Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/28/1993CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Mayor — Gary G. Miller Mayor Pro Tem — Phyllis E. Papen Councilman — John A. Forbing Councilman — Gary H. Wemer Councilman — Dexter D. MacBride City Council Chambers are located at: South CoastAir Quality Managetnent DrstrictAuditorium 21865 East Copley Drhv MEETING DATE: September 28, 1993 MEETING TIME: 7:00 p.m. Terrence L Belanger City Manager Andrew V. Arczynski City Attorney Lynda Burgess City Clerk .�... vv -go v, utnur wnuen aocumentation relating, to, each itemreferred tp +art this agenda n the office of the 04 Clerk and are available for public inspection.have questions The City of ;item,<please contact the City Clerk at (9091:4160 248& Burin buahess 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. 1. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Pro Tem Papen ROLL CALL: Councilmen MacBride, Forbing, Werner, Mayor Pro Tem Papen 2. PUBLIC HEARING: 2.1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NOS. 92-1 AND 2; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51407, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-8 AND OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 92-8; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 32400, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-5, AND OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 91-2; TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51253 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-12; OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 92- 9; THE SOUTH POINTE MASTER PLAN; AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 92-1 - This is a request for approval of a mixed use project, known as the South Pointe Master Plan, consisting of land uses which include residential, commercial, park, open space and school facilities. The project site is approximately 171 acres in size and is located north of Pathfinder Rd., west of Brea Canyon Rd., east of Morning Sun Drive, and south of Rapid View Dr. The project proposes to develop 30 acres of commercial retail/office space of 290,000 sq. ft.; approximately 200 single-family detached residential dwelling units, a 28 acres neighborhood park; and the construction of a middle school. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the development proposal. Continued from September 14, 1993. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council receive presentations from staff, City consultants, and project developers; open the Public Hearing; receive public testimony and continue the Hearing. 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS: 4. ADJOURNMENT: REMINDER Please remember to bring the following South Pointe Master Plan Documents: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Dated November 1992 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT dated February 1993 TECHNICAL APPENDIX - RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT dated May 1993 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: September 28, 1993 REPORT DATE: September 23, 1993 FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director TITLE: Development Agreement Nos. 92-1 and 2; Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407, Conditional Use Permit No. 92-8 and Oak Tree Permit No. 92-8; Vesting Tentative Tract No. 32400, Conditional Use Permit No. 91-5, and Oak Tree Permit No. 92-3; Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 and Conditional Use Permit No. 92-12; Oak Tree Permit No. 92-9; the South Pointe Master Plan; and Environmental Impact Report No. 92-1 continued from September 14, 1993. SUMMARY: This is a request for approval of a mixed use project, known as the South Pointe Master Plan, consisting of land uses which include residential, commercial, park, open space and school facilities. The project site is approximately 171 acres in size and is located north of Pathfinder Road, west of Brea Canyon Road, east of Morning Sun Drive, and south of Rapid View Drive. The project proposes to develop 30 acres of commercial retail/office space of 290,000 square feet; approximately 200 single-family detached residential dwelling units, a 28 acre neighborhood park; and the construction of a middle school. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council receive presentations from the staff, City consultants, and project developers; open the Public Hearing, receive public testimony, and continue the Hearing. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification _ Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office) X Other EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: Library SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed N/A _ Yes —No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? MAJORITY 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? X Yes _ 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: PUBLIC WORKS REV Y: ?. Terre L. Belanger 0 Jir4es DeStefano City Manager Community Develop ent Director CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: September 28, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Development Agreement Nos. 92-1 and 2; Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407, Conditional Use Permit No. 92-8 and Oak Tree Permit No. 92-8; Vesting Tentative Tract No. 32400, Conditional Use Permit No. 91-5, and Oak Tree Permit No. 92-3; Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 and Conditional Use Permit No. 92-12; Oak Tree Permit No. 92- 9; the South Pointe Master Plan; and Environmental Impact Report No. 92-1 continued from September 14, 1993. ISSUE STATEMENT: This is a request for approval of a mixed use project, known as the South Pointe Master Plan, consisting of land uses which include residential, commercial, park, open space and school facilities. The project site is approximately 171 acres in size and is located north of Pathfinder Road, west of Brea Canyon Road, east of Morning Sun Drive, and south of Rapid View Drive. The project proposes to develop 30 acres of commercial retail/office space of 290,000 square feet; approximately 200 single-family detached residential dwelling units, a 28 acre neighborhood park; and the construction of a middle school. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council receive presentations from the staff, City consultants, and project developers; open the Public Hearing, receive public testimony, and continue the Hearing. PROJECT SUMMARY: The South Pointe Master Plan has been proposed to guide the development of 171 acres in the South Pointe Middle School/ Sandstone Canyon area. The Master Plan incorpor- ates property owned by five entities; the City of Diamond Bar, Walnut Valley Unified School District, Arciero and Sons, Inc., RNP Development, Inc. and Sasak Corporation. The proposed project, if approved, will be developed, in phases, with primary land uses of residential, commercial, park, open space, and school. Approximately 82 residential acres are requested for construction of 200 single family homes, 30 acres are proposed for a future commercial/office use, 28 acres are proposed for open space as a public park site, and 31 acres are proposed for the construction of the South Pointe Middle School (see Exhibit "A"). As presently proposed, the project will be developed over a projected ten year period. Under the proposed development plan, all of the residential dwelling units, one-half of the commercial/office use, and the park site will be aempletea within a projected five vav 6614e8. The remaining commercial/office use is projected to be completed within the remaining ten year period. To accommodate the proposed land uses, a number of circulation system improvements are required. These improvements include the creation of new local streets within the project site, a new access road to the school from Brea Canyon Road, improvements to Brea Canyon Road, and a number of area off-site street and intersection improvements including new signalization. The proposed project will require the approval and implementation of Development Agreements between the City and the project applicants, adoption of a Master Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Oak Tree Permit, Subdivision approvals and an Environmental Impact Report. The Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed project and has recommended City Council approval. BACKGROUND: On September 14, 1993, the City Council began the public hearing process to consider development applications for the South Pointe Master Plan project. The Council received a presentation on the proposal from the City Staff and a summary of the environmental review process from the City's environmental consultant. Anticipated developer presentations were postponed to September 28 at the request of the applicants. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT: On September 14, 1992, the City Council opened the Public Hearing on the stated project and the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). The Public Hearing for both the project and the DEIR was continued to September 28, 1993, for further public comment and possible action to certify or deny the DEIR. It should be noted that, in accordance with the Public Resources Code, At least 10 days prior to certifying an environmental impact report, the lead agency (City) shall provide a written proposed response to a public agency on comments made by that agency which conform with the requirements of this division... Copies of responses or the environmental document in which they are contained ... may be used to meet the requirements imposed by this section. " The Public Hearing has not closed and, therefore, action on the DEIR would be inappropriate at this time. PROJECT REVIEW : The proposed South Point Master Plan contains several entitlement requests as more fully described within the Staff Report prepared for the September 14, 1993 City Council meeting. Upon conclusion of the environmental review the council should begin to consider the specific entitlement requests. General Plan : The 1993 General Plan designation for the properties is PD, Planned Development. The purpose of this designation is to encourage the innovative use of unique properties, incorporate various land uses, coordinate public and private facilities, and integrate the proposed project into existing development patterns. The proposal has been designed to meet the requirements of the General Plan. Consistency with the adopted General Plan is required by State Law in order to approve the project. The general rule for consistency determination is, after considering all its aspects, will the project, on balance, further the objectives and policies of the general plan and not obstruct their attainment. Master Plan : The use of a "Master Plan" is proposed to guide the overall development. The components of the plan include permitted uses and development standards. The proposed zoning regulations and development standards will be implemented via the use of development agreements for the RNP and Arciero proposals. The standards are attached to the Sasak proposal as a component of the Tentative Map conditions. The complete document is contained within the previously prepared report. The use of a master plan is a tool for implementing the Genaral Plan and often bridges the gap between General Plan policy and zoning standards for the property under consideration for development. Subdivisions : Please refer to the previous report regarding the proposed tentative tract maps, hillside conditional use permits, oak tree permits, and the Draft Environmental Impact Report for a detailed review of each map and their cumulative impact upon the environment. Cross sections illustrating the proposed grading (cut and fill) activity are attached. Development Agreements: Development agreemnets are proposed as reviously indicated. Attached to this report are maps which illustrate the existing and future ownership of property as a result of project implementation. FINANCIAL SUMMARY : A Fiscal Impact Analysis has been prepared for the proposed projct. The Levander Company, Inc. analized the proposed project and two alternative development scenarios. The report indicates that each development sceniaro studied yields a positive cash flow to the City. The potential 30 acre commercial center proposed by the project proponents is estimated to provide an annual net surplus of $684,000 begining in the 11th year, the projected first year after full development. The complete report is attached for review. PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE: The public hearing for the South Pointe Master Plan was publicly noticed in accordance with State and local requirements. PREPARED BY: James De Stefano Community Development Director Attachments 1. Land Use Plan 2. City Council Staff Report dated September 14, 1993, (without attachments) 3. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 4. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32400 5. Tract Map No. 51253 6. South Pointe Master Plan - Sections 7. Existing ownership map 8. Future ownership map 9. Levander Fiscal Impact Analysis - dated April 21, 1993 10. Correspondence received to date in favor of and against the South Pointe Master Plan. CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: September 14, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Development Agreement Nos. 92-1 and 2; Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407, Conditional Use Permit No. 92-8 and Oak Tree permit No. 92-8; Vesting Tentative Tract No. 32400, Conditional Use Permit No. 91-5, and Oak Tree Permit No. 91-2; Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 and Conditional Use Permit No. 92-12; Oak Tree Permit No. 92- 9: the South Pointe Master Plan; and Environmental Impact Report No. 92-1. ISSUE STATEMENT: This is a request for approval of a mixed use project, known as the South Pointe Master Plan, consisting of land uses which include residential, commercial, park, open space and school facilities. The project site is approximately 171 acres in size and is located north of Pathfinder Road, west of Brea Canyon Road, east of Morning Sun Drive, and south of Rapid View Drive. The project proposes to develop 30 acres of commercial retail/office space of 290,000 square feet; approximately 200 single-family detached residential dwelling units, a 28 acre neighborhood park; and the construction of a middle school. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the development proposal. It is recommended that the City Council receive a presentation from the City staff, City consultants, and project developers, open the public hearing, receive public testimony, and continue the public hearing. PROJECT SUMMARY: The South Pointe Master Plan has been proposed to guide the development of 171 acres in the South Pointe Middle School/Sandstone Canyon area. The Master Plan incorporates property owned by five entities; the City of Diamond Bar, Walnut Valley Unified School District, Arceiro and Sons, Inc., RNP Development, Inc. and Sasak Corporation. The proposed project, if approved, will be developed, in phases, with primary land uses of residential, commercial, park, open space, and school. Approximately 82 residential acres are requested for construction of 200 single family homes, 30 acres are proposed for a future commercial/office use, 28 acres are proposed for open space as a public park site, and 31 acres are proposed for the construction of the South Pointe Middle 1 School (see Exhibit '$A'#). As presently proposed, the project will be developed over a projected ten year period. Under the proposed development plan, all of the residential dwelling units, one-half of the commercial/office use, and the park site will be completed within a projected five year period. The remaining commercial/office use is projected to be completed within the remaining ten year period. To accommodate the proposed land uses, a number of circulation system improvements are required. These improvements include the creation of new local streets within the project site, a new access road to the school from Brea Canyon Road, improvements to Brea Canyon Road, and a number of area off-site street and intersection improvements including new signalization. The proposed project will require the approval and implementation of Development Agreements between the City and the project applicants, adoption of a Master Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Oak Tree Permit, Subdivision approvals and an Environmental Impact Report. The Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed project and has recommended City Council approval. BACKGROUND: The South Pointe Master Plan project proposes the subdivision of a primarily undeveloped 171 acre site to accommodate the phased development and subsequent use of the site for residential, commercial, park, open space, and school purposes. The South Pointe Master Plan project represents a comprehensive land use planning effort. The proposed project is the culmination of a multi-year effort by landowners to produce a balanced development plan for one of the remaining large undeveloped properties in the City. The applicants for the proposed project are: (1) RNP Development, Inc., 4439 Rhodeli,a Dr., Claremont CA 91711 (2) Arciero and Sons, Inc., 950 North Tustin, Anaheim, CA 92807 (3) Sasak Corporation, 858 W. 9th St., Upland CA 91785 (4) City of Diamond Bar, 21660 E. Copley Dr., Ste. 100, Diamond Bar, :A 91765 The property owners include the applicants and the Walnut Valley Unif:e; School District. Ownership boundaries are identified within Exhibit 'A• attached. Approximately 82 residential acres are proposed for construction approximately 200 single family homes. A future commercial/office developme— of 30 acres is planned adjacent to Brea Canyon Road. A 28 acre propo80.1 neighborhood public park site is proposed which would consist of both pass;.• and active recreational uses. The remaining 31 acres are.proposed for construction of a permanent South Pointe Middle School. The proposed project, as presently contemplated, would be developed over , projected 10 year period. To accommodate the proposed land uses, a varies, of circulation system improvements are being considered. They include the creation of new local streets within the project site, and a new main access road to the school from Brea Canyon Road. A variety of public improvements to both Brea Canyon Road and other off-site street and intersections improvements will be required as a result of the project. As graphically depicted in Exhibit "C", the project site has been divided into five (5) district, planning areas (or enclaves). Project specific development standards have been proposed for each enclave as a part of the South Pointe Master Plan. Each tentative tract map has been designed consistent with the proposed development standards. VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51407 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 is proposed by RNP Development, Inc. and consists of 84.20 acres containing 90 single family residential parcels with 28.13 acres proposed for recreational open space and 21.9 acres proposed as a commercial center. This map is located within Enclave 1, as described within the Master Plan development standards. Minimum lot sizes for this Enclave are 8,000 square feet with minimum pad sizes of 6,900 square feet. The proposed residential neighborhoods within this Enclave are designed to be compatible with the existing style and type of development pattern adjacent to the project. Vesting Tentative Map No. 51407 provides for an overall density of 2.59 units per acre on the 34.62 acre residential site. Lot sizes range from 8,977 square feet (Lot 024) to 18,679 square feet (lot #34). Pad sizes range from 7,079 square feet (Lot 126) to 13,322 square feet (lot 130). 28.13 acres have been set aside for open space/ recreational purposes (Lot #91). Three commercial lots are proposed ranging in size from 3.40 acres to 13.50 acres for a total of 21.90 commercial acres. Earthwork quantities indicate 2,567,000 yards of cut and 2,571,000 yards of fill for the proposed map. The circulation pattern consists of a residential collector, street "A", from Brea Canyon Road to the middle school site, and a residential street "B" proposed extending through to Morning -Sun Drive. The project proposes six residential dwelling units facing Larkstone Drive on property presently owned by the Walnut Valley Unified School District. The proposed map would supercede previously recorded Tract Map No.'s 32576 and 35742. Those maps dedicated the right to prohibit the construction of residential units within certain lots. That right was accepted by the County and is valid and enforceable against any development request. Other restrictions on the property relate to flood hazard and restricted use areas. This proposed map would supercede and erase the existing development restrictions placed upon the property. There are a number of other parcels in the community which are also subject to similar development restrictions. Other properties with such development restrictions have been re -subdivided by Los Angeles County. The applicant has specifically requested approval of this application package which permits the City to evaluate the change in entitlement on the merits of the proposed project. