% 3.48% 4,000 215,850 2.56% 67,400 0.80% 6,600 884,700 10.49% 55,000 00 290, 0 290.000 3.44% $21,000 $290,000 $8,432.345 100.00% $6419250 -19- EXPENDITURE DETAIL DEPARTMENT _21_ CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Division - Legislative • City Council • City Attorney • City Manager • City Clerk -23- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT: Legislative ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION. Summary 1993-94 ACCOUNT if. 4010-4040 SUPPLIES 1100 Office Supplies 3,950 1992-93 City Manager City Council 300 .1,600 Amended Budget Recommended Approved PERSONNEL SERVICES 0 TOTAL SUPPLIES $4,350 0010 Salaries 331,200 362,100 0 0020 Overtime 0 0 0 0030 Wages - Part time 19,800 31,300 0 0070 City Paid Benefits 6,568 6,400 0 0080 Benefits 52,250 57,000 0 0083 Worker's Comp Exp. 61100 7,050 0 0085 Medicare 6,480 7,700 0 0090 Cafeteria Benefits 51,992 53,750 0 0 TOTAL PERSONNEL SVC $474,390 $525,300 $0 SUPPLIES 1100 Office Supplies 3,950 3,000 0 1200 Operating Supplies 300 .1,600 0 1300 Small Tools & Equip 100 100 0 TOTAL SUPPLIES $4,350 54,700 $0 OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2110 Printing 2,200 700 0 2115 Advertising 4,200 3,200 0 2120 Postage 0 100 0 2125 Telephone 600 1,000 0 2130 Rental/Lease-Equip. 200 200 0 2200 Equipment Maint. 950 650 0 2310 Fuel 11000 1,000 0 2315 Membership & Dues 1,225 11350 0 2320 Publications 700 700 0 2325 Meetings 4,150 7,150 0 2330 Travel-Conf & Mtgs 12,000 13,000 0 2335 Mileage & Auto Allow 11500 900 0 2340 Education & Training 4,300 3,300 0 2390 Elsctfons 5,000 35,000 0 TOTAL OPERATING EXP. $38,025 $68,250 50 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4000 Professional Svcs 52,640 43,200 0 4020 Legal Services 75,000 75,000 0 4021 Special Legal Svcs 60,000 60,000 0 4023 Self Ins. Defense 30,000 0 0 TOTAL PROF SVCS $217,640 $178,200 $0 CAPITAL OUTLAY 6230 Computer Equipment 1,400 0 0 TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY $1,400 $0 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $735,805 $776,450 s0 -25- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACTIVITY COMMENTARY 1993-94 The City Council is the legislative and policy-making body for the City of Diamond Bar. Five councilmembers are elected at -large for four-year, overlapping terms of office. The Council annually elects one of its members to serve as Mayor. The Mayor presides over all Council meetings and is the ceremonial head of the City for official functions. As Diamond Bar's elected representatives, the City Council expresses the values of the electorate in keeping pace with viable community needs and for establishing the quality of municipal services in the urban environment. The Council determines service levels and revenue obligations through the adoption of an annual budget; authorizes City contracts and expenditures; establishes City service and operating policies; and adopts such regulatory measures as may be necessary for the mutual protection of the community. Councilmembers also represent the City on various intergovernmental organizations to achieve governmental cooperation, legislation, and programs that are consistent with.the needs of the community. .PERSONNEL City Council Members 5.0 -26- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT Legislative ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION: - City Council 1993-94 ACCOUNT#: 4010 SUPPLIES 1100 Office Supplies 1200 Operating Supplies TOTAL SUPPLIES 1,750 500 500 $1,750 $1,000 $0 OPERATING EXPENDITURES 1992-93 City Manager City Council 2,000 500 Amended Budget Recommended Approved PERSONNEL SERVICES 2315 Membership & Dues 0010 Salaries 30,000 30,000 0070 City Paid Benefits 2,800 2,850 0080 Benefits 4,800 4,750 0083 Workers Comp. Exp. 300 300 0085 Medicare 500 450 0090 Cafeteria Benefits 13,600 13,700 TOTAL PERSONNEL SVC $52,000 $52,050 s0 SUPPLIES 1100 Office Supplies 1200 Operating Supplies TOTAL SUPPLIES 1,750 500 500 $1,750 $1,000 $0 OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2110 Printing 2,000 500 2310 Fuel 2315 Membership & Dues 2320 Publications 2325 Meetings 2,000 4,000 2330 Travel -Cont & Mtgs 81000 81000 2335 Mileage & Auto Allow 500 0 2340 Education & Training 2,000 2,500 2395 Misc. Expenditures TOTAL OPERATING EXP. $14,500 $15,000 s0 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4000 Professional Svcs 24,000 25,200 TOTAL PROF. SERVICES $24,000 $25,200 DEPARTMENT TOTAL -27- $92,250 $93,250 $0 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACTIVITY COMMENTARY 1993-94 The City Attorney acts as the City's legal counsel, prepares resolutions, ordinances and agreements; and advises the City Council and staff on all legal matters relating to the operation of the municipal government. This service is provided through a contract with the law offices of MARKMAN, ARCZYNSKI, HANSON AND KING. The City pays a monthly retainer fee which covers attendance at meetings and general consulting services. Special legal services required in addition to the contract are also included in this department. PERSONNEL Total Positions 0.00 -28- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT-: Logi ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION. City AttomeIy 1993-94 ACC(�tJNT t. 4020 -29- 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4020 Legal Services 75,000 75,000 4021 Special Legal Svcs 60,000 60,000 4023 Self Ins. Defense 30,000 TOTAL PROF. SVCS. 1651000 135,000 0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $165,000 $135,000 $0 -29- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACTIVITY COMMENTARY 1993-94 THe City Manager's Office budget provides for continued administrative direction to all operating departments in compliance with the City's Municipal Code. This department is responsible for the execution of Council policy and the enforcement of all laws and ordinances. The City Manager, in concert with the City Council, establishes Policy, provides leadership and implements efficient and effective services. The City Manager is the director of all City personnel. As such, he establishes and maintains appropriate controls to ensure that all operating departments adhere to Council and legally mandated policies and regulations. Additionally he is responsible for the preparation and administration of the annual budget. Administrative and clerical support to the City Council members is also provided through the City Manager's office. PERSONNEL POLL TIME POSITIONS City Manager 1.00 Asst. City Manager .75 Asst. to City Manager .25 Executive Secretary .75 Admin. Assistant .50 Sub -Total 3.25 PART TINN POSITIONS Clerk Typist 1.00 Admin. Intern 2.00 Sub -Total 3.00 Total Positions 6.25 -30- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT: Legislative ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION: City Manager> 1993-94 ACCOUNT #: 4030 ' 1992-93 City Manager City Council PERSONNEL SERVICES Amended Budget Recommended Approved 0010 Salaries 193,600 214,950 0020 Overtime 0030 Wages - Part time 19,800 31,300 0070 City Paid Benefits 2,068 11850 0080 Benefits 30,450 33,800 0083 Worker's Comp Exp 4,700 5,600 0085 Medicare 4,380 51550 0090 Cafeteria Benefits 21,692 22,800 TOTAL PERSONNEL SVC $276,690 $315,850 $0 SUPPLIES 1100 Office Supplies 1,000 1,000 1200 Operating Supplies 300 300 1300 Small Tools & Equip 100 100 TOTAL SUPPLIES $1,400 $1,400 $0 OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2110 Printing 200 200 2115 Advertising 200 200 2120 Postage 100 2125 Telephone 600 1,000 2130 Equipment Rent 200 200 2200 Equipment Maint. 800 500 2310 Fuel 1,000 1,000 2315 Membership & Dues 1,000 1,000 2320 Publications 600 600 2325 Meetings 2,000 31000 2330 Trawl -Cont & Mtgs 3,000 4,000 2335 MOMW & Auto Allow 500 500 2340 Education & Training 2,000 500 TOTAL OPERATING EXP. $12,100 $12,800 $0 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4000 Professional Svcs 7,000 0 TOTAL PROF. SVCS. $7,000 $0 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $297,190 $330,050 $0 -31- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACTIVITY COMMENTARY 1993-94 The City Clerk has a statutory duty to record the official minutes of all City Council meetings; maintain original resolutions and ordinances, and is the custodian of the City seal. Additionally, she is the chief election officer for municipal elections. The City Clerk's office is the depository for all official documents and records. The Clerk assists and supports the public and City departments by making available the records necessary for the City to advance its administrative, legal and legislative functions. The City Clerk encourages the use of cost-saving/productivity improving records management techniques throughout the City. The City Clerk prepares all necessary documents for public hearings, posts notices and copies of ordinances as required by law and maintains and updates the Municipal Code. PERSONNEL FULL TIME POSITIONS City Clerk 1.00 Deputy City Clerk 1.00 Clerk Typist 1.00 Total Positions 3.00 -32- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMEKr, Legislative ,1:- EXPENDITURES DIVISION: City Clerk 1993'94 ACCOUNT #: 4040 SUPPLIES 1100 Office Supplies 1,200 11500 1200 Operating Supplies 800 1300 Small Tools & Equip TOTAL SUPPLIES $1,200 $2,300 $0 OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2110 Printing 2115 Advertising 1992-93 City Manager City Council 2120 Postage Amended Budget Recommended Approved PERSONNEL SERVICES Telephone DEPARTMENT TOTAL 0010 Salaries 107,600 117,150 0020 Overtime Membership & Dues 225 0070 City Paid Benefits 1,700. 1,700 0080 Benefits 17,000 18,450 0083 Worker's Comp. Exp. 1,100 1,150 0085 Medicare 1,600 1,700 0090 Cafeteria Benefits 16,700 17,250 300 TOTAL PERSONNEL SVC $145,700 $157,400 $0 SUPPLIES 1100 Office Supplies 1,200 11500 1200 Operating Supplies 800 1300 Small Tools & Equip TOTAL SUPPLIES $1,200 $2,300 $0 OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2110 Printing 2115 Advertising 4,000 3,000 2120 Postage 6230 Computer Equipment 1,400 2125 Telephone DEPARTMENT TOTAL $181,365 $218,150 $0 2200 Equipment Maint. 