Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
10/05/1993
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Mayor — Gary G. Miller Mayor Pro Tem — Phyllis E. Papen Councilman — John A. Forbing Councilman — Gary H. Werner Councilman — Dexter D. MacBride City Council Chambers are located at: South CoastAir Quality Management DistrictAuditonum 21865 East Copley Drive ec�.Se reftain rOrn Sn10 In ea n or rin In Int ; e ounce . am ; ; rs MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 MEETINGTIME: Closed Session - 5:00 p.m. Regular Session - 6:00 P.M. Terrence L Belanger City Manager Andrew V. Arczynski City Attorney Lynda Burgess City Clerk Copies of atdf;teparts or other written documentationrelating 16.034 Atem referred to on this agenda are on file in the office of the City Cler[c and are available for;`p0b;.s >: inspection if you gave questions regarding art m * agenda iteplease con#act the City Clerk at (908j 860 4ss during business>hours. Tha City of Diamond Bar uses RECYCLED Qaper and encourages you to do the same. 1. CLOSED SESSION: ►w 3. E,w Next Resolution No. 93-71 Next Ordinance No. 05(1993) 5:00 p.m. A. Litigation - Government Code Section 54956.9 1. City of Diamond Bar v. County of Los Angeles 2. Diamond Bar Associates v. City of Diamond Bar 3. Diamond Bar Citizens v. City Clerk B. Personnel - Government Code Section 54957.6 CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Miller INVOCATION: Reverend Randy Lanthripe - Church in the Valley ROLL CALL: Councilmen MacBride, Forbing, Werner, Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Mayor Miller SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, ETC. 3.1 Presentation of Certificate of Recognition to Davis Paul for saving the life of Tatum Paul. 3.2 Presentations of City Tiles to "City Online" Volunteers and Local Vendors. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 4.1 Planning Commission - October 11, 1993 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 4.2 Traffic & Transportation Commission - October 14, 1993 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 4.3 City Council Meeting - October 19, 1993 - 6:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS: "Public Comments" is the time reserved on each regular meeting agenda to provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the Council on Consent Calendar items or matters of interest to the public that are not already scheduled for consideration on this agenda. Please complete a Speakerfs Card and give it to the a five minute maximum time limit when addressing the City Council. OCTOBER 5, 1993 PAGE 2 6. COUNCIL COMMENTS: Items raised by individual Council - members are for Council discussion. Direction may be given at this meeting or the item may be scheduled for action at a future meeting. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following items listed on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and are approved by a single motion. 7.1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 7.1.1 Regular Meeting of September 7 1993 - Approve as submitted. 7.1.2 Adjourned Regular Meeting of September 14, 1993 - South Pointe Master Plan - Approve as submitted. 7.2 WARRANT REGISTER: Approve Warrant Register dated October 5, 1993 in the amount of $548,641.44. 7.3 MEMBERSHIP OF HIDDEN HILLS IN SCJPIA - The Southern California Joint Powers Insurance Authority, at their meeting of September 22, 1993, recommended approval of the City of Hidden Hills as a member of the Authority. Cities applying for membership must be approved by a two-thirds majority of the current membership. Recommended Action: Approve membership of the City of Hidden Hills in the SCJPIA and authorize C/Forbing to execute the consent form as the City's delegate to the Authority. 7.4 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES - Filed by Korenne Offenbecher, August 10, 1993. Recommended Action: Reject request and refer matter for further action to Carl Warren & Co., the City's Risk Manager. 7.5 BOND EXONERATIONS: 7.5.1 PAVING SURETY BOND POSTED FOR TRACT 42534 (Montefino Condominium Complex) - The City desires to exonerate Surety Bond No.00300752 posted for paving of private streets at Porto Grande, Estoril Dr. and Bodega Way in the amount of $111,500. Recommended Action: Approve and accept completed work and exonerate the surety bond posted for paving of private streets. 7.5.2 PAVING SURETY BOND POSTED FOR TRACT 42533 (Montefino Condominium Complex) - The City desires to exonerate Surety Bond No. OC300865 for paving of Estoril Dr. (private street) in OCTOBER 5, 1993 PAGE 3 the amount of $85,850. Recommended Action: Approve and accept completed work and exonerate the Surety Bond posted with L.A. County in November, 1984 for paving of Estoril Dr. (private street). 7.5.3 GRADING SURETY BOND POSTED FOR TRACT 42535 (Montefino Condominium Complex) - The City desires to exonerate Surety Bond No. OC300453 posted for grading of Buildings Nos. 44-65 inclusive, on Chardonnay Ave. in the amount of $7,000. Recommended Action: Approve and accept work completed and exonerate the surety bond posted with L.A. County in June, 1983 for grading for 22 buildings on Chardonnay Ave. in Tract 42535 in the amount of $7,000. 7.5.4 PAVING SURETY BOND POSTED FOR TRACT 36741 - (Montefino Condominium Complex) - The City desires to exonerate Surety Bond No. 5293514 posted for paving of Bodega Way and Colombard Ln. (private streets) in the amount of $118,000. Recommended Action: Approve and accept work completed and exonerate the Surety Bond posted with L.A. County in November, 1986 for paving, curb and gutter on Bodega Way and Colombard Ln. 7.5.5 STORM DRAIN BOND FOR PRIVATE DRAIN NOS. 1813 AND 2061 ON TRACT 42535, CONSTRUCTED BY PRESLEY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA - The City desires to exonerate Surety Bond No. OC 300530 posted for Storm Drain Nos. 1813 and 2061 in the amount of $194,000. Recommended Action: Approve exoneration of Bond No. OC 300530 posted for Storm Drain Nos. 1813 and 2061 on Tract 42535. 7.5.6 GRADING SURETY BOND POSTED FOR 2452 ALAMO HEIGHTS - The City desires to exonerate Surety Bond No. 3 SM 719 269 00 posted for grading in the amount of $4,460. Recommended Action: Approve and accept work completed and exonerate the surety bond posted with L.A. County in May, 1989 for grading for a single family residence. OCTOBER 5, 1993 PAGE 4 7.5.7 SURETY BOND POSTED FOR GRADING AT 2638 BLAZE TRAIL DR. - The City desires to exonerate Surety Bond No. P2500423 posted for grading in the amount of $8,622. Recommended Action: Approve and accept work completed and exonerate the Surety Bond No. P2500423. 7.5.8 GENERAL INSPECTION SURETY BOND POSTED FOR TRACT 36741 (MONTEFINO CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX) The City desires to exonerate Surety Bond No. 6322839 posted for general inspection of Bodega Way and Colombard Ln. (private streets) in the amount of $10,000. Recommended Action: Approve and accept work completed and exonerate the surety bond posted. 7.6 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO ACCEPT ON BEHALF OF SAID DISTRICT A TRANSFER AND CONVEYANCE OF STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS KNOWN AS PRIVATE DRAIN NO. 1813 IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FOR FUTURE OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND IMPROVEMENT, AND AUTHORIZE THE TRANSFER AND CONVEYANCE THEREOF - Private Drain No. 1813 was constructed in 1984 as part of the improvements on Tract 42535 in the Montefino Condominium Complex. Subsequently, the drain was inspected and approved by L.A. County Department of Public Works in June, 1993. Based on satisfactory completion of the improvements per approved plans. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX requesting L.A. County Department of Public Works Flood Control District to accept the transfer and conveyance of Private Drain No. 1813 for future operation, maintenance, repair and improvement. 7.7 AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE CITY'S SOLID WASTE PERMIT SYSTEM AND TO ASSIST IN THE COORDINATION OF AB 939 RELATED ACTIVITIES DURING FISCAL YEAR 1993-94 - On January 19, 1993, Council authorized the City Manager to retain the services of Charles Abbott Associates, Inc. a qualified consulting firm with experience in solid waste management practices, to administer the City's solid waste permit system through the end of FY 1992-93. Although the agreement expired on July 1, 1993, with the advent of the new fiscal year, the City continues to need the services of a qualified consultant to assist with the administration of the OCTOBER 5, 1993 PAGE 5 City's solid waste permit system and in the implementation of integrated waste management programs. Recommended Action: Approve the proposed work program and budget for solid waste related activities for FY 1993-94 and authorize the City Manager to execute a letter amendment, in an amount not -to -exceed $25,000, to the existing agreement with Charles Abbott Associates, Inc. for administration of the City's solid waste permit system and to assist in the coordination of AB939 activities during FY 1993-94. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 8.1 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA DETERMINING THAT UNDERGROUNDING, IN THE SPECIFIED AREA, IS IN THE GENERAL PUBLIC INTEREST AND ESTABLISHING THE DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 2 - This relates to a proposed project to underground utility lines between Temple Ave. and Gold Rush Dr. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX establishing Diamond Bar Blvd. Underground Utility District No. 2. 8.2 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 28, 1993. This is a request for approval of a mixed use project, known as 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 Dr. 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. Recommended Action: Receive presentations from staff, City consultants and project developers; open the Public Hearing, receive testimony and continue the Hearing. OCTOBER 5, 1993 PAGE 6 9. OLD BUSINESS: 9.1 DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTION PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATION (RETENTION/ATTRACTION) Recommended Action: Review RFP and discuss. 9.2 LEYLAND DRIVE ENCROACHMENTS - Residents on Leyland Dr. have constructed walls and other structures within the existing right-of-way easement. When the tract maps were approved by the County prior to the City's incorporation, a public easement was given to the City for public improvement and utility purposes. Recommended Action: It is recommended that staff be directed to identify any encroachments that may violate applicable codes and ordinances and that action be taken to mitigate violations. Any encroachments that are not in violation would be allowed to remain. 9.3 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MODIFYING A "2 -HOUR PARKING, 7:00 A.M.-6:00 P.M." PARKING RESTRICTION TO A "NO STOPPING, 6-8:00 A.M. & 4-6:00 P.M., EXCEPT SATURDAY AND SUNDAY" SUPPLEMENTED WITH A "2 -HOUR PARKING, 8:00 A.M.-4:00 P.M., EXCEPT SATURDAY AND SUNDAY" RESTRICTION, RED CURBING ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PATHFINDER ROAD BETWEEN SR 57 OFF -RAMP AND BREA CANYON ROAD - Proposed signing and striping for the south side of Pathfinder Rd. between SR 57 off -ramp and Brea Canyon Rd. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX and approve the design to include a right -turn lane at Brea Canyon Rd. from eastbound Pathfinder Rd. 9.4 PUMP STATION DESIGN FOR "COUNTRY" SEWERS - This item relates to the design of the Indian Creek Pump Station. Recommended Action: Authorize an expenditure of up to $40,000 for the design of the Indian Creek pump station. 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS: 11. ADJOURNMENT: LAW OFFICES MICHAEL B. MONTGOMERY A LAW CORPORATION October 5, 1993 13200 CROSSROADS PARKWAY NORTH SUITE 3SO CITY OF INDUSTRY, CALIFORNIA 91746 TELEPHONE (310) 908-1850 FAX (310) 908-1854 BY FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL Diamond Bar City Council City of Diamond Bar 21660 E. Copley Drive Diamond Bar, Ca. 91765 Re: City Council Agenda, October 5, 1993 Gentlemen/ Madam: W ALSO ADMITTED TO FLORIDA AND HAWAII STATE BARS (-7 co The undersigned represents the Diamond Bar Citizens to Protect Country Living, an unincorporated association. The Association has provided me with the City Council Agenda set for this evening, and called my attention to Item 8.2, the South Pointe Master Plan. The Association requests that this item be deleted from the agenda for two reasons. One, a decision cannot be reached on any matter, because no valid General Plan is in place. Candidly, the Association has heard an opinion from the City Hall that the City may decide to go ahead on the ground that the resolution adopting the General Plan remained in effect for more than 30 days before the court order, or some such strained construction to that effect. The Association would point out that a resolution adopting a General Plan is not effective until 30 days after passage'. The referendum petitions were filed 28 days after the date of passage of the resolution adopting the General Plan, thereby suspending its effective date . 2 The Court's order of September 28, 1993, enforced the petition circulator's right to have the petitions accepted by the City Clerk as of August 24, 1993. 'The second ground is that any testimony taken will only be of assistance in the event that the current suspended General Plan is confirmed by a subsequent election. Even if that were to happen, the data that would be received this evening would not then be current at the time the project could be affirmed or denied, or especially if the passage of time would require modifications not known at ;h=s LAW OFFICES MICHAEL B. MONTGOMERY Diamond Bar City Council re City Council Agenda October 5, 1993 Page 2 time. The Association is confident that if the the recent Court decision is appealed, the trial court will maintain the writ.' Very truly yours, 46, MICHAEL B . MONTGOMERY MBM/pp cc: Diamond Bar Citizens to Protect Country Living Midway Orchards v. County of Butte, 220 Cal. App.3d 765. Election Code 54051. Farrington v. Fairfield, 194 Cal. App.2d 237. Is Code of Civil Procedure §1110b. Budke Design Service' Land Planning - Grading - Earthwork 5 Wrigley • Irvine, CA. 92718 - C714) 587.6997 - lax: !7141 830-0546 October 5, 1993 Mr. Jim DeStefano Community Development Director City of Diamond Bar 21660 L. Copley Drive, Suite 190 Diamond Bar, CA. 91765 Re: South Pointe Master Plan Dear Mr. DeStefano] I am dismayed by the news that Mayor Miller and Mayor Pro Tem' papen will not be available for tonight's public hearing, and In alight of Councilman Warner's posture at last Tuesday's public hearing I am requesting on behalf of my client, Mr. Patel, that you continue our pxesentation.to the next available meeting of: the City Council. Please notify my office if Chia presents a -problem. Sincerely, aures J. Budke cc: Mr. Amrut Patel, Sasak Corp. r7 -- Iry fill 0 ! 9.13 J.C.D. J. C. DABNEY & ASSOCIATES LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS & ENGINEERS 671 S. BREA CANYON ROAD SUITE 5 WALNUT, CALIFORNIA 91789 714 594-7568 FAX - 714-594-5090 October 5, 1993 Mr. James DeStefano Director of Community Development City of Diamond Bar Reference: South Pointe Master Plan Dear Mr. DeStefano, Mr. Forrister and Mr. Arciero have instructed me to inform you that they wish to have the Public Hearing on the South Pointe Master Plan continued until October 12 or the next available meeting of the City Council. My clients are concerned that the consulting team may once again be called on to show up at the Council Chambers prepared to make a presentation that is not going to take place. It is their hope that a one week continuation will allow the City Council and Staff to determine the direction that they need to take and what, if any, avenues are available to them in the resolution of the General Plan. Thank you once again for the consideration you have extended to both Mr. Forrister and Mr. Arciero. R _ tfu�y, Ja C. Dabney RCE President cc: Mr. Dwight Forrister, R -N -P Development Inc. Mr. Frank Arciero Jr., Arciero & Sons Inc. ;`���!_: ••7: . •', . • • ice: •� i / /�. •�' � ��_'/, is •[ � � �i'� �- � � � � I� K • IIS �� .0 7J 1G[f 1 Is w fans • � . a fe 1t; •� �••\� _ a a r or<�sEs orsusoY sac _ 23 AM . .- ..1..... • ' W �s. gas uJ >, Is sum • • ' ' - 411- K foee PKK - COWACIAL I SOMOL LCM nAMW A ASSOCIAM SOOTS POINTE MASTER PLAN sGIN& p hamw N.. PROJECT BOUNDARIES s J.C.D. J. C. D ABNEY & ASSOCIATES LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS & ENGINEERS 671 S. BREA CANYON ROAD SUITE 5 WALNUT, CALIFORNIA 91789 714 594-7568 FAX - 714-594-5090 Mr. & Mrs. Rim March 8, 1993' 1704 Morning Sun Ave. Walnut, CA Reference: Brow Drain and Slopes Tract No. 27141 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Rim, The obligation for maintenance of the brow drain, down drain an associated slopes tnat they protect rest with Tract No. 27141. The R -N -P Development property and the Patel property, in 1967, was owned by the Transamerica Development Company of Diamond Bar, California. During the approval process for Tentative Tract Map I would suggest that either you or your attorney visit the Los Angles County Department of Public Works office in La Puente and review the County's file for Tract No. 27141. The area of concern is reflected on sheet 4 of the grading plan dated November 29, 1968. The slope release document signed by Transanerica Development Company is locatad within the sauce file and dated January 20, 1967. Now that it is apparent that the legal obligation for maintenance of the slopes and drains rest with Tract No. 27141, R -N -P Development Inc. is presenting you with a bill for the repairs made to the slopes and drains in question. As you stated in your letter dated February 23, 1993, "I hope to resolve this situation in an amicable manner", we too would like to resolve this situation in an amicable manner. Your timely attention to this matter would be d;. Thank -you. R ectfully an C. Dabney RCE President cc: Mr. Dwight Forrister, R -N -P Development Inc. Mr. Amrut Patel, Sassak Corp. Mr. George Wentz, City Engineer, City of Diamond Bar INVOICE March 8, 1993 To: Mr. & Mrs. Rim From: R -N -P Development Inc. Invoice No.: 0001 RE: Slope Repair Sack Charge(Morning Sun Ave.) (Jan. 27 - Feb. 8) Scope of work Cleanup Brow Drains & Slope Repair. J. C. Dabney & Assoc. Contractor (Equipment & Operator) Laborers & Materials Total Amount Due $ 2,100.00 $ 4,145.04 S 959.11 $ 7,204.15 1— km _ N N O r M 4- 44% I J.C.D. J. C. DABNEY & ASSOCIATES LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS & ENGINEERS 671 S. BREA CANYON ROAD SUITE 5 WALNUT, CALIFORNIA 91789 714 594-7568 FAX - 714-594-5090 Mr. & Mrs. Rim February 5,1993 1704 Morning Sun Ave. Walnut, Ca. Reference: Brow Drain Failure Above Rear Yard Slope Dear Mr. & Mrs. Rim, I have reviewed the available recorded information, the site and the damage associated with the drain failure. The following are my thoughts and conclusions: tract approval by the County of Los Angles. 2. Mr. Patel's property and R -N -P Developments Inc's property was established by Tract No. 32576 as recorded in the County of Los Angles, in 1979. Upon review of Tract No. 27141, (your ownership being Lot 156 of said tract) anu Tract No. 32.576, I find no evidence of a drainage easement along or near the common boundary of the two tracts. Upon reviewing the title report provided by First American Title Company, Los Angles, which includes all the backup and official recorded documents I find no recorded easement by separate instrument. 3. It is my opinion, that the drain was clearly built to protect the homes within Tract No. 27141 against seasonal flooding and flows from the adjacent undeveloped property to the east by the developer of Tract No. 27141. Furthermore, I would suggest that the drain was built illegally upon the property to the east, unless someone can produce a recorded instrument indicating the contrary. If a recorded easement can be located I am sure that it will clearly indicate that the responsibility for maintaining the brow drain belongs to Tract No. 27141. 4. R -N -P Development Inc., at it, reasons; to protect se RUMany litigation that could arise from a person being harmed while trespassing across or through the unsafe area, to protect it ' s property from any further dama(le caused by the failure of. the drain, and to protect the adjacent owners from further damage as a good neighbor policy. R- NP Development Inc. has asked First American Title Company to provide them with any and all available recorded information surrounding the recordation of Tract No. 27141, including any recorded C. C. & R.'s or Homeowner's Association documents. r S. e, C yard, with your authorization, cover an( ff-dinc. 19 9 3 with Mrs. Kim at the Rim at Inc. will make to your. rear consist of patching the areas 6. Per my meeting and discussion with Mr. Kim on the site February 3, 1993, I strongly suggest that you contact your homeowners insurance carrier and file a claim for all damages you have sustained due to the flooding. If I can provide any further information to you that would help process your claim, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Respectfully, Jan C. Dabney RCE President cc: Mr. Dwight Forrister - R -N -P Development Inc. Mr. Amrut Patel - Sassak Corp. Mr. George Wentz - City Engineer, City of Diamond Bar 44 Y. H. Kim 1704 Morning Sun Ave. Walnut, CA February 23, 1993 Mr. Jan C. Dabney J.C. Dabney & Associates 671 S. Brea Canyon Road, Suite 5 Walnut, CA 91789 Reference: Flood Damage and Necessary Repairs Dear Mr. Dabney. In response to your letter dated February 5, 1993, I am again comyletely repairing the erosion and flood damage to my vrope Mo'm property own a ovment When we spoke in person about this problem at the one_ aheath January 25, 1993, you assured me that you would "take care of also contiimea verpatty that the damage to my property would be repaired. A partial repair attempt was then made by filling in a large hole that had been eroded. However, 1%r this attempt has proved ineffective during subsequent rains of the past couple of weeks. The water running off from the property behind my lot has pushed through the soil under the brow drain and caused damage to the slope, ground cover and trees. Furthermore, the onslaught of water has collected under my yard and damaged the outdoor spa located there. Thb floodin¢ has dislo L the spa tub and rendered it inoperative. In your letter you stated that I should rely on homeowners insurance to cover the damages to the yard. These damages are not covered by the insurance policy. You also stated that you think the brow drain was illegally built on the property by the developer of my tract. The circumstance I believe that the responsibility for repairing all of the damage to the slope, ground cover, trees and backyard spa rests fully with R -N -P Development Inc. because the property was not sufficiently maintaincd to provide adequate drainage and runoff to the strut. I hope to resolve this situation in an amicable manner and will authorize R -N -P Development Inc. to make all of the necessary repairs mentioned above. I would appreciate a response from you regarding this matter by March 5, 1993. Sincerely, 04., Kim Mr. Dwight Forrister, R -N -P Development Inc.- Mr. nc:Mr. Amrut Patel, Sassak Corp. Mr. George Wentz, City Engineer, City of Diamond Bar 1 ���� ! �. �w 1, i,,, rT . '.'C`' •�i ._ k;A Id� 777 jn • •t - '—� .' "J`� INK��� � Il it II ` i 7�"� 7� !W��' k� " ,r ? j •j . I f- t•"� All, r' '. 7t' �^ t ,.� j� tilt r' ���r►t r r " �� � , 1 ' 'i C � � i' i}, if I y./-"i� }r �fYtt Y)q1� jl.+. 11 _!y '•� ! � � ` 1•: J,;LT 1 0. L " ^ ii. -, I Ou .41 il��noopp-- -7 I �f r' 7: i � � 1 +ti � ,lr,7 ,,r i w S: Maicra Ntll 19 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 21308 Pathfinder Rd., Suite 208 • Diamond Bar, CA 91765 • (714) 860-6761 10/5/93 THE CITY HAS NEVER REQUESTED OUR INPUT IN REGARDS TO OUR LIMITED PARKING AT CANYON VIEW OFFICES LOCATED AT: 21308 PATHFINDER ROAD. WE CURRENTLY HAVE 36 OFFICES WITH 36 SPACES WITH 12 SPACES IN FRONT. WE AS BUSINESS OWNERS ARE OPPOSED TO "NO STOPPING ANYTIME". WE NEED AT LEAST (5) SPACES IN FRONT, AND (2) IN THE FRONT OF CHEVRON GAS STATION. DUE TO THE FART THAT THERE ARE 7 BUSINESSES FACING PATHFINDER THIS WILL ALLOW ONE SPACE PER OFFICE. WE ALSO, OPPOSE A 2 HOUR PARKING ONLY. eAL af 0 lh (� q6q !gym 96Y 410d0 low - yej MCI"�aCA VfXUWO`M 09V5 li \ TELECOMMUNICATIONS 21308 Pathfinder Rd., Suite 208 - Diamond Bar, CA 91765 - (714) 860-6761 /v -,5= 73 THE CITY HAS NEVER REQUESTED OUR INPUT IN REGARDS TO OUR LIMITED PARKING AT CANYON VIEW OFFICES LOCATED AT: 21308 PATHFINDER ROAD. WE CURRENTLY HAVE 36 OFFICES WITH 36 SPACES WITH 12 SPACES IN FRONT. WE AS BUSINESS OWNERS ARE OPPOSED TO "NO STOPPING ANYTIME". WE NEED AT LEAST (5) SPACES IN FRONT, AND (2) IN THE FRONT OF CHEVRON GAS STATION. DUE TO THE FACT THAT THERE ARE 7 BUSINESSES FACING PATHFINDER THIS WILL ALLOW ONE SPACE PER OFFICE. WE ALSO, OPPOSE A 2 HOUR �o y PARKING ONLY. Y i a r7 01Y C(A- i Vvy� ko-C)737 1. 2. MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL 40*f REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 4A CLOSED SESSION: None held. CALL TO ORDER: M/Miller called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. in the AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Mayor Miller. INVOCATION: The invocation was presented by Michael Fallabella from Calvary Chapel, Diamond Bar. ROLL CALL: Mayor Miller, Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Councilmen Werner, Forbing and MacBride. Also present were Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; Andrew V. Arczynski, City Attorney; James DeStefano, Community Development Director; George Wentz, Interim City Engineer; Bob Rose, Community Services Director and City Clerk Lynda Burgess. 3. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, ETC.: 3.1 Introduction of Captain Larry L. Waldie, L.A. County Sheriff's Department, Walnut Station - Captain Waldie expressed appreciation for being able to work with a community so supportive of the Sheriff Department. 3.2 Presentation of Certificate of Recognition to Italo Jimenez for saving the life of Walter Chavez - presented by M/Miller. 3.3 Proclamation - "City Online Week" - September 20-26, 1993 - M/Miller presented a Proclamation to Nick Anis and expressed appreciation to the volunteers and donors for their contributions toward the betterment of communica- tion between government and citizens. Mr. Anis stated that there were 40 volunteers who donated their time and resources to establish "City Online," developed to provide the public with immediate access to information available at City Hall. 3.4 Update on 57/60 HOV Lane - MPT/Papen reported that Caltrans held an EIR hearing last week in D.B. regarding the 57/60 HOV lanes to be constructed 1995 through 1997. A short video offered by Caltrans was presented deline- ating the proposed project. Any written comments sub- mitted to Caltrans Environmental Branch, received this week, will be accepted. She then reported that the State has decided not to accept any new projects in the 1993/94 year, signifying that any interchange work will be post- poned for 2 years, thus requiring the City to resubmit applications for the 1994/95 year. SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 PAGE 2 3.5 Status of Graffiti Enforcement - Deputy Larry Luter, Walnut Sheriff Station, reported that., since the adoption of the Graffiti Enforcement Ordinance, 51 persons have been arrested, 2 of which were arrested twice. Since the reward system went into effect, it has been noted that out of the 26 arrest reports generated, 15 of those reports were from citizens of D.B. Further, a review of costs of removing graffiti since December of 1992 to the end of July of 1993, indicates a 68% decrease in costs for graffiti removal, as well as a significant decrease in the number of areas where graffiti has been removed. In response to a series of Council inquiries, Dep. Luter reported that the Probation Department has sent 100% of the graffiti arrests to the Juvenile D.A.'s office. Of the 49 people arrested, 6 were adults and the remaining had an average age of 14-15 years old, with one as young as 11. CM/Belanger reported that, following the adoption of the Graffiti Enforcement Ordinance, the Mayor embarked upon an aggressive program of public information specifically targeting Junior High Schools. As indicated by Dep. Luter, between the period of December of 1992 and July of 1993, there was an approximate $4,000 per month reduction in graffiti eradication charges. The graffiti enforcement activities have been very successful based upon the data. The City will continue in its eradication efforts. RECESS: M/Miller recessed the meeting at 6:25 p.m. for adjustment of the technical equipment. RECONVENE: M/Miller reconvened the meeting at 6:32 p.m. 4. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: CM/Belanger presented the schedule of future events. 4.1 Traffic & Transportation Commission - September 9, 1993 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 4.2 Heritage Park Grand Opening - September 11, 1993 - 10:00 to 1:00 p.m., 2900 Brea Canyon Road. 4.3 Planning Commission - September 13, 1993 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 4.4 City Council Meeting - September 14, 1993 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 4.5 City Council Meeting - September 21, 1993 - 6:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS: William Gross, 21637 Highbluff, expressed concern that the City Clerk recently decided not to accept 4,000 signatures to referend the General Plan because each page of signatures had not been separately attached to a copy of the entire General Plan, the EIR and the Resolution of Approval. On behalf of the Citizens to Protect Country Living, Mr. Gross then served a notice to M/Miller and MPT/ SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 PAGE 3 MPT/Papen of its intent to recall them. Fred Scalzo, Chamber of Commerce, concerned with the economic shortfall to be faced by the City in the next few years, stated that the City will have to look for ways to raise funds or cut expenses. The City should focus on the success of businesses as a way to balance. revenue versus expenditures. He invited all businesses to participate in the Economic Round Table involving the City and the Chamber scheduled for September 9, 1993 at 7:00 a.m. Oscar Law, 21511 Pathfinder, expressed concern that the Council is not representing the people. There needs to be a system of checks and balances to assure that the people are being properly listened to. Barbara Beach-Courchesne, 2021 Peaceful Hills, referenced a letter she received from Gary Miller regarding a personal litigation matter. MPT/Papen inquired if it is appropriate to allow Mrs. Courchesne to continue to address a topic that is a personal issue involving M/Miller. A public forum should not be allowed to be used for personal issues, and such matters should be addressed outside of the Council meeting. CA/Arczynski explained that the Public Comment portion of the agenda, as required by the Brown Act, is for matters within the jurisdiction of the City. It is the Council's ultimate decision to determine if the matter being addressed is personal or City business. C/Forbing stated that since the issue has nothing to do with Council business, it should not be addressed during the Public Comment portion of the agenda. C\MacBride concurred. C/Werner suggested that Mrs. Courchesne be allowed to continue as long she refrains from making personal remarks, but rather generalizes the application to the entire City. The Council concurred. Barbara Beach-Courchesne stated that she is addressing the issue of honesty and integrity of the Council. The lawsuits issued are deliberate efforts to harass, intimidate and silence the people of Diamond Bar. She stated that though she is saddened by the efforts of a recall, she will support it. Don Schad, 1824 Shaded Wood, objecting to a statement made by one of the Councilmembers referring to the referendum group, stated that that Councilmember should not be re-elected. M/Miller, noting that it was 7:00 p.m., stated that the Public Comment portion of the agenda would be continued following the Public Hearing items. SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 S. PUBLIC HEARINGS: PAGE 4 6.1 (A) RESOLUTION NO. 93-66: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, ESTABLISHING POLICIES, PROCEDURES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE USE OF FACILITIES OPERATED BY THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. (B) RESOLUTION NO. 93-67: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING FEES AND CHARGES FOR RENTAL OF PUBLIC FACILITIES - CM/Belanger reported that the Parks & Recreation Commission had developed a draft set of policies and procedures for the scheduling of City parks, athletic fields and facilities. With the impending completion of the Heritage Park Community Center, a set of policies need to be approved establishing the reservation and fee requirements for the Community Center. C/Werner inquired if the groups currently using the facilities had opportunities to review the proposed resolution. He suggested that these groups should have received notice of this hearing. CSD/Rose explained that the policies, regulations and procedures have been in use in a draft format for about the last year. All of the affected user groups had had the opportunity to work through these policies and meet with the Parks & Recreation Commission every six months. The response received from the groups thus far have been quite positive regarding these policies. CM/Belanger stated that this issue has been public noticed in newspapers. In the future, with these kinds of activities, staff will assure that those groups affected by these kinds of policies and procedures will, as a matter of routine, receive a copy of the public notice. In response to C/MacBride's inquiry regarding page 3, section B(j), of the Resolution, CM/Belanger stated that the Resolution will be amended to reflect "any other parks or buildings." C/MacBride suggested that page 8, item 3 include provision (c) indicating that use for skating of any kind on the City courts would be prohibited. M/Miller opened the Public Hearing. Nick Anis, 1125 Bramford Court, inquired if some of the tennis courts will be made available to the public and public schools, preschools, private schools, etc., for open, unrestricted use. There should be a provision for exclusions for a limited set of people who are not in a position to pay these fees. SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 PAGE 5 CSD/Rose explained that there are no reserved uses of the tennis courts or basketball courts in City parks and no fee is involved. For use of the park for a daytime outing, the only requirement of a payment is in the form of a deposit which is retained only if there is a direct service charge related to their use such as cleanup, loss of a key, etc. The intent of the fees for the Heritage Park Community Center, which are market rates based on surveys of other meeting rooms and facilities in the area, is to collect the direct and indirect costs incurred by the City by the function. Martha Bruske inquired if the citizens residing near the park were notified of the regulations being considered, and the type of activities that might occur. CSD/Rose explained that the outdoor activities are restricted to a 10:00 p.m. curfew. Any exceptions to that time limit must come before the Parks & Recreation Commission, which would thus provide notice to the surrounding neighborhood. The community was noticed via the newspaper. Hearing no further testimony offered, M/Miller closed the Public Hearing. MPT/Papen inquired how a group qualifies to be certified for a nonprofit status. She requested clarification to the insurance requirement, as indicated on page 16, as to how it is identified when insurance is required for a group. Any non Diamond Bar public agency and Diamond Bar non profit agencies should be required to have insurance. The City cannot afford to bear the liability for any accidents that might occur on our property with group events. AA/Fritzal explained that the City requires insurance to be on file with the City from any group of 50 or more, and for all commercial activities regardless of the number of people. The City and the Sheriff Department work together to determine the need for Sheriffs for any event with alcohol. MPT/Papen suggested that the statement "groups of 50 or more" be inserted in paragraph one, page 16. CSD/Rose, in regard to qualifying as nonprofit status, explained that the groups should have a notice from the State of, California certifying their non profit status, which is confirmed by an IRS number. Motion was made by C/Werner, and seconded by C/Forbing to adopt Resolution No. 93-66, entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING POLICIES, PROCEDURES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE USE OF FACILITIES OPERATED BY THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, as amended. Motion carried unanimously by the following Roll Call vote: SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 PAGE 6 AYES: COUNCILMEN - Forbing, MacBride, Werner, MPT/Papen, M/Miller NOES: COUNCILMEN - None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None Motion was made by MPT/Papen and seconded by C\MacBride to adopt Resolution 93-67 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING FEES AND CHARGES FOR RENTAL OF PUBLIC FACILITIES. Motion carried unanimously by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN - Forbing, MacBride, Werner, MPT/Papen, M/Miller NOES: COUNCILMEN - None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None 6.2 RESOLUTION NO. 93-68: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING A SERVICE CHARGE FOR MAINTAINING A PUBLIC NUISANCE ALARM SYSTEM - CM/Belanger reported that the charge of $125.00, assessed upon any alarm owner whose alarm system generates three or more false alarms in a twelve month period, should raise approximately $250,000 to offset the law enforcement costs for responding to false alarms, as well as the City's administrative costs for implementing the provisions of Ordinance No. 04 (1993). M/Miller opened the Public Hearing. Hearing no testimony offered, M/Miller closed the Public Hearing. C/Werner suggested that there be a graduated fee schedule by which about half of the $125.00 charge would be assessed for the third offense and increasing thereafter. M/Miller expressed concern that the fine is too stringent, particularly since most other cities assess a graduated charge for false alarms starting as low as $25.00 after the third offense. C/Forbing stated that he was told by several alarm companies that it is common to have one or two problems with an alarm system in a year, but three in a year's time is excessive. The taxpayers should not have to subsidize a business owner who is not willing to properly maintain his equipment. MPT/Papen pointed out that the fee has been based upon recouping the costs, not making a profit. She agreed with C/ Forbing to leave the rates as recommended by staff. C/ MacBride concurred. Motion was made by C/MacBride and seconded by MPT/Papen to adopt Resolution No. 93-68 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING A SERVICE CHARGE FOR MAINTAINING A PUBLIC NUISANCE ALARM SYSTEM. Motion SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 PAGE 7 carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN - Forbing, MacBride, MPT/Papen, M/ Miller NOES: COUNCILMEN - Werner ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS (Cont'd.) Martha Bruske objected to the suggestion that the Council vote to exclude one of its members from certain closed sessions. The Councilmembers were elected to represent the people. silencing C/Werner seems to fit too closely with the apparent attempts to silence the residents of this City. Punishing one of the members on the Council should not penalize constituents as well. Red Calkins encouraged the citizens of Diamond Bar to stop fighting and join forces to stop the MRF proposed by the City of Industry. Max Maxwell inquired when the City will respond to his letter dated August 10, 1993 as well as to the letter sent by attorney Michael Montgomery, dated August 20, 1993, requesting information. Frank Dursa questioned why the City Council won't accept the referendum, and realize that the General Plan needs to be put to a vote of the citizens. Nick Anis, 1125 Bramford Court, questioned why the referendum group did not attach a copy of the General Plan and the Resolution to the petitions collected. People have a right to know what they are signing. These conflicting issues need to be resolved so we can concentrate on operating the City. Michael Lowe stated that the deliberate miswork of the referendum is a disservice to the 40,000 plus citizens who signed the petition. Don Gravdahl stated that he attended a meeting on September 1, 1993 regarding the MRF proposed by the City of Industry. Such a facility will negatively impact D.B. by the increase of noise, odor, vectors and traffic. He urged the public to contact their Councilmembers to get suggestions as to what can be done to oppose the facility. Norman Beach-Courchesne, 2021 Peaceful Hills Road, President of the Pathfinders Homeowners Assn., suggested that a regional group be formed to oppose the proposed MRF in the City of Industry. Bill Tinsmen stated that there was a lot of active antagonism that occurred during the collection of signatures for the referendum. He pointed out that 4,000 people chose to sign the petition, wanting a referendum so that the General Plan would go to ballot. Perhaps the City Council should consider SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 PAGE 8 putting it on the ballot. 6. COUNCIL COMMENTS: C/MacBride encouraged citizens to express themselves regarding the MRF issue. He announced the Economic Resources Strategic Planning Roundtable, as mentioned by Mr. Scalzo, scheduled for September 9, 1993 at 7:00 a.m. at the Golf Course on Golden Springs. He then requested an update on his request for further investigation from staff to address the problem whereby owners have improved their front yards up to the interface of the sidewalk, thus encroaching upon City property. CM/Belanger stated that City owns 12 feet of property from the face of curb toward the property owners property. There have been development activities taking place in the front yard which exceed the City's height restrictions, and infringe upon the public utilities easement. Staff is researching the situations and will provide to the City Council a report, at the September 21, 1993 meeting, on the status on this matter. CM/Belanger then reported that the City filed a 40 page response on September 2, 1993 to the City of Industry's Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the MRF, and included a traffic, noise and air quality analysis as attachments to that response. The City will be prepared to respond to the EIR in the same manner it responded to the NOP. C/Forbing stated that if the referendum is ever submitted to the Council, he will consider voting to schedule it for election. He pointed out that, though 4,000 individuals signed the referendum petition, only 58 people participated in the writing of the General Plan. Furthermore, no one ever checked out the General Plan from the library to read the document. MPT/Papen reported that the DBIA is sponsoring a "Clean Party" at 9:00 a.m., on September 18, 1993, meeting at Heritage Park. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Forbing moved, seconded by MPT/Papen to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN - Forbing, MacBride, Werner, MPT/Papen, M/Miller NOES: COUNCILMEN - None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None 7.1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 7.1.1 Adjourned regular Meeting of July 27, 1993 - General Plan Public Hearing - Approved as submitted. 7.1.2 Regular Meeting of August 3,' 1993 - Approved as submitted. SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 PAGE 9 7.2 WARRANT REGISTER - Approved Warrant Register dated September 7, 1993 in the amount of $593,850.90. 7.3 TREASURER'S REPORT - Month of July, 1993 - Received & filed. 7.4 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular Meeting of July 26, 1993 - Received & filed. 7.5 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES: 7.5.1 Regular Meeting of July 22, 1993 - Received & filed. 7.5.2 Special Meeting of August 2, 1993 - Received & filed. 7.6 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES: 7.6.1 Regular Meeting of June 10, 1993 - Received & filed. 7.6.2 Regular Meeting of July 15, 1993 - Received & filed. 