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 51253 This 6.7 acre site is currently proposed as a 21 unit single fan, residential development by Sasak Corporation. The proposed project ,is presently designed is consistent with the Master Plan developme 3 standards for Enclave No. 1. Lot sizes range from 8,241 square feet (Lot 11) to 20,962 square feet (Lot#4). Pad sizes range from 6,906 square feet (Lot #20) to 11,214 square feet (Lot 14). Earthwork quantities indicate 145,800 cubic yards of excavation, 98,300 cubic yards of embankment, and 47,500 cubic yards of export. The proposed subdivision provides for an extension of street FIs" as shown within Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 to connect with Morning Sun Drive. This Tentative Map contains the same basic development restrictions as the previously discussed map. The Subdivision Map Act provides a means to remove such restrictions. If a resubdivision or reversion to acreage of the tract is subsequently filed for approval, the offer of dedication previously rejected is terminated upon the approval of the new map by the City Council. VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 32400 Vesting Tentative Tract No. 32400 is proposed by Arciero and Sons and contains 93 lots. 91 single family homes are proposed with two lots totaling approximately 7 acres set aside for commercial purposes. The proposed map is located within Enclave 3. The minimum lot size proposed for Enclave 3 is 7200 square feet with a minimum pad size of 6000 square feet. The proposed project contains lot sizes that range from 7200 (lot 031) to 15,095 (Lot #14) square feet. Pad sizes range from 6,070 (lot 169) to 13,365 (lot 045) square feet. Primary access is from Brea Canyon Road with a secondary access point through the future commercial development. Earthwork quantities indicate 1.795 million cubic yards of cut and 1.810 million cubic yards of fill. The proposed map is consistent with the design and development standards contained within the Master Plan. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS: The use of Development Agreements are proposed for the Arciero and RNP development project. The Development Agreement is utilized as a single contract document to incorporate the Master Plan, the Hillside Management regulations, the Oak Tree Permit, the Development Standards with reference to the Tentative Tract Maps. Cities are provided with the ability to enter into Development Agreements with any property owner. Development Agreements are essentially a negotiated contract between a public agency and a private developer. 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 proposed agreements incorporate a variety of land transfers and commitments by all parties toward the successful completion of the proposed project. HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND OAK TREE PERMIT: The Hillside Management Ordinance requires a conditional use permit approval for each tentative tract map proposal. The hillside management standards and guidelines have been incorporated within each development. The impact of the project grading is analyzed in the Draft Environmental Impact Report within the earth resources and aesthetics sections. The Development Code requires an Oak Tree- Permit for the removal of any oak genus which is eight inches in diameter as measured four and one-half feet above the natural grade. Each proposed subdivision site contains oak trees which would require removal. 4 In accordance with requirements of the Code, an oak tree inventory was conducted for each subdivision site. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 contains 449 oak trees. Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 contains 53 trees scheduled for replacement. Vesting Tentative Tract Map 32400 will require the removal of 276 oak trees. The Draft Environmental Impact Report indicates that 92 percent of the inventoried oak trees will be removed as a result of the proposed grading activities on-site. All oak trees removed as a result of the proposed project will be replaced at a 2:1 ratio. MASTER PLAN: The South Pointe Master Plan represents a comprehensive land use planning approach designed to provide a mixed use neighborhood comprised of residential, open space/park, and commercial/ office land uses which blend with the adjacent built environment and coincide with the natural resource values currently associated with the project site. The Master Plan weaves five private and public parcels with different ownership into a land use strategy which provides for a full range of land uses and therefore a balanced neighborhood. It also contains specific development standards to guide the future implementation of the project. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the City has determined that an Environmental Impact Report should be prepared to assess and analyze the environmental effects of the proposed project. The City engaged Ultrasystems Engineers and Constructors, Inc. as an independent consultant to prepare the environmental documents. An Executive Summary of the Environmental review record is attached (exhibit "D" ). PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE: The South Pointe Master Plan project was publicly noticed in accordance with State and local requirements. Advertisements were published within the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on August 12, 1993. Notices were mailed to property owners within a 500 foot radius of the project boundaries on August 12, 1993. Several hundred additional notices were mailed to interested citizens providing public awareness of the proposal. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The Planning Commission conducted numerous public study sessions and public hearings on the proposals. A walking tour of the site was conducted on December 14, 1992. Study Sessions were held in October and December 1992. Noticed public hearings were held in January, February, March, April, and May 1993. The Planning Commission concluded its activities on May 24, 1993 by recommending City Council approval of all project components. A summary of the Commission activities is attached. 5 CONCLUSION: The scheduled public hearing of September 14, 1993 is intended to introduce the City Council to the South Pointe Master Plan. PREPARED BY: James Destefano Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS: 1. Exhibit "A" -Land Use Plan 2. Exhibit "B" - Ownership Map 3. Exhibit "C" - Enclave Map 4. Exhibit "D" - Environmental Review Record 5. Planning Commission Resolutions, Condition B (for each tract), Development Agreements, Condition A (for all tracts), Condition C (for all tracts) 6. Project Tract Maps 7. Public Hearing Notice S. Draft Environmental Impact Report dated November 1992 (previously transmitted) 9. Response To Comments On The Draft Environmental Impact Report dated February 1993 (previously transmitted) 10. Technical Appendix - Response To Comments On The Draft Environmental Impact Report dated May 1993 (previously transmitted) F:\WP51\WOM\AGENDA\AGB-RPT.FRM 6 u r6 s IF T tj cr, 7xpo u r6 s IF cr, 7xpo u r6 E � •ii. E .T,_ i 3 i < <ILL EL E � •ii. E .T,_ i 3 n 4 N P" 400 T-1 tj tT L� ;J - § Gj� Zx� n L� ;J - Gj� Zx� kr t n W FUN O a 2 H O z a J a. W Ch a W Q V O W a c� z z z a J a w M Csi m w U. 0 4 V i i I I I I I i I 4 V I � I o kMl I r"t W � al 0 c- M. It Y �� �� I I ��� �ti� r� a O b r � 0 Q' r , Q w r a ! � f 1�1 i t Q' r O 6l r v i 3 0 0 I W I i Z o i ' — v8 .I J � W � � u I I � r DL t.: v 0 u a Ltd - --I - ---I ---- �� l 1 I I 0 X11 \ h _ t v 1 t , 1 w t I F I X \ Z _O i - I r 'Q / I I I I r i % l 1 I I 0 I opm rob" RM s•* �XISPN& OWNW.,49AIP p ea4oa� o �2v°�� a O o 0o c, ,��► .,, o©a o0 0°°0° o o�oo ooe'� o0 0o 0 OOp0��O0 WVUSD daelin LAu nal 8/5TM PI 127 mcia 40.17 ACRES 30.61 ACRES (31.66 ACRES) �'Ao 44 •OdG s 0 oO � v O op O�oO o d Kill 11flill 3P�aoaaa�oo�o ONNI LOCATION I P I °�'� i0R NAP B -R -P DEVELOPMENT we s wrrt.u� �r em � ■r a oAwe� souf" 6 @or.1tWm 5''4 �UtUR� OUNVE�IIp R13.50 '•', ACRES �'Ao 44 •OdG s 0 oO � v O op O�oO o d Kill 11flill 3P�aoaaa�oo�o ONNI LOCATION I P I °�'� i0R NAP B -R -P DEVELOPMENT we s wrrt.u� �r em � ■r a oAwe� souf" 6 @or.1tWm 5''4 �UtUR� OUNVE�IIp THE LEVANDER COMPANY, INC. 25550 Hawthorne Boulevard, Suite 310, Torrance, CA 90505 (310) 375-8611 FAX (310) 375-9981 FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS & OTHER BENEFIT -COST CONSIDERATIONS SOUTH POINTE SPECIFIC PLAN DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA Prepared For The Planning Associates April 21, 1993 economics and management consultants THE LEVANDER COMPANY, mc. 25550 Hawthorne Boulevard, Suite 310, Torrance, CA 90505 (310) 375.8811 FAX (310) 375.9981 INDEX Introduction....................................................1 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..........................................2 (1) Overall Conclusions ......................................... 2 (2) Projected Financial Returns to the City ............................ 3 (3) Other Benefit -Cost Considerations ................................ 6 2. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.......................................7 3. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REVENUES ................................ 9 4. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR EXPENDITURES ............................ 10 5. DETAILED COMPUTER PROJECTIONS AND FISCAL MODEL ............... ............................11 Appendix.....................................................12 economics and management consultants THE LEVANDER COMPANY, wc. 25550 Hawthorne Boulevard, Sulte 310, Torrance, CA 90505 (310) 375-8611 FAX (310) 375.9981 MEMORANDUM To: The Planning Associates Date: April 21, 1993 From: Dale H. Levander File: 1408 Subject: FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS & OTHER BENEFIT -COST CONSIDERATIONS -- SOUTH POINTE SPECIFIC PLAN At the request of The Planning Associates in behalf of their client, the City of Diamond Bar, we have prepared this fiscal impact analysis of prospective development of the South Pointe Specific Plan area (identified hereafter as South Pointe). The specific plan calls for development of the 171 -acre South Pointe area for 31 acres of commercial facilities and 200 single-family residential units, with added development to include a park, a middle school, circulation improvements, and open space. Our analysis considers three alternative development scenarios involving variations in the amount of commercial development, as follows: o Alternative A --Maximum Commercial Development Development of the full 31 -acre commercial site for 290,000 square feet of commercial facilities, primarily major highway -oriented retail types, with such development assumed to occur 50% in Year 5 of development and the balance in Year 10. o Alternative B--Mid-Range Commercial Development Development of 50% of the commercial site (15.5 acres), with the remaining site area to remain in open space, resulting in 145,000 square feet of commercial facilities, also primarily of highway -oriented retail types. o Alternative C --Minimum Commercial Development Development of only 5.0 acres of the commercial site, the remainder to remain in open space, with development to involve primarily an extension of commercial office now found to the south of the area and also minor strip -commercial retail, with a total of 61,000 square feet of building space. In the preparation of this analysis, we have utilized information from the following sources: o Personal inspection of the South Pointe area and its neighborhood setting. o Discussions with City of Diamond Bar officials, identified in Appendix E. o Review of the City's 1992-93 budget, with computer analysis thereof documented in Appendix D. economics and management consultants o Property tax rate breakdowns from the Los Angeles County Auditor - Controller's office. o Current assessed values of the area from the Los Angeles County Assessor. o Development program estimates from review of the South Pointe EIR and discussions with The Planning Associates. o Current population data for the City of Diamond Bar from January 1992 estimates prepared by the State Department of Finance, with 1990 Census Data for surrounding neighborhoods as compiled by City staff. o Survey of single-family housing pricing in nearby neighborhoods by our staff. o Our experience in the preparation of more than 1 So local governmental fiscal impact analyses during the past five years. It should be noted that we have not undertaken a detailed market analysis of development marketability and timing. However, based on our experience we have prepared estimates of logical commercial development expectations for the South Pointe property. This report is summary in nature. Additional research material are available from our files upon request. 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. (1) Overall Conclusions In our judgment, maximum commercial development as reflected in Alternative A is in the City's best long-term interest from a financial standpoint, and this development will also provide several non -quantified benefits as well, as subsequently discussed. The potential 31 -acre commercial site --by virtue of its size, configuration, freeway access, and freeway visibility --is a logical site for future highway -related retail, with possible development including such facilities as a discount department store, home improvement outlets, furniture stores, and the like. Maximum commercial development will have a highly beneficial impact on City finances, with a projected net surplus to the City of $16.5 million during a 20 -year projection period and an annual net surplus of $684,000 starting at Year 11, the projected first year after full development (these dollars expressed in 1993 current dollars). While the lesser development alternatives reflected in Alternatives B and C will also yield positive cash surplus to the City, the amount of such surplus is well below that to be obtained under OA maximum commercial development --less than one-half that of Alternative A in the case of Alternative B and less than one-third in the case of Alternative C. Our judgment of prospective development potentials are viewed in light of the City's long- term potentials, and in this regard our projections cover a 20 -year time frame from date of first occupancy, probably two or three years hence. We are aware of the current economic downturn, but we can point to similar downturns in the 1970's and 1980's which were followed by periods of major economic growth. We do not profess to be able to predict exactly when the major commercial development can occur, but we believe our five- year delay in projected growth over first residential occupancies is probably conservative. The key point is that the City of Diamond Bar has a property within its boundaries which is suitable for major commercial development at some point in the future, and as such represents a future financial resource to the community. (2) Proiected Financial Returns to the City Table 1 immediately following presents a summary of 20 -year financial projections under the three development alternatives considered. During the full 20 -year projection period, Alternative A's projected $16.8 million surplus will result from the following: o Projected revenues of $19.7 million, including $9.0 million in property taxes and $7.3 million from commercial ground lease rental revenues. o Operating expenditures (costs) of $2.8 million, including park maintenance, police protection, street maintenance, and other smaller items. Specific revenue and expenditure (cost) factors utilized in the projections are discussed in detail in Sections 3 and 4 of this report. Detailed annual projections for Alternatives A, B, and C are found in Appendix A, B, and C respectively. Table 1 also provides summary projections of City cash surplus under the assumption of ongoing inflation averaging 4.0% annually. In these computations, we have increased operating revenues and costs at the 4.0% figures, with assessed values and resulting property taxes increased at 2.0% for commercial and 2.5% for residential, consistent with Proposition 13 limitations and consideration of residential turnover. Property tax growth limitations notwithstanding, City cash flows under inflation assumptions continue to strongly favor Alternative A over other alternatives. The above net cash surplus projections reflect deduction of all ongoing operating costs associated with commercial and residential development, including police protection, street maintenance, recreation services, park maintenance, and administration. In addition, they reflect coverage of the following somewhat special costs: 3 i w-1 Y Y Y I ►• 1 • V W 1 1 VJ M Y y� i p�pyry A y 1.0� M� 6 •W i Y N M Y v I M W w •Y M F• M !� n V• fY w M O• I O IAV 1.� Y q 1 rr b y +~+ ►Sr 11~� i 1 � 1 'A I M N b! && i •Mi Y4+ M I ry 1! M i 1 1 y 1 N 1 I 1 I 1 I I M W w •Y M F• M !� n V• fY w M O• N A 1 1 rr b y +~+ ►Sr 11~� i Nil Y y d 1 1 w ► 1 i 1 I w Y 1 C 1 1 I 1 1 w 1 •ea y 1 N 1 I wl 1 I 1 h•� rr b y +~+ ►Sr 11~� i Nil Y y d 1 M O w A I N 1 N a S 1 � a •IV •lwyi I `+•,y„ I M p �YIy W 1 I 1 M •1'•t I O I I I O u'1 N M ri H N• •"1 N ! �"1 N I y A •O� � M r N N t1 d V ..Vi 7 .�-� f•1 wl r6 �y h•� f•� w M O Ir0�1 Y � A Nil �~'►P�A ZS a«.gnaw =e..!•II►� w� w O u'1 N M ri H N• •"1 N ! �"1 N fV f1 r w H eyr� A •O� � M r N N t1 d V ..Vi 7 .�-� f•1 wl w � f•� w M O e� Nil �~'►P�A ZS a«.gnaw =e..!•II►� w� w d O d O d O d O Cb !_ P •"� �_ ! N O O• t Cd P d M M w M ! P •'7 I� �! N d Cn r d O d► O d O O O d ! O n !+ ! N d Cn h w M w M d Ci O O O P C► P O r O M rN !I y at w w A n � w aw p n M it n n W w M w M YY M ~ O Y O~ q Y y 4u w e ++ y sa Uk 0 u N I H 1 i n n w .ti w I V p I M i 1 I i W 10 /Y L O I 1 Y� !1 � C► P CY A SIM N M pq M a! I 1 I 1 � P• Ir O 4 1 I � � CN ! .M �p 4'� Y O H Y I 1 .r'1 M F .q•I .F1 vMs � O �yw+ f.� •n'1 1 Mp 1 � 1 1 I 1 I I I � 1 1 I 1 1 I :2 4 I .w 1 w•1 V cya 1 d {� j 1 j ^� 1 O •� ►� �j 1 1 1 j hd 1� yy w ++ VV O H I ~ � P ► ► •! M ti P 4�i 1 O u`1 rt N 1 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I r � � � � a+ y 1 8 1 i 1 .A M A M� +r q r � e•� N epi p� M I �Y O L 1 1 ��� 4'1 a0 d� If► 1 N I Y N yO O S 1 1 f`~� ♦ A � ~ M �O F N fr •� rf �"� .•M Q wMr 1 w� Yw y N M r w � P 1 1 N o $62,000 annual costs of maintaining 10.0 acres of finished park, even though the 200 residential units in South Pointe alone would require park development of only 3.0 acres per City standards, which in turn would cost only $18,600 annually for maintenance. o A portion of the improvement costs required for park development, assumed to be 50% of total improvement costs of $750,000, the balance of improvement costs and site costs assumed to be a developer responsibility. o Costs of maintaining not only streets within the area but also an assumed widening of Brea Canyon Road to a full four lanes at time of commercial development (in Alternatives A and B), with costs projected for the additional two lanes of $9,600 annually. Please refer to tables in Appendix A, B, and C for detailed projections and underlying development and financial factors. (3) Other Benefit -Cost Considerations Non -quantified community benefits not reflected in the financial projections include the following: o Park Facilities. As noted earlier, the prospective 10 -acre park is well above 3.0 acres which would be required for the 200 residential units alone. The park will serve a much broader part of the Diamond Bar Community. At present, the City currently has 39.9 acres of finished park, to be increased in the near future to 55 acres with completion of Pantera Park. This latter figure reflects parks of about 1.0 acres per 1,000 population, far below the City's standard of 5.0. South Pointe will help the City move towards its goal. More specifically, the South Pointe park will also be directlyaccessible to the approximate 7,000 Diamond Bar residents living west of the 57 Freeway. Also, the South Pointe park will be usable City-wide by youth sports, which face a significant shortage of space. In all, South Pointe will help some 4,000 current youth -sport participants find needed facilities, practice facilities in particular. o School Access. The planned Street A collector in South Pointe will provide direct access to the South Pointe Middle School, access which is now available only to the north via neighborhood streets. This access will result in benefits of resident time savings and safety. 0 o School Replacement. South Pointe development will allow the replacement of the existing South Pointe Middle School temporary facilities with permanent facilities on an adjacent site, by virtue of grading and access benefits. We have not attempted in this analysis to discuss the wide range of non-financial matters covered by the specific plan's EIR. However, while not quantified in dollar terms,the above considerations may be considered to be of significance by many in the community. projections. 2. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. South Pointe development programs under the three alternative scenarios are summarized in Table 2. immediately following. Several points of note include the following: o Maximum commercial development of 290,000 square feet is a preliminary planning figure, possibly taking into consideration traffic limitations and other development considerations. Under typical Southern California development densities, we estimate that the 31 -acre site could accommodate 10% to 20% more building space, a factor which applies to Alternatives B and C also. o Under Alternative A, the City is projected to own a 50% share of the 31 -acre site, or 15.5 acres. Under Alternative B, the City site is also assumed to be 50% of the total site, or 7.75 acres. Under Alternative C, City ownership is assumed to the full 5.0 -acre site. o It is assumed that the A Street collector will be developed in Year 1 of the project, to provide full access to the South Point Middle School from the outset. Brea Canyon Road is projected for widening by completion of major commercial facilities in Year 5 for Alternatives A and B. No widening is projected under Alternative C. o Residential values are projected at $300,000••per unit, although our survey of current asking prices for nearby homes indicated a $340,000 average. Commercial values are based on our files of Southern California experience. o Commercial taxable sales are also based on Southern California experience. As shown in detailed projections, our judgment is that Alternative A development should yield higher taxable sales on a square -foot basis than Alternative B, which in turn should show better performance than Alternative C. 7 Sable 2 Sitml DIIILO UT 14HUltlltS 4 FDLL IaI DM Sara: =he Duda Color, In. --lltaraati76 1-- --11t6r51tiV6 1-- --11torsative C -- (I1.0 It Cu'I) (1S.5 It Cowl) t 5.0 1C Coal) Ulm DSt (lCUS) Iasidestial 14.4 10.0 14.4 Coaaarcial 31.9 15.5 5.4 Park (fisisked) 1414 10.4 14.4 scDool 72.4 72.0 72.0 Opel.Spac6/Cirsalatia 11.4 I3.S 14.0 iota! 171.0 171.0 171.0 COaIUCIn MAIN SPICt ($I) Shop zu--Srajor teail 110,444 94.000 4 Shop Ctr--1661st Asuil 51,990 2S,9o0 20,000 Shop Ctr--laaaat Not -Retail 14.000 5,004 11,000 Iatie9 t Drisiis f:tab 20,009 10,100 0 iiuoeial Office 14,011. 