150 150 2315 Membership & Dues 225 350 2320 Publications 100 100 2325 Meetings 150 150 2330 Travel-Conf & Mtgs 11000 1,000 2335 Mileage & Auto Allow 500 400 2340 Education & Training 300 300 2390 Elections 5,000 35,000 TOTAL OPERATING EXP $11,425 $40,450 $0 PROFESSIONAL SVC 4000 Professional Svcs 21,640 18,000 TOTAL PROF. SVCS $21,640 $18,000 $0 CAPITAL OUTLAY 6230 Computer Equipment 1,400 TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY $1,400 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $181,365 $218,150 $0 -33- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Division - Admin & Support • Finance • General Government • Community Promotion • Insurance -35- PERSONNEL SERVICES 2100 Photocopy 2110 0010 Salaries 119,700 122,450 0 0020 Overtime 0 0 0 0030 Wages - Part time 4,900 0 0 0070 City Paid Benefits 1,500 1,600 0 0080 Benefits 18,900 19,750 0 0083 Worker's Comp Exp. 1,200 1,200 0 0085 Medicare 2,200 11800 0 0090 Cafeteria Benefits 15,700 16,200 0 Misc. Expenditures TOTAL PERSONNEL SVC $164,100 $163,000 $0 SUPPLIES 1100 Office Supplies 1200 Operating Supplies 1300 Small Tools & Equip TOTAL SUPPLIES OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2100 Photocopy 2110 Printing 2115 Advertising 2120 Postage 2125 Telephone 2126 Utilities 2130 Rental/Lease-Equip. 2140 Rent/Lease-Real Prop 2200 Equipment Maint. 2205 Computer Maint 2210 Maint-Grounds & Bldg 2310 Fuel 2315 Membership & Dues 2320 Publications 2325 Meetings 2330 Travel-Conf & Mtgs 2335 Mileage & Auto Allow 2340 Education & Training 2350 Newsletter 2353 Anniversary 2355 Contr-Community Grps 2395 Misc. Expenditures 7200 Insurance Expense 7225 Insurance Retention 200 TOTAL OPERATING EXP -36- 9,000 13,000 0 5,655 3,000 0 500 500 0 $15,155 $16,500 $0 10,000 5,000 0 6,000 5,750 0 0 300 0 15,000 16,000 0 24,000 24,000 0 100 100 0 8,500 8,500 0 120,000 1.30,000 0 6,100 6,000 0 0 5,000 0 9,500 7,500 0 300 500 0 11,450 18,950 0 650 1,300 0 1,250 2,150 0 750 750 0 250 200 0 4,800 11500 0 30,000 50,000 0 0 1,500 0 1,000 0 0 0 750 0 105,000 0 0 100,000 0 0 $454,650 $285,750 $0 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT: Admin & Support ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION- Summary 1993-94 ACCOUNT & 405045,4810 1992-93 City Manager City Council Adopted Budget Recommended Approved PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Auto Equipment 0 0 4000 Professional Svcs 5,000 30,000 0 4010 Auditing Services 13,800 18,600 0 4030 Data Processing Svcs 15,500 16,000 0 4260 Economic Development 25,000 25,000 0 TOTAL PROF SVCS $59,300 $89,600 $0 CONTRACT SERVICES TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY $5,000 5000 Contract Services 2,000 0 0 5300 Contr Svcs -Com. Svcs 0 0 0 TOTAL CONTRACT SVCS $2,000 $0 $0 CAPITAL OUTLAY 6100 Auto Equipment 0 0 0 6220 Office Furniture 0 0 0 6230 Computer Equipment 5,000 3,000 0 6250 Misc. Equipment 0 0 0 6310 Bldg Improvements 0 0 0 TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY $5,000 $3,000 $0 ALLOCATED COSTS 9980 Less Allocated Costs (8,000) 0 0 TOTAL ALLOC COSTS ($8,000) s0 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $692,205 $557,850 $0 -37- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACTIVITY COMMENTARY 1993-94 The Finance Division provides accounting control over assets, revenues, receivables and maintains budgetary control over all City funds. This department is responsible for the proper receipt, custody and disbursement of all City funds. The Finance Division processes all financial transactions of the City. Specific activities include accounts payable, cash receipts, payroll, fixed assets, budget maintenance, audits, financial reporting, and the refinements and mantenance of the general accounting system. The Finance Division is also responsible for the safety, liquidity and maximization of the yields of the City's financial resources. In conjunction with the payroll function, the Finance Division is responsible for the administration of the personnel function. This includes benefit administration, personnel review and salary adjustments. PERSONNEL FULL TIME POSITIONS Accounting Manager 1.00 Senior Accountant 1.00 Subtotal 2.00 PART TIME POSITIONS Account Clerk I .75 Total Positions 2.75 -38- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT General�OVL ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION: Financal. 1993-94 ACCOUNT A 4050 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved PERSONNEL SERVICES 2110 Printing 0010 Salaries 119,700 122,450 0020 Overtime 2325 Meetings 0030 Wages - Part time 41900 Mileage & Auto Allow 0070 City Paid Benefits 1,500 11600 0080 Benefits 181900 19,250 0083 Wkr's Comp. 1,200 1,200 0085 Medicare 2,200 11800 0090 Cafeteria Benefits 15,700 16,200 TOTAL PERSONNEL SVC $164,100 $162,500 $0 SUPPLIES 1100 Office Supplies 1300 Small Tools & Equip TOTAL SUPPLIES OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2110 Printing 2200 Equipment Maint. 2315 Membership & Dues 2320 Publications 2325 Meetings 2330 Travel-Conf & Mtgs 2335 Mileage & Auto Allow 2340 Education & Training $3,100 $0 TOTAL OPERATIM EXP. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4010 Auditing Services 4030 Data Processing Svcs. TOTAL PROF SVCS 500 1,000 $500 $1,000 $0 1,000 750 100 450 450 150 300 250 150 750 750 250 200 800 500 $3,750 $3,100 $0 13,800 15,000 15,000 15,000 $28,800 $30,000 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $197,150 $1961600 $0 -39- CITY OF DIAMOND BMR ACTIVITY COMMENTARY 1993-94 This division provides funds for the operating, rental and general operation of City Hall. Included in this are items which cannot be specifically identified as one division's expenditure, such as utilities, duplicating, postage, etc. This division provides for the purchase of general office furniture and equipment. PERSONNEL Total Positions 0.00 -40- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT: General Govt ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES 1993-94 Photocopy DIVISION: ACCOEIN'1' General Govt. 4Q90 2110 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved PERSONNEL SERVICES 2120 Postage 15,000 0080 Benefits 2125 500 24,000 0083 Worker's Comp. Exp. 2126 Utilities 100 TOTAL PERSONNEL SVC $0 $500 $0 SUPPLIES 2140 Rent/Lease-Real Prop 120,000 1100 Office Supplies 9,000 81000 6,000 1200 Operating Supplies 2,000 3,000 1300 Small Tools & Equip 500 500 9,500 TOTAL SUPPLIES $11,500 $11,500 $0 OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2100 Photocopy 10,000 5,000 2110 Printing 5,000 5,000 2115 Advertising 300 2120 Postage 15,000 16,000 2125 Telephone 24,000 24,000 2126 Utilities 100 100 2130 Rental/Lease-Equip. 81500 8,500 2140 Rent/Lease-Real Prop 120,000 130,000 2200 Equipment Maint. 6,000 6,000 2205 Computer Maint 5,000 2210 Maint-Grounds & Bldg 9,500 7,500 2310 Fuel 300 500 2315 Membership & Dues 11,000 18,500 2320 Publications 500 11000 2325 Meetings 1,000 2,000 2330 Travel-Conf & Mtgs 2340 Education & Training 4,000 1,000 2395 Misc. Expenditures TOTAL OPERATING EXP. $214,900 $230,400 $0 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4000 Professional Svcs 30,000 4010 Prof Svcs -Auditing 3,600 4030 Prof Svcs -Data Proc 500 1,000 TOTAL PROF SVCS $500 $34,600 $0 CONTRACT SERVICES 5000 Contract Services 2,000 TOTAL CONTRACT SVCS $2,000 CAPITAL OUTLAY 6220 Office Furniture 6230 Computer Equipment 6250 Misc. Equipment TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY DEPARTMENT TOTAL 5,000 3,000 $5,000 $3,000 $0 $233,900 $280,000 $0 -41- CITY OF DIMOND BAR ACTIVITY COMONTARY 1993-94 VISION TITLE: This division is to provide for the general promotion of the City of Diamond Bar. Included in this budget are funds for the publishing of the City newsletter. various community awards, certificates, and recognition plaques will be funded through this department. Also the City will be providing support to the local business community through various economic development programs. PERSONNEL Total Positions 0.00 -42- SUPPLIES 1200 Operating Supplies TOTAL SUPPLIES OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2350 Newsletter 2353 Anniversary 2355 Contr Community Grps 2395 Misc. Expenditures TOTAL OPERATING EXP. PROFESSIONAL SVCS 4260 Economic Development TOTAL PROF SVCS 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved 3,155 4,000 $3,155 $4,000 $0 30,000 50,000 0 1,500 1,000 750 $31,000 $52,250 $0 25,000 25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $0 ALLOCATED COSTS 9980 Allocated Costs (8,000) TOTAL ALLOCATED COST ($8,000) DEPARTMENT TOTAL $51,155 $81,250 -43- $0 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACTIVITY COMMENTARY 1993-94 • • �1117 1: 117 • , • The Insurance Division originally accounted for the financial transactions pertaining to the cost of insurance coverage which is provided through the So. California Joint Powers Insurance Authority. However, starting in Fiscal Year 93-94, these expenditures will be more appropriately funded thru the City's Self Insurance Fund (Fund #510). PERSONNEL Total Positions 0.0 -44- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT: General'GovL ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION: Insurance 1993-94 ACCOUNT fit: 4810 -45- 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved OPERATING EXPENDITURES 7200 Insurance Exp. 105,000 7225 Insurance Retention 100,000 TOTAL OPERATING EX $205,000 $0 $0 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4000 Professional Svcs 51000 TOTAL PROF SVCS $5,000 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $210,000 s0 s0 -45- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Division - Community Development • Planning • Building & Safety -47- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT: CommunityDev. ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISIOK Summary 1993-94 ACCOUNT P. 4210-4220 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved PERSONNEL SERVICES 0010 Salaries 224,300 227,400 0020 Overtime 1,000 1,000 0030 Wages - Part time 0 10,250 0070 City Paid Benefits 2,800 2,800 0080 Benefits 35,300 35,850 0083 Worker's Comp Exp. 3,400 3,350 0085 Medicare 4,000 4,100 0090 Cafeteria Benefits 27,900 28,250 TOTAL PERSONNEL SVC $298,700 $313,000 $0 SUPPLIES 1100 Office Supplies 1,000 2,000 1200 Operating Supplies 1,000 500 1300 Small Tools & Equip 50 50 TOTAL SUPPLIES $2,050 $2,550 $0 OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2100 Photocopying 10,000 500 2110 Printing 3,000 2,000 2115 Advertising 4,000 2,000 2120 Postage 500 200 2130 Equipment Rent 500 500 2200 Equipment Maint. 