9. OLD BUSINESS: 9.1 DIAMOND RANCH HIGH SCHOOL (SYMBOLIC) GROUND BREAKING AND CELEBRATION - CM/Belanger reported that the Diamond Ranch Boosters Club, in association with the City of D.B., the City of Pomona and the Pomona Unif ied School District are planning a community event to celebrate the attainment of property for the Diamond Ranch High School. The City has indicated that it would provide financial support for the event in an amount up to $5,000 dollars. In response to a series of inquires by C/MacBride, CM/ Belanger stated that $1,500 is allocated to the City's Anniversary Celebration and the City has purchased a trailer for the use by D.B. High School for their marching band totaling $5,000. CSD/Rose, in response to C/MacBride, stated that since the event has four major co-sponsors and 25 sponsors, the City anticipates that probably only $1,500 to $2,000 will be adequate to cover the needs for the event. MPT/Papen expressed concern that the City has not received a request in writing from the Booster Club for these funds, with an estimate of costs and a breakdown on how the money is to be spent, which is the common procedure followed by other community groups. Also, liability insurance should not be waived just because the City is participating in this event. It is important that we follow procedure and be cautious as to how tax dollars are spent. She stated that though she is 100% behind the construction of the high school, she is concerned with spending such a large sum of money during these economic times. The Board of Education of the SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 PAGE 10 Pomona Unified School District has indicated that though they support the October event, they will not be contributing any funds toward it and that an official, on-site ground -breaking is to be scheduled at a later date. Though there are four sponsors, the City is being asked to contribute 100% of the costs, which in effect creates a policy issue for the City which needs to be addressed. Oscar Law indicated that the Pomona Unified School District should pay for the entire event since it is their project on their property. Sue Sisk, President of the Diamond Ranch High School Booster Club, expressed concern that these issues are being brought forth at this time after all the hours spent planning the event for this community. The spirit of the event was to have a celebration for finally acquiring the property for the high school. The Council should consider funding whatever is needed with the event, as was promised, with the understanding that there are budget constraints. At this point, the City has offered $300 for ice cream. MPT/Papen offered to pledge to raise a $100 cash donation to the Booster Club, and indicated that the other Council members will probably do as well. However, because of a concern as to the use of tax dollars, and the purpose they are going to, MPT/Papen offered the following motion: that the City of Diamond Bar donate $5,000 to the Diamond Ranch High School for use in a program such as telecommunications, library services, cultural enrichment; such program being mutually agreed upon at the time of the opening of the school, and that M/Miller present a symbolic check from the City at the Community Celebration of October 10, 1993. Sue Sisk, in response to M/Miller's inquiry, stated that the Booster Club has not yet assessed the costs related to the event. A number of sponsors have donated a variety of things, but many items still need to be addressed such as insurance and shuttles. The Booster Club was not made aware there was a procedure to follow, and it is too late in the process to expect the Club to change direction. C/Forbing, in response to MPT/Papen's concern regarding staff's commitment to financially assist the Booster Club, suggested that any problem with staff's functioning should be taken up with the City Manager rather than with the committee. C/Werner stated that, to his understanding, the event was never discussed at subcommittee level, and that the matter had been administratively approved on the basis of SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 PAGE 11 the precedent set with the donation to the D.B. Brahmas Booster Club. He offered the following motion: to grant the Booster Club $5,000, working with staff to assure that the money is properly spent. M/Miller pointed out to Ms. Sisk that the issue is not of supporting Diamond Ranch High School, but whether the City can justify spending $5,000 for a party. Gary Neely, 344 Canoecove Drive, stated that the Booster Club set out to organize a regional event, based upon assurances given by the City Manager, the Mayor and the commitment of staff to help coordinate the event. There are 30 years of pent up demand to get this high school built, putting up with politicians undermining the efforts. The audience has pledged $1,300, even if the City won't support the event. Bill Tinsmen pointed out that the $5,000 given to D.B. High School went for something considered of substance, and a like amount need not be given to Diamond Ranch High School for something considered frivolous. It is more appropriate to offer some financial support to be used on something of substance needed by the students of that school, as was suggested by MPT/Papen. Sue Sisk stated that most items for the event have been donated, and not all of the $5,000 will need to be spent. The balance of the money could be put in a fund for the high school to be used at the time that the school opens up. M/Miller indicated that he would be willing to pledge to raise a $100 cash donation, and suggested that the Pomona Board of Education and the Pomona City Council be asked to do the same. However, the City should also commit $5,000 to the Diamond Ranch High School so that if more money is needed after the pledges are collected, then perhaps the City can supplement the expenditures using some of the $5,000, with the understanding that the Booster Club promises to be frugal. MPT/Papen stated that the whole $5,000 should be used to purchase something to supplement the education of the children. If, in two weeks, it is determined that additional funds are needed, the Booster Club can make a written request once they have determined their final budget. It is not the City's policy to give a cash donation to any group. Proposition A funds can be used for the transportation shuttle needs of the event. CSD/Rose reported that the itemized costs of what staff expected the City to cover for this event, excluding the costs for the shuttle, totals approximately $1,300, which includes the sound system, deputies and insurance. SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 PAGE 12 C/Forbing, objecting to the direction of the discussion, pointed out that the City is listed, and advertised, as co-sponsor of this event. Motion was made by C/Forbing, seconded by C/Werner that the City allocate $5,000 maximum. M/Miller noted that the meeting is still open to public comments. Michael Lowe stated that it is the responsibility of the Council to confront any action taken by the City Manager that is not appropriate. This event is merely symbolic and not the formal ground breaking. It is not appro- priate for the City to donate money, specifically during the present budget constraints, and the fact that the group has never properly applied for the money. The money needs to be given directly to the students. Kim Chapman, member of the Booster Club, stated that they were told that the City would be able to help fund the event. The group's intentions have always been to get the best possible school for the children. Red Calkins indicated that the City Council needs to express their support of the north side of Diamond Bar. C/Werner stated that commitments have been made at the administrative level and plans have been laid toward the progress of this event. The City can commit to this group the same level of commitment given to the Brahmas, given the direction discussed this evening. The City Council and the whole community needs to show their support for this high school. Motion was made by MPT/Papers that the City donate $5,000 to the Diamond Ranch High School for use in a program such as telecommunications, library services, cultural enrichment, such program being mutually agreed upon at the time of the opening of the school; that M/Miller present the symbolic check from the City at the Community Celebration of October 10, 1993; and that the City use Proposition A funds for the transportation. M/Miller inquired if the motion includes allocating some of the $5,000 to the Booster Club if there are any shortfalls in funds obtained. MPT/Papen indicated that if more money is needed than what can be pledged, then the matter can come before the Council for discussion in two weeks. C/MacBride stated that, since City staff gave a verbal agreement that $5,000 would be allocated to the event, and that there are people dependent on that agreement, SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 PAGE 13 the City has the responsibility to live up to those verbal agreements. He then suggested that there needs to be discussion on the City's policy regarding the distribution of funds, at certain levels, that have been allocated to staff. Motion was made by MPT/Papen and seconded by C/Forbing to allocate $5,000 to assist in the funding of the Diamond Ranch High School Celebration. Motion carried unanimously by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN - Forbing, MacBride, Werner, MPT/ Papen, M/Miller NOES: COUNCILMEN - None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN - None 9.2 DISCUSSION REGARDING THE AMENDING OF RESOLUTION NO. 91- 71, WHICH ESTABLISHES THE CITY COUNCIL STANDARDS OF OPERATION, TO INCLUDE SANCTIONS/ PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. 91-71 - MPT/Papen reviewed the Council's standards regarding confidential information and litigation, as adopted in December of 1991. State law provides for the Council to take three different sanctions if these standards are not being followed: declare willful misconduct and ask for an investigation by the County grand jury; adopt a Resolution establishing criminal sanctions making it a misdemeanor; or adopt a Resolution for censoring. Councilmembers have a responsibility to put aside personal feelings and politics in the matters of closed sessions, negotiations, and litigations. She referred to the declaration signed by C/Werner, filed in Pomona Superior Court on August 12, 1992, making claims as to what happened in Council closed sessions and stated that C/Werner should be disqualified from participating in closed sessions as they relate to the lawsuit Diamond Bar Citizens to Protect Country Living Against the City. There is also evidence of C/Werner having private meetings and accepting contributions from a developer who is suing the City for $124 million dollars, though the Council policy clearly states that no Councilmember shall meet with the parties who are suing the City or their representatives. C/ Werner should be censored for breaching the Code of Conduct. She then referred to the Minutes of August 18, 1992 and pointed out that C/Werner provided information to citizens regarding subcommittee negotiations on trash issues, in which C/Werner was a member of the sub- committee. Council policy states that if a subcommittee is in the process of negotiating a contract, that information is confidential, and is subject to closed session, and cannot be discussed with any member of the public outside the City Manager, the City Attorney or other Councilmembers. She requested consensus from the Council to direct staff to work with the Council to prepare a Resolution censoring C/Werner and prohibiting SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 PAGE 14 his participation on these two lawsuit issues where he has breached the code of ethics. Bill Tinsmen pointed out that each Councilmember has made statements during meetings only to later deny that they were ever made, despite the fact that they are evident on video tape. Perhaps each Councilmember ought to judge himself first before judging colleagues. Frank Dursa stated that, as he indicated at the August 18, 1992 meeting, C/Werner never gave him any information about the trash issue. C/Werner pointed out that he never stated that he discussed information on the trash issue but rather that he would not have a problem with doing so. The fact of the matter is that the information was already public. Max Maxwell stated that he is appalled that there would be an attack on another Councilmember. He then indicated his support of the efforts to recall M/Miller and MPT/Papen. The issue brought forward by MPT/Papen should be dropped and the Council should proceed with City business. Clyde Henersly stated that there is no audio on cable channel 12 after around 9:00 p.m. Tom Van Winkle indicated that C\Werner is the one Council member he has been able to communicate his concerns to. Michael Lowe expressed concern that wrong -doings are being justified. Barbara Beach-Courchesne stated that it is inappropriate to twist words and misuse statements. Gary Neely, 344 Canoecove Drive, stated that the issue brought forth by MPT/Papen should be dropped and the Councilmembers should get back to City business. Nick Anis suggested that some of these matters be discussed in committee rather than closed session. He questioned if it would be effective to censor any Council member from closed sessions since any information is readily available. C/Werner stated that since he did not receive any notice of this item to be on the agenda, a violation of the Brown Act may have occurred. In response to the allegations made, he made the following comments: the source of information regarding the trash issue received by Mr. Dursa came from another individual, thus the matter was no longer confidential; the declaration was signed, on an issue that should not have been a closed SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 PAGE 15 session item, not to compromise the City but rather to defend the rights of the people to gather signatures unimpeded; and he did receive a contribution from DBA, but there was no compromising of confidentiality, and he pointed out that he had seconded the motion to deny their project. There is no proof to the allegations made. M/Miller stated that he does not feel that the Brown Act was violated in regard to the affidavit signed by C/Werner since the conversation never took place. However, the perception that a closed session item could have been discussed is disturbing. He expressed concern that C/Werner had met with DBA, and accepted a campaign contribution, six weeks after the City was served with a lawsuit. The Council needs to trust each other and work together for the benefit of the City. He pointed out that the issue before the Council is to include sanctions/ penalties for violations that may be made as Council policies. MPT/Papen stated that the focus of her statements was to indicate that the Council's standards of operation, as it relates to confidential information and litigation, had been breached. The policies of the Council must be adhered to or they should be changed. Since C/Werner has met with the parties and the attorneys suing the City, the consequences should be that he can no longer partici- pate in the Council's discussions on those lawsuits. C/MacBride noted that very few cities have codes of ethics and sanctions. It is a common procedure for professional associations to have codes of ethics; however, one becomes a member of a professional assoc- iation by their permission, but one becomes a member of the Council by vote of the citizens. Therefore, the Council cannot be removed nor sanctioned easily. It would be helpful to draw up guidelines for conduct for Councilmembers to adhere to, but it would be nearly impossible to pose sanctions on a political leader. He suggested the following: not take immediate action this evening; request staff to prepare a set of guidelines that may be based upon other cities' guidelines; and come together to determine if the Council can agree upon such a code of conduct. The current code of conduct needs improvement and should be redrafted. The Council should also consider conducting business in a two -person committee process rather than a closed session forum. C/Forbing stated that he feels that there is no need to place sanctions in an ethical statement. Each Council member was elected by the community to operate City business in an ethical manner. If the voters feel that any Councilmember has not been operating in an ethical manner, then it is up to the voters to vote that indiv- idual out, not the other Councilmembers. SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 PAGE 16 M/Miller stated that he felt it would be appropriate to direct staff to redraft the standards to clearly define and expand upon the policy. Council needs to be aware of these things that are creating a division on the Council and try to eradicate this distrust. C/Forbing suggested that M/Miller and C/MacBride be on a subcommittee to rewrite the standards and expand upon the policy. MPT/Papen stated that there are policies designed to protect the City in legal manners. If those policies are not going to be enforced, and the City Council is not going to censor a Councilmember for breech of conduct in legal issues, then why have the standards. Following discussion, it was the consensus of the Council to concur with C/MacBride that guidelines are needed by all, and that the current policies and standards should be rewritten. 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/Forbing reminded the audience of the Economic Resource Meeting scheduled September 9, 1993 at 7:00 a.m. 11. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m. Lynda Burgess, City Clerk ATTEST: Mayor MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 'PAP, SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 1. CALL TO ORDER: MPT/Papen called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by MPT/Papen. ROLL CALL: Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Councilmen Forbing and MacBride. Councilman Werner arrived at 7:05 p.m. M/Miller was excused from attending due to a perceived potential conflict of interest. Also present were Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; William P. Curley III, Assistant City Attorney; James DeStefano, Community Development Director; George Wentz, Interim City Engineer and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk. 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 - CDD/DeStefano presented a brief overview of the South Pointe Master Plan, utilizing slides to illustrate the area and the specific location of each of the proposed projects. The project represents a comprehensive land use plan- ning effort for one of the remaining large undeveloped properties in the City which is owned by the following five land owners: RnP Development, owner of 78 acres (Vesting Tentative Tract 71407); Arciero and Sons, Inc., owner of 45 acres (Vesting Tentative Tract 32400); SASAK Corporation, owner of 7 acres (Vesting Tentative Tract 51253); the City of D.B., owner of 13.5 acres; and the Walnut Unified School District, who occupies approximately 30 acres within the center of the site. He introduced the following individuals retained by the City to participate in the review of this Plan: George Wentz, Interim City Engineer; Hardy Strozier, Project Manager, the Planning Associates; Peter Lewendowski, UltraSystems, for preparation of the EIR. The plan proposes a subdivision of an existing primar- ily undeveloped 171 acre site to accommodate the phased development of residential, commercial, park, open space and school uses. Approximately 82 acres are proposed for construction of single family homes; approximately 30 acres proposed for commercial office development; 28 acres are proposed for a neighborhood SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 2 public park site with both passive and active uses; with the remaining 31 acres proposed for construction of a permanent South Pointe Middle School. It is proposed to be developed over a ten year period and accommodate the land uses in a number of circulation and utility improvement systems in the immediate area. The project is broken up into five enclaves and through the Master Plan process, each enclave has a specific set of development standards and criteria. Each Vesting Tentative Map is incorporated within a specific enclave and must adhere to the standards that have been created for that enclave. He then described the specific components of each project as indicated in the staff report and represented on the graphics displayed. No specific plans have bee presented to the City for suggested land uses for the commercial area. He reported that the Master Plan project, representing a comprehensive land use planning approach, is a unique opportunity for the City to develop the 171 acre area. In order to accomplish the Master Plan, the property lines must be erased to create a variety of transfers between the five entities to create a better land use pattern for the future. Such transfers require the use of development agreements, which are a land planning contract between public and private agencies providing terms and conditions to provide assurances and commit- ments to both parties in terms of timing, compliance, implementation, etc. The Arciero project and the RnP project both have requested approval for the Development Agreement incorporating the following: a Hillside Management Ordinance, CUP and an Oak Tree Permit. The SASAK proposal, which does not contain a Development Agreement, contains a Hillside Management Ordinance, CUP and an Oak Tree Permit. The City's Hillside Management Ordinance requires a CUP for each of these Tentative Tract Maps because they all have sites that exceed 10% grade. The impact of the devel- opment in terms of grading has been analyzed within the EIR. The Oak Tree Permit is required by County Code for each project because each will cause the removal of oak trees that exceed the basic minimum threshold contained within the Ordinance. The details of the Oak Tree Inventory conducted for each of the sites are contained within the EIR. The Code requires that all of the removed oak trees be replaced at a minimum 2:1 ratio. A summary of those replacement processes and a table illustrating the various sizes proposed are contained within the suggested list of conditions. Peter Lewendowski, Director of Planning for the Environmental Services Division of Ultra Systems, stated that his firm contracted with the City to pre- pare an independent environmental assessment of the direct, indirect and cumulative impacts associated with SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 3 the construction and development of the South Pointe Master Plan project. He explained that CEQA requires governmental agencies who have authority over partic- ular projects to include an analysis of the project's impacts upon the environment. The City conducted an initial study for this project and concluded that the project implementation had the potential to result in significant impacts upon the environment. Based upon that conclusion, the City directed the preparation of an EIR. The intent of CEQA is to provide an environ- mental basis for the decision making process and to insure public access to the decision makers so as to insure a full disclosure of the project's potential impacts, potential alternatives that may produce lesser impacts and to identify and develop mitigation measures which might further reduce the impacts identified in the analysis and brought forward through public testimony. The Planning Commission, at their final hearing on May 24, 1993, recommended certification of the EIR as well as adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program, Findings of Fact and the Statement of Overriding Considerations. The following topical issues were addressed in the EIR: a geotechnical report; traffic studies; hydrology studies; biological assessment; noise and air quality studies. In addition to those independent studies, the following relevant documents were reviewed: the Final EIR on the City's General Plan; the Master Environmental Assessment and the Final EIR prepared by the Walnut Valley Unified School District for the South Point Middle School project. Mr. Lewendowski reported that the following project alternatives and mitigation measures were considered in compliance with CEQA: no project; project developed in full compliance with General Plan and zoning policies; a reduction in project size, deleting one or more of the individual property owners; as project designed by which residential development was clustered in outlying areas; a maximum development; and Vesting Tentative Tract 51253 in isolation. Based on the assessment of those project alternatives, the EIR concluded that the "no project" alternative would be environmentally superior to the proposed action and that the "clustered development alternative" would also be environmentally superior. In addition to the Response to Comment doc- ument and the Technical Appendix document, companions to the draft EIR, as detailed Springtime Survey was conducted to assess the existence of three potentially recurring plant species. The survey concluded that the three species examined did not exist on the project site. The Technical Appendix also brought forth the change in status of the California Gnatcatcher, SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 4 recently elevated to a threatened status. He then explained that the Final EIR contains all the information derived from dialogue, the draft EIR and information that materialized through further analysis based upon public testimony. The EIR attempts to represent a non -biased, professional, technical opinion of the project's impacts to assist the decision makers to make a well-balanced, informed decision. The City can request further analysis as may be required. If the assisting environmental record is sufficient, the City must then certify the environmental analysis before taking action on a proposed project. In certifying the EIR, the City is not further obligated to take any particular action on the proposed project. The following three documents are presented that currently comprise the EIR: the Draft EIR: the Response to Comment and the Technical Appendix. If the Council elects to open the Public Hearing this evening and solicit additional oral and written testimony, the City will be required to prepare an additional Response to Comment document. CDD/DeStefano reported that the packet prepared for the City Council and the public incorporates the staff report, the executive summaries of the EIR process and Planning Commission's actions, staff reports and minutes of each meeting, all Resolutions that the Planning Commission forwarded to the City Council for consideration, maps of the project sites, copies of the legal notice provided for the Public Hearings and all of the documents outlined by Mr. Lewendowski. He stated that the legal notice for the Hearing was mailed and published over 30 days prior to this meeting. Notices were mailed to all property owners resident within 500 feet of the project's boundaries. In addition, several hundred interested parties on the City's mailing list also received notices. There have also been several newspaper articles in both the Bulletin and the Tribune describing this proposal. Jan Dabney, Senior Consultant for RnP and Arciero & Sons, Inc., explained that Mr. Forrester and Mr. Arciero could not attend this meeting due to unavoid- ble circumstances. It was believed that the meeting was to be a staff presentation addressing the environ - ental considerations for the project. He requested that the developers be allowed to save their presen- tation for the Master Plan and the development con- ideration until the next meeting. James Budke stated that he, too, was not prepared to give a presentation at this meeting. He suggested that it would be more appropriate if all the developers made SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 5 presentations at the same time since all projects are related. MPT/Papen stated that Public Hearing comments will focus on the EIR and discussion on the Development Agreements and the Master Plan will be held the next meeting. C/Werner suggested that since it was anticipated that the developers would be giving a presentation along with staff and that the EIR was not to be discussed at this meeting, perhaps it would be appropriate to hold all discussion until the next meeting. MPT/Papen stated that since all the necessary infor- mation had been provided, there is no reason why the Council cannot proceed with opening the Public Hearing on the EIR and receive public testimony at this time. C/Werner, noting that it was indicated in the staff report that Vesting Tract Map 51407 proposes to supersede provisions of Tract Maps 32576 and 35742, inquired if staff provided notification to the bene- factors of the previous subdivision as required by the Subdivision Map Act, when provisions of a previous subdivision are modified. ACA/Curley explained that staff believes that the City's notification procedures were accurate. However, the procedure will be verified and if it was not done accurately, renoticing will be recommended. C/MacBride expressed support of proceeding with the Public Hearing on the EIR. MPT/Papen opened the Public Hearing. Joyce Hill, 1836 Shaded Wood Rd., expressed opposition to the project as currently proposed. She stated that many citizens desire the remaining canyons and wilder- ness areas to remain. People who purchased homes in the Sandstone Canyon area were told that the property would remain open space. The Council needs to consider other possibilities for the area with less damage to the environment, such as a museum, trails, an observ- atory, etc. As elected officials, the Council should do everything possible to protect the citizens. Michael Shay, 1042 Capen Ave., stated that D.B. does not need more shopping centers, commercial office space, supermarkets, a new park and 200 new homes, particularly at a time when people can't sell their current homes. The project would only compound the problems currently plaguing California such as crime, pollution, etc. The Council needs to support the SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 6 desires of the citizens. Clair Harmony, 24139 Afamado Ln., stated that the property owned by RnP, which incorporates nearly half of the entire project, has been set aside as unbuild- able, open space, and designated as a future park. Approving this project would result in rejecting the principle of density transfer which guarantees open space and low density for the benefit of the public for the public good. If the Council aggregates these public guarantees and gives up map restrictions placed by the County, which are still in effect, then, at a minimum, the Council should hold a General Plan hearing to amend the Plan accordingly. He expressed concern that no financial due diligence has been required. He asked if the City has looked into the cost benefits and risks involved. Don Schad, 1824 Shaded Wood Rd., stated that the project would increase noise, pollution, traffic and crime. Since 97% of the canyon would be destroyed, it would be impossible to mitigate any adverse environ- mental impacts. The project is in direct violation of General Plan guidelines. He expressed concern regard- ing the destruction of vegetation and wildlife and the replanting of vegetation destroyed. Peter Lewendowski, in response to some of the comments made by Mr. Schad, made the following comments: a detailed noise study was conducted which found that the existing noise environment is within established City criteria and that, although project implementation will increase noise levels within the project site, in no instance will noise levels be exceeded beyond existing City standards; detailed surveys of the project site, in springtime and other seasons, have been conducted and it is believed that all the plants on the property have been identified and none are either rare, protected or endangered. Hardy Strozier stated that each proposed project resolution under the Resource Management Plan provides a program of seed collection and replanting of the particular plant type count within Sandstone Canyon, as well as a plan for revegetation. C/Werner requested further elaboration regarding noise impacts relating to the project. Mr. Lewendowski explained that topographics were considered in completing the noise study. In attempting to assess a worst-case scenario, his firm assumed the absence of hillsides as potential mitiga- tion. It was determined that the on-site conditions for both existing residences and on the project site SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 7 were within established City standards. The removal of the barriers, the addition of project traffic and construction -related impacts on site have the potential to increase noise levels at specific receptor locations up to 20 dba; however, the established standards will not be exceeded. There is a detailed noise study on Page 4-139 of the DEIR identifying six receptors. In assessing noise impacts, the City's criteria is not in single -hour dba, but in 24-hour CNEL; therefore, a single hour dba reading is not available. The noise readings are averaged in a 24-hour period. Oscar Law, 21511 Pathfinder Rd., pointed out that the increase in traffic on Brea Canyon Rd. will create a noise level in excess of 95 dba once the barrier is removed, which would be a higher level than a smoke alarm, which has an 85 dba level. The increased traffic will also increase pollution. The citizens do not want more development but rather a retention of what is left of D.B.'s country living. The Council needs to respond to the citizens who elected them. Mr. Lewendowski stated that the traffic study on Page 4-73 in the EIR identified, at buildout, that the total project increase in traffic will be 13,320 vehicles for all phases of the project. Only approximately 50% of all project -generated traffic will travel on Brea Canyon Rd., or approximately 6,660 per day, not the 15,000 identified by Mr. Law. The environmental analysis, as presented on Page 4-146 of the EIR, identifies both existing and future conditions at the six receptor locations identified. The noisiest part of the project site, which is directly adjacent to Brea Canyon Rd. in the area where there is no intervening topography, has a current CNEL of 74.8 and a projected CNEL of 75.7 at project buildout in the year 2002. The highest noise increase on the project, which is identified to be in the vicinity of Larkstone, has a current CNEL of 42 and a projected CNEL of 62.6 at project buildout in the year 2002, which is less than the 65 CNEL standard adopted by the City. In regard to the issue of air quality impacts, a number of criteria pollutants that will exceed AQMD standards have been identified in the EIR. However, any project develop- ment generating 500 vehicle trips per day, even perhaps a southwest museum, would be deemed significant and any grading activity which resulted in fugitive dust emissions would, in all likelihood, exceed established standards. Dr. Joe Gorman, 1333 Mountain, Claremont, asked if the issue at hand for discussion is the DEIR or 1992 or the Final EIR. Mr. Lewendowski explained that the title of the docu- SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 8 ment before the Council is the DEIR. The Council has not taken any action to certify that document; therefore, CEQA finds the document under review as the Draft document until it is certified. Dr. Gorman expressed concern that the proposal has been piece-mealed. Since the project has not been coord- inated, it is difficult to assess noise impacts and the overall environmental impacts of the treatment of Sandstone Canyon. He pointed out that cougar tracks have been identified in the canyon. He then noted that the project, for some reason, has been cloaked as the South Pointe Master Plan when in actuality, it should be the Sandstone Canyon Project. Mr. Lewendowski stated that, in conducting the environmental assessment, the criteria is clearly in accordance with the methodology identified by AQMD. Furthermore, a technical study in the Technical Appendix, to determine the presence of mountain lions on the project site, concluded that, because of the isolated nature of the project site, it is inconclusive to conclude definitely whether the site functions as part of a wildlife corridor. In response to Dr. Gorman's inquiry regarding notification, he explained that there is a statutory requirement that ten days prior to certifying the final EIR, the document or the responses to all comments will be provided to govern- mental agencies who have provided comments. Paul Parmentier, 20404 Tam O'Shanter, Walnut, stated that he felt that the proposed project of over 100 homes would have a significant impact on the existing neighborhood. He questioned whether the Council would consider the change from rural to urban as an insig- nificant impact. Mr. Lewendowski stated that the traffic study included an assessment of traffic impacts upon Tam O'Shanter and other streets in the project area. Though there is a potential that traffic will increase on those roadways, based upon traffic diversion from the construction of the collector street linking those residential areas with Brea Canyon Rd., all streets analyzed will not result in an increase in LOS standards of those road- ways beyond established City standards. Max Maxwell, referring to a letter submitted by Kevin Thomas of Pacific Southwest Biological Service regard- ing a study of mountain lions by Dr. Beier, which can be found as an addendum letter in the EIR, stated that Dr. Beier, responding to a letter written by Mr. Maxwell dated April 9, 1993 inquiring into the accuracy of the information provided by Mr. Thomas, stated that no extensive tracking was done west of the 57 freeway SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 9 but only east of the 57. He pointed out that the EIR, which concluded that there had been a study made show- ing that there are no cougars west of the 57 freeway, is inaccurate. He stated that he would like the letter included in the record. He expressed opposition to the project and felt that the project is being mis- represented. Mr. Lewendowski stated that the survey conducted by Pacific Southwest Biological Services, which is a very reputable biological company, and the on-site invest- igation done by his firm's in-house biologist and other consulting biologists participating in this project, did not identify the existence of tracks on-site. It was concluded that, although mountain lions may occupy this site for limited time periods, the site is not conducive to long term habitation, nor as a wildlife corridor. CEQA indicates that disagreement among experts is quite understandable in any sort of environmental analysis. Elizabeth Hodges, 1604 Morning Sun, Walnut, expressed opposition to the entire project; specifically, the connection of Street "A" to Morning Sun Ave., which is located in County area. The Response to Comment document includes statements from the following indiv- iduals opposing the connection: Frank Menessee, L.A. County Department of Regional Planning, Impact Analysis Section; Todd Chavers, Chairman of the City's Traffic & Transportation Commission; John Beke, Commission on the City's Traffic & Transportation Commission and Carl Blum, Assistant Deputy Director of L.A. County Department of Public Works, Planning Division; Richard Anderola, Deputy Superintendent, Walnut Valley Unified School District, Administrative Services; and comments from the Planning Commission and residents in the area. No developer has the right to adversely impact existing communities especially to the magnitude created by this project. Jay Nelson, Traffic Engineer, Linspot, Law & Greenspan, stated that the traffic study concluded that the increase in traffic on Morning Sun would be minimal. The majority of the project traffic is expected to ingress and egress the project from Brea Canyon Rd. The traffic volume near the connection on those cul-de- sacs would substantially increase but within the capacity of those streets as they are currently designed. William Gross, 21637 Highbluff Rd., stated that since the City is a proponent of the project, the Council is not qualified to objectively determine the best interest of the City. He questioned whether the City would have the ability to make sure the project meets SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 10 the standards. He then expressed the following concerns: the Council indicated a few months back that hillsides are important; yet the project proposes to throw a hillside into a canyon; density criteria and open space criteria is being changed for the project; if this project meets City standards, yet raises noise levels unreasonably, then it is the responsibility of the Council to change the standards based upon what is best for the City; the current noise standards in D.B. are deafeningly loud; the current traffic conditions in the City are bumper -to -bumper during peak hours; the current standard for air quality in the City is un- healthful smog; and the citizens voted for incorpor- ation in order to raise our standards to excellence. He stated that the consultants have an opportunity to refute comments made by citizens; however, citizens do not have an opportunity to refute those responses and it becomes one person's word pitted against another's. He expressed the following additional concerns: there, is no project manager and no mention in the EIR as to what would occur if this project is not completed by one of the components; there are no answers as to who is RnP and there is no financial due diligence requested. Mr. Lewendowski stated that CEQA allows the applicant to also be the lead agency. UltraSystems acted independently in assessing the project -related impacts and was not influenced by the applicant. Economic considerations are not required under CEQA and the EIR does not include an economic assessment of the project impacts and no cost benefit analysis was conducted. In regard to the City's standards, he stated that those standards are, for most instances, compatible and con- sistent with the standards adopted by other agencies and are neither over -demanding nor excessively lax. In regard to the concern if specific aspects of the pro- ject are not completed, he stated that this is not an EIR issue; however, it is assumed that the Development Agreement will place adequate safeguards for project implementation. MPT/Papen indicated that a financial analysis of the project is scheduled to be discussed at the next meeting. Eileen Ansari, 1823 S. Cliffbranch, expressed oppo- sition to the project, the one-time destruction of the canyon, holding the South Pointe Middle School as hostage, the removal of trees and the impropriety of the City being involved in the development. She asked if the 21 -acre area proposed for park use includes the park land promised the City by Arciero as a fine for cutting down the oak trees near the water tower. The Council needs to weigh the benefits to the City. SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 11 Mr. Lewendowski stated that the EIR identifies, as mitigation measures for removal of trees, compliance with the oak tree Ordinance and other mitigation measures concerning replacement of the trees. The EIR concludes that the impacts upon oak trees would be deemed significant. C/Werner inquired if any of the trees are conducive for relocation so that when the site has been graded, the area can have some resemblance to what was there before with a mature tree setting. Mr. Lewendowski explained that the EIR does not specifically address the issue of relocation, but does quantify the number of trees that should be replanted in compliance with the oak tree Ordinance. The Planning Commission recommended approximately 24 trees currently identified for relocation. The arborist indicated that oak tree relocation is a very difficult and expensive process with questionable results. Ann Flesher, 20647 Larkstone Dr., pointed out that Larkstone Dr. currently has traffic problems that need mitigation. The street should not be designed as a thoroughfare, as indicated, since the situation, at it currently exists, already exceeds standards for how the street was designed. Originally, the plan was to make Larkstone Dr. an emergency access only. She questioned how a straight thoroughfare from Brea Canyon Rd. directly through Larkstone Dr. emptying onto Lemon and Colima could be a benefit to the project. She then expressed support of the project as a unified approach to solve various needs. Jay Nelson explained that the project is intended to create a new access from the school to Brea Canyon Rd. so that bus traffic and the majority of the traffic to and from the school can go directly to Brea Canyon Rd. without passing a residential neighborhood. It is also possible to make Larkstone Dr. a turn -around point. George Barrett, 1884 Shaded Wood Rd., stated that he was under the impression that the South Pointe Middle School would be built with or without this project. He questioned how the Planning Commission approved a pro- ject that is 1/3 incomplete and how the City Council can consider an incomplete plan in regard to the park and the commercial center. Mr. Lewendowski stated that the Walnut Valley Unified School District's FEIR indicates that the soil material identified on the school site which requires relocation will be deposited in the South Pointe Project site. Relative to the aspect of the phasing of the project, he explained that there are aspects of this project SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 12 that have not been precisely defined at this stage. In order to complete the environmental assessment, certain sets of assumptions were made concerning some of the development characteristics, primarily of the commercial site. As that site progresses, further environmental review will be necessary. C/Werner asked if the Master Plan presented is an optional step chosen by the developers or a mandatory step. He also inquired if each of the developers can proceed individually without the Master Plan or if there is something in the City's regulations that mandates that a Master Plan precede any discretionary approval. Mr. Lewendowski stated that there area number of in- dividual property owners who are attempting to pursue development concurrently. Each of those projects could proceed under their own merits, recognizing some intertwining aspects in terms of land exchanges and the effects of one development on another piece of prop- erty. Whether the project's advance as a series of individual applications or occur under the umbrella of a Master Plan, under CEQA, the environmental assessment must look at each of the project components to evaluate their cumulative impacts. The Development Agreement would provide the implementing mechanisms to assure project phasing. Mason Wind, 1389 S. Lemon Ave., a recent graduate of the University of Colorado, stated that he used to hike through Sandstone Canyon and he knows there are deer, rabbits and other wildlife. One cannot measure the option of a park for the replacement of the canyon. Children need a place to explore and adventure. He questioned how this project would benefit the children and raise standards of living. Mr. Lewendowski stated that part of the environmental review record is a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which delineates the benefits of the project. Art Fritz, 20635 Larkstone Dr., stated that it is extremely difficult to get out of one's driveway because of the traffic on Larkstone Dr. The General Plan discusses an objective of maintaining the integrity of residential neighborhoods and discourage through traffic. He pointed out that if the school is to be constructed regardless of this Master Plan, there are two options for the dirt on the site: to dump it into the canyon or haul it out. Hauling out the dirt would require about 28,000 truck loads and Larkstone Dr. was not designed for such activity. SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 13 Terry Birrell, 1528 S. Gold Canyon Dr., pointed out that the Planning Commission recommended certification of the EIR after the recision of the 1992 General Plan and the adoption of the 1993 General Plan, which is inconsistent with Section 65.360 of the Planning & Zoning Law. Perhaps the EIR, as well as the Master Plan, should go back to the Planning Commission for their reconsideration in accordance with the 1993 General Plan, when it is adopted. She expressed concern for the impacts that cannot be mitigated and the impacts to the area. She questioned the appro- priateness of considering this Master Plan project when there is no 1993 General Plan in place. ACA/Curley stated that the authority under which the Planning Commission considered the South Pointe Project is currently in litigation regarding the applicability of Ordinance No. 4 and it would not be appropriate to discuss the issue at this time. RECESS: MPT/Papen recessed the meeting at 9:45 p.m. RECONVENE: MPT/Papen reconvened the meeting at 10:04 p.m. Barbara Beach-Courchesne expressed concern that public comment is being permitted when the public has not yet received a full presentation. She questioned why public comment is limited to five minutes during a Public Hearing, denying the public their rights to adequately address this EIR. She then made the following comments and inquiries: what happened to the money placed in escrow to guarantee the removal of the dirt to build South Pointe Middle School; how can the project be mitigated and established in the event of seismic activity, as indicated in the EIR: John Gutwein, the County Planning liaison for D.B. when Arciero illegally cut down oak trees, stated that replacing the oak trees with saplings is not advisable because of environmental conditions and because it would take nearly 50 years to benefit D.B.; though the Gnatcatcher is best detected in the months of January through March, the consultants did their study August through September; Page 4-143 of the EIR indicates that there is no significant impacts in terms of noise with the window is closed; the citizens should determine public policy; the Department of Fish & Game has written a letter disagreeing with the findings of the EIR, yet it is not included in the document; the pro- ject does not meet the vision of the General Plan in the areas of retention of rural and country living, community character, preservation of open space and reduction of traffic impacts; and the land is presently map restricted with a prohibition on building and should remain so. SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 14 Mr. Lewendowski stated that independent studies conducted both for the Water District and the individual applicants concluded that, from a geotechnical perspective, the project could be developed to satisfy existing design standards. In regard to the oak trees, the current oak tree Ordinance requires a certain size tree to be provided as mitigation. In regard to the California Ghatcatcher, the existing established protocol for that species allows surveys to