5,410 4 Caer41 Office 30,001 1o,40e 30,000 Total ue,ae les,oal c1,o4o W10MUL 41175 2aa lot 201 I= P9141C ff= (rats-r1WS) Mt 7.01 UID [01LIC eltu (utu) 11.1 11.4 10.0 11 Cgum OOMAR$ (io99'S) 921304 76,250 �7.c2i Attu 1011th no 4 U f $MIS II CRM MUM (=ON's) 62,100 if.i2S . 11./64 Sara: =he Duda Color, In. o Resident taxable sales while relatively minor are keyed to housing values and per -capita income estimates. We estimate that family incomes are one-third of housing values and taxable sales are 35% of per -capita incomes. o Population is estimated at 3.0 residents per unit, consistent with current City population estimates and also consistent with single-family experience elsewhere in Southern California. In the three alternatives, our analysis assumes that the City will lease its commercial site at time of commercial development, a long-term ground lease with annual revenues computed at 8.0% of value, in turn computed at $10 per square foot. This is one City option. Another option is sale of the property, which would result in one-time revenue to the City, which in turn could be invested at 6% to 8% annually under current conditions to provide ongoing General Fund revenue. _ Our computer model is established to handle such a projection alternative. Please refer to Tables 2-5 in Appendix A -C for detailed projections and underlying factors of the three development programs and resulting development measures. 3. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REVENUES Ongoing annual revenues to be received by the City as a result of South Pointe development will include the following: o Secured Property Taxes. 3.469% of the $1.00 per $100 AV tax rate collected by the Country, per the County Auditor -Controller tax -rate breakdowns for Tax Rate Area 10067 in which the subject area is located. o Unsecured Property Taxes. 10% of secured property taxes of commercial facilities only, based on Southern California experience. o Sales Tax. 1.11% of projected taxable sales, this factor based upon the City's statutory 1.00% plus additional allocations by the State to the City for sales from unidentified locations. o Property Transfer Tax.. 5.5 cents per $1,000 of new development value, based upon the City's 50% share of transfer tax computed at $1.10 per $1,000 of transfer value, under the assumption that residential properties have a ten-year ownership turnover (no consideration given to commercial property turnover). 0 o Motor Vehicle In -Lieu. $33.91 per capita for these taxes received from the State based upon the City s 1992-93 budget documented in Appendix Table D1. o Franchise Fees. $11.11 per capita, based upon review of the City's 1992-93 budget documented in Appendix Table Dl. o Gas Tax. $16.35 per capita, based upon the City's 1992-93 budget documented in Appendix Table D1. o Local Transportation Tax --Prop A. 25% of other sales tax, per the City's current budget documented in Appendix Table Dl. o City Commercial Site Lease Revenues. $34,848 per acre per year, based on 8% rate applied to value of $435,600 (10 acres @ $43,560 per acre, computed at $10 per square foot). Additional ongoing revenues include fines and forfeitures,vehicle code fines, and waste hauler permits, as identified in Appendix Table AS. One-time revenues to be received by the City as a result of South Pointe development will include: (1) document transfer tax on initial residential sales, computed at 55 cents per $1,000 valuation and (2) development control fees estimated at 1.5% of new development value, the later a regional average and assumed to be directly offset by development control costs. 4. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR EXPENDITURES Ongoing annual expenditures are estimated as follows: o Sheriff. $66.86 per capita, based upon the City's 1992-93 budget documented in Appendix Table D2 per discussion with City staff, 4.18 cents per square foot for commercial facilities utilizing an equivalent dwelling unit approach of 4,800 square feet of commercial building space equal to one dwelling unit with 3.0 residents. o Street Maintenance. $4,000 per lane -mile, based upon regional experience and discussion with City staff. o Park Maintenance. $6,200 per acre, based on review of current budget per Appendix Table D2 and review of current park subcontracts with City staff. 10 o Recreation Services. $7.74 per capita, based on the City's current budget per Appendix Table D2. o Administration . Estimated at 15.9% of other ongoing direct costs, based upon our analysis of direct and indirect costs in the City's current budget, documented in Appendix Table D2, a conservative approach inasmuch as administrative costs for most cities are not directly keyed to direct costs. Additional ongoing expenditures include animal control, emergency preparedness, and waste management, as identified in Appendix Table AS. The principal one -.time expenditures projected in this analysis is $375,000 for park improvements. Based on discussion with The Planning Associates, this analysis assumes that 50% of park improvement costs will be borne by the City, the balance by the developer. Improvement costs are estimated at $50,000 per acre, per regional experience and discussion with City staff. 8. DETAILED COMPUTER PROJECTIONS AND FISCAL MODEL Detailed computer projections are contained in the Appendix to this report, as follows: o Appendix A. A full set of detailed projections covering Alternative A. o Appendix B and Appendix C. Summary Table 1 of Alternatives B and C respectively. The computer program utilized is in the form of six individual tables, as identified in Appendix A. These individual tables have been constructed in such a form as to identify all detailed factors underlying the projections. Also, the computer program is in such a form that additional projections can be easily run under alternative development and value assumptions. Computer projections are in Symphony spreadsheet form. Each individual set of projections requires approximately 273,000 bytes of computer memory. WP33/1408R2 11 APPENDIX A. Alternative A Detailed Projections --Tables Al -A6 B. Alternative B Summary Projections --Table Bi C. Alternative C Summary Projections --Table C2 D. City of Diamond Bar 1992-93 Budget Analysis E. List of City of Diamond Bar Officials Contacted 12 Appendix A ALTERNATIVE A DETAILED PROJECTONS--TABLES Al -A6 yyM r3 L li $ � I I I I I I a I Alfl z N y ti N p N w 0 y O w O p, O O p OOdOrO dNp00.wNp Oq x w w r "'�pO.Ow 0iyy ,y - N :t O d A O p A» » w~ O o y 0 0 h x N �py00.0 pbp.on N Mt WII 4yiV�ti .l�il r0 w M A y N»h R � + � + � i `�► � 1 3 y � s M � � `lit � l.^f aS Ll P a d dt } � M r Y• � p� g r A� V S eri i7$af FZs $c bt bt g � Y i I w I I � w1 �Q 0 n r► d� e N e�� w� 0� � N� w e� M O N w � M1 ► i � I I ` fail � s wNMyMynyw.4i .wilwiw.Nil�.ni .ri^fV si RSN�l1�wl0 �iRit Fi����^/M1✓!'j i.��.������.�'.R ri si��.If .� s.n R �,r.pengs�sNd�o�wJsv� �N n'"sn'"�N xi 1 a w g e n nano N O O 4 w Q O r N IN w e H A O w O A I a M~ !p O f► n► O� O N O y� w� 0� � N� wl O� .w O !j w �i •�S I I ` fail � s wNMyMynyw.4i .wilwiw.Nil�.ni .ri^fV si RSN�l1�wl0 �iRit Fi����^/M1✓!'j i.��.������.�'.R ri si��.If .� s.n R $§E � - � � ° _ e ƒ � � - ©- ■ , _ , a _ � . k 2 2 § § � � ƒ� ' � $ ■ � �� � ��'� � � � - _� ■ � § 2 I Vii. ®--a a � . ° ' ■ - ■ � $ 3 _ co � � j ' ■ - ■ � � \� ---■ ■ ® ' . � _ a � ' ~ ■ � k k - -■- , -_,- 2 = £ 3 $ ( . ■ 2-■, {J ��� ■---®---f $©f©�-----2 \ k ■ 2 2 f w 'I ------.-___ - ; � 22} . . � -� ® - Am A } . � � ����� Ia � � ■ � f �� @ � � � } � � $ I f � � � � � � ° ■ ■■■■■$■ - � � � � � ■■a�k�a■#A#�■■#■a■a■a■■■k,aa■■ � � ' � ��■■§§@$$@■@§22k3J��==/ 3 e g O q e e e e en. r Si � w d e e o e e e • e n r a 0 0 0 0 e e O e e N n s e o e e e e e n N 000.0 e e O 0 r s o e o e e • 0 0 O O g 0 0 O O e O O Iy M H �. R►:RARF$aa:4Aa4aax8vvXs 5. ■ � i � �� � 2 # - ■ } ] ® ■ } �� � � ■ _\ ■ wb - } - _ �! § 2 - $ ■ = 7 J : / / �� ■ 7 ) . . I � 7 $-■ 4 . ■ � 88§5ae885■�8@@SSB■■■■- , _a■_�$■a■■e§■e§e§■■■■§2@■■§■s■GSSE�::�r� a § � R � @ § � � i � k � $ � � � � � I a ■ � $ ■� � � � k § 2 5§@�@4§85�§5245@5@§@2§2$�$§#§§§§§■@$E#§■§§2#§■2§��GS@K�5B2S§ ' ■ k � � § � � § � � a � i � $ � � � � � I a ■ � $ ■� � � � k § 2 5§@�@4§85�§5245@5@§@2§2$�$§#§§§§§■@$E#§■§§2#§■2§��GS@K�5B2S§ ' ■ i � ► ''► * aQ f ►yLii4'�i''.� '�.+ gaS.,;:Nsa4Go C6 dq b: 1C fkv w ` � oq eq Baia ,�� 46 it dt r q 40 db 4p OPo jq S wr Cr • aw �Cr qp dq,A dq q 7c � � d �`'�f •� oqo*liCju q �q d � .i1 $d dw+ rl w►vl M d.n .A ar w i g d q d q i r► I j w dgdgdqdq dw alorgd'm d• •4 r4•IiOgO 4� q i q• g d w d v d q•,+ o o O• d q y a dgdgdqdq day t•dgdgd dv i�i i�"� s � dw gd�jege ��{{ , dgdgd dw • d o oigdald d �.. j q �aaiaioq dq gd 1 aft • N W d x it 04 J CP � •` � .may.{. M J a a► daiedededoel °b c► d �e Ir ( d #1#414 4 .cwewweo: �t d Sid a►odosv�lo� do d• eajdvid�idwx I yk * ra4d� dodedoalo e►4 d �a g r � w i � S� i�• O e e e e� o w I1 ii �^. 1 d B 4 4 0 d w s o d g o v d d q d o x a c► ej i s I I d s$ dgdedoC►ee1 dw o �• .�.. i ���4�� p eQ�4+e�w"► Z A i fr o S* 4 d al o d o i e d q u1 d w ab i $$ d d d o m d d a i d i db • ele ded d 4 d r+, i aidajsgso� R I i � I � r ��i ��d if eswdajrajaq+ de d Q • i � � � 4d iea►esedai do y yy ab•� _ g d • g d A d p 4 d ow d . '��"' �' I d �4�4�4 4 sgd.r4o•�j .. sib 0 oil 32 ggg z ,,,. ��rprpm---- 0 :3 % §22 . � � � a _ ■ | . ■� 22� �� � . | ■; ���_ �� $ _ db �i k �� ��� ■� � . � . ca4p�i _ k a _ _ f■ '* ;4Gb s 2 d6�di dk diN k % $ | �__ ■■ 2 d ! '_- | § ■ a� a % � � § �I � m �■ ■ � � �q�k�i�K�§@R■���8��■t■�■#Eak■!■ 2222@�2�&■_§_���k@�@#■�42����_ ! w i I ys� 1�1 ci i 46 op ab Y ���,�il �fid�i♦i !MAMMAS r•rNM..�r i r4 IR s i V1 m ry loll! .: " .4 - u i 0 3 w q+! q q d q d q .R�` 4 �Ss40w N W g q g + d o I all 111111111 k � d v► K ( . tl �dIq -qq# ft co y$�$dq ` dI 4 iMeR Iq q$gR 4 i +e tlgtl� b + a► Y r is M' tl g tl q d q tl q v gg .i q �( tlgtlgtlotlo �q7Q d e w q+! q q d q d q .R�` 4 �Ss40w N W g q g + d o I all 111111111 YY 8f do ai I � �� i,+f � h h � `2 fy.iK •i~ j~ jK Re S d o e l d e o s � ¢ $ d de►d keg S e4dR g $ d do Q# psi "' Si 4 j � egad d4 PC e q e a y i dgdasdg keg 8�e� eo 4 R i y ,[ 2 ^ �+ +9+ q �1 a Qd + do ! $ d q od$'3dQ d e d 0 ca 3 jN jy iN'j11,jN 112 N 1� dgdq�gdw+z w d w N Si H d W+wS}W+ i�17'+RS dc q dwr�g4w Sed f df q d j algdq � dgalgdq+w S � dal n d g d q d W d q w $ d w+ w+ q d w w di 0 d g d q+ q d w $ W S g d d .r + +gdgdqdw w d"C N y� N 1� dgdq�gdw+z w d w N Si H d W+wS}W+ dwr�g4w � f df q d j algdq O d f 1104914/ .asi l taI .t ��t �.�,T d W+q}lgd oe � • � �•e � 3 � iC iii � is�7 � a + W d g d o d o d q d d + W d d d .. I � w w� w d w e R• �� ��� �� 1 y� ��7V��'Rd,� w 5i '� ��� d Wdq qdq• • � '^R Y �t KS Q e p d p d p r p 46 0 0 0 d 0• • O O p $� p r O r e Q 7iVV " 7f e �{ >i .Sys aCOO ra0waedOrr� rwd4d4dw dA0 r dor d ds s rq►do�oror��►4 w� e4rprprp .r " ! � �` d O d d 0 0 0 d O O g Q e• O• Jai 0 �' { QQ 1 r qd qd qrq 0p0 r r00 dOrOQOeO•J`ZOA N O p O p 0 0 r 0 e d 0w0 emrw$kpOOr�O$ d r d r N i7JfS { � rwsprprp roa d rpr eorp�arw05ie� " r O r O Q � � I rwrwrq`w ror r rwr sgrw�w � �G �� «� sprpdwrw rws r .� d41• •w•.��prw•�r� MIR fill«; « •• 8 �► x► zr3fi if 412 3fJig SRI Is 4f 5f i� yw y� + j, ►;i q �� sF Reit gas 7E yr s »414444 V r if SR e19d °lyw ^ p it a1q�L 4 jig it s�+��i X111= M# # lx m Ins 1r 1 J j v w 0 q a e i a Y 14 Y IN+ 4 Appendix B ALTERNATIVE B SUMMARY PROTECTIONS --TABLE B1 R I �q�q,♦Md �dNdv�� •. �h O g S O� N O� o N d r ✓� .+ � q �q�q+►Na�0..0y^� ~�PFi M ,mow �.O r/ Nd�►O wdy • 00 q . r� N O N w O M d► .+i m M J P m P 00y OwOON000.M N Pd q r M� g O� •r O .i � �$ N N N x 0 0 P O O M .�.r ».q ^O d odPd y w n .. .tOayoP�x V r M q V Q O v 0 O •� r F1 H w r w J1 F y� y+ r.p N w F O r J 1� I y iVAll if ~ w N M V � y 1r N O� A wl y M wVil w � �.~/ S ; F � N � � S � H � � � ^ M � .+� � � rM1.► wi IA + � .1 � � .» � '+ + � a M M � � i M1 n 14 0 a► wh ua; al s .n m $�ss�A 1#9111'1 4 �xSNs�s � rail r � i • _� � N J y` •• $ � �bt5�bt�w�� � Y y8 O Q M 0 I! �' i �►..� o^n m�a�Nswo�r�plC �w�wsi3'"on� �+ y ^ n n w YS I � n ii �, ! I `�w�' aM1ge/�a e.e+'.i"�e� � In�wa��rmn�� •� o; y N n L. 1 }j N N 3 n tl► w w g M "• i II • PI N S � + � I � i i 7E'"P�q^�►a/�sNooa� �p.q HN do let r yyO� I � � � R • S � O N S 6 I i� � �j r� w^ "1 e� O M e .wi N O N •, n y •'� � � � N.I� w 0�.+� ON.i � .+i a 11 n li r �� � � � ��'$Onne�• NO w iiw�o� �M� wr lu .+�O�� �i ,IZ '; Y i J , ■ ■--f-----\ %-f-�----©R -----®---- •_--_------ - 2 f g \ k ! � § � ■■$■$■■$9■���■■■■■■■■■a■■■■,#■,■„#s■§k■■§$§■■§§§25§§SSIG . � f. .4°-2 q ! ! 2 -: � cm cm , }$ � . i -®-■ � a ' ___, » \ }� � -- It ■ ■ ■--f-----\ %-f-�----©R -----®---- •_--_------ - 2 f g \ k ! � § � ■■$■$■■$9■���■■■■■■■■■a■■■■,#■,■„#s■§k■■§$§■■§§§25§§SSIG . � § ! 2 -: � � § ) . i 3 ■ � ■ ■--f-----\ %-f-�----©R -----®---- •_--_------ - 2 f g \ k ! � § � ■■$■$■■$9■���■■■■■■■■■a■■■■,#■,■„#s■§k■■§$§■■§§§25§§SSIG . � Z v t t k i OWeq e e e •' i t eooq o e e o N N e _ • wi i i g q O q 0 d q e e e K V 3 y t t O e e e N N t eosq e e eco .-. i I i e 0 0 0 0 d 0 0 O N .M+ ' eg00 00010 L` 4600 W 40 e e e ey Mw"1.i'.���viT►it7:�C,"'.�1Cill:d�:i�1i�.�i�iiti7i:r�i'i~.17�:t7R^w�i� � � � ` y W I t N � N J `r m N N N N m r iJJ N O O O i 0 (y » v O d �N1 N J `r {�j N 0 1 u i 11 -A y y y •11 y .� y y y y y w y � y �i 1 � w wi y .if w� � � �T � � �i � � � � � Q � � � � �1 � � � �j � � �i � w�l + � H � � M I� A Appendix C ALTERNATIVE C SUMMARY PROJECTIONS --TABLE Cl m mmPmpm PSt$mogti C >: in ss y J N .wn •A O� P '� M► O M e N O P� w� q .M1+r p �A d� M d� e N d M •� •� y O rr� q� p♦ N O M O w m y '� w» O J v M q~ w O y O w O y r g 0 O J w r@ N w m y e w e M J 0 0@ N M w e� w p N w M1 •q ••yl e e� w O i� � F N J --------- w g 9 w st I ~ r ai � rr a ��yy ••��►► yy�� ++ rr rr �Ny ^ + MM ��N w ss �Ny •M� yw� 1/� �y �y�} »»i VV w N ~ .y NI y � N O w w wNl � w w � w .i � fi � N {^V F N N N N � w � M ^ M ^ � M Fi ^ V � + V + � � � � r •7S r� M M Y� i �M aa 6 .r 1 •�pS s � � 44 y 40 I YLa J T a � N G i I � u N I � ► � � w aY � � 1 O R s ti ^ � H y � ► ws3 riF� I Y N .wn •A O� P '� M► O M e N O P� w� q .M1+r p �A d� M d� e N d M •� •� y O rr� q� p♦ N O M O w m y '� w» O J v M q~ w O y O w O y r g 0 O J w r@ N w m y e w e M J 0 0@ N M w e� w p N w M1 •q ••yl e e� w O i� � F N J --------- w g 9 w st I ~ r ai � rr a ��yy ••��►► yy�� ++ rr rr �Ny ^ + MM ��N w ss �Ny •M� yw� 1/� �y �y�} »»i VV w N ~ .y NI y � N O w w wNl � w w � w .i � fi � N {^V F N N N N � w � M ^ M ^ � M Fi ^ V � + V + � � � � r •7S r� M M Y� i a N A e . 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 1 1 lk M L 4.0 Y IN0 w�gh^'►0�r N r �'�i� wO� N w ,I�o �or.n r�s.rso��+,�w►o� N 'nw pp. .q •�10 NO ��.+' X03 N w w N p= p h- 0 A 0 N 0 Z N, M w I M O w 0 � �/ r� O M• w N .M .hi O N w Np�Oh w/0�0 N• � r"�^ w/k M O.* O h " O n O "a O •11 A O A N w w w w I e2-2-0=-09+ t N VI Mj w O w •• O N N w r A ,. N rI�y�,y^y M»,+I► h Wr N r� � h � ' � � � N � � � N A � ti i w M M y M " h M P i N w� w wM1 � w w w� � N N� HI 1L N N�� � i�f n M n7 � A M �► � r+ y �• 'A N R w I i M O e 2 O C A J I MOdIt "z O st ~ .•� g st r It 3 r4 M1 M1 1 � { ( ~ q r ItrA IF � � a N I { M g O P y M i �! f ri 00�O Oeit R «► iC a F { �g0$Oq •• � �4+r4ggeg00� � � Tf ~ A � H ��r,.5 � � p� sgeoeoee�re re rerorrrre r + /A � � N N N1 � o o 0 0� '~� � �{ � g r� r q w o i y► q a� g q� � � F{ $ C� Y �•>� � a � y M. A 2 B)§ ■■■a�■■■■■����■�R■■■■�■a■a■■■■■�■aaa■■■■§$@■@■§■§§g■��§a5.-. : ! - - . - - 7 ■ § E j ® - 40- | - i - - - - ' \� db § § S ---- k� ■ �� � C6 ® ® . @ § K } 7 i� , _ - - 7 ■ § R \ \; I ---- ® _ " - - ■ § f - - - - - _ 7 § , . - ® $ ■ § & 2 � ---- _ �� § $ - see* ■■■a�■■■■■����■�R■■■■�■a■a■■■■■�■aaa■■■■§$@■@■§■§§g■��§a5.-. , kk� ■ � ƒ! - � - ■ �I ■ � � a � � � � § ■ - G � | � - � . � ■ ■ $ i ` ■� � 22a| � � � - 7 - f � . § § � a Iop � � � ■ I 9 � : s » ■ � m; � § � � . I §� � § � _ ■ } �' ' ■ \ � � % � # - � ■ - _ � ■� _ _ � | 2 - .�■ �� i � 7 , ! � � 2 7� _ ■#��■■■53!! ' s,_ �■ R-,A,�■m§§S2�§�S$k$2§2§§�23§§§§�■£4 8-=---.--- Appendix D CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 1992-93 BUDGET ANALYSIS 0 v y � e ��� w�� '3 O v� N ♦ q N h� N 111121 sm a 11114 k k 4 (Itti 44- 4 4"if O v a p IA N� 0 N O N wl H M `I N � � » � � A M M w w M w •NII rl Ir N N N h fV {V C N � � M n~l M � b{ � M � � � � � � � � � + `� � a N N N � � � N � Js a axa a Y M M Mm M M v y � e ��� w�� '3 O v� N ♦ q N h� N 111121 sm a 11114 k k 4 (Itti 44- 4 4"if O v a p IA N� 0 N O N wl H M `I N � � » � � A M M w w M w •NII rl Ir N N N h fV {V C N � � M n~l M � b{ � M � � � � � � � � � + `� � a N N N � � � N � Js IRA off i Angl all 11415 Ufa A I y td I q w M 4 N { IRA off i Angl all 11415 Ufa A I y td I q w M 4 I I If N N N M s s e o N � r � O �x S gMa wM1d +e.s rHr +,ajC, R a ' e e e o s e e p s~ eoa aiooa poops "l�i�'i i r g e o r� e.r sora► woos $$�$ � r ci s g n g$ g S s M M { yy+� qq 0 0 O O O O O O Q O e e 0 + .r ie a► e o cm a ar o CD o 0 0 0 0 o e e�f i 8 8 M 1 O O a • » .: r as y INS !i I g s 0 s P O s 0 Q y „ O Sig 1 �� x N w M M O n M i O o 0 0 n yeep N O O O n O n r N S O q .~n +~ O S g N O O � q O O O O O q� 0 • O� • ss « �C OR 1 3 3 1 O O 1� i $$ O k O k 6 ling 11212 xp A f9tid4 F0 x « N v Appendix E LIST OF CITY OF DIAMOND BAR OFFICIALS CONTACTED James DeStefano Community Development Director Don Hemsley Superintendent of Parks & Maintenance Linda G. Magnuson Accounting Manager Bob Rose Director, Department.of Community Services George A. Wentz, P.E. Interim City Engineer CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED AGAINST SO -UM POINTE MASTER PLAN January 19, 1993 January 29, 1993 February 2, 1993 February 3, 1993 February 5, 1993 February 28, 1993 February 11, 1993 February 11, 1993 February 13, 1993 February 23, 1993 February 25, 1993 April 1, 1993 April 4, 1993 May 10, 1993 Letter from Mr. & Mrs. Chisholm Letter to Supervisor Dana from Mr. & Mrs. Hodges Letter to Diamond Bar City Council from Mr. & Mrs. Hodges Letter to Diamond Bar City Council from Mr. & Mrs. Collins Letter to Diamond Bar City Council from Mr. & Mrs. Taylor Letter to Supervisor Dana from Mearlyn Stein Response from Supervisor Dana to Mr. & Mrs. Hodges Cover Letter for Form Letter to South Point Neighbors - 9 signatures Form Letter from South Pointe Neighbors - 50 signatures/letters rec'd Letter to Planning Commission Chairman Bruce Flamenbaum from Mrs. Hodges Letter to Planning Commissioner David Meyer from Mrs. Hodges Letter from Mr. & Mrs. J. Oliva Form Letter from Pathfinder's Homeowners Association - 45 signatures/letters reed "Grassroots Petition to Save Sandstone Canyon" - 1334 signatures CORRESPONDENCE IN FAVOR OF SOUTH POINTE MASTER PLAN February 1, 1993 Cover letter from South Pointe Middle School to Parents February 1, 1993 Form letter/petition from South Pointe Middle School Parents 234 signatures on file February 14, 1993 Letter fromRon Hockwalt, Superintendent Walnut Valley Unified School District February 22, 1993 Petition from Diamond Bar Little League 59 signatures on file May 10, 1993 Letter from Nick Anis June 8, 1993 Petition from AYSO Soccer Club of Diamond Bar 124 signatures Mr. and Mrs. William J. Chisholm 1570 S. Blackhawk Dr. Walnut, CA 91789 January 19, 1993 Diamond Bar Planning Commission 21660 E. Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Planning Commission Members, Please absorb the serenity of this view of country life taken from our back yard and consider the value of our natural resources as you ponder the following "Message from Chief Seattle" (Translated from a speech he presented in the 1850's) interspersed with quotes taken from the Draft Environmental Im acp t Rem, South Pointe Master Plan, November 1992. Brother Eagle,inter, Iii A Message from Chief Seattle How can you buy the sky? Chief Seattle began. ?low can you own the rain and the wind? My mother told me, Every part of this earth is sacred to our people. Every pine needle. Every sandy shore. Every mut in the dark,woods. Every meadow and humming insect. Afl are holy in the memory of our people. "Goal 1: Create and maintain an open space system which will preserve scenic beauty, protect important biological resources, provide open space for outdoor recreation and the enjoyment of nature, conserve natural resources, and protect public health and safety." pages 2-5 and 2-6 My father said to me, I know the sap that courses through the trees as I (know the blood that flows in my veins. We are part of the earth and it is part of us. ?he perfumed flowers are our sisters. The dear, the deer, thegreat eagle, these are our brothers. the rocky crests, the meadows, the ponies - all belong to the same family. Zhe voice of my ancestors said to me, ghe shining water that moves in the streams and rivers is not simply water, but the blood of your grandfather s g ra n dfa t he r. Each ghostfy reffection in the clear waters of the fakes teffs of memories in the life of our people. 'IFie water's murmur is the voice of your great great grandmother. rAe rivers are our brothers. r hey quench our thirst. ?Frey carry our canoes and feed our children. You mustgive to the rivers the kindness you wouldgive to any brother. "Project implementation will alter existing drainage patterns on-site, including increasing the quality of storm water discharged to the regional storm drain system and decreasing the quality of that run-off. In addition, proposed grading activities will result in the disposal of dredged or fill material into two blueline streams as identified on the 7.5 minute USGS Yorba Linda Quadrangle." page 2-29 Inc voice of mygrandfather said to me, the air is precious: It shares its spirit with all the fife it supports. the wind thatgave me my first breath also received my last sigh. You must keep the land and air apart and sacred, as a place where one cango to taste the wind that is sweetened by the meadow flowers. "During construction operations, projected nitrogen oxide emissions are anticipated to exceed established criteria for significance. Long-term emissions for both carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxides are projected to exceed SCAOMD NSR threshold values." page 1-36 When the fast Red Man and Woman have vanished with their wifderness, and their memory is only the shadow of a cloud moving across the prairie, wiff the shores and forest stiff be here? `INiff there be any of the spirit of my people left? My ancestors said to me, 9his we /know: The earth does not belong to us. We belong to the earth. `Vie voice of mygrandmothersaid to me, Teach your children what you have been taught. rAz earth is our mother. What befalls the earth befalls all of the sons and daughters of the earth. "Project development will physically alter the project site and change its existing visual character from a natural open space parcel to a property more characteristic of other residential and non-residential areas within the City. Additionally, the proposed removal of existing oak trees will result in the loss of this identified aesthetic resource." page 2-47 Here my voice and the voice of my ancestors, Chief Seattle said. The destiny of your people is a mystery to us. Wkat will happen when the buffalo are affslaughtered? She wild horses tamed? What wiff happen when the secret corners of the forest are heavy with the scent of many men? When the view of the ripe hifLs is 61otted by talking wires? Where will the thic(_et be? Gone. ` -INzre wiff the eagle be? Gone! And what wiff happen when we saygood bye to the swift pony of the hunt? It wiff be the end of the living, and the beginning of survival. ?his we know: Aff things are connected Eike the blood that unites us. We did not weave the wed of fife, We are merely a strand in it. %Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves. We love this earth as a newborn loves it's mother's heartbeat. "Project development will result in the removal of the majority of existing on-site vegetation, resulting in both the replacement of that vegetation with a plant palette more traditionally associated with developed areas and a corresponding loss of habitat value." page 2-30 If we self you our land, care for it a as we Have cared for it. (We did not sell our land but we did vote for incorporation so that the City would prevent the County from doing what the City now wishes to do --destroy the rural quality of our lives.) Hold in your mind the memory of the land as it is when you receive it. Preserve the land and the air and the rivers for your children's children and love it as we have loved it. "Project development will result in the removal of an estimated 768 specimen -sized oak trees (92% of all oak trees) and will necessitate both the on-site and off-site replacement of those trees in accordance with established public policy. Grading activities, including the removal of existing trees on-site, has the potential to affect nesting birds of prey. (raptors) which may inhabit the property during those operations." page 2-32 God has created a beautiful area that man in his quest for commercialism wants to destroy. It is our responsibility to preserve and treasure not to cut down and destroy. This is an ideal opportunity for the city of Diamond Bar to truly have a Master Plan of maintaining a green -belt area and retaining the country atmosphere that is. so much a part of our present community. The "No -Project Alternative - Open Preservation" is an option (pages 6-2 and 6-3) and should not be discarded as easily as the ERI developers would like to do (page 6-3). Respectfully Submitted, c City Council January Cy, 199Cs supervisor Deane Dana C/o L.A. County Board of Supervisors Rowland Heights Field Off ice 1 199 Fairway fir. Walnut, CA 91789 Dear Superviscr Dann: We are homeowners who live in the unincorporated area of Walnut which is roughly bordered by Brea canyon Cutoff/Fairway Dr., Colima Blvd., Pathfinder Rd and the Diamond Bar city border. We are writing to you about an issue which was recently brought to our attention anc that we feel is of significant importance to the County. We are speaking of the proposed South Pointe Master Flan Development. The proposal includes a residential street which would connect the new development with Brea Canyon Rd. and Morning Sun Ave. Morning Sun Ave. is part of the neighborhood in which we live, and we feel that allowing this or000sal to be aporoved would have serious reoercusssions on our neighborhood and L.A. County. First of all, we understand that a strip of land along Morning Sun Ave. included in the building pian is under County jurisdiction and is not a part of the City of Diamond Bar. This tact, along witr, the opening of the new road onto Morning Sun Ave. would appear to require the Count•✓'s involvement in the project. We are very concerned about the problems which could arise from the significant increase in traffic along the County roads in our neighbonccod. We are sure that cars from the 2Qu homes being built will be sUr= to use that route on a daily basis in order to reach Colima Blvd. and the freeways so as to avoid some of the gridlock: th-. already occurs in the area. Our streets do not contain sidewalks until you reach Walnut Lear Ave., nor are there any stop signs at any of the 7 intersections that cars must pass when travelling from the new development to Colima Rd. OUr children (and also adult commuters who walk. to public bus stops) must walk in the street going to and from the School bus stop on Walnut Less. We are very worried about their future safety if traf= increase=_ to the degree we feel it surely will. We are also concerned that with a conservative estimate of 200 - cars a day on our steep roads, we will have a dramatic increase in c accidents. This then could raise the :_Bue of County liability, not to mention costs the County will also incur from the increased wear and tear on the roads! The building of this develooment :n Sandstone Canyon also rail - a whole host of environmental issues for- the canyon itself, includ:- the flood control aitch which runs thrcuan the canyon, erosion of t- remaining sl ooes and the resultant damage tc private and CoUntl✓ propert•: from mud, the decimation of pl Rat end animal life, inti �_r�-- Diamond Ear City Council J 1660 E. Copley Dr. lite. 10C� Diamond Ear CA 91765-4177 Dear Diamond Ear City Council: We are writing to you in order to voice our opposition tcLthe. proposed South Pointe Master Flan. We earnestly feel that this proposal would have serious, permanent negative consequences for the City of Diamond Ear and the surrounding unincorporated areas. We are sure you are aware of the environmental concerns that have already been raised by area residents. The damage to nature and our quality of life can not be rationalized by the promise of neighborhood parks and the planting of new oak: trees. The estimate of 400+ new jobs is very misleading when you consider that an estimated 60% of commercial space in the City now lies vacant. It seems to us that a plan to encourage businesses to locate here and occupy existing sites would be a much more prudent and wise action to pursue in order to solve whatever problems the City now has in generating revenue. One of the suggested benefits of the Flan is that a new road Would alleviate traffic problems in the area. Anyone who lives in the area knows that routing all the new traffic generated by the proposal onto Brea Canyon Rd. will only mal::e the congestion in that area much worse! The suggested outlet for the development's West end concerns us even more, though. Allowing the volume of traffic generated by 200 homes to empty onto a residential neighborhood is not only short-sighted, but down -right dangerous! We can speak with authority on this area because we happen to live on Morning Sun Ave., the street on which "Street A" would empty. Our neighborhood is made up of narrow streets which do not contain any center lines. There are no stop signs at any of the 7 intersections that traffic will pass on it's way to Colima Blvd., nor are there any sidewalk's until you reach Walnut Leaf Ave. The area children must walk: in the street to reach to their bus Stop, which in some cases is more than 1/4 of a mile. We fear for their safety as well as that of residents in their cars! The issue has been raised that developers have the right to develop their property in order to make a profit. We feel that a developer who purchases property in order to develop it is speculating= that he/she will be able to make a profit. Their desire to develop said property does not give them the right to infringe on our rights as homeowners! They do not have the right to devalue our.property, t disturb our quality/ of life nor to put us in physical danger. We respectfully to you that all of the above conditions are likely to occur if this proposal is allowed to go through. �J February C , 1993, `1�Q�i-C!;) Diamond Ear City Council J 1660 E. Copley Dr. lite. 10C� Diamond Ear CA 91765-4177 Dear Diamond Ear City Council: We are writing to you in order to voice our opposition tcLthe. proposed South Pointe Master Flan. We earnestly feel that this proposal would have serious, permanent negative consequences for the City of Diamond Ear and the surrounding unincorporated areas. We are sure you are aware of the environmental concerns that have already been raised by area residents. The damage to nature and our quality of life can not be rationalized by the promise of neighborhood parks and the planting of new oak: trees. The estimate of 400+ new jobs is very misleading when you consider that an estimated 60% of commercial space in the City now lies vacant. It seems to us that a plan to encourage businesses to locate here and occupy existing sites would be a much more prudent and wise action to pursue in order to solve whatever problems the City now has in generating revenue. One of the suggested benefits of the Flan is that a new road Would alleviate traffic problems in the area. Anyone who lives in the area knows that routing all the new traffic generated by the proposal onto Brea Canyon Rd. will only mal::e the congestion in that area much worse! The suggested outlet for the development's West end concerns us even more, though. Allowing the volume of traffic generated by 200 homes to empty onto a residential neighborhood is not only short-sighted, but down -right dangerous! We can speak with authority on this area because we happen to live on Morning Sun Ave., the street on which "Street A" would empty. Our neighborhood is made up of narrow streets which do not contain any center lines. There are no stop signs at any of the 7 intersections that traffic will pass on it's way to Colima Blvd., nor are there any sidewalk's until you reach Walnut Leaf Ave. The area children must walk: in the street to reach to their bus Stop, which in some cases is more than 1/4 of a mile. We fear for their safety as well as that of residents in their cars! The issue has been raised that developers have the right to develop their property in order to make a profit. We feel that a developer who purchases property in order to develop it is speculating= that he/she will be able to make a profit. Their desire to develop said property does not give them the right to infringe on our rights as homeowners! They do not have the right to devalue our.property, t disturb our quality/ of life nor to put us in physical danger. We respectfully to you that all of the above conditions are likely to occur if this proposal is allowed to go through. February 3, 1993 Diamond Bar City Council 21600 E. Copley Dr. Suite 100 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Dear Sirs: ' We are writing to voice our concern over a proposed development that willej adjacent to our home. We live at 1612 Morning Sun Ave., in an unincorpoF..3ted L.A. county sraa of Walnut, Ca. Our property is the dividing line betwe4tW the City of Diamond Bar and unincorporated Los Angeles county. The City of Diamond Bar has proposed to build a 171 acre development. The development would span from our house east to Brea Canyon Rd. Part of this plan includes 200 homes, commercial properties and construction of a major street from Brea Canyon Rd. and tying into our small residential, cul de sac street of Morning Sun Ave. The following is a list of the major points we feel must be addressed and resolved prior- to approval of this development: 1. The proposed new street will route traffic from 200 homes and businesses from the new area through to our neighborhood. We do not have sidewalks in our neighborhood. Our children play in the streets, ride their bikes in the street and walk to their bus stop at the corner of Walnut Leaf and Tam O'Shanter in the street. We all walk our dogs and jog in the streets. This would create a very unsafe situation as people from the new development zigzag through our streets to get access to the major thoroughfare of Colima Rd. There is no signal at this intersection. Our streets were built in the late 1960's and are narrow — not designed for heavy traffic flows. 2. Massive amounts of grading and earth moving will vied to be done. This will affect the stability of our hillsides. 3. Noise and dirt pollution to surrounding neighborhoods. 4. The new development will have residences where the backyards will be facing Morning Sun Ave. but all the existing homes have front yards facing Morning Sun Ave. This will create an eyesore and a target for graffiti on backyard walls due to the new street bringing in uncontrolled traffic from the outside. 5. The impact on the environment will be devastating to plant and Wildlife. Sandstone Canyon which they propose to fill in is a beautiful, natural wilderness area filled with different varieties of tees and Wildlife. Some of the Wildlife we have personally seen are deer, racoons, possums owls, hawks, coyotes, egrets and many others. This habitat will be lost forever! 6. The proposed downsizing of the lots from 15,000 sq. ft. lots to 8,000 sq. ft. lots. All of our homes are on one-third and half acre lots. The City of Diamond Bar is not acting responsibly in the planning of this development. We feel they are more concerned about their city revenues than the residents of Diamond Bar and Los Angeles County. We request that the county of Los Angeles become involved in the planning of this project before it is too late. The adverse impact of this project on county residents is very real and will be irreversible. The City of Diamond Bar and Los Angeles County should be equally concerned about possible lawsuits due to traffic accidents, hillside slippage, disappearing natural habitat, additional burden on schools and increased crime in a relatively crime -free area. Government needs to work for us and listen to our needs and input and not just cater to the developers and their money. The negative aspects of this mammoth project far outweigh the positive ones! Come out to our neighborhood - walk our canyons and drive our streets. Put yourself in our place and honestly ask yourselves if you would approve this development if this was your home. Your prompt response and attention to thismatter will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Michael and Susan Collins 1612 Morning Sun Ave. Walnut, Ca 91789 909-595-5165 February 5, 1993 Diamond Bar City Council _ 21600 E. Copley Dr, Ste. 100 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Members of the City Council; We are writing to you to express our disapproval of the proposal to fill in Sandstone Canyon in order for the Arciero Corporation to build 200 homes and a commercial complex. When these homes are built and connected to the existing streets in our neighborhood the through -traffic to access Colima Rd. would be excessive, There are busstops for school children along Lake Canyon Dr. and Walnut Leaf. I saw a small child crossing Lake moreotraffictonothesebresidenntial bstreetsrwouldwbeeansunsafeand situation, Also, we have environmental concerns about the loss of our rural hills and canyons, our recent rains certainly showed the results of the loss of natural lands for the absorption of rain, For these reasons we oppose this proposed project. Sinc rely G, vL Clyde and Dia�'e Taylor 20136 Rhapsody Rd, Walnut, CA 91789 FEBRUARY 28, 1993 SUPERVISOR DEANE DANA L.A. COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ROWLAND HEIGHTS FIELD OFFICE 1199 FAIRWAY DR. ROWLAND HEIGHTS, CA. 91748 DEAR MR. DANA, pMP WE ARE WRITING THIS LETTER OF OPPOSITION TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF SANDSTONE CANYON, INCLUDING THE NEW ROAD WHICH WOULD RUN FROM BREA CANYON RD. TO MORNING SUN, 200 HOMES AND COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. WE WILL LIST SOME OF OUR CONCERNS: o 0 PROPOSED 1. EROSION OF SLOPES CAUSING FLOOD AND MUD DAMAGE TO NEARBY HOMES 2. LOSS OF NATURAL HOMES FOR REMAINING WILD LIFE 3. INCREASED TRAFFIC ON RESIDENTIAL STREETS 4. SAFETY OF THE CHILDREN GETTING TO BUS STOPS 5. WALNUT LEAF DR. AND COLIMA RD. IS A BUSY INTERSECTION WITH NO TRAFFIC SIGNAL, INCREASED TRAFFIC ON WALNUT LEAF DR. WOULD LEAD TO MORE ACCIDENTS AT THE INTERSECTION 6. DIAMOND BAR DOES NOT NEED ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL SPACE, TAKE A DRIVE THROUGH ALL THE CENTERS AND YOU WILL FIND MANY EMPTY LOCATIONS PLEASE DO NOT DESTROY THE SANDSTONE CANYON AREA. AREA RESIDENTS MOVED HERE BECAUSE OF THE BEAUTIFUL GREEN EMERALD HILLS OF SPRING. LET US NOT DESTROY THIS IMPORTANT PART OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. S CER �� RANK M STE MEA RLN L. STEIN C.C.DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 822 KENNETH HAHN HALL OF ADMINISTRATION I LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90012 February 11, 1993 Mr. and Mrs. Ronald E. Hodges 1604 Morning Sun Avenue Walnut, California 91789 MEMBERS OF TSE BOARD GLORIA MOLINA YVONNE BRATHWAITE SUPKE EDMUND D. EDELMAN 0EANE DANA MICHAEL 0. ANTONOVICH DEANE DANA Supervmsor. Founn O,slra (217) 974-4 4 FAX (21 J) 626-6941 L� Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hodges: Thank you for your recent letter expressing concerns regarding' the City of Diamond Bar's proposed South Pointe development. Please be assured that I am well aware of the many concerns being expressed by residents in your neighborhood. County staff has reviewed the proposal and made recommendations that alternative access routes be explored. I understand these concerns are currently under review by the City of Diamond Bar. Responses to concerns, as well as recommendations on alternatives, will be available at an upcoming City Planning Commission meeting on Monday, February 22. In the meantime, I will be working with County staff further on the concerns raised, as they relate to the effects of this development on the unincorporated area in which you reside. I am also referring a copy of your letter to the City of Diamond Bar in order that your position be made a part of the record. Again, thank you for taking the time to write and make me aware of your concerns in this regard. Sincerely, ORIGI ! #k SIGNED DEANE DANA Supervisor, Fourth District County of Los Angeles DD: as cc: City of Diamond Bar Febriary 11, 1993 Dear South Point Neighbors: As you have probably heard by now, the Planning Commission for the City of Diamond Bar is reviewing plans and the EIR (Environmental impact Report) for the complete development of Sandstone Canyon - the undeveloped area south of our homes, bordered by Brea Canyon Road and north of Pathfinder. The plans include the building of approximately 200 homes and 30 acres of commercial, retail and office space. As concerned homeowners and parents, we need to let the Planning Commission hear our objections to this proposal. Since this will affect our neighbor- hood, it is imperative that you express your concerns about the following issues: 1.) Opening up Rapidview Drive to any new development, making it a traffic throughfare. 2.) Erosion and possible mudslides associated with fill dirt which will be used to fill in the canyon to an elevated slope, directly above our homes. 3.) Increasing crime rate due to increased retail activities, condensed housing and easy freeway access. 4.) Loss of valuable open space which contributes to the natural habitat and beauty of the area. We urge you to sign tiie enclosed letter or write your own concerns to the Planning Commission. The next meeting of the Planning Commission will be Monday, February 22, 1993 at 7:00 p.m., at the AQMD Building located at 21865 East Copl-ey in Diamond Bar. It is important that you let the decision makers know your views NOW! Thanks for your participation. 0.11 i �-o�.9a.4 J & Lind Agulsoff 2 750 . elft .ta Ron & inda Bisho 28 apidview Drive ger & Josie unas 2 Rapidview rive A A . / -A Dan & Fauline Huffmart/U .'-Keelfield AJA1)G n & Vickie` King � ` 1304 R idview Driv (� �\� — -JW.jg4 r & Jpck' Sa�elson`� 1285 Rapid /ew Drive Dave & Debbie Trau tt 1322 RR pidview Drive o% Bruce & Sandv Wallace 207-.0 E. Kelfield February 13, 1993 Diamond Bar Planning C 3ission 21660 Copley Drive, Su :16190 Diamond Bar, Californi 91765 ATTENTION: Planning C nission RE: Sandstone zyon - South Poir Master Plan - ("Plan") Objection Proposed Development GENTLEMEN: FORM kETTCRIS So S L-4 ",We s V -kA T, ITV - We object to the propc i development of Sandstone Canyon as set forth in the South Pointe Master Pi., ("Plan"). The Plan calls for excessive development of one of the last nat. al areas remaining in Diamond Bar. Besides the fact that .is development is unnecessary, the Plan fails to adequately address the _ssues of added traffic conjestion, the over burdening of surrounding neighbcr-,00d streets, increase in crime, and potential erosion from newly graded slopes and land -filled areas. Specifically, we oppose any extension of Rapidview Drive to facilitate access to the proposed development. Finally, the construction of the permant facilities for South Pointe Middle School should not be contingent upon finalization of this Master Plan. Sincerely, 73 J N ;�,".7--- 7-2, � . cam& ;�.F�r� J� Fctbr,,,� �_ , _7 7-1 w. Fl a.rr;anb._.! I.m Chairmen Eli.-.mcrid tar Cit-. FIannlna CL.trowi==ion Li1amorld mar. _ �a7•_,=- :. at ndir_ t-:==:_,i,ninaIrl===.rla i=.=t -.gnt, I Fes- 1 t .1 - - - h :=i 1ti - - _ - - T t, '., _ _ �I c rii _ - - - w r- _ } ._ =i I_ - n u _ _ o u. i:: n �_� L4� �. C. o 1 . - - t•J .a _ L It �: _ G2�`:' em � � _ _ L i`I �a L t r. =. rl _ o 1 C" _•d } he r _ : rl _ r- lam. '= 1 `I ^_ _ i i L;: i i - C,1 r i t C' M .y ._ t F i Cri. 1} w..= Ver' ` d -i Sh i t m, tri tci rlv r�.o _. =a _a_=!: ,0 w- n s o= a _-:"er''nment aa_ncy-FUnCticninc. at :•Jt -at Wc.==_r-t3.ir;? l _c_ tLl=.n i4. - be =-t- .-b==t Ir:_=.IT, O_, --t QT t1IT, '_ _ a.t VJc._ _ -_- t UnGr- LI. _..$I .r th 'TI =et1nQ WB.= t :Ja s=^r_..-I1 }`,..y _riar2 -i th0'=- _r U= In t„= aU-:1 n'__ __ 7JGrid=r .• _'i II'__ ti'h r.e Wa.= aV r'r_C.='Jig T_. Li- LL' v Cir---'_--`- _-Incer'n 41--nIJUg h •_-I. d LJI whll�_n I =.1!__. Wil i r'L'� �,mm. 1• = l� '- ,-,- - i_ inn _ �-Iw: in'gn=-- ' -- - - =u� �- rlea +.ni _=Dc.nd t t`,a LIPTRa-C, n=_ I _ __Tull m t a ci=•o_It t; -I,-=- or-iyin iu,�CI_!merIt r= 1 z ITi?=_ u =zn ✓`r n lri t`St' -rUtUr e Qt tm1- ~F'1 =trl rict UB •tri o 0 t. 0 r-' - I_l n i _ t!=. hr ---=t- .Z rI d •_ G r C C J r - r e 4' '_. _ _ t rI C- IT, i in,-! _ [: !-; C. c Q c• ._ �] nEga_ed ..I 1 T.=.i' :v F_ now hzd,ve _ri t-.=or=[=s=. :-!?l. _ 1--._=�fl_ _ =..L r.i•-:`i_ _ ;1=--i. - 3.i.d tC=},=r_•c �- _ Fi-- I �JTI ITS_ 7- - Mr . Lla'.' i d vice c_; -airman D1,:it fond Bar Lit. F. cop e. D i anion ba.r , Cr••I Jr_{r- htr i'i c''v fir' Fla.nnin-�- =.ommi__IGn -.0 _.♦_ -! _Li^t.�=ti_�. i--ri •"[ 1!r 11ri. !�- -« -.J = «`t'J!_t'aIl rn c. m e n t t c: 1 •= t 'Y C, V. I': m l•J 'h a. t I Z, u r - = i a T_ et '. _ a. } 1 C � _ _ . i C '_l •� c. . _ + G L 1 t i C ;-M c W t 'J S v �_' i.. C � _ I_'. •_ L i � - -- m •-' f_I. _ 'G _'"- . _ .__ - - __ .n, -4- i i _ _ " c. E _ � r .� rt `7 i � � ; r-� C, I_; - - _� rl = t '_ IT, `,' - - a. _�=':•J.�C i = o- .r:=. ��� _rl_:i ri=== _r. ..t 't=•-..._ t+_ 1714a .:e -._ :J _ _'L"_ _ =�c r rLL'=`_�"at i Cin 1 T _ r _. �_ _i- t tc = rl I. �_.. r �� •� IT! _ _.rl +� c• . _ G C' IT, -+ _ t r1 t W O Ll I L. t a,:: _ _ v t ._, _ SO, T: e _ _i Ll'=. -DI_lr =:`l i cd OU.r home n, --. r- T or , _ . 'JcmamC ='r _ s _mt:r-,ir [+I_1 r- C. nutt[+ C _ 1_Ii_i. r�o= i '.•'e a r ld o!_ir ._ri 1 �i •prem s cer�ta In ri marlt In v. 1"i 1 tC' I I . Ti-._r=Y+_r'e I J- - - - _ - CG11'_i_:-c'- tr!�t I r�y11-v Warit t!� ITI�C.inta.l r. _.i_ G!1.=.1i+`v' i._ th=._ !T'. YzlTil i �;:.= cn,ic =- ,orror the IC l `✓= .� = WE rIave 1 1':` d t h e r a i 0 h--RVe t 11Ua11Tv t _._ _t tCITI=r:_ av I '- tila =hr CLl lt`y ='r I lYe LJi`c =.1 t_r'='_=JITI_What Whan the _..1_Itlrr4 ;�OI_itil 'Gini= Iiri trl=.t ti fT-, GeE-r WCrc ._=1C+i= vai. U!_�.• irlq t`;ecLi.IT.mCr- _'n til= hIII 'rl !1 1+=1i i= I'll h' ._. _ _ _ �� f J C• = r � �`� c •~I c. v tr _ •J IJ. ri � '_- u � ri •_ L' ' �+ �J t _ : r- c. U : i C � C. tri arc _� r _ 1.7IC . �v of _M 7 f W= ..+_ 1.•: .alrlGr._ =a.r i _ 1 .,Tait= IT. Taf .1 i V c i:Tpacted t'` .•Jh.-t ~:-._ en. _tn =:_lth PGint_ ...a=ter F'I..n Lnd _ Wc! _ =.1-- d=--! wi`h IT, t.TiB z-;. r. rin.�nclai r=-=-C-'.rc== CTT_'r_�_ to ,.rsser,s }4iic .area. J j _ _ _ - _ _ r t - ur.e�eY�_ia._ior! cYrpr.«= Tc._ �.n'_ .] =`-_�ITt� � 1n, i WOUld Ler'-.alai _-- t�_lt mcr e _iter~_ -'n LG' _ t n til o s e .. T _(= t.•J,`i [ _ . _ .. I . Eimer a. I _ I-1 i . c a r _ ''-- - =�EC1 1Ca11 j'ior r-i:r!y ci'_C171�r!t r! �J t ad •`. n71^ ! `V C. T T ec t - _..- Z sr e - 1 _. rl Lit 'vOLi a illcir'e exact _t__ _�T i•J _._ :i'_'-i1t t'C -rr'm_ ci rui,, �. _, _ __..e T=r- MS - =�i '__.� i _�_l ci 1C= Wn.=tt 1 c" - - j-1 =z t.•J,n_li = .t = _n_ w:_'=i _ nee-.- - �� - -- - - - - ---- 1 .t. _i. ctr __ --__ hli - _ _.ir _.__='0J•_3.Gi ✓ i' _ 1 - - " r I � r^ _ r- � t �. _ a r = u � Vi c r• i t v ITi .K F: E tV = urc'-_r t o,r thy= JI_lt^�!•J=_ 4L_ _r- `ri =--=n E 9cisTiCllr''� Will =how a pr"GT it. --i i'- yr.at the`-, do not n,a`ie the rl�-It to intrinae on another's r'I'��it= In Gr -d r' t,_ c•� oC°. r 1 =O, atei] GLtbI ic1'j' a. c.,rC. izu meetlnq I =_•trorlgl y + e e I that th1= a.rec. h•a= re_GhE'7 It = d e v s I C.Grrlant111Tilys, aria tuiIdirg mora In '_,rder tG =pt_,eec= =ger`; penn•. CUt or it or tr bu..1d a. _chG,Z)i n,d thiz 1. -c Ti a t=a ~:er-!; thr I_i`_•, _. Di=.morac car' __ T— nc11 nrc•b1 =.r=_ 1_ wron r+9,:A1M 7.� >'CJI_l for ol_ir cons ider^ttion thl= EVemin', and hooe that ~I ~ i = i cater W 1 l I h; ---Ii Your of 171` f DO.ltiJn In tl!`` 1_ iTl o.t :ef -� /�� r�� .� -- � J �,�� �ti �d����/� GC!� �-�-� J/�%�l-��rc���J�j2 G�LI�C.i2��Z�' � ���7�j�c ` � `� �� _ ��1�%��t.,�c�C' Vic.. - -tom /� ��C�rfG���Z�� �lix��� ���� �v � �� ,,. ��l �j''���CI.L/ GC �i��y �� � � ys =�-�-� y o There are plans to build a big development behind the Albertson's whopping Center at Colima & Brea Canyon Roads. o while developments in themselves are not bad, our area is already overbuilt'. o No matter which way you look at it, this will have a NEGA'T'IVE IMPACT on the people in the community of Diamond Bar. o Make up your own minds whether you want it or not. Here are the facts: 1. They will BULLDOZE DOWN THE HILLS west of Brea Canyon Road (between Colima & Pathfinder) and build a 31 acre commercial site and an amphitheater. o These hills buffer the freeway noise from our homes. The noise is loud enough already. It will be louder from more traffic and the amphitheater. o The Project will take at least 5 - 10 years. Do you want to live with dust, noise, and traffic from the construction for that duration? 2. Adding 200 homes and a 31 acre commercial site WILL MAKE TRAFFIC WORSE THAN IT IS. 3. Aren't there a lot of store vacancies in all of the commercial sites near by already? Building 31 more acres (double the size of the Alpha Beta Shopping Center across the street from The Country) will result in more VACANCIES, MORE GRAFFITI, and BRING MORE CRIME TO THE AREA. 4. AMPHITHEATER will bring more noise and undesirable activities. 5. Where will all the new kids from the 200 homes go to school? Budget cut backs in schools are already taking place. Our kids need all the attention teachers can give them just to stay average. OVERCROWDING THE SCHOOLS definitely won't help. 6. WE SUPPORT SOUTH POINTE MIDDLE SCHOOL. The South Pointe Middle School should not be included in the South Pointe Master Plan Project. IT SHOULD BE A SEPARATE PROJECT. Arciero & Sons, Inc., the developer, should move the dirt that they left on South Pointe School's land. ONCE THIS IS DONE the school district will be able to build the school. IT IS LONG OVERDUE. 8. Cutting down the hillsides and moving all the dirt around to build on them will affect the STABILITY OF THE HILLSIDES adjacent to the Project. There is already a landslide from the recent rains that the developer is trying to take care of. The city of Anaheim is being sued by t`� residents of Anaheim Hills. 9. The PROPERTY VALUES OF OUR HOMES WILT, GO DOWN. 10. Sandstone Canyon is a NATURAL WILDERNESS AREA. THE DEVELOPMENT WILL DESTROY IT. It would be nice to preserve it. Also, the Canyon �..: many mature trees which serve as a natural filter for air quality. If the majority of the trees e cut down to make room for the development, plus more cars traveling in the area; THE AIR QUALITY WILL REACH UNACCEPTABLE LEVELS. It will be unhealthy to let children play outside. The way we live now la iu-sa, let's rpt eb&ng-a it for the wcra& What we need to do now is control what we have, and even try to make it better. You need to let the City of Diamond Bar know how you feel. Sign and return to: ' Planning Commission, City of Diamond Bar, 21660 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 WE SAY NO ... To'1ba fxtb Ftima E =tw Flan Developmer4 I am /(�� ) agai t.hve]�t. Aate Signature— ---( Signature (_ Address L Z / / ��,,,�,� L,¢„�E- _ _ Diamond Bar, CA y / 7 k V/y1 THIS IS A GRASSROOTS PETITION TO SAVE SANDSTONE CANYON Our City Council does not think there' is sufficient citizen support AGAINST the South Pointe Master Plan/Sandstone canyon Project which will include 30 acres of retail commercial, plus 210 homes that will completely destroy 171 acres of pristine canyon. This destructive canyon development will impact the entire community of Diamond Bar, with an additional 13,000 daily vehicle trips, gridlock traffic, increase smog and noise pollution to unacceptable levels. The location of Sandstone Canyon is north of Pathfinder, south of Colima and west of Brea Canyon Road, (also known as Area A). When you sign this petition, you are saying "I am for the completion of South Pointe Middle School as soon as possible and removing the school from the Master Plan. I am against the City's participation as a developer and totally against the destruction of Sandstone Canyon." I am a resident of Diamond Bar. THIS IS A GRASSROOTS PETITION TO SAVE SANDSTONE CANYON WE ARE D DISMAYED AND FRIGHTENED REGAR INDU TRIOS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. WE DO NOT WANT THIS DEVELOPMENT TO TAKE PLACE. WE ARE IN FAVOR OF THE COMPLETION OF SOUTH POINTE MIDDLE SCHOOL PRINT & SIGN NAME^ ADDRESS PHONE 8AR I AM A RESIDENT OF DIAMOND, CALIFORNIA s� G oT L)� J /S��i f s3 39/i sahib �:-� cys 6 7. n 7y A -S h�� 3' . o-Ciit�_ _ 8. 'c9 1 �; C, l_ -� �r�C.� � �r,��., c�.�-: �•4 iii 7j, � I � . � P�¢� 12. Com+ Z-� l,' T Lk -� L.1 < 961 8AR I AM A RESIDENT OF DIAMOND, CALIFORNIA s� G oT L)� POINT SOUTH POINTE MIDDLE SdffOOL �t� E 20671 Larkstone Drive, Walnut, CA 91789 C (714)595-8171 N February 1, 1993 Community Club We Need Your aC dpo Dear South Pointe Parents: Re: Support of the 'Environmental Impact Report & the Subsequent Building of South Pointe As President of the South Pointe Community Club, I have attempted to maintain a low profile and focus on matters concerning the best interest of the students. It is difficult for a Community Club Board to enter into political issues, simply because Community Club is made up of and supported by its general members, you the parents, who purchased membership. Unfortunately, this is a matter demanding immediate attention which is both extremely vital to the children and, regrettably, political. The enclosed letter explains the situation, and we request that you review it, respond with your signature and have your child return it to the Community Club table upon arriving at school. It is important to have these letters for the Planning Commission meeting, which you are encouraged to attend, on February 8 at 7:00 p.m. at the AQMD (Air Quality Management Department) Building at 218 65 E. Copley in Diamond Bar. The large green -roofed building is located just off Colima between Grand and Brea Canyon Road. The distribution of this letter was approved by the Community Club Board members but printing costs were privately funded to prevent using monies collected from any general member opposing the South Pointe school permanent building project. Thank you for your immediate attention! Respectfully, Sherry Rogers President � I J I It G El NT to I *The EIR document is available to be reviewed at City Hall, 21660 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar. 9 SOUTh POINTE MIDDLE SCHOOL 20671 Larkstone Drive, Walnut, CA 91789 (711) 5958171 February 1, 1993 To Whom It May Concern: Community Club As parents and students of South Pointe Middle School and as members of the Diamond Bar - Walnut community, we wish to express our support of the EIR (Environmental Impact Report) which allows the building of South Pointe school. The plan will allow a permanent school to be built at South Pointe. The community voted by a 75% maiority in favor of issuing bonds to fund this project as well as other school construction over a year and a half ago. It is past time to move forward on this. In addition to allowing a permanent middle school to be built, a new entrance to the school will provide safer and more efficient access to the school. The plan also allows a much needed community center and park to be built adjacent to the school property. But most of all, we the community will be able to provide our youth with the advanced educational environment they so deserve to progress through the turbulent years of middle school. We respectfully implore you to expedite the Environmental Impact Report approval and begin building South Pointe Middle School immediately! Signature of Parent(s) ac- VN T�4zS Name (Please Print) Address Signatur of Student Name (Please Print) (,0P► i'r:;- 1.0 Pt,�.Uyvl T • P. Walnut Valle Unified School District x`11 - y -, 880 South lemon Avenue, Walnut, California 91789 (714) 595-1261 • Fax (714) 598-8423 Ronald W. Hockwalt. Ed. D . Superintendent February 14, 1993 Jim DeStefano, Community Development Director City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department 21660 E. Copley Dr., Suite 190 Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177 Dear Jim: Please accept this letter in support of the facility plan that will allow us to build South Pointe Middle School, and to encourage the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar to certify all aspects of the project that will allow us to begin construction. We have actively worked with the City to address all possible creative solutions to build South Pointe Middle School. Our discussions have included the conveyance of real property between the district and the city, land improvements surrounding South Pointe Middle School, and the removal of the soil from the school site so that the permanent school can be constructed. During the Planning Commission's hearing of February 8, 1993, Commissioner Grothe indicated that the District should explore alternative solutions for the removal of the 400,000 cubic yards of soil now deposited on the school site. Among the solutions indicated was the retention of that soil on-site by backfilling that material onto the existing school area and/or revising the adopted facility plan for the South Pointe facility. Based upon both engineering and land use constraints, neither of those alternatives are available to the District. It should be noted that the proposed grading solution (i.e., deposition of soil into Sandstone Canyon) was thoroughly addressed in the District's Final Environmental Impact Report for the Walnut Valley Unified School District School Site (SCH No. 88112305), which was certified in 1989, and is still legally valid. The Walnut Valley Unified School District appreciates the opportunity to comment during this process We understand that the decisions before the Planning Commission and the City of Diamond Bar are extremely difficult. However, we believe that all of us have responsibility for the schools and students and that construction of South Pointe Middle School should proceed without delay. The continuing delays to build a permanent school will cost us additional millions of dollars as we have just missed ir. economic point in our economy where the school could have been constructed for much less than tht_ projected costs. We would like to bid the project as soon as possible, and we ask for your cooperat c approving our project, allowing us to move forward with the removal of the residual soil, and initiatirc construction of the school. Thank you for your careful consideration of our request. Most sincerely, Ronald,W. Hockwalt, Ed. D. Superintendent RWH:If Diamond Bar Little Leal ue�5 22601 S t C � � unse rossing P.O. Box 4113 Diamond Bar, California 91765 February 1993 City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive Suite 100 Diamond Bar, California 91765 Subject: Petition of Positive Response to the E I R Concerning the South Pointe Master Plan - Alternative 3 We, the undersigned petition the City of Diamond Bar to approve the proposed siting for the South Pointe Master Plan, Alternative 3. This 171 acre master plan in the South Pointe/Sandstone Canyon area will provide the needed open space for the residents of Diamond Bar. The youth sports groups within the Diamond Bar community need more park and school sites to practice and play their games. This Master Plan provides for new park areas as well as residential and commercial property all coordinating in a total plan for the future of Diamond Bar. Please record our individual responses to this E I R as TOTALLY APPROVED. 0 Nick Anis 1125 Bramford Court • Diamond Bar, CA 91765 (909) 860-6914 voice (909) 386-0014 fax/bbs May 10, 1993 Sandstone Canyon's "Saviors" are Blowing Smoke The Mayor Doesn't Have a Financial Interest, but They Do When Diamond Bar Mayor Gary Miller was involved with the South Point Master Plan property he was not a member of the Diamond Bar City Council. When he sold the property two and one half years ago, he still was not a member of the city council. When he was again elected to the city council, within a week of his taking office he turned over his files to the city attorney, Andrew Arczynski, for review. (Public records, Mr. Arczynski, and other documents confirm this.) Arczynski's determination was and still is that Miller has no conflict of interest and in his opinion as the City Attorney, Miller can be involved in the processing of this project through the city if, he chooses. Incidentally, Miller never owned all of the property, or most of the property: He owned a portion of the project's property now owned by RnP Development. (I verified this from checking the tax roles, doing a title search, and other research.) My inquiries also determined Miller is involved in the real estate industry, but this is not uncommon for mayors of small cities and other elected officials in general. For example, the highly respected Presiding Judge of the Criminal Court of Los Angeles Superior Court, Cecil Mills, is a land developer who owns properties in our area. When Miller was re-elected to the council, however, he chose to abstain from any of the processes for this property and any related properties. Prior to his name even being publicly associated with this property, he issued a letter to all staff, commissioners, and council members (a public document) acknowledging his former involvement, and also stating that although he had formerly been involved, he had no legal conflict of interest. However, due to the possible "perception" of conflict of interest, Miller took the unprecedented step of removing himself from any part of the process including publicly stating he would not vote on the project He also put it writing. (I know because I had got a copy of Miller's letter faxed to me before I wrote this. Using an exhaustive list of questions being circulated (which it appears to me are designed more to cloud the truth that to uncover it) and other questions I formulated, I found no evidence of any wrong doing by mayor Miller relating to Sandstone Canyon. If anyone has any, I'm waiting to see it. Accusations should not be made without proof. Over a year ago the owners of Sandstone made a sober offer to sell the property to naturalist Don Scha,i or any conservancy in response to Mr. Schad's purchase inquiry, so the property could be held as a nature preserve. As of this morning, the owners have not yet received an offer. Mr. Schad's concern is heartfr! and genuine. He truly is trying to save this canyon for our children. But no buyer can be found willin: to dedicate it as a nature preserve. Don't citizens have rights to their property? Remember most of us are property owners; do we want our rights taken away? Should government illegally condemn someone's property without compensation to appease a group of environmental extremists even if many of them are well intentioned? How can this property be "saved for our children" when it doesn't belong to us, and 99.99 percent of us have never seen it, will never see it, and wouldn't know what to do with it if we had it? Yes, I would prefer to have Diamond Bar look the way it did 20 years ago. I would like to look the way I did 20 years ago! Besides being unrealistic, such an attitude is actually harmful to the community. The South Point development will actually be the second intrusion into Sandstone Canyon. The first was when the homes of some of its saviors were built. It seems that their opposition to homes being built in the canyon does not extend to dwellings they live in themselves. What's really going on here is a handful of citizens want the city to effectively steal the property that their backyard overlooks and, in essence, deed it over to them. (Hmm..., could it be that the most vocal opponents and others of their ilk have backyards that overlook open space, and have a substantial financial interest in preventing its development?) CP The community also has a financial interest at stake. Besides hurting the litigate property owners, giving into these unreasonable demands will hurtus all because the income from utilizing this property is critically needed to keep our city's budget balanced and avoid raising taxes. (How do you spell "Utility Tax?" — N O D E V E L 0 P M E N T.) If the community wants more parks and open space, I'm in favor of it. But I am also in favor of not raising taxes, and acquiring land legally rather than effectively stealing it from its owners. Developing this property actually gives us more "available" open space. MORE not Less! The owners will be deeding twenty-eight acres of the land to our community that we can all enjoy — even if it doesn't overlook our backyards. There will be acres of undeveloped green belt space and a 28 -acre park with nature trails and a baseball diamond, soccer field, and basketball courts. City officials also hope the Walnut School District will finally be able to build the South Point Middle School for our children. A nature preserve may be a better alternative, but a willing sponsor with 12-15 million dollars to pay for it, has yet to be found. I don't particularity like Miller, or any of the city council members. Prior to a fewmonths ago I had never met or had any dealings whatsoever with any of them. In fact, they voted in favor of restricting the use of one of our public streets that really ticked me off and taken a lot of my time to get corrected. But I like Diamond Bar, and I believe in the city. I don't %vant it taken over by a group of extremists with a personal agenda which includes taking away other people's rights, hurling false accusations, character assassinations, and numerous personal insults. The fact is. these "concerned citizens" are just running for city council or supporting their buddies who are running. They are disrupting our city government to propel themselves or their cronies into public office. Thev have also sued our city which has taken lots of money out of our treasury and are threatening filing additional lawsuits. This group is costing us a fortune based on lies, half-truths, innuendo and pursuit of their own financial interests. We simply can* afford their kind of anti-government. If, by chance, these disruptive backyard landerabbers get their way, they can do even more harm as electec officials. Just watch our city council meetings and drat \ ou own conclusions. Nick Anis Diamond Bar 0 N �O ►"� i(1'1. , ell �(!l_i PETITION IN FAVOR OF THE SOUTH POINT DEVELOPMENT(PER THE�C ATTACHED LETTER). ,2 NAME ADDRESS PHONE # _-------- ---------------------------------- ------------------ ----------------------------------------- ?3� 3 w. 6 -�- --------------------------------------- O - S co 7c 11 �� .S c. �d1 i �� • ✓�� �fNl� 6 !i ky ZZIL14--, 7 -r ca,14T �� d • f j-0 f 4 021 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Mayor —GaWh G. Miller Mayor Pro Tem — yllis E. Papen Councilman — John A. Forbing Councilman — Gary H. Werner Councilman — Dexter D. MacBride City Council Chambers are located at: South CoastAir Quality Management D`StriCtAudmodum 21865 East Copley Drive MEETING September 1993 Terrence L Belanger City Manager Andrew V. Arczynski City Attorney MEETING TIME: 7:00 p.m. Lynda Burgess City Clerk Copies of staff reports or otherwrltteri documentation relating to each item referred<to pan this agenda are ori file in the Office of the City Clerk and are available for public inspection If.ybu have questions regarding an agenda Item, please contact the City Clerk at iness hours. The City of Diamond Bar uses RECYCLED paper and encourages you to do the same. 1. 2. 3. 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. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Pro Tem Papen ROLL CALL: Councilmen MacBride, Forbing, Werner, Mayor Pro Tem Papen PUBLIC HEARING: 2.1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NOS. 92-1 AND 2; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51407, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-8 AND OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 92-8; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 32400, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-5, AND OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 91-2; TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51253 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-12; OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 92- 9; THE SOUTH POINTE MASTER PLAN; AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 92-1 - This is a request for approval of a mixed use project, known as the South Pointe Master Plan, consisting of land uses which include residential, commercial, park, open space and school facilities. The project site is approximately 171 acres in size and is located north of Pathfinder Rd., west of Brea Canyon Rd., east of Morning Sun Drive, and south of Rapid View Dr. The project proposes to develop 30 acres of commercial retail/office space of 290,000 sq. ft.; approximately 200 single-family detached residential dwelling units, a 28 acre neighborhood park; and the construction of a middle school. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the development proposal. t � 11 1q_4)3 Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council receive presentations from staff, City consultants, and project developers; open the Public Hearing; receive public testimony and continue the Hearing. ANNOUNCEMENTS: 4. ADJOURNMENT: 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 Coast Air Quality Management DistrictAuditonum 21865 East Copley Drive ease re airn sft in' zeatin or rin ioIn a ounce COarn rs MEETING DATE: September 28, 1993 Terrence L. Belanger City Manager Andrew V. Arczynski City Attorney MEETING TIME: 7:00 p.m. Lynda Burgess City Clerk copies,vf staff reports or other written documentation' relating #o aach i#em referred to ;on this agenda are on fee in the office of the City Cler[c and ate available for public; mspect�orr if you have questions agarding an agenda item, please contact the City Clerk at:(909)a6Q 2afie during bu:mess hours'. The City of Diamond Bar uses RECYCLED paper and encourages you to oo me 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. 1. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Pro Tem Papen ROLL CALL: Councilmen MacBride, Forbing, Werner, Mayor Pro Tem Papen 2. PUBLIC HEARING: 2.1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NOS. 92-1 AND 2; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51407, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-8 AND OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 92-8; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 32400, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-5, AND OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 91-2; TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51253 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-12; OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 92- 9; THE SOUTH POINTE MASTER PLAN; AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 92-1 - This is a request for approval of a mixed use project, known as the South Pointe Master Plan, consisting of land uses which include residential, commercial, park, open space and school facilities. The project site is approximately 171 acres in size and is located north of Pathfinder Rd., west of Brea Canyon Rd., east of Morning Sun Drive, and south of Rapid View Dr. The project proposes to develop 30 acres of commercial retail/office space of 290,000 sq. ft.; approximately 200 single-family detached residential dwelling units, a 28 acres neighborhood park; and the construction of a middle school. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the development proposal. Continued from September 14, 1993. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council receive presentations from staff, City consultants, and project developers; open the Public Hearing; receive public testimony and continue the Hearing. 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS: 4. ADJOURNMENT: CITY OF DIAMOND BAR NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING AND AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ) The Diamond Bar City Council will hold an Adjourned Regular Meeting at the South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium, located at 21865 E. Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, California at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, September 28, 1993. Items for consideration are listed on the attached agenda. I, LYNDA BURGESS, declare as follows: I am the City Clerk in the City of Diamond Bar; that a copy of the Notice for the Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Diamond Bar City Council, to be held on September 28, 1993 was posted at their proper locations. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this Notice and Affidavit was executed this 24th day of September, 1993, at Diamond Bar, California. /s! Lynda Burgess Lynda Burgess, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar REMINDER Please remember to bring the following South Pointe Master Plan Documents: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Dated November 1992 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT dated February 1993 TECHNICAL APPENDIX - RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT dated May 1993 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: September 28, 1993 REPORT DATE: September 23, 1993 FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director TITLE: Development Agreement Nos. 92-1 and 2; Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407, Conditional Use Permit No. 92-8 and Oak Tree Permit No. 92-8; Vesting Tentative Tract No. 32400, Conditional Use Permit No. 91-5, and Oak Tree Permit No. 92-3; Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 and Conditional Use Permit No. 92-12; Oak Tree Permit No. 92-9; the South Pointe Master Plan; and Environmental Impact Report No. 92-1 continued from September 14, 1993. SUMMARY: This is a request for approval of a mixed use project, known as the South Pointe Master Plan, consisting of land uses which include residential, commercial, park, open space and school facilities. The project site is approximately 171 acres in size and is located north of Pathfinder Road, west of Brea Canyon Road, east of Morning Sun Drive, and south of Rapid View Drive. The project proposes to develop 30 acres of commercial retail/office space of 290,000 square feet; approximately 200 single-family detached residential dwelling units, a 28 acre neighborhood park; and the construction of a middle school. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council receive presentations from the staff, City consultants, and project developers; open the Public Hearing, receive public testimony, and continue the Hearing. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:XStaff Report _ Public Hearing Notification _ Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office) X Other EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: Library SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed N/A _ Yes _ No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? MAJORITY 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? X Yes _ 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: PUBLIC WORKS REV Y: i Terre ce L. Belanger City Manager IL I Ades De Stefano Community Develop ent Director' CITY COUNCEL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: September 28, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Development Agreement Nos. 92-1 and 2; Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407, Conditional Use Permit No. 92-8 and Oak Tree Permit No. 92-8; Vesting Tentative Tract No. 32400, Conditional Use Permit No. 91-5, and Oak Tree Permit No. 92-3; Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 and Conditional Use Permit No. 92-12; Oak Tree Permit No. 92- 9; the South Pointe Master Plan; and Environmental Impact Report No. 92-1 continued from September 14, 1993. ISSUE STATEMENT: This is a request for approval of a mixed use project, known as the South Pointe Master Plan, consisting of land uses which include residential, commercial, park, open space and school facilities. The project site is approximately 171 acres in size and is located north of Pathfinder Road, west of Brea Canyon Road, east of Morning Sun Drive, and south of Rapid View Drive. The project proposes to develop 30 acres of commercial retail/office space of 290,000 square feet; approximately 200 single-family detached residential dwelling units, a 28 acre neighborhood park; and the construction of a middle school. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council receive presentations from the staff, City consultants, and project developers; open the Public Hearing, receive public testimony, and continue the Hearing. PROJECT SUMMARY: The South Pointe Master Plan has been proposed to guide the development of 171 acres in the South Pointe Middle School/ Sandstone Canyon area. The Master Plan incorpor- ates property owned by five entities; the City of Diamond Bar, Walnut Valley Unified School District, Arciero and Sons, Inc., RNP Development, Inc. and Sasak Corporation. The proposed project, if approved, will be developed, in phases, with primary land uses of residential, commercial, park, open space, and school. Approximately 82 residential acres are requested for construction of 200 single family homes, 30 acres are proposed for a future commercial/office use, 28 acres are proposed for open space as a public park site, and 31 acres are proposed for the construction of the South Pointe Middle School (see Exhibit "A"). As presently proposed, the project will be developed over a projected ten year period. Under the proposed development plan, all of the residential dwelling units, one-half of the commercial/office use, and the park site will be completed within a projected five year period. The remaining commercial/office use is projected to be completed within the remaining ten year period. To accommodate the proposed land uses, a number of circulation system improvements are required. These improvements include the creation of new local streets within the project site, a new access road to the school from Brea Canyon Road, improvements to Brea Canyon Road, and a number of area off-site street and intersection improvements including new signalization. The proposed project will require the approval and implementation of Development Agreements between the City and the project applicants, adoption of a Master Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Oak Tree Permit, Subdivision approvals and an Environmental Impact Report. The Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed project and has recommended City Council approval. BACKGROUND: On September 14, 1993, the City Council began the public hearing process to consider development applications for the South Pointe Master Plan project. The Council received a presentation on the proposal from the City Staff and a summary of the environmental review process from the City's environmental consultant. Anticipated developer presentations were postponed to September 28 at the request of the applicants. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT: On September 14, 1992, the City Council opened the Public Hearing on the stated project and the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). The Public Hearing for both the project and the DEIR was continued to September 28, 1993, for further public comment and possible action to certify or deny the DEIR. It should be noted that, in accordance with the Public Resources Code, "At least 10 days prior to certifying an environmental impact report, the lead agency (City) shall provide a written proposed response to a public agency on comments made by that agency which conform with the requirements of this division... Copies of responses or the environmental document in which they are contained ... may be used to meet the requirements imposed by this section. " The Public Hearing has not closed and, therefore, action on the DEIR would be inappropriate at this time. PROJECT REVIEW The proposed South Point Master Plan contains several entitlement requests as more fully described within the Staff Report prepared for the September 14, 1993 City Council meeting. Upon conclusion of the environmental review the council should begin to consider the specific entitlement requests. General Plan : The 1993 General Plan designation for the properties is PD, Planned Development. The purpose of this designation is to encourage the innovative use of unique properties, incorporate various land uses, coordinate public and private facilities, and integrate the proposed project into existing development patterns. The proposal has been designed to meet the requirements of the General Plan. Consistency with the adopted General Plan is required by State Law in order to approve the project. The general rule for consistency determination is, after considering all its aspects, will the project, on balance, further the objectives and policies of the general plan and not obstruct their attainment. Master Plan The use of a "Master Plan" is proposed to guide the overall development. The components of the plan include permitted uses and development standards. The proposed zoning regulations and development standards will be implemented via the use of development agreements for the RNP and Arciero proposals. The standards are attached to the Sasak proposal as a component of the Tentative Map conditions. The complete document is contained within the previously prepared report. The use of a master plan is a tool for implementing the Genaral Plan and often bridges the gap between General Plan policy and zoning standards for the property under consideration for development. Subdivisions Please refer to the previous report regarding the proposed tentative tract maps, hillside conditional use permits, oak tree permits, and the Draft Environmental Impact Report for a detailed review of each map and their cumulative impact upon the environment. Cross sections illustrating the proposed grading (cut and fill) activity are attached. Development Agreements: Development agreemnets are proposed as reviously indicated. Attached to this report are maps which illustrate the existing and future ownership of property as a result of project implementation. FINANCIAL SUMMARY A Fiscal Impact Analysis has been prepared for the proposed projct. The Levander Company, Inc. analized the proposed project and two alternative development scenarios. The report indicates that each development sceniaro studied yields a positive cash flow to the City. The potential 30 acre commercial center proposed by the project proponents is estimated to provide an annual net surplus of $684,000 begining in the 11th year, the projected first year after full development. The complete reportis attached for review. PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE: The public hearing for the South Pointe Master Plan was publicly noticed in accordance with State and local requirements. PREPARED BY: James De Stefano Community Development Director Attachments 1. Land Use Plan 2. City Council Staff Report dated September 14, 1993, (without attachments) 3. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 4. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32400 5. Tract Map No. 51253 6. South Pointe Master Plan - Sections 7. Existing ownership map 8. Future ownership map 9. Levander Fiscal Impact Analysis - dated,April 21, 1993 10. Correspondence received to date in favor of and against the South Pointe Master Plan. CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: September 14, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Development Agreement Nos. 92-1 and 2; Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407, Conditional Use Permit No. 92-8 and Oak Tree permit No. 92-8; Vesting Tentative Tract No. 32400, Conditional Use Permit No. 91-5, and Oak Tree Permit No. 91-2; Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 and Conditional Use Permit No. 92-12; Oak Tree Permit No. 92- 9: the South Pointe Master Plan; and Environmental Impact Report No. 92-1. ISSUE STATEMENT: This is a request for approval of a mixed use project, known as the South Pointe Master Plan, consisting of land uses which include residential, commercial, park, open space and school facilities. The project site is approximately 171 acres in size and is located north of Pathfinder Road, west of Brea Canyon Road, east of Morning Sun Drive, and south of Rapid View Drive. The project proposes to develop 30 acres of commercial retail/office space of 290,000 square feet; approximately 200 single-family detached residential dwelling units, a 28 acre neighborhood park; and the construction of a middle school. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the development proposal. It is recommended that the City Council receive a presentation from the City staff, City consultants, and project developers, open the public hearing, receive public testimony, and continue the public hearing. PROJECT SUMMARY: The South Pointe Master Plan has been proposed to guide the development of 171 acres in the South Pointe Middle School/Sandstone Canyon area. The Master Plan incorporates property owned by five entities; the City of Diamond Bar, Walnut Valley Unified School District, Arceiro and Sons, Inc., RNP Development, Inc. and Sasak Corporation. The proposed project, if approved, will be developed, in phases, with primary land uses of residential, commercial, park, open space, and school. Approximately 82 residential acres are requested for construction of 200 single family homes, 30 acres are proposed for a future commercial/office use, 28 acres are proposed for open space as a public park site, and 31 acres are proposed for the construction of the South Pointe Middle 1 School (see Exhibit "A"). As presently proposed, the project will be developed over a projected ten year period. Under the proposed development plan, all of the residential dwelling units, one-half of the commercial/office use, and the park site will be completed within a projected five year period. The remaining commercial/office use is projected to be completed within the remaining ten year period. To accommodate the proposed land uses, a number of circulation system improvements are required. These improvements include the creation of new local streets within the project site, a new access road to the school from Brea Canyon Road, improvements to Brea Canyon Road, and a number of area off-site street and intersection improvements including new signalization. The proposed project will require the approval and implementation of Development Agreements between the City and the project applicants, adoption of a Master Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Oak Tree Permit, Subdivision approvals and an Environmental Impact Report. The Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed project and has recommended City Council approval. BACKGROUND: The South Pointe Master Plan project proposes the subdivision of a primarily undeveloped 171 acre site to accommodate the phased development and subsequent use of the site for residential, commercial, park, open space, and school purposes. The South Pointe Master Plan project represents a comprehensive land use planning effort. The proposed project is the culmination of a multi-year effort by landowners to produce a balanced development plan for one of the remaining large undeveloped properties in the City. The applicants for the proposed project are: (1) RNP Development, Inc., 4439 Rhodelia Dr., Claremont CA 91711 (2) Arciero and Sons, Inc., 950 North Tustin, Anaheim, CA 92807 (3) Sasak Corporation, 858 W. 9th St., Upland CA 91785 (4) City of Diamond Bar, 21660 E. Copley Dr., Ste. 100, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 The property owners include the applicants and the Walnut Valley Unified School District. Ownership boundaries are identified within Exhibit "B" attached. Approximately 82 residential acres are proposed for construction of approximately 200 single family homes. A future commercial/ office development of 30 acres is planned adjacent to Brea Canyon Road. A 28 acre proposed neighborhood public park site is proposed which would consist of both passiv* and active recreational uses. The remaining 31 acres are. proposed for the construction of a permanent South Pointe Middle School. The proposed project, as presently contemplated, would be developed over a projected 10 year period. To accommodate the proposed land uses, a variety 2 of circulation system improvements are being considered. They include the creation of new local streets within the project site, and a new main access road to the school from Brea Canyon Road. A variety of public improvements to both Brea Canyon Road and other off-site street and intersections improvements will be required as a result of the project. As graphically depicted in Exhibit "C", the project site has been divided into five (5) district, planning areas (or enclaves). Project specific development standards have been proposed for each enclave as a part of the South Pointe Master Plan. Each tentative tract map has been designed consistent with the proposed development standards. VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51407 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 is proposed by RNP Development, Inc. and consists of 84.20 acres containing 90 single family residential parcels with 28.13 acres proposed for recreational open space and 21.9 acres proposed as a commercial center. This map is located within Enclave 1, as described within the Master Plan development standards. Minimum lot sizes for this Enclave are 8,000 square feet with minimum pad sizes of 6,900 square feet. The proposed residential neighborhoods within this Enclave are designed to be compatible with the existing style and type of development pattern adjacent to the project. Vesting Tentative Map No. 51407 provides for an overall density of 2.59 units per acre on the 34.62 acre residential site. Lot sizes range from 8,977 square feet (Lot 124) to 18,679 square feet (lot #34). Pad sizes range from 7,079 square feet (Lot #26) to 13,322 square feet (lot 030). 28.13 acres have been set aside for open space/ recreational purposes (Lot #91). Three commercial lots are proposed ranging in size from 3.40 acres to 13.50 acres for a total of 21.90 commercial acres. Earthwork quantities indicate 2,567,000 yards of cut and 2,571,000 yards of fill for the proposed map. The circulation pattern consists of a residential collector, street "A", from Brea Canyon Road to the middle school site, and a residential street "B" proposed extending through to Morning Sun Drive. The project proposes six residential dwelling units facing Larkstone Drive on property presently owned by the Walnut Valley Unified School District. The proposed map would supercede previously recorded Tract Map No.'s 32576 and 35742. Those maps dedicated the right to prohibit the construction of residential units within certain lots. That right was accepted by the County and is valid and enforceable against any development request. Other restrictions on the property relate to flood hazard and restricted use areas. This proposed map would supercede and erase the existing development restrictions placed upon the property. There are a number of other parcels in the community which are also subject to similar development restrictions. other properties with such development restrictions have been re -subdivided by Los Angeles County. The applicant has specifically requested approval of this application package which permits the City to evaluate the change in entitlement on the merits of the proposed project. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 51253 This 6.7 acre site is currently proposed as a 21 unit single family residential development by Sasak Corporation. The proposed project as presently designed is consistent with the Master Plan development standards for Enclave No. 1. Lot sizes range from 8,241 square feet (Lot 01) to 20,962 square feet (Lot,#4). Pad sizes range from 6,906 square feet (Lot #20) to 11,214 square feet (Lot 14). Earthwork quantities indicate 145,800 cubic yards of excavation, 98,300 cubic yards of embankment, and 47,500 cubic yards of export. The proposed subdivision provides for an extension of street "S" as shown within Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 to connect with Morning Sun Drive. This Tentative Map contains the same basic development restrictions as the previously discussed map. The Subdivision Map Act provides a means to remove such restrictions. If a resubdivision or reversion to acreage of the tract is subsequently filed for approval, the offer of dedication previously rejected is terminated upon the approval of the new map by the City Council. VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 32400 Vesting Tentative Tract No. 32400 is proposed by Arciero and Sons and contains 93 lots. 91 single family homes are proposed with two lots totaling approximately 7 acres set aside for commercial purposes. The proposed map is located within Enclave 3. The minimum lot size proposed for Enclave 3 is 7200 square feet with a minimum pad size of 6000 square feet. The proposed project contains lot sizes that range from 7200 (lot 131) to 15,095 (Lot ,#14) square feet. Pad sizes range from 6,070 (lot ,#69) to 13,365 (lot 145) square feet. Primary access is from Brea Canyon Road with a secondary access point through the future commercial development. Earthwork quantities indicate 1.795 million cubic yards of cut and 1.810 million cubic yards of fill. The proposed map is consistent with the design and development standards contained within the Master Plan. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS: The use of Development Agreements are proposed for the Arciero and RNP development project. The Development Agreement is utilized as a single contract document to incorporate the Master Plan, the Hillside Management regulations, the Oak Tree Permit, the Development Standards with reference to the Tentative Tract Maps. Cities are provided with the ability to enter into Development Agreements with any property owner. Development Agreements are essentially a negotiated contract between a public agency and a private developer. 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 proposed agreements incorporate a variety of land transfers and commitments by all parties toward the successful completion of the proposed project. HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND OAK TREE PERMIT: The Hillside Management Ordinance requires a conditional use permit approval for each tentative tract map proposal. The hillside management standards and guidelines have been incorporated within each development. The impact of the project grading is analyzed in the Draft Environmental Impact Report within the earth resources and aesthetics sections. The Development Code requires an Oak Tree Permit for the removal of any oak genus which is eight inches in diameter as measured four and one-half feet above the natural grade. Each proposed subdivision site contains oak trees which would require removal. 4 In accordance with requirements of the Code, an oak tree inventory was conducted for each subdivision site. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 contains 449 oak trees. Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 contains 53 trees scheduled for replacement. Vesting Tentative Tract Map 32400 will require the removal of 276 oak trees. The Draft Environmental Impact Report indicates that 92 percent of the inventoried oak trees will be removed as a result of the proposed grading activities on-site. All oak trees removed as a result of the proposed project will be replaced at a 2:1 ratio. MASTER PLAN: The south Pointe Master Plan represents a comprehensive land use planning approach designed to provide a mixed use neighborhood comprised of residential, open space/park, and commercial/ office land uses which blend with the adjacent built environment and coincide with the natural resource values currently associated with the project site. The Master Plan weaves five private and public parcels with different ownership into a land use strategy which provides for a full range of land uses and therefore a balanced neighborhood. It also contains specific development standards to guide the future implementation of the project. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the City has determined that an Environmental Impact Report should be prepared to assess and analyze the environmental effects of the proposed project. The City engaged Ultrasystems Engineers and Constructors, Inc. as an independent consultant to prepare the environmental documents. An Executive Summary of the Environmental review record is attached (exhibit "D" ). PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE: The South Pointe Master Plan project was publicly noticed in accordance with State and local requirements. Advertisements were published within the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on August 12, 1993. Notices were mailed to property owners within a 500 foot radius of the project boundaries on August 12, 1993. Several hundred additional notices were mailed to interested citizens providing public awareness of the proposal. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The Planning Commission conducted numerous public study sessions and public hearings on the proposals. A walking tour of the site was conducted on December 14, 1992. Study Sessions were held in October and December 1992. Noticed public hearings were held in January, February, March, April, and May 1993. The Planning Commission concluded its activities on May 24, 1993 by recommending City Council approval of all project components. A summary of the Commission activities is attached. 5 CONCLUSION: The scheduled public hearing of September 14, 1993 is intended to introduce the City Council to the South Pointe Master Plan. PREPARED BY: James Destefano Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS: 1. Exhibit "A" - Land Use Plan 2. Exhibit "B" - Ownership Map 3. Exhibit "C" - Enclave Map 4. Exhibit "D" - Environmental Review Record 5. Planning Commission Resolutions, Condition B (for each Development Agreements, Condition A (for all tracts), Condition all tracts) 6. Project Tract Maps 7. Public Hearing Notice 8. Draft Environmental Impact Report dated November 1992 transmitted) 9. Response To Comments On The Draft Environmental Impact February 1993 (previously transmitted) 10. Technical Appendix - Response To Comments On The Draft Impact Report dated May 1993 (previously transmitted) F: \ WPS 1 \WORK\AGENDMA0&iUrr.FRM 6 tract), C (for (previously Report dated Environmental z 0 t2i CD 7-1 e CJ kn o all Mill W F z 0 a 2 H O z a J x W F a U) W Q U O W W Q z E z a a M 01 N m LL H a 0 01-14-1 0 C +• %=.:'� r., 01-14-1 0 r +• %=.:'� r., JSP =��. _ - _ _,J ,..,,,. .. '..I 7 y G r 1 i . M I o l � � � � 1 r-It m o (I� El 9 I s� —tel — - — - a -- -t` •- - V\ I { .� .. i - 1 `1� 4 0 i I l ,\ 7 0 J �� \� -� c G f�\(�� �..1 I � N —��i�— � IN I / W r o ' � � z � a � � J 10 � — - . _'�L --� I I --- r�-t4 �r I I I i I I I r �� 1 l 11 t 1 1 i I I i t � � i r -L 4 b -�- i� :: _ c �y..�y--.; �. 4 `� �� }.n¢ �r 1 I .I I 1 1 1 W r O ! It Ql I \ v I 1 \ 1 1 �1 Wim` �r 1 I .I I y - n I i it I Zw i g S AA (\ Lb i Z r I W f p I W " J � f � � l ' W t z F LL - 0 i f I 8 A 9 0 o A 9 0 � _� i-1 \ lAUl1 ail v a `1L 1 1\ 1 1 �1 ' W U I I � 1 X � i\ _O F -- I � J I -T� I i M I I o 0outm roAM Sol* PXIStIN& OWNOft6o*"—AIP r.," I WvUso 550TI ►/IlT ICN!!L 30.61 ACRES (h. 66 ACRES] SCALE 1'-600' ARCIiu Ase sell 40.77 ACRES CIiT •► 11 itlD/ !li i i f S. CACRES c ACGES IDC elt ze. 7 •[RES lA/ ! N ► 21TILMNSIT INC f7. 60 ACRES wo o�do�o, ., o0 o�4ee oI ►� v v a o oao ��►�o�e�oo� OWNERSHIP Fwam FOR LOCATION�MAP R -N -P OEYELOF.:�' > n wr nWn ■al r ruwu son1� Pb1Mt� �MMrrF M+1 �UtUR� IP THE LEVANDER COMPANY, iNc. 25550 Hawthome Boulevard, SuRe 310, Torrance, CA 90505 (310) 375.8611 FAX (310) 375.9981 FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS & OTHER BENEFIT -COST CONSIDERATIONS SOUTH POINTE SPECIFIC PLAN DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA Prepared For The Planning Associates April 21, 1993 economics and management consultants THE LEVANDER COMPANY, wc. 25550 HWthome Boulevard, Suite 310, Torrance, CA 90505 INDEX (310) 375.8611 FAX (310) 375.9981 Introduction .......... 1 • EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....... . (1) Overall Conclusions (2) Projected Financial Returns to the City' ..... ' ' .. (3) Other Benefit -Cost Considerations ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 3 ..............6 2. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 3. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REVENUES 4. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR EXPENDITURES ............................ 5. DETAILED COMPUTER PROJECTIONS AND FISCAL MODEL ........ . Appendix ............... economics and management consultants THE LEVANDER COMPANY, mc. 25550 Hawthorne Boulevard, Suite 310, Torrance, CA 90505 (310) 375.8811 FAX (310) 375.9981 MEMORANDUM To: The Planning Associates Date: April 21, 1993 From: Dale H. Levander File: 1408 Subject: FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS & OTHER BENEFIT -COST CONSIDERATIONS -- SOUTH POINTE SPECIFIC PLAN At the request of The Planning Associates in behalf of their client, the City of Diamond Bar, we have prepared this fiscal impact analysis of prospective development of the South Pointe Specific Plan area (identified hereafter as South Pointe). The specific plan calls for development of the 171 -acre South Pointe area for 31 acres of commercial facilities and 200 single-family residential units, with added development to include a park, a middle school, circulation improvements, and open space. Our analysis considers three alternative development scenarios involving variations in the amount of commercial development, as follows: o Alternative A --Maximum Commercial Development. Development of the full 31 -acre commercial site for 290,000 square feet of commercial facilities, primarily major highway -oriented retail types, with such development assumed to occur 50% in Year 5 of development and the balance in Year 10. o Alternative B--Mid-Range Commercial Development. Development of 50% of the commercial site (15.5 acres), with the remaining site area to remain in open space, resulting in 145,000 square feet of commercial facilities, also primarily of highway -oriented retail types. o Alternative C --Minimum Commercial Development. Development of only 5.0 acres of the commercial site, the remainder to remain in open space, with development to involve primarily an extension of commercial office now found to the south of the area and also minor strip -commercial retail, with a total of 61,000 square feet of building space. In the preparation of this analysis, we have utilized information from the following sources: o Personal inspection of the South Pointe area and its neighborhood setting. o Discussions with City of Diamond Bar officials, identified in Appendix E. o Review of the City's 1992-93 budget, with computer analysis thereof documented in Appendix D. economics and management consultants o Property tax rate breakdowns from the Los Angeles County Auditor - Controller's office. o Current assessed values of the area from the Los Angeles County Assessor. o Development program estimates from review of the South Pointe EIR and discussions with The Planning Associates. o Current population data for the City of Diamond Bar from January 1992 estimates prepared by the State Department of Finance, with 1990 Census Data for surrounding neighborhoods as compiled by City staff. o Survey of single-family housing pricing in nearby neighborhoods by our staff. o Our experience in the preparation of more than ISO local governmental fiscal impact analyses during the past five years. It should be noted that we have not undertaken a detailed market analysis of development marketability and timing. However, based on our experience we have prepared estimates of logical commercial development expectations for the South Pointe property. This report is summary in nature. Additional research material are available from our files upon request. EXECU'T'IVE SUMMARY (1) Overall Conclusions In our judgment, maximum commercial development as reflected in Alternative A is in the City's best long-term interest from a financial standpoint, and this development will also provide several non -quantified benefits as well, as subsequently discussed. The potential 31 -acre commercial site --by virtue of its size, configuration, freeway access, and freeway visibility --is a logical site for future highway -related retail,with possible devel fuopment including such facilities as a discount department store, home improvement outlets, furniture stores, and the like. Maximum commercial development will have a highly beneficial impact on City finances, with a projected net surplus to the City of $16.5 million during a 20 -year projection period and an annual net surplus of $684,000 starting at Year 11, the projected first year after full development (these dollars expressed in 1993 current dollars). While the lesser development alternatives reflected in Alternatives B and C will also yield positive cash surplus to the City, the amount of such surplus is well below that to be obtained under 2 maximum commercial development --less than one-half that of Alternative A in the case of Alternative B and less than one-third in the case of Alternative C. Our judgment of prospective development potentials are viewed in light of the City's long- term potentials, and in this regard our projections cover a 20 -year time frame from date of first occupancy, probably two or three years hence. We are aware of the current economic downturn, but we can point to similar downturns in the 1970's and 1980's which were followed by periods of major economic growth. We do not profess to be able to predict exactly when the major commercial development can occur, but we believe our five- year delay in projected growth over first residential occupancies is probably conservative. The key point is that the City of Diamond Bar has a property within its boundaries which is suitable for major commercial development at some point in the future, and as such represents a future financial resource to the community. (2) Projected Financial Returns to the City Table 1 immediately following presents a summary of 20 -year financial projections under the three development alternatives considered. During the full 20 -year projection period, Alternative A's projected $16.8 million surplus will result from the following: o Projected revenues of $19.7 million, including $9.0 million in property taxes and $7.3 million from commercial ground lease rental revenues. o Operating expenditures (costs) of $2.8 million, including park maintenance, police protection, street maintenance, and other smaller items. Specific revenue and expenditure (cost) factors utilized in the projections are discussed in detail in Sections 3 and 4 of this report. Detailed annual projections for Alternatives A, B, and C are found in Appendix A, B, and C respectively. Table 1 also provides summary projections of City cash surplus under the assumption of ongoing inflation averaging 4.0°x6 annually. In these computations, we have increased operating revenues and costs at the 4.0°x6 figures, with assessed values and resulting property taxes increased at 2.0% for commercial and 2.5% for residential, consistent with Proposition 13 limitations and consideration of residential turnover. Property tax growth limitations notwithstanding, City cash flows under inflation assumptions continue to strongly favor Alternative A over other alternatives. The above net cash surplus projections reflect deduction of all ongoing operating costs associated with commercial and residential development, including police protection, street maintenance, recreation services, park maintenance, and administration. In addition, they reflect coverage of the following somewhat special costs: 3 I I rV ► I I 1 I 1 •w 1 r"I Iff 1 O O n t'^• rod... lel u ti 1 ►. � d Mp«�� r�►�' 1 M 1 o n! 1� 2-3 1 I .y ►� M �y ►w 1 I I w u•1 n n .pr r F ►+ L y 1 .•-1 e9 Y7 •^ *Y.1 i 1 � n O 1 I 1 i 1 .•i e•t 1 I 1 I i 1 rwY N 1 I .0.1 ! O e•7 e+ 1 ! e1 1A 41 ho w ii 1 y F LL 1 _ 1 1 O 1 I IMN .•r w J/ N wo M ti ti 1 1 I M 1 1 a CO d P 1 •w �{ Ii i I I r"I Iff O O O n t'^• rod... lel u � d Mp«�� r�►�' 1{y� 1 1 o n! 1� 2-3 1 I .y ►� M �y ►w 1 O 1w L 1 I �" w � i 1 .Ni N ti O W eq u•1 n n .pr O n n .•-1 e9 Y7 IMN .•r w J/ N wo M ti ti N V! N M M a CO d P a s O M 1'f r"I Iff O O O n t'^• rod... lel u d Mp«�� r�►�' gel hd%l yy �` ! ev o n! .•a A d a h wl {'•• 1+. y V m i7 O n N ti O W eq u•1 n n .pr O n n .•-1 e9 Y7 V n N ...1 �w e•i rf vs .•i e•t ..� G` �= O N e+ w. e�• o �Ir e•1 N n w u 7 N n r �O O O d odo a eq 1^y F r"I Iff O d o a o d d Mp«�� r�►�' gel hd%l yy �` ! ev O n'1 F a* A� � rM r1 �1 d N I�1 {'•• 1+. y V �! N fL O� N wl ry e7 w '•'1 .•-1 e9 Y7 N ...1 Ml YI• A V n ry n�� u1 �. M V n� � O 1~e\ w .0.1 ! O e•7 e+ d O O� it ! e1 1A 41 e1 O ti N N � u.nN�r �O odo a �%.~ia�.li lel nlw.d vs � .r�qw•.werd�vv+ yy a* A� � V M M X dg• i44N " ►. c3, 40 o �r U 1 1 rl I 1 I V I w 1 W W •~ w ~ IYa p r I M 1 � A1111 O �1p w .I O O 1 I ti 1 H I y M 1 O IV V 1 I 1 1 � 1 1 1 1 ti 1 1 w•. P 1 .••1 � 1 I Ir I M 1 1 1 W wy� r I •1p�� �q � a pp:,1 $ i a M Y N aO•'1 � � 1 r M r 1 1 Ir 1 ��aal 1 0~..o 1 O 1 1 u � n « 0041 M �► A W .ela N'1 o In 5i v « r Y to Y a xq a �Q kt ps 4 .•ii �I{ � 1 .O e. � 1 A 7 4w i 1 t 1 1 w•. P 1 .••1 � 1 I Ir I 1 A w 1 h i wy� r I �1`YwM�1 a 0~..o u 1� � n « 0041 M �► A W .ela N'1 o In 5i v « r Y to Y a xq a �Q kt ps 4 .•ii �I{ � 1 .O e. � 1 A 7 4w i o $62,000 annual costs of maintaining 10.0 acres of finished park, even though the 200 residential units in South Pointe alone would require park development of only 3.0 acres per City standards, which in turn would cost only $18,600 annually for maintenance. o A portion of the improvement costs required for park development, assumed to be 50% of total improvement costs of $750,000, the balance of improvement costs and site costs assumed to be a developer responsibility. o Costs of maintaining not only streets within the area but also an assumed widening of Brea Canyon Road to a full four lanes at time of commercial development (in Alternatives A and B), with costs projected for the additional two lanes of $9,600 annually. Please refer to tables in Appendix A, B, and C for detailed projections and underlying development and financial factors. (3) Other Benefit -Cost Considerations Non -quantified community benefits not reflected in the financial projections include the following: o Park Facilities. As noted earlier, the prospective 10 -acre park is well above 3.0 acres which would be required for the 200 residential units alone. The Park will serve a much broader part of the Diamond Bar Community. At present, the City currently has 39.9 acres of finished park, to be increased in the near future to 55 acres with completion of Pantera Park. This latter figure reflects parks of about 1.0 acres per 1,000 population, far below the City's standard of 5.0. South Pointe will help the City move towards its goal. More specifically, the South Pointe park will also be directly'accessible to the approximate 7,000 Diamond Bar residents living west of the 57 Freeway. Also, the South Pointe park will be usable City-wide by youth sports, which face a significant shortage of space. In all, South Pointe will help some 4,000 current youth -sport participants find needed facilities, practice facilities in particular. o School Access The planned Street A collector in South Pointe will provide direct access to the South Pointe Middle School, access which is now available only to the north via neighborhood 'streets. This access will result in benefits of resident time savings and safety. 1.1 W o School Replacement. South Pointe development will allow the replacement of the existing South Pointe Middle School temporary facilities with permanent facilities on an adjacent site, by virtue of grading and access benefits. We have not attempted in this analysis to discuss the wide range of non-financial matters covered by the specific plan's EIR. However, while not quantified in dollar terms,the above considerations may be considered to be of significance by many in the community. projections. 2. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. South Pointe development programs under the three alternative scenarios are summarized in Table 2 immediately following. Several points of note include the following: o Maximum commercial development of 290,000 square feet is a preliminary planning figure, possibly taking into consideration traffic limitations and other development considerations. Under typical Southern California development densities, we estimate that the 31 -acre site could accommodate 10% to 20% more building space, a factor which applies to Alternatives B and C also. o Under Alternative A, the City is projected to own a 50% share of the 31 -acre site, or 15.5 acres. Under Alternative B, the City site is also assumed to be 50% of the total site, or 7.75 acres. Under Alternative C, City ownership is assumed to the full 5.0 -acre site. o It is assumed that the A Street collector will be developed in Year 1 of the project, to provide full access to the South Point Middle School from the outset. Brea Canyon Road is projected for widening by completion of major commercial facilities in Year 5 for Alternatives A and B. No widening is projected under Alternative C. o Residential values are projected at $300,000 per unit, although our survey of current asking prices for nearby homes indicated a $340,000 average. Commercial values are based on our files of Southern California experience. o Commercial taxable sales are also based on Southern California experience. As shown in detailed projections, our judgment is that Alternative A development should yield higher taxable sales on a square -foot basis than Alternative B, which in turn should show better performance than Alternative C. 6 LM ffS1 (ICM) lesideatial tonerrial Park (Piaishedl School Opel Space/Circulation Total CORIIRRCIIL IVILDIK SP1CR (SP) Shop Gtr--lajor Retail Shop Ctr--Ienaat Retail Shop Ctr--?sant-Ion-Retail Rating 1 Driaiin Utah Piuucial Office General office Total RESIDRITIR OATS 1DDRD PDILIC Sl ms (LJIt-IILRSl 1DDRD FORLIC PlIKS (KRIS) m DUMP= TILII Ii mm DOLLIRS ism -S) IMM Tu1RLR 3= I Cm sl n 11 mm DOLLBS (s000':) Source: The Levander Coepaa7, Inc. Table 2 SMUT DMLOPEW IL?nll?IiBS I ML IOILDODT --alternative 1-- (31.0 1c C011'11 --------------- --ilternative 1-- Alternative C-- (IS.5 1c Cowl) ( 5.a lc Cowl) --------------- --------------- to.a 40.0 aa.o 31.0 15.5 5.0 13.4 14.4 14.0 72.0 12.0 X2.0 11.4 ».5 44.0 171.0 171.0 171.0 114,004 40,040 0 50,000 25,000 20,000 10.404 51000 11,000 20,000 10,000 0 10,000 51000 0 20,000 240,000 10,000 10,000 IIS,000 61,000 200 200 200 7.01 7.01 4.61 10.0 10.0 10.0 42,504 76,150 67,625 52,400 29,62S 10,000 o Resident taxable sales while relatively minor are keyed to housing values and per -capita income estimates. We estimate that family incomes are one-third of housing values and taxable sales are 35% of per -capita incomes. o Population is, estimated at 3.0 residents per unit, consistent with current City population estimates and also consistent with single-family experience elsewhere in Southern California. In the three alternatives, our analysis assumes that the City will lease its commercial site at time of commercial development, a long-term ground lease with annual revenues computed at 8.0% of value, in turn computed at $10 per square foot. This is one City option. Another option is sale of the property, which would result in one-time revenue to the City, which in turn could be invested at 6% to 8% annually under current conditions to provide ongoing General Fund revenue.. Our computer model is established to handle such a projection alternative. Please refer to Tables 2-5 in Appendix A -C for detailed projections and underlying factors of the three development programs and resulting development measures. 3. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REVENUES Ongoing annual revenues to be received by the City as a result of South Pointe development will include the following: o Secured Property Taxes. 3.469% of the $1.00 per $100 AV tax rate collected by the Country, per the County Auditor -Controller tax -rate breakdowns for Tax Rate Area 10067 in which the subject area is located. o Unsecured Property Taxes. 10% of secured property taxes of commercial facilities only, based on Southern California experience. o Sales Tax. 1.11% of projected taxable sales, this factor based upon the City's statutory 1.00% plus additional allocations by the State to the City for sales from unidentified locations. o E!q eg = Transfer Tax. 5.5 cents per $1,000 of new development value, based upon the City's 50% share of transfer tax computed at $1.10 per $1,000 of transfer value, under the assumption that residential properties have a ten-year ownership turnover (no consideration given to commercial property turnover). 0 o Motor Vehicle In -Lieu. $33.91 per capita for these taxes received from the State based upon the City's 1992-93 budget documented in Appendix Table D1. o Franchise Fees. $11.11 per capita, based upon review of the City's 1992-93 budget documented in Appendix Table D1. o Gas Tax. $16.35 per capita, based upon the City's 1992-93 budget documented in Appendix Table Dl. o Local Transportation Tax Prop A 25% of other sales tax, per the City's current budget documented in Appendix Table Dl. o City Commercial Site Lease Revenues $34,848 per acre per year, based on a land value of $435,600 per acre (43,560 square feet at $10 per square foot) and an annual lease rate of 8% of value. Additional ongoing revenues include fines and forfeitures,vehicle code fines, and waste hauler permits, as identified in Appendix Table A5. One-time revenues to be received by the City as a result of South Pointe development will include: (1) document transfer tax on initial residential sales, computed at 55 cents per $1,000 valuation and (2) development control fees estimated at 1.5% of new development value, the later a regional average and assumed to be directly offset by development control costs. 4. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR EXPENDITURES Ongoing annual expenditures are estimated as follows: o Sheriff. $66.86 per capita, based upon the City's 1992-93 budget documented in Appendix Table D2 per discussion with City staff; 4.18 cents per square foot for commercial facilities utilizing an equivalent dwelling unit approach of 4,800 square feet of commercial building space equal to one dwelling unit with 3.0 residents. o Street M 'ntC=ce. $4,000 per lane -mile, based upon regional experience and discussion with City staff. o Park Maintenance. $6,200 per acre, based on review of current budget per Appendix Table D2 and review of current park subcontracts with City staff. 10 o Recreation Services. $7.74 per capita, based on the Cir/'s current budget per Appendix Table D2. o Administration . Estimated at 15.9% of other ongoing direct costs, based upon our analysis of direct and indirect costs in the City's current budget, documented in Appendix Table D2, a conservative approach inasmuch as administrative costs for most cities are not directly keyed to direct costs. Additional ongoing expenditures include animal control, emergency preparedness, and waste management, as identified in Appendix Table AS. The principal one-time expenditures projected in this analysis is $375,000 for park improvements. Based on discussion with The Planning Associates, this analysis assumes that 50% of park improvement costs will be borne by the City, the balance by the developer. Improvement costs are estimated at $75,000 per acre, per regional experience and discussion with City staff. 8. DETAILED COMPUTER PROJECTIONS AND FISCAL MODEL Detailed computer projections are contained in the Appendix to this report, as follows: o Appendix A. A full set of detailed projections covering Alternative A. o Appendix B and Appendix C. Summary Table 1 of Alternatives B and C respectively. The computer program utilized is in the form of six individual tables, as identified in Appendix A. These individual tables have been constructed in such a form as to identify all detailed factors underlying the projections. Also, the computer program is in such a form that additional projections can be easily run under alternative development and value assumptions. Computer projections are in Symphony spreadsheet form. Each individual set of projections requires approximately 273,000 bytes of computer memory. WP33/1408R2 11 APPENDIX A. Alternative A Detailed Projections --Tables Al -A6 B. Alternative B Summary Projections --Table B1 C. Alternative C Summary Projections --Table C2 D. City of Diamond Bar 1992-93 Budget Analysis E. List of City of Diamond Bar Officials Contacted 12 Appendix A ALTERNATIVE A DETAILED PROJECTONS--TABLES Al -A6 � � d odeees Q Oyf�SQ�o � �1 r - sl �w�gh�.ORd Ne O+� ea NNNwd wOJM � ry t IV w y ' A I N w w N I� " I I w+ro�►,wd I I N mg W y, I ` �' f •$'a.�Nd-d.,sln�eRei 4-AMOR-21 b N 1[e J JJ M ( I M g � '� •o.rodwd-s..d.. ..odew� .n. i w �I r�H aNwdyd wo p.�edo� .v dd N~. > 1 N i � N.O^. ,J,ew..dvdOdN+�OdO wwdOO d w ^�` d q�O.+e dN • qd wNe de ^ s O I w M n •h ed�+�'N P-1 N �► h O fir{ �Jy nl Jf N J a w N M r M» f 3 0 w } �y w O n q O • N O O O N M N w O M �+ O h N wn P M � R �w� ♦ N N �� N w w < Y N >. 1 � I r N M r JI ~ n ~ w�wwl w.~i w.Ni .++r�TRFyNHRiNNNNNRRI T'. ��N RSM ^ 3 a �y.i y.7 ni .�iy��u�i 1/1� NKx � � S. I I �iw� WnnO�eNOo2 w¢O� �N�we�woN� aY r� T I I I �S w w i0 r n„I I I I II �wl�sfnneRdNOo�w� W f2 :i , �N�w1e R.wgwn Nnl � g a� p a I nl N lV Fig I ( w _ p w N 1/f q i I N r� O n M !► O• N e y i .. � 0 y 12 ^r � N N w d N r O N x N � ti I � .n.� r r P N O C a` M ri IIJ w } �y w O n q O • N O O O N M N w O M �+ O h N wn P M � R �w� ♦ N N �� N w w < Y N >. 1 � I r N M r JI ~ n ~ w�wwl w.~i w.Ni .++r�TRFyNHRiNNNNNRRI T'. ��N RSM ^ 3 a �y.i y.7 ni .�iy��u�i 1/1� NKx � � S. R } I q I I x I , a r I I ' I h I yL � S i g R } Ii g r I N d I N i I I Y � ' I — 1 s 0 T • ki y S N M q e p q rd R Ale � r= I m _ 8 j M o s t d p � � I • N p S N M q e p q M e m R 2st 1 o d R I t M O- i 2 M-• R• "�' 0 0� � M M M h p p m o 0 e e p e d O e e o e p m g m p p p Ale � r= I m _ 8 - � ©-& a ■uj � , ! . ■ � � 2 2 I � � � 2 I ■ f � � � � � . � . .m■■■�■�■,■��a■Q■sa;;,��■■,■■§§§■■@§■■§§©22:. , k k - - - a _ . ' . - ©- - db _ _ ® -- � ____� ca ° Cb - m § . _ di. _ _ � I - - - ® ®- ■ - - © - - - © ® - G G 2 i - - -® - -.® ■& s - - �§ �| -- -® © - Is - � ©-& a ■uj � , ! . ■ � � 2 2 I � � � 2 I ■ f � � � � � . � . .m■■■�■�■,■��a■Q■sa;;,��■■,■■§§§■■@§■■§§©22:. , � �2� . I � | ■ � � � « ~ @ � �| � . � � � .�� � & _ ~ $ �■ , I � �� 2 # - ■ ■ . � �� ! [ � $ - 2 g � � � � � � § � � � � � � � � �� -| K � S � � ■ . � � � �� , - � - } � � �i f _§ 9 2 ® � ■ I � � - � � � | -� � i § � $ _ _ . ■ � J � � �, � � _ � ` ■ $ � � . ■ # \� | ���| � � � ■ 7 f f§�� i � �§. � � � ( § � # � 7 � ■ _@�■ � §� �_ il���| _ � ' _ k � . . �$a■ ! | � � . . 2 � � 7 � f � � � 2 ,2 � § . | 2� � 2 � � � � - � � � §§§��■§§§§§§§■§$§B§■2222��§@§§§@a4§#§@■■§§2■§■§■■■S■2�£! , ' • Y s a a e O I e d � d w N N O a m � N O v 0 x a I a � v14111 'd ao ivswsegj iggR amb A v dgdgdoiq iv dvalaakgi dv l� 9f�9 :p Osq�GO My I v dgdvioalq bq de �j viol so e� ti € Oe►:p:4:q: � �i iqi eii q igdgdqiq do dvdodg0 ► 'y�' a dgigdqdo do acedy dvd iv d } I :a► •gsg0q: g I * ` v l g d v d q i m e OP a A e o do d v d o ., j �R'.ER W, IW. a * y ¢ F�.� ► 14i+ 14ii Ry::,:.:^lyak de yEq Re �, !1 � ► q � � � � �i � d � d 4 d q O O � C� � d o ey �i � W x323J4 f ► i► S Sde A do�1v{va do q .T w i y ' q a $d 4o doClod quj i0 v14111 'd ao ivswsegj iggR amb A v dgdgdoiq iv dvalaakgi dv l� 9f�9 :p Osq�GO My I v dgdvioalq bq de �j viol so e� ti € Oe►:p:4:q: � �i iqi eii q igdgdqiq do dvdodg0 ► 'y�' a dgigdqdo do acedy dvd iv d } I :a► •gsg0q: g I * ` v l g d v d q i m e OP a A e o do d v d o ., j �R'.ER W, IW. a * y ¢ F�.� ► 14i+ 14ii Ry::,:.:^lyak de yEq Re Cis � � .� . � _ r di ®41go-- C*- � ©i �$��@� � �«������� ■°§ } �j � ■■£■ � ,■$■f■�d_-t_� �_ _ @®■ db �` @■ - �_�_�-�- �- §�« �■@�@ ■ __��_--d •---•_�_ db ©@ a a � ------���� �_ . $�$���f■ �������-# ��� ■ • 46 $���§��� �- - | ■ . � �| �3f SE af� ■ 2���:�:;� �- ` M°m Ii � �| ' ���■■��■ ��:2:�:�� �- - ■°! ' � $ �| � �$�$�f� ■ ����:�::� �- � -@°■ - �§� 2 § a § ■ � | § ��$$J § ��■J �����■� � $ 2a� �4 } i a ■ i �_� ■� ■■-_ ! � m Mall! � -� 111m�� ��� a� _� 1111q� 2 ■1 -��a, 2�,@1� @� ■■a■ ■a■■■■■■■a■■#--_-_®�^ � ■~#�,f ! ■____■_____________�@�@@■�§���;.■_�■■�gB§�§��§B§§§_�_,2 °! n k2§ ` � � ■ m40db ■� - k t-� 981■ di '-- � | a �I dtC�: a 46 ■■ ■ _14 . a �� �| d�dt Gb CD�� ■� e � . ■ � �� 40 416 di P; � $ M�� eM. #CA ° ' - • ■ ■ ■ • . if 'W | ■ ■ ■ ci . Cd, � § 2 | � $ q � } 2 , @ § §$ ■ 22�■�■2■��@■■�■���■■■�2■@���■�/S§�K�«�§@#■8�■B8�■§e8�■�f���� I Y 0 jjj I • vj � � A w N V < ysg gg ����� �����M �h � "'►:.0 .q r�►���i�����i���K�r� � �r���ri w��rK r� r��..��.�.�r���.�7K��.�j 7•G x-�i 131 U ppy§y§a4 Y Ii { 41L i dgdgdada Sigel �p d�� aiodq�oeQe� � '� I dgd°�d•dq q d I i78 elgda ede 5t dgdq,►gdqq d d d g d a d q d a sea46 d d g d q¢ q 4p r d q d q dvsv4-46 d $ dq 3 s N y� +rErE iyif ! Q �'►i "''�d'g dodo q d 0 R • .1 dlgdgdvdq dlod d dqd dgdv�gdqe5l-+ y�! ! � a � ■� -••-•--- ®-- c -- -0-®§-®9©2•§ - -� -- db - db - -- db -- ab --- ab-4--4--m®a - | \ � ■ --6046464, 46,46 - ®046 ----46-db- --- 9b --db--�- §-©©°■°§ - ' ___ _ db._ � ~ � ■ ■a_ C6 ,_- -®-®f--©-2©§ ƒe o-----4- ®-- - 4646_ ____§_4646®m®§ i ,�-----®® --- - 4646_ 4646®--•©46@46§ -_-®__db_ __46 46 46_40 - - db -----§°§ - --4646__,_ 0046 ® 2 4646- --®-§®®4646■-n � $ ) do � § ■ ■ ��) a ■ ■2 k �� ■ �$ �. 2 @� 2 � g1g1q1 1 0 "4; 4x9 lit �Q�4 a,:S wr #,f� Ina ski I4tSf• db up ob If sr 3; ell 14 > "1 I ! f x'21 #�� zE 3 �F if 122 t 0 4 x� xf ft f ��� jyj �{ O 4 F J g1g1q1 1 0 "4; 4x9 lit �Q�4 a,:S wr #,f� Ina ski I4tSf• db up ob If sr 3; ell 14 > "1 I ! f x'21 #�� 1 9 131 d Y a�+ 3YY .i e • I i d 0 � � � � # 0 O i � � � O q r r q e .gy M A q � .�+� yn r M 0 e r g O$ a +i s � M i I Ssii f»frfyfy.j vl .. 44 ' db 4 0 • q r 1� N �1 » r q 0 Q o s ¢ * • r e r 0 e• .► • O e QQ o$Q � K I • 0 0 0 600 i'► OII n r O 0 QQ 0 i # #i i • eor db 046 3 e a M y M M M M ^ i r r 0• r 0 11� n • 0 0 I °' I !! • ev• db 4w nA n sve o � � � � � � ###g�#s q� eor rvs ��� ��� •ve $_� r • o e d v• IS HP 1+ iflll i �w.��1 ? ! I � r p4 (Ny » v+ w� .�► 1M1� ++go, ++ 8 y+ y y v N is S e » 1 w w �} N N J�1 .� ail Jjl N 39 N M A S lsp yN �y �♦1 �+y Hwy r� N slu 9 a A a M N N I N N I It i I Go 0 I A j I i I JIMM III 11fll I ^avid #e M a di a 7 M N � N Jill w Appendix B ALTERNATIVE B SUMMARY PROJECTIONS --TABLE B1 sV! pN I Ia �Y Oat +2 YLq � •i +y. K i¢ O R 3S iiiN ! I I I ' i Y I w I oga h M 4 r d" � aOdN«ag.�i w w r 41 I � LI a$ m A r O^ ar d n .. /, 1 O M t2 I d rt I I sy } M i I w O� O M r tl^ tl -a N ::mg a ri i I iG n w+ O am M N w 0 tl P a a P 3 V h P ! "V M I � wS rl� O N w 0,0 d w b» J O tl 0:9 M w^ g d m a O d � V a I I I I sI r. I r�^O..wevdemrwomo� M w.raa.l►a Onx r. � I I $ I Y I I st L � I � I I a I �' I • � Ri I I .� � � a O wi a ..� w � ~ .Ni � w � e � � ^ � P J N � a ^ ti w In a cr u bl = yy} I y >1i M t a J �1 d» M P+ a V w a f� M1 el� i Mr a a 3 dl I V Yy I �i Y` I2 Yt W � ►. ! I: i ! � � w L i .. At��= wr»♦.h Vr.»Pwgil i7i�w.wwlw�wlV Ai:�>dN�ANAR�>X�MpMRM�s���3r�'��v9t�NY1�IAx ✓^+� � O tl C AOdNd + 4 4 y6 O O w V 1 �S j a I I � w� � w t~V hl • � w O N+ 0 H � � � P y I Yf M > N N ^ 1 10 y r I I � IC fM. I �w�gnlh.�d�N.tiy-��•� g'N�ws�'"'e."'�.� '.: i y, +Loh voila 1 iii aha !C I � w N M �/ 1A y n y p w w N 11�� ♦ N h rr w r �y ��yy ++ yy�� ��..11 Ny� JJ + w� .1� J 1r11�� '- 2 t x _x >g -4.w d - i w w w o ar �s a -6,000 - - °► O O w N a � w � i I y ' O O N O ! swww - 9 � j • Y N YY I� I JIM W i •Zv"1�'�j',2'jS1lR'iCi.ki:1d7C�.�AfSi.�3Z�^w'•!!�'�RL!L:e'27Cyt7R�ix�`8iii � ids^$�, •� �:• a .► .A R� .+ � R S � R ti � w 0 i ■ � \ � @ � � } � � � � $ 2 � ■ J ■ 2 B © # N h � 9 � � $ ■ � @ f ■ - I m ® � 2 2 � � } � � � � $ 2 � ■ J ■ S§§5§e885■§§2e§�S§§■§g2■�$§2;�§aaa§48@§■2§2■§■2■■■GS@��■§■«� Appendix C ALTERNATIVE C SUMMARY PROJECTIONS --TABLE Cl 7 �+ � e meoeee � e�QmoQoy� JJx .yyn O r N w �i `f � r33 22SS L -• 8 � � IA ITI IIS W � � N iq+ 1t I S i i N O� O M1 �'► O� O N O O � r J p r w Y I I rYi w J I I "�4$q+�NONOwOye wM1p,�► NN w N of .N "� Jo.+�OMwOyO wOv r,� e s o� � M I'+wN •NwO�►6 wOw�JO em� .rwSOO.�dO r I I M W Y ... N ii � I NQ �, gwwO V000arJp 00 + ti � I I eeo+� he.rodveair. � ^1n., � s kt q�NewJ�^��' M 3 416 I , .x ;`I it .r f • N . I Y 0 9 A6 I y1 d w N Oi �i v� O Id A o O O O i ul w 41 y M Y Y � � � � •i 1 1� wy • N I V 1 44 40' M.ra.. 4 w NM vMynM^.q.ww�.Jiw.•Tiw.~..�.AiiiN N�N�NNA*.�i ii����rhi A, '1v� •1 ���v�.^I������x r a � S O h nO�OnnbAO Nb ��wI�1 O� ls` N.� w by• p�.� �(. A M M � � NO�On.� bAb N0 w�►w� Og �O� w O w.. Oa� � .� n N p� O n q O� O N d 0 N w� b .� 1� VI r�r w 0P.. •+ O H •vwi qv � Ff N NO�OnnO�dNOO��+w.11M1iO� rN� wbe�wo"�,J'w'^. A � «s w N O a O n M O A O N O O H w� O� J M� w O w •+ p N w � � "', N p w O n q• A O N O w� w w O� � O� w b w w 0� 1�wX � A r I V 1 44 40' M.ra.. 4 w NM vMynM^.q.ww�.Jiw.•Tiw.~..�.AiiiN N�N�NNA*.�i ii����rhi A, '1v� •1 ���v�.^I������x r a � S 0 R F a I KeC►� ;� mIft .. I' M O db It .�, d "Ada q �y Y M wd d M w 1 rrSFi � N up IM. 40.0 ca d N Ir r " + d It A G I � ? f I e � .. HAI ;,�ws=ewwww� �►srsdwsod+.'~i s ���� Y �Ot � i dwssswrerd eoewrwwwwer j♦ ++ M N Y i i ' S Ow Ow wA+OS i Ix N � � N 3.^i�SSS.^�3SIlT."iC�:ICkRl:7Cl.i'li.i.r:Yj.'tSi'.tl►i�i"."t y! n .. �I � rr�+.��W..�.., � P r 3 0 Mt r•`.�+•3S�r~+Ivnxlv�%%��+:i��w�Myw R� ���P �wX�S���������:.�M�ti.�+ � ^ N I t I I 1 w i d O d O e e d d !► � � ii � .~.. xi d o s o 0 o d O e a1 a I I ' } d O d 0 e d e O e IA i 0 0 0 0 d 0 O O O Mt r•`.�+•3S�r~+Ivnxlv�%%��+:i��w�Myw R� ���P �wX�S���������:.�M�ti.�+ � ^ R vpN I w s � ����rars�st�xIztaz��x��xxxx��_x�tsxaracsr�^�"-"� N N ,ai O A O a A O M ti s w M � y 0 w • w s � ����rars�st�xIztaz��x��xxxx��_x�tsxaracsr�^�"-"� l y a 0 O a 0 O 0 a O .r w .. O a Appendix D CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 1992-93 BUDGET ANALYSIS :ta a==a X292 :2 4;t;S1e* $t a 9 filial also a falls O A a O N N wl g N O N P w 0 0 O JL4 i 2 •' G o 7 f0 nA AgaL Y Y a g a a:s a M M Mg M q M M ++N o A � � n /� F ♦ N w i 0 O YC W� P :ta a==a X292 :2 4;t;S1e* $t a 9 filial also a falls O A a O N N wl g N O N P w 0 0 O JL4 i 2 •' G o 7 f0 nA AgaL Y =sa 8 s .4 V i a 1122 $2 a a a a ittIR all gains :j " : � ;lit Nix '~ I tit� a ' ~ M P Irj yi(� az All x I Iz 4 3 N M M N 0 O O O d I _I r p �y A e N n Jf 1 9 11 t 4 s N O pzP 0 v N ri P ri M A= .� d w O� •► N r y A M R 1�� , O O O O O • A O O O O O O O O n � N 0000 00 OOO memo w gI v to�g sa eas $s� i I 0 mom 0000 00000 00460 Q V w I � y I p s R Ova 3 3 gas ei Q }� 4 g« � 1 all �Rlv HAIlt 3112 3 x al VAw ► O V N 1� I � P P s r J �'� � snhvdgSsMvegoelw Y� � � •� nNi yh.a e� �y wwwq�M1i N iS �S �r!� � eh ti rO mOO qhos� NOp s00 h N '��« I so�gerogodC►�oqq� � r w �I Mll all son! 11212 so m w r h N I Appendix E LIST OF CITY OF DIAMOND BAR OFFICIALS CONTACTED James DeStefano Don Hemsley Linda G. Magnuson Bob Rose George A. Wentz, P.E. Community Development Director Superintendent of Parks & Maintenance Accounting Manager Director, Department of Community Services Interim City Engineer