300 500 2310 Fuel 400 700 2315 Membership & Dues 1,000 1,000 2320 Publications 400 450 2325 Meetings 500 500 2330 Travel-Conf & Mtgs 3,000 2,000 2335 Mileage & Auto Allow 200 200 $0 TOTAL OPERATING EXP. $13,800 $10,550 $0 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4000 Professional Svcs 10,000 10,000 4100 Commissioner Comp. 7,200 7,200 4110 Com. Comp-SEATAC 1,000 1,000 4210 Planning -Regional 35,000 35,000 4220 General Plan 45,000 20,000 4240 Environmental Svcs 49,362 15,000 TOTAL PROF SVCS $147,562 $88,200 $0 CONTRACT SERVICES 5201 Contr Svcs -B & S 220,000 220,000 TOTAL CONTRACT SVCS $220,000 $220,000 $0 CAPITAL OUTLAY 6220 Office Furniture 0 5,000 TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY $0 $5,000 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $682,112 $639,300 $0 -49- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACTIVITY COMMENTARY 1993-94 DIVISION TITLE: PLANNING The Department of Community functions related to current safety, code enforcement, administration. It consists Development is responsible for the and advanced planning, building & ecoonomic development, and CDBG of two operating divisions. The Planning Division provides the community with long and short term planning in order to coordinate and monitor growth and development. It is charged with the development and implementation responsibilities of the General Plan. I.t prepares and administers the zoning and subdivision ordinances and reviews development projects for compliance with various development ordinances. The Planning Division insures that all projects receive the required environmental review in compliance with CEQA. Further, it provides technical support to the City Council and the various planning related committees/commissions. The Planning Division is also responsible for the development and administration of economic development and CDBG programs. It updates and maintains records for the general public and coordinates projects and programs with other governmental agencies. PERSONNEL FULL TIME POSITIONS Community Development Director Associate Planner Assistant Planner Code Enforcement Officer Admin. Secretary Subtotal PART TIME POSITIONS Planning Intern Total Positions -50- .90 1.00 1.00 1.00 4.90 1.00 5.90 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved PERSONNEL SERVICES 2100 Photocopying 0010 Salaries 224,300 227,400 0020 Overtime 1,000 1,000 0030 Wages - Part time 0 10,250 0070 City Paid Benefits 2,800 2,800 0080 Benefits 35,300 35,850 0083 Worker's Comp. Exp. 3,400 3,350 0085 Medicare 4,000 4,100 0090 Cafeteria Benefits 27,900 28,250 TOTAL PERSONNEL SVC $298,700 $313,000 $0 SUPPLIES 1100 Office Supplies 1200 Operating Supplies 1300 Small Tools & Equip TOTAL SUPPLIES OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2100 Photocopying 2110 Printing 2115 Advertising 2120 Postage 2130 Equipment Rent 2200 Equipment Maint. 2310 Fuel 2315 Membership & Dues 2320 Publications 2325 Meetings 2330 Travel-Conf & Mtgs 2335 Mileage & Auto Allow TOTAL OPERATING EXP PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4000 Professional Svcs 4100 Commissioner Comp. 4110 Com. Comp - SEATAC 4210 Planning 4220 General Plan 4240 Environmental 1,000 TOTAL PROF SVCS 1,000 2,000 1,000 500 50 50 $2,050 $2,550 500 3,000 2,000 4,000 2,000 500 200 500 500 300 500 400 700 1,000 1,000 400 450 500 500 3,000 2,000 200 200 $0 $13,800 $10,550 $0 10,000 10,000 7,200 7,200 1,000 1,000 35,000 35,000 45,000 20,000 49,362 15,000 $147,562 $88,200 $0 CAPITAL OUTLAY 6220 Office Furniture 5,000 TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 51000 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $462,112 $419,300 $0 -51- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACTIVITY COMMENTARY 1993-94 The Building and Safety Division is responsible for the protection of public health and safety through the enforcement of the Building Code and other related codes. This division provides for Building and Safety plan check, permit issuance, and inspection services. These services are currently being provided under contract with Pacesetter's Municipal Services. PERSONNEL Total Positions 0.00 -52- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT: Community Dev, ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION: & Safety. 1993-94 ACCOUNT#: 4220 1992-93 City Manager City Council CONTRACT SERVICES Amended Budget Recommended Approved 5201 Bldg & Safety 220,000 220,000 TOTAL CONTRACT SVCS $220,000 $220,000 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $220,000 $220,000 $0 -53- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Division -Community Services • Park Administration • City Parks Paul C. Grow Park Heritage Park Maple Hill Park Peterson Park Ronald Reagan Park Starshine Park Summitridge Park Sycamore Canyon Park • Recreation -55- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACTIVITY COMMENTARY 1993-94 The Community Services Department is responsible for the maintenance and operation of the City's eight parks. This includes grounds maintenance, facility upkeep, park improvements and capital projects. This fiscal year it is anticipated that the Pantera Park site will be designed and developed. The Department also administers the City's community recreation program, a portion of which is provided through contracted services with the City of Brea. In addition to the contracted services, the Diamond Bar City staff currently conducts the Tiny Tots program, adult excursions, and the popular Concert in the Park series, and administers the park reservation system. PERSONNEL FULL TITLE pOBITIONS Community Services Director .50 Supt of Parks & Maint .40 Maintenance Worker II .50 Admin Assistant 1.25 Sub total 2.65 PART TIME POSITIONS Community Services Leader 2.00 Total Positions -56- 4.65 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT; Community Svcs ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION: Summary 1993-94 ACCOUNT #' 4310-4350 1992-93 City Manager City Council PERSONNEL SERVICES Adopted Budget Recommended Approved 0010 Salaries 75,500 106,100 0 0020 Overtime 0 120 0 0030 Wages -Part Time 17,380 20,500 0 0070 City Paid Benefits 11100 1,510 0 0080 Benefits 11,900 16,710 0 0083 Worker's Comp. Exp. 2,900 3,450 0 0085 Medicare 2,300 3,120 0 0090 Cafeteria Benefits 10,900 15,710 0 TOTAL PERSONNEL SVC $121,980 $167,220 s0 SUPPLIES 1200 Operating Supplies 24,800 24,800 0 1300 Small Tools & Equip 3,000 1,500 0 $461,850 TOTAL SUPPLIES $27,800 $26,300 $0 OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2110 Printing 500 500 0 2120 Postage 0 300 0 2125 Telephone 710 4,900 0 2126 Utilities 70,850 86,050 0 2130 Equipment Rent 750 500 0 2140 Rent/Lease-Real Prop 70,000 70,000 0 2200 Equipment Maint. 4,300 11800 0 2210 Maint-Grounds & Bldg 30,000 33,850 0 2310 Fuel 2,600 2,800 0 2315 Membership & Dues 300 300 0 2320 Publications 0 100 0 2325 Meetings 3,600 2,050 0 2330 Travel-Conf & Meetings 200 200 0 2340 Education & Training 400 400 0 TOTAL OPERATING EXP. $184,210 $203,750 $0 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4100 Commissioner Comp 4300 Professional Svcs TOTAL PROF SVCS CONTRACT SERVICES 5300 Contract Services 4,800 4,800 0 7,000 4,000 0 $11,800 $8,800 $0 420,545 433,450 0 5305 Concerts in the Park 9,500 9,500 0 5310 Excursions 0 18,900 0 TOTAL CONTRACT SVCS $430,045 $461,850 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $775,835 $867,920 $0 -r I- ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES 1993-94 PERSONNEL SERVICES 0010 Salaries 0020 Overtime 0030 Wages - Part time 0070 City Paid Benefits 0080 Benefits 0083 Wkr's Comp. Exp. 0085 Medicare 0090 Cafeteria Benefits $6.300 $0 TOTAL PERSONAL SVC SUPPLIES 1200 Operating Supplies 1300 Small Tools 3 Equip TOTAL SUPPLIES OPERATING EXPENDITURES DEPARTMENT: Community Svcs DIVISION: Park Admin. ACCOUNT#: 4310 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended &KkW Recommended Approved 32,400 35,350 120 500 510 5,100 5,560 1,500 1,550 500 520 51100 5.210 $45,100 $48,820 $0 4,800 4,800 3,000 1,500 $7,800 $6.300 $0 2110 Printing 500 0 2120 Postage CONTRACT SERVICES so 2130 Equipment Rent 750 500 2200 Equipment Maint. 1,500 1,800 2210 Maint-Grounds &Bldg 10,000 2,000 2310 Fuel 2,800 2.800 2315 Membership & Dues 300 300 2320 Publications 100 2325 Meetings 1,800 250 2330 Travel-Conf & Mtgs 200 200 2340 Education a Training 400 400 TOTAL OPERATM EXP $18.350 $8,400 s0 PROFEWONAL SERVICES 4300 Prof. Serviws 7,000 4,000 TOTAL PROF SVC $7,000 $4,000 $0 CONTRACT SERVICES 5300 Com. Svcs. contract 2,500 0 0 TOTAL CONTRACT SVC $2.500 s0 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL -59- $80,750 $67,520 s0 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES 199©-94 DEPARTMENT: Commur* Svcs ONIStON• am Park ACCOUNT k 4311 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Reoomn wded Approved OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2126 Utilities 14,200 10,200 2210 Malnt-Grounds & Bldg 2,500 2,500 . . TOTAL OPERATING EXP $16,700 $12,700 50 CONTRACT SERVICES 5300 Com. Svcs. contract TOTAL CONTRACT SVC 12,500 '13,750 $12,500 $13,750 s0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $29,200 $26,450 $0 amc CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT,. Community Svcs ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION: Heritage Park 1993'94 ACCOUNT #: 4313 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2125 Telephone 710 2,800 2126 Utilities 5,700 9,400 2210 Maint-Grounds &Bldg 3,500 5,250 TOTAL OPERATING EXP $9,910 $17,450 $0 CONTRACT SERVICES 5300 Com. Svcs. contract TOTAL CONTRACT SVC 21,000 21,000 $21,000 $21,000 $o DEPARTMENT TOTAL $30,910 $38,450 s0 -61- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR oEPARTMa Ceruntmity ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVIStONrMalplow Pgrie' 1993-94 ACCOUNT #. 4316 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $32,500 $27,500 $0 -Fi 2- 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved SUPPLIES 1200 Operating Supplies TOTAL SUPPLIES $0 $0 $0 OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2126 Utilities 51000 11,500 2210 Maint-Grounds & Bldg 4,000 4,000 TOTAL OPERATING EXP $9,000 5151500 50 CONTRACT SERVICES 5300 Com. Svcs. contract 23,500 12,000 TOTAL CONTRACT SVC $23,500 $12,000 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $32,500 $27,500 $0 -Fi 2- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT: Community Svcs ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION: Peterson Pew 1993-94 ACCOUNT O 4319 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2126 Utilities 13.200 15,500 2210 Maint-Grounds & Bldg 4,000 4,000 TOTAL OPERATING EXP $17,200 $19,500 s0 CONTRACT SERVICES 5300 Com. Svcs. contract TOTAL CONTRACT SVC DEPARTMENT TOTAL 24,466 22,000 $24,466 522,000 $0 $41,666 $41,500 s0 -63- CITY OF DIAMOND ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES 1993-94 BAR DEPARTMENT: CoarurlunilyS-AX D1V1310N: R"Igan Pw. ACCOUNT,11, 4322 1992-93 City Manager City Council SUPPLIES Amended Budget Recommended Approved 1200 Operating Supplies 1300 Small Tools & Equip TOTAL SUPPLIES 0 0 0 OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2126 Utilities 9,700 10,800 2210 Maint-Grounds & Bldg 1,500 2,100 TOTAL OPERATING EXP $11,200 $12,900 s0 CONTRACT SERVICES 5300 Com. Svcs. contract 12,370 13,100 TOTAL CONTRACT SVC $12,370 $13,100 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $23,570 $26,000 s0 -64- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT: Communkysvcs ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION: Starshine Parte 1993'94 ACCOUNT & 4325 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2126 Utilities 4,300 4,300 2210 Maint-Grounds & Bldg 11000 11000 TOTAL OPERATING EXP $5,300 $5,300 $0 CONTRACT SERVICES 5300 Com. Svcs. contract TOTAL CONTRACT SVC 5,160 5,700 $5,160 $5,700 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $10,460 $11,000 $0 -65- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES 1993-94 DEPARTMENT; CaaunuMty Svc;a DIVISION:. $u[11rni1r(Q�e Pk ACCOUNT k 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2126 Utilities 13,350 16,350 2210 Maint-Grounds & Bldg 3,500 3,500 TOTAL OPERATING EXP $16,850 $19,850 s0 CONTRACT SERVICES 5300 Com. Svcs. Contract TOTAL CONTRACT SVC 18,549 20,400 $18,549 $20,400 s0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $35,399 $40,250 $0 -66- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT: ComnunitySvcs ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION: Sycamore Park 1993-94 ACCOUNT /: 4331 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2125 Telephone 2,100 2126 Utilities 5,400 81000 2210 Maint-Grounds & Bldg 2,500 91500 TOTAL OPERATING EXP $7,900 $19,600 $0 CONTRACT SERVICES 5300 Com. Svcs. contract 25,500 25,500 TOTAL CONTRACT SVC $25,500 $25,500 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $33,400 $45,100 s0 -67- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT: CommunitySvcs ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION:. Recreation 1993-94 ACCOUNT 9:> 4350 PERSONNEL SERVICES 0010 Salaries 0020 Overtime 0030 Wages -Part Time 0070 City Paid Benefits 0080 Benefits 0083 Worker's Comp. Exp. 0085 Medicare 0090 Cafeteria Benefits TOTAL PERSONNEL SV SUPPLIES 1200 Operating Supplies 1300 Small Tools & Equip TOTAL SUPPLIES OPERATING EXPENDITURES 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved 43,100 70,750 17,380 20,500 600. 1,000 61800 11,150 1,400 1,900 1.800 2,600 5,800 101500 76,880 118,400 0 20,000 20,000 $20,000 $20,000 so 2110 Printing 500 2120 Postage 250 2140 Rent/Lease of Prop. 70,000 70,000 2325 Meetings 1,800 1,800 TOTAL, OPERATING EXP $71,800 $72,550 $0 PROFESSIONAL SVCS 4100 Commissioner Comp 4,800 4,800 4300 Prof Svc$ -C= SVCS TOTAL PROF SVCS $4,800 $4,800 $0 CONTRACT SERVICES 5300 Com. Svcs. contract 275,000 300,000 5305 Concerts in the Park 9,500 91500 5310 Prop A Excursions 181900 TOTAL CONTRACT SVC $284,500 $328,400 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL -69- $457,980 $544,150 $0 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Division - Public Safety • Sheriff General Traffic Crime • Fire • Animal Control • Emergency Preparedness CITY OF DIAMOND ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES 1993-94 BAR DEPARTMENT: PubIioSafety DIVISION: Summary ACCOUNT 5: 4411-4440 91000 0 1992-93 City Manager City Council SUPPLIES Amended Budget Recommended Approved 1200 Operating Supplies 4,500 5.000 0 TOTAL SUPPLIES 4,500 5,000 0 OPERATING EXPENDITURES TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY $5,000 2120 Postage 0 0 0 2125 Telephone 0 1,000 0 2126 Utilties 0 0 0 2130 Equipment Rent 0 0 2200 Equipment Maint. 18,249 18,249 0 0 2315 Membership & Dues 3,000 3X 000 0 2325 Meetings 0 500 0 2340 Education 3 Training 1,000 500 0 TOTAL OPERATING EXP. $22,249 $23,249 $0 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4040 Emergency Co-ord 22,400 17,5W 0 TOTAL PROF SVCS $22,400 $17.500 $0 CONTRACT SERVICES 5401 Contr Svcs -Sheriff 3,591,939 3,672,000 0 5402 Contr Svcs -Fire 7,526 7,526 0 5403 Contr Svcs -An Contrl 55,000 50,000 0 5531 CS - Crossing Guards 0 55,000 0 TOTAL CONTRACT SVCS $3,654,465 $3,784,526 $0 CAPITAL OUTLAY 6100 Vdkis Equip 0 91000 0 6240 Communications Eq 2,S00 0 0 6250 Min Equipment 0 0 .0 6310 i91dg Improvements 2,500 0 0 TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY $5,000 $9,000 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $3,708,614 $3,839,275 $0 -73- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACTIVITY COMMENTARY 1993-94 DIVISION TITLE: sHERIt! DIVISION NO, 4411 The City of Diamond Bar contracts with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department for law enforcement services. These services include general law enforcement and traffic safety. General law enforcement provides an assortment of officers to provide crime prevention via around-the-clock street patrols, narcotics prevention, special investigations and the general enforcement of laws. Traffic safety provides routine traffic patrol as a means of encouraging motorists and pedestrians to comply with traffic laws and ordinances and, when necessary, issue citations and/or warnings for violations. Traffic accidents are investigated and their circumstances recorded and analyzed. -74- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT) Public Safety ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION: Sheriff -General 1993-94 ACCOUNT f: 4411 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2130 Equipment Rent 2200 Equipment Maint. 18,249 18,249 2325 Meetings 500 TOTAL OPERATING EXP. $18,249 $18,749 $0 CONTRACT SERVICES 5401 Contr Svcs -Sheriff 3,591,939 3,672,000 5531 CS -Crossing Guards 55,000 TOTAL CONTRACT SVCS $3,591,939 $3,727,000 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $3,610,188 $3,745,749 $0 -75- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACTIVITY COMMENTARY 1993-94 DIVISION TITLE: FIRE DIVISION NO, 4421 The City, upon incorporation, became responsible for fire protection within the City boundaries. Therefore the City assumed wildland fire protection. This has required additional resources to be used by the Consolidated Fire Protection District. It is a responsibility of the City to pay annually for these added costs. -76- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT: puOflCSafety ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION., Fire 1993-94 ACCOUNT & 4421 IM -93 City Manager City Council CONTRACT SERVICES Amended Budget Recommended Approved 5402 Contr Svcs -Fre $7,526 $7,526 TOTAL CONTRACT SVCS 7,526 7,526 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $7,526 $7,526 -77- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACTIVITY COMM39NTARY 1993-94 Animal Control provides for the care, protection, and control of animals who stray from their homes or are abused by their owners. This ,service, provided by the Pomona Valley Humane Society, includes enforcement of leash laws and the provision of a shelter for homeless animals. -78- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR T; PubkSafety ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES EACCOUNT Animal Control 1�-9 4431 1992-93 City Manager City Council Adopted Budget Remmmendsd APProved 1992-93 City Manager City council AdMed CONTRACT SERVICES Budget oo Remmendsd Approved 5403 Contr Svcs -An Contrl 55,000 S0,000 TOTAL CONTRACT SVCS $55,000 $30,000 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $55,000 $S0,000 -79- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACTIVITY COMMENTARY 1993-94 �' • Yom._ . > > � EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS The preservation of life and property is an inherent responsibility of local, state and federal governments. The City of.Diamond Bar therefore, has prepared a comprehensive planning document, known as the Multihazard Functional Plan, which serves as the basis for the City's emergency organization and emergency operations. The primary objectives of this plan are to enhance the overall capabilities of government to respond to emergencies. This is accomplished by incorporating the policies, principles, concepts and procedures contained within this plan into an efficient organization capable of responding adequately in the face of any disaster. It is the responsibility of the Emergency Preparedness Coordinator to coordinate the day-to-day activities of the emergency preparedness function, as well as ensure the preparation and implementation of the City's emergency response plan, neighborhood based emergency plans, post -disaster recovery plans, and the establishment of an emergency operation center (EOC). PERSONNEL Total Positions 0.00 -80- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT. Public safety. ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION: Emergency Prep 1993-94 ACCOUNT#: 4440 1992-93 City Manager City Council SUPPLIES Amended Budget Reoornmendsd Approved 1200 Operating Supplies 4,500 5,000 TOTAL SUPPLIES $4,500 $5,000 OPERATING EXP. 2210 Postage 2125 Telephone 2126 Utilities 2130 Equipment Rent 2315 Membership & Dues 2340 Education b Training TOTAL OPERATING EXP PROFESSIONAL SVCS 4040 Emergency Co-ord TOTAL PROF SVCS CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,000 3,000 3,000 1,000 500 $4.000 $4,500 $0 22,400 17,500 22,400 17,500 6100 Vehicle Equipment 91000 6240 Communications Eq. 2,500 6310 Building Imprvmnt 2,5W TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 5,000 91000 0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $35,900 338,000 30 -81- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Division - Public Works • Public Works/ Engineering Administration Engineering Traffic & Transportation Public Works -83- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACTIVITY COMMLNTARY 1993-94 The Public Works Department provides information on General Engineering matters relating to City streets, public right-of-ways, City's Capital projects, utilities, traffic related issues, etc. to the general public, contractors, developers, utility companies, and other public agencies. It coordinates City projects and plans with other governmental agencies to ensure that the City's concerns are addressed (i.e. SCAG, LACTC, CalTrans, County of Los Angeles) This department manages and enforces the City's requirements for subdivisions, lot development, utilities, vehicle/pedestrian traffic, and the use of public right-of-way. All plans and projects for proposed development are reviewed and any required reports are prepared for the Planning Commission, Traffic and Transportation Commission, and the City Council. The department is responsible for the City's traffic and transportation activities, grant administration, and the administration of related Capital Projects Funds. The maintenance service division is responsible for the day-to-day maintenance of all publically owned properties, including streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, traffic signals, signs, street lights, sewers and storm drains. This division is responsible for the administration of maintenance contracts to accomplish the fore mentioned items. PERSONNEL FULL TIRE POSITIONS Senior Engineer 1.00 Asst Civil Engineer 1.00 Admin Analyst 1.00 Secretary Sub Total 4 00 PART TIME POSITIONS Intern 1.00 Total Positions 5.00 -84- CITY OF DIAMOND ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES 1993-94 BAR DEPARTMENT: Public Works DIVISION. Summary ACCOUNT* 4510-4555 0 1992-93 City Manager City Council PERSONNEL SERVICES Amended Budget Recommended Approved 0010 Salaries 225,000 157,050 0 0020 Overtime Telephone 0 1,000 0030 Wages - Part time 0 10,250 0 0 0070 City Paid Benefits 2,800 2,350 0 0080 Benefits 35,400 24,750 0 0083 Worker's Comp Exp. 2,400 1.700 0 0085 Medicare 4,100 3,150 0 0090 Cafeteria Benefits 27,900 24,000 0 TOTAL PERSONNEL SVC $297,600 $223,250 $0 SUPPLIES 1100 Office Supplies 3,000 3,000 0 1200 Operating Supplies 2,000 2,000 0 1300 Small Tools 3 Equip 0 0 0 TOTAL SUPPLIES $5,000 $5,000 $0 OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2110 Printing 2,200 2,500 0 2115 Advertising 2,600 3,100 0 2120 Postage 1,200 700 0 2125 Telephone 1,000 1,000 0 2126 Utilities 20,000 45,000 0 2130 Rental/Lease-Equip 0 0 0 2200 Equipment Maint. 0 0 0 2210 Maint-Grounds & Bldg 0 0 0 2310 Fuel 0 0 0 2315 Mernbership & Dues 950 800 0 2320 hlblications 700 500 0 2325 Mefto 600 500 0 2330 Trawl-Conf, & Mtge 1,000 1,000 0 2335 Mileage 3 Auto Allow 1,200 700 0 2340 Education & Training 1,500 1,200 0 TOTAL OPERATING EXP. $32,950 $57,000 $0 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4000 Professional Svcs 2,000 3,000 0 4100 Commissioner Comp 3,600 3,600 0 4230 Pavement Mgt 55,000 531000 0 TOTAL PROF SVCS $60,600 $61,600 $0- -85- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT" PubOC Warks ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION: Summary 19903-94 ACCOUNT#: 4510-4555 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved CONTRACT SERVICES 5221 CS -Engineering 15,000 11,000 0 5222 CS -Traffic 37,000 18,500 0 5223 CS -Plan Check 60,000 85,000 0 5224 CS -Soils 25,000 25,000 0 5226 CS -Surveying 5,000 5,000 0 5227 CS -Inspection (CIP 30,000 10,000 0 5500 CS -PW 9.000 154,000 0 5501 CS -Street Sweeping 150,000 100,000 0 5502 CS -Road Maint 270,000 230,000 0 5503 CS -Pkwy Maint 15,000 12,700 0 5504 CS-Sidswlk Insp/Rep 50,000 43,000 0 5505 CS-Crb/Gutter Repair 60,000 50:000 0 5506 CS-StplMk/Sign 55,000 40.000 0 5507 CS -Traffic Signals 70,000 50,000 0 5508 CS-Veg Control 65,000 60,000 0 5509 CS -Tree Trimming 100,000 100,000 0 5510 CS -Tree Watering 25,000 22,000 0 5511 CS -Lighting 0 0 0 5512 CS -Storm Drainage 10,000 81500 0 5513 CS -Bridge Maint 5,000 4,000 0 5514 CS -Mapping 2,000 30,000 0 5515 CS -Permit Invest 0 0 0 5518 CS -Storm Damage 2,000 2,000 0 5519 CS -Weed Abatement 0 0 0 5520 CA"raMtl Removal 25.000 40,000 0 5530 Contr Svc -Ind Waste 10,000 10,000 0 5531 CS -CM ting Guam 70,000 0 0 TOTAL CONTRACT SVCS $1,165,000 $1,110,700 $0 CAPITAL OUTLAY 6200 Office Equipment 4,000 4,000 0 TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY $4,000 $4,000 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $1,565,150 $1,461,550 $0 Wr-z CITY OF DIAMOND ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES -94 BAR DEPARTMENT. Public works DIVISION: PW/ErVAdmin ACCOUNT #: 4510, 3,000 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved PERSONNEL SERVICES 0010 Salaries 225,000 85,100 $5,000 0020 Overtime OPERATING EXPENDITURES 0030 Wages - Part time 2100 10,250 0070 City Paid Benefits 2,804 11150 Printing 0080 Benefits 35,400 13,400 2115 0083 Worker's Comp Exp. 2,400 950 0085 Medicare 4,100 2,050 700 0090 Cafeteria Benefits 27,900 12,000 1,000 TOTAL PERSONNEL SVC $297,600 $124,900 s0 SUPPLIES 1100 Office Supplies 3,000 3,000 1200 Operating Supplies 2,000 2,000 1300 Small Tools & Equip TOTAL SUPPLIES $5,000 $5,000 $0 OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2100 Photocopy 2110 Printing 1,000 2115 Advertising S00 2120 Postage 1,000 700 2125 Telephone 1,000 1,000 2200 Maint - Equipment 2315 Membership & Dues 100 2320 Publications 700 Soo 2325 Meetings 600 S00 2330 TMISI-Conf & Mtgs. 1,000 1,000 2335 Mcage 200 200 2340 ft=Uon 3 Training 1,500 1,200 TOTAL OPERATING EXP. $6,000 $6,700 $0 CONTRACT SERVICES 5500 Cont Svcs -Public Wks 153,000 5530 Cont Svc -Ind Waste 10,000 0 0 TOTAL CONTRACT SVCS $10,000 $153,000 $0 CAPITAL OUTLAY 6200 Office Equipment 4,000 4,000 TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY $4,000 $4.000 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $0 $322,600 $293,600 -87- PERSONNEL SERVICES 0010 Salaries 0020 Overtime 0030 Wages - Part Time 0070 City Paid Benefits 0080 Benefits 0083 Worker's Comp Exp. 0085 MedIcare 0090 Cafeteria Benefits 500 TOTAL PERSONNEL SVC OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2110 Printing 2115 Advertising 2315 Membership & Dues 2335 Mileage TOTAL OPERATING EXP. CONTRACT SERVICES 1992-93 City Manager City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved 42,450 5221 600 10,000 6,700 5222 450 660 5223 6,000 $0 $56,850 $0 1,200 1,000 2,000 2.000 500 500 1,000 500 $4,700 $4.000 $0 5221 Cont Svc -Engineering 10,000 10,000 5222 Cont Svc -Traffic 5223 Cont Svc -Plan Check 60,000 85.000 5224 Cont Svc -Soils 25,000 25,000 5226 Cont Svc-Sunroywg 5,000 5,000 5227 CS-Inspecdw (Cip) 20,000 0 5514 Cont Svc -Mapping SVC 2,000 30,000 TOTAL CONTRACT SVCS $122.000 $155.000 s0 UWARTMENT TOTAL $126,700 $215,850 s0 -88- CITY OF DIAMOND ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES 1993-94 BAR T: Public Works Traffic & Trans EACCOUNT 4553 18,500 1992-93 CityManager City Council PERSONNEL SERVICES Amended Budget Recommended APProved 0010 Salaries 0 29,500 CS -Crossing Guards 0020 Overtime 0 TOTAL CONTRACT SVCS 0030 Wages - Part Time 518,500 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 0070 City Paid Benefits 600 $67,400 $0 0080 Benefits 4,650 0083 Worker's Comp Exp. 300 0085 Medicare 450 0090 Cafeteria Benefits 61000 TOTAL PERSONNEL SVC 50 541,500 i0 SUPPLIES 1100 Office Supplies TOTAL SUPPLIES $0 $0 $0 OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2110 Printing 500 500 2115 Advertising 100 100 2126 Utilities 20,000 2315 Membership S Dues 200 200 2325 Meetings 2320 Publications TOTAL OPERATING EXP. $20,800 5800 $0 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4000 Professional Svcs 2,000 3,000 4100 Coexrtissiorm Comp 3,800 3,600 TOTAL PROF SVCS $5,600 $6,600 $0 CONTRA6T SERVICES 5222 Cont Svc -Traffic 37,000 18,500 5506 CS-S"rk/Sign-New 25,000 0 5507 CS -Traffic Signals 70,000 0 5531 CS -Crossing Guards 70,000 0 TOTAL CONTRACT SVCS $202,000 518,500 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $228,400 $67,400 $0 -89- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR EACCOUNTfi: T. Public Works ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES Publk Works 1993-94 4555 1992-93 CityManager City Council OPERATING EXPENDITURES Amended Budget Recommended Approved 2110 Printing 500 0 2115 Advertising 500 500 2120 Postage 200 0 2126 Utilities 45,000 2315 Membership & Dues 250 TOTAL OPERATING EXP, $1,450 $45,500 $0 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4230 Prof Svc-Pavemnt Mgt 55,000 55,000 TOTAL PROF SVCS $55,000 $55,000 CONTRACT SERVICES 5221 CS -Engineering 51000 1,000 5227 CS -Inspection 10,000 10,000 5500 CS -Public Works 9,000 1,000 5501 CS -Street Sweeping 150,000 100,000 5502 CS -Road Maint 270,000 230,000 5503 CS -Pkwy Maint 15,000 12,700 5504 CS-Skiewlk Insp/Rep 50,000 43,000 5505 CS-CrbJGutter Repair 60,000 50,000 5506 CS-Strping1Prkg1Sign 30,000 40,000 5507 CS -Traffic Signals 50,000 5508 CS -Vegetation Cntrl 65,000 60,000 5509 CS -Tres Trimming 100,000 100,000 5510 CS -Tres Watering 25,000 22,000 5512 CS -Storm Drainage 10,000 8,500 5513 CS -Bridge Maint 51000 4,000 5518 CS -Storm Damage 2,000 2,000 5520 CS-GraMq Removal 25,000 40,000 5530 CS -Industrial Wash 10,000 TOTAL CONTRACT SVCS $831,000 $784,200 $0 DEPARTMENT TOTAL $887,450 $884,700 $0 -90- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Division -Transfers Out • Transfers Out -91- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACTIVITY COMMENTARY 1993-94 Interfund transfers from the General Fund to other funds for Fiscal Year 93-94 consist of transfers to the Self Insurance Fund and the Capital Projects Fund. The transfers to the Self Insurance Fund includes the annual transfer as required by City Resolution 89-53 and the budgeted amount for the City's general liability insurance premiums. The transfer to the Capital Improvement Projects Fund is for the annual lease purchase payment for the land which is being purchased from the Walnut valley Water District. This transfer will occur as the funds are expended. -92- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT; Transfer *A. ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIVISION: Transfer Out 1993-94 ACCOUNT #: 4915 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 9112 Transfer out-Prp A 9250 Transfer out-CIP Fd 9510 Transfer out -Ins Fd DEPARTMENT TOTAL 1992-93 City Myr. City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved -93- 560,000 100,000 100,000 190,000 $660,000 $290,000 $0 SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGETS -95- SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS --n•t_ CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET 1993-94 TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND FUND DESCRIPTION: FUND TYPE Specht Revenue FUNCTION: Traffic Safety FUND 0: 110 The City receives traffic fines levied by local courts. California Penal Code (section 1463(b)) requires that these funds are to be used for traffic safety purposes. These funds are recorded in the Traffic Safety Fund and then are consequently transferred to the General Fund for traffic safety purposes. ESTIMATED RESOURCES: 3215 Vehicle Code Fines 3610 Interest Revenue TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS. - 4915 -9001 . PPROPRIATIONS: 4915-9001. Trans out - Gen Fund TOTAL 1992-93 City mgr City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved -99- 40,000 30,000 200 $40,000 $30,200 $0 40,000 30,200 $40,000 $30,200 $0 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET 1993-94 GAS TAX FUND FUND DESCRIPTION. FUND TYPE: Special Revenue FUNCTION: Str Maint(Const FUND . 111 The City receives funds from Sections 2105, 2106, 2107, and 2107.5 of the Streets and Highway Code. State law requires that these revenues be recorded in a Special Revenue Fund, and that they be utilized solely for street -related purposes such as new construction, rehabilitation, or maintenance. During FY 93-94, the City Manager is recommending that $2,423,600 be used for Capital Improvement Projects (see listing;. In addition, $681,500 is to be allocated to the Public Works operations budget to fund street maintenance programs (see listing). All Gas Tax revenue is received in this fund and transferred as required per City Council direction. CAPITAL PRQIECTS INCLUDE.- Various Street Improvements 01494 Slurry Seal 185,000 01394 Brea Cyn Rd - South 200,000 05694 DS Blvd -Sidewalks 150,000 06494 DB Blvd -Rehab 650,000 Inspection Pathfinder@Brea Cyn 160,000 Street Sweeping D8 BVShCyn/FtnSpgs 165,000 Road Maint Gldn Spg@Prospectors 125,000 Pkwy Maint Gldn Spg@Gldn Prados 125,000 Crb/Gutter Repair Gldn Spg 0 Carpio 125,000 06394 Grand Ave Overlay 300,000 06194 Gidn Sprg Reconstr 238,600 Bridge Maint 2,423,600 TRANSFER TO GENERAL FUND: Salaries & Bortefits 65,000 PW-Opwgft Exp 46,200 PW-ErtpUfNring 1,000 PW Admin-Contr Svcs 92,800 Inspection 10,000 Street Sweeping 100,000 Road Maint 230,000 Pkwy Maint 12,700 Crb/Gutter Repair 50,000 Strping/Signing 40,000 Storm Drainage 81500 Bridge Maint 4,000 Storm Damage 2,000 T & T - Operating Ex 800 T & T - Traffic 18,500 681,500 -100- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FUND TYPE: Special Revenue SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET FUNCTION: Str Maint(Const 1993-94 FUND /: GAS TAX FUND APPROPRIATIONS: 4915-9001 Trans out - Gen Fund 1992-93 City Mgr City Council 4915-9225 Trans out - Grand Av _ Amended Budget Recommended Approved ESTIMATED RESOURCES : Trans out - Trf Mligtn 167,600 2550 Approp. Fund Balance $2,121,676 $2,289,600 3171 Gas Tax - 2106 281,230 276,377 3172 Gas Tax - 2107 619,520 605,114 3173 Gas Tax - 2107.5 7,500 7,500 3174 Gas Tax - 2105 311,270 403,244 3610 Interest Revenue 60,000 TOTAL $3,341,198 $3,641,835 $0 APPROPRIATIONS: 4915-9001 Trans out - Gen Fund 836,650 681,500 4915-9225 Trans out - Grand Av 300,E 4915-9227 Trans out - Trf Mligtn 167,600 238,600 4915-9250 Trans out - CIP Fund 175,000 1,885,000 2550 Reserves 2,161,946 529,535 TOTAL $3,341,196 $3,634,635 $0 -101- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET 1993-94 PROP A FUND FUND TYPE Spec W Revenue FUNCTIOtr Pub Tmsprtn FUND k 112 ES77MATED RESERVES: 4090-7230 Contribs.-Other Govt 2550 Fund Balance Reserve $508,228 $150,414 3110 Local Trans Tx-Prp A 500,000 500,000 3810 Interest Revenue 7,000 18,000 3915 Transfer in/Gen Fd 4099-0090 Cafeteria Benefits TOTAL $1,015,228 $668,414 $0 APPROPRIATIONS• 4090-7230 Contribs.-Other Govt 4099-0010 Salaries 4099-0070 City Paid Benefits 4099-0080 Benefits 4099-0083 Wkr's Comp Exp. 4099-0085 Medicare Exp. 4099-0090 Cafeteria Benefits 4360-2115 Advertising 4360-5310 CS-Exursions 4360-5315 CS -Holiday Shuttle 4553-5500 Professional Svcs 4553-5528 Public Transit Svcs. 4553-5529 Para -Transit Svcs. 4915-9250 Trans out - CIP Fund 4915-9001 Trans out - Gen Fund 2550 Fund Balance Reserve TOTAL PERSONNEL INCLUDES.' 500,000 49,900 51,600 600 600 7,900 81150 500 500 800 800 81000 6,000 500 50.000 25,000 27,000 25,000 222,564 50.000 25,000 50,000 24,650 20,000 23,314 505,264 $1,015,228 $868,414 s0 Transportation Planner 1.0 -102- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET 1993-94 PROPOSITION C FUND FUND DESCRIPTIO - FUND TYPE Spedai Revenue FUNCTION.- Str Ma[nUConst FUND if: 113 The City periodically receives additional allocations of State Gas Tax funds from Los Angeles County. These funds must be used for street -related purposes such as construction, rehabilitatio or maintenance. In order to receive these funds the City must submit a project to the County for approval. Budgeted as a transfer to the General Fund is $55,000 for pavement management and an additional $20,000 for contract engineering costs. APPROPRUTWW. 1992-93 City Mgr City Coundl 4915-9001 Trans out - Gen Fund Amended Budget Reoomrnendad Approved ESTIMATED RESOURCES;: 470,000 2550 Fund Balance Reserve $458,920 $717,500 3112 Transportation Tax 250,000 3810 Interest Revenue TOTAL $458,920 $967,500 s0 APPROPRUTWW. 4915-9001 Trans out - Gen Fund 75,000 4915-9250 Trans out - CIP Fund 470,000 2550 Fund Balance Reserve 456,920 422,500 TOTAL $456,920 $967,500 s0 CAPITAL PRWECTS INCLUDE Grand Ave Signal Synch. Diamond Bar Blvd. Rehab -103- $270,000 200,000 $470,000 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET 1992-93 FUND TYPE: Special Revenue FUNCTION: Waste Mgt FUND #-. X15 INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT FUND FUND DESCRIPTION: The Integrated Waste Management Fund was created during FY 90-91, to account for expenditures and revenues related to the activities involved with the City's efforts to comply with AB939. Revenues recorded in this fund are the recently adopted waste hauler permit fees. ESTIMATED REVENUE.• 2550 Reserve Fund Balance 3480 Waste Hauler Permits 3610 Interest Revenue TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS: 4099-0010 Salaries 4099-0030 Part Time Wages 4099-0070 City Paid Benefits 4099-0080 Benefits 4099-0083 Wkr's Comp Exp. 4099-0085 Medicare Exp. 4099-0090 Cafeteria Benefits 4515-1200 Dept. Supplies 4515-2110 Printing 4515-2320 Publications 4515-2325 Meetings 4515-2340 Education & Training 4515-4000 Professional Svcs 2550 Reserve Fund Balance TOTAL PERSONNEL: Full Time: Asst City Manager Asst to City Mgr Exec Secretary Total Positions 1991-92 91-92 Actuals City Mgr Adopted Budget as of 4/30/92 Recommended $653 $30,388 78,472 61,115 76,000 391 $79,125 $61,506 $106,388 41,300 33,698 60,700 320 700 6,200 5,092 9,600 400 320 1,500 600 492 900 6,700 3,269 7,000 1,988 11808 2,500 59 256 1,500 7,358 20,000 23,925 $79,125 $52,672 $106,388 25 75 20 1.20 -104- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FUND TYPE: Special Revenue SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET FUNCTICft Air Quality 1993-94 FUND 0- 11a - AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT FUND FUND DESCR/P710N This fund was established in FY 1991-92 to account for revenues received as a result of A82766. AS 2766 authorizes the imposition of an additional motor vehicle registration fee to fund the implementation of air quality managemcgnt plans and provisions of the California Clean Air Act of 1988. 1992-93 City Myr City Council Amended Budget Reoom waled Approved ESTIMATED RESOURCES: 2550 Approp. Fund Balance 15,154 23,154 3315 Pollution Reduc Fees 33,000 40,000 3610 Interest Revenue 1,000 TOTAL $48,154 $84,154 $0 APPROPRIATIONS• 0010 Salaries 10,610 0070 City Paid Benefits iso 0080 Benefits 11870 0083 Wkr's Comp Exp 110 0085 Medicare 950 0090 Cafeteria Benefits 1,S00 2320 Publications 4000 Professional Svcs 35,000 5,000 6100 Vehicle Equipment 5,000 6230 Computer Equipment 15,000 2550 Approp. Fund Balance 13.154 24,164 TOTAL $48.154 $64,154 $0 PERSONNEL Asst to City Mgr -105- 0.25 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET 1993-94 PARK GRANT FUND I=IJlVD TYPE 3p�i>!v' Rat+enue FUNCTI(ft Perk 1mprovemnt. FUND is FUND OESCRIP7/ .• - The City receives State Park Grant money for the purpose of the development of new parks and the initial purchase and/or installation of equipment in new and existing perks. This fund accounts for these financial transactions. ESTIMATED RESOURCES. 3320 Park Grant Revenue TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS. 4915-9250 Trnsfer out - CIP Fd TOTAL 1992-93 City Mgr City Council Amended Budget Recommsndsd Approved -106- $40,000 $40,000 S0 $0 40,000 $40,000 $0 i0 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET 1993-94 PARK FEES FUND FUND TYPE- Special Revenue FUNCTK*k Park lmprvvemnt FUND : 121 FUND DESCRIPTION. Within the Subdivision Map Act of the California State Constitution is a requirement that developers either contribute land or pay fees to the local municipal government to provide recreational facilities within the development. This fund is used to account for the fees received. 1992-93 City Mgr . City CouncN Amended Budget Recommended Approved ESTIMATED REVENUE, 2550 Approp. Fund Balance $180,077 $180,077 3456 Quimby Fees 150,000 350,000 3610 Interest Revenue 61000 TOTAL $330,077 $536,077 $0 APPROPRIATIONS. 9001 Transfer Out -Gen Fd 10,000 9250 Transfer Out-CIP Fd 40,000 38,500 2550 Reserves 290,077 487,577 TOTAL $330,077 $5361077 $0 CAPITAL PROJECTS INCLUDE• Park Sign Retrofit $30,000 Beldb ATennis Ct Imp 81500 $38.500 -107- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET 1993-94 PROP A - SAFE PARKS ACT FEND TYPE Special Revenue FUNCTION Park lmprovemnt FUND t 123 FUND DESCRIPM N.• The Los Angeles County Safe Neighborhood Parks Act was passed in 1992. This act provides funds to Cities to improve, preserve, and restore parks. For FY93-94, the City of Diamond Bar has been awarded $2,040,000 for this purpose. This fund has been established to account for these funds. 1992-93 City Mgr City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved ES77MATED REVENUE: 3320 Park Grants $2,040,000 TOTAL $2,040,000 $0 APPROPRIATIONS - 4915 -9001 Transfer Out Gen Fd 30,000 4915-9250 Transfer Out-CIP Fd 1,810,000 2550 Reserves 400,000 TOTAL $0 $2,040,000 $0 CAPITAL PROJECTS INCLUDE. 06594 Pantera Park -Design & Development 02494 Peterson Park - Lights -108- $1,470,000 140,000 $1,610,000 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FUND TYPE Special Revenue SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET FUNCTK t4* Community Dev 1993-94 FUND #: 125 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUND FUND DESCRIPTION: The City receives an annual CDBG allotment from the federal government via the CDC. The purpose of this grant is to fund approved community development projects. It is anticipated that these most of these funds will be used for the construction of a senior comer. 1992-93 City Mgr City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved ESTIMATED RESOURCES. 2550 Approp. Fund Balance $6,600 3330 CDBG Revenue 390,535 290,923 TOTAL $390,535 $297,523 s0 APPROPRIATIONS. 4215-0010 Salaries 18,610 4215-0070 City Paid Benefits 260 4215-0060 Benefits 2,930 4215-0083 Wkr's Comp Exp. 180 4215-0085 Medicare Exp. 270 4215-0090 Cafeteria Benefits 2,700 4215-2355 Contrbtns-Com Groups 25,631 681100 4215-4000 Professional Svcs 16,991 4,143 4215-6250 Misc Capital Equip 32,750 4915-9250 Transfer Out-CIP 344,947 167,580 2550 Reserves 2,966 TOTAL $390,535 $297,523 $0 PERSONNEL WCLUDEM Admin Asolsom Clerk TypW Com Dev, Dkeolor CAPITAL PRA/ECTS INCLUDE 06694 ADA Park Retrofit 06794 Handicap Access Ramps -109- 0.25 0.10 0.10 0.45 84.600 82,980 $167,580 FUND DESCRIPTION: The City is responsible for the operations of the LLAD i38. This district was set up in accordance with the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. Property owners benefiting from this district receive a special assessment on their property taxes. This fund is to account for the cost of the operations of this special district. 1992-93 City Mgr City Council ESTIMATED RESOURCES: Amended Budget Reconrnended Approved 2550 Approp. Fund Balance $97,294 $162,454 3015 Prop Tx -Sp Assessmnt 256,500 256,500 3610 Interest Revenue 2,000 TOTAL $353,794 $420,954 $0 APPROPRIATIONS: 4538-0010 Salaries 26,000 28,000 4538-0070 City Paid Benefits 400 400 4536-0080 Benefits 4,100 4,400 4538-0083 VVWs Comp Exp. 1.200 1,200 4538-0085 Medicare Exp. 400 400 4538-0090 Cafeteria Benefits 3,400 3,600 4538-2126 Utilities 54,000 66,000 4538-2210 Maint-Grounds & Bldg 15,000 15,000 4538-4000 Professional Svcs 91000 10,000 4538-5500 Contract Svcs 41,500 41,500 4538-6410 Capitallmprovenwnts 200,000 4915-9250 Transfer out-CIP 131,500 2550 Reserves $7,294 50,454 TOTAL $353,794 $420,954 $0 PERSOANgLa Full Tin»; OU. Cornrnwtity Svcs. .20 Supt. Parks a Mainz .20 Maint. Worker II .20 Total Positions .60 CAP?AL PROJECTS INCLUDE Gln Sprgs Medians 200,000 $200,000 -110- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FuNDTYPE: spedalRevenue SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET FUNG1rM tandbCaps 1993-94 FUND '#: 139 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE — DIST. #39 FUND FUND DESCRIPTION: The City is responsible for the operations of the LLAD #39. This district was set up in accordance with the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. Property owners benefiting from this district receive a special assessment on their property taxes. This fund is to account for the cost of the operations of this special district. APPROPRIATIONS: 4539-0010 Salaries 1992-93. Clry Mgr City Council 4539-0070 m Aended Budget Recoinmended Approved ESTIMATED RESOURCES: 4539-0080 Benefits 2550 Reserve Fund Balance $164,400 1811081 3015 Prop Tx -Sp Assessmnt 91,781 91,781 3610 Interest Medicare Exp. 4,000 TOTAL $258,181 $176,862 $0 APPROPRIATIONS: 4539-0010 Salaries 22,900 25,000 4539-0070 City Paid Benefits 300 300 4539-0080 Benefits 3,600 3,950 4539-0083 Wkr's Comp Exp. 1,100 1,100 4539-0085 Medicare Exp. 400 400 4539-0090 Cafeteria Benefits 3,200 3,300 4539-2126 Utilities 43,200 53,000 4539-2210 Maint-Grounds & Bldg 10,000 10,000 4539-4000 Professional Svcs 2,500 2;500 4539-5500 Contract Svcs 75,000 72,000 4539-6410 Capital Improvements 57,500 4539-7200 Insurance Exp. 6,200 2550 Reserve Fund Balance 30,281 5,312 TOTAL $256.181 $176,862 $0 PERSONNEL• Full Time: [W. Community Svcs .15 OitpL Parks S Roc .20 Maim. Worker 11 .20 Total Positions .55 -111- FUND DESCRIPTION: The City is responsible for the operations of LLAD #41. This district was set up in accordance with the Landscape and Ughting Act of 1972. Property owners benefiting from this district receive a special assessment on their property taxes. This fund is to account for the cost of the operations of this special fund. 1992-93 City Mgr City Cour Adopted Budget Recommended Approved ESTIMATED RESOURCES: 2550 Approp. Fund Balance $104,738 $92,952 3015 Prop Tx -Sp Assessmnt 121,154 121,154 3610 Interest Revenue 2,800 TOTAL $225,892 $216,906 $0 APPROPRIATXXM 4541-0010 Salaries 191800 22,000 4541-0070 City Paid Benefits 300 300 4541-0080 Benefits 1,900 3,450 4541-0083 Wkr's Comp Exp. 900 1,000 4541-0085 Medicare Exp. 300 300 4541-0090 Cafeteria Benefits 2,600 2,700 4541-2126 Utilities 49,000 50,000 4541-2210 Maint-Grounds S Bldg 4,000 5,000 4541-4000 Professional Svcs 1,900 2,000 4541-5500 Contract Svcs 44,000 41,000 4541-5519 Weed/Peet Abatement 16,000 16,000 4541-641 O Capital Improvements 25,000 25,000 2550 Reserve Fund Balance 80,192 48,156 TOTAL $225,892 $216,906 s0 PERSONNEL - Full Time: Dir. Community Svcs .15 Supt. Parks & Recx. .20 Maint. Worker II .10 Total Positions .45 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS: Brea Cyn -Landscape Imp 25,000 25,000 -112- CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS -113- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FUND TYPE: Capital Project SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET FUNCTIONS Strimprovement 1993-94 FUND #F: 225 GRAND AVE CONSTRUCTION FUND FUND DESCRIPTION: During FY 89-90, the City entered Into an agreement with the County of San Bernardino to settle it's Grand Ave. litigation. This agreement mate that the County would provide the City with funds for improvements which are relevant to the Grand Ave. opening. The agreement state that these funds were to be held in a special fund and expenditures for improvements were to be made from this fund. This fund was established to record these activities. 1992-93 City Mgr City Council Amended Bud" Reoomn ancied Approved ES77MATED RESOURCES. 2550 Approp Fund Balance 487,389 450,000 3915-9111 Transfer in -Gas Tax 300,000 3915-9255 Transfer in-SB821 20.000 TOTAL $487,389 6770,000 $0 APPROPRIATIONS.- 4510-6411 PPROPRIATIONS. 4510-6411 Street Improvements 200,000 770,000 4915-9001 Transfer to Gen Fd 20,900 2550 CIP Reserve 266,489 TOTAL $487,389 6770,000 $0 CAPITAL PRWECTS INCLUDE. 06394 Grand Ave. Overlay -115- 6770,000 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Rmo rme Ca tai lholect SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET FUNCTION: capital Project 1993-94 FUND % 227 TRAFFIC MITIGATION FUND-GOLDEN SPRINGS FUND DESCRIPTION: This fund was established in FY 90-91 to account for traffic mitigation fees received from developers. These revenues are to be used to improve traffic flow around and through major developments, such as the Gateway Corporate Center. ESTIMATED RESOURCES: 2550 Reserved Fund Sal 3466 Engr-Traffic Mit. Fees 3610 Interest Revenue 3915-9255 Transfer In -88821 3915-9111 Transfer Inas Tax TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS: 4510-6411 Street Improvements 4510-6412 Traffic Control Imp 2550 Reserved Fund Bal TOTAL CAPITAL PROJIMM /MCLUW-- 1992-93 City MW City Council Amended Budget Recommended Approved 281,017 271,400 20,000 167,600 238,600 $448,617 $530,000 s0 530,000 442,000 6,617 $448,617 $530,000 s0 06194 GW sliprgs Reconstruction $530,000 -116- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FUND TYPE ; Cal" Project SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET FUNCTION: Capital Project 1993-94 FUND k 250 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FUND FUND DESCR/PTIOW.• This fund was created to account for the City capital imrovement projects which are not required to be accounted for in independent funds. The rsvenues in this fund will generally come from transfers -in from other funds and have been identified for specific capital projects, ESTIMATED RESOURCES:• 2550 CIP Reserve-Traf Sig 3455 Developer Fees 3610 Interest Revenue 3915-9001 Transfer in -Gen Fd 3915-9111 Transfer in -Gas Tx 3915-9112 Transfer in-Prp A 3915-9113 Transfer in -Prop C 3915-9121 Transfer in -Pk Grant 3915-9122 Transfer in -Pk Fees 3915-9123 Trnsfer in-Prp A Pks 3915-9125 Transfer in-CDBG 3915-9138 Transfer in-LLAD #38 3915-9139 Transfer lr -SB 821 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS: 4510-6411 Street Improvements 4510-6412 Trafft Control Imp 4310-6415 Park & PIM Imprmts 4510-6416 lamb ape S Irr Imp 4215-6420 1 W Nelpal 81Idp S Fac 2550 CIP Reserve -Tref Sip 2550 CIP Rearve-ft Imp 167,580 TOTAL 1992-93 City mor City Council Amended Budget Recorrrnended Approved 52,291 25,000 560,000 100,000 175,000 1.885,000 50,000 182,980 52,291 470,000 40.000 $1.006.791 38.500 1,610.000 167,580 131.500 60.000 $1,008,791 $4,356,080 so 175,000 1,445,000 995,000 500,000 1,733,100 131,500 0 100,000 182,980 52,291 50,000 $1.006.791 $4,356,080 so -117- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FUN»rrp capltatProject SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET FUNCTION: Capita[ Projects 1993-94 FUND0: ?.50 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FUND FY93-94 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS INCLUDE: STREET IMPROVEMENTS: 01494 Slurry Seal (IV Phase) $185,000 Gas Tax 01394 Brea Cyn Rd (South) 210,000 Gas Tax (200,000) SB 821 (10,000) 05694 D Bar Blvd Sidewalks 150,000 Gas Tax - 06494 Diamond Bar Blvd Rehab 900,000 Gas Tax (650,000) Prop C (200,000) SB 821 (50,000) TOTAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS TRAFFIC CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS: Pathfinder 0 Brea Cyn Rd $160,000 Gas Tax DB BI/Shadow Cyn/Ftn Spgs 190,000 Gas Tax (165,000) Dew Fess (25,000) GIM ftw 0 Prospector's 125,000 Gas Tax Gldn Sprgs 0 Gldn Prado$ 125,000 Gas Tax Gldn Sprgs 0 Carpio 125,000 Gas Tax Grand Ave Signal Synchr 270,000 Prop C (MTA) TOTAL TRAFFIC CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS -118- $1,445,000 $995,000 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FUND TYPE,: capi!tai Project SPECIAL MODS BUDGET FUNCTION: Capital Project 1993-94 FUND r. 250 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FUND PARK & REC IMPROVEMENTS: 06594 Pantera Pk -Design & Dev $1,470,000 Prop A -Safe Pks 02494 Peterson Pk -Lights 140,000 Prop A -Safe Pks 06694 ADA Parks Retrofit 84,600 CDBG City Park Signage Retrofit 30,000 Quimby Act Basketball & Tennis Ct Imp 81500 Quimby Act TOTAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS & FACILITIES: 06394 Land Acquisition $100,000 General Fund 06794 Handicap Access Ramps 82,980 CDBG $1.733,100 TOTAL MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS S FACILITIES $182,990 GRAND TOTAL - CAPITAL PROJECTS -119- $4.359.080 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET 1993-94 SB 821 FUND FUND DESCRIPTION. FUNa YYpE Capital prolm FUNGT[al capfta>I, protea FUND 0 356 The state allocates funds to cities for the specific purpose of the construction of bike and pedestrian paths via SS821. This fund has been established to account for transactions related to the receipt and expenditure of these funds. 1992-93 qty Mor City Mgr Amended Budget Recommended Recommended ESTIMATED RESOURCES: 3350 From Other Agencies Brea Cyn (South) 21,000 3610 Interest Revenue Grand Ave Rehab 3,000 2550 CIP Reserve 131,777 131,777 TOTAL $131,777 $155,777 $o APPROPR/ATIOIVS: 4915-9225 Trans out -Grand Ave 20,000 4915-9227 Trans out -Traffic Mit 20,000 4915-9250 Trans out-CIP Fd 80,000 2550 CIP Reserve 131,777 55,777 TOTAL $131,777 $155,777 $0 CAPITAL PROJECTS MWLUDE 01394 Brea Cyn (South) 06194 Odds Sprge Rehab 06394 Grand Ave Rehab 06494 Wwond Bar Bhrd -120- 10.000 20,000 20,000 50,000 90,000 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS _121_ CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET 1993-94 SELF INSURANCE FUND FUND DESCRIPTION: F Infernal. aft $elf Insurance 510 This fund was established In accordance with Resolution #89-53. The resolution states the City will establish a self-insurance reserve fund. The purpose of the fund shall be to pay all self - assumed losses and related costs. Contributions to the fund shah be pro -rata from all other City funds afforded protection under the program based upon each of the funds exposure to liability. ESTIMATED RES ACES: 2550 Reserved Fund Bal 3810 Interest Revenue 3915-9001 Transfer in -Oen Fd TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS 7220 Claims & Judgements 2530 Self Ins Reserve TOTAL 1992-93 City Mgr City Council Amended Budget ReconM10nded Approved -123- 329,812 429,788 10,000 100,000 100.000 $429,812 8539,788 s0 429,812 539,788 $429,812 $539,788 $0 GLOSSARY -125- GLOSSARY Activity - The smallest unit of budgetary accountability and control which encompasses a specific unit of work or service responsibility. A sub -unit of a Function budget. Adoption - Formal action of the City Council which sets the spending limits for the fiscal year. Allocate - To divide a lump -sum appropriation which is designated for expenditure by specific organization units and/or for specific purposes, activities, or objects. Annual Budggs - A budget applicable to a single fiscal year. ADDro2rriation - An authorization made by the council which permits the City to incur obligations and to make expenditures of resources. Audit - Prepared by an independent Certified Public Accountant (CPA), the primary objective of an audit is to determine if the City's Financial Statements present fairly the City's financial Position and results of operations in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. In conjunction with their performance of an audit, it is customary for an independent auditor to issue a Management Letter stating the adequacy of the City's internal controls a well as recommending improvements to the City's financial management practices. Budget - A financial plan for a specified period of time that matches planned revenues and expenditures to municipal services. Budget Calendar - A schedule of key dates which the City follows in the preparation, adoption, and administration of the budget. Budget Message - Included in the opening section of the budget, the Budget Message provides the Council and the public with a general summary of the most important aspects of the budget, changes from the previous fiscal years, and the views and recommendations of the City Manager. Capital imnrovement Program (CTP) - A program to provide for the maintenance or replacement of existing public facilities and assets and for the construction or acquisition of new ones. Contingency - An appropriation of funds to cover unforeseen events that occur during the fiscal year, such as flood emergencies, Federal Mandates, shortfalls in revenue, and similar eventualities. -126- 1 Contractual, Se ;moa - Services rendered to City activities by private firms, individuals or other governmental agencies. Examples of these services include traffic engineering, law enforcement, and city attorney services. Department - A major organizational unit of the City which has been assigned overall management responsibility for an operation or a group of related operations within a functional area. Designated Fund Balance - A portion of unreserved fund balance designated by City policy for a specific future use. Encumbrance - The legal commitment of appropriated funds to purchase an item or service. To encumber funds means to set aside or commit funds for a future expenditure. Fees for Services - Charges paid to the City by users of a service to help support the costs of providing that service. Fiscal Year - The beginning and ending period for recording financial transactions. The City has specified July 1 to June 30 as its fiscal year. FixedAssets - Assets of long-term nature such as land, buildings, machinery, furniture, and other equipment. The City has defined such assets as those with an expected life in excess of one year and an acquisition cost in excess of $300. Franchise Fee - A franchise fee is charged for the privilege of using public rights-of-way and property within the City for public or private purposes. The City currently assesses franchise fees on cable television, bus stop shelters and utilities. LMd - An accounting entity that records all financial transactions for specific activities or government functions. The generic fund types used by the City are: General, Special Revenue, Capital Project, and Insurance Funds. Fund Balance - The excess of current assets over current liabilities, and represents the cumulative effect of revenues and other financing sources .over expenditures and other financing uses. General Fund -'The primary operating fund of the City, all revenues that are not allocated by law or contractual agreement to a specific fund are accounted for in the General Fund. with the exception of subvention or grant revenues restricted for specific uses, General Fund resources can be utilized for any legitimate governmental purpose. Goal - A statement of broad -direction, purpose, or intent. Infrastructure - The physical assets of the City, i.e., streets, water, sewer, public buildings, and parks, and the support - structures within a development. -127- Investment Rev nue - Revenue received as interest from the investment of funds not immediately required to meet cash disbursement obligations. Key Objective - A statement of specific direction, purpose, or intent based on the needs of the community and the goals established for a specific program. Line -Item Budget - A budget that lists detailed expenditure categories (salary, materials, telephone service, travel, etc.) separately, along with the amount budgeted for each specified category. The City uses a program rather that line -item budget, although detail line -item accounts are maintained and recorded for financial reporting and control purposes. Municipal - In its broadest sense, an adjective which denotes the state and all subordinate units of government. In a more restricted sense, an adjective which denotes a city or village as opposed to other local government. Objects of Expenditure - The individual expenditure accounts used to record each type of expenditure City operations incur. For budgeting purposes, objects of expenditure are categorized into groups of similar types of expenditures called major objects of expenditure. The principle objects of expenditure used in the budget are: • Personal Services: Salaries and benefits paid to City employees. Includes items such as special duty salaries and retirement. • Supplies: Amounts paid for items that are consumed or deteriorated through use or that lose their identity through fabrication or incorporation into different or more complex units or substances. Operating Expenditures: Office supplies,'materials and other items used in the normal operations of the City departments. Includes items such as books, maintenance materials and contractual services. • Professional Services: Services supporting the government. These professionals include physicians, lawyers, architects, auditors, therapists, systems analysts, planners, etc. -128- Capital Outlay: Expenditures which qualify as capital costs according to accounting standards. This includes furniture, fixtures, machinery, equipment and other relatively minor fixed assets. Operating Budget - The portion of the budget that pertains to daily operations providing basic governmental services. The program budgets in the financial plan form the operating budget. Ordinan e - A formal legislative enactment by the City Council. It has the full force and effect of law within the City boundaries unless it is in conflict with any higher form of law, such as a State statute or constitutional provision. Po-� - A direction that must be followed to advance toward a goal. The direction can be a course of actin or a guiding principle. Property Tax - A statutory limited tax levy which may be imposed for any purpose. program - A grouping of activities organized to accomplish basic goals and objectives. Program Budge - A budget that focuses upon the goals and objective of an agency or jurisdiction rather than upon its organizational budget units or object classes of expenditure. ResRes—fie- - An account used to indicate that a portion of a fund's balance is legally restricted for a specific therefore, not available for general appropriation. Resolution - A special order of the City Council which requires less legal formality than an ordinance in terms of public notice and the number of public readings prior to approval. Revenue - Funds that the government receives as income. It includes such items as tax payments, fees from specific services, receipts from other governments, fines, forfeitures, grants, shared revenues and interest income. Risk Management - An organized attempt to protect an organization's assets against accidental loss in the most cost-effective manner. Sales Tax - A tax on the purchase of goods and services. SCS - Southern California Joint Powers Authority. Special Assessment, - A compulsory levy made against certain properties to defray part or all of the cost of a specific improvement or service deemed to primarily benefit those parties. -129- Soeci al Revenue Fundy - Funds used to account for the proceeds from specific revenue sources (other than trusts or major capital projects) that are legally restricted to expenditures for specific purposes. Subventions - Revenues collected by the State (or other level of government) which are allocated to the City on a formula basis. The major subventions received by the Cit from the State of California include motor vehicle in -lieu, cigarette taxes and gasoline taxes. Trust and-&gAncy Fundy - Also known as Fiduciary Fund Types, these funds are used to account for assets held by the City in a trustee capacity or as an agent for private individuals, organizations or other governmental agencies. User Fees - The payment of a fee for direct receipt of a service by the party benefiting from the service. Working Cal2ital- Difference between current assets and current liabilities. -130-