be conducted for 12 months of the year. The project biologists conducted the surveys in full accordance with established protocol for that species and concluded that the Gnatcatcher does not exist on that site. In regard to noise impacts, no noise standards will be exceeded by project implementation. He pointed out that they have attempted to eliminate personal judgment from the conclusions presented in the EIR and have deferred to public policy documents, as established by the City and other appropriate agencies as the threshold criteria. The leter from the California Fish & Game is included in the Response to Comment document as well as a letter from the U.S. Department of the Interior raising similar issues. Stan King, 1304 Rapid View Dr., noted that C/Werner is the only Councilmember that appears to show any concern for citizens, issues. The removal of 700 oak trees is a travesty. He pointed out that the residents on Larkstone Dr. were also once told that there would not be any traffic problems resulting from the school and now those same people are before the Council pleading for relief. The Council should be able to understand why the citizens want to keep the area as is. Jeff Nelson, 23051 Rio Lobos, commented on the importance of meeting in a City Hall belonging to D.B. with a more personal atmosphere. The Council needs to respond to the publics desire to retain open land and encourage only acceptable growth. Technical standards are not nearly as important as the standards of the public. He then noted that most recommendations made recommend that a project go forward. Ken Anderson, noting a discrepancy in the actual percentage of traffic to utilize Brea Canyon Rd., inquired of the actual number of vehicle trips projected. He pointed out that a 20 dba actually translates into a 100% increase in noise. Jay Nelson stated that 80% of the project traffic will come out of Brea Canyon; however, in any one location, whether north of the project access or south of the project, the maximum amount of traffic on Brea Canyon is 40%. SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 15 John Anderson, 1896 Shaded Wood Road., stated that Brock developers assured him when buying his property that the surrounding property would remain as open space. Brock developers would have developed that remaining property; however, because of the density factor, the County of L.A. did not permit them to do SO. He questioned why all of the Councilmembers are not making inquiries regarding the EIR. MPT/Papen explained that the Council usually holds their comments to receive input from the public first. Tom Van Winkle noted that the proposed project will gridlock traffic in the surrounding areas. It appears that this project is pretty much a done deal. The Council needs to take the citizens' issues into consideration. Norman Beach-Courchesne, 2021 Peaceful Hills, President of the Pathfinder Homeowners Assn., stated that the HOA opposes the project and objects to the misrepresentation of J.C. Dabney using our land to enhance his open area. He made the following comments: L.A. County restricted the land to open space and future park land; there will actually be over 2,000 trees removed; why are 24-hour average decibel levels used when most use hourly decibel readings; since the streets around South Pointe School were never engineered to carry heavy school buses and the increase in traffic, the City should require funds to mitigate the early replacement and destruction of local streets in D.B. and L.A. communities and the homeowners are still trying to find out who is responsible. He then requested to see the letter from the Department of the Interior that is supposed to be in the Response to Comment document. Mr. Lewendowski stated that the two letters referenced can be respectively found under section 5.2, commencing with comments 61, on Page 5-41, and under Section 5.3, commencing with comments 76, on Page 5-57. In regard to the number of trees removed, he explained that the only trees surveyed are oak trees and only those that met a certain height standard as delineated in the oak tree ordinance. James Roberts, 829 Silver Fir Road, inquired how the project can be considered without a Tentative Tract Map from RnP . CDD/DeStefano stated that the maps for each of the specific projects, as well as a composite map, were contained within each of the Council packets and all packets made available to the public. The issue of map restrictions will be addressed at subsequent meetings. SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 16 Frank Dursa, 2533 Harmony Hill Dr., asked why Pathfinder Road and Golden Springs have not been addressed in regard to further traffic impacts from the development. He questioned the accuracy of the noise level projections. Mr. Lewendowski stated that state-of-the-art computer technology is utilized in completing all studies and it is believed that all conclusions are accurate based upon the assumptions utilized. Jay Nelson stated that the traffic study addresses all the traffic impacts on Golden Springs, Pathfinder Road and other key roadways int he study areas. Since it was known that the Pathfinder Bridge widening project was to occur, it is accounted for in the traffic studies. Irving Gassowitz, 1644 Chapel Hill Dr., stated that the residents on Chapel Hill do not want signs and sidewalks as is being proposed. Furthermore, the golf course area will also be affected. He stated that he is resentful of the problems being created by the City. Chuck Bowler, Morning Sun, stated that Walnut Leaf and Colima will be very much affected by traffic coming through the area. he inquired why SASAK is being allowed to build on that property when L.A. County denied building permits about ten years ago. Jay Nelson stated that less than 15 cars were forecasted for the a.m. peak hours on Walnut Leaf with 16 to 20 cars during the p.m. peak hours on Walnut Leaf for both phase one and phase two projects, and about 30 cars in the peak hours, each direction, on Colima Road during peak hours. CDD/DeStefano stated that SASAK Tract Map 51253 contains a building restriction similar to the larger adjacent tract proposed by RnP, which is a restriction allowing only one unit per lot. There is also a flood hazard area on the SASAK property. As a product of the resubdivision of the property, those restrictions would be erased. C/Werner requested staff to investigate why SASAK was restricted to IDU/AC. Jay Nelson, in response to an inquiry regarding Colima Road, stated that the existing traffic volume on Colima Road are significant enough that the addition of the amount of traffic added by the project traffic would not change the existing condition significantly. Hearing no further testimony offered, MPT/Papen closed SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 17 the Public Hearing. C/Werner stated that there are many issues needing further consideration. Perhaps once the developers have made their presentations, there will be a better understanding of the project based upon their intent and what they are willing to commit to. He then requested staff to address the following issues: the actual peak and ambient noise levels; the history of the land use restrictions on the SASAK properties and the RnP property and if there are legal implications to changing those restrictions; the General Plan recog- nizes that the City does not have adequate noise standards and relies on CEQA guidelines to give a better sense of what are proper noise standards; how many trees to be removed are indigenous since the General Plan considers all indigenous trees to have value to the City; the inclusion of the HOA property on the map should be addressed; and it would be helpful to get the information from the L.A. County Animal Control Department as to the amount of calls received siting bobcats. He suggested that the Council continue the meeting out to the site so that the Council can hear the noise for themselves and get a better feel for the project. He suggested that the Public Hearing be continued to allow the public to address any further environmental issues, particularly when it was indi- cated that this meeting was to be a presentation meeting. MPT/Papen stated that the purpose of this discussion was to decide if the EIR is adequate to certify as an information document. The law provides for a reason- able professional difference of opinion, thus the question is if there is enough scientific information within the document for the Council to make a decision. Certifying the EIR does not mean that the project will be approved. She concurred to continue the Public Hearing to September 28, 1993, allowing Mr. and Mrs. Courchesne to speak first since they did not receive a full report. She directed staff to draft two Resolutions --one to certify the EIR and one to reject the EIR. Following discussion on the certification of the EIR, a financial analysis of the project has been scheduled. C/Forbing stated that he had visited the site numerous times during the last eight years and a visit to the site is unnecessary. MPT/Papen agreed that a visit to the site was unnec- essary, particularly since she and C/MacBride attended the field trip with the Planning Commission toured by Mr. Schad. In response to C/Werner's inquiry regarding the economic report, she explained that she scheduled a SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 PAGE 18 consultant to attend the next meeting to make a presentation. Hardy Strozier stated that the City commissioned a cost revenue/cost benefit study reviewed by the Planning Commission. MPT/Papen requested that the consultant be present at the next public meeting in order to review the study with the City Council. C/Werner asked if it would be acceptable to the owners of the project site if he entered the site before the next meeting to review the material. Jan Dabney, speaking for the owners of the property, stated that he would have no problem with escorting C/Werner and members of staff to visit the site. 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/MacBride announced that the City's library services have been cut in half. The Friends of the Library will conduct a meeting on September 22, 1993 from 6:00 to 8:30 p.m. in the Community Room at the Library to discuss ways to support and assist the Library. 4. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, MPT/ Papen continued the Public Hearing to September 28, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. ATTEST: Mayor Lynda Burgess, City Clerk I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mayor Pro Tem Pape�n and Councilmember Forbing FROM: Linda G. Magnuson;`Accounting Manager SUBJECT: Voucher Register, October 5, 1993 DATE: September 30, 1993 Attached is the Voucher Register dated October 5, 1993. As requested, the Finance Department is submitting the voucher register for the Finance Committee's review and approval prior to its entry on the Consent Calender. The checks will be produced after any recommendations and the final approval is received. Please review and sign the attached. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR VOUCHER REGISTER APPROVAL The attached listing of vouchers dated October 5, 1993 has been audited approved and is recommended for payment. Payments are hereby allowed from the following funds in these amounts: FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION 001 General Fund 112 Prop A Transit Fund 118 Air Quality Imp Fund 138 LLAD #38 Fund 139 LLAD #39 Fund 141 LLAD #41 Fund 250 CIP Fund TOTAL ALL FUNDS APPROVED BY: Linda G. Ma son Accounting Manager City Manager AMOUNT $488,064.32 5,105.16 709.29 26,888.03 23,155.73 1,718.91 3.000.00 $548,641.44 Phyl s E. Papen Mayor Pro Tem John A. Forbing Councilmember 1011AL DUE V,NDCR--------) 1.445.50 Accurate Landscape Accurate RUS 1 ihF: 17:51 091 i3ig3 410J5A J i? H ?- 25786 Ranairs/Maint Dist 1a. 343.93 f139.4Y;9-2218 2 4129 A �'., THt1ii .............!t 519 29161 V _*X,q 4AMC, 191.56 VENDOR 1D. 41005A 99/2`1' * FI'+._?,A 0 # } ACCOUNT P;tlE:1.Td49 --------------------•---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maint Haritane Prk PATCH Pl►.i INF/N;i. ENTRY/DUE INV01('t Dt 1(:R1Pf I(lN WONT DATE Hr '►: ARA/C,iry Refre�.hvir Svcs: ARA 189.0 1881-431.3 2218 2 41825A 1821 49�1e 23?{ 1 419859 9912`, 19/e4 31367/ Mpptirip Sunnliecs 74.18 99/29 19/85 111911 "list Park Sucolies IW AL CI;F V NDuR --------- 74.0 ASL consultants 99/2" 19/05 29911 Maiot-Manl.e Hill 288.88 113b-45,16-4930 1 4105A, e4/1512A 8`-1129 RW' 146 4 Prof Svcs -Dist 31, 481..64 1137-4'39-4828 1 41e0SA 95115i2A 09129 10/95 146; 4 Pv,,; SVrS-Dist :119 R81.63 1141--4F41-4838 1 419250 0611512A 99/29 18185 14514 Prof Secs -Dict 41 481.63 1011AL DUE V,NDCR--------) 1.445.50 Accurate Landscape Accurate 113F, 45:16-2219 1 410J5A 891Z' 1e1e5 25786 Ranairs/Maint Dist 1a. 343.93 f139.4Y;9-2218 2 4129 A 09/19 13/05 29161 ReoairslMaint Dist t39 191.56 1001-431.3 2219 1 41005A 99/2`1' 19185 2961.6 Maint Haritane Prk 334.611, 11:59-4539-2219 1 41005A 69/'9 18/6 19;61 RecairslMaint Dist 139 189.0 1881-431.3 2218 2 41825A 09/21)*' 10/e5 25919 Maint Heritane Prk 958.82 1:01 -431e-1798 1 41USA 99/29 19/85 111911 "list Park Sucolies 199.0) 1801-431.6 211.9 1 4192 A 99/2" 19/05 29911 Maiot-Manl.e Hill 288.88 1081-4319-27.10 1 416259 89/29 .10/85 27911 Sain4-P?t?rsan Prk ISOOM 1031-431.9 2219 2 4102SA 99/2,' 10185 29111 Maint-Paterson Prk. 175,88 1e21 43`x.2 2210 1 4199;A 09/29 19/05 '1'1911 Maiot-Ron R?anan 7e9.et 1001-43:31-2218 1 41825A 99/2'•; 10/05 2'1'111 Maint-Svcamare Cyn 482.08 *1 TIP, -4538- See 1 41095A 45/15/7 99/19 18195 191"92 `eot Saint Dist 2:18 3.348.8) 1135'-M,1-5{03 14100SA 0?/1576 99/29 10105 25'Y'13 Spot Maint Dist 23'; 5,922.22 1981-4311-2210 1 41MA 09129 18105 3aV6 Saint Paul Grow Prk 1.':09.0) feel S11:104 2 41045A e6/1666 89129 10/05 We Spot Maint-Pail. &row 1,108.08 1ee:-4313-x.390 2 41005A :0'2/16x,b 99/29 18185 30858 Sant Saint-'rpritaae 159.00 1021-4316 5:13 2 41025A 64/1666 09/29 10105 3ANS8 ';pat Maint-Manle Hill 938.90 x981.4=119-'1308 2 410?5A 81/1656 99124 18/25 ;:00;6 ?pot 413int-Peterson 1.209.a? 1221-4322 SAN 2 41035A 03/166.5 99/2; 10165 38256 Spot Maint-Ran R-rauan 1.902.92 Q1,41-43'25 LIM 2 41e115A 35/1666 69/29 Wes :29058 1901"alnt StarShin? ,99.90 1821-4326-5:,88 2 41685A 87/1666 09/29 10105 32258 Spat Maint-&immit Rcine 1.522.02 121!1-4331-1:3D0 2 41085A $6/1656 09/29 10/05 ?0856 ^plot "taint-Syraanre Cyn 1,:08.90 4prican `aoci?ty ;f A`UF- 1021-4518-2340 2 419850 e11167e Arsentr mit, Phil Arvantrput 1021-4449-'4840 1 410259 ;UTA: Dtif VROOR--------) 23,233.22 9-^,/2`1 10/05 234;45 Pah{) gminar-D.1 i.0 345.88 1UTAL OF 4ENDCR--------) 345.00 091?'; 19105 617E 1 rCnnrdSvcs-9/13 9/24 673.08 T1jfAl- 1;i;F VENDOR --------) 673.00 4 4 4 0 p a r RIIN' i lMF: 12:57 0/'Ibtn V 0 ij H R (R G 10t THRul . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q V;:,u)f;R NAM,: VENDOR iD. PR 1- p A i 0 ACC. L* MINT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ BATCH P3.1 INEW1. ENTRY I DOF INVOT0 ------------------------------------------- AMOUNT DATE ,11 trues,,, Lvrtda brae -,sl Yn 4849-2;{9e 1 410d5A 09/?' 101/6 Rpi0-GznPlnR,?fprpndut it'." 1WAL Dia:c V,W)IJR --------i 6 1 2 3 00T CLOUT 41e 21c'5 1 410051 Mto 9/23-Forbino 12.0 10/05/9 0284171?::,- t0fAL PREPAID AMOUNT 1233 iIITAt DtIF VENDOR -------- 9.03 Chino Hills Ford C01 I IF-Ird +001-4030-2288 1 4103SA 01116,12 99!24, 10/6 I -D, 6Vehicle Maint - T a u r u s 11613y IWAL 01;9 --------- 116.39 Clavton. -jovre onj 1021-4095-1280 2 41025E 01713.rl 10/0; R, -i0, m2ptina sopolips I34.58 10/e5/913 TOTAL PFO40 AMOU`%T ---- 111,8.58 19TAi Duf VENDOR -------- 6.00 Industries +041-454;5-5.23 I 410850 0912' 1045 Auoust titter Abatps,,it 639.44 1481-'+0'15-1772 t '41905A 99/29 10/05 11833 390 graffiti Buttons 317a. 0 ?(ITA; DUE VENDOR --------- 1.?2?.44 on!' opland Assoc cotaplAssa I 41925A 07124 10/05 3161 prof qvis-S.?l Plan 424.55 1HAL DUE lh--WR -------- '424.')5 B. Cha2b;ar r -,f Crm?rce 09chambs?r +112 :43b0-211; 141®05E 0/32 10/05 0- 5,1calcm-rs 'Cloide-93 11103.09 19/05/93 Wk 'PAID "MOLY ---- 1.190.93 IIITAI P01 VFNXIR 9.09 DpIradilln, Ben 914 iOl - '14 74 2 4108;6 04'07 1019S K-84 R2,reit imi REfonol 311.08 > 04 P,eot of Transi)nrtatioii C-8ot i rain -i 1 41"r -A 09127 lelti:. Li,-.iht-,-Ju1v 9'' 964.15 <201-b',5; ;58 2 41WIA 0129 18/95 t26737 5111r.;1-1 93 1.211-6.34 7 i.iTll.: li1 WiNXtR ---------- ?,?12.49 1A F?taral rr?dit Union F1,Arr?AitJ 43a1-2110-1031! 2 41005E 89/30 Wes Payroll DQduction5-PP19 2,288.00 10/65193 03'4713:": 10fAL v PAID AMOUNT ----> 7.'288.32 111AI DUE 10NDUR------- 6.00 Federal rxnrpa Corn. FedExnress f► i C :' 2 .. 1 a .A '] 11 1 B a r * x* 3A.e? 10/05/93 ki°i TTME; 12:'% 0?/3:3%9; 40a1-7;188-1010 1 4102011 1 l J C ti 'e R R F r 1 Mail -HL 92 16 13.00 :'tal-2?22 1010 2 4tefeB r.i;� 10/35 1.056:1iri60 0.0a UCS`!!.±R hAMc 43.06 vEND11R Iia. 42a1 ?302 1211 1 41031: 09/29 10/05 * * NU-P?Iil t # ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BATCH ,b.liNF NO. VIRY/011: 13.02 iNvUi:p 1 4te23B AMOUNT DATE Dia and Bar h--1inu•o& A,;nc 25!;-: —r5 c '".ail fien Govt 76.20 0271-4716 4210 2 4102011 teat -4{. 2 7't i.0 1 41oaSA Cli2'v le/05 Plan Area Maint 6r,11.20 1 41e2'uB 29129 13/05 :,;6:01)562 ".ai:-City iOiAt i?U V00up---------- 557.22 r;,;a_ie Cons ructlor Ifne'i -rofs Baal ?=!3a 1 410244 0"12'? IP../85 Plan CRer.k. Rpionr lVA,_ DI;E U NDUR---- - - - -`: rwmht French 3 AgSuc. );wjahtFr n 413"-45;�L-0410 0L,4;4 2 4128SA 21/162.; 29/2;' 19/05 1021263 FioOe;ian57cs-Media:± 6.300.36 TOTAL Oi;E vEADUR--------5 6..32.20 `a=,'cman Inr.. fa;f r.3n 4118 4059 034 2 41b2SA 01/1672 09/?" 10/05 0113343'.•x, Mirri.e:±terBrkStatinn 5a.44 x001 -4312-1t20 1 412t'•5A :>5/th22 09/29 Wes 211238723 Suooli s-Pris 92.:,5 4021-431.0 1722 1 410SA 3,./1621 09/25 10/85 811969051 Sunnhpc;-Recreatinn 1.61 :201 i35'a 1228 2 41335A :37/16,12 09/::9 12/85 011392632 9ui)n1h•s-iacr7atirn 8.91 TOTA: DOE WNW --------- > 683,11 tivin Fantosi l3 40a1-^472 1. 418a'.A 89/29 10/65 Ra:reatinn R,,bnd 33.04 IQiAL DUE VENDOR --------- 33.89 1A F?taral rr?dit Union F1,Arr?AitJ 43a1-2110-1031! 2 41005E 89/30 Wes Payroll DQduction5-PP19 2,288.00 10/65193 03'4713:": 10fAL v PAID AMOUNT ----> 7.'288.32 111AI DUE 10NDUR------- 6.00 Federal rxnrpa Corn. FedExnress 4021-4010-2410 1 41HS5 07/35 1/P5 F: paarr 3A.e? 10/05/93 x001-4020 03';5 40a1-7;188-1010 1 4102011 09/29 10/05 505635',1.0 Fxore=.= Mail -HL 92 16 13.00 :'tal-2?22 1010 2 4tefeB 09129 10/35 1.056:1iri60 0.0a xai -i"?i- 43.06 9.20 42a1 ?302 1211 1 41031: 09/29 10/05 505635550 Fxrire,=. !!ail -HIR 91-007 13.02 4601 -43`02 -?128 1 4te23B 39129 tales 520635:60 =oru:s '".ail fien Govt 76.20 0271-4716 4210 2 4102011 09/29 10/05 52563551.0 Faun..-. Mai 1-i;?n Plan 21.50 1 41e2'uB 29129 13/05 :,;6:01)562 ".ai:-City !?n Line "6.00 llT^i !'iF `lEtiD(!R--------? 173.52 First Interstate Pank Fir,tIr.tar 4021-4010-2410 1 41HS5 07/35 1/P5 F: paarr 3A.e? 10/05/93 x001-4020 03';5 t 4162';F 19120 12125 1'r0 7 2-rac4n 39.65 12/25143 000;::0: 40a1 -48;3a 2325 2 41025E 0?/30 10/05 !'la 8.'4 Pn:?n 28.00 10/05/93 00r,r TO A!- , !:?air A140I;4T ----; 91.07 VFN)(IR --------. 0.0a .011i l",j-: 12:5? V!3863 V 0 d C F R R F 1 5 F R P A S- ............. VENDOR NAME VENDOR D. PIR I. P A 4I.AIRINT r1lifl. ---------------------------------------- TX-NO BATCH MJ 1-WiliO. ------- -Vpytpl:;" ------------------------ tVvljll.E ---------------------------------------------------- '001,:N I DATE ------- 8 1 8 Trophy Co. 136rroohy M1_43`4_ Ina 3 410M 02/16,4 09/2',' IMS e. L% t� 9 annhipq-Vol te'ipa) 1 700 TOTAL *DIJE "'NDUR -------- -a Ai CA R D eA.'iCARD WOO 91,1100• 10/05 F,,Pq-AltFlrriatp Fl-rel 1e.00 TOTAL DUF VrN.DI;R --------- la." 6l IDA 6FOA M1-40%-2_i0 2 41MR WIK'q e9/29 10/05 62294 GAAFR Publications 74.0 TUAL DijF VCNDuR -------- 74.09 I bTE 6TEL fea1-401110-.2138 I 4RU: 09!29 Wes FaLlin Rent 9/19 I@/Iq 619.0 MIAL NE V500R -------- 66M3 bTE California MI-4040-2125 j 41OUT, 0/29 10105 MOdUlb Svcs 16,96 I fj rAL PlJF VENDOR-------- 16.96 bTF California 6TE MI-43141-212S 1 4103'al; 09/2111 Wes S-4cavirp Cyn Phafip Svcs 66.94 KfAL GUE vfr,.NDI,,R --------- ) ;6.'14 Fallardo., Alina 913 401-3476 4 41035A 0912", RIOS 9032 Rer-reatinn Refund 27.00 104- OU VENDOR--------- 27.00 knt:a1vP5 I Son, inE A. Gonsilyps +x81 4016 40x8 1 4IA09R 0/2ti 10/95 Ort Lerii;lative Svc,; 2,10.00 l0rAl. ojl"F KIM"R -------- 21108.09 Graphic roov 6ra0ivrno MI-402x-4021 1 410x9I: 09/2'. Wes DNAs,- Vs City-Pane;/ 45x.93 TOTAL 00F VENDOR -------- 4S0.93 Hear, log? Q31-?4744 I 41MA 09121,' 1P,/05 7e32 Rprreatinri R?f;.Ind 46.0 TMAL Dll%F V?IMUR --------- 1 0.0 III* City of US t i I] C H x F: G T If-, Hh VENDOR 10. f AC0110W PNO—TX-ND ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BATCH PO.1 IKEW. ENIRY/DUE !NVOTU DKIuR) P WONT PAIF 71Y hvh1P1-!int kwhirs Hiptif,cont WA W,'8-2110 2 410828 0011611,1 1p,16 2"'114 Prtn q.-vcq--CtvOninp 64.9=, lrifk 71IF --------I 64.v9 ,iiiphlaildn publicaticins ."46 rib I andpr 3 410101: 019/2`-1 IMS 1/4 Pane G;?n Plan Ad 4/11+ ;(Ili 10"'AL Dl;F V,,-NDuR Hfildnliter De Uans qiPdi?T I it r 021-4090-14010 I 4103OR 0912,,, 1045 101; Prof qvcq-3rd Gtr 191,,3 91121.00 )MAL DUF VENIMM --------- M.0 Hot rinnner Tours Irr. ':otDrjocpr 1112 4360-5310 1 41KI011 e.9/29 10/05 Transq, 191!4 Rose Parade 1,21A.68 flk DUE VENDOR - -------- t.218.0 I c tip. 1CMA1 1021-408-23" 2 410298 411W,6A 09129 IWS a51(,76 162.0 MAI- 1711E IVINDUR -------- 108M 102-2110-1807 1 410O2IR 0W211, 1010' Pavroll, Dp6mction PPIA.19 382.03 M 1-42IU-909 I 41MB 9909 Mes Confrart Cootrib-13plaptier 498.011 IO2'1-4033--8898 1 410228 0/29 Wes Oct 541.77 *2ai-42I40-19721 I 419028 99/29 tolts pct.. rafia-l"M 1133.0 ja ro-aag@ pl-4g J 1 419028 0712 11115 0.,t Cafe-Finance 161,34 108'1-4210-U1 I 41099B 49/29 IMS ort r;;f�. pinij 514.74 102I-431.9-090 1 410118 e9/29 10/05 Oi: t C;J;-Prk I R?r 253.57 1981-4:3;0 e t In I 4180i9 99/79 10195 Ort r;47,-rrAm Sorvirpq 712.09 1841-4510 2290 1 419119 09/29 IMS Ort C.af?-E:orlPabW4s 1,053.84 Mi[. 111,,: VENDOR -------- 4141911-i5 1111and raoire Stane 111C20)fane 1821-431.4-5310 I 410081+ 09/211 I0105 092493 TrAncnikrac. 9124-2.1 7SI.04 11.12-4362-531a 2 410e08 0/0 MOS 092443 TTIr-17-i .301hii9 9/24-26 315. t-13 nTAi D4 VF.N`Iflk I.066.64 111laild Valley Div Pullefil 1V113 fool-4040.111S 2 41909P 09729 14105 dc-52183 Pdh HTTI I WP-; Pub ME 45.38 0011-4848-2115 1 41202B 99/1,:9 IMS 1638-t5 ?;i) SA 51.59 TOTA. VFjj(jR TOTAL DIiF 'JFti9UR --------: ?80,..471.34 i ,A.Couilty Public `krk5 Ou'Putiik +031-43:{1-2210 3 418050 09/32 18/05 94004237545 June-R?pairs Sycamore Cvn 4,7113.43 iON TIME: 12:51 t.)iSir9? V U U C PI E R R F 6- S`- rA h +231 4��� 51.26 6 410.15(.: 09130 18/85 94088032546 June -Maim Sioninn 2.051.97 V ND'UR NAK VEUOR III. 09/32 10105 94808082549 jure "x4111/fiinninn + + Pkt P AI; + .f-COIVT „+11.1.iX-v0 ;;ATCH PO. (INE V. :dTAYrAI;F 10/05 144 .!_ ,;.tiCRiri N A;OUNT 1!A1F a;)itn. x35 912 09/30 18105 942811082541 jur'2 T.'d 'sras+? SvCs 2.117.87. 1231 :476 4182';a 0')42`, 10105 9214 Per-reatinn R?f rnd 5).02 MI 4',;, =,06 3 41MC 09/30 12/05 940011002;56 401114_ ;�I„= '.,_YDi;R--------• �7.0a jbitlt Alr;an S. T, joitnAlr'en 09138 10/05 94038827`;~; Junr' "air,L Sinn inn 534,58 +221-401f7 2290 1 4.t02dr; 07i2� 10105 942&11082;;4 Ork Caf=-milirr 451.0" +231 45ti';-5:26 7 410250 09132 10/05 94082327'S3 MM. '!Y';= '.'"=.UD11R--------> x52.29 jnsaahir-e Inst. r.•f Whirs jos?shine 09130 10/85 94202022;52 �urr "airti5irnilto 57.48 1001-4010 2315 1 4100011 09121; 10/0{i 9403828% MeaPr.lin R?neual. 38.03 1031-45 5 5417 1 410050 29/33 12/05 9480086:5;9 ! 1 i A!- O r I;;:YDCA 38.00 -ludiclal lata ;lvst ads lidat4sys 89/32 10/05 94002227562 ,7us,e--RDar; !Saint 9,387,81 +221-4090-4028 1 4108811 09121; 10105 940801182513 All Prkn Citation Admin 28';,22 +231 455. 5524 1 41 WC 09/30 18105 9402222?`.b7 fork rjhE OADU'R--------> 2P,6.2) !.A. cro)Itts-Sheriff's i'a-; LAI;Sil!?rlff 1 41005+, 019/32 10105 940808025,'18 ji,rc- C=;:is ;Zc;aval".;11.87 +821-441 -5101 2 410854: V129 10/0' 20476 Ago, ,` Contract Sres 280,424.18 1021 4411 X481 t 4100 0 091;9 10/65 2x498 rpl. -2-o er Svcs-.3r)Iv .247.16 TOTAL DIiF 'JFti9UR --------: ?80,..471.34 i ,A.Couilty Public `krk5 Ou'Putiik +031-43:{1-2210 3 418050 09/32 18/05 94004237545 June-R?pairs Sycamore Cvn 4,7113.43 1 4111050 89/30 10/05 941180002541 jar.? Maint/Strininn 46.35 +231 4��� 51.26 6 410.15(.: 09130 18/85 94088032546 June -Maim Sioninn 2.051.97 t3 4t005C 09/32 10105 94808082549 jure "x4111/fiinninn 105.$6 11. 410050 09132 10/05 94888887;48 June-Maint/Sinnina 674.15 1221-4;5-'45;2 1 4t1105C 09/30 18105 942811082541 jur'2 T.'d 'sras+? SvCs 2.117.87. +331-45ti`.;-5',26 ? 410850 09/30 10/05 9402822?;411 Jurle-ma;nt Sinninn 1..401.,?2 MI 4',;, =,06 3 41MC 09/30 12/05 940011002;56 jure yai�t Sianine 102.22 Ml-45ii�-5`:?t. 4 410650 09138 10/05 94038827`;~; Junr' "air,L Sinn inn 534,58 11121-45':,5 ;5.08 5 4t205C 89130 18105 942&11082;;4 jt);ia "�i. t Sinninn �82.1;b +231 45ti';-5:26 7 410250 09132 10/05 94082327'S3 ,june-Maint 52.54 12et-4;';5 ;5�8 8 4t1105c 09130 10/85 94202022;52 �urr "airti5irnilto 57.48 +r�dt-455; 5~26 9 41W.": 09132 10/05 9403828% J<<;re--ya0t/S1anino 28.84 1031-45 5 5417 1 410050 29/33 12/05 9480086:5;9 ur.e ;".92 Tr.-,�artioils ?.103.95 89/32 10/05 94002227562 ,7us,e--RDar; !Saint 9,387,81 1221-4;';5 5� 3 2 410050 09123 1.8/05 940801182513 urs-Parkaav "ain't 410.60 +231 455. 5524 1 41 WC 09/30 18105 9402222?`.b7 June-`:inL 9idevlkln5nect 3,972.15 1401-4555 5,78 1 41005+, 019/32 10105 940808025,'18 ji,rc- C=;:is ;Zc;aval".;11.87 +$3}-455.-5'.10 1 410 fLI, 09132 18/05 9482+02321W June- a,:,t free Werino 2,292.96 1081 4;';5-,542 1 4M"3c 09133 13/85 940002825:,5 'u e-C:at :h Nasin Maint 176.27 +231-4555-5`'18 1 410250 09/32 18105 94030227564 Jrr;,e-': rr 15.aaare Maint 153.78 1231 4331 53113 3 41 0I 09132 12/05 94000110%571 ur.e Moist Su1110 rv; Syrme 115.95 '!;TA; i; '; ViVi D 32,5`..'i.84 ---------- ! 32.0+1 DIA�Ond Bar *.*f ,kl:!N I T�- : 12, S 1 6' 1 &1 i9"' I C 0 C E R R'FGII'GTFR 7 ............. V,L4114 NAME VENDOR ill. f M-PAI0 Ail'i,"OGN 1 1115.H -VO ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BATCH MUNUNO. F, 4 , R y 1 NVOI 111-: R I P " i i, 4 A JI 1) IJ N T DATE �K I.A.Countv Public �ofks 4 41W". Vj?'; 1915 TrAfhr3imiaIMaint-jmn93 6'5-.39.01 ---------- h"53A.01 W2 Sr?Y 1 410511, 09/2" JIUV 5`1140402PP39 ParAfra!i!;t 6130 2,472,16 MAI. DjUr V'4DOR ---------- I'A'Coulity Public 'hfis I-Al"",)Jbvk Ml-4S5r-138.07 ; 41051: 1011'j MvLWl3IWI,A Traf F'i r?ioriai Mai nt-AL1093 6,089.5? MIA1 Oi E vENDCR -------- h,M9.9 i Molliltv Public 'Jo0s ?I,,bwk 031-022 2216 2 41050 09/2'1 WOS 9400302yI' Mairit-Ron Rpaiarl Park. Wslj c0l-4329-2218 1 41005C 9911`9 OM 9`400202"57 Faint-Su*mit Rido.e Prk 214.19 MI-41-il-2210 2 41NSIC 09125' 10/0; 9400000255i Faint-qvcamnrpfynPrk 315,84 0K -44j53 -L,506 I 41095E 9909 '.B/PS 940001'82I'M Sionipm Striping Svr-3 167.41 +138-45II,8-2?Ie 2 4JUSC 0?12'11 IVOS 9400332559 sidewalk CmIstruction 6,764.11 ii'JIAI- 131-!E 7,02.74 ",,Cn wity Public 'Joris I -N ' 'Pubwk 3 4 10 "1 S. C 0901; 10,1t; ?,930028?3h! Traifir-^,ioria]Maint-DP61 91965.3� TOW QE VCNVIR -------- 9.1965,39 1 anOsrari? 'j?st ,apdvacsv (141 4541-2110 le 410251: 09/30 10/e5 11.2b' ReoajT5/Paint-PLuhb].eLa-ie 107.03 k141 -45+1-22t8 1 410950 HiN IMS 117.46 Rijn IS 6 . 95 *14i -4-F'41-211.9 2 4103SC 09/30 JeIOI.; 1127 399.76 114 � + ;, -4 1 *i41 _; 3 41tosc 09/39 IWS 11 i121A 07.63 1141 4548-211.0 4 410851: 09/33 1015 11269 Rp.lair;!MaInt-Pathfinder 71.68 X14,-4;41-1210 s 41065C 09/20 10/95 11122 1)6.22 114.1-4S41-2?I9 7 416350. 09/33 10/05 11211 R,-oairs/Maint-lkfail Run 24. 72 E141-4'141-2210 6 419050 0/36 IUM 11 19 Rena i rc;) Ma int --path F i 110pr ig. 29 f!41-4541-2210, 6 419,,r� "I. OWN 10/05 11273 Repairs/Faint-Pathfinder 72,44 *141-4,341-2210 9 4 i i1c MU 10/ES i11.74 R4ra i -r-04,3int-Patlif inder 1 In. 39 I 101AI, DOE VFNNIR -------- > 1,231.e9 I021-423--2324 3 LIJUS(I' 0111/2v Wes Art Publication 3233 ---------- ! 32.0+1 Lpiobtan and Assoriat.zs Leigntan +801-2322-1912 +++ . i t v r: f D i d P o ri i 78728 17;51 0/3o3T Svcs -EN 93-816 251.10 S?} 2 4199'+0 09/2.9 18/85 tl TY:RU.... . ........10/9;193 Prrf Svrs-3"1346 V::N1:1;R NAME VENDOR ID. 3 41005," 09/25' + } PY11PA1D + ► ACC WNT P;;Lr,i.Tl NO ---------------------•--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BATCH POJ INEM. ENTRY/DUF 100 list DI- ;CR ? i:uN AMDUNT DALE CNFC.t; ,eacuIp of Ca. e.itiPG Leaoup Wes WU Prrf +921 4919 2330 i 41.e3CF 99/3:1 19/05 Raoistration Cmi Paopn 22.92 I0/95/93 8228?71aT9 it19L 211?A1D AMQUNT "W-4020-4021 2 41085D 89/32 "ITFi DUt VFN'DOR------- ; 9.99 i_Yaar;e rt 44. 11t1s5 l->eaue +8a1-4299 23 it 1 41x3::: 09/30 10!95 Corooratra Tickpt4-Airfare 15.22 'arira Cantractors Inc. Marir.aCant 10FAL D1.E VENDOR --- ---- 15.91 Lpiobtan and Assoriat.zs Leigntan +801-2322-1912 1 410050 e9,'2^ 10/85 78728 Prof Svcs -EN 93-816 251.10 1221-2792-1.012 2 4199'+0 09/2.9 18/85 8021,6 Prrf Svrs-3"1346 289.28 +805-208-1012 3 41005," 09/25' 19!05 88761 Praf Secs EN93 838 53:1,08 +901-23218 t8S2 4 41MC 29/30 Wes WU Prrf Sur=. -:.N 93--34 184.91 TOM DOF VENDOR ------- 1,2£,},1.9 L�oiq =naravin,l inr. L�:iislingra +825 4995 2150 1 410851:' e9/29 10/05 614114 City 19 Line Plates 1,506,8+ +$8i-42:'5 2110 2 41e94C 29129 12/25 0141'�3 rtty On tine Plates -Repo 11.32 (1TA1 DUF VENDOR --------; 1,52i.ib M S M Co,irt Rtirortprs B;IMrourt "W-4020-4021 2 41085D 89/32 10/05 911'146 DNA;;. vs Paaen-Leaal. Svc 143.85 i0iAL 01;E V"VOOP,--------y 143.85 'arira Cantractors Inc. Marir.aCant +011 455,5 5'.,03 141e81,D 09/38 10/05 Matprlals-Wwy Protect 7,641.18 ts2FAi_ i,I;F V,.tlD!)fl--------- 1.841.18 Markun Armnsh Hanson Narkoanhc +825-2,44-le1D, 7 41885E 09!38 19/05 Sa'=;vcs- ". 9? 19 S"M? 334.5:1 10/05/93 0;?;br ' ;281 1320-1010 8 41205E 99l22 18/95 S;SyrS - 93-e6 5P MP 1,53.99 1.8/95/93 9s;;'.!i +~,a5-2308 Me 9 41995E 99/30 19/05 Sotvcs-FP', 9? 32 SPMP 42.48 10/95/93 0z? V +'1 1-4070-48?2 1 419L3,E 94138 Wes Au±i:�t etair.�r 5.588.08 18195293 99121; +ea5-4978 4971 3 41885E 09/3 10195 5a Svcs 3+ Assoc vs City 399,82 10/05/93 eL^^° #901 4230-4221 4 4190;E 29/?2 10/95titioation 91118.98 18/25/93 902 }1'25-4928-4e21 5 41et5. 99/32 10/05 S? Svc=.-5pv A3rpsaznts 62M 18/05/93 02:2 +991-4810-422.1 6 419e'IE 99123 5.8/25 So Svgs -up Citi<en4 nrd 4 5.289.92 12/951,93 +085-4020 4021 7 41885E 09/3? le/o 5=- ty 5?a'pr 0 +„+ 102,50 19/85/9.3 0. . CPA10 AM11UNT ----> 13. 7j'i3.48 t Tcl D4 VFN )OR -------- 9.88 TA: D4 VD401OR------- 1.440.62 1,orv.lanr, Hotvi OAry.land{it 4:3111-49A.2330 1 41085E @9/33 lofts POA cni Helanoer9/11-21 461.56 1@/05/9. 6E" I Q j r'ii_ :+'_nA.iD AMOUNT ----; 481. 6 OR ---------) 0.02 "reiel, Lillian Ore elL (021-434.0-1222 4 41125E 09/32 18/05 Ti; i "nt S;lonlipe 71.74 10/6/99 J1 , '= ALD AMOUNT ---- 12.74 TOTAr D!!E VENDOR ------- 0.02 441E +. .i J.a1I Bar 44� WK TIMI : 12:511 t' / 3 2/ y V D j" Hi F R R F 6 T S T R "= S.91 TA; F TM :.............18/25,' VIND0R N1r.E MOOR Iu, ; PRt"AI1 ACCOUNT PRO.I.TX-NO BATCH PO.1.IW,'NO. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4TkyIDl,: VNIJ !;E ?_'3CRIYTII AM1)UNT DATE !:'i! ;t Mobil Mobil 4331-421@-2':10 1 41"SD 6913:3 10/05 k247S`:i0 F;Pl-Pln(l 23.62 RM -4312-73t8 5 4tthD t9i 112/65 k2471; 4 14 F!;p1-113 43.31-409t-2310 1 410053 @9%33 10/95 047b4;i7 F;IpI-6-.9 6,-)dt 14.92 !f2-1312 2 41UbO J9/33 IMS k247/;b'r5 Ft;ai rpil hove 11.02 10211-4316 2310 2 410SS 0913) 1@/05 k2"90.405 F;:ci. PSR 2#..b4 11231-4318-7310 1 416"I.D 19/33 13/15 k316-t33b F+;?I-',- aR 3,S.t3 MI -431.0-•2:10 4 41@353 07/3:3 10/@5 k316",401 F;+el PSR 3a. 75 4121-I+1113-2312 7 41.9hD 0/30 10/05 k45i?3114 FI:PI-Y11,; 22.47 +221-4319-2310 3 41@351~ 09!33 1@/@s k.4512421 FjF1-PSR 32.61 !0iAI_ DOE VENDUR --------) 629.149 Mobil Mobil 1031-4210-2'120 1 4105(; 0'11'33 1.0/0,5 k7+15';16'. Maint-Plno Track 311.12 4601-431@-2F60 1 4tt64D 69/32 12/t5 k4'/72/2 Maint-*&R Truck 191.12 T(ITN DUF VFN'_1QR--------- 507.34 Mt. Baldy 11nitpd i'av initrr av i@31 -711E 1631; 3 41035E @9/33 R RS Unitarl day Conti-PP14-19 172.@2 11311;3!- DUc WNUIR--------, 1117.69 Mver,;. i 10abeth MvxnE 4031 -44 -MAN 1 41@253 69/32 10/ts 9 dbl6 Mat S?rrkarv-UP.to 9/7 3UM 4:.o1 -40W-460@ 2 41225-; 69 'O t0/45 '/3!ih!b 4fq 9/14 363.6 4321-47191-4022 1 41@3,11 0/2 10/05 931',16 Mate-E=nn R25aurcp 9/9 160.02 4631-4210-4162 2 41CM @9/32 112/25 93dh16 Mnt=,-Ylra Ccrpa Mtn. 9/13 268.19 +081 4211 4632 3 410253 09133 10/05 9:,db16 Mats -ADR Mtn 9113 1231 ';'.53-':613 1 41MD 69/2$ 10/M 93016 Mat ry-IF ytq 9/9 118.'9 TA: D4 VD401OR------- 1.440.62 1,orv.lanr, Hotvi OAry.land{it 4:3111-49A.2330 1 41085E @9/33 lofts POA cni Helanoer9/11-21 461.56 1@/05/9. 6E" I Q j r'ii_ :+'_nA.iD AMOUNT ----; 481. 6 OR ---------) 0.02 "reiel, Lillian Ore elL (021-434.0-1222 4 41125E 09/32 18/05 Ti; i "nt S;lonlipe 71.74 10/6/99 J1 , '= ALD AMOUNT ---- 12.74 TOTAr D!!E VENDOR ------- 0.02 H F R RFGIS7F!; ............. IM, 0 R NA r, FX -NO BATCH Po.t.1WIN3. ;'4 T R P E,,- AMM,:N DATE ------------------------ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- Pic PI ranular Ml -4238 MS pac-�,txif:?r Munirinal vcs pac4nfnftpr +881-4'578-5281 ? 41225E +220-P:i82 1212 3 4122`.1 Payrr,11 rTao0pr *831-;2281 41285r P�prv. Dora MI -M8 T, I) ra Favp,,'t-1Tr 41WA Pr.�nra 'qIy TrarsooTtation FCMlalilky 2 4M5,) +885-427!0-21'8 2 4]2858 T 1---OaTe !.maa,41llq 71). prr* 4rpl,e 210 1 412010 4211468 Pnp"aIltial elirpali i Hl +:sa1 2112-128 1 4111KAP I 419MD 0/38 IWS Spat Cp1lular. I'll"i : irifAl- 01;F v:NDfR --------- > 44.19 OWN, 110/015 Spot Bido Svcs 29/38 Mti Van CIA Svcs 9.40-0. 9913o IOU 2416 plu', pinchk Svcs -ADR 93 1S 1101.08 I � - . . F VOM"R --------- IF)"! fill 11 434. C44 e9138 RIOS PavrDlj 31111283.23 101AI DOE VENOCR -------- A.2!38.0 Rperpeinn Reforld 37.0 --------- ) 37.0 29/j3 12!25 P -,.k!7 Viol af infis-hicki9t 214.61 ir14, 101JE V':%)[ , JR --------- 714.61 29038 12/25 1688 Traisn-.1-P.4 AhAtp Bid JAM CAI. NE --------- 145.0 I'MAIv, 1, 99/33 1016 04 IVIIA 11/16 S-vcCyn 564.62 fj Al.---NDFjR --------- 29/38 12/e5 �jr J -ppr I f;jI P- , (_,,o ; 9,f4. 93, 29112l 19/25 '4HOOR -------- 1,9H,91 y 44 v q f pj , .3 k q n .4 . I.Ij I T 1, F : 17 3 s 19 3. C ij, E R. R. S T, F R ............. YCINMIOR NAME VEOIR IP, 4 1: 11 0 1 JN T !IRFO, U-NO ----------------------------------------------------------------------- BATCH 0,0.1 1NIF/W. CVRY " DI;C 1 $10, ------------------------------------------------------------ Rubtir 7,1131 RptirrAplit ;'F;;; I , IM 10it5 R&tirp, Contrih-PP19 ET.ilr 2.3+3.3'? 419950419 VII� OM Q Fle -IF'IItqri Retire Contra;-^P 9,624. 67 fITPj DOF VPN)OR 4,90.92 R S D Blupnrinf RI&I'lehe 09/13 10195 10,140 Blutoriotr4N. 92 Iq 6.5 X001 2320-1818 5 419hD 99/13 Wts 4363 92-a6 3.63 031-2323-I010 6 410353 e9/33 10195 1030 PIvp,orintq-FN. 92 39, et.b3 10 i Al I)I;F VII:NOUR -------- 13.45 R.H.F. loc. 'R*Inc MI-4411-2?00 4 41035D 09/3? Wes IWO Sppt R;trfar Maint 45M Q01-14411-2290 3 4t"D t9l,?3 OJOS 116'79 S?ot Radar Maint 46.0 103I-4411-2?0 2 410SO 97,133 IVOS 119%f7 Sent. Radar Maht 45,03 101-44141-2220 1 410950 09/311 16i05 1246 Sept Radar Maint 13.37 'IITA,I DOF WNDLIR -------- 285X Re,?d, 'ape 8/2 f3ai-31 Ts 1 41UA 99/29 10/05 6401 Recreation Refund 51.100 101'A1 DUF YENDUR --------- ) 51.0 Reno grdohit --)rr,13rauh 11,141-460-2110, 2 41f ,jfU el/lbrg 09/33 10105 6422 Prto Svcs-FurchOrdprForm; 215,3*f 10fk TWE V"N;DUR -------- 215.37 cao Pabr,pl Viv Tribune ') WrOupe 'M-40 t-2115 1 410si 09/33 19/9'1 vivt2'19,3 Pah 6".62 JOIAL 0114 -------- 67.62 '3baru '3Pafipq Uarany RarpSeat 41035v 0S/30 le/el; 2,245.63 1041. - N01"IR 7,245.64 qiqcka, liarrsin C. 5is?64 f 21-45`;1 5121 1 410050 P/N 10/05 30211,8 Prof Svcs+-tqr 195.03 *?':8-4SIO-W2 3104 1 410913D 99)33 1045 ?339 Pfr-f Svi-s SbdioCvn/Fti-,Gn,rq 3,ze3.90 MM D4 VINDOR -------- 3,195m :s,, .•F liarcn;i Bar #1f Rii1K TIMI: 12:5 6,';3:ai93 J 1 J F n R= 5 I]y ' G R VL DA NAK VENDOR II!. ;'R!i-1 X -4G BAICH MAIPiUNO, 31RYINI BVGTCE U:111'rniri KIN AMOUNT DATE C,is Cr ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sir S!;eedv Si rSr;29dy 1031-49+1.211.9 1 410W., U :621-4x92-2118 2 41t0iD 1981-4440 21.191 1 41VJ -1:23 1 41.2$'')D SmAhern Ca. Edison 504-dislm foal -4326-2126 1 4108SE 6021-4331-2126 1 4110E So�ithern fa. Edison SoCa�dison 12:!1-45S'3 21.26 1 41PW5 Southern Ca. tdisor SoCaU i.son 113$.-45 6-212b 1 41985E 50++tilern Ca. Edison Sora,- dison 111 -4539-212& 2 419915E Sta,}lard Irsoranra 6 OTe StandarAln 1821-21 i9-1935 1 41t9:� Standard Ir.suranre cf Ore 5tandardln 1031-211e-1935 2 4191SO ifate rf California StataTax 1881-211e 1009 1 41ea2F: R ratpr.on Inc, Stratemn 1821-4940-40291 3 418a5J c/3.: loit". 12'146 Siah nnaTy SaoniiPs 61.41 v9/?2 19/65 1^631 Sta=iocary Sunolips 53.2? 991213 Wes 12622 Statin+tary S;wnlia= 49.09 i9;?9 te/95 P.M 51;-)olir:-City On ! ine 57."9 TUTA'i D01 VENDOR --------'i 221.42 09/38 Wes Electric 226.19 69/2: t9765 tlprtrir Svrs Svr;anrr.Cyn 119.53 TOTA; DOF VENDOR --------- 525.71 04/32 Wes TrafFic 'Control Svcs 1,121,.33 1 O i A!_ ME VENDUR--------> i .126.:13 29/32 le/es Electric Sacs -Dist 3r, 126.6`; IG AL D!;E VCNDUR--------> 126.65 9W34,1945 Electric Snc;-Dict 39 142.62 iorm- Mir' c:=NDOR--------) 142.69 09/38 lefts SuDnl Ins Prrm;-Oct 17.94 --------? 17.09 97132 lefts Inc Pres;-Gct 348.98 "'? i Al, Nc .IEVDOR--------) 34x.09 t9/2'; 10/6 PS116.19 tithhnldinv Order 198.96 ;!i,F ""AUR --------? 198.96 99;32 le/6 Prni ;,,s-Mav thro SiAut 4,479.00 T!iAi- C'!; VfV1}UR--------> 4,470.09 t[f t of 11.aTond gar + 7{N ilti!:: 12:5759!';2;'/3 VilUCN _R RE615-FR 3 V=06H NhME VENDOR 11). � � plii.pA1C: f f ACCOUNT PF,t1;.Tx-N) BATCH PU.IINE/H+. ENINY/00F INYfultC.k (1k';i::RiPfit'ti AMOONT DA1E CHF::.; ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "ov;,r C?nt?: Travel To�aeCPnte foal -4010 2330 2 41824. US Gorint ;":j,Skprint f0a1-4518 2125 1 41065. walnut VIV wat"r Dist Kiaterf',is f0ai-431.9 2126 1 41025E f221-432,-2126 2 41D8'SE +021-43,41-2126 2 41025E Walnut Viv Water Dist Mat?rl)is +031-4440-21.26 1 41W& walnut Viv 2a+. ,r Dist Matfar its f13`•7-4 5 1`,-212., 1 410r.b ialn,,t Viv iia•?r Di;t Vw'at:=rfiis fi3"-45;38-212,1; 2 410 sr . , rest Coast arj of ist Inc. YCArhor 89!32 10/05 8)/32 10!05 89/30 09130 M20 09/;:2 09!32 09/30 89732 09/30 09/30 09/30 09/32 09/30 f22i 455'•-5`.29 3 41005E 14/1627 09/30 10/05 7911. `221-45'_5 5':09 2 41015E 13/1627 09/30 10/05 7927 f221 4555 5`.29 1 41105E 12/1627 19/34 10/05 7925 Svis-Sumit Ridoe 4 4121E 25/1627 09/30 10/25 79.',8 Wright, Paul WriahtP Taal -4098-4022 4 410K: 09/32 10/05 L eAo c- Coni Forhiria 517.51 10/95193 0 222212;'j° wA- ;'R=PAID AMOUNT - - ;27. 2 itiTAt DtlF VFNDuR --- ---; 9.0v kior t onU Trio Pm Svcs 3.51 101AL i)i;E V;-.N.UUR --------? 3.57 E1.Pl-t Svcs-Petersan PTk 31062.25 klert Svis-Sumit Ridoe 3.;.92.2) Fivt Svc,,-3-dcaure Cvn 1.2SMa tOfAl_ DU V;:NUCR--------> 91812.45 F1Pct 5v;.c-Cana Site 43.55 M I AL 91,E Vr_NDUR--------; 43.' 5 Flair Svcs-D;Gt 39 161329.52 { O t Al- s)i;E VI-NDUR--------> 16.329.51 FlFct Svcs -Gist 3,4 9,482.70 IUTAi- 11;E V:'.NGUR--------) 9,482.7) Tree 1"aint 202.ea Tr e "aiat 2.9.55.0 Tref Maint 4,232.02 Trae mint a52.0i ,'!TC;! PWF 'VENDOR --------'> 12.65..08 Atr.io"ri5.a? Svcs-CCMtns 330.00 1. Oi r V':YUCR------- 331M) +}} t t Diaor,d Par �t RI;ti ICiF: 12:51 d9!' 81 '13 v Q, C 4 t R R E S T S � T ?^ _: i4 bilk' li'::..............1 NS"93 V; ND(iR 4, AME VMOR 10. 'PRCPA O t t ACCOUNT P ------------------------------------------------ t,f.1.T><-1k1 BATCH P0.1INIE N; N(fk ------ ------ ------ '------ ------ ------ ------ ------ li.;i FUND 548.641.44 E�.360.47 361,?t 4Y/.919.7S *^� C�ry X�1,1,*1Tr12' 0Y/3*/Y3 V]UC6ER RFGI�TFR FUID S:MMARv KFP6RT %lj' TK�u............./93 �1e� --------------------- -------------------------------------------------------- TO (AL 0[K`,/ PAY R'VF�/F FXpL4�� K;v9�1F F�YL�� R[V[�� F<PL�� e-w Gm,ral Funo' 4,A8.64.3/ 31,10 49 43/.q4e'.6: 1 LUAD ViS F"ou 26,VIA. 0H 26.8.118.03 �3v 1,10 139 Fo^d pl�,1R./� 2,.1.1�fl 71 mi LUAD m41 Food 1,71,0.91 1.112 P76m, A'Ton,it F 5,>C_,,16 1V.16 1\8 Air illi abtv T?13 /89.i9 /2,9 9 �11� C./.P. F�tndl 3.91PAje? 3.*0"I It 11, N(fk ------ ------ ------ '------ ------ ------ ------ ------ li.;i FUND 548.641.44 E�.360.47 361,?t 4Y/.919.7S i 'SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE TO SCJPIA DIRECTOR PRESIDENT CIO CITY CLERK, SCJPIA MEMBER CITY Larry Van Nostran FROM THOMAS M. BUTCH, GENERAL MANAGER ow��� I.AKE'%OOD DATE SEPTEMBER 23, 1993 VICE PRESIDENT Charles Belba SUBJECT APPROVAL OF MEMBERSHIP FOR THE CITY OF EOMEI'A HIDDEN HILLS 5ECNETA R ®® �e Curtis Morris The SCJPIA Executive Committee at their regular meeting on September 22, SAN DIMAS 1993 recommended the approval of the new City of Hidden Hills for membership in the Authority, subject to the following: (1) That all claims related to soils or slope movement be excluded; and MEMBERS (2) The initial primary deposit has been established at $7,500. The John O. Chavez development of the deposit was based on a pro -forma utilizing the PICO HI, ERk city's claims history. Jim Edwards The annual excess general liability deposit has been established at FLINTRIOGE $5,000, based upon .97% of the imputed annual payroll. LA CANA0.9 Primary Deposit $7,500 Ronald S. Karnes Excess Pool Deposit 8,000 5:1 N'1'f FE tiPRINGS Total Annual Liability Deposit $15,500 Michael Moody PAI.OS NERDES ESTATI S Enclosed is a Membership Consent Form for the admission of the City of Hidden Hills along with the report of Physical Survey. Ronald Oliver ARTF SIA We are requesting that each City Clerk deliver the enclosed materials to the SCJPIA Director appointed by their Council, and expedite returning the form to Albert G. Perez this office as soon as possible. If the Director is unavailable, the duly appointed SOI TH EI, MONTE Alternate may execute the Consent. The SCJPIA Bylaws permit the independent judgment and action of your City's Director (or Alternate) on this matter, so that Admissions may be accomplished in a timely manner. If your City's procedures require Council action on the matter, please arrange that this item be given special handling at your next Council Meeting. Thank you in advance for your assistance in expediting the return of the consent form by October 15, 1993. Please feel free to call this office if you have any questions. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY 4952 LA PALMA AVENUE, LA PALMA, CALIFORNIA 90623 TELEPHONE (310) 402.6372 • 1714) 827.3361 • FAX (3101 860.4992 so. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CAI.. O JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY 4952 La Palma Avenue, La Palma, California 90623 (310) 402-6372 (714) 827-3361 FAX (310) 860-4992 MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION REPORT OF PHYSICAL SURVEY of CITY OF HIDDEN HILLS I. GENERAL INFORMATION A. Date of Survey: August 5, 1993 B. Participants in Survey: 1. For SCJPIA: Thomas Butch, General Manager Patricia France, Risk Manager David Jones, Risk Manager Jeff Jones, Risk Manager 2. For City: Cherie Paglia, City Clerk . Greg Robinson, Building Inspector Pamela Boothe, Counclimember H. Brian Herdeg, Councilmember Howard M. Klein, Councilmember Jim Cohen, Councilmember C. Description of Applicant: Nestled between the western foothills of the San Fernando Valley and the Ventura County line is Hidden Hilis,a community of 1,843 residents living within approximately two square miles. The city is almost exclusively residential and has an extensive system of horse trails, three riding rings, community swimming pool, tennis courts and a small theater. The community was started in 1950 by Mr. A. E. Hanson, the same builder who earlier developed much of Rolling Hills. The Hidden Hills Community Association and Round Meadow Homes Association maintained the gated community from 1950 until incorporation of the City on October 19, 1961. The residents chose to incorporate when the County Master Plan of Roads showed Burbank Boulevard being extended through their gated community. The Community Association continues to maintain the gates, bridle trails and private streets. -1- Hidden Hills is a general law city organized under the council-manager form of government. The five council members are elected at large and serve four year overlapping terms. The mayor is selected from within the ranks of the council members. The City is in a relatively unique position because the Community Association assumes responsibility for many roles, such as "public works" type activities, that a city would be expected to perform. The City's three employees administrate city operations with the assistance of contract employees. The current budget is $840,000. Current payroll is $152,300. It. CURRENT INSURANCE PROGRAM The City currently purchases commercial general liability insurance, including property coverage. Primary limit of liability is in the amount of $1,000,000, $2,000,000 aggregate, with excess coverage in the amount of $5,000,000. Total cost is $15,750. There is no deductible or SIR. (Property coverage, if written through the SCJPIA Property Insurance Program, with similar limits and coverage, would cost the City of Hidden Hills $366.00 per annum. With the addition of Earthquake and Boiler & Machinery coverage, the total cost would be $1,041.00 per annum) III. EXPERIENCE AND LOSS DATA A. General and Automobile Liability: As the City of Hidden Hills is a totally gated community, loss exposure is limited. Five years of claims history were reviewed; a total of eight claims were presented. Three of those were closed, with no payment. Three are still open, with total reservesof $12,000. They areclaims relatedto flooding/mudflow. The County of Los Angeles maintains the overall Flood Control District with the Hidden Hills Community Association having some local jurisdiction; the city has no responsibility. Of the remaining two claims, one is from a local resident who was thrown from her horse, alledgedly because of noise from city construction. The city had no construction at that time; reserve is $1,000. The remaining claim has a reserve of $5,000; it arises out of action the US Government took against the State of California, who, in turn, then sued all cities in the County of Los Angeles. B. Workers' Compensation: The City presently purchases coverage from the State Workers' Compensation Fund. No claims during the last five years. C. Property: No claims have been presented. IV. APPLICATION FEE AND DEPOSIT COMPUTATIONS A. Application Fee: The City has paid an application fee of $1,500. B. General Liability Deposit: The initial primary deposit was established at $7,500 The development of the deposit was based upon a pro -forma utilizing the city's claims history. The excess general liability annual deposit was established at $8,000 based upon .97% of -2- the imputed annual payroll. Both figures used for establishing initial deposits were approved and adopted by the SCJPIA Executive Committee. V. PHYSICAL INSPECTION AND COMMENTS A. Civic Center/City Hall Complex: City Hall, located at 24549 Long Valley Road, is owned and maintained by the City. The housekeeping and general condition of City Hall was observed to be excellent. No hazardous conditions or activities were observed. B. Corporation Yard: None: The City does not maintain a corporation yard. C. Parks and Playgrounds: None: The City presently owns one small playground area adjacent to City Hall. The Hidden Hills Community Association will shortly assume ownership. D. Streets and Sidewalks: 1. The streets within the city limits are owned and maintained by the Hidden Hills Community Association. The City is only responsible for 1,025 feet of public street, and 500 feet of sidewalk, outside of City gates. The streets appear to be well maintained with adequate pavement markings and signs. The area has foregone curbs and gutters in pursuit of a rural atmosphere. During the course of our investigation no evidence of roadway undermining caused by surface drainage was observed. Some roads in the community have varying grades. VI. WATER AND OTHER UTILITIES Both the water and sanitary sewer services are provided by the Las Virgenes Municipal Water District. Electrical power is provided by Southern California Edison. Natural gas is also available from Southern California Gas, and Pacific Bell provides telephone service to the City. Solid waste disposal is provided by contract between individual homeowners and private service providers. VII. FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire protection and paramedic service is provided by the Los Angeles County Fire District. VIII. POLICE DEPARTMENT Police protection is provided through a contract with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department. -3- IX. SUMMARY AND EVALUATION The city leadership understands and is committed to the concept of risk management and is very aware that hazardous conditions need to be evaluated and addressed to reduce the city's exposure to risMoss. It is the SCJPIA staff's conclusion that the loss experience and interest expressed by the City Council and City staff qualify the City of Hidden Hills for consideration for membership in the SCJPIA. We also find that membership will be of advantage to the city by providing economical coverage and will be advantageous to the SCJPIA by expanding its ability to spread pooled losses and costs. X. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the application of the City of Hidden Hills, for membership In the Southern California Joint Powers Insurance Authority, be approved, excluding coverage for soils or slope movement, with an initial annual general liability primary deposit of $7,500 and an excess liability deposit of $8,000 for a total annual liability deposit of $15,500. Pa e -4- S0. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CAL O JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY 4952 La Palm Avenue, La Patina, California 90623 (213) 402-6372 (714) 827-3361 FAX (213) 860.4992 APPLICATION FOR MEMBERSHIP INSTRUCTIONS: Please complete the following underwriting Information. you may attach additional sheets, if necessary, io amplify your answers. The application should be signed by the City Manager. Please type your answers. Date of Application: 7/13/93 Date of Incorporation: 10/19/61 CITY OF: 14idden Hi l 1'!A ADDRESS: ? Idr, Ag T:nnq -Valley RQ=4 CITY MANAGER: FINANCE OFFICER: City Treasurer Eddie Bauch RISK.MANAGER: N/A 1. POPULATION: 1843 2. AREA: Just under 2 square miles 3. TOTAL CITY BUDGET: (include redevelopment or other covered agencies) Current FY (1ggWg1993-94 proposed 1,273,650 Preceding Fy (c19 9 2- 9 3 Actual 840,000 4. EMPLOYEE CENSUS: (no. of ful time employees) Cie" Office (8810) 3 Municipal Non -Manual (9410) AN Other Municipal (9420) FirelighitePPolice tficers (72200) — 0 Bus Operators (7382) Other (Designate Class) ( ) TOTAL FULL TIME EMPLOYEES 3 1 of 7 5. CURRENT INSURANCE PROGRAM: (Or last Insured year) In addition, please submit the face sheets of all current policies. A. GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE: POLIO. NOT YET AVAILABLE -SEE ATT BINDER 1. Primary Coverage: Copy of last Carrier:.United .Community Insurance Co. year's policy witlp� Peiod:- general A;rzcident OowrrenWLknk:: S1�a0Q..nnn sent previously premkim:(includes property coverage) S 7;,8nn Deductibie/Retentiom' S /A Claims AdmirdstWor: N/A - 2. EXCESS LIABILITY COVERAGE: POLICY NOT YET AVAILABLE - SEE Copy of last year's ATTACHED BINDER policy with Chubb E s' nna,lLn Excessofs.1,�nn,.�.Qo _ Custom attached Carrier Gnldan Bear Tnsnranng Co Policy Period: 1/1_/ 9.3 F; / 3 n / 9 4 - Premium: 7,950 $ Excess of $ Carrier: Policy Period: Premium: S Excess of $ Carrier: Policy Period: Premium: B. WORKERS COMPENSATION COVERAGE: S 1. Primary Coverage: Carrier. State Compensation Insurance Fund Policy Period. - 1,400 Employers Liability Limit: - $ 3, 0 0 0, 0 0 0 Deductible/Retention: $ N/A Claims Administrator. N/A 2. Excess Compensation Coverage: N/A 3 Excess of Z Carrier PoNcy Period: Premium: 20F7 s C. PROPERTY INSURANCE: See 5A1 1. Coverage: (replacement cost or other, please specify) g,p , anomp-nt Cost Insured values: Buildings: Contents: Vehicles: Other. Total Values Carrier: Policy Period: Premium: D. HEALTH BENEFITS: 1. Medical Coverage: s s s W/A s s� I Type of plan: Indermity, PPO, EPO. HMO, or other PPO Number of participants: 3 Carrier. PERS CARE Policy Period: 7/1/93 - 6/3G/94 Premium: $ 8.466 Deductible/co-pay: $ 200 Claims Administator. N/A - 2. Dental Coverage: N/A Type of plan: Indemnity or Pre -paid Number of participants: Carrier. Policy Period: Premium: s Deductible/co-pay: S Claims Administator. S. Other Benefits Offered: yes no Vision: X Life: % Lora Temp Disability % Flex Benefits X Orthodontia X Deferred Compensation % Other. (please specify) City's contrttxition to the Employee's benefit Package $ N/A 30F7 S. LOSS EXPERIENCE: (Past five completed years) SEE ATTACHED In addition, please submit a current loss run with summary Information. A. GENERAL LIABILITY INCURRED LOSSES: Year Number of bases Amount of losses 1989-90 0 1988-89 0 1987-88 0 1986-87 0 1985-86 0 B. WORKERS' COMPENSATION INCURRED LOSSES: 1992-93 1991-92 1990-91 1989-90 1988-89 Year Number of losses Amount of losses >996 0 1988-89 0 1987-88 0 18tt7 0 =M4 0 C. INSURED PROPERTY INCURRED LOSSES: Year Number of losses Amount of losses 1989-90 1988-89 1987-88 1986-87 1985�et 40F7 7. 8. 9. GENERAL EXPOSURES: Number A. Waterfront Property: B. B. City -owned Cemeteries: 0 C. City Housing Projects: 0 D. Libraries andlor Museums: 0 E. City Parks and Playgrounds: 1 F. City Stadiums and/or Grandstands: 0 G. Swtmmkg Pools: 1 H. Golf Courses: 0 I. Audkork ms and/or Exhibition Halls: 0 * J. Community Centers: * 1. K. City -owned Buiklir ge Leased to Others. 0 * * L City -owned Umxn Leased to Others: **2 Riding Rings M. Leased Buildings 4rKilor Land: 0 N. City -owned Hospitals: 0 O. City -owned Airports: 0 P. Permits: Construction: Demolition: VEHICLE EXPOSURES: Number A. General City Vehicles:. N/A Passenger. Pidwps/Vans: ConstudbnMeavy Equipment: Other. B. Emergency Vehicles: N/A Police: Passenger: Motorcycles: Plckups/Vans: Fire: Passenger. Pk uips/Vans: Apparatus: C. Public Transit Vehicles: N/A Passenger. MW Buses/Vans: Buses: ROADWAY AND TRAFFIC EXPOSURES: A. City Streets: Ofto B. County Roads: (mites) C. State H%ihway: (mites) D. Traffic Souls: (number) E. City -owned Parking Lots: (number) F. Parking Meters: (number) G. Sidewaks: Pifto Area 3800 sq..feet 1250 sq. feet 45,600 sq. feet *includes City Hall, -2 .tennis courts, th swimming pool, & 1 theater (seats only 79) **Plus 1 pending Riding Ring 43,725 sq. feet 1025 feet (private streets wit in 0 gates owned by Hid en 0 Hills Community As oc a 0 1 0 500 feet 10. POLICE SERVICES EXPOSURES: N/A Los Angeles County Sheriff A. Number of Sworn Officers: Full-time: Part-time: B. Number of Reserves: Level I: Level II: C. Number of Poke Stations: D. Number of Jail Facilities: Number of Cels: E. Is there a Policy and Procedures Manual? F. Is them a written Pursuit Policy? G. Is there a written Policy on the use of Firearms? 11. FIRE SERVICES EXPOSURES: N/A Los Angeles County Fire A. Number of Swum Fire Personnel: Full-time: Part time: Volunteers: Paramedics: B.- Number of Fire Stations: 12. UTILITY SERVICES EXPOSURES: A. Water Department: N/A Las Virgenes Municipal Water District pr services Please submit an inundation map showkV location and describe each dam. 1. Number of Employees: 2. Average Capacity/day: . Domestic: Industrial: 3. Source of supply: 4. Dams: Number: Capacity: Type: 5. - Reservoirs: Number: Capacity: Type: S. Storage tanks: Number: Capacity: Type: 7. Source of water supply: 80F7 des -0. Sanitary Sewer Service: N/A Las Virgenes Municipal Water 131s Number of employees: provides seri Average ylday: twat of treatment: Eflluent discharged to: - C. Electrical Power: gniithgrn CA Rd i s nn Nat and Gas: Southern CA rag Telphon ee: pace i f i r- AP 1 1 Cable Televtsbn: Water. (11 private) & sp" N i Mb fUnc • hire Sold Waste Disposal: Tndi tai dLal rPssi APn a rnntraet sai th whomever they choose 13. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The City agrees that d of the above Information, including attachments, are deemed material and that all pertinent Information has been fuly disclosed. SCJPIA w1l rely on these answers,k4iding aftaclunents, when considering this application for membership. NAME: Cherie L. Pagl i a TITLE: City Cl Prk DATE: 7-/13/9- /I I - /13/9- - _.P .D A SIGNATURE: 7 OF 7 A REV. 11-21-20 t �** Seasonal Part Time Help ALFP City's fiscal year -(7/l/92-6/30/93) is different from calendar ; t year tax stat p�Qj� (1 C�lI.Sl YFAi PAYROLL REPORT CITY OF Hidden Hills CLASSIFICATION I. Clerical Office 2. Municipal Non -Manual 3. All Other Municipal 4. Firemen (8810) (9410) (9420) (7706) 5. Policemen (7720) 6. Bus Operators (7382) 7. Other (Designate Class) ( NUMBER OF FULL TIME EMPLOYEES 3 0 0 0 0 0 J 0 TOTAL NUNZER OF FULL TIME EewyEEs 3 S. TOTAL PAYROLL * * ..• - OOP? Or 199 2 : IRS FORl1 N- I OR FORM 9. Total amount withheld under employee Deferred Compensation' Plan. 20. Compensation included in Item 8 paid to employees assigned exclusively to operations excluded from 9WPIA general liability coverage (i.e. hospital, airports, etc.) 11. GENERAL LIABILITY PAYROLL (Items 8 + 9 - 10) 22. Imputed payroll for volunteer Workers Covered for Workers Compensation by Resolution of Council No. - X $5,000 each. 13. WORXERS COMPENSATION PAYROLL (Item 8 + 12) 24. POLICE PAYROLL (Compensation included in Item 8 for all sworn Police Officers plus any deferred PAYROLL FIGURES ACTUAL 199:2--9-'-tSTIMATED 199 3 - 9 4 $102,428 ; 107,500 **+ $102,428 $ N/A $ $ N/A $ $107,500 S 102,428 $107.500 $ N/A S $ 102. 428 $107.500 --pensation included in Item 9.) $ N/A $ Completed by h - T•. paali=itle City Clerk Tel. (818 888-9281 payrrept/dsk5/rvsdl/90 4952 La Palma Avenue, La PalJba, CA 90623 a 12131 402-6372 nr 1714% nw-aaal JvAt.o V—, - C,r-k,-yX-ZM,4-1 DV� ���y CARL WARREN & Co. !rsuranceAdjusters - (1aims:Management and Adm;ii i n 7( FhtCitv Drive liws4oG Orin, e, CA 142w 8 B0\ 2; 180 Sarti Ana, CA 12741)-;180 (7111740-7999 180)) 5' , 2-6900 FA C: 714-740-7992 TO: City Of Diamond Bar �f"iS?R -Y P?3 SEEP 29 PH 1. y8 ATTENTION: Lynda Burgess, CNC/ALE - City Clerk September 28, 1993 RE: Claim Offenbecher vs. City of Diamond Bar Claimant Korenne offenbecher D/Event 4-6-93 Rec1d Y/Office 8-10-93 Our File 8 75334 RAQ We have reviewed the above captioned claim and request that you take the action indicated below: EXI XK RWNCTXONS Bond a standard roj*ctioa letter to the a, .a. CLAIM TNSUFFTCTANCY•- Ilk acandsoft with the telephone cam*, ti of a notice of insufficiency must be sailed to the claimant- no later than 19*- THIS MUST BE MAILRD TO TU CZAIMUR WIC 20 MY$ Or RZ=IpT OF THE ORIGINAL CLAIM IN YOUR OMCZ.See Government Code Section" 910 &MVAW 610.2 and/or 910.4. I IDED/SUPPLR=Ar' CLKIMA SO" a standard rejection letter to the claimant, rejecting this i&1t—i6WU/&UOnd0d claim. IATE UATM =PQRS2.0 Rotwu the original claim material to the claimant, advising that tbG CI MA JS Ute'and that their mly r000ur" is to file a written"ApIplie"A"L W%60ft to Present aLate, ClaW. (Return copies in your file.) 79zo-, I I I OW.- . MILRD TO TUR CLUMANT Wr=5 45 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF TH% CLAIM = =0 4PM=. DO NOT SEND Jk n 21j=109" LETTER, See Government Code S*ctiom 011.4'. APPT.Tte--h A*( Reject claimant's *Application for Leave to WUM Present a La 0 300 G4wernment Code Section 911.8. TAKE NO j_r Defer any written response to the claimant pending our further Please provide us with & copy Of the notice sent, as requested above- if you have any questions please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, CARL WARM & COMMY ,-f � 1&0,&Mftq'a- Richard Marque. TO PERSON OR PROPERTY INSTRUCTIONS I. Claims for death, injury to -person or to personal property must be filed ;tot later than 6 mos. after the bccurrence. (Gov. Code Sec. 911.2) 2. Claims for damages to real property must be filed not later than 1 year after the occurrence. (Gov. Code Sec. 911.2) 3. Read entire claim before filing. 4. See page 2 for diagram upon which to locate place of accident. 5. This claim form must be signed on page 2 at bottom. teest(full details SIGN N EACH SHEET.7.ClaiAttam musbefiled with City Clerk.GovCde Sec. To: The City of Diamond Bar Name of Claimant Korenne Offenbecher Home Address of Claimant City 2449 Oakleaf Canyon Road, Walnut, CA 91'789 and State Business Address of Claimant 3401 Centrelake Drive, Ste. 150, Ontario, CA 91761 Give address to which you desire notices or communications to be sent regarding this claim: 3401 Centrelake Drive, Ste. 150, Ontario, CA 91761 CHCt�C1�w✓ _ A' 1993 PS 10 Fil 4: 0 6 Age Of Claimant Cif natural person) Home Telephone Number 909-594-6068 Basi less Telephone Number 909-983-2040 How did DAMAGE or INJURY occur? Give full particulars. While playing in Sycamore Park in the creek area near the opening to a concrete drain, Korenne slipped and was trapped under an unlocked steel gate, gate was hinged at the top and pinned Korenne beneath it in shallow water foreappro 2 hours requiring the fire department to rescue and subsequent air lift topprox. Childrens Hospital. When did DAMAGE or INJURY occur? Give full particulars, date, time of day: April 8, 1993 Where did DAMAGE or I IJURY occur? Describe fully, and locate on diagram on reverse side of this sheet, where appropriate, give street names and addresses and measurements from landmarks: Sycamore Park, Diamond Bar, Ca., at the entrance to a storm drain located at the end of the creek. What particular ACT or OMISSION do you claim caused the injury or damage? Give names of City employees causing the injury or venture near. damage, if known: The steel gate was allowed to remain unlocked creating a trap for those who What DAM.;6GE or INJURIES do you claim resulted? Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed: Check with Childrens Hospital in Los Angeles for actual report. The physical injuries were mostly cuts and abrasions requiring only stitching. What AMOUNT do you claim on account of each item of injury or damage as of date of presentation of this claim, giving basis of computation: $5,200.00 Air Ambulance - $1,380.00 Hospital - $ 340.00 Misc. & Compensatory - $3,480.00 Gi-e ESTIbiATED AMOUNT as far as known you claim on account of each item of prospective injury or damage, giving basis of computation: Air ambulance $1,380.00, Childrens Hospital $340.00 - 4 SEE PAGE 2 (OVER) THIS CLAIM MUST BE SIGNED ON REVERSE SIDE Insurance payments received, if any, anu names of Insurance Company: None Expenditures made on account of accident or injury: (Date—Item) Alr 111ijulcince � Hospital $ 340.00 (Amount Name and address of Witnesses, Doctors and Hospitals: Dr. Danuta Jackson University Childrens Medical Group (213) 669-2336 READ CAREFULLY For all accident claims place on following diagram names of streets, including North, East, South, and West; indicate place of accident by "X" and by showing house numbers or distances to street corners. If City Vehicle was involved, designate by letter "A" Iocation of City vehicle when you first saw it, and by "B" location of yourself or your vehicle when you first saw City vehicle; location of City vehicle at time of accident by "A-1" and location of yourself or your vehicle at the time of the accident by "13-1" and the point of impact by "X." NOTE: If diagrams below do not fit the situation, attach hereto a proper diagram signed by claimant. FOR AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENTS L Li I FOR OTHER ACCIDENTS Signature of Claimant or person filing on his behalf givi relationship to Claimant: CLkr"S Ivit?ST BE FILED SIDEWALK Typed Name: TH CIS' CLERK (GOV. CDDE SEC. 915a) . ILL �/MPLAINT REPO COUNTY OF LOS ANGEL' RECORDS 6 STATISTICS BUREAUS USE ONLY �COSHERIFFSDEPARTMENI ACTIVE ACTION 1 ENDING( ) (NDE% I Y., ( No of RT DATE /) \' No of URN � PAGE / OF J INACTIVE INFO NO ( ACult cuDl![t fine Nom) Cl A$$Ii1CATIDFI i..l4tf CIl1lntlonf� ur CLASSIC ICATKyI kno DATE TIME Dir IK OCCURRENCE ---'--- �(- c r-013 If Domestic Violence: ii z a- // - •dA[,�7�� I PRINT Weapon Useo )YES ( ) NO T LOCATION OF OCCURRE E DEPU,Y p0 rE5( )LOC( I STA( ) vEyl ) VIA SECTY TIME CODE: V-y1CTEM, W -r AN[[t, )REOVESTFD �. a/ j %� W- to A' n TYPE LDC TION ;// TRACT CODE VEA I-yNRORMANT� -�BPORTMG ARTY, -PARTY LI [T ON[ WITN[[[ IR NAMtO ANO TN[ INFORMANT ON THIS ►AO[, or M100LE SEX RESIDENCE ADDRESS / RACE CAIiU DOB CpA,K 2444 �/���+I (:ITY _ O ELM _l O I�iRG I' C Q �% . YIP RES PHONE (AREA CODE) BL/51NE55 ADDRESS I\V cv t ,Aj I c ' CITY T— CODE ZIP BUS PHONE (AREA CODE) / LAST NAME -1 F AST OS RESIDENCE ADDRESS MIDDLE � ) SEX �JV/ /Vv� M ,RAD DOB •�F /�, CHECK PMDAY 1 _ [J ` ^✓� I� I43' ♦ 1 � '.'V C T, zip RES PHONE W (AREA ?,,,0 •7 CODE) ONE BE SOW T BUSINESS ADDRESS Ci cooE LAST NAME CITY /� ZIP L/I � I / �' 151 7 / 3 Bus PHONE (AREA�Op-) f� 7 VN No �1� . 1 D�� RESIDENCE V FIRST MIDDLE SEX RACE ooe co �K ADORES_ NDN, j� �l'%, 3 G�M�N� �u. O f CITY ZIP 17� D ` /0 RES PHONE /AREA E' • CODE) BUSINESS ADDREg$ • � I� /Wl N ) � Art 310/ CY� /fE // CODE: f—[U[PeCT, �/ `' A I Q D 4� .! /I 4� / BUS PHONE (AREA CODE) 7 -CODE fJ — [Uu[eT, M—►wrl[Nr, Z/V—fH[►[Cr/VI Q 1-- > _ IM, $J/V--[URIRCT/VICTIM LAST NAME CIRCL[ COD[ IF fu•P, PAL:[s ucco Pon: V W S SJ M f: V fl V FIRST No OF ADDRESSCITY MIDDLE7DRIVEIR S uCENSf (STATE i No 1RESf7ENCE BUSINESSADORE$$ ZIPEs PHONE (AREA CGOE/ SEK RACE CITY ZiPUS PHONE (AREA CODE) HAMi EYES HEIGHT �T- WEIOH7 DOB OBSERVABLE PHYSICAL ODDITIES —1 AGE WHERE DETAINED -_— Na CLOTHING WORN _ CITE AKA NICKNAME BOOKINCt4 __. �1 __— CHARGE --- MAIN -- CODE LAST NAME WEAPONUSEO _ - No O( ilRsl MIDDLE DRIVERS LICENSE (STATE A AI! , RESIDE NCEADDRESs LITY ZIP RES PHONE(AREACODE) _.-- BUSINESS ADDRESS -- ary ZIP ---- - BUS PHONE (AREA CODE) SEX I RACE __ Hun EYES i NEN;y, WEIGHT DOB AGE .. WHERE OBSERVABLE PHYSICAL ODDITIES �--- DETAINED No _ CITE AKA NICKNAME -.._.. BOOKING No No CLOTWNG .CHARGE — MAIN WEAPON USED _. VEHICLE USED IN CRIME Yf1( I NO YR MAKE UNKNOWN 1 / STORED 1 1 IM BODY TYPE ��UNDED1 1 COLOR Br DEPUTY LICENSE (STATE t ND 1 A BADW r ` Q Ap VIN /FRAME No DEPUTY 7 �+ REGISTERED OWNER fAOp[ �. _ IDENTKYy4G CHARACTERISTICS STIITIONA �t4� UNIT /CAR ND �w/ SUBMITTED YES ( GARAGE NAME • PHONE AN ED BADGE MO Np ASSIGNMENT 111 VICTIMoDE5UTION TES ( 1 NCT YES ( ) EAP No a RROSECUTION NO ( No f ) wsPECOVE BJEcr -�.-fie SPECIAL REDI 'ST DISTRIBU ON R i�/4��-�� ! APPROVED BY ARREST REVIEW YES( ) TT B/C tB/NO N SUBMITTED DATE TIME 76C300F-SM-R 49 Rev, 1/86) PS 1/06 SEC`• _ Ili j� • ,�`�,[ ``_ i X 1 'PAGE •CODE I CODE: V - victim, W. LAST NAME ./ �,,, No. Op r I ��A/ i>•�C FIRST MIDDLE R! .i %CITY fE I ��E CHECK RESIDENCE ADDRESS DAY �j (/��[�� PHONE 2 / iI,` f �MW P�' CITY ZIP BELOW D "A RES. pMONC (AREA COD[) ■UfIN[ft ADDRESS 9�9-- pa CITY ZIP [ a wJT it �. BUf. 'MUNK I AIR A CODE) CODE I I LAST NAM[ FIRST MIDDLE _ No.�-pF fE% I RACE I AG[ I CMECK RESIDENC[ AODR[ff DAY PHONE CITY ZIP BELOW REB. PHONE (AREA CODE) BUSINESS ADDR[ff CITY ZIP BUS. PHONE (ARCA CODE) CODE I I LAST NAME FIRST MIDDLE _ Nom. OF BE I RAC! I AGE CHECK REfID[NC[ ADDRESS DAY PHONE CITY Zip BELOW _ RES, PHONE (AREA CODE) BUSINESS ADDRESS CITY ZIP BUf. PHONE (AREA CODE) I ..- USED IN CRIME YES, ) NOI ) UNKNOWN( ) STORED( ) IMPOUNDED( YR. MAKE BODY TYPE (COLOR LICENSE (STATES NO.) ) V.I.N./FRAME No. CNP IBD YEfI )I "RAG[ NAME B PHONE fUBMITTlO NO( ) IDENTIFYING CHAIRACTERISTICS 76C30OG—SH-R-49A- Cdb 4-75 'JA LE O . / ��— _ _ _ � _ TIME REC L 'AGE 1_ Oes DET ( , CALL URN _ v )c CII E CREC YE I 1 __._-_.. �.—_- __--_ G_ Oat ^A NrIL,CII ETC NS1 EVIDENCE !CODE -E VI HELD YES ( I MARKED TAGGED URN PLACED —.--- _ NCp<.L IN STATION EVIDENCE LOCKER INSID ( 1 SAFE ! ) LEDGER -- OUTSIDE I 1 REBY IFBURGLAAY FORCEUSED YES; I — FRIG ( l .-------_—_— NO( I ROINT OF ENTRY. DOOR f I WINDOW ( I ROOF l I OTHER _ PROPERTY ,107AL -ALUEI --- -- RECOIERED $ ----- _ STOLEN PROPERTY CODE S—sroier R eCOvered L—lost F—Io"nd E— embezzled D— damaged I USL All ADpl,cable Cooes: For EAam le. Ir pro damaged T— p perfy is Born Srolen d Recovered. Code Is S, R) ITEM OJgl NCLVDEKIND OFARTICLE TRADENAME IDENTIFYING"UMBERS-PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION I No DESCRIPTION- MATERIAL. COLOR. CONDITION AGE AND 'RESENT MARKET VALUE DAMAGED PRO^EFTY RELEASED TD SERIAL No vAIUE 4 7r --,, 4 — ACL X41 77 Sv C-�L_cfl_T1o��. 1ej9 S Gt-2 4A ? h M -Q _�17�" • cJ��cl-I iS__ __-L4�� o�Ci�-1�T;�Z.�[_ /tiG_f�--%o__l�� _ 30 /�!'�T STN_ V � Q_ 1e��J�' _tJ ►Tyl_�6� S T�,� __.-- S�cI� � -- T��-���$s vel 7Ne�'ye ��,�•1 f�- -__'0 -7-vir GA 7 r, s1 -.g.0 c7�•v� ,vac '?a 7 - d'' q <TIM S_ N lr q D . . YES NO SCREENING FACTORS 1. SUSPECT IN CUSTODY • YES NO 2. SUSPECT NAMED/KNOWN �• GENERAL SUS?ECT DESC IPTION 3. UNIQUE SUSPECT IDENTIFIERS B. GENERAL VEHICLE DESCRIPTION 1 4. VEHICLE IN CUSTODY 9• UNIQUE M.O. OR PATTERN 5. UNIQUE VEHICLE IDENTIFIERS 10. SIGNIFICANT PHYSICAL EVIDENCE 6. WRITER/REVIEWER DISCRETION 11. TRACEABLE STOLEN PROPERTY P M 12. MULTIPLE WITNESSES PART I STATISTICAL INFORMATION A �ITIDNA NUMBER OF 'RIMES 21 VICTIMS PROPERTY TYPE IF WEAPONS CODE pgpPER T STOLEN RECOVERED TYPE OF ( )ARTICLES THROWN PROPERTY STOLEN RECOVERED )EWEL1Y S ( )CAUSTIC CHEMICALS S ( ) CLUB "BLUNT INSTRUMENT CL07HINd FIa$ _ S LIVESTOCK S S ( ) DRUGS !NOXIOUS GAS ) FIRE /EXPLOSIVES CONSUAABLE000DS LOCA, S'OLEN ( I HANDS/FEET/FIST'ETC. _— $ vE hI�LEb S $ ( 1 KNIFE/CUTTING INSTRUMENT CURPENCY NOTES S ( I POISON S M'SCELLANEOUS S S ( 1 REVOLVER,PISTOL FIREARMS RIFLE S S ( ) SHOTGUN LIF* CE EOUIPMENT S S ( ) STRANGULATION HOUSEHOL--GDODS S( ) VEHICLE 'V RADIO STEREO S S ( I UNKNOWN, OTHER OF REPORT CONTINUATION NARRATIVEURN PAGE OF X93— �6L3� Z9z,Z-- �f8� T V-# c . c,J A ov — .�o v A)%v :. �10 AlkHozJ SK /-o1/ s+.Jec�G OAJ, 70 H. po 111 1,44 r'S Q v rc.t � •,•�,, D 1 t t S nJG�tis$ ca 76R288M-Sh R "I- AS 1082 ., /AJ 44S O4N FA .Scklk( WAS iti �cwtMA�v 6 S102 C -r rT a Tl0•�1, /4�"p 7110 W r TiJ c33 S W Tb REPORT CONTINUATION NARRATIVE JU�RN71,,93,_ r " Me" PaMrrte-d' C,yULD - gnq X t%) 04 S /nl ¢Q�2� 4 crf 1 c,AlZ�,N S t t WAS i f C 11288M--Sh R 373- PS 1C-82 CAJ F #1 PAGE OF Eu e 711AT- 7144 f/< <T/ P A A"TQ-F r�. tf- V, - . . A r— /3� d NRS. sjjcr , I P. MICHAEL FREEMAN FIRE CHIEF FORESTER g FIRE WARDEN May 6, 1993 Parent/Guardian of Korenne Offenbecher 2449 Oakleaf Canyon Walnut, CA 91789 Dear Parent/Guardian: ..OUNTY OF LOS ANGEL,,, FIRE DEPARTMENT 1320 NORTH EASTERN AVENUE LOS A 9q$S8%, F�44L 90063.3294 SUBJECT: AIR AMBULANCE TRANSPORT FEE As the result of a medical emergency, Korenne required transportation in our air ambulance to Childrens Hospital on 04/08/93. Our Department's goal is to provide prompt and skillful services to you, the public we serve. County Ordinance #92-0091 provides for an Air Ambulance Transport Fee of $1,380 to be charged to the clients of this service. Therefore, you are financially responsible for full payment of this fee. You should remit your check or money order, made payable to the Los Angeles County Fire Department, to the following address: Los Angeles County Fire Department 1320 North Eastern Avenue, Room 225 Los Angeles, CA 90063-3294 Attn: Fiscal Services Division Cashier If, however, you believe this fee is covered by your personal insurance, or that you may be covered by Medicare or Medi -Cal for this charge, please complete and sign the enclosed Insurance Information Form. Return the form to us as soon as possible at the address given above so that the proper third party may be contacted on your behalf. SIGNAL HILL SOUTH EL MONTE SOUTH GATE TEMPLE CITY WALNUT WEST HOLLYWOOD WESTLAKE VILLAGE W HITTIER SERVING THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS AGOURA HILLS BRADBURY OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY AND THE CITIES OF: ARTESIA CARSON DIAMOND BAR IRWINDALE LOMITA AZUSA BALDWIN PARK CARSON GLENDDUART GLWAIIAN LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE MALIBU LAKEWOOD PICO RIVERA RANCHO PALOS VERDES BELL CERRITOS CLAREMONT HAWAIIAN GARDENS HIDDEN HILLS LA MIRADA MAYWOOD NORWALK ROLLING HILLS BELLFLOWER COMMERCE HUNTINGTON PARK LANCASTER PALMDALE ROLLING HILLS ESTATES BELL GARDENS CUDAHY INDUSTRY LA PUENTE PALOS VERDES ESTATES ROSEMEAD LAWNDALE PARAMOUNT SAN DIMAS SANTA CLARITA SIGNAL HILL SOUTH EL MONTE SOUTH GATE TEMPLE CITY WALNUT WEST HOLLYWOOD WESTLAKE VILLAGE W HITTIER Parent/Guardian of Korenne Offenbecher May 6, 1993 Page 2 In the envelope provided, please remit your payment or return the completed Insurance Information form to us no later than June 7, 1993. If you have any questions, please contact Kent Hoyos, Accounts Receivable at (213) 881-2444. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Very truly yours, CLIFFORD E. CABALLERO CHIEF, FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT FISCAL SERVICES DIVISION CEC:cm Enclosures FAakWA038872 Q z a �= W z U r- 'T LL, s u < V q �M1 E q 1,w< ? L . V > u7 ti lY z Z d} :-'• �L-A.� � '.iqf C W Y U 2Q CZ v � f Q Q W O W Q co _Er w J O CO U Q Q O cv� U JH cin U -- ULU Cf) �a LU LU Q , z ~ ^ _ LU LIr z} Oz U Z O Q CO W O ~ uj w o Q O W z > CL _Dz Ir CO O VQ O O w >_ U f— ti rr Wo O r -O Z CQ C!' ., • L NIVERSITY CHILDRENS MEDICAL GROUP AINc DCLTON •49 OAKL EAF CYN RD ALNUT,CA 91 789 PATIENT NAME OFFIEN3ECHER,KORENNE WILL DATE ACCOUNT NO.AMOUNT PAID 04/16/93 I M11234CO THIS IS A STATEMENT OF 'ICES RENDERED BY UNIVERSITY CHILDRENS MED. GRP. FILE NO. 53279 LOS ANGEL =S,CA 9CO74-3275 T EL c P HO NE : 213- 669- 23 36 PLEASE DETACH AND RETURN TOP PORTION WITH PAYMENT -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- _ _ _ 70'4/C�11/93 TE OF SERVICE -------------------- 4/L1/93 99234 E/R VISIT, MOGcRATE COMPLEXITY DANUTA JACKSCN M.J. 12001 REPAIR SUPERFICIAL bOUNC/UP TO 2.5CM CANUTA JACKSCN M.Q. ----------------------------------- AMOUNT 2ZO.00 120.00 DATE I PNrMT NAPE ACCOUNT NaMM G4/16/93 OFFENSECHE R,KCRENNE M11234CJ PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER THIS DATE WILL APPEAR ON YOUR NEXT STATEMENT 3 40 . C O PLEASE WRITE ACCOUNT NUMBER ON CHECK AND MAKE PAYABLE TO: U N I V E R S I T Y C H I L C R E N S PEI). GRP. #THIS SERVICE HAS BEEN BILLED TO YOUR INSURANCE COMPANY. ANY PORTION OF THIS CHARGE NOT PAID BY YOUR INSURANCE COMPANY IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY. THE ABOVE 3ALANCE IS CUE FROM YCU WITHIN 30 DAYS. PLEASE CALL US IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION CONCERNING YOUR ACCCUNT. THANK YOU. (SI PCR ALGUN MCTIVC USTED NO ENTIENDE EL CCNTENIDJ OE ESTA CARTA, POR FAVCR, LLAMENOS A NLz-STAO TELEFONO Y LE OAREMOS MAS INFCRMACION.) u . r Y - - - traps teen Paramedics fre girl from gate BY nAM C. GIRARD(n DIAMOND BAR Rorenne Offenbecker ha P1a}red around the storm drai at Sycamore Park in Diamon Bar before, but after what hal M just before noon yesta �Y> she insists she'll neve Play there again. Offenbecker, 13, of walnut - and some Mends were playiq c on the gate that separates i large drain pipe from the reps of the park. The gate is hinges ftm the top so that its botion .swings open freely when t pushed. "I got inside the little cave yr whatever it is and started to push the gate, but then my foot sliPPed I slipped under the gats and it sort of wedged me ' in there;' ahe said. When that happened, "I just :. ed,,. she said. While one of Offenbecker's Mends held her hand, Offen- backer's mother, Elaine Dal. I - ton,, called the paramedics who ultimately freed her. The teenager then was taken by helicopter to Children's Hospi- } tal, in Los Angeles, where she r was treated for a small cut, then released. t It was a kind of uneventU } helicopter ride me " I " Put ��ere and said `OR, you're on your way: J but I couldn't really see �b� a ceiling . per. After watching her leave with the paned j• Dalton sighed and said, Tin glad she's OK But my daugh- ter has been into things before. Once she fell into a spa and cut I her eye. The next day she cut t the other eye falling off a slide." By 6 p -m. last night mother and daughter were back at r home, watching themselves on the'It's m' of Nn being on TV," Rore M said "I couldn't �i Teally see myself, I just saw �Mworkets and my brother KO w 10 Membe ;ou, if 1 r ly ; xr -1 , 1 by a tm.�,, CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.: 7, T"/ TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager REPORT DATE: September 23, 1993 MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer TITLE: Exoneration of Paving Surety Bond Posted for Tract 42534 (Montefino Condominium Complex). SUMMARY: The City of Diamond Bar desires to exonerate the Surety Bond posted for paving of Porto Grande, Estoril Drive and Bodega Way (private streets) located in the Montefino Condominium Complex in the amount of $111,500. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and accept the completed work and exonerate the Surety Bond which was posted with Los Angeles County in May, 1984 for paving of Porto Grande, Estoril Drive and Bodega Way (private streets) in the Montefino Condominium Complex in an amount of $111,500, and is now in the posession of the City Clerk. Further, it is recommended that the City Council instruct the City Clerk to notify Los Angeles County, Presley of Southern California and Fremont Indemnity Company of the City Council's action. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:K Staff Report _ Resolution(s) _ Ordinance(s) Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: _ Public Hearing Notification _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office) X Other: Final Engineering Certificate & Bond 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed N/A by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority N/A 3. Has environmental impact been assessed. 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? — Yes N/A Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? — Yes x No Report discussed with the following affected departments: N/A REVIEWED BY: Terrence L. Belanger George A. We City Manager Interim City CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Exoneration of Paving Surety Bond Posted for Tract 42534 (Montefino Condominium Complex) ISSUE STATEMENT: This report requests the exoneration of a Surety Bond posted for Paving of Porto Grande, Estoril Drive and Bodega Way (private streets) located in the Montefino Condominium Complex in the amount of $111,500. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and accept the completed work and exonerate the Surety Bond which was posted with Los Angeles County in May, 1984 for paving of Porto Grande, Estoril Drive and Bodega Way (private streets) located in the Montefino Condominium Complex in an amount of $111,500, and is now in the posession of the City Clerk. Further, it is recommended that the City Council instruct the City Clerk to notify Los Angeles County, Presley of Southern California and Fremont Indemnity Company of the Council's action. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: This recommendation has no financial impact on the City's 1993-1994 budget. BACKGROUND: The streets in this Tract were constructed in 1985. The City received final sign -off by the Developer's engineer on these streets in September, 1993. A visual inspection of said streets was completed by the Public Works Inspector and he finds them to be in substantial conformance to the plans reviewed and approved by the County of Los Angeles in 1984. Therefore, we now recommend that the surety which was posted with the County of Los Angeles be released. DISCUSSION: The following listed surety needs to be exonerated: Tract: 42534 Developer: Presley of Southern California Bond Number: OC300752 Principal: Fremont Indemnity Company Amount: 5111.500 (Original Bond Amount $111,500) PREPARED BY: Anne M. Garvey MADOLE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Civil Engineering, Land Planning and Surveying 1820 EAST SIXTEENTH STREET SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92701 (714) 835-2548 FAX (714) 835-0612 FEBRUARY 24, 1993 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 21660 E. COPLEY DRIVE SUITE 100 DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA 91765 ATTENTION: MS. ANNE GARVEY f?NGINEERIITG TECHNICIAN SUBJECT REF: TRACT NO. 42534 Dear Ms. Garvey: —N. 142-459 This is to certify that the undersigned has inspected the private streets in Tract No. 42534 and that they have been constructed in substantial conformance to the plans prepared by this office and reviewed by the County of Los Angeles. Very truly yours, MADOLE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. `�. M. Madole R.C.E. 14814 JMM:srl �P(`FESS; O?,� No. 14814 ")5z L r J LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPAF .ENT OF COUNTY ENGINEER -F 1 LITIES FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: Bond No. CC 300752 Premium: $446.00 That we, PRESLEY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Name of 17991 MITCHELL SOUTH, IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92714-6095 , dd-re ss as Principal and FREMONT INDEMNITY COMPANY as Surety, are firmly bound unto the m e sum of ONE HUNDRED ELEVEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED & no/100--- dollars (y 111,500.00-----------), for the payment of which sum, we hereby bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assignees, jointly and severally. The condition of the foregoing obligation is such that where- as said Principal has entered into or is about to enter into the annexed contracts) with the County of Los Angeles, pursuant to the authority of an act of the Legislature of the State of Cal- ifornia, known as the "Subdivision Map Act" (.Division 2, Title 7, of the Government Code) and any amendments thereto, and pur- suant to the authority of Title 21 of the Los Angeles County Code, and any amendments thereto, which said contract(s), dated , 19 , are hereby referred to and made a part hereof, for t e fo owing work: PRIVATE STREETS all for Tract No./Parcel Map No. 42534 in accordance with the attached contract(s) and is required by said County to give this bond in connection with the execution of said contract(s). If the annexed contracts listed above include an agreement for monumentation, then a further condition of the foregoing obligation is for the payment of the amount of the Bond to the County for the benefit of the authorized surveyor or engineer who has performed the work and has not been paid by the contractor as provided for in Division 2, Title 7, of the Government Code. Now therefore, if the said Principal shall completely perform all of the covenants and obligations of said contract(s) and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his part to be performed at the times and in the manner specified therein, and in all respects according to its true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the County of Los Angeles, its officers, agents, and employees, as therein stipulated, then this obligation shall be null and void; otherwise it shall be and re- main in full force and effect. The Surety hereby expressly con- sents to, and waives any prior notice of, the granting, from time to time by the County, to the Principal, of any extensions of time to perform and complete the work under the annexed con- tract(s), and to any changes or alterations to the terms of the contract(s) or to the work or to the specifications, ordered by the County pursuant to the provisions of said contract(s). The Surety further expressly agrees that any such extensions of time or any such changes or alterations shall not in any way affect its obligation on this bond. The provisions of Section 2845 of the Civil Code are not a condition precedent to the Surety's CO FF (2-83) - 1 - CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.: :), , TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 REPORT DATE: September 24, 1993 FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer TITLE: Exoneration of Paving Surety Bond Posted for Tract 42533 '(Montefino Condominium Complex). SUMMARY: The City of Diamond Bar desires to exonerate the Surety Bond posted for paving of Estoril Drive (private street) located in the Montefino Condominium Complex in the amount of $85,850. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and accept the completed work and exonerate the Surety Bond which was posted with Los Angeles County in November, 1984 for paving of Estoril Drive (private street) in the Montefino Condominium Complex in an amount of $85,850, and is now in the posession of the City Clerk. Further, it is recommended that the City Council instruct the City Clerk to notify Los Angeles County, Presley of Southern California and Safeco Insurance Company of America of the City Council's action. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:x Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file Ordinance(s) in City Clerk's Office) _ Agreement(s) X Other: Final Engineering Certificate & Bond EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed N/A by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? N/A 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? Yes x No _ Which Commission? N/A 5. Are other departments affected by the report? Yes x No Report discussed with the following affected departments: N/A REVIEWED BY: ' Terr nce L. Bel ger Geor$e A. We tz City Manager Intejrim Cittk ineer CITY COUNCIL KEPUKT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Exoneration of Paving Surety Bond Posted for Tract 42533 (Montefino Condominium Complex) ISSUE STATEMENT: This report requests the exoneration of a Surety Bond posted for Paving of Estoril Drive (private street) located in the Montefino Condominium Complex in the amount of $85,850. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and accept the completed work and exonerate the Surety Bond which was posted with Los Angeles County in November, 1984 for paving of Estoril Drive (private street) located in the Montefino Condominium Complex in an amount of $85,850, and is now in the posession of the City Clerk. Further, it is recommended that the City Council instruct the City Clerk to notify Los Angeles County, Presley of Southern California and Safeco Insurance Company of America of the Council's action. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: This recommendation has no financial impact on the City's 1993-1994 budget. BACKGROUND: The streets in this Tract were constructed in 1985. The City received final sign -off by the Developer's engineer on these streets in September, 1993. A visual inspection of said streets was completed by the Public Works Inspector and he finds them to be in substantial conformance to the plans reviewed and approved by the County of Los Angeles in 1984. Therefore, we now recommend that the surety which was posted with the County of Los Angeles be released. DISCUSSION: The following listed surety needs to be exonerated: Tract: 42533 Developer: Presley of Southern California Bond Number: OC300865 Principal: Safeco Insurance Company of America Amount: $85.850 (Original Bond Amount $85,850) PREPARED BY: Anne M. Garvey MADOLE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Civil Engineering, Land Planning and Surveying 1820 EAST SIXTEENTH STREET SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92701 (714) 835-2548 FAX (714) 835-0612 FEBRUARY 24, 1993 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 21660 E. COPLEY DRIVE SUITE 100 DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA 91765 ATTENTION: MS. ANNE GARVEY ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN SUBJECT REF: TRACT NO. 42533 Dear Ms. Garvey: J.N. 142-459 This is to certify that the undersigned has inspected the private streets in Tract No. 42533 and that they have been constructed in substantial conformance to the pians prepared by this office and reviewed by the County of Los Angeles. Very truly yours, MADOLE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. �oQRpFESSIONq! M. Madole ���*\LTOp�9QFyc� R.C.E. 14814 No.�14.%8144 JMM:srl gT�OF CpL\c� LOS TNGELES COUNTY BOND NO. OC -300865 _ DEPARISNT OF COUNTY ENGINEER -FA •ITIES PREMTUM:$343.00 FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That we, PRESLEY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, Name of 17991 Mitchell South; Irvine, California 92114-6095 Address as Principal and FREMONT INDEMNITY COMPANY as Surety, are firmly bound unto the COUNTY OF L L n the sum of EIGHT -FIVE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED FIFTY dollars ($ 85,850.00****************), for the payment of which sum, we hereby bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assignees, jointly and severally. The condition of the foregoing obligation is such that where- as said Principal has entered into or is about to enter into the annexed contract(s) with the County of Los Angeles, pursuant to the authority of an act of the Legislature of the State of Cal- ifornia, known as the "Subdivision Map Act" (Division 2, Title 7, of the Government Code) and any amendments thereto, and pur- suant to the authority of Title 21 of the Los Angeles County Code, and any amendments thereto, which said contract(s), dated November 12 '1984 , are hereby referred to and made a part here o , or the fol-7o—wing work: PRIVATE STREETS all for Tract No./ tj;-KXmWxXb. 42533 in accordance with the attached contract(s) and is requ re by said County to give this bond in connection with the execution of said contract(s). If the annexed contracts listed above include an agreement for monumentation, then a further condition of the foregoing obligation is for the payment of the amount of the Bond to the County for the benefit of the authorized surveyor or engineer who has performed the work and has not been paid by the contractor as provided for in Division 2, Title 7, of the Government Code. Now therefore, if the said Principal shall completely perform all of the covenants and obligations of said contract(s) and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his part to be performed at the times and in the manner specified therein, and in all respects according to its true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the County of Los Angeles, its officers, agents, and employees, as therein stipulated, then this obligation shall be null and void; otherwise it shall be and re- main in full force and effect. The Surety hereby expressly con- sents to, and waives any prior notice of, the granting, from time to time by the County, to the Principal, of any extensions of time to perform and complete the work under the annexed con- tract(s), and to any changes or alterations to the terms of the contract(s) or to the work or to the specifications, ordered by the County pursuant to the provisions of said contract(s). The Surety further expressly agrees that any such extensions of time or any such changes or alterations shall not in any way affect its obligation on this bond. The provisions of Section 2845 of the Civil Code are not a condition precedent to the Surety's CO FF (2-83) - 1 - CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.:7, TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 REPORT DATE: September 24, 1993 FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer TITLE: Exoneration of Grading Surety Bond Posted for Tract 42535 (Montefino Condominium Complex). 41JulRA The City of Diamond Bar desires to exonerate the surety bond posted for grading of Building No.s 44-65 inclusive, on Chardonnay Avenue located in Tract 42535 (Montefino Condominium Complex) in the amount of $7,000. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and accept the completed work and exonerate the surety bond which was posted with Los Angeles County in June, 1983 for grading for 22 buildings on Chardonnay Avenue in Tract 42535 (Montefino Condominium Complex) in the amount of $7,000, and is now in the posession of the City Clerk. Further, it is recommended that the City Clerk notify Los Angeles County, Presley of Southern California and Fremont Indemnity Company of the City Council's action. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:,x Staff Report Resolution(s) Ordinance(s) Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: Public Hearing Notification Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office) X Other: Final Engineering Grading Certificates & Bond 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? Yes Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: 1-,�16 ) 421-��� Ter ence L. Be(2ger City Manager Geor a A. Wen yo City z neer N/A N/A x No N/A x No N/A CITY CGUXCIL RZPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, city Manager SUBJECT: Exoneration of Grading Surety Bond Posted for Tract 42535 (Montefino Condominium Complex) ISSUE STATEMENT: This report requests the exoneration of a Surety Bond posted for Grading of Building No.s 44-65 inclusive, on Chardonnay Avenue located in Tract 42535 (Montefino Condominium Complex) in the amount of $7,000. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and accept the completed work and exonerate the Surety Bond which was posted with Los Angeles County in June, 1983 for grading for 22 buildings on Chardonnay Avenue in Tract 42535 (Montefino Condominium Complex) in the amount of $7,000, and is now in the posession of the City Clerk. Further, it is recommended that the City Council instruct the City Clerk to notify Los Angeles County, Presley of Southern California and Fremont Indemnity Company of the Council's action. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: This recommendation has no financial impact on the City's 1993-1994 budget. BACKGROUND: The grading in this Tract was completed in 1985. The County received final sign -off by the Developer's engineer on Building No.s 44-48, 53, 55-56 in 1985 and the City received final sign -off by the Developer's engineer on the remaining Building No.s 49-52, 54 and 57-65 in September, 1993. A visual inspection of grading for building no.s 44-65 inclusive has now been completed by the Public Works Inspector and he finds them to be in substantial conformance to the plans reviewed and approved by the County of Los Angeles in 1983. Therefore, we now recommend that the surety which was posted with the County of Los Angeles be released. DISCUSSION: The following listed surety needs to be exonerated: Tract: 42535 Developer: Presley of Southern California Bond Number: OC300453 Principal: Fremont Indemnity Company Amount: $7,000 (Original Bond Amount $7,000) PREPARED BY• Anne M. Garve COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF COUNTY ENGINEER -FACILITIES BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION SUPERVISED GRADING INSPECTION VERIFICATION ob Md.... I, T—.1 No. 42535 811, - Permit Nd. r �_E INSPLCTICN, I jfy chat, wh —qul-4 by Us -11,.,.d laijm/GeaIqy ROM- and Chapter 70 of the I. C..., ground ... p..P.—d I. receive fill and all required b.nchlo, we. tut in. .aq. No. Data 'Nsprnlo" 1 sfy that -11 cut slopeswere constructed in .-ordapproved with he d d and, based upon current out* of the art analysis, I stify the ujoe ji "a " cy of all cut slopes as E n or Goa Lt9t.i R.Q. NO. au L'LL _1115-1ECTLO-H, rills have been placed —d cor.cd J.ordanc.jh the pp,._d plane and -peafl..ti.... Istgna caul 9• Dace -111-E -EVICE INSPECTION, I ify Us, all p1p,., f- "a ,L,f ... I, -usl were placed and located In co,d� pp --d plan. and ific.u Eng neer Reg Data MU,'.H TRADING "TI SOILS Y Nat the on Ne follow in fell .1eP. Z_ - 0 In c—l"'n— -I- -R"-- of building Code .ItI.h 7010 and I. ._,d_Itnq iota ' w'U Us d,::d.r,-y,::p —i.i— d _ 9 Plans. Inc -il. Engin.., "g. No - "M "-IN' VE�rTCATN By has be.n I I Verify that rough grading of the lot. listed below er -Y --pimLon In conformance with the 9 -ding plan, approved by the County on Idaul lac Nos. Fno neer ISlgna rural R-9. sin. Daca S+rout has o VERIFICATION INCGRAD ENGINEER, I w,rify that -11 Me —u - be done under this In[ cwi ch approved -Ppr.w.plan. and Rog. Mo. "to 11-_ 8-85 For ldir,g N(SQS .qn3r ) �- . -45 1 COtrt'(U A.Cl verify Met all Us -k don, under this permit I ey di,.c- ::I, Is.111in, Code and the pp. d plan. —d pjfjr.tj.,o In anl e) tib. f U" 0 14 '"ONF-Itech s&licl.n" eh..t if C.n Data :ISE :'I'LY;:s Permit .Vo. Lo: ;L ccr. lrfwt -lot. •• COUNTY OF IAS ANGELES '•• DEPARTMENT OF COUNTY ENGINEER -FACILITIES BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION SUPERVISED GRADING INSPECTION VERIFICATIONL .Iub Address or Tract No. • 42535 _ _ 8114\ P. -it Mo. FIG:• TrE INSPECTION, I v -ty -at, Where requlr.d by en. approved Soils/Gwlogy Report and Chapter 70 of the Cod•, ground Was p[eP... d U tw•Lre till end all required b.nchlnq w.. cut in. ' Lnq—..r Rag. No. bate ISl9nature) , CUT SIIJP[ 14SPECTIONn I verify tNc all cut slopes vara cone t[ucted cd. In accordance With W approved plane W .Pec a lltatloAa. and, based upon Currant state Of the arc onelYSis, I sertty We cbllty of all Out plane s. onacrucca L.Q-..r or r logiet Reg. No. Data (Slgn■cuiel FILL INSPECTION, Fills env. been placed and ccg cc.d In .Crowden.. Wj" the approved Plan. and ePetLtlutlOw. Ingln«r /iagnacural X.M. No. Data DRALNAG[ DFVi¢ inSPLCTIONnI varltY Wt .11 pip... f.— and t.Lnlo..is, ■-.1 ver. Pl... d and lwac.d 1■ accordance W- the apPlowd plana and .p..iflc.tsm.. login«[ Y9. Ib. Data Isigacur.) IOUGN GAADI NG VERIFICATION BY SOIfS ENGINEER, ! ilwelly that N. earth buttress*.,tills. bu[trsea, et.b111Ldon Y.eu[.a. li hope aurfac•a and auidraana pieced of conacrwctw on Na following lots were installed under my supervision L. rc.pliamc. With -9.irern- of Building Code S.ctLon 7010 and is aCourdanoe with the -pp—.4 gra" plana, fat We. b.arke So11a Fagln«r- Rag. No. Data - (519nacura) ROl1LI1 GRADING VEAIFICATIDM BY SUPERVISING GRADING ENGINECRn I verify -. .0.gh gradin. Of the 1OtA listed b•lw A•. wen eoepleud ender ry auperYSalw in canfor�ant. rich the grading plane approved by the County on . Engineer -. 1519natur0 Aeg. w. pare l _ FINAL GAADINL VERIF]GTION BY SLP[pVISING GRADING ENGINEER, I verify that all the wrk W be done under thl. pe—t ase bean caapi• d in acIordance with the a pprov.d plana and epedfirarjoas. ERgin«r Ii��UQ� Raq. No. • 14814 3-4-85 ��%�� lSi9n<turel Oast - - 1.ux BUILDING NOS. 46l�-4�7 & 48 FINAL GRADING VCRIFIGTION BY GRADING C40W6 J C4 I verify that .11 the work eon. under this pecan at nay dir.c- di. Code and heto' te'IngtaacaP"Cals) (describe afully or writsaeNCNs'9 • -t ch addltiwalo.beatlit ..cse■ry)'Scaclona Contractor Llan« Mo. laignacur•1 Data -'r.L7"C:T JSE 'JNLI: So:.Yd. Prerrit Yo. ]at. agu �Oi.�d iro.I'n � �: iLnLrr1 , Wrn=r 1 - r _- COUNTY OF IAS ANGELES .. .•• "' - D_•ARTNENT OF COUNTY ENGINEER -FACILITIES , BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION SUPERVISED GRADING INSPECTION VERIFICATION' •�: am Address or Tract No. 42535 Permit No. 8114 "'- 11 rIL:. ME INSPF—IDN, I verify that, where required by the approved sollayGoingy Report and Chapter 70 of Utz _ code, ptaparsd to receive fill sed all required benchln9 ru cut in. Lnqtnear Req. No. Gu (sigI - neture) ! - _ CUT SLDPE INSPECTION, I verity that all cut slope$ were constructed in accord to with the approved plane and sp•ca4catfone, - and, "sad upon current auto o! the art analysts. I verily the stability of all cut s1opN nd constructed. - .. tngtnur .. or Gwlegaet Reg. No, o.ta Isignatur" - - FILL INSPECTION, Fills have been placed and coopactad in accordance with the approved plana and specifications. - fnglneer Meq. Mo. Data - Isagnecural , ' - - DaAINAGC DNI¢ INSPCCTION, 1 verily that all plpss, lesme and reinforcing sisal were Placed and Located is ) aurotdanea with tha approved plus, and sp.cilleat_. t=�'I f+,ginoer Seg. Mo. Data (signature) - PWGII GMDING VEAIFI[ATIQV by SOILS ENGINEER, I verify that the earth fills, buttresses, atab111Ltlon saacuroa. fill clop• surfaces _ - - and subdroLu placed or conacrucud un the following lou ware installed under my supervlelq to ro.Plianee with r•quLraYnta of Building Code Section 7010 And LA scourdeAcs with the approved grading plane. . - Lot Moa. Remarks Fa9inaer -ionstute) Req• Mo. Data " RouGA GRADING VLAIFIGATION BY SODERVISING GRADING ENGINC[A, I wanly that rough gradln9 of the lotp listed below 1,•s bees ee,plsud unlit . ey aupervlalon !n mntormance ritk the grading plane approved by the County an • Ides,) !ret "a. Asmanha i i v p ` r:nganser 4 Req. No. Co. Islgne:urel - - ,r FINAL GRADING VEP.IPIGTION aT SLTERV[ SING GRADING ENGINEER, I Verity that all the wort to be done under this p.rut has beep cn„plsted in accordance with the APptoved Plans a,d specifications. Aeg. No. • 148i4 atr 2/11/85 _ ,/ IStgnatur•1 1 V For Building N..s 49,50 and 54 - FINAL GRADING VERIFIGTIDN BY GRADING GONTAs^IOR, I vetifY that all the work does under able permit at cion ra, do-- to mY dtr•c- _ accordance with the toe ha9elu .County buildingCod. and the approved Dive end specifications racn the following's.-eptioala) (describe - lull Y or Kite •NDNE'—sttath addlrinnal shoat if necessary), - .. Contractor 1dNna• Md. Dau (atgnaeutel Ysr fJ: :htc: yo. Penni- So. .lace Doth - - - mj;h Jrai'n . L.: �wnccra 'tree. COUNTY OF IAS ANGELES ,EPARTMENT OF COUNTY ENGINEER -FACE ^ IES BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION - SUPERVISED GRADING INSPECTION VERIFICATION .lob Add...... Tratc Nn. 42535 8114 P.—itNe. FILL TE INSPECTION( I v rlfy Na[, where r.gwr.d by the approved soil -/Geology Report and Chapter 70 of the Code, ground vat Prepared tc r ... [v. fill and all—Julred benchlaq was rut In. Engines Raq. No. Data 1519estuta) CUT SIM INSPECTION, I v r1fY that all cut slop.s r e corattucted in accordance with the apprved plana W tpectf,cation', and, based upon current •taco of the art analysis, I verity the stability of Alto" t elope. a eonscrucx.d. Engines eo or Gloq..t (Sig--.) P.W. ft. Data FILL 1NSPECTI0N, Fills have Mtn placed and co.ipacttd in actordence with the .pprowd plane and • pec ifl c at loos. Eng lnesr Req. tlo. Data 151yna tun) DRAINAGE Dt'VICE INSPECTION, I verify that all Pipes, fore. and reinforcing steel were placed and located is accord— with the Approved Plane and sp.c,fleatioos. , Engin— (saq,u cure) R•9• tlo. Data 1rouGX GRADING VERIFICAT70N BT SOILS ENGINEER, I verify on Nat the 1—th fill', buttresses, stabilization YANt.s, till s1APe sail ossa end autdral,u yLc.d or coesrruc tad the following lou w re Installed under y .upervlalrw, fa co.pllance with tpuir•se... of Building Coda section 7010 abd in acoordanc* with the apprevd gradlnq plans, ]u1 Noe. _ Ma:k' Soil• [ngine.r Iscgna tura) hag" No.hat. RW(:tl GAADING VERIFIUTION BY SUPERVISINGGRADING ENGINE[R, I verify that rough grad!-, of the I.- listed below has Man eompleted under ry 'uT,•rvLaon in ronfor•ane' wi ti the gCeding plans approved by the County no ,date) Loc Noe. Psa•tk' Engineer Req_ No. Data IS 19na tutal FINAL GRADING NG VERIFICATION BY SLPERVISING -M ING ENGINEER, I verifY that all Ns work tb be dons u,d.r this P. wait Iter M•n mspl. ted In accordance with the approved Plans and tptiflutions. meq.".er�� �Ts,gn�a�tR.q. . • 14 81& 4 e8/28/84� Bdg s 51,52,5758 FINAL GRAD]NG VERIFIGTION BY GRADING CONTRACTOR, I verify that all W work dons unds[ the' p•r>.Lt at . dire.- • done In • ordanca with the Lo. M9ela,ounty Ruildinq Code and the approved plans end .p.clliwcio w+xh the tollowingcs'ceptionls) (describe fully or _IM •NONE• --•teach additional 'hest if necessary), n. contracmt Lic.nee No. Data lSagnacur•1 Pemri: .Vee Data i t:e a C. .. , .Mel. _ •',p' WlGtra 142-459 . .. COUNTY DP IAS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OP COUNTY ENGINEER -FACILITIES BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION SUPERVISED GRADING INSPECTION VERIFICATION Job Addre•. or Tr.tt No. 42535 p.tdt No. 8114 rlL1 TOE IMSPECTIDNI I verify that, vhere r.qulr•d by the apprewd fe1L/Leelogy Mpert and Ch "top 70 If the Code, ground wac pt.p.red to r.c.Lv. fill and all required b...hind . out 1 Ingin.er Mg. Mo. Date Iblgmcur.l , pprovod Plane CUT SIDPL INSPECTION, I verily LNt .11 rut .lope. r n. t..[td in .....dance v1N tJn aWct .......... ad. Gnd upon carr..! rut. e! the are analy.t.r i verify N..caDtllry Of all C .lane as con. -..,ad. • Lngtneer ar Geoloq.et Req. Me, pay (Slgrotural FLLL INSPECTION, Till. have been pl... d and cey+aetd In accordance with tha approved plane and epeclflcation.. Engineer (Sign .tur.l Raq. no. Data I" GI DEVICE INSPECTION, I verily that all pipe(, faJ1.. and nln(o[tiog .t..1 Inn plated and lee•t•d 1. t ccotdu,e. qth the approved plan. and rpe111—ticau. Engineer Rag. Me. Data ISlgm [ural ROULN GRADING VERIFICATION .y SOILS placed I•verify that the ..rth fill., butt[••...• .tabllL aatlen r /ill clop. eurtaca. and autbr to o placed os cone trutt.d no the /eLlwlnq lot. v . (mulled under •aur.•, t. ea.plL.nea trlth Jpulnarnt. of Building Cede S.Ction 7010 and la aeoordaow•V1 th the ■ ny ao, Plan.en pprw.d grading plan.. Int Ib.. MNrA. _..� 6011. tngln•ei Islgn.t... Rag. no. Bet. 11R1L11 GMDING VER1 rICATION BI SUPERV131NG GRADING ENGINEER, I verify that rough grading of the lot. hated belw h.a bean ...plead unMr ry ■upenielon Ln mnfer>.a„r. vlth the grading plan. approvd by the county on IdaW !at Moa. Reanzlu I Engineer ISlgnaturel Req. Mo. Date _ rTNAL GRADING VERIPIGTLON ST SUPERVISING GRADINGENGINEER, I verify that all tA. —,k to !» done under thl. Wra1c N. an [..plead In accord.nc• with the approved plan. and .pocifiteLione. tog --.j-' - b• R 14814 fsign.tut.l •q• Mo. . Date 10/25/85 R BUILDING NOS. 53, 55 AND 56 r1NA1 ORAD G wmrIGTION By GRADING CONIjUCTOR, I wrlfy that all the vert done under ala cion va. dnm In accordance with the Loc Anq•la.•Ceunt AuLldtn Code a.d the Wttd t .cry dlrac- r1N the follwlnq exception, (d•.Lrlbo fully or writ. 'NONL'9-.[t.rJ, dd[tlonal ghost ilt,. ct..arylrlcb[WM1E Co. t ... to[ lEignac7.l..... No. pet. - ur.l Afi^E'!T YSE OSLr: :rues .Yd. l7N b- rr van t� _ Jbmr zns•>r :ya:.a;ii/sl x h eL - 142-459 . .. COUNTY DP IAS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OP COUNTY ENGINEER -FACILITIES BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION SUPERVISED GRADING INSPECTION VERIFICATION Job Addre•. or Tr.tt No. 42535 p.tdt No. 8114 rlL1 TOE IMSPECTIDNI I verify that, vhere r.qulr•d by the apprewd fe1L/Leelogy Mpert and Ch "top 70 If the Code, ground wac pt.p.red to r.c.Lv. fill and all required b...hind . out 1 Ingin.er Mg. Mo. Date Iblgmcur.l , pprovod Plane CUT SIDPL INSPECTION, I verily LNt .11 rut .lope. r n. t..[td in .....dance v1N tJn aWct .......... ad. Gnd upon carr..! rut. e! the are analy.t.r i verify N..caDtllry Of all C .lane as con. -..,ad. • Lngtneer ar Geoloq.et Req. Me, pay (Slgrotural FLLL INSPECTION, Till. have been pl... d and cey+aetd In accordance with tha approved plane and epeclflcation.. Engineer (Sign .tur.l Raq. no. Data I" GI DEVICE INSPECTION, I verily that all pipe(, faJ1.. and nln(o[tiog .t..1 Inn plated and lee•t•d 1. t ccotdu,e. qth the approved plan. and rpe111—ticau. Engineer Rag. Me. Data ISlgm [ural ROULN GRADING VERIFICATION .y SOILS placed I•verify that the ..rth fill., butt[••...• .tabllL aatlen r /ill clop. eurtaca. and autbr to o placed os cone trutt.d no the /eLlwlnq lot. v . (mulled under •aur.•, t. ea.plL.nea trlth Jpulnarnt. of Building Cede S.Ction 7010 and la aeoordaow•V1 th the ■ ny ao, Plan.en pprw.d grading plan.. Int Ib.. MNrA. _..� 6011. tngln•ei Islgn.t... Rag. no. Bet. 11R1L11 GMDING VER1 rICATION BI SUPERV131NG GRADING ENGINEER, I verify that rough grading of the lot. hated belw h.a bean ...plead unMr ry ■upenielon Ln mnfer>.a„r. vlth the grading plan. approvd by the county on IdaW !at Moa. Reanzlu I Engineer ISlgnaturel Req. Mo. Date _ rTNAL GRADING VERIPIGTLON ST SUPERVISING GRADINGENGINEER, I verify that all tA. —,k to !» done under thl. Wra1c N. an [..plead In accord.nc• with the approved plan. and .pocifiteLione. tog --.j-' - b• R 14814 fsign.tut.l •q• Mo. . Date 10/25/85 R BUILDING NOS. 53, 55 AND 56 r1NA1 ORAD G wmrIGTION By GRADING CONIjUCTOR, I wrlfy that all the vert done under ala cion va. dnm In accordance with the Loc Anq•la.•Ceunt AuLldtn Code a.d the Wttd t .cry dlrac- r1N the follwlnq exception, (d•.Lrlbo fully or writ. 'NONL'9-.[t.rJ, dd[tlonal ghost ilt,. ct..arylrlcb[WM1E Co. t ... to[ lEignac7.l..... No. pet. - ur.l Afi^E'!T YSE OSLr: :rues .Yd. l7N b- rr van t� _ Jbmr zns•>r :ya:.a;ii/sl COUNTY OF IAS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF COUNTY ENGINEER -FACILITIES BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION SUPERVISED GRADING INSPECTION VERIFICATION .loo Addsa or T:,ct Ne. 42535 p.radt No. 8114 FILL ME INSPECTION. I -l=ily that. -hers raquir.d by N• approval Soil[/Gaology Alport and Cl.ept.r 70 of the code,s-ground .a. Prap... d 'o racer-. fill and .11 r.qulrad b ... hing was cut IR. -- Ingan••r sag. No. Date (Sig......) . CUT SLOPE INSPECTION. I v rify that all cat slop•• rare onetructed in accordance with the approval plana -A .pecafacaclena, snd, b..d upon tush[ •uta of N.. .rt analy.is. I e•rify the •tebility of all cvt •lopes an cm a trotted. Ingi.sr or G.o1o91.t Req. Ib. 0.t. 15igr�.cur•1 FILL INSPECTION. F1119 have wan placed and co.pacted In accordanc. with the approved plans and •pacification. Engtnsr R•g• 1b. Data ISign.tural DRAINAGE DEVICE INSPECTION. I verify the' .11 pip.a, fort and rolaferriaq .4e1 ware plated and located In accorda-a with the approved plane and specification, """r 0.9• No. Date (Signature) RDUCN GAADING VERIFICATION by SOILS ENGINEER. I verify Nat the earth fills, buttress-, -tabil—tion r fill .lop• surfaras and .ubdraina placed o truc-4 en the following Iota -ea installed Mnd•z y supervision w coepliance with zequlr.rnts of Rullding Code a ... 1— 7010 and In atoo[daoc•rith N. app -4 9—ding plana. t., Mae. Aerrke bila Iagil.es. Req. Mo. Date (S ign.[urel " GRADING VERIFICATION By SOpcniHG GRADING ENGIN££Ri I v =ify that rough 9radin9 of N. lot. 11—d blow Asa baa co-plsul unl.= ry sap•rvi.ion in wnlarsanc. rich the grading plans approved by the County on (date) Lot Moa. Ruazk. Engin.•r R.9• Mo. Dat. (Signatur.l FINAL GRADING VERIFICATION By S'T£RVISING GRADING ENGINEER, I - =ify that all Na work to b done snd•[ thl. perut Ns wan cn p1—ad in accordance with the approved plane and apeclfi—xia. Engin«r✓t/. l y�. YV�d+�U Req. No.. 14814 Det° 8-15-84 ildin4 if ogn.c9 59 FINAL GRADING VERIFIGTION Br GRADING CONTjUCTOR. I va rify that all tba work done under this pared t at ry direc- c -aa done in • ordance with Na Loa Angels .County Auildin9 Coda aM the app—ad plans and specifications raN the follnring eaeepuon1.1 (dscribe fully or Kate -NONE'--attach .ddicional swat if nece—ty). Contractor Liens. No. Oat. (Signator.) F.Imi t .Va. ^it:. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF COUNTY ENGINEER -FACILITIES BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION _ SUPERVISED GRADING INSPECTION VERIFICATION _ . . j: Job Addl... o[ T- No. 42535 F. _t No. 8114 FIl:. TOE INSPECTION, I v ifY that. -here raqulr•d by the approved Bolla/Gaology Report mad Chapter 70 of he Co.-, ground -a• prepared to r... ave fill and .11 raqula•d W..hLnq r.. cut in. Engcneer Rag. No. Dau (Sl9niun) CUT SIDPE INSPECTION, I v rafy that all c •lope* rat, ciruct&d In ac Ordanc• with tW approved plata and •p.ca[auclona, and, bud upon current e"c• of the arc analy.u. I verify the etabtllty of ala cut slope$ u ronl [-acted, Engtn..r et Gan 1o9r•c peg. W. Data (Signaaw*) FILL INSPEMON, Fill. have bean pl... d and co\pactad in accordane• with the approved plane and eP..ific.ti.va. En91n s.9. No. Dat• (Signature) LRAINAGE DEVICE INSPECTION, 1 verify that all pipe-, lora• and [•inforeioq •"al wen placed and located 1n ..cads,.. with the approved plan. and rp.eificacima. Engan••r peg. No. Dau (Sig— ROUGH Gp INC VERIFICATION BV SOILS I verify that the earth fill&, buttrene•, etabillration awa&ur*e, fill Slope Sumac's and aubdraina pl—ed O[ —.'ad on the lollwieg lot. Yen in -"lied under \y aup&rvlelon u co\pll.nc. with regwnrnu of building Coda faction 7010 and La Ac dance with the approved grading plan.. Iut Noe. Raaaaka Soils Llgln•er Rag. No, ba" (Signature) nOUGII GRADING VE Rr FICATIOR BY SUPERVI5ING GI "G ENGINEER, I verify that rough grading of Me lot- 116"d blow has Wen coeplsaed Wider wry superviaton in tonfo[•unoe with the gradiag plena approved by the County un Lot woe. R.aerke Engrnear Rag. sb. nate l5 igna cool FINAL GMnING VERIFICATION BY 5GTERVISING GRADING ENGINEER, I va"fy that all the work to W done und*r this peratt tut Wen eoapl... d In accordance with the approved plant ind tpecificationa. Engrn..ra�Rag. No. 14814 8-7-84 bc• ' {Sa9,ucural Buildings N0. 60,61 6 62 I FINAL GRADING VERIFIGTION BY GAADING CONTR 7C1R, I Verify clot all the wort don. under this pareit at ey drr.c- LIDn wet don* in a o[dan with Na Loa Ange 1•e.Councy Building Code and the approved pl.n• and apaclfiucione wa to cAa follovingc.a<.ptionl al ld.acrrW tally or war" -NONE---at"ch .dditional ehe.t it .•..nary), Contractor Li..... No. Dac& l5agnacw.l riY_"C:l' JS_ 7'ULr: ....Oc :/o. .. .... r:tom: Pel+ait Yo. Jac• tic.. Do.. COUNTY OF LOS ANCELES DEpARTNENT OF COUNTY ENGINEER -FACILITIES BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION SUPERVISED GRADING INSPECTION VERIFICATION Job Mdna. or Tract No. 42535 _ 8114 Permit No. ` FILL TOE INSPECTION, I v rtfy that, where req.—A by the pproved So11a/Geology P•port and Chapter 70 of the Cod., ground u.. pr.par.d to receive 1111 and .11 required b ... hing w.. cut in. Lngtne.r - Peg. No. D.ts Iiign.cur•1 CUT SLOPE INSPECTION, I v r[fy that all cut .lap.. w tad in o—don.. with the approved plan• end .pact Laca cion•, end, 0.•.d upon curtenc .tate of he arc analysis, I verify the stability of .11 N .lop.. .• cm1[rucc•d. Engtn.er ar C logret / q. No. ate (Si9^=cuiel FILL INSPECTION, Fill& have been placed end —potted in accordance with the approved plans and specification.. Fngin•ar Req. No. Date - Istgnatur.l r,MINAGL DEvICE INSPECTION, I verity that .11 pipes, fo and reinforcing steal were placed and located in ' ccordanc• with the approvd plane end specifications. Englnaa[ Bog. No. Dat• Ii.gnacura) ROUGH GRADING VERIFICATION BY SOILS ENGINEER, I verify that the earth fill., buter.erer. •tebillantinn ar f111 11cpo auifo— and autdral,u placed or a rrvet.d on the follwi.9 lot. w e Ln 11.4 undo. sy sup.rvi.ion in co..pliance with requir,we c of Building Code Section 7010 and in . —rdoom with the approvad grading plans. Lot No•• Remark. _- Soil. Encina.. Rag. No. Dat. (STgnatur•) POUGX GAMING VERI FI[ATION BY CUPEAyiSING GRADING ENGINEER, I verily that cough grading of th. loth listed allow I iva been eoepl. dor ry aupervi•ion in wnforeane• wi to &he gr.ding plan, approved by the County on Id.c.l Lit Noe. Fngeno.i Rag. No. Dat. ,Signa tura) p FINAL GRADING VERIFICATION BY SGPER" STNG GAMING ENGINEER, I verify that .11 the work - be don• undo. this ? Permit has �b-e-ems ....l.c•d in n�dran with the approved plan. and 1poci llucio,a. E q..... i1 )%y ung. No.' 14814 Data 7/19/84 F DIW'ff8W- 63, 64 AND 65 `)p} Fl GRADING VERIFICATION By GRADING CONTOZTOR, 1 verify that all the work don. under this permit at By diet- } in .c•nt• ordwith the Loa Mg•1.a.County Buildplena and Code AM the approved pland .pacifications w with Ne fol lingerception(al (describe fully or write •NONE' --attach additional .hoot if necessary), Contractor Lic.n.. No. cat• (S\gnacurol .L7"C•.'J' :ISE OtlLY: taco :lo. Pr wrir No. Dot. ty: ^tit:. G R h d I K 0 PIR1AIT Rb 110 KNOW ALL MEN t'! Th a t w. PRRSLEY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA prI(JD t. ":2! I !t OC -300453 PREMIUM: $28.00 or 4600 Campus Drive Newport Beac�alirornia, principal, and_ FREMONT INDEMNITY COMPANY a corporation, as _,.rrty, are i,eld and ''firmly bound unto the Count of LOS ANGELES a body poli C and corporate of t'.• ;tate o_ .:alifornia, in the sum of creTrrr ms.nitSAND & Nr�/j0($ p1.0�0_��Y_ lawful money of :I'.: ::n:teu States, for the payment or which well and truly to be made we hereby bind ourselves, ioln!ly and severally, firmly by these presents. Signed, sealei ani dated this loth day of June 1q 83 WHEREAS, an application by the above-named principal, has been made to the DEPARTMENT OF COUNTY ENGINEER, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Division of Building ani Safety for the issuance, to said principal, of a permit to perform excavation or fill work or both wlthin the County of Los Angeles more specifi- cally described In the application for a Gratin Pg mit, upon a location owned by said principal known as lot block , tract 5p35_, locality or as street address of in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 70 of the Los Angeles County Building Code, and WHEREAS, Les Angeles County Building Code, Chapter 70, requires as a condition precedent to the issuance of said permit that the principal shall furnish a bond in the sum above named to the County of Los Angeles, conditioned as hereinafter set forth: NOW, THEREFORE, (1) if the principal shall well and truly comply with all the applicable requirements of Les Angeles County Building Code, Chapter 70, and (2) If all of the work required to be done complies with all of the terms and conditions of the Permit for excavation or fill c: both to the satisfaction of the County Engineer and is completed within the time limit specified in the Grading Permit, then this ob- ligation shall be void; otherwise it shall remain in full force and effect. It is understood that the liability of the principal andsurety upon this bond shall oe in effect from the date hereof and remain in effect until the completion of the work in compliance with all terms and conditions of said Grading Permit and until final approval thereof by the County Engineer. It is further understood that the County of Los Angeles, or the surety, or both, or any authorized representative of either, shall have the right to enter the above described property for the purpose of inspecting the work, and should the principal default in the performance of any of the terms and conditions of the Grading Permit, the salt County, or surety, or both, or agent of either, shall have the right of access to the property and may complete the work necessary for compliance with requirements of said Building Code, Chapter 70. It is also understood that the time limit specified in the permit above mentioned, may be extended for good and sufficient cause by the.County Engineer. No such extension of time shall be valid unless the same be in writing and no such extension of time shall release the principal or surety from the obligations of this bond. Where the work requiring this bond Is located within an incorporated city and the County of Lcs Angeles is the enforcement agency, the obligation of this bond shall include the incorporated city where the work is to be performed. In such case the wards 'Department of County Engineer, County of Los Angeles, Building and Safety Division" and "Building official" shall mean such Department and Official respectively while acting, respectively, as the appropriate department and official of such city. The words "Los Angeles County Building Code" mean the building code or other ordinance having provisions the same as, or substantially similar to Chapter 70 of said Los Angeles County Building Code. STATE OF California ) i ) ss: ICOUNTY OF Orange ) On this 10th day of. June in the year 1983 before me Jeanine Tarnowski Notary Public personally appeared Linda Sciaini personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence)to be the person who executed this instrument as attorney-in-fact of—Fremont Indemnity Comoany the corporation therein named, and acknowledged to me that the corporation executed it. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year stated in this certificate above. t•ty Commission Expi JEC:225 RrIGmLXAL / Notary Public JEANINE M.TARNOWSKI / NOTARY PUBLIC • CALIFORNIA PRINCIPAL OFFICE IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY MI CoMmms*n Exp. Aug. 1, 1985 i. 4 �V 2;c r� a ;6 G R h d I K 0 PIR1AIT Rb 110 KNOW ALL MEN t'! Th a t w. PRRSLEY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA prI(JD t. ":2! I !t OC -300453 PREMIUM: $28.00 or 4600 Campus Drive Newport Beac�alirornia, principal, and_ FREMONT INDEMNITY COMPANY a corporation, as _,.rrty, are i,eld and ''firmly bound unto the Count of LOS ANGELES a body poli C and corporate of t'.• ;tate o_ .:alifornia, in the sum of creTrrr ms.nitSAND & Nr�/j0($ p1.0�0_��Y_ lawful money of :I'.: ::n:teu States, for the payment or which well and truly to be made we hereby bind ourselves, ioln!ly and severally, firmly by these presents. Signed, sealei ani dated this loth day of June 1q 83 WHEREAS, an application by the above-named principal, has been made to the DEPARTMENT OF COUNTY ENGINEER, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Division of Building ani Safety for the issuance, to said principal, of a permit to perform excavation or fill work or both wlthin the County of Los Angeles more specifi- cally described In the application for a Gratin Pg mit, upon a location owned by said principal known as lot block , tract 5p35_, locality or as street address of in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 70 of the Los Angeles County Building Code, and WHEREAS, Les Angeles County Building Code, Chapter 70, requires as a condition precedent to the issuance of said permit that the principal shall furnish a bond in the sum above named to the County of Los Angeles, conditioned as hereinafter set forth: NOW, THEREFORE, (1) if the principal shall well and truly comply with all the applicable requirements of Les Angeles County Building Code, Chapter 70, and (2) If all of the work required to be done complies with all of the terms and conditions of the Permit for excavation or fill c: both to the satisfaction of the County Engineer and is completed within the time limit specified in the Grading Permit, then this ob- ligation shall be void; otherwise it shall remain in full force and effect. It is understood that the liability of the principal andsurety upon this bond shall oe in effect from the date hereof and remain in effect until the completion of the work in compliance with all terms and conditions of said Grading Permit and until final approval thereof by the County Engineer. It is further understood that the County of Los Angeles, or the surety, or both, or any authorized representative of either, shall have the right to enter the above described property for the purpose of inspecting the work, and should the principal default in the performance of any of the terms and conditions of the Grading Permit, the salt County, or surety, or both, or agent of either, shall have the right of access to the property and may complete the work necessary for compliance with requirements of said Building Code, Chapter 70. It is also understood that the time limit specified in the permit above mentioned, may be extended for good and sufficient cause by the.County Engineer. No such extension of time shall be valid unless the same be in writing and no such extension of time shall release the principal or surety from the obligations of this bond. Where the work requiring this bond Is located within an incorporated city and the County of Lcs Angeles is the enforcement agency, the obligation of this bond shall include the incorporated city where the work is to be performed. In such case the wards 'Department of County Engineer, County of Los Angeles, Building and Safety Division" and "Building official" shall mean such Department and Official respectively while acting, respectively, as the appropriate department and official of such city. The words "Los Angeles County Building Code" mean the building code or other ordinance having provisions the same as, or substantially similar to Chapter 70 of said Los Angeles County Building Code. STATE OF California ) i ) ss: ICOUNTY OF Orange ) On this 10th day of. June in the year 1983 before me Jeanine Tarnowski Notary Public personally appeared Linda Sciaini personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence)to be the person who executed this instrument as attorney-in-fact of—Fremont Indemnity Comoany the corporation therein named, and acknowledged to me that the corporation executed it. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year stated in this certificate above. t•ty Commission Expi JEC:225 RrIGmLXAL / Notary Public JEANINE M.TARNOWSKI / NOTARY PUBLIC • CALIFORNIA PRINCIPAL OFFICE IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY MI CoMmms*n Exp. Aug. 1, 1985 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.: TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager REPORT DATE: September 24, 1993 MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer TITLE: Exoneration of Paving Surety Bond Posted for Tract 36741 (Montefino Condominium Complex). SUMMARY: The City of Diamond Bar desires to exonerate the surety bond posted for paving of Bodega Way and Colombard Lane (private streets) located in the Montefino Condominium Complex in the amount of $118,000. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and accept the completed work and exonerate the surety bond posted for paving, curb and gutter for Bodega Way and Colombard Lane (private streets) in the Montefino Condominium Complex and instruct the City Clerk to notify Los Angeles County, Presley of Southern California and Safeco Insurance Company of America of the City Council's action. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:x Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification _ Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file _ Ordinance(s) in City Clerk's Office) Agreement(s) _x Other: Final Engineering Certificate & Bond EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed N/A by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? N/A 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? — Yes N/A No Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? Yes x_ No Report discussed with the following affected departments: N/A REVIEWED BY: Terr nce L.bSelanger George A. ntzy City Manager Int rim Ci y Efigineer MEETING DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. October 5, 1993 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager Exoneration of Paving Surety Bond Posted for Tract 36741 (Montef ino Condominium Complex) ISSUE STATEMENT: This report requests the exoneration of a Surety Bond posted for Paving of Bodega Way and Colombard Lane (private streets) located in the Montef ino Condominium Complex in the amount of $118,000. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and accept the completed work and exonerate the Surety Bond which was posted with Los Angeles County in November 1986 for paving, curb and gutter on Bodega Way and Colombard Lane (private streets) located in the Montefino Condominium Complex in an amount of $118,000, and is now in the posession of the City Clerk. Further, it is recommended that the City Council instruct the City Clerk to notify Los Angeles County, Presley of Southern California and Safeco Insurance Company of America of the Council's action. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: This recommendation has no financial impact on the City's 1993-1994 budget. BACKGROUND: The streets in this Tract were constructed in 1987. The City received final sign -off by the Developer's engineer on these streets in September, 1993. A visual inspection of said streets has now been completed by the Public Works Inspector and he finds them to be in substantial conformance to the plans reviewed and approved by the County of Los Angeles in 1986. Therefore, we now recommend that the surety which was posted with the County of Los Angeles be released. DISCUSSION: The following listed surety needs to be exonerated: Tract: 36741 Developer: Presley of Southern California Bond Number: 5293514 Principal: Safeco Insurance Company of America Amount: $118,000 (Original Amount:$383,300) PREPARED BY: Anne M. Garvey MADOLE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Civil Engineering, Land Planning and Surveying 1820 EAST SIXTEENTH STREET SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92701 (714) 835-2548 FAX (714) 835-0612 J.N. 142-459 FEBRUARY 24, 1993 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 21660 E. COPLEY DRIVE SUITE 100 DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA 91765 ATTENTION: MS. ANNE GARVEY ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN SUBJECT REF: TRACT NO. 36741 Dear Ms. Garvey: rivate This is to certify th36741eanddthatgtheyhhavenbeentconstruccted in streets in Tract No. Tans prepared the ped by this office and substantial conformance to the p reviewed by the County of Los Angeles. Very truly yours, MADOLE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. J. M. Madole R.C.E. 14814 JMM:srl Of rrL` y Y l r N - a r- YZt1 0 BOND NO: 5293514 [ ] STORM DRAIN improvement under Private Drain No. in the sum of dollars [ ] MONUMENTATION in the sum of dollars ($. [X3 WATER SYSTEM improvements in the sum of NINETY-FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS AND 00/100 dollars (;94,000.00-----------�. [)] ROAD improvements in the sum of FIFTEEN THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED DOLLARS AND 00/100 (SJruce Tree Drive) dollars ($15,300.00---------- )• [ ] INSPECTION of road improvements in the sum of dollars ($ )' [ ] STREET TREE improvements in the sum of dollars ($ )' [ X] PAVING, CURB S GUTTER FOR PRIVATE DRIVEWAYS improvements in the sum of ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEEN THOUSAND AND NO 100----------------------------- ---------------- dollars ($ 118,000.00 -------------- -------- ) all for Tract No./RaxX)eRXXaP No. 36741 in accordance with the attached contract(s) and is required by said COUNTY to give this bond in connection with the execut.nn of said contract(s). If the annexed contracts listed above include an agreement for monumentation, then a further condition of the foregoing obligation is for the payment of the amount of the bond to the COUNTY for the benefit of the authorized surveyor or engineer who has performed the work and has not been paid by the contractor as provided for in Division 2, Title 7, of the Government Code. Now therefore, if the said PRINCIPAL shall completely perform all of the covenants and obligations of said contracts)ntoabe alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his p artperformed at the times and in the manner specified therein, and in all respects according to its true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless COUNTY, its officers, agents, and employees, as therein stipulated, then this obligation shall be null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect. The SURETY hereby expressly consents to, and waives any prior notice of, the granting, from time to time by the COUNTY, to the PRINCIPAL, of any extensions of time to perform to and complete the work under the annexed thetCOUNTY)or pursuanttto work or to the specifications, ordered by ressl the provisions of said contract(s). The SURETY further exp Y agrees that any such extensions of tie or affect itsa y such c changes or alterations shall not in any Y CO FP (1-85) -2- CITY Or DIAMOND Drx AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.: `a TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 REPORT DATE: September 24, 1993 FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer TITLE: Storm Drain Bond Exoneration for Private Drain Numbers 1813 and 2061 on Tract 42535, constructed by Presley of Southern California. SUMMARY: The City of Diamond Bar desires to exonerate the surety bond posted for Storm Drain No.s 1813 and 2061 located on Tract No. 42535 (Montefino Condominium Complex). RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and accept the completed work and exonerate the Surety Bond which was posted with Los Angeles County in September, 1983 for Storm Drain No.s 1813 and 2061 on Tract 42535 in the amount of $194,000, and is now in the posession of the City Clerk. Further, it is recommended that the City Clerk notify the Los Angeles County, Fremont Indemnity Company and Presley of Southern California of the City Council's action. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification _ Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file _ Ordinance(s) in City Clerk's Office) _ Agreement(s) X Other: L. A. Co. DPW 's Letter re. Board of Supervisors' Acceptance Letter of P.D. No. 2061; L.A. Co. Sign -Off of P.D. 1813 and Bond EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed _ Yes x No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? _ Yes x No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes x No Which Commission? N/A 5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes x No Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: Terre Lce Lelanger City Manag . Geoge A.'Wpfitq Intirim City_a gineer CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L.Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Storm Drain Exoneration for Private Drain No.s 1813 and 2061 in Tract No. 42535 (Montefino Condominium Complex). ISSUE STATEMENT This report requests the exoneration of a faithful performance bond posted for Storm Drain No.s 1813 and 2061 in Tract 42535 (Montefino Condominium Complex) constructed by Presley of Southern California. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve and accept the completed work and exonerate the Surety Bond which was posted with Los Angeles County in September, 1983 for Storm Drain No.s 1813 and 2061 in Tract 42535 in the amount of $194,000, and is now in the posession of the City Clerk. Further, it is recommended that the City Clerk notify the Los Angeles County, Fremont Indemnity Company and Presley of Southern California of the City Council's action. FINANCIAL SUMMARY This action has no impact on the City's 1993-1994 budget. BACKGROUND The construction of these storm drains on Porto Grande and Albariza Drive have been completed. Transferrance of P.D. 2061 to Los Angeles County for maintenance was accepted by the County Board of Supervisors on July 31, 1990. P.D. 1813 was field reviewed and approved by Los Angeles County in June, 1993 and is presently being transferred. The fees involved in the transferrance procedure have now been fully paid by the Principal, Presley of Southern California. Therefore, the surety bond posted for these drains may now be exonerated. DISCUSSION The following listed surety bond needs to be exonerated: Tract No.: 42535, Storm Drain No.s 1813 and 2061 Bond Number: OC 300530 Principal: Presley of Southern California Surety: Fremont Indemnity Company Amount: $194,000 (Original Bond Amount $194,000) Prepared By: Anne Garvey F40M:KONICA FAX PO -6 is TO: qOB 17, 1993 7:00AM P.01 LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS f� ?� MEMORANDUM August 9, 1990 �� r _3 r MOFlood Ma n enance v s on Mapping & property Management Division (2) Secretary of Nomenclature Committee FROM: N. C. Datwyler Land Development Division File No. 2-15.40 Transfer of Storm Drain,Systems Privftt ,brA11 0411061 For your information, the above-mentioned drain has been transferred to the District for operation and maintenance. Date of Board Supervisors' approval: July 31, 1990 _Date of Board -Letter: July -18, 1990 --- -- -- --- -- - -- - Supervisorial District: Fifth Transferring Agency: Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Construction plans: District Drawing No. 337-F136.1-.3 Main Line Length: 795' more or less Area: Pico Thomas Guide: 126-J5 Quad Sheet: Oat Mountain Operation and Maintenance Area: West 4�; _Z ROD H. KUBOM T Section Head Drainage and Grading Section SD:al Post -Wm brand fax transmittal memo 7671N of pages ► Z ` TO Vim' From rkAc co. co. (� . Dept. 1 Phone N 1 ^ LM l �k S� _� Lq l FaxN �+ �t11!]� Fax BC: Design (Technical Services), Flood and Maintenance (2), (Hansen Yard), Mapping & Property Management (Permits), Land Development Division (D&G) General Files U Date im N. C. Datwyler Land Develogmnt Division FROM: Gary J. Hartley Construction Division ATTENTION: David Diotalevi post-lt'" brand fax transmittal memo 7671 N of peget ► / To From Co. Co. co Dept. Phone 0 (n 4a _-] t q i �j :J l T Fax NOTICE OF COMPLETION - PRIVATE DRAIN r� �PM NuMBER PROJECT /©D 1v i,. JOB W BER L � / / 6 1 z l LOCATION 11 -1001471,11 -?o por 7�0 Gj rr�nC& " 0/Ci. S� Final Inspection of the above -captioned Private Drain has been made. The work has been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications, and is ready for formal acceptance. _ Field Review -ad Date ��-��,3 By . /, Head Construction Inspector Approval bate Head Construction Inspector R> rests This Jeb Nr•rber has be -„n closed. Recomend this Job be accepted for public use. tn• Supervisor, Contract Cons4rucn Approved By .1�MeS' �t�f�f'�/�y i°r A(tt'y Head, Subdivision 'Inspection cc: Hdatrs/Permit office/Road Element Head Construction Inspector File �. l i, HSA t me • �,';� C(VT--PD Revised: 6/10/92 � ; I AIW ,::� 2T::� �Crry of DIAM140 BAR PFtlq.A*rE DRAIN No. 183 rs. No. 42535 t � t 1 .A \�L �h� yT��~ J •1 dc- ' -t �~ � �n ao 3oHvuo ,::� 2T::� �Crry of DIAM140 BAR PFtlq.A*rE DRAIN No. 183 rs. No. 42535 all fir Trac: No.1darn{1y�14Sp�N�✓ 42335 in accor•drrre with :hs taohed cantractts) and is requ rec-7 s3`_d County tc giv* ii°r atbond iri C:=Mecticir w'th t.le e%e3LitiCY1 Of Said ContraCc01i . If the a,,,nexed oontracts listed gbr.�ve ir,alude on agreement fcr monume;-tsticn, ;hen a further con.!;tion of tie foregoing obligation is fcr the payment of the kcrount of the Bon: to the County for ihio bene."it c2e they authorised surveyor or engineer who has perfcrzed the wcrit and has not been paid by the contractor as .--;vidcjd for in. Jivis:on c, Title 7, of t e Government Cade. G+! therefc^e, if the said Principal shall cbmpl_'ely perform sjll: of t'.e cJvenants and obligations of Said contr ct(s) snd any alteration .hereof macre as therein, provided, on his wart to be perfar":ed at tte times and in the manner t-ecified therein, and in ail res;ezts acc,;rding to its true intent and iiieenin(„ and shall indemnify ,snd Lave harmless the County of Los Angeles, its officerf, agents, and mmployees, as therein stipuiatec, Cher this obligat:r, cgel ye null and void; otherwise it 3hal: be and ra- main in fall `orae and effect. The Surety h.ereoy expressly son - se -its to, and wa IYea any ^rior notice of, t. ".e granting, from time t:, time 1.)y,;he County, to the rrinoipal, of any excsnsions of time to pe^fo;•m and coreplete the work ander the annexed con- traCC:S), inl to any changes or alterations zo the terms of the C,"ntract(s; yr to the work cr to the spac:ficat:ons, ordered by the CcunG y p'�rs!.:a t to the provisions of said contract( s) . The Surely f::.r.er axpresazly agraes trat eny s:ch exte,131Icns of Mime sac `• charges e; alt(trat ar.s shall not in any wayaffsct c9 igr': or. t' -:s bond. The prcvi_!,:n- of Soc%ti'ol' 2545 cf the evil Code are not. h condition prece,,!nt to the 9ur_ty's C FF i _51 F - " .FLITHF'UL •PREFORMANCE BOND A 2 X 4 A'?.. MLN BY THESE ..RESENTS: That we, PUBLEY OF sot�rxsn CALT?0RNi.A �� �JA��pn P Go• Mame C ° �i4600 a*WUS BRtvz, VXWOR4' DEACii, Cts 92880 `C` _ ,•,� hems COM PANY- a5 P r i n_ i p a i and )PREN01M '#3GZlitet ITY COMPANY '3'� ��a .n t� as 5uraty, are firmly'�oUK unto the �^5"^RTY -37 'LOS 07Ur_.rn__tFe_ as Ona-huAdcad riratiy- a+ r tha�taad,ted Ao/lOC- -:` dollars sum of- -- AWA.►-rINo - ( t.94 000: C+- foe Lha ',paynsnt z.f which sum, we hereby Dind cur a9:ves, our ctk re, -axeoutori, administYlrtors, aucc,asacrs F ROM or assignees, jointl} Wnd sev4rally.. The cond;tior of the foregoing obligation is such that where- as slid Principal has entered into or is abou'c to enter into tris annexed ocntra.t(s) with the County of Loa .Angeles, pursuant to the authority of an act of Ahe Legislature of the State of Cal- ifornia, 'Known as the "S.:bdivisiom Kap Act", (Division 2, Tittle 7, of the Government Code) and any umandmenta thereto, and pur- sL;ict to the authority of Tile 21 c; the Las Angeles County Code, and any &:randwents thereto, whish said aontraot(s), dated iy , are referred to snd J:ar ming mob' a Parc nuicea, �r.e toT a work; D*271It:l.0 PACILi'r2a 8: pj- all fir Trac: No.1darn{1y�14Sp�N�✓ 42335 in accor•drrre with :hs taohed cantractts) and is requ rec-7 s3`_d County tc giv* ii°r atbond iri C:=Mecticir w'th t.le e%e3LitiCY1 Of Said ContraCc01i . If the a,,,nexed oontracts listed gbr.�ve ir,alude on agreement fcr monume;-tsticn, ;hen a further con.!;tion of tie foregoing obligation is fcr the payment of the kcrount of the Bon: to the County for ihio bene."it c2e they authorised surveyor or engineer who has perfcrzed the wcrit and has not been paid by the contractor as .--;vidcjd for in. Jivis:on c, Title 7, of t e Government Cade. G+! therefc^e, if the said Principal shall cbmpl_'ely perform sjll: of t'.e cJvenants and obligations of Said contr ct(s) snd any alteration .hereof macre as therein, provided, on his wart to be perfar":ed at tte times and in the manner t-ecified therein, and in ail res;ezts acc,;rding to its true intent and iiieenin(„ and shall indemnify ,snd Lave harmless the County of Los Angeles, its officerf, agents, and mmployees, as therein stipuiatec, Cher this obligat:r, cgel ye null and void; otherwise it 3hal: be and ra- main in fall `orae and effect. The Surety h.ereoy expressly son - se -its to, and wa IYea any ^rior notice of, t. ".e granting, from time t:, time 1.)y,;he County, to the rrinoipal, of any excsnsions of time to pe^fo;•m and coreplete the work ander the annexed con- traCC:S), inl to any changes or alterations zo the terms of the C,"ntract(s; yr to the work cr to the spac:ficat:ons, ordered by the CcunG y p'�rs!.:a t to the provisions of said contract( s) . The Surely f::.r.er axpresazly agraes trat eny s:ch exte,131Icns of Mime sac `• charges e; alt(trat ar.s shall not in any wayaffsct c9 igr': or. t' -:s bond. The prcvi_!,:n- of Soc%ti'ol' 2545 cf the evil Code are not. h condition prece,,!nt to the 9ur_ty's C FF i _51 n ; r 1 t+ 7'4;iU1 ,1, TTY C D1ANIOND .tiet�� r�( i100 , 4- N -tet +10 B M j[,AY1 Vit.l++u are walVIC oy -rne 41L;0ity. As a part of p 3i. t: a ur_ad�h a�sd-in-add f -tion- to- 4tte--tane aMVUrt_. �a#t'3e�-tF.errfo, �; rrrr #a3i t includ-ad =costs *rd rrasnnab� —. ay Count in auaceaxfully enforcing such obligation, al: Co be tared as aaats and included in any JiAdgment.tendersd, furthermore, the Surety expressly agrees as follows: (1) If the principal fails to complete any work .hereinabove .fisted Within the time specified in the annexed eonzract(s), the County may, upon writter, photiaer tothe Principal, served in the time and manner provided :in ".the 'applicable Code, determine thst said War"'<L or any part thereof -ia Untompiet&d, and may Cause to be forfeitid to the t4unty svoh portion of this otligation as may be nec13aary to toapleto su^h work, (2) If t^e Principe, :ail to .ttmpleto more Liar. one of the r..equirE�cents 3:ereirabove listed within the apeoifxer, time, the County 9ha.1 not be required to declarw a forfeiture of this '-obligat!on or to praaaauty an action under this bond as to all Such Uncomp.eted requirements•*nd may subsequently, from time to time, d*alaro additional forfeitures or prosecute edditioral nc- tions und4r tr13 bond as to any one or more of the remaining u-n- obmpl-ted requirements, evan LthojLh the County knews or has rea- son to knew: st the time of -the initial forfti.ture, thst the re- quirements :a which the subsequent forfeitures or proseeutior..5 of action pertain were not, as of the time of the initial :orfvi_-. Lure, completed `within the time speoified for Completion. (3) :he County may expressly exonerate the Surety w1th respeo: tc on+y one or more of the annexed contracts) without ' waiving any of its rights against the' Principal or tha Surety under any o`ner 3U*h contract(:). In witna53 thereoS; the Yrincipsl and Surtty caus4d this bond to be exeautad on t!: a 14ttdey offt'rEVXER —9 --, 9 a3 (Seal) No riders, er:d0r3taer1t3, or a+tashmenca rave been made hereto by t,.e Surety axtept as noted hereon to the right. Principal._ Princ»pal" LINbA.L. FOSTER, sec, -Surety ?UXONT SNtS1F4 ITY COMPA Address 4262 CWua Drive Howport aaoh. CA 92ELo LINDA SC7,XINI, �tt�+rney-ire-F'ac. BAR ;#10 Note: A11 s:gstures must be saknowledged before a notary pumlia. (Attach apprpprizte acknowledgments) Accepted on bOi'alf of the County of Los Angeles, By COUNTY ENGINZER App!-oved as to for% COUNTY COUNSEL By D42puty _ __ eeytly CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.: TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager REPORT DATE: September 24, 1993 MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer TITLE: Exoneration of Grading Surety Bond Posted for 2452 Alamo Heights Drive in the "Country" in Diamond Bar. SUMMARY: The City of Diamond Bar desires to exonerate the surety bond posted for grading located at 2452 Alamo Heights Drive in the amount of $4,460. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and accept the completed work and exonerate the surety bond which was posted with Los Angeles County in May, 1989 for a single family residence grading at 2452 Alamo Heights Drive in the amount of $4,460, and is now in the posession of the City Clerk. Further, it is recommended that the City Council instruct the City Clerk to notify Los Angeles County, Jim Martin and .American Motorists Insurance Company of the City Council's action. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:x Staff Report _ Resolution(s) _ Ordinance(s) Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: _ Public Hearing Notification _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerks Office) X Other: Final Engineering Certificate & Bond SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: kgae TerrenceL .Bela ger Gegor A. a tz, City Manager Interim pity Engineer N/A N/A X No N/A x No N/A MEETING DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Crry COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. October 5, 1993 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager Exoneration of Grading Surety Bond Posted for 2452 Alamo Heights Drive ISSUE STATEMENT: This report requests the exoneration of a Surety Bond posted for grading located at 2452 Alamo Heights Drive in the amount of $4,460. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and accept the completed work and exonerate the Surety Bond which was posted with Los Angeles County in May, 1989 for a single family residence grading at 2452 Alamo Heights Drive in the amount of $4,460, and is now in the posession of the City Clerk. Further, it is recommended that the City Council instruct the City Clerk to notify Los Angeles County, Jim Martintz and American Motorists Insurance Company of the City Council's action. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: This recommendation has no financial impact on the City's 1993-1994 budget. BACKGROUND: The grading on this 0.9 acre lot was for a 7,000 square foot single family residence. The lot was inspected and final grade was approved subject to planting of slopes in May, 1990 by the Public Works Inspector. In September, 1993, after a request was made to the City to release the grading bond, staff inspected the slopes and approved planting of same. Therefore, we now recommend that the surety which was posted with the County of Los Angeles be released. DISCUSSION: The following listed surety needs to be exonerated: Address: Owner: Tract No.: Bond Number: Principal: Amount: PREPARED BY: Anne M. Garvey 2452 Alamo Heights Drive Jim Martin 30578 3SM 719 269 00 American Motorists Insurance Company $4,460 (Original Amount $4,460) CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 21660 E. COPLEY DRIVE, SUITE 100 DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 714 -860 -CITY 714-860-2489 SUPERVISED GRADING INSPECTION CERTIFICATE A -T NO. 2452 Alamo Heights PERMIT NO. trtin CONTRACTOR Nicholson Land Co. -:Y'S ROUGH GRADING CERTIFICATION nat the earth fills placed on the following lots were installed upon competent prepared base material and compacted in compliance with requirements of e Section 7010. I further certify that where the report or reports of an gecicgist, relative to this site, have recommended the installation of buttress )ther similar stabilization measures, such earthwork construction has been -1 accordance with the approved design. dated —%--A) — S-7 for compaction test data, recommended allowable soil :ues and other recommendations. SOILS�'(Y��S (NO) LOT NOS, =ILLS (YES) LOT NOS._ 9. No l��-!�� Date -5 /_ / /) signature --NG GRADING ENGINEER'S ROUGH GRADING CERTIFICATION v rough grading including: grading to approximate m to the satisfactory completion of levations, property lines, located and staked; cut and fill slopes correctly graded oc:ated in accordance with the approved design; swales and terraces graded ready for nc, berms installed; and required drainage slopes provided on the building pads. I ::'_her certify that where report or reports of an engineering geologist and/or soils ;cheer have been prepared relative to this site, the recommendations contained in such ,t-orts have been followed in the presecution of _thp. work. NO.`i. h���r�^ c i ^7 zgineer Reg. No. Date L_4- � JPERVISING GRADING ENGINEER'S FINAL GRADING CERTIFICATION i certify to the satisfactory completion of grading in accordance with the approved plans. All required drainage devices have been installed; slope planting established. and irriga- tion systems provided (where required); and adequate provisions have been made for drainage of surface waters from each building site. The recommendations of the soils engineer and/ were employed) have beeny� s Q7c-porated in the work or engineering geologist (if such persons Nos. 119 Q Q5_? / )' 1� a h ti fid; - EMARKS ngineer n Gilbert Reg. No 16104 Date Maya; 4, ;,., c���G3P9� • 1990 State of l 1 SS. County of- GRADING PERMIT SECURITY W COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES sorra #33M 719 269 00 PREMI'UM: $134.00 " DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORN$ - BUILDING AND SAPETV DIVISION --- KNOW ALL MEN 11r THESE PRESENTS, SECURIIT NUMBER - Jim Martin - - That . - Hawkwood, Diamond Bar [.urornta, AN r'3631 pr lrie lP•1. and AI prican Motorists Insurance Compan}- fish, .. •,Petr, . . held .,d firmly b ... d u„lo the C..j • LUs 11M Cl[S. a B•dr C, „ OO/iG ft!VHI Six _ o�o`PLo�, ;rt♦ Pala or ln: stat. or cal lr. n,l.. IM u,. •u. .r 1'Cl7C YExS _ I 'll R LA�b*6U�e'4Tw1•.,ui u,. U„fled I'll,: loY - ' . or ou�ma J• n • :..rNiY. iri.if to ��nPrt�.ut - - - - to b• ...• •• n•r.br bina v.•. Slgmd, ...led .fid dated all. 25th der of My lW 89 ” YII[R[AS, •n •PP 11c •l len by In■ •saves -mud yr lnc 1p•1. Au bun •ad• is en. UCIAR IIICNI - - - - or PUBLIC YUR•S, toil." OrL.S ANCEIE S, oIvta IN,.of 11u1101ng mud Sefaly for LNa le.u.nee. fill or both Within the County - to acid urine 1p•1. of • p•relt to Amer— Wee •l ton or Work la• An9•1.s ea .peer f leelll d•aer IN - A In lh• • Ile•tl n Iaf • Sr.■In9 IW r. 3�77t5 on - - of lec•llon ..nae •Tr••ld Pr l,¢IP, kne.n a.to eY frac! o iff='1 hts—in •ceItr■.oe—" a With loc.uly ar •. atrt•t .der...., The to— .1Toni oTen.pt.r 711 of the L.• ►ng .a dun r u ln9 •e., .fid '. WHEREAS, La. Anq.l.. C.untY Building Code. Clupt.d 70. r.•alrm .. • tondltlon or.- furoLh In the - cedant to 1h. bau•ncs o! •u a p•olt that the prinrlP•i •hall • wrurltr llsmd as Mr•ln.i l.. ut farthl •u. move to Lhe [munq •f tea A.gAlu, eendl :. .. Now. imERCromE, tA. Pr1 uc1Ps1 .nn it •all and Lruly[b.lele maha.11 the applicable regulr.wnt• - - •f Lo• Ang1 b• evenly Ba11U n9 Code, 171 If ell ar he Work Haul rad le b. dem ew•Pit.• .itl, •11 o! the ter, and tondl- tl,• - rich• of the P•r.IL for •.< velion ar fill er bath la the a.l lelaetion Or be ..idl sth•e.i.. It •Nall t..•/n '- •ulldinq or It 1.1 the,. this obligation *hall .f /Act. ' It fa untl•r.toad that the 11.1II1lT of the /rincipA and •ur.tY ,p%, thl• • curtly •lull B• In arrest Ire. U. seta Mnof one f..N„ In •Tract until lIN co•plA Uan ..t r Cr dI.9 Permit and ys/ ln• eark In enc• eltl, All tat.• .nes deficit tem of sold it /I..1 .0Pt•.a1 th•r.af bf the 11,11,11,•9 affil isle y y t' It is further undo rat and that the Ceur,tY o1 Lea Anyelee, or it,. eur.tY, or bath, ar .ny •uttm,liod cap .... nt•tl.• AI .ithar, ahsll 1,•.a tM rlgl,l is anter the tn• - ) above d.rerlb.0 property fad the p.IP••• AT In•pectf•q !fie .ark, and .herrld of lha pr lnc!pal default In Ind perfor..,,cA of A. of the term. and ..fiditlam Count or .are l y, .r both, or .gent .f •l Lh.r, eh•lfar - Gr•dl nq I•defau the •aid Tl thus lh• right of •cera• to the ProPartY and .•y a"1'" • the Work A ....... y compliance with .vulrem•nt. of uld 11u11ding cad.. [hepter 711. r I .�k. Yhe.• The .ark t.9ulr lnq Ihla b.n0 la Lotted .I tIJn en In ,,par•t.d city and y of city .•. ray •Ask l.ao bsp.r crud. ..... by r.cla0.l the lncorperltoa it,, In •urh • • the mord. l,t .f Public Yorke, County of tea A„yelee, Yulld- !nq and SefetT Ulal•lone and 'Building II .hall me „each osV srtuut mud d.p•rtunt - ,r Brflcl.l r•.p•Ctl v.ly shill eelln9, r•mP.et lvelY, •• tna•.Pprp,j.t• Ih. 'lot A„qe le• County 11uildl,.q Cewe.ubel•u- . - - and afrltlal .I much city. •orde lbe baadl,9 tee. od of he ertl Inom•'I"" prva•lanA tb• enure ., - - t/•Ili alai lar to Ch.plat 1. of •old to• An9s 1.• C.w,tr Uwldluy cod. - IN YI INESS YIIERr Bfthe pr lnl opal and •ur.ty caused tl,l• •starllY lm be •.... I'd lin r I ..... .ratan- /////1r�1\\\\\\\\tuJ///v/ STATE OF CALIFORNIA J S5. COUNTY OF ORANGE 1 < ON MAY z s 19e9 19 _,before mp a Nntary Public in and for said State, personally appeared -- GENERAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT NO n' State of l 1 SS. County of- On this the.4;, day of _!�e� 19-a, before me, n the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared ersonally known to me oved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persons) whose name(s) subscribed to the within instrument, and, acknowledged that L executed it. WITNESS my hand and official seal. NoCary's Signature NATIONAL NOTARY ASSCCIAr— . 11111 ven,ura eon. - ..v. o.....,... OFFICIAL SEAL CHARtENE A MC MANN NCTARY PUULIC - CALIFORNIA LC; tNO:LFS COUNTY i Lly .cm erp... FEB 27, 1991 On this the.4;, day of _!�e� 19-a, before me, n the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared ersonally known to me oved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persons) whose name(s) subscribed to the within instrument, and, acknowledged that L executed it. WITNESS my hand and official seal. NoCary's Signature NATIONAL NOTARY ASSCCIAr— . 11111 ven,ura eon. - ..v. o.....,... CITY OF DIAMOND BA ! DA NO . AGENDA REPOR' TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager - ------ - - -- MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 REPORT DATT E: September 17, 1993 • FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer TITLE: Exoneration of Grading Surety Bond Posted for 2638 Blaze Trail Drive in the "Country" in Diamond Bar, in the amount of $8,622. SUMMARY: The City of Diamond Bar Blaze TrailDrive in the amountof $8 desires oexonerate the ebond for grading located 6 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and accept the completed work and release the surety bond which was posted with the City of Diamond Bar for grading at 2638 Blaze Trail Drive in the amount of $8,622 and instruct the City Clerk to notify Paul Kaitz and Planet Insurance Company of the City Council's action. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:x Staff Report _ Resolution(s) _ Ordinance(s) Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: _ Public Hearing Notification _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office) X Other: Final Engineering Certificate & Bond 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed N/A by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority N/A 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes N A Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? — Yes x No Report discussed with the following affect d departments: N/A REVIEWED BY: Terren L. B nger Georg A. We City Manager Inte 'm City ngineer CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Exoneration of Grading Surety Bond Posted for 2638 Blaze Trail Drive ISSUE STATEMENT: This report requests the exoneration of a Surety Bond posted for grading located at 2638 Blaze Trail in Diamond Bar. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the release of the Surety Bond which was posted with the City of Diamond Bar in February 1992 for grading at 2638 Blaze Trail in an amount of $8,622, and is now in the that the City posession of the le is reco her the Cit rk. Fu Council instruct Y Clerk to tnotifyl Paul Kai zmandePlanet Insurance Company of the Council's action. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: This recommendation has no financial impact on the City's 1993-1994 budget. BACKGROUND: The grading on this 1.5 acre lot was for a 9,000 square foot singld oneulye family residence. The lot was inspected and final grade was app 1993 by the Public Works Inspector. Therefore, we now recommend that the surety which was posted with the City of Diamond Bar be released. DISCUSSION: The following listed surety needs to be esonorated: Address: 2638 Blaze Trail Owner••Paul and Barbara Kaitz Tract No.: 30578 Bond Number: P2500423 Principal: Planet Insurance Company Amount: $8,622 (Original Amount $8,622) PREPARED BY: Anne M Garvey CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 21660 E. COPLEY DRIVE, SUITE 100 DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 714 -860 -CITY 714-860-2489 SUPERVISED GRADING INSPECTION CERTIFICATE JOB ADDRESS/TP.ACT NO. 2638 Blaze Trail/TR. NO. 30578 PERMIT NO. CONTRACTOR P.K. Development & Const. OWNER SOILS ENGINEER'S ROUGH GRADING CERTIFICATION that the earth fills placed on the following lots were installed n competen I certify and properly prepared base material and compacted in compliance with oT='_ �ortsnof a Building code Section 7010. I further certify that where the report buttres engineering geologist, relative to this site, have recommended the k conlaticn Vn has bee fills or other similar_ stabilization measures,such earL'nwork consLxuc�' completed in accordance •n;'-`.,: the approved design. LOT NOS. for compaction test data, recommended a.icwable soi- See report dated bearing values and other reco,unendations. EXPANSIVE SOILS (YES) (NO) LOT NOS. BUTTRESS FILLS (YES) (NO) LCT NOS. REMARKS Reg.No Date Engineer signature SUPERVISING GRADING EN--T-T" ROUGH GRADING CERTIFICATION croxima`- certify to the satisfacto completion of rough grading including: grad:_ng t• •P. 1ir.es located and staked; cut and fill slopes cor�cctly grade_ I cert fe_ final elevations, property roved design; swales and terraces graded' ready and located in accordance with the app ads. paving, berms installed; and required drainage slopes provided on theologist and/or sores:: further certify that where report or reports of he engineering g engineer have been prepared relative to this site, therecommendationscontained in suc: reports have been followed' in the presecution � f _thy LOT NOS. cert. REMARKS Swale alon South Pro?. line not in. Will check p g ?//7 No. to —[ Reg. T Engineer -- "' No. 29011 SUPERVISING GRADING ENGINEER'S FINAL GRADING CERTIFICAT Erd.33;A5 � in w' OPAP` he approved plans. I certify to the satisfactory completion of grading a installed; slope lished.and irriga- All required drainage devices have been required); and adequate provisi been made for drainac! *.neer an,3/ tion systems provided (where from each building site. The recorn„er.dations of been the soils en acr incorporQ,� "�t,�le of surface caters or engineering geologist (if such persons were employed) have c r �- LOT NOS-_ -- )jI (r �y1 (1a jj ej ' REMARKS nor ch bre I�t7t cira►u�aae l5 �J��Vhu—fin gas--- No. 2q0�� e U/ Reg. ngineer ' 7-r, 3 CI+i 11. �� JlgJ +L 1= v 2=l ill i G,c;i»;,vG, F OF Cry, � �-',=� 7 YY 0[qA t { 1 y;e l �4. ¢ ;a Y � I L�f�i y 5 2 K;♦''j�: � Y A T i r !f� yxh. "L 1 i- I �`F y f I� I {! Y 1 I ++ rf x�� k ; }lkr.'• Y I y syyr � Ig 5W i t i kN �f 1. i 4 l e YY 0[qA t ANET INS'�R A NCE COMPANY r r HEAD OFFICE, SUN PRAIRIE. WIS<:ONSIN • POWER OF ATTORNEY / v,,tl ILL MEN e" THESE PRESENTS. That me PLANET !NSJIRANCE COMPANY, a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State S^. dors hereby rake. consntwe and appoint 1%1is,SHA C. GARRISON Of FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA - A seal and deliver for and on its behalf- and as its act and deed t,ue and lawful Attorney -in -Fact- to make. execute. ------- ANY AND ALL BONDS AND UNDERTAKINGS OF SURETYSHIP - and to bind the PLANET INSURANCE COMPANY thereby as fully and to the same extent as if such bonds and undertakings and other writings obligatory in the nature thereof were signed by an Executive Officer of the PLANET INSURANCE COMPANY and sealed and attested by one other of such officers. and hereby ratifies and confirms all that its said Attorney(s)-in- Fact may do in pursuance hereof. This Power of Attorney is granted under and by authority of Article VII of the By -Laws of PLANET INSURANCE COMPANY which became effective September 21. 1gal. which provisions are now in full force and effect reading as follows: ARTICLE V11 — EXECUTION OF 130NOS AND UNDERTAKINGS 1. The Board of Directors, the President. the Chairman of the Board, any Senior Vice President, any Vice President or Assistant Vice President apin or other officer designated by the Board of Directors shall have izances,power contracts oofnde(mnrity to ry pond othernwr'tti gze them to execute s obliga to nFact and to utthe rtnature thereof, and on behalf of the Company, bonds and undertakings, recogn (b) to remove any such Attorney -in -Fact at any time and revoke the power and authority given to him. rne excute and ions of the wer of 2. Attorneys -in -Fact shall have power and authority, subjec^°ancesf contracts of ithe tems and tndemnity andootherr writingsyoblig ory in thetnatuee the eof. deliver on behalf of the Company, bonds and undertakings, recog alidity of any bonds and undertakings, recognizances, contracts of indemnity and other The corporate seal is not necessary for the vwritings obligatory in the nature thereof. 3. Attorneys -in- n -Fact shalt have power and authority to execute affidavits required to be attached to bonds, recognizances, contracts of indemnity or other conditional or obligatory undertakings and they shall also have power and authority to certify the financial statement of the Company and to copies of the By -Laws o1 the Company or any article or section thereof. - . Thii power of attorney is signed aid sealed by facsimile under and by authority of the following Resolution adopted by the Board of Directors of PLANET INSURANCE COMPANY at a meeting held on the 29th day of March, 1982, at which a quorum was present and said Resolution has not been amended or repealed: "Resolved, that the signatures of such directors and officers and the seal of the Company may be affixed to any such power of attorney ng mile or any certificate relating thereto by facsimile, and an such s Pon erweof asorexecuted and cerbfiedney or cartfic-ate nbY tacshmle signatures 9natures and facsimt emile signatures or t seal seal shall be valid and binding upon the Company Y Po shall be valid and binding upon the Company in the future with respect to any bond or undertaking to which it is attached. - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PLANET INSURANCE COth MPANY has caused e se presents t9 e signed by its Vice President and its corporate seal to be hereto affixed, this PLANET INSURANCE COMPANY Vice President STATEOF Washington COUNTY OF Ki ng i� .Y^ 4th day of - ' Jun 2 . 19 90. .Personalty appeared- ar I S ti Cm On this - .)�•. 'O tt-� foregoing to me known o be the Vice -President of the PLANET INSURANCE CO and acknowledged that a th esolution, instrument and affixed the seal of said corporation thereto, and that Artic VII, Sectio 1, 2, and 3'of the By- o gait. Z 4. set lorth therein, are still in full force. PUBLICO Nty Commission Expires �1( May 1 5 , 19 9 4l Notary Public in and for the State of WA Residing at Tacoma L Keith A. Poling Assistant Secretary of the PLANET INSURANCE COMPANY, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of a Power of Attorney executed by said PLANET I SURANCE COMPANY, which is still in full force and ertect- TTTIESS WHEREOF. I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said Company this 8 H ay of UA� 19 9 2 IN W Assistant Secretary CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.: T -A' TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 REPORT DATE: September 30, 1993 FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer TITLE: Exoneration of General Inspection Surety Bond Posted for Tract 36741 (Montefino Condominium Complex). SUMMARY; The City of Diamond Bar desires to exonerate the surety bond posted for general inspection of Bodega Way and Colombard Lane (private streets) located in the Montefino Condominium Complex in the amount of $10,000. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and accept the completed work and exonerate the surety bond posted for general inspection of Bodega Way and Colombard Lane (private streets) in the Montefino Condominium Complex and instruct the City Clerk to notify Los Angeles County, Presley of Southern California and Safeco Insurance Company of America of the City Council's action. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:x Staff Report _ Resolution(s) Ordinance(s) Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: _ Public Hearing Notification _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office) X Other: L.A. Co. Tract Exoneration Letter 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? Yes Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: Terr nce L. nger Geor a A. City Manager Interim Cit tz Engineer N/A N/A x No N/A x No N/A MEETING DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. October 5, 1993 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager Exoneration of General Inspection Surety Bond Posted for Tract 36741(Montefino Condominium Complex) ISSUE STATEMENT: This report requests the exoneration of a Surety Bond posted for General Inspection of Bodega Way and Colombard Lane (private streets) located in the Montefino Condominium Complex in the amount of $10,000. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and accept the completed work and exonerate the Surety Bond which was posted with Los Angeles County in November 1986 for general inspection on Bodega Way and Colombard Lane (private streets) located in the Montefino Condominium Complex in an amount of $10,000, and is now in the posession of the City Clerk. Further, it is recommended that the City Council instruct the City Clerk to notify Los Angeles County, Presley of Southern California and Safeco Insurance Company of America of the Council's action. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: This recommendation has no financial impact on the City's 1993-1994 budget. BACKGROUND: The streets in this Tract were constructed in 1987 and Los Angeles County released this Tract in May, 1989. A visual inspection of said Tract has now been completed by the Public Works Inspector and he finds it to be in substantial conformance to the plans reviewed and approved by the County of Los Angeles in 1986. Therefore, we now recommend that the surety which was posted with the County of Los Angeles be released. DISCUSSION: The following listed surety needs to be exonerated: Tract: 36741 Developer: Presley of Southern California Bond Number: 6322839 Principal: Safeco Insurance Company of America Amount: $10,000 (Original Amount:$10,000) PREPARED BY: Anne M. Garvey SENT BY: Olivetti FX 2100 ; 9-28-93 ; 7:20AM ; December Ii, 1989 Gi)UNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 900 SOUTH FRSMOXT AVENUE ALHAMBRA. CAL1POINIA 91/011311 tekpkeax (819) 4WJJ00 Presley of Southern California 17991 Mitchell South Irvine, CA 92714 TRACT EXONERATION -TRACT 36741 REFERENCE BOND NUMBER 8322839 ViN;r.E1VR0 DEC 18 1989 ENGINSERING 459 POP ADDRESS ALI COR)tt"ONDSNCE T0: "IDX 1460 ALHAM RA. CAUPORNIA 51/02-1460 k! 11I.1Y POW u:ul To NX BF -4 850.24 irm This 113 ractnwas9ComSto PletedhMarche3581989e of the andstheeeffective dateect tract. We coffreleaset t was May 23, 1989. If there are any questions, please call Mrs. Darlene Adams of this department at (818) 458-8953. very truly yours, T. A. TIDEMANSON Direct MERG, IC RICHARD Lf Business and Finance Division DA!acl8b-TE73 Po*h- band fax bansmitW memo 7UM V of"$" I. :.I�_I 1i -LI - f�tYtor��j d�� A :I RD 350 aav, 14.4r V` kNGEl.ES COUNTY ROAD DEPT AENT 1114-bi gond No. 6322839 A f� :1:.,.d�,,.,�.. UNKRAL BONI) FOR INSPEC11ON Tract Noe 32091 1f ALL KEA X7 —.0Z PTtIMENTS: �� ._ DRL9LI7 OT SOf7l1iL� CItUIP'OANIIt . (NAME) 44//; rwsVbe X170 Nevpo="t seactr, California 92660 hetelftafter, 411'• CADDREAS) With 6))d 'yb Mt r yl • !^'.sacs to make cortato highway and drainage improvements in accordance State of CauWgr• a h u PaY141ons Of Ordlcanea No. 4478., as amended, of the County of Los Angeles, Kul, meat, tpidt�"' wA:A III of Ordinance No. 4470 requites Principal, berets o0mmen►clhg Any lmprove- cost of : e`µ v4 !Load Cornmissfonat a sum estimated by the Road Commissioner to cover the GeeTr,4 yf tit Bald 11ApT01em444, and 1rU¢A g4aW�718 of Ordinance No. 4479 provides that P71,0019111 VW make and maintain a tang^: OeprgK ;441Ayi of the special deposit required by Section 211: Section 313,3 provides that Prinolbal may "14 ' WPM bond (not lass than 21,000,00 ill amotlat) in lien of the geaaral deposit: IM the :toad !•. 1; _ 10, Gr% slur has determined that the amount necessary to protect the County's interest and wNItRr jr�fwl de11irw to file such a general bond, on which the obligation of Prlaclpai WW surety 14S(j,,T len ooa4 on all work performed by Principal ander 190TIOoea of Ordinance No. 4479: and iylrviln"In, nl apses to Payment of monthly billing on said general bond, NOW THEREFORE, principal aril---MLAMERICAN IH RANGE COMPANY , as WOO. are IwW(aUagTY COMPANY) and ""ly Mrord in the cum of g 10,000-00 nnlo the COUnty of Lw Angeles, State of Catifoinla and each officer and employee thereof, tog the pay - want of "'Oh gum thOy hereby bind themselves, tbelt heirs, executors, administrator$, sueasaog;. and 6111111", )hint" end severally, firmly by these presents. The 00114111ena of !hf■ oblllatt0n are su0h that it Principal falls to pay said Inspection charges IS Mralrobnve get forth, surety will pay the same In an amount not to exceed the sum net torth above, and also, In case 1841t !a brought upon this bond, a reasonable attorney's tee to be fixed by the court. It htnclp'1 ahrll properly comply with the provisions of said Ordinance and shall make monthly payment of All in6pen"" ohar9e4 incurred hareunder, then this abliptloo shall be null and void, other- wtsa !t shall 1111 end remain in full force and effect. surety „y "'mill this bond by giving written notice of Its intentlan to do go by reglatered mall b the „ Ito" Cua,n,tA4fo"er not leas than ton (10) data prior t0 each date of cancellation, but scale ean- °sllailon "al' not 01841 the obligation of Surety In conclletlon with any work on whicb the Road Com- mlaalonar has leau44 Inapeotion eiders. In t1,e •ver"t the furety eancola this bond, or the full penalkv thereof is ezhausted, all Tight of Priholp6l to 'mks tmpruvements to hoTainabove provided Is forthwith suspeadad until 512th gime as a furiblr bond to filer! pc,tektiont to the provlslons of Oedinan0$ No. 4474. IN Wrrrykgg err 7t1tor, we have hereunto get our haeda and sea16 this 2M data of 19 N' stn 77 PRES F S UT N IFORNIA �y � 13Y (/ rrinelp.l r l BY Principal 1 T E R 1 AW i NSURANCE COMPANY Surety t � w Ross Mortensen y-AttornerIn-fact p. _ Ang 5194- Framon tel i fornrm Qg7SS Address ALL 910\;\1yjrli'It (Albeh Ut�ltl' 111► tt]TYE35£D BY NOTARY aptr>Wgt4lo turwlrl , OITY OP DIAHOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. % �, TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 REPORT DATE: September 21, 1993 FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer TITLE:Transfer of Private Drain No. 1813, in Tract 42535 located on Porto Grande Drive and Albariza Place in the Montefino Condimium complex, to Los Angeles County Flood Control District. SUMMARY: Private Drain No. 1813 was constructed in 1984 as part of the improvements on Tract 42535, in the Montefino Condominium complex. Subsequently, the drain was inspected and approved by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works in June, 1993 based upon the satisfactory completion of the improvements per approved plans. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached Resolution No. 93 -XX requesting the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Flood Control District to accept the transfer and conveyance of Private Drain No. 1813 for future operation, maintenance, repair and improvement. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:x Staff Report Public Hearing Notification x Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file in Ordinance(s) City Clerk's Office) _ Agreement(s) X Other: Transfer Documents EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed x Yes No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? _ Yes x No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? Yes x No Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes x No Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: P� 4rfttL. Banger GedrJJge Wentz City Managei�r Interim Citjt Engineer CITY COVWXL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Transfer of Private Drain No. 1813, in Tract 42535 located on Porto Grande Drive and Albariza Place in the Montefino Condominium complex, to Los Angeles County Flood Control District. ISSUE STATEMENT: This report requests the City Council's authorization to request the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles to accept, on behalf of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, a transfer and conveyance of storm drain improvements constructed in the City of Diamond Bar. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution No. 93 - XX requesting the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Flood Control District to accept the transfer and conveyance of Private Drain No. 1813 for future operation, maintenance, repair and improvement. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: The process of transferring this drain has no financial impact on the City's 1993-94 Fiscal Year budget. BACKGROUND: Private Drain No. 1813 was constructed in 1984 as part of the improvements in Tract 42535. Subsequently, the drain was inspected and approved in June, 1993 by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works based upon the satisfactory completion of the improvements per approved plans. DISCUSSION: The private drain construction on Porto Grande and Albariza Drive, in Tract 42535, was completed in 1984. The work is in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the County. The transfer documents have now been completed and forwarded to the Los Angeles County Recorder's office. A copy of these documents along with the Resolution and a map of the project area is attached for your review. PREPARED BY: Anne Garvey RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAKOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO ACCEPT ON BEHALF OF SAID DISTRICT A TRANSFER AND CONVEYANCE OF STORX DRAIN INPROVEMENTS KNOWN AS PRIVATE DRAIN NO. 1813 IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FOR FUTURE OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND IMPROVEMENT, AND AUTHORISE THE TRANSFER AND CONVEYANCE THEREOF. A. Recitals (i) There have been dedicated to, or the City has otherwise acquired, the storm drain improvements and drainage system known as PRIVATE DRAIN NO. 1813, described in Exhibit A attached hereto; and (ii) The City is authorized and empowered to transfer and convey to the Los Angeles County Flood Control District any storm drain improvements and drainage systems for future operations, maintenance, repair and improvements; and (iii) The City and the Los Angeles County Flood Control District entered into an agreement dated June 20, 1989, and recorded March 20, 1990, as Document Number 90-545570, of the Official Records in the office of the County Recorder for the County of Los Angeles, whereby the City made certain warranties about its future transfers and conveyances of Flood Control facilities to the District; and (iv) The best public interest will be served by transfer and conveyance of the storm drain improvements and drainage system described in Exhibit A attached hereto from the City to the Los Angeles County Flood Control District for future operation, maintenance, repair and improvement. B. Resolution NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City does hereby request the Los Angeles County Flood Control District to accept the transfer and conveyance of the storm drain improvements and drainage system described in said Exhibit A. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, subject to the acceptance thereof of the Board of Supervisors of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, the City Engineer is directed and ordered to prepare all necessary instruments and documents, including deed, to effectuate said transfer and conveyance, and that the Mayor is authorized and instructed to execute said deed and other instruments and documents. District shall have no obligation or responsibility to maintain said storm drain, improvements, and drainage until all rights of way for said drain now vested in the City and all other necessary rights of way therefore have been conveyed to and accepted by District. Reference is hereby made to District Drawing Nos. 313 -F104.1 -F104.3 the plans and profile of said storm drain improvements and drainage system on file in the office of the City Engineer and on file of the Chief Engineer of said District for further data as to the exact location, extent, and description of said storm drain improvements and drainage system. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the transfer and conveyance hereby requested are subject to each of the warranties described in the Agreement between the City and the District dated June 20, 1989, and recorded March 20, 1990, as Document Number 90-545570, of the Official Records in the office of the County Recorder for the County of Los Angeles. Such warranties by the City are incorporated here by this reference. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this resolution by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, and shall cause the same to be posted in three (3) conspicuous places in the City of Diamond Bar, and it shall thereupon take effect. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this fifth day of October, 1993. MAYOR I LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on fifth day of October, 1993, by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBERS - LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar EXHIBIT "A" Private Drain 1813 A reinforced concrete pipe storm drain system and appurtenant structures for Tract No. 42535 filed in Book 1023, pages 71 to 76, inclusive, of Maps, Records of the County of Los Angeles, generally described as follows: Line "A": Commencing from an existing storm drain per P.D. 1668, Station 15+60.51, located in Montefino Avenue, northwest of Diamond Bar Boulevard; thence northwesterly in Porto Grande Drive to an easement to Los Angeles County Flood Control District for storm drain and appurtenances and storm drain ingress and egress purposes; thence southwesterly and southeasterly in said easement to Iron Bark Drive to a catch basin, Station 31+58.16, a distance of 1598 feet, more or less. Laterals "B", "C", "D", "E" and "F" Connector pipes from Line "A" to catch basins. Line "D": Commencing from Line A, Station 27+12.86; (Station 0+02, Line D) thence southwesterly and southeasterly in an easement to Los Angeles County Flood Control District for storm drain and appurtenances and storm drain ingress and egress purposes to Barberry Drive to a catch basin, Station 1+88.35, a distance of 186 feet, more or less. All as shown on District Drawing Nos. 313-F93.1 through 313-F93.4. ffiIBIT 1 � 1 t4o A\ Ale . 1 \ , i f / , �>••IQ+ a�ea•AauT TO Tr `yam_ y_ `�__ / 1 `� �u6LL�ati rp•� y,�� D4.6•../ '✓ J � 1 ////���J ^0.60 AR T\f _ �p6�10 {{ ��• Nle 41 -ten l jv . 1 14, lzl�l q rd _ ma'''y d� ♦ � �� ' 3n1a4 3olrvb� ,� a 'a O� r a �iD z c�' 1r �a�t•j 6 p> _ p =,o r ) 7�a10'S a 1 '0 ? 0 Z[ ' ++ 1 )r[S 0 Date '" 2, 7 ` 9 3 TO: N. C. Datwyler Land Development Division FROM post -it'" brand fax transmittal memo 7671 N o} page$ ► To a ``..! FramA. 1. Y, 4� is Co. Co. G,( Dapt. Phone �•3 ( [ I [ i FaxNyi� 2,[r _ Fax# Gary J. Hartley Construction Division ATTENTION: David Diotalevi NOTICE OF COMPLETION- PRIVATS DRAIN PM NUMBER _-12 �J C -J3 PROJECT JOB NUtSER G //gyp/2/ LOCATION /70nT��/%�D F� POr�aL7rGnc/G� I. CGS" ;_ Final Inspection oC the above -captioned Private Drain has been made. The work has been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications, and is ready for formal acceptance. _ Field Reviewled Date 6 9-�i,3 By , Head Construction Inspector r: Approval Date jai\t a.s aboo� g�,R Head Construction Inspector F��lAftKS This Job Number has been closed. 1tecowiend this Job be accepted for public use. 1 Supervisor, Contract Construc ion r. Approved By .I�meS' tTWA��� Head, Subdivision Inspection CC: Hdgtrs/Permit Office/Road Element Head Construction Inspector File HCA.- 7c COMP- PD Revised: 6/10/92 sr STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) On this day of in the year before me (here insert the name and quality of the officer) personally appeared personally known to me satisfactory evidence) instrument as (or proved to me on the basis of to be the person who executed this (here insert title of the officer) of City of Diamond Bar (name of the public corporation, agency, or political subdivision) and acknowledged to me that the City of Diamond Bar (public corporation, agency, or political executed it. subdivision) Witness my hand and official seal. (Signature of Officer) RECORDED AT THE REQUEST OF AND RETURN TO: LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS P.O. Box 1460 Alhambra, CA 91802-1460 Attention: Mapping & Property Management Division File with: TRANSFER DRAINS PRIVATE DRAIN NO. 1813 C.I. District T.G. For a valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, a municipal corporation as successor in interest to the County of Los Angeles by reason of incorporation does hereby remise, release, and forever quitclaim to LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT, a body corporate and politic, all its right, title, and interest in and to those certain easements for storm drain and appurtenances and storm drain ingress and egress purposes acquired by Tract No. 42535, filed October 26, 1983, in Book 1023, pages 71-76, inclusive, of Maps in the office of the Registrar -Recorder of the County of Los Angeles, insofar and only insofar as said easements exist on the real property in the City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, State of California, described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. DATED ATTEST: CITY CLERK CITY OF DIAMOND BAR a municipal corporation BY MAYOR EXHIBIT "A" File with: TRANSFER DRAINS PRIVATE DRAIN NO. 1813 C.I. District T.G. PART (a)• That portion of Lot 1, Tract No.42535, as shown on map filed in Book 1023, pages 71 to 76, inclusive, of Maps, in the office of the Registrar -Recorder of the County of Los Angeles, designated as "...EASEMENT TO THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FOR STORM DRAIN INGRESS AND EGRESS PURPOSES", on said map. PART (b)• That portion of Lot 2, of said Tract No. 42535, designated as "EASEMENT TO THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FOR STORM DRAIN AND STORM DRAIN INGRESS AND EGRESS PURPOSES", on said map. Part (c) That portion of Lot 3, of said Tract No. 42535, designated as 'EASEMENT TO THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FOR STORM DRAIN AND STORM DRAIN INGRESS AND EGRESS PURPOSES", on said map. Part (d)• That portion of Porto Grande Drive, of said Tract No. 42535, designated as "EASEMENT TO THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FOR STORM DRAIN AND STORM DRAIN INGRESS AND EGRESS PURPOSES', on said map. J � e � a ?t . y r I 1 A Lz crty OFDjAm®BAR' I)RA - N ,-rRi CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the within deed or grant is hereby accepted under the authority conferred by Ordinance No. 85-0108, duly and regularly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles on the 18th day of June 1985, and the Grantee consents to the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer. DATED: BY: ASSISTANT DEPUTY DIRECTOR MAPPING & PROPERTY MANAGEMENT DIVISION CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager AdCNGA Nb. 7,7 REPORT DATE: October 1, 1993 TITLE: Amendment to existing agreement with Charles Abbott Associates, Inc., for the administration of the City's solid waste permit system and to assist in the coordination of AB 939 related activities during Fiscal Year 1993-94. SUMMARY: On January 19, 1993, the City Council authorized the City Manager to retain the services of Charles Abbott Associates, Inc., a qualified consulting firm with experience in solid waste management practices, to administer the City's solid waste permit system through the end of Fiscal Year 1992-93. Although this agreement expired on July 1, 1993, with the advent of the new fiscal year, the City continues to need the services of a qualified consultant to assist with the administration of the City's solid waste permit system and in the implementation of integrated waste management programs. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the proposed work program and budget for solid waste related activities for Fiscal Year 1993-94. It is further recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a letter amendment, in an amount not -to -exceed $25,000, to the existing agreement with Charles Abbott Associates, Inc., for the administration of the City's solid waste permit system and to assist in the coordination of AB 939 activities during Fiscal Year 1993-94. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:_ Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification _ Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification Ordinances(s) _ Agreement(s) X Other Proposal to Coordinate AB 939 Program Activities Contract Specifications for Fiscal Year 1993-94 (Memo) SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? Which Commission? reviewed _ Yes _ No N/A MAJORITY N/A _ Yes _ No Yes X No 5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes X No Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: _ Terrence L. Belang Troy 14utz1aff City Manager Assistant to the City Ma ager CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 REPORT DATE: September 29, 1993 FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer TITLE: Resolution No. 93 -XX, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, California Establishing the Diamond Bar, California Establishing the Diamond Bar Boulevard Underground Utility District No. 2 SUMMARY: This item relates to a proposed proejct to underground utility line between Temple Avenue and Gold Rush Drive. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution 93 -XX establishing the district. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report X Public Hearing Notification X Resolution(s) _ Bid Specifications (on file in City Clerk's office) Ordinances(s) _ Other: _ Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed _ Yes X No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 415 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? _ Yes X No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? Yes X No Which Commission? _ 5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes X No Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: Terr nce L. Wianger City Manager Georgie A. Wentz Inte�m City Engineer CITY COUNCIL nlDmnT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Resolution No. 93 -XX, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, California Establishing the Diamond Bar, California Establishing the Diamond Bar Boulevard Underground Utility District No. 2 ISSUE STATEMENT The Public Works Department has determined, based on information gathered from Southern California Edison and other utility companies, that an underground utility district can be formed on Diamond Bar Boulevard from Temple Avenue to Gold Rush Drive. On September 21, 1993 the Council adopted Resolution No. 93-69, a resolution setting a public hearing on the matter for October 5, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. Los Angeles County Ordinance Title 16, HIGHWAYS; Division 2, UNDERGROUNDING OF UTILITIES, as duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, provides a procedure for formation of underground utility districts. After consultation with the utilities affected and holding a public hearing on the matter, it is then necessary for the Council to make certain determinations and adopt a resolution establishing the district. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution 93 -XX thereby establishing the district. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: Total estimated project cost is $790,000. Funding is anticipated as follows: Uncommitted 20A Funds $429,000 1994 and 1995 Allocations $226,000 1995 Mortgage of Funds $80,000 Other funds required $55,000 Total $790,000 Other funds required represented the cost of converting existing above ground meters to underground and installing street lights. Estimated cost for the other funds are: Street Lights $39,000 City Owned Meters $10,000 Costs for Private Conversions $6,000 Total $55,000 These other funds may not include Rule 20A monies. 1 BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The City adopted, by reference upon incorporation, Division 2, UNDERGROUNDING OF UTILITIES of the Los Angeles County Code which provides for the formation and applicable regulations regarding underground utility districts. This is the first district of this type proposed to be formed by the City in accordance with this section of the code. Several other districts of this type exist in the City having been formed under this same code by the County when the area was unincorporated. When the City forms an underground utility district, the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) rules and regulations, require Southern California Edison Company and General Telephone Company to convert existing overhead utilities to underground installations at the utilitiesf expense. Jones Intercable is not regulated by the PUC, but rather by its franchise agreement with the City. It is subject to the undergrounding resolution and is required to underground its existing facilities within the district at its expense. The PUC allows and SCE collects from its customers, along with its monthly billing for service, an amount to be set aside for this express purpose. These monies are collected from its customers within the local jurisdiction for use within that jurisdiction. GTE and Jones must incur the expense of undergrounding from their annual operating budget. The City, to require the utilities to convert and remove existing facilities at their expense, must, after consulting with the utility, determine and find that: Such undergrounding will avoid or eliminate an unusually heavy concentration of overhead facilities, or; the street is extensively used by the general public and carries a heavy volume of vehicular or pedestrian traffic, or; the street adjoins or passes through a civic area or public recreation area or an area unusual scenic interest. The City must then act to: Adopt a resolution creating an underground district in which area, all existing and new utility distribution facilities will be placed underground, each property served will have installed necessary private facilities for underground service, and the utility will be authorized to discontinue its overhead service. The proposed limits of the district generally include the Diamond Bar Boulevard corridor from Temple Avenue to Gold Rush Drive. This is more specifically shown on Exhibit A. Crossing this proposed district is the Golden Springs Drive -Grand Avenue Underground District. Approximately 1,700 feet southerly of this proposed district is the Diamond Bar Boulevard Underground Utility District extending southerly from Steep Canyon Road. These districts were created in 1974 and 1986 respectively. The project is planned for completion by January 1, 1996. It is specifically provided in the resolution that all overhead facilities must be removed and the utility companies may discontinue providing overhead service after that date. N All customers of the utilities are requlred to cvnv�rt e�latlny �va�lead service drops to underground lines. Three properties have been identified as requiring conversion - 405, 415, and 425 Charmingdale. This expense is the responsibility of the owner and is estimated to range from $500 to $2,000 each depending on the details of the site and installation. The remainder of the properties can be commented to existing meters. Funding sources were evaluated to determine if any could be used for the meter conversions. No alternative funding sources appear feasible. The City could provide a loan to help fund these conversions at the time of construction. CONCLUSION: The public having been heard, the hearing closed and the necessary determination(s) made the Council may adopt the attached resolution. Adoption of this resolution creates the Diamond Bar Boulevard Underground Utility District No. 2. Subsequently notice will be given by the Director of Public Works, as required by the enabling ordinance and directed by the resolution, to the utilities and affected property owners, directing conversion and removal of existing overhead facilities. PREPARED BY: George A. Wentz 3 RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA DETERMINING THAT UNDERGROUNDING, IN THE SPECIFIED AREA, IS IN THE GENERAL PUBLIC INTEREST AND ESTABLISHING THE DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 2. A. RECITALS (i) WHEREAS, Los Angeles County Ordinance Title 16, HIGHWAYS; Division 2, UNDERGROUNDING OF UTILITIES, as duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, provides procedures and regulations for underground utility districts; and; (ii) WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 93-69 a public hearing was called for October 5, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California, to ascertain whether the public necessity, safety, health, or welfare requires removal of poles, overhead wires, and associates overhead structures and the underground installation of wires and facilities for supplying electric, communication, or similar or associated service on Diamond Bar Boulevard in the area specified; and (iii) WHEREAS, notice of such hearing was given to all affected property owners as shown on the last equalized assessment roll and utilities concerned in the manner and for the time required by law; and (iv) WHEREAS, notice of such hearing was posted in the manner and for the time required by law; and: (v) WHEREAS, such hearing has been duly and regularly held, and all persons interested have been given an opportunity to be heard. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section l: Undergrounding, in the specified area, is in the general public interest for its health, safety and welfare as: (a) such undergrounding will avoid or eliminate an unusually heavy concentration of overhead electric and communication facilities; and (b) the street or road or right of way is extensively used by the general public and carries a heavy volume of pedestrian or vehicular traffic. Section 2: The following specified area shall constitute and be known as the Diamond Bar Boulevard Underground Utility District No. 2: That portion, being entirely within the City of Diamond Bar, of a strip of land one hundred twenty (120) feet wide lying sixty (60) feet each side of and parallel with the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard, as shown on the Los Angeles County Surveyor's Maps No. B-5339, as filed August 13, 1979, and B-5363, as filed December 4, 1979 beginning at the centerline intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Gold Rush Drive, as shown on said Surveyor's Map No. B-5339, thence northerly along the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard three thousand six hundred seventeen (3,617) feet, more or less, to a point, which point is at the intersection with the easterly prolongation of the southerly line of Parcel 1, as shown on Parcel Map No. 4699 as filed in book 52, page 39 of Parcel Maps of records of the Los Angeles County Recorder; thence continuing northerly along the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard within a strip of land one -hundred fifty five (155) feet wide lying seventy (70) feet westerly of and eighty five (85) feet easterly of and parallel with the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard, as shown on said Surveyor's Map No. B- 5363, from the northerly terminus of last said strip of land one hundred five (105) feet, more or less, to a point, which point is at the intersection with the easterly prolongation of the northerly line of Parcel 1, as shown on said Parcel Map No. 4699; thence continuing northerly along the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard within a strip of land one hundred thirty five (135) feet wide lying fifty (50) feet westerly of and eighty five (85) feet easterly of and parallel with the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard as shown on said Surveyor's Map No. B-5363, from the northerly terminus of last said strip of land two thousand eighty three (2,083) feet, more or less to a point, which is at the intersection with the easterly prolongation of the northerly line of Parcel 1, as shown on said Parcel Map No. 4699; thence continuing northerly along the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard within a strip of land one hundred thirty five (135) feet wide lying fifty (50) feet westerly of and eighty five (85) feet easterly of and parallel with the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard, as shown on said Surveyor's Map No. B-5363, from the northerly terminus of last said strip of land two thousand eighty three (2,083) feet, more or less, to a point, which point is at the intersection with the westerly prolongation of the northerly line of Parcel 2, as shown on Parcel Map 10208 as filed in Book 106, page 73 as Official Records of the Los Angeles County Recorder; thence continuing northerly along the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard within a strip of land one hundred ten (110) feet wide lying fifty (50) feet westerly of and sixty feet easterly of and parallel with the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard, as shown on said Surveyor's Map No. B-5363, from the northerly terminus of last said strip of land four thousand two hundred eleven (4,211) feet more or less, to a point in the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard, which point is six hundred fifty (650) feet northerly of the centerline intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Highland Valley Road, as shown on said Surveyor's Map No. B-5363, thence continuing northerly along the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard within a strip of land one hundred two (102) feet wide lying forty two (42) feet westerly of and sixty (60) feet easterly of and parallel with the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard, as shown on said Surveyor's Map No. B- 5363, from the northerly terminus of last said strip of land fifty (50) feet; thence continuing northerly along the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard within a strip of land one hundred ten (110) feet wide lying fifty (50) feet westerly of and sixty (60) feet easterly of and parallel with the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard, as shown on said Surveyor's Map No. B-5363, from the northerly terminus of last said strip of land two thousand one hundred (2,100) feet, more or less, to the northerly City limits of the City of Diamond Bar as said City limits now exist; along with Parcel 1 as shown on Parcel Map 1749 as filed in book 27, page 57 of Parcel Maps of records of the Los Angeles County Recorder; excepting therefrom that portion of Golden Springs Drive - Grand Avenue Underground Utility District crossing said strip. Section 3: The following exceptions are incorporated in the Diamond Bar Boulevard Underground Utility District No. 2. (a) Poles and pedestals for fire alarm boxes, street lights, traffic signals and the like installed and maintained by or for the City. (b) Airvents, meters, cabinets containing electronic devices, and cabinets for connection points determined by the Director of Public Works to be necessary for service continuity, and not feasible for underground location, subject to approval by the Director as to location and unobtrusiveness. (c) Antennae and supporting structures used for communication service or reception for a community antenna system subject to approval of the City Council as to location and unobtrusiveness. (d) Temporary overhead facilities necessary for emergency services for less than ten (10) days which period may be extended by the Director of Public Works for a period not exceeding ninety (90) days and which may be extended by the City Council for an unlimited period. (e) Temporary overhead wires and supporting poles approved by the Director of Public Works and erected to facilitate construction of a building or other structures, for a period of not more than one hundred eighty (180) days. Section 4: The utility company, at its expense shall, install underground service connection facilities on the customer's property for not more than one hundred (100) feet in length. Section 5: All poles, overhead wires, and associates overhead structures shall be removed and underground installations made in said underground utility district within the following times: (a) Underground installation by utility companies and property owners not later than July 31, 1995, and (b) Removal of poles, overhead wires and other associated structures not later than January 1, 1996 after which date the utility may discontinue its overhead service. Section 6: The Director of Public Works, within ten (10) after the adoption of this resolution, shall mail a copy hereof and a copy of Los Angeles County Code Division 2, Chapter 16.32, as duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, to the affected property owners as same are shown on the last equalized assessment roll and to the affected utilities. Section 7: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this resolution by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, and shall cause the same to be posted in three (3) conspicuous places in the City of Diamond Bar, and it shall thereupon take effect. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1993. day of , MAYOR I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on day of , 1993, by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS - NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS - ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS - ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBERS - LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar LEGEND: F—X%4%S1T "A" PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD UTILITY IINDERGROUNDING DISTRICT / " TEMPLE �p M 30-32 V.E — 7800 : PROPOSED DISTRICT BOUNDARY : CENTERLINE OF DIAMOND BAR BLVD. ti r.- E S `!Y. }•' C! T n rs.. int --- - -- - ,o. _ - a 7 b r N W r ti r.- E S `!Y. }•' C! T n rs.. int ,o. a 7 b 5 'L a. 'obi yl S e W I S.nh.l co 1 �400 0 � 2 3 15 13 Al •�'7. J.Cc.*Ac Suiss/ 1 DETAIL ,^•'�' i vii SCALE' 1'r=100' / ,' � 8719 � /• r (`� x°91 s •�0 17 5 it + t0.414 14 G tF L£el �6. ,� ar,t•e, "IA 13 s 12 A _ �`�lOOsO"/S tt � la 'Dlagramalrc oeD�: is aia• t •� II f}� Odlncnslon a. _ 10 the as uaanent v - — 1 'L • o t� Plana• ,ncl.d (,�� �•a�R 9 `� a.ras /s set to tr. Conaomrnt�m _ �i �• Yr /I b� Vl an crterenrc 1•et �a + �v4vOq- t�'�� �• J hepta rli�' TRACT NO. 34803 M. B. 92 5- 14 - 18 CONDOMINIUM COLI TRACT NO 394:14.M.B.958-BO-81 T t:" ATC _ • '.T d J Y�J•F4 ,1 y.�� r L.'/\ f ©if � 1 ., � s - fi - K, ori.,.- -- -• r . \. y f � l • \ a 1 08 cr X! ft 3 i r i ' K 6i+ cr 130 z 6 tot N _ it if �' � �ry � i+ '' rt G(a,OSS\}• fit', y � `, SUir NSET s.- t 0 2 0 to IX _ ', 8718 —`�J !r ,iso•' �i - r•t .� q� ,. 1 w� ,1 KII, C) IWO e NO 27530 - i I t3ty°jO �P TRAGI lUM -TRPC.T,'VO co J�MI TAPS °I0011 cr om 169 60 o � N ! $a16 4 -,�71 GHT-4,op _. in pi O� TRAOT_ NO. 27530 _IVO a 21N1UM CONppµo1 ppRCEL MAP toOlo Colt _ 10011 � � • '. O 1 L Jpr -Y � r'riw Y•�.a�i i'„- tY � � i /T 167 � L i O �'• Wz4�k'%"v ; O ;JJoi6166� 1 ��C Q O 0 r err 64 rs t? r B K eJ 2 a 718 � s. ss ••� a r..i 1 163 13 r2 Y is �f 0 Y � 71. t t P Q -TWE WAY ,,PPRoACHES -- POMONA ion • tea/ PORZSE 1/4 SEC g ,, TZS R91N pG v IIL A,ry 1 \ Qti vv Q 'y uun,Y 10 BK 8717 SMT. Sap $ 6 0 u3oo POMO�P R P M 1p0-31-3�\ ;"°IM �, 22 li MATCH- �� aQ wt'�9.60 r►'� � �' t t IN rsLN i �9/F o� `� e �! j q�; •� r� SS 1 . ' GS `. \5_De,lw uSEyi ti G�� ,, Ak ty\ 591.75 ._ _ \ O-ssfso"Y//.-1QiClt' 0 � 4 051 � O �a o / Dpi— _ S C -TR / NO 33851',, '�i3O > 1 c+v© O ��Q4 SHEETS 4 8 5 / x �. ib 4 /7C E.. -NSs•/OEC U 9s �e -�*r-- '�.+ 6 177 11e.n it r A a IIOi1 ��, I _ b , 1 I rrybIt, a 111 B$ m 111.15 X01 f =4 SHEETS 2 & 3 °jk siso f ,:o –� a s.s4•s9'w ,1 wy liJ.OJ M'. t.,i v , 21 - i• -r.ky 90_3-54-56' 11 0 I o. 0 __j 1.ff- ES 1.S2 O a voo _ S/•JI iJY� 5 _ 64 -65 P M 61 - 76 CD bow~4�\tf0� QP O \0006 -A 7r.19 n.7r� lel �v A� <>9 . > SpR`NC'S ;' 7� ,oC 9 ` ` ! D // 9O Zvi. � of �y s � O• ' t { Or / B /c2_56_6py M. 866_60-6/ ! / i AIC LI rRACr . c46/p b Re mar., v5 �,5 ifi 6 G g: i37. f G �',�'ti' � fir. "1� 4 •r:o,. — r'tio: .. e 3419 0 y w Go 33 . 1 esl7 .f z/o ejUBILEE2 LN - CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. '. TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 REPORT DATE: September 29, 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 28, 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 No REVIEWED BY: O Ten nce L. Belanger City Manager A,� himes DeStefano Community DeveloprIent Director CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: October 5, 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 prejam6&A fi"e VAau er�e�_ *L— 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, 1993, 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 Midd.e School/Sandstone Canyon area. The Master P1��. incorporates property owned by five entities; the City Diamond Bar, Walnut valley Unified School Distric! Arceiro and Sons, Inc., RNP Development, Inc. and Sast. Corporation. The proposed project, if approved, will be developed• phases, with primary land uses of residentia. commercial, park, open space, and school. Approximate.. 82 residential acres are requested for construction 200 single family homes, 30 acres are proposed for future commercial/office use, 28 acres are proposed open space as a public park site, and 31 acres j proposed for the construction of the South Pointe M.:: 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 passive 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 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 134). 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 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 11) to 20,962 square feet (Lot#4). Pad sizes range from 6,906 square feet (Lot #20) to 11,214 square feet (Lot #4). 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 #31) to 15,095 (Lot #14) square feet. Pad sizes range from 6,070 (lot 169) 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 COMMI88ION 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 8. 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: \ W PS 11 W OR MAGENDMA0& RYf . PRM 6 .25 co 0 -r-r--rT Cq T ol IZ 31 wz Z; u z u &n W W F z O a I H O F1 ,1<-I ci � �, � �u r s I � i � a I 0 0 I I � \ I � I nrz i c— --ICLI - - - - - 10 Z ♦R m i i �. i .� � I 1 1 J"�1 1 i I � I � i � I i' � ,\ �, o r I� I� � �� � �� � 8� � � `, � �i �o � � N � � --�� ,� X N I l Jl ' � � �/ � L_ , 1 7 � o i � � I ,� O — — - — � -- - -i �1- =� - -- 4 �� ►8 i� I i �� c I I r � I! � � � L., ! ,, r i ui � � -� 1l1 3 � � ss�iL �' �, I � i �� l �� � ti I _� I � � '�! I � I I f �. I �.� 1 �_ O b �, r � I I 11= v - m n r° UJ I t �S,II 1 ku f v ` � J I v 1 1 I I 11= v - m I g o v o v m � r 0 0 0 0 II F-- D v` I W I z o LU r r W � � n i r r IU U I 4� 1 CL. o � C11 r r P _ 1 1 1 1 f W v Lo � �I v� A i� I 0 IN] R scum Fowl s•++ �XISVN& OWNU.1 R I P NVUSD lllTN 1`910T 1060L 30.64 ACRES (31.66 ACRESI AIMV O ev w iii■�� 8 � �� •`• . 000av� SCALE V -600' W Alcills Ago logo 40.77 ACRES w=AF1� 'v© e v v�o�eAs a 000� � o Ovpo vv�000aaau� OWNERSHIP I—uloFog LOCATIOTION MAP R -N -P DEYELOPNE9i INC. sA wim AUI� Rr nn s �� r pIYAIA sotrFN PbIft trF 1l�W C.." 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, wc. 25550 Hawthome Boulevard, Suite 310, Torrance, CA 90505 (310) 375.8611 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, imc. 25550 Hawthorne Boulevard, Sufte 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 150 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 2 maximum commercial development --less than one-half that of Alternative A i:: 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% 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 1 M O 1 N y 1 1 Q 1 b I I I w �V 1.� F N I 1 f.l Y ti i I ti L q 1 � .ef u't ! I .Oi M �fna M„1M Wlr+Mf+ rf � A 1 1 A a 1 1 ti 8 1 ! A f H O RI I I r+ M 1 1 V 1 I I I I I I 1 1 M I M Y 1 1 Q 1 1 1 I 1 N 1.� F N I 1 rti r�e1M fel �O fYl.r P � .ef u't ! ♦C n N R � H1 .Oi M �fna M„1M Wlr+Mf+ rf � A 1 I 1 I wr A rf M� Y O .I.f �wi 1 i 1 ti F N L 11� 1 I ! A f H O RI I I O ~~ � 2 o a a a o N M M r Pt rf �O�pp M h rti r�e1M fel �O fYl.r P � .ef u't ! ♦C n N R � H1 .Oi M �fna M„1M Wlr+Mf+ rf n f/ f wr A rf M� ti � rf O ~~ � 2 o a a a o lmng- N �' 1 M rf X11 m O rr R Orf n � �fna M„1M Wlr+Mf+ rf n f/ f N M S �► r! 1 r r ! A f H O RI M N r+ o a a a o a a a o lmng- M rf X11 m O rr R Orf n � r1 rf O Q O d O O O d P d P 6 lmng- in 1 M N 1 � 1 1 1 _ Iywy y 1 Y O y If/ y 7 1 1 1"f = N Y F ti 0004 i\iI t 1 r 1.. �7 1 1 O 1 ' ...f r..Yfre40 Illfesrfnrl of =wr�fM f�+f6n V I M oN'I A � yN� M off If «« ! M ►' 1+ M �i M w V n!! r M n ! rf n r 9 e 1 e 1 i ti _ � w A 10 r M p y'Y w ub u Y � � � Y � � >f! � � y � � �•V ti 1Y1 w A M _m � 6a ~ ii li H q' r r F ^ 1"Y r V M � I H 1 •e'• � V� Y I ; Y I 1 O V �O V Iq�y} M I 1 i Y 1A W IA � Y Y •0 I 1 A 1� O 1 1 w o M r MM O ^! �• N H O O O •"1 P r1 �O �O ! p b n •W � Y y b N I 1 !� q Mb L7 r4 M Y Y K I 1 u A 1 V 1 1 P w P r-• wa �O �! �n a~i � •.bi .N 1 I � M {•� N � �a'1 �o 0 �+ IIyy M~ Yy N 1 i � n M ►+ O In r• M p Y t1• 1 1 ti I O 1 1 L� M 1 i0 1 �• I 1 � V� � O V �O �O i q Mb L7 u A 1 V 1 1 � Al •W L� M 1 �•1 N P f•1 M 4A ! I ti pPp ! M �•M u•1 n N �•M � i NY ?�, as ; �:•� -cam 1 1!1 Y M (MMy 1 1 •Y fr I.1 11 � O ! � I w •� M 1 1 � I I h b 1 ►�1 1 r 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 wM I 1 1 I 1 I 1 4y r1 � m! d 1 I v1 ��11 1 O 1 1 I P'f /•� V ! wt M W � �••� O N i 14 1 1~1�� 1��y y R1 I Yp rp1 1 I P�1 ✓~1 y w P � r Y� 1.0 �O ••w N ! /� rl •ra Y+ IY M 1' M A �'+ M .01/� W iu1••I ZIP 1 I 1 L M •H 1 I 0 1/1 w M�r w�l n co r^I N V 1 �'•� •^Y v 1 1 f•� �••� H y � M 4-A 40 •1j aA a uQ iw.•1 w �+ r•1 w r-. 4.0 11 Y M 46 � G ./�pa�j� dw `" Ilf r � w • q p A M M I 1 Q ! J ! IwIo� W M Yy Od W+ 1 r w i0 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. 0 M 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 Lm as (ICEES) lesidential Canercial Part (!misled) School Open Space/Circulation Total COlQIEICIIL MILO= SPICI (SP) Shop Ctr--Major letail Shop Ctr--Tenant letail Shap Ctr--Tuut Ju-letail Eating i Driniin Utah Iiaancial Office Cenral Office Total IESIDWIIL UrTs IDDED PULIC STEEETS (UR -MILES) IDDED PDDLIC Pil[S (ICIIS) IED DETELOPM m TILDE II CDIIDT DOLM isl00's) mu 11mu am I tiTI HOMES A CnW DOLLIES (344e'c) Source: The Leander Cospany, Inc. Table 2 SMUT DMLOPIM ILTtffiITIPtS ML DDILDOD! --llternative 1-- Alternative 3----Ilternative C-- (31.0 1c C0='11 USA Ic Coi'1) ( 5.0 Ic Cowl) --------------- --------------- --------------- 80.0 30.0 80.0 11.0 15.5 5.0 10.4 10.0 10.0 32.0 72.0 32.0 13.4 33.5 44.0 171.0 171.0 171.0 134,004 94,044 0 50,000 25,000 20,000 10,404 5,000 11,000 20.000 10,000 0 14,004 51000 0 20,000 10,000 70,000 290,000 145,004 61,000 200 200 200 7.Ot 7.03 4.61 10.0 10.0 10.1 92,504 76,.250 67,625 52,004 29,625 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 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). 6 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 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 A5. 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 &Rendix A. A full set of detailed projections covering Alternative A. o ADuendix 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 J' a d O n n O QQ O N O yJ� �y � i JNNf .r N`o � I P I 1I �V "• O J rn 0� d N q P A .r � q d N r+ w O� w q Ni pi 'b C� � '� j I �-��ou�.►e�eNew�..�e� �•►xies�""°'NI« `� � S I N � I J � ! ^w�s+►�vsyswdv�w�q� `�MResp..ow^ � "�^ "! y J Jw»q.lwdwdwdvMode ANJodwe ew.� v � ,n "► I � r�•O,neN.+sys..iq.�oeo� ^w�oeweers V ... Y N I N V •� o +• w d M e 0 0 N r 0 e O� dl w r O d ,'�.� •" io.rs..sYNsgiwNoeow o.+esvYe+� � � .. s I � I + list a �xne ti=Few y�� w �i�e?xii i 1 7� 8 M .yi• � S ow s l ddM OIw we w♦=N New e N jji yk� �.li � ^ � Mw w x.i y M ���^ yne�O !•i 1� P � 1 � Z GAJ H � : �.'�.ry��'^ � •• �"��w � � 1 S ff i.M. ww� tiww�ii 92A�i�Mis �iR�iat�•��R�t�=r���r �y i v ���� r. 'Y a Y I I w 1 1 .�.1 M ~Oh1?O�ONOO W wi�O t1tM �N "1O n'°ONw N �f i �i w� O n M O a• N O S +� r G� O� r M N r O � w O r= N M yI w y I r "n �► Y I I w 1 .�.1 M ~Oh1?O�ONOO W wi�O t1tM �N "1O n'°ONw N �f i �i w� O n M O a• N O S +� r G� O� r M N r O � w O r= N M y r "n �► ti INN, ti I W 1 w NMy �w yA~P�w w��. w'^.�. .moi �iw�fV 1I• M'�I�j�MN�j Pi r� C'. ��.`�r'� PIP :�r1`►.��� ���i'��1 �1'�.f "��7i: I Yiix A i co r� 0 0 0 P O R M 4 r w d S I I r M .p O d O R .�.. I -boor P 0 M n N J R Jt 1 ^ i O o M M K I is p ` •. O r O r v r r 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 v do I Ig 1 N � L}y ysy� La yN H yy JJ w1 r � � + � � y � Ic i► ^ n IL % ^ � % � � � M + � + � M y A � ! ii � � P x w P S g Z ^ ^ � w � � � � � w w W � w ."i : - ,- - ? � ©2� ■_ �� _ � § � � . § . .���x�*�■■■■�@�■■■■�� „ ■#»,■■§■§■@@§$@§=22 " ■ � � • _ Is ,e ---- - . . k _ _ _ - - | , § _ _ _ _ . . _ ■ ® - ® - - - © © - � �� � ■ _ - ® - ® - |- ---- - • _ � A G §/ ( ®--® � ©2� ■_ �� _ � § � � . § . .���x�*�■■■■�@�■■■■�� „ ■#»,■■§■§■@@§$@§=22 " Ila-------- 8 si N CD Y V O I y Y � i■I � i ^ O "3 V O t y i 1 M M J Y � 1 m � O y M 1 P � / 1 I 31 a i M Ila-------- 8 i ■ � � � � � k � � § � @ � � � |@■8#®@S@2§2■�42$§�G§§a§@§@§§222@§$2@B■GSRS�lS"I! § � � § � � � § - § � � � � � § � � � � � •� � |@■8#®@S@2§2■�42$§�G§§a§@§@§§222@§$2@B■GSRS�lS"I! 1414144 dwi osu�.d rO g �('o r I � I .I .w4 AgSda s 3�S iagoegogdq I I iy I r i I I I � I n I i � I • J A 3 it C7 Oq sssgoej d0 F q I M .t H 4*0�q�wN/ Mi w LL i} i g*g dQ 4w�re a as a 00 :O:q:q 1414144 dwi osu�.d rO g �('o r 3 .w4 AgSda s 3�S iagoegogdq rw idgowdiw ro qq 3 A 3 it C7 Oq sssgoej d0 F q i H 4*0�q�wN/ Mi A g*g dQ 4w�re a as a 00 :O:q:q .i w d rA 4 1446g1�O�A oO q • q s pF rq q a r S t 4� •$ r Sy4� 46 .A 40 A$. am Of N M ifP/ 11C � YC w 4 A dgdg4lwrw rA am dq elw e► q;: w dgdwrwdA dw rw 4k 4rdw• oo � :� �q � eiaj depw::gj: OP d g r A r A r O S q r w 46 CO r w r e : d q q 41 p : q : q : w 6 g i q r w d A d w It 4! r g r q 46 :4i w4i:q:4 a d o ¢ o • O r g r q i q* r d o 41s r O d A r♦ 46 g r o i d osePa41 W r d d wrMMg46 46 SZo filly 13111 34 ,.. ff � � .� \�$$�$� __ _ ■@t@4.a ■-■ � �| � @■@�_� �_�����A� �- � �'■ �� $$�■�® � ` '° � � _, � �■��§��� �2���2:�� �_ � @°2 A ±� � @��$@�-■ ����:���� a_ ��« � |� �s�■�� � C §°! ■ � � �■�■■� � ■| � �■�� ���¥���®■ - @ @$■�� a®a---�-+ �- §°■ •CP a 0:a-_■ I �� _ ■_■ § § -@■��� -- ab §°! | $■�4�� ■ 2 § di ..1_IR1,r •® _■°■ ���; a 2$■■■$■ :: ( �$- �-�� � �#��-� � � ■�a$ ■_-!_; 2 � _-.Q=__- ■wQ■,�! ' §§�■§§§§��Ek���■t§t�@�@�@��@�q#=;,�■■�§8���#R�$§�-_�--, 8 k2§ . 40 � � R a i i .; .SQ:.: a �.apj: �mQQ► .44* i diQ A Ills. 8�3 d d de egg4 q rl 8 � � S$ZS iigige Abe 46 co wo .'n liYi { 1e� ffi dgdadgdv got a 14 co d g d q d q dCq q a $ e d 3 O d d o i dge►gdqd oq O �Q+ Li � $ � tl o s too 0 �•�•Ada •,� S! i eal� ��#�$�����i� day t g 8 '� ~ { ar zf xf 9F 9F CC yr l y • q t » J Sf ..' NIB: .�+yi d g d p A q O q O R ¢ icpC6cp 4 *Od 1' r dOdp!#oO0 � d 0 i O g i d g O p q f _ i g i o R .l i q d q d p i d q d gill a 1q1q0q41 lot 1 040 "� � � � i igigipiq dqi d dqd igiq gdod R . db 4p 46 4p o CP 46 Y yy • II O d q� p i p got ggi' i 1 ,7ij N$ dgelgiqaiq o d°G Y dpioaigip N f 3 gg i g i q i q d q q 8 i I IN i g i q i 0 i p Q p 6 i Iab Op i0 d s 3gUi S N YL d g d p A q O q O R ¢ icpC6cp 4 *Od 1' r dOdp!#oO0 � d 0 i O g i d g O p q f _ i g i o R .l i q d q d p i d q d gill a 1q1q0q41 lot 1 040 "� � � � i igigipiq dqi d dqd igiq gdod R . db 4p 46 4p o CP 46 Y yy � a 2 ___ _ _- -©--§--m-2-§ a a_� � •-- C6_ob'�°Cb°'f'f �_® db -_- --- - --4b --db-§®--®@-§ __�_._ .,_ d�_db -- ®- ■--- - m-n db., _ --- m §®!-------- C*__ - - -®---®■--°©f°f § :2 --- - -©------®®f-m §� -_-----$---�f°m $ � � $ � . � § � ■ s ��a�� ��� � &■ $ _k2����$���); � ■ ■ �� � ��G��S!§I! o @§ F, 414$414111 f 4 43"?a Ail 1-49 va& 4aa � cp y�c wCn� h � y � cp ii � jr jy jN jN jN y1 � .. M Si% d►0o• c* 4v �►.'� doe I j,jjyj,gjq.iM � � ..Y:e• co ca moo db 0 d v d d o d 460 e o Sj ¢ ¢co 96 db a dby g db co 40 o d g o d e. d w d+ M d w d g Y j ( .0 V •l V► .i M j M •L u � � rn Ti e� .e. .600 zi 40 It 41 41:1 IIjAjIj MIND III A F F7 �4 i 11 4 j f V I �6p u � A e es M st 0 Appendix B ALTERNATIVE B SUMMARY PROJECTIONS --TABLE B1 yW. �Ia zi r wl � V M V x lit T W W � iEr •q. w w � : y � � �E ew 'Z a rr� N 16 4 r � �yy I I I P I � p �A o J M i� i N d P y w� p� � v� w e� .� w N� � N • y� r r N y I ; i ^ e� e� N O � i r i n� .+ � w� � ^>• M w i h^ • w w i i e11N.N.r.y�-,gyp �i "'amtlp..px� � 1 40 ga 3 I • y� O M H.� tl r tl 1q � O� O^ H r M p i R '"' O .N.I � M wri I > I 1 I M I y I y I M I .AVN qNr iri r tlM JOGIO � » w ^QO AOO �y �i v y i d O ^ O O 0 V O O e a I I s i I i 0 i I • Sa I � ,'.���•�r'xi�+�^.~i.�r#p"� ��y�Prnt�e+tee. � �+ cq q M N � N r M r I I 4e S � 91 I Yy � r I � ► 7A � ff1 d � � � �l A � � ~ y+ � � r ` � � � � � I L V 1 rrCC � I w a wN»•IA �i►n•PwtiA�����x��E A�t��'%S 1E �t�A��;x ����lR �l�3���������9t�N��S��t��' � a st at � i 0 II Y I M N J M w N A♦ N �I M1 M n� y y .fl y N�� i N F N N M N N� N� N�^ M���� M M A i �% � V� V� `� � r til N N N x ✓~i R i a t �w�OM1nd�dtlOy�w�O� y N �M�wdNwgN� JI � ��Yff11f ^ � a �O ^ ti NN FN INS •Y �O N ^ `�► w �! j� O M1 M O R b N 0 g y w� q� + N� w O N! g N� � � ^ r ^ �V N 1 1/•� R ^ x w r R q ,. A O� O N O O f� w g p� � e7 l� N .s w O �i •r O H� � �.�i �• M ^ x.11 N N V a N ^ i� Rs a ^ II Y I M N J M w N A♦ N �I M1 M n� y y .fl y N�� i N F N N M N N� N� N�^ M���� M M A i �% � V� V� `� � r til N N N x ✓~i R i a t R Y I ^ I K e O h 6 N M I w, N N N MI M K o e "�, tl K N cs A d I ' w J i K al e ff g i rn g i I o YL r I I K e O $ ,•� O 6 � 1 Y Q i M I KqO 0 ei 1I L ` I ry - I O O O a ci e A T "b K Q' s i I i n,[40�sA Ogd%A AA A CI ee41, `` ,3 I I w M yr • y M NJ K ^ • y y ��rl� i l � �00 •�i OgeAe�. �h O �Oege00eM � x � � D V r }1 M � ry[ �f� W � •; yi/ VV� � � � V gg � • � •`j � � � 1 z��3���3sle����xx�xlcSt��l���x��setasaaxX:�Ax88��3��S�s§�a�^_ I . � � . ■ # m - ® - - ° - - - - $ @ 3 § | memo - - - - - | © ■_ | � 7 ^ i - - ® - ® ® - _ - _ - ® K- .0400- - - - - 462 � 4040®- - ® � 2�& 2 = J; ,���■�■�■■■■■■�■■s,�;■,■a■■■■§■@@@■§■■■§§�§:I ' 1 Y N w O i I yi i I 1 a w 1 � I _ N 3■■ � T f I oY 0 �i ~ ��+1 e s I I I e x� f I Ilk ��s�si i I i a w s 0 O 1� e N 1V O O d N n N 0 O J! Y1 lVV N O A 6 O NN N Y e M a a w s 0 Appendix C ALTERNATIVE C SUMMARY PROJECTIONS --TABLE Cl �„y 0 eey tl O � ONy V Oy O O Q 0 0 1 0 33 K •y e y • M fV ^ N •� � � �e o�MaroNsq�l..n.eP i ^ I � v1 q.�vvlNalvande. e N M.rodr e� '^ � ro�oMNaed^e�n or�er� .rNMea^.re.+ N Y "� ���oMwsydwarrgeor� ^N.�eswdew� V � Yi "'� .� `+'�M�ONwa.�dwsMJeee►3 ^vaydgr � ... M r a I i y 1 � Y� i ,��• �R i � �rM1q"�^u"ieM.n""`"�""�^ Y.te� ���w���e�� � 3 i N N A M ti r M 4 V � � � � � "� I � ^ � q � w~I e � .r w N � ~ � e ^ � 'R '� M N a n q .^7i � � � •-. � I 3 � I �I s Orf pao0 $ p a 3 4 = 4 o LS i'� Ak r 1 ry ..Y i • Y Rc u N W !a � p= p M1 /� r�• N a 0� w� 0 2QIonna046-&a"g00 .�o�on.naRrNr ow `~'w.^.QR N MO^onnbRrNr ti�.+M1 O� N w w N q wan �? d� N• w b ^I ^ O N OA M1 q• O N• N.n. O 4 a R Nawpngs��M�l ^�w~e� a �YY 3 3 R M N r r V i w Y Mr e� �di6i v FF{{ M y� v s{Tr• i R y} I r i I M ma Ii I o Y I Y 1 1 Moos r j �ooervsva�s.r! �T n jig i vvrvsorvrr r e evrwrwrer • s yy yy� � a m � Fyy yV ry �Sl x 3 $ ■ � ! � � @ a f ■ � � �) � � � } ; 2 k � � § � � ■ � ■ f � _ ! \�■■%�■■s■�■aq■■■s,�;■a■a■■■■§■§■@■§■§§22�§§l�23! � � � . . § _ _ ob _ . . , - - 7 B § ■ $ � e j_ _ , • - § ■ § § S � -| � _ - . — ~ - - - - - ® - - - 7 ■ § § 2 2 |A .� . | • - © - - - - 7 @ § _ | _ - \ f , - - - 7 ■ § ( \ - _ � _ . � ■ ! : ®- _ _ _ _ - 7 ■ § � \ - ■ _ Is - - 7 ■ § S_ k k � _ _ _ _ - - ® - - � ■ § A 2 © --®- ® _ _ $ ■ � ! � � @ a f ■ � � �) � � � } ; 2 k � � § � � ■ � ■ f � _ ! \�■■%�■■s■�■aq■■■s,�;■a■a■■■■§■§■@■§■§§22�§§l�23! n 3 Im 3 9 M 'j Yy w w .+ w e a R •� a •� a m e e yya�1 a e 9 M 'j Yy w w .+ w Appendix D CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 1992-93 BUDGET ANALYSIS O ItxaQ AaaRV x a 9 j 4a i A 44,444 a hi r allot$ 11212 1 a I tlttfs�" �f�s y .: n: r p 1f1 N ��' 0 N 0 N P w 0 0 O 4qJ11-4 19M Hill it Ag N N 9C XMN� x xt 4M x x 4 d r� 414 f4 3 r 0 M N IuVi��s� rerM V ulrhwPw.`« :1u►,�hww �„ .�.� r r r r.I .� V O ItxaQ AaaRV x a 9 j 4a i A 44,444 a hi r allot$ 11212 1 a I tlttfs�" �f�s y .: n: r p 1f1 N ��' 0 N 0 N P w 0 0 O 4qJ11-4 19M Hill it Ag N N 9C XMN� x xt 4M x x 4 d r� 414 f4 3 r 0 M N IuVi��s� rerM V ulrhwPw.`« :1u►,�hww �„ .�.� r r r r.I .� ::iaw 8 a 4 _+ mi O TA A J M ^ P t S �! 143 off ! I I i-31 4 all 11411 IMPN P �} wM� yN� �/ ++ p �Ny yM� + w + �Ny y� �+• M pp �Ny yy � s yy y► yy + a a 0 N � sci .e o O a m m 0 at e m 6» o e o ooCb Bose aimom a $R'i i O w a a w w w a �o mm m o n o ^ P ss g8s gaa gl "`i yi A gal swam oawam aeaoso J iA N i r A A s1 R I a 0 a► m w a in 0 0 0 0 0 a 4p c p g u � w � i » r r Ilk kEiji "s d� O us 11 � r V Y Y ii II � 0 4 �I g a � '� � eMn.�dgdeM.►rq •OM « is e• r N e g N 8 q N ee2oeeeoeo`smoot J � w going lsf Bala NO a I M _ N N ~ M 9�^ Sol _ it M sy y 1Y I , 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 SOUTH POINTE MASTER PLAN January 19, 1993 Letter from Mr. & Mrs. Chisholm January 29, 1993 Letter to Supervisor Dana from Mr. & Mrs. Hodges February 2, 1993 Letter to Diamond Bar City Council from Mr. & Mrs. Hodges February 3, 1993 Letter to Diamond Bar City Council from Mr. & Mrs. Collins February 5, 1993 Letter to Diamond Bar City Council from Mr. & Mrs. Taylor February 28, 1993 Letter to Supervisor Dana from Mearlyn Stein February 11, 1993 Response from Supervisor Dana to Mr. & Mrs. Hodges February 11, 1993 Cover Letter for Form Letter to South Point Neighbors - 9 signatures February 13, 1993 Form Letter from South Pointe Neighbors - 50 signatures/letters rec'd February 23, 1993 Letter to Planning Commission Chairman Bruce Flamenbaum from Mrs. Hodges February 25, 1993 Letter to Planning Commissioner David Meyer from Mrs. Hodges April 1, 1993 Letter from Mr. & Mrs. J. Oliva April 4, 1993 Form Letter from Pathfinder's Homeowners Association - 45 signatures/letters reed May 10, 1993 "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 rile 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 January19, 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 Impact Report, South Pointe Master Plan, November 1992. Brother E ale, 5ister,b A Message from Chief Seattle How can you buy the sky? Chief Seattle began. How 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 mist in the dark,woods. Every meadow and humming insect. AfI 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. The perfumed flowers are our sisters. The bear, the deer, thegreat eagle, these are our brothers. The rocky crests, the meadows, the ponies - alfbelong to the same family. The voice of my ancestors said to me, The shining water that moves in the streams and rivers is not simply water, but the blood of your grandfather sgrandfather. Eachghostly reflection in the clear waters of the lakes tells of memories in the life of our people. the water's murmur is the voice of your great great grandmother. The rivers are our brothers. they quench our thirst. ` 7iey 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 `the voice of mygrandfather said to me, The air is precious: It shares its spirit with all the life it supports. Tie wind thatgave me my first breath also received my last sigh. You must Beep the land and air apart and sacred, as a place where one can go 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 SCAQMD NSR threshold values." page 1-36 When the fast Red Adan and Woman have vanished with their wilderness, and their memory is only the shadow of a cloud moving across the prairie, wiff the shores and forest stiff be,here? Wid there be any of the spirit of my people left? My ancestors said to me, `This we /(know: the earth does not befong to us. We belong to the earth. `The voice of mygrandmother said to me, ?each your children what you have been taught. The 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, ChiefSeattfe said. The destiny of your people is a mystery to us. `What wiff happen when the buffalo are affslaughtered? the 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 blotted by talking wires? Where wiff the thicket be? Gone. ` 1 here 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 survivaf this we know: All things are connected like the blood that unites us. We did not weave the web 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 mothers 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 sell you our (and, 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 (and 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, ;995 Supervisor Cleane [lana cio L.A. County Board o7 Supervisors Rowland Heights Field 04+1ce - 1199 Fairway Dr. Walnut, CA 91789 Dear Supervisor Dana: We are homeowners who live in the _tninccrporated area cf Walnut which is roughly bordered by Brea canyon Cuto+t/Fairway Dr., Colima Blvd., Fath+inder Rd and the Diamond Scar city border. We are writing to you about an issue which was recently brought to our attention ana that we Leel is of significant importance to the County. We are speaking of the proposed South Fointe Master Flan Develooment. The proposal includes a residential street whi.ch would connect the new development with Brea Canyon Rd. and Morning Sun Ave. Morning gun Ave. is part of the neighborhood in which we live, and we +eel that allowing this proposal to be approved 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 plan is under County jurisdiction and is not a part of the City of Diamond Bar. This fact, along with the opening of the new road onto Morning Sun Ave. would appear to require the County's involvement in the project. We are very concerned about the problems which could arise from the si_nificant increase in traffic along the County roads in Our neighbonccod. We are sure that cars from the 2c,ici homes being built will be sUre 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: that already occurs in the area. uur streets do not contain sidewalks until you reach Walnut Leaf 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 stopsi must walk: in the street going to and from the school bus stop an Walnut L eat. We are very worried about their- future safety if traf-�ic increases to the degree we feel it surely will. We are also concerned that with a cJnsarvative estimate of '?i,i,+ cars a day on our steep roads, we will have a dramatic increase in car accidents. This then could raise the :s=ue of County liability, not to men`icn costs the County will also incur from the increased wear and tear on the roads! The building o+ this develcomen_ :n Sandstone Canyon also rai=e=_ a whole host of environmental issues for the canyon itself. includinc the *load control aitch which runs thrCugr� zne canyon, erosion of the remaining slooes and the resultant dam_ae tc private and County property trom mud. the decimation of end animal life, inciUdinC February 2, 199 ` CC: Diamond Par City Council' •1660 E. Copley Dr. Ste. I00 Diamond Par CA 91765-4177 Dear Diamond Par City Council: We are writing to you in order to voice our opposition to.the. proposed South Pointe Master Flan. We earnestly feel that this proposal would have serious, permanent negative consequences for the City of Diamond Bar 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 4i►ir+ 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 make 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 sidewalks 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 lii.-.ely 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 will -A9 adjacent, to our home. We live at 1612 Morning Sun Ave., in an unincorpof.4ted L.A. county area of Walnut, Ca. Our vroperty 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 teed 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 e_qually 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 o February 5, 1993 Diamond Bar City Council 21600 E, Copley Dr, Ste, 100 .77— 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 Canyon to get to her bus stop hit by a car a few years ago, and more traffic on these residential streets would be an unsafe 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, Clyde and Dia�'e Ta for Y Y 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, 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: N O ' 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 INTERSECTIC', 6. DIAMOND BAR DOES NOT NEED ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL SPACE, TAKE A DRIVE THROUGH ALL THE CENTERS AND YOU WILL FIND MA`.': EMPTY LOCATIONS PLEASE DO NOT DESTROY THE SANDSTONE CANYON AREA. AREA RESIDENT: - MOVED HERE BECAUSE OF THE BEAUTIFUL GREEN EMERALD HILLS OF SPRINT LET US NOT DESTROY THIS IMPORTANT PART OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. MEARL N 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 THE BCARD GLORIA MOUNA YVONNE BRATHWAITE SL,RKE EDMUND D.EDELMAN DEANE CANA MICHAEL D. ANTONOVICH DEANE DANA !Zooms". Fourtn O.sma (2131974-4AA4 FAX (213) 626-6941 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hodges: Thank you for your recent letter expressing concerns regardinc 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 I S.GNED DEANE DANA Supervisor, Fourth District County of 'os Angeles DD: as cc: City of Diamond Bar February 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 spac,. which contributes to the natural habitat and beautv of the area. We urge you to sign the 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 Copley in Diamond Bar. It is important that you let the decision makers know your views NOW! Thanks for, your participation. J&6 & Lind Agulsoff 2 750 elfi •tiA' t��� r Ron & inda Bisho =dvi6w Drive i (?VV54' ger &'Josie unas 2 Rapidview rive Dan & Pauline Huffman/1) e 1 f i e 1 d & Vickie -King 1304. R idview Driv & Jjpck' Sapelson� 1285 Rapid /ew Drive Dave & Debbie TraugAtt, 1322 R pidview Drive Bruce & Sandv Wallace 20740 E. Kelfield February 13, 1993 Diamond Bar Planning C( Lssion 21660 Copley Drive, Sui 16190 Diamond Bar, Californiz )1765 ATTENTION: Planning Cc :ssion RE: Sandstone C on - South Point 4aster Plan - ("Plan") Objection T 'roposed Development GENTLEMEN: F RM ��TT�Rs 50 S i q A&ftwoS 0'` f" I,¢. We object to the propos development of Sandstone Canyon as set forth in the South Pointe Master Pla "Plan"). The Plan calls for excessive development of one of the last natu <.- areas remaining in Diamond Bar. Besides the fact that t! -s development is unnecessary, the Plan fails to adequately address the .,sues of added traffic conjestion, the over burdening of surrounding neighbortood streets, increase in crime, and potential erosion from newly graded slope& 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, ✓� CLC..% ' (`�?Ln mac; Jam^+ - GZ , Gc.X-Z✓.crGlct f Hr. rr! L,=e Fl arnentaufr; L,ha1rm--yn C1i-among F.ar Cit'. FIannina 1=ominiE_II_-n 1.=..moi, E c. z, i = , lir- . Su. i 1 _ 1 Cliainond parr. -7.ia_-�: rii 1 n,-7 -1-' ITI ITI 1 - - -'r. :Ti E S _ . m 'a I = n. i ' n t 1 _ - -- - - - L - * - - - -- � - !-fir - _ - , - - - - 1 _ _i c 1 1 _ - ' - W ! - = - - -. d. n u _ _ .' �� U. n: nI �_I :J _� iV �. L` [� i _ W.=. tr _ c°r,t S c.t t s n s o 1r _.d t her r= 1.-I .-_ _ rl.. _ _ t.`._ t• i cii 1t l•J = 'Y'a-r- =i =i -=I, to wiy Ieo= n _v'. t'f'riiTiCnt aaanl 'r tl_lnct mon ing :at ;,oho-- ojA-.= __.: i r== t`ia.n 1t t=st 1 In e IT, m t _.T t IIT,•_ `_~i._.i Wc._ _Z _'I} tr; C';- ��t_r _- ;' 1 17,, ITICe t 1nVJ o.=�i� a a -., _= E�� _+.i-=n1t +`.=.t _-1 c'rr ✓J.g.o _'r'` I 1 t _ _ _� r1 i n _ _ _ T1= Fi 1 J -- � 1snl CI � c _ �'i _t _ - r _ _ t-7-- _t U �� 1 E rt I- - - 1� l=i n 1� r- :-i = _ . = I" n o = j'i'J r__.___t _•J r,[arni ti1C)Li'ti t'1. arid c, r,. :•J1I iI_n i =1If__ _:�'I 'v vLI. w i i ad,t ro•== VJ 2.= the 'IcJ(r, T., 4. ss Lnm = Li niW img r':_= __ I _ _ .r.= C, I_lG' i. r,eztr ==--'nd t the LIEiR = L�Gc0Crl 11 I__.`uTlEri== -Lf..- 0 L� I-:.-0L� t t Dr -Mr, d CL1.ITiG-ent Zr-''= 1a Z i-iITc.t- `-'-'�� --_=f -._ dU =an=1��.- ti r, _ri the itI_!.� E' ot t'lc .' .tar Fl anl r„+t ;,,,-ng US an tC h, ----=.r and' =Wires or re:;; -.t= the ITS: _ - =i• -J n,_ r r z..-, --- � -- nca NE now have 1n ti.= Or z), -=c.= . +�L' .ITi;fl='midi.=� =ci K.= :tcC''E -_ r I" ? . _ _ _ _� t�IP�- Da'.' i d Me',. ce C la;rman Eli ,c.ITlond Bar Lit -'I E. iliaprond bar-' [.;= Fl annin.4 =+=rniTl_=pion wi=t 11 C_+ill, m===.=n m_etir_ arld =. thcual-+- t� �.:.:.._ _i m+=, m.erlt to l Vii• `i 0U 1.,-1 _,.•J TnC.t Z, z _=iaT_•_ __�1•--ur �i_l '7=..= _'r=1tiCcrl= Gin`_c c.=lar =' yri _ u - S � ._ I -1=-- '-' Com-. .+._ ti_ lil =.E�.c ='n i r_ r-_' r- =1_ir- '�c'v='TI'=-it tri=.: 4•J1=+i_!� 1=. �+.= ---��C•`=`' - - - , ' _'Ur 1IoITIe ri+_ _ T+ r-..�,•� . _ oGITIeriT LI r- -=- n_ir .S= I : e= �.n'~ G! it =h 1 ; Crer a r2r-- - -i�rci nlTient In v;hI=h t I i':'e ! - - 1 d. w C'_+rIC3_.=tJWant tC ITiaint_.l7, I;i itv _.� iTI'. ITi1 i'. r. _i= =n o-= rOr the Ii 'J= =~W= iI._ i i t _. ice _ - - .va :- � -:I_: C. i r'=' I1-_i'VC tO C_1Ua-1 iT'Vy =1 _.y ITlen_ _ =�. �'rlL ; i -I^.7 CU=F: ]t 11"@ yJ3_ �.it-r-'eG~==ITIC-wh.E.t +:hle,tr,-.1'citlrl'_� Z, OU '_++ �-�' _pDmerit W►- _ d i�l_.' .,:^:7 _r.0=i11T+Iner-" ='n rr.0 �li � Wr1iCL i= - _ Jr:J .rr_ v c-- 'i.cr+. Sclri 'a friar-- - --a L_1i a rn_?r.0 C..it 1 .:T+i1= ' _ _ _ C, T �ITi tr=Tle-.RC1_.= i:TiG tcted t, vi h,:, h.g,r nc l•:. _'i +`_ "� - - -_- __-!=.. F:=ir+t= hi==ter- F1 an -nd t1 Tle =. r;- T-in._nciai r_=_.ol_I'rc.-=to +L iI_ .area. ia.t 44 on ET T:Jr}_'_=� _ wol! lei Let�y .a ir++ _ - _- tL J- - - ,t _ _ ~ --- =1•- micre _ =t :_ion c,a to -="erIT.Ca11 v orn.rlC n ad VE?1--=I,V a. Er t 7I''- ---S.E. _ _-__ _ _ rl Lit ' +I-•' `Y+_,11 i _= m 're.i'='I_!1 rf re =er'm= a; n_i17iter- c' _=-.a _+•_.- ==r = . _`__. rcr- :Tie __ -_ =_'' 1 =_id i== ,•,h.�t -- =]n7 1,7,;_; P- _. _. I rl.w, _., = i =:� nQ== t- _n�r;_r. _.-d=r- -_---=--= .`v I Cart 1-! i+ 'C 'c •'� - _ d; l •- l �+ -. _ _ - u = • C- i '=l Cly y' .a n 1 = U IL investment, 1 _1 a ;ej hen _. [;Cr'=Gn �l l_!r0o_= i _ . z' = f-, will 1 ITI..' i n! •� 7. c- +IC. will=hlol•J a =,rc t =n_ =:t~t Ie', the r 4.mhlt to inTringe on a.rlother's rlz� In or -'+der t,=, d.= C. :a = 1 =' t a t e +C O C_! u 1 i +=1 '.y tiTl e e t: (� q, i. s t r',_ rl 9 1 y feel ,that thi5 a.r==. h• -a reached 1 L = 1= .E1C'1rila:^,t i IlTilt-= yi'd bL!i 1 u ir,g more in order to S'CUee - -� `- =`cry Deriri'> =1_.'_ O* It or t c. bI_.1d a. m tia := MITI tea'=her-!; _ L'l.�.mond ca'- = T='robl .+n= 1 _ a,rcna a -:1:F, r-, ;a_� -or ur- consideration this e✓ming and hooe that ":= 1 _tier will hel ;oUr Ur-d;rstandina of my ocsition in thi=_ mat=er. c.� '••'orn ins =�_in �v= . s nu 41- o There are plans to build a big development behind the Albertson's Shopping Center at Colima be Brea Canyon Roads. o While developments in themselves are not bad, our area is alreadv 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 be 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 the residents of Anaheim Hills. 9. The PROPERTY VALUES OF OUR HOMES WILL 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 has many mature trees which serve as a natural filter for air quality. If the majority of the trees are cut down to make room for the development, plus more cars traveling in the area; THE AIR QUALITY WILL REACH UNACCEP'T'ABLE LEVELS. It will be unhealthy to let children play outside. The way we live noir to iw, let'2 not cherrp it for the wars& 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 77ba Ckxth Fcri.7rSca Xzztiar Flan Developmerd I am ag;it�h�-4 veld t - J, ate / /1993 Signature _ Signature C Address L�71,,L,�E- _ _ Diamond Bar, CA i 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 FRIGHTENED OUTRAGED SHOCKED THIIS PROPOSED DEVELOYED PMENT. 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 BAR I AM A RESIDENT OF DIAMOND, CALIFORNIA 133` SiGt►�R zk 2 3q �� y A ,, �, 39,ii sahib -rte cy� �7' i c• .�: �h� ���' c GSA � �' � ` J94 GJ �' L) � r 641 � Ll -4 1 r, �� �► �2i�r� 3 E- 9. /� . IV,4 y 24422 12. ( C :7 �/3' Ctii C LL f - C� 1j t -CJ t7 BAR I AM A RESIDENT OF DIAMOND, CALIFORNIA 133` SiGt►�R SOUTH POINTE MIDDLE SdROOL 20671 Larkstone Drive, Walnut, CA 91789 (714)595-8171 February 1, 1993 Communitv Club We Need Your 6)L7 JUM 0 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 *The EIR document is available to be reviewed at City Hall, 21660 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar. SOUTh POINTE MIDDLE SCHOOL 0671 Larkstone Drive, Walnut, CA 91789 (71.1) 595 -8 17 1 February 1, 1993 To Whom It May Concern: 4788 / _ 4r�, Communis} Club 0-1A f:2� k 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% majority 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 througb 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! 1 Signature of Parent(s) i 3� t-t\c V-\ —Tc C4 e 5 Name (Please Print) � � 'I Z�-k \ ,,. :`r --A .�, -1t �-c - .A . Address n .r Signatur of Student Name ((Please Print) -- Copp tZ) Walnut Valley Unified School District-• _V 880 South Lemon Avenue, Wain ut, 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 the economic point in our economy where the school could have been constructed for much less than the projected costs. We would like to bid the project as soon as possible, and we ask for your cooperation in approving our project, allowing us to move forward with the removal of the residual soil, and initiating construction of the school. Thank you for your careful consideration of our request, Most sincerely, ---�-= / CSI fI Ronald,W. Hockwalt, Ed. D. Superintendent RWH:If Diamond Bar Little League, �5 unset 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. IN E 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.) Arezynski'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 aportion of the project's property now owned by RnP Development. (I verified this from checking the tax roles, doing a title search, and oEher 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 thi " 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) acknowledgin11 his former involvement, and also stating that although he had formerly been involved, he had no leg i. conflict of interest. However, due to the possible "perception" of conflict of interest, Miller took the unprecedented step removing himself from any part of the process including publicly stating he would not vote on the proje, He also put it writing. (I know because I had got a copy of Miller's letter faxed to me before I wrote thi , Using an exhaustive list of questions being circulated (which it appears to me are designed more to cloy, the truth that to uncover it) and other questions I formulated, I found no evidence of any wrong doing F, mayor Miller relating to Sandstone Canyon. If anyone has any, I'm waiting to see it. Accusations shot, not be made without proof. Over a year ago the owners of Sandstone made a sober offer to sell the property to naturalist Don Sc or any conservancy in response to Mr. Schad's purchase inquiry, so the property could be held as a na preserve. As of this morning, the owners have not yet received an offer. Mr. Schad's concern is heart and genuine. He truly is trying to save this canyon for our children. But no buyer can be found wi i 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?) The community also has a financial interest at stake. Besides hurting the litigate property owners, giving into these unreasonable demands will hurt us 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 O 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 a28 -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 few months 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 want 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. They 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 cant afford their kind of anti -Government. If, by chance, these disruptive backyard landgrabbers vet their way, they can do even more harm as elected officials. Just watch our city council meetings and dra%� %ou own conclusions. Nick Anis Diamond Bar C.oV'f.'rn .1� e o • f. n, PETITION IN FAVOR OF THE SOUTH, POINT DEVELOPMENTPER1� ( THE ATTACHED LETTER). A' NAME I ADDRESS t "YT -1- .. C, Zf- S`41f 40 Q4,- C'� ,,, '-.. l t 'L' k e,'L DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS For Economic Development Planning and Implementation For The City Of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, State Of California TO: Economic Development Planning and Implementation Consultants FROM: City Of Diamond Bar, California RE: Economic Development Planning and Implementation The City of Diamond Bar is soliciting written proposals from economic development consultants to prepare an Economic Development Action Plan and to coordinate the implementation of the Action Plan. Sole practitioners are encouraged to respond to this solicitation. It is anticipated that a single firm would be selected for both Action Plan preparation and implementation. Those submitting proposals will be evaluated with particular attention to their qualifications and ability to perform the required tasks. From the proposals submitted, three (3) to five (5) proposers will be selected to make a brief presentation of their proposals, after which a final selection will be made. The proposer's staff shall include persons with experience in economic development planning and plan implementation. Each proposal shall include a resume of the qualifications and experience of all personnel who will be involved in the planning and implementation process. The consultant is required to furnish references with the initial proposal and describe the firm's capabilities to perform the requested work. References should include staff resumes and relevant past projects. Indicate which members of the firm will be responsible for providing the services requested and the amount of time (by man-hours) each member of the firm would devote to the project. Include the name of the Project Director. Provide a list of former and current clients (include names of contacts and telephone numbers) for whom services similar to those described in the RFP have been performed. Sole practitioner firms are encouraged to submit proposals. The consultant shall describe his approach to the city's project and submit proposed time lines for completion. The following sections include subjects to be addressed and are presented as a guide to the consultants in developing their proposals and determining the scope of work necessary to accomplish the goals of this project. The successful consultant will be required to meet with City representatives prior to entering into a contract to identify pertinent issues in economic development action planning and implementation; and, to determine DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL OCTOBER 5, 1993 PAGE TWO the type and magnitude of effort needed to address each issue. The results of this meeting or series of meetings will more clearly identify the scope of the project. A firm price for the work shall be negotiated and agreed upon by the City and the consultant. General Objectives The City of Diamond Bar is in need of a program for the development of the community's economy, particularly the retention and attraction of businesses to existing commercial property, as well as, the current and potential opportunities, including the providing of a work plan implement a plan to overcome business retention/attraction constraints and realize the related opportunities. The City has traditionally called upon a wide range of citizens' input. The City will involve the participation from elected and appointed city officials, appointed committees, service organizations, the Chamber of Commerce, local business representatives, and the citizens of the community. The City expects to receive a work plan, setting forth specific objectives, and an implementation plan. The City Council would expect a clear, attainable action plan, which addresses short-term issues related to business retention and attraction. The consultant will work under direction of the City Manager's Office and in close supervision of the Community Development Department. The Consultant will work closely with the City's elected and appointed officials, as well as, the other individuals and organizations mentioned above. Scope Of Work: The scope of work will include, but not be limited to, the following: Task 1: Assess economic constraints and opportunities related to business retention and attraction. Consultant shall review all available data regarding the City of Diamond Bar that would assist in the assessment. This data would include the City's General Plan and EIR, previous marketing research studies, adjacent cities' plans, and other information identified by the City to the Consultant which may effect community's economy. Consultant shall interview city business leaders, city officials, and other citizens to obtain information regarding the overall assessment. Survey research will be conducted by the Consultant to determine the City's economic needs and goals. DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL OCTOBER 5, 1993 PAGE THREE Scope of Work: Task 2. Prepare an economic development market analysis, emphasizing business retention/attraction. Consultant, working with city staff, will develop the data and prepare the city's market analysis, which would include an inventory of existing commercial developments, vacancy data, Standard Industrial Code (SIC) data, lease/rent rate data, and other pertinent data. In addition, Consultant, working with City staff, will compile information on existing and proposed development activity within the city. Consultant shall obtain other information necessary to prepare the market analysis, to include the following information: The selected firm should review the City's new General Plan, other data, studies and information made available by the City and others. Identify, obtain and review studies and plans which have been prepared by the County and adjoining cities and agencies which may have an impact on the economic future of the City of Diamond Bar. Conducting interviews, surveys and other original and secondary research needed in order to define economic potential and constraints, and to prepare a retention and attraction program. Utilizing the information generated, as appropriate, the selected firm, working in conjunction with City staff and others, will identify those attributes and deterrents which impact on the economic development of Diamond Bar. Under the guidance of the selected firm, City staff would compile information on the development activity in or near the City of Diamond Bar including information on permits, zoning, General Plan designations, previous studies, demographic data, potential develop sites, etc. as required for the market analysis. The selected firm will obtain, review and analyze all other studies and other available information normally necessary to conduct the type of market analysis being proposed, including field analysis/audit of retail development located in the City's trade area boundary and competitive area. This inventory will provide the basis for analyzing the performance of the City's trade area boundary and competitive area. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS OCTOBER 5, 1993 PAGE FOUR Scope Of Work• DRAFT This inventory will provide the basis for analyzing the performance of the City's retail sector. The field inventory would measure and classify all retail space in the trade area including vacant space and lease rates in free-standing and center locations. Retail categories would be consistent with categories used to determine retail expenditure. Potential selected retail anchors and sites beyond the City limits would be surveyed to evaluate retail retention/attraction opportunities and their potential impact in attracting new retail projects to Diamond Bar. Investigate retail projects in the pipeline in the competitive market area. Working with City staff, the selected firm will collect and analyze retail sales tax data and determine in - leakage and out -leakage for the purpose of identifying and targeting those retailers which are under- represented in the market. The selected consultant will prepare pro forma analyses of demand based on existing and projected trade area population. Project retail floor space needs by retail -type to identify the retailer void. Using the primary research product of this analysis, the pro forms demand projection will be refined on the basis of City retail performance data, existing access, competition and major physical constraints. The primary purpose will be to identify specific retention and attraction. The study will also identify retail opportunities supportable at future population levels. Retail opportunities will be described in terms of type of anchor to the tenants, feasible store types, leasable space and acreage needed to support such development. The selected firm will analyze the source of the market demand for office space in existing office facilities, which could be attracted to Diamond Bar; including medical, financial services, attorneys, accountants, insurance headquarters, corporate headquarters and other users. Analysis of potential capture rate of total regional office growth. Amenities which would be required. Projected absorption rates (high/low). Projected lease rates (high/low). Office commercial square footage needs. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS OCTOBER 5, 1993 PAGE FIVE Scope Of Work: DRAFT Identify the specific types of businesses (SIC or other suitable classification) which could, realistically, be attracted to the City of Diamond Bar. This would include an analysis of the opportunities to target, including but not limited to restaurant and entertainment related, supermarkets, drugstores, discount chains, restaurants (fast food, coffee shops and sit-down), home improvement stores, nurseries, home furnishing stores, factory outlet stores, freeway - oriented retailers, and others. Indicate the number of square feet of each store type for which a market demand exists in Diamond Bar. The selected firm and City staff will identify support systems needed to attract and retain business in Diamond Bar including: Actions required by City to improve business development climate and to encourage new business development and business retention, including networking, public information/education, targeted advertising/mailings, industry trade association membership/activities, prospecting visitations, community events and other. As part of the process of completing Tasks 1 through 4, the selected firm will meet with City staff, the project Area Committee, Planning Commission and City Council and others on an as needed basis to define the issues and the strategy needed to resolve the City's economic problems. It will be the responsibility of the selected firm to prepare the Economic Development Action Plan for consideration by the City and to revise the document to include all revisions and issues raised through the public meetings and hearings and comment processes. Submission Of Proposal: This proposal should include, at a minimum, the following information: Description of Proposed Work Program - Explain your understanding of the project. Describe the detailed work program including the scope of each task. Identify the specific and products to be submitted. DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL OCTOBER 5, 1993 PAGE SIX Proposed Work Schedule - Present a comprehensive work schedule showing the dates for the completion of the major activities for each task, including major decision points. Indicate how you will complete the work within the schedule approved by the EDA. Cost of Services - The proposal must define the aggregate cost for the work called for in this RFP. Provide a cost breakdown for each Task for the City. Define the basis for the fees. A total not -to -exceed cost for each of the three Work Programs and for the entire Scope of Work must be included. Firms interested in providing the above services must submit five (5) bound copies and one unbound reproducible copy of their proposal in sufficient detail to allow for a thorough evaluation and comparative analysis. The proposal must be submitted by no later than 5:00 p.m. on 1993 to : City of Diamond Bar City Manager' Office 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 SELECTION PROCESS A committee will review each proposal received and will interview those firms which appear most qualified to carry out the work called for in the Scope of Work. Following this review, it is anticipated that the Council of the City of Diamond Bar would select the firm and approve the agreement with the selected firm. EVALUATION CRITERIA The proposer's understanding of the work required as exhibited by the clarity, utility and adequacy of the proposal. The demonstrated competence and experience of the personnel responsible for performing the work. The demonstrated competence and experience of the personnel responsible for performing the work. The demonstrated prior experience of the firm in similar projects. The proposer's time schedule and demonstrated willingness to devote resources to the proposed work in order to - meet the desired schedule. DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL OCTOBER 5, 1993 PAGE SEVEN Targeted Selection Schedule Dates: Issue request for proposals - October 8, 1993 Proposal deadline - November 1, 1993 Interviews conducted - Week of November 8, 1993 Selection of consultant November 16, 1993 The proposer may suggest changes from the scope of work contained in this RFP that in the proposer's opinion would enhance their ability to perform the work desired by the city and/or would provide a benefit to the program itself. Such deviations would be items of discussion during the interview/negotiations. This RFP description does not commit the City to award a contract or to pay any costs incurred in the preparation of a proposal. The City reserves the right to accept or reject any proposal. Although the City's intention is to enter into a contract covering the entire Scope of Work described herein, due to funding constraints, the City reserves the right to reduce or otherwise modify the Scope of Work. CSTY OF D=AMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 REPORT DATE: October 1, 1993 FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer TITLE: Leyland Drive Encroachments SUMMARY: Residents along Leyland Drive have constructed walls and other structures within the existing right-of-way easement. This report discusses those encroachments and how they should be handled. RECOMMENDATION: That staff be directed to identify any encroachments that may violate applicable codes and ordinances and action be taken to mitigate any violations. Any encroachments that are not in violation would be allowed to remain. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Resolution(s) Ordinances(s) Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: _ Public Hearing Notification _ Bid Specifications (on file in City Clerk's office) X Other: Typical Section Exhibit "A" 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed N/A by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? N/A 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes X No Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? X Yes _ No Report discussed with the following affected departments: Planning Department REVIEWED BY: Ter ence L. Belhnger City Manager +"n nC GF1r�JEY (70` George A. Wentz Interim City Engineer MEETING DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: ISSUE STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. October 5, 1993 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager Leyland Drive Encroachments How should encroachments in the right-of-way on Leyland Drive best be handled? RECOMMENDATION: That staff be directed to identify any encroachments that may violate applicable codes and ordinances and action be taken to mitigate any violations. Any encroachments that are not in violation would be allowed to remain. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: At a previous City Council meeting, staff was directed to review and evaluate encroachments into the right-of-way along Leyland Drive. These encroachments consisted of walls, fences, pilasters and stairways. Four different tract maps for this area were approved by Los Angeles County prior to our City's incorporation. Per description on the maps, a public easement was given to the City for public improvement and utility purposes. The right-of-way in questions is a 64 foot easement. A typical section is attached (Exhibit A). Utilities are located within the parkway. What has occurred over time is that residents have constructed various improvements within the parkway area, directly behind the sidewalk. Approximately 44 of 69 properties have constructed such improvements. These include: 31 wall encroachments/pilasters 4 stairs 9 both of the above 44 Total To the best of our knowledge, none of the encroachments violate applicable codes. 1 Page Two Leyland Drive Encroachments October 5, 1993 Since the right-of-way in question is an easement, and is not owned in fee by the City, there is technically no reason the owner could not construct the improvements in question. However, the owners are constructing these at their own risk, since the City and/or utility company would have the right to remove any such obstacles should maintenance or construction be required. Based on discussions with the City Attorney, maintaining the current easement would be preferable to fee ownership. In addition, as long as no codes or ordinances are being violated, related improvements could be allowed to remain. CONCLUSION: Based on the information at hand, it would be appropriate to take no additional action at this time unless codes have been violated. We also believe this would be true for any similar circumstances in other locations in the City. PREPARED BY: George A. Wentz `. 0 dw 0 ,. KI CITY OI` DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. '• TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 REPORT DATE: September 29, 1993 FROM: George A. Wentz, Director of Public Works TITLE: Proposed signing and striping for the south side of Pathfinder Road between SR 57 off -ramp and Brea Canyon Road SUMMARY: As part of the overall plan to widen Pathfinder Bridge, the existing signing and striping along eastbound Pathfinder Road between SR 57 off -ramp and Brea Canyon Road will also need to be modified. RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX to approve the installation of "No Stopping, 6-8:00 a.m. & 4-6:00 p.m., except Saturday and Sunday" signs supplemented with "2 -Hour parking 8:00 a. m. -4:00 p. in., except Saturday and Sunday" signs with appropriate red curbing on the south side of Pathfinder Road between SR 57 off -ramp and Brea Canyon Road; and 2. City Council approve the deign to include a right -turn lane at Brea Canyon Road from eastbound Pathfinder Road. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification X Resolution(s) Bid Specifications (on file in City Clerk's office) _ Ordinances(s) X Other: T/T Commission R=rt _ Agreement(s) Proposed Signing and Striping Plan EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed Yes X No by the City Attorney? _ 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? Yes X No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? X Yes No Which Commission? Traffic and Transportation Commission _ 5. Are other departments affected by the report? Yes X No Report discussed with the following affected departments: N/A _ REVIEWED BY: ('� Q^, Terrence L. Bel a Geor A. Wentz City Manager Dir for of Public orks emir COUNCU, nEPURo AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Proposed signing and striping for the south side of Pathfinder Road between SR 57 off -ramp and Brea Canyon Road ISSUE STATEMENT: Existing diagonal parking spaces will be converted to parallel parking spaces the south side of Pathfinder Road between SR 57 off -ramp and Brea Canyon Road and a right -turn lane on eastbound Pathfinder Road at Brea Canyon Road will be created. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX to install "No Stopping 6-8: a.m. & 4-6:00 p.m., except Saturday and Sunday" signs supplemented with 112 -Hour Parking, 8:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m., except Saturday and Sunday" signs in lieu of the existing 112 -Hour Parking, 7:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m.", and appropriate red curbing on south side of Pathfinder Road between SR 57 off -ramp and Brea Canyon Road. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: The proposed scope of work will be funded by Traffic Control Maintenance Account and is estimated to cost $1,500.00. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: As a cooperative project to widen the overcrossing and roadway approaches on Pathfinder Road over SR 57, the City of Diamond Bar is currently working with the State of California Department of Transportation and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. With the County of Los Angeles being the lead agency in the construction phase, the project began on February 24, 1993 and is anticipated to be completed by the end of November, 1993. As part of this project, parking on the south side of Pathfinder Road, between SR 57 off -ramp and Brea Canyon Road was planned for modification. There are currently twelve (12) diagonal parking spaces in front of the businesses with a 112 -Hour Parking, 7:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m." parking restriction. With the anticipated widening of the overcrossing, these diagonal parking spaces will need to be eliminated. Approximately five (5) parallel parking spaces are feasible along with the necessary red curbing, creation of a right -turn lane on eastbound Pathfinder Road at Brea Canyon Road. Page Twe Pathfinder Rd. @ 8R 57/Brea Canyon Rd. October 5, 1993 Prior to the project beginning, staff met with the owner of the complex to discuss the short and long range implications of the Pathfinder Widening. Of the immediate concern was that construction workers not use the spaces and that the greatest number of spaces remain when the project was complete. Staff committed to assure that the spaces would not be used by the construction workers during the project. We also indicated that we would try to retain as many parallel spaces as possible. At the September 9, 1993 Traffic and Transportation Commission meeting, the Commission reviewed the parking situation and the anticipated change in the configuration. They discussed the attached signing and striping plan, red curbing and right -turn lane on eastbound Pathfinder Road at Brea Canyon Road and the signage. Based upon review of the site and input from businesses, the Traffic and Transportation Commission concluded the following: * modify the existing 112 -Hour Parking, 7:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m." parking restrictions to 112 -Hour Parking, 8:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m., except Saturday and Sunday" signs; * include signage to prohibit stopping between 6-8:00 a.m. and 4-6:00 p.m., except Saturday and Sunday; and * include red curbing to provide adequate sight distances and install the right -turn pocket. Based on these actions, staff is bringing this item to the City Council for action. PREPARED BY: David G. Liu Tseday Aberra M!RW-OR Off RAMP w - - ��� Q < ON pAMP 1p y I i I 1'' I 1 I- I TIti) rN j t� I ICP �� �► V O ft ON pAMP 1p RESOLUTION NO. 93-73 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MODIFYING A 112 -HOUR PARKING, 7:00 A.M.-6:00 P.M." PARKING RESTRICTION TO A "NO STOPPING, 6-8:00 A.M. & 4-6:00 P.M., EXCEPT SATURDAY AND SUNDAY" SUPPLEMENTED WITH A 112 -HOUR PARKING, 8:00 A.M.-4:00 P.M., EXCEPT SATURDAY AND SUNDAY" RESTRICTION, RED CURBING ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PATHFINDER ROAD BETWEEN SR 57 OFF -RAMP AND BREA CANYON ROAD. A. RECITALS. (i) The Traffic and Transportation Commission considered this matter, as shown on Exhibit "A", at a public meeting on September 9, 1993. (ii) At the meeting of September 9, 1993, the Traffic and Transportation Commission determined: 1. That the 112 -Hour Parking, 7:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m." parking restriction be modified to 112 -Hour Parking, 8:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m., except Saturday and Sunday" and "No Stopping, 6-8:00 a.m. & 4-6:00 p.m., except Saturday and Sunday" signs; and 2. That the southerly curb be painted red 40 feet easterly from SR 57 off -ramp curb return, 30 feet westerly from the drive approach at 21316 Pathfinder Road, and 20 feet between the drive approaches of 21316 Pathfinder Road and 21324 Pathfinder Road on the south side of Pathfinder Road between SR 57 off - ramp and Brea Canyon Road; and (iii) The Traffic and Transportation Commission recommends installation of said parking restriction and red curb. B. RESOLUTION. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Pursuant to Section 15.20.010 of the Los Angeles County Code, as heretofore adopted, by reference by the City Council, provides the following upon approval by the City Council: a. Installation of 112 -Hour Parking, 8:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m., except Saturday and Sunday" and "No Stopping, 6-8:00 a.m. & 4-6:00 p.m., except Saturday and Sunday" signs on the south side of Pathfinder Road between SR 57 off -ramp and Brea Canyon Road; and b. Red curbing the southerly curb 40 feet easterly from SR 57 off -ramp curb return, 30 feet westerly from the drive approach at 21316 Pathfinder Road, and 20 feet between the drive approaches of 21316 Pathfinder Road and 21324 Pathfinder Road on the south side of Pathfinder Road between SR 57 off - ramp and Brea Canyon Road; and 2. The City Council hereby finds that the public health, safety, and welfare will be best protected by establishing a parking restriction and installation of red curbing on the south side of Pathfinder Road between SR 57 off -ramp and Brea Canyon Road. 3. This resolution shall become effective upon installation of the parking restriction signs and red curbing as required in Section 1 of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED and APPROVED this 5th day of October, 1993 MAYOR I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on 5th day of October, 1993 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Werner, Forbing, MacBride NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Miller ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Papen ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ATTEST: City Clerk City of Diamond Bar Off ,2AMP LI �- I w G� 5~L17 I l_ 0 kr �I I l_ 0 AGENDA NO. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT DATE: September 3, 1993 MEETING DATE: September 9, 1993 TO: Chairman and Members of the Traffic and Transportation Commission VIA: George A. Wentz, Director of Public Works FROM: David G. Liu, Senior Engineer P/ Tseday Aberra, Administrative Analyst SUBJECT: Request not to remove existing 112 -Hour Parking, 7:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m." signs located on the south side of Pathfinder Road between SR 57 off -ramp and Brea Canyon Road BACKGROUND: The Department of Public Works received a request from Rinehart Management Company, which manages the 30 -unit office building located on 21308 Pathfinder Road, to reconsider the elimination of the current 112 -Hour Parking,. 7:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m." signs when the Pathfinder Road Bridge Widening Project is completed. DISCUSSION• The 112 -Hour Parking, 7:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m." signs in discussion are currently installed in front of a 30 -unit office building located on the south side of Pathfinder Road, between SR 57 off -ramp and Brea Canyon Road. At the present, 28 of the 30 office spaces are leased with a total of 18 employees. Four of the offices, which employ 8 persons, have their only access through Pathfinder Road while the remaining 24 offices have access from both Pathfinder Road and the back of the building. This means that employees and customers of the 24 offices are not limited to parking on Pathfinder Road only and are able to park in the 35 on-site parking spaces provided by the office building and enter their respective offices. As shown on the attached aerial and pictures, diagonal parking spaces (12) are currently provided for the businesses along Pathfinder Road. The attached signing and striping plan demonstrates the proposed plan for said area. Rinehart Management Company feels the elimination of the parking spaces on Pathfinder Road will in some way cause hardship to the businesses. Page Two Parking on Pathfinder Road September 3, 1993 Currently, the various businesses and restaurant have approximately 103 additional on-site parking available for its employees and customers. Although restricted (2 -Hour Parking between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.), additional parking is available along the westerly side of Brea Canyon Road immediately south of Pathfinder Road. RECOMMENDATION• That the Traffic and Transportation Commission deny the request for the 112 - Hour Parking, 7:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m." signs to remain as currently posted and recommend to the City Council the installation of "No Stopping Anytime" signs on the south side of Pathfinder Road, between SR 57 off -ramp and Brea Canyon Road. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. e�3 DATE: I _ TO: City Clerk — V,Y) FROM: ADDRESS: P`� DS-' ,Zl V Is i ] ORGANIZATION: ^ SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address�ap wt�ten above. NOTE: All persons may attend meetings aWd address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: Ji L' — S -- O zs TO: City Clerk FROM: ADDRESS: C) ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: L)p 'It, r-, HE VN � I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda itPlease have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as writt%n,70*ve. /� Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: TO: City Clerk j� A� FROM: ADDRESS: or-ed2mc o ORGANIZATION: S}44e A r aj4 (rep, J ' ISS • SUBJECT: fi Qp-.f& CJ I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as ygityen abqFe. NOTE: All persons may attend Meetings and address the 1City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to censure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: / G16`/q 3 TO: City Clerk FROM: 1t"7 A X �%� X f�✓�L ADDRESS: 3 // /',��i�� 7G L/-! ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: %�C/✓v'L.r �G'/Eo-�I I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as wr' toen abo e. Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognised and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CVY.COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO DATE: TO: City Clerk FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and add2e.-;s awrit-ten above. NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY}} CLERK C� FROM: t'`t'_ IJ. f C �'`� DATE: ADDRESS: �(�>¢�� l�%Q__ J,� PHONE: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT:iJ��l� I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature VOLUNTARY REQUEST To A=Raoo rnn cxww oovwa=z. REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: TO: City Clerk FROM: g,* [s C/ G L 4 IYR CJ9 Rao /G ADDRESS: 7Z / -S'- ZS YC1"VQ ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: 9' �- I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. C Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: TO: City Clerk FROM: 2SL? ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: �` /1.G_'/ALL zei I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. 8r.', DATE: TO: City Clerk FROM: /-'1,4 X `` 1 n X ADDRESS: 103�"`3W 190to]`F SUBJECT: S P 1.4 /' I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Q_ Sianature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. CITY OF DIAMOND DAA AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 REPORT DATE: September 29, 1993 FROM: George A. Wentz, Interim City Engineer TITLE: Pump Station Design for "Country Sewers" SUMMARY: This item relates to the design of the Indian Creek Pump Station. RECOMMENDATION: That City Council authorize an expenditure of up to $40,000 for the design of the Indian Creek pump station. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Resolution(s) _ Ordinances(s) _ Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: _ Public Hearing Notification _ Bid Specifications (on file in City Clerk's office) Other: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed N/A by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? N/A 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes X No Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes X No Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: (R � Te ence L. Belar@er City Manager 1"ne Garv6 CO George A. Wentz Interim City Engineer CITY COUNCIL. REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: October 5, 1993 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Pump Station Design for "Country Sewers" ISSUE STATEMENT As part of the Country Sewer Assessment District, an additional pump station needs to be upgraded. RECOMMENDATION: That City Council authorize an expenditure of up to $40,000 for the design of the Indian Creek pump station. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: The estimated cost for design services is less than $40,000. The City would need to authorize the related expenditures with reimbursement from the District, upon formation. Transfer $40,000 from reserves for the expenditures. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: As a part of the design of the sanitary sewer system in the "Country", the consultant (DFA) has completed the design of the system and submitted plans to the County of Los Angeles for review and comment. The County has determined that,'based on the additional sewerage materials being added and the condition of the pump station at Indian Creek; the pump station will not be able to handle the additional load from the District. Although the pump may technically be adequately sized to handle the sewerage, it is the County's position that based on age, condition and maintenance history at this location, the pump needs to be upgraded to handle the new District. Staff has met with County representatives to discuss details of the requirements to upgrade the system and to discuss what the County's participation may be, since this is also a maintenance issue related to the station itself. The County's position is that the upgrades that are required are due to the addition of the District and that although there may be some maintenance issues, they do not believe that the pump station in question can handle the flow quantities and that the District should finance the related costs. 1 The consultant has considered otner aiternatiY=a and -------d tk-i=- viability. The conclusion is that utilizing the Indian Creek pump station is still the most cost effective and feasible design, even with the increased cost. The total estimated cost to upgrade the pumps, including the design, may be as high as $400,000. Staff is not certain what impact this will ultimately have on the cost for constructing the District until the bids are received and the engineers report prepared. As the City Council is aware, Dwight French and Associates, Inc. (DFA) is performing the current design and is able and willing to perform the additional work. we recommend that the City Manager be authorized to negotiate with DFA for the related services or to select a Consultant best qualified to perform the design services in a timely manner and negotiate the best price based on the service to be provided. PREPARED BY: George A. Wentz 2 DRAFT City of Diamond Bar 09/29/93 Meeting Agenda For Page: 1 October 5, 1993 1. CLOSED SESSION: 5:00 P.M. 2. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: MAYOR MILLER INVOCATION: REVERNED RANDY LANTHRIPE - CHURCH IN THE VALLEY ROLL CALL: COUNCILMEN MACBRIDE, FORBING, WERNER, Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Mayor Miller 3. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES Etc. 3.1 CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION - LIFE SAVING EFFORTS 3.2 BF.ZME&L PRESENTATION* TO "CITY ONLINE" VOLUNTEERS V, .. 3.3 VERBAL PRESENTATION - "PROFILE OF A TAGGER" - Deputy Larry Luter 4. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 4.1 PLANNING COMMISSION - OCTOBER 11, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 4.2 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - OCTOBER 14, 1993 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 4.3 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - OCTOBER 19, 1993 - 6:00 P.M AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS: 6. COUNCIL COMMENTS: 7. CONSENT CALENDAR: 7.1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 7.1.1 ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 - South.Pointe Master Plan - Approve as submitted. 7.1.2 REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 21, 1993 - APPROVE as submitted. 7.2 WARRANT REGISTER: APPROVE WARRANT REGISTER DATED ,Qctober 5, 1993 in the amount of $ 7 / J 114 7.3 BOND EXONERATIONS: 7.3.1 PAVING SURETY BOND POS'T'ED FOR TRACT 42535 (Montefino Condominium Complex) - The City desires City of Diamond Bar 09/29/93 Meeting Agenda For Page: 2 October 5, 1993 7.3.1 PAVING SURETY BOND POSTED FOR TRACT 42535 to exonerate the surety bond posted for paving of private streets at Porto Grande, Estoril Dr. and Bodega Way in the amount of $111,500. Recommended Action: Approve and accept completed work and exonerate the surety bond posted for paving of private streets. 7.3.2 PAVING SURETY BOND POSTED FOR TRACT 42533 (Montefino Condominium Complex) - The City desires to exonerate the Surety bond posted for paving of Estoril Dr. (private street) in the amount of $85,850. Recommended Action: Approve and accept completed work and exonerate the Surety Bond posted with L.A. County in November, 1984 for paving of Estoril Dr. (private street). 7.3.3 GRADING SURETY BOND POSTED FOR TRACT 42535 (Montefino Condominium Complex) - The City desires to exonerate the surety bond posted for grading of Buildings Nos. 44-65 inclusive, on Chardonnay Ave. in the amount of $7,000. Recommended Action: Approve and accept work completed and exonerate the surety bond posted with L.A. County in June, 1983 for grading for 22 No. buildings on Chardonnay Ave. in Tract 42535 in the amount of $7,000. 7.3.4 PAVING SURETY BOND POSTED FOR TRACT 36741 - (Montefino Condominium Complex) - The City desires to exonerate the surety bond posted for paving of Bodega Way and Colombard Ln. (private streets) in the amount of $118,000. Recommended Action: Approve and accept work completed and exonerate the Surety Bond posted with L.A. County in November, 1986 for paving, curb and gutter on Bodega Way and Colombard Ln. 7.3.GRADING SURETY BOND POSTED FOR 2452 ALAMO HEIGHTS (o Dr. in the "Country" - The City desires to exonerate the surety bond posted for grading in the amount of $4,460. Recommended Action: Approve and accept work completed and exonerate the surety bond posted with L.A. County in May, 1989 for grading for a single family residence. City of Diamond Bar 09/29/93 Meeting Agenda For Page: 3 October 5, 1993 7.3y6 STORM DRAIN BOND FOR PRIVATE DRAIN NOS. 1813 AND 2061 ON TRACT 42535, CONSTRUCTED BY PRESLEY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA - The City desires to exonerate the surety bond posted for Storm Drain Nos. 1813 and 2061 in the amount of $194,000. Recommended Action: Approve exoneration of Bond No. OC 300530 posted for Storm Drain Nos. 1813 and 2061 on Tract 42535. 7-.3. GRADING CASH BOND POSTED FOR 23970 RIDGELINE RD. - T44 --Vit y desi 9 to exo ra a the,�a h bond posted f r raying f a t1nn' cou t 1 ate at 23970 idge ine d. in the mount of,/$1,728. Recommended Action: Approve and accept the work completed and exonerate the cash bond posted for grading of a tennis court. 7.3.8 SURETY BOND POSTED FOR GRADING AT 2638 BLAZE TRAIL Dr. - The City desires to exonerate the surety bond posted for grading in the amount of $8,622. Recommended Action: Approve and accept work completed and exonerate the Surety Bond No. P2500423. 7.4 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR TRANSFERING PRIVATE DRAIN NO. 1813, IN TRACT NO. 42535 LOCATED ON PORTO GRANDE DRIVE AND ALBARIZA PLACE IN THE MONTEFINO CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX, TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT - Private Drain No. 1813 was constructed in 1984 as part of the improvements on Tract 42535 in the Montefino Condominium Complex. Subsequently, the drain was inspected and approved by L.A. County Department of Public Works in June, 1993. Based on satisfactory completion of the improvements per approved plans. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX requesting L.A. County Department of Public Works Flood Control District to accept the transfer and conveyance of Private Drain No. 1813 for future operation, maintenance, repair and improvement. 7.5 AMENDMENT TO CHARLES ABBOTT & ASSOCIATES CONTRACT FOR SOLID WASTE MONITORING - Troy Recommended Action: 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 8.1 UNDERGROUND UTILITIES: City of Diamond Bar 09/29/93 Meeting Agenda For Page: 4 October 5, 1993 9. OLD BUSINESS: 9.1 DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Terry Recommended Action: 9.2 REPORT ON PROPERTY ISSUES ON LEYLAND - GEORGE Recommended Action: 9.3 AMENDMENT TO SIGNAGE & STRIPING FOR PARKING ON PATHFINDER ROAD IN FRONT OF COMMERCIAL CENTER EAST OF PATHFINDER BRIDGE - Recommended Action: 10. NEW BUSINESS: 10.1 QUITCLAIM BY BRAMALEA LTD. TO THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR OF *ROPERTY LOCATED ON LONGVIEW DRIVE NORT OF ST. IVES OURT In 1988 when Tract 42568 was appro by L.A. Co the owner/bevel per Bramalea L . offered to !7� dedi, Lot 85 to the ounty for purposes. However, the aega aperwork inoolved in is transition,w" never find ramalea now wis to q itclaiw tie lot located on Lo iew Dr. t die City. Recommended Action: ccept lot 85;of Ttact 42568 located on Longview Dr., n h:, St. Ives fit: and authorize the City Clerk to s' and re rd the Quitclaim. 1 FOR" ROPOS F't3R "PA ER -FL - d l Recommended Action: 11. ANNOUNCEMENTS: 12. ADJOURNMENT: City of Diamond Bar 09/30/93 Meeting Agenda For Page: 1 October 5, 1993 1. CLOSED SESSION: 5:00 P.M. 2. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 P.M. yro r a , o Gk UE 5 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: MAYOR MILLER 2 pl a o fND„1^ i , kl! A-1 :) P° D E $ f : t T INVOCATION: REVERNED RANDY LANTHRIPE - CHURCH IN THE VALLEY, t eL. ROLL CALL: COUNCILMEN MACBRIDE, FORBING, WERNER, Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Mayor Miller 3. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES Etc. 3.1 CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION - LIFE SAVING EFFORTS 3.2 PRESENTATIONS OF CITY TILES TO "CITY ONLINE” VOLUNTEERS AND LOCAL VENDORS 4. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 4.1 PLANNING COMMISSION - OCTOBER 11, 1993 - 7:00 P.M. AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 4.2 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - OCTOBER 14, 1993 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 4.3 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - OCTOBER 19, 1993 - 6:00 P.M AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS: 6. COUNCIL COMMENTS: 7. CONSENT CALENDAR: 7. 1 APPIWVAL OF, MINUTES: 7 .l EGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 7 1993 - rove as submitted. r 7.1.2,ADd6URNED REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 South Pointe Master Plan - Approve as submitted. ,ARRANT REGISTER: APPROVE WARRANT REGISTER DATED ,•''__./- October 5, 1993 in the amount of $548,641.44. 7,73 MEMBERSHIP OF HIDDEN HILLS IN SCJPIA - THE / Southern California Joint Powers Insurance Authority, at their meeting of September.22, 1993, recommended approval of the City of Hidden Hills as a member of the Authority. Cities applying for membership must be approved by a two-thirds majority of the current membership. City of Diamond Bar 09/30/93 Meeting Agenda For Page: 2 October 5, 1993 7,..3' MEMBERSHIP OF HIDDEN HILLS IN SCJPIA - THE Recommended Action: Approve membership of the City of Hidden Hills in the SCJPIA and authorize C/Forbing to execute the consent form as the City's delegate to the Authority. 7>,4� CLAIM FOR DAMAGES - FILED BY KORENNE OFFENBECHER, August 10, 1993. Recommended Action: Reject request and refer matter for further action to Carl Warren & Co., the City's Risk Manager. 7.5 BOND EXONERATIONS: 7ZV-1 PAVING SURETY BOND POSTED FOR TRACT 42534 (Montefino Condominium Complex) - The City desires to exonerate Surety Bond No. OC300752 posted for paving of private streets at Porto Grande, Estoril Dr. and Bodega Way in the amount of $111,500. Recommended Action: Approve and accept completed work and exonerate the surety bond posted for paving of private streets. i 7 PAVING SURETY BOND POSTED FOR TRACT 42533 (Montefino Condominium Complex) - The City desires to exonerate Surety Bond No. OC300865 for paving of Estoril Dr. (private street) in the amount of $85,850. Recommended Action: Approve and accept completed work and exonerate the Surety Bond posted with L.A. County in November, 1984 for paving of Estoril Dr. (private street). 7�3 GRADING SURETY BOND POSTED FOR TRACT 42535 (Montefino Condominium Complex) - The City desires to exonerate Surety Bond No. OC300453 posted for grading of Buildings Nos. 44-65 inclusive, on Chardonnay Ave. in the amount of $7,000. Recommended Action: Approve and accept work completed and exonerate the surety bond posted with L.A. County in June, 1983 for grading for 22 buildings on Chardonnay Ave. in Tract 42535 in the amount of $7,000. 7.5--4--,PAVING SURETY BOND POSTED FOR TRACT 36741 - (Montefino Condominium Complex) - The City desires to exonerate Surety Bond No. 5293514 posted for paving of Bodega Way and Colombard Ln. (private streets) in the amount of $118,000. City of Diamond Bar 09/30/93 Meeting Agenda For Page: 3 October 5, 1993 7 PAVING SURETY BOND POSTED FOR TRACT 36741 - Recommended Action: Approve and accept work completed and exonerate the Surety Bond posted with L.A. County in November, 1986 for paving, curb and gutter on Bodega Way and Colombard Ln. 7,--_5 STORM DRAIN BOND FOR PRIVATE DRAIN NOS. 1813 AND 2061 ON TRACT 42535, CONSTRUCTED BY PRESLEY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA - The City desires to exonerate Surety Bond No. OC 300530 posted for Storm Drain Nos. 1813 and 2061 in the amount of $194,000. Recommended Action: Approve exoneration of Bond No. OC 300530 posted for Storm Drain Nos. 1813 and 2061 on Tract 42535. 7.5,.-6' GRADING SURETY BOND POSTED FOR 2452 ALAMO HEIGHTS - The City desires to exonerate Surety Bond No. 3 SM 719 269 00 posted for grading in the amount of $4,460. Recommended Action: Approve and accept work completed and exonerate the surety bond posted with L.A. County in May, 1989 for grading for a single family residence. 7- ,5,1�7 SURETY BOND POSTED FOR GRADING AT 2638 BLAZE TRAIL Dr. - The City desires to exonerate Surety Bond No. P2500423 posted for grading in the amount of $8,622. Recommended Action: Approve and accept work completed and exonerate the Surety Bond No. P2500423. /i 7.5,,�8 GENERAL INSPECTION SURETY BOND POSTED FOR TRACT / 36741 (MONTEFINO CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX) - The City desires to exonerate Surety Bond No. 6322839 posted for general inspection of Bodega Way and Colombard Ln. (private streets) in the amount of $10,000. Recommended Action: Approve and accept work completed and exonerate the surety bond posted. 7 X RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO ACCEPT ON BEHALF OF SAID DISTRICT A TRANSFER AND CONVEYANCE OF STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS KNOWN AS PRIVATE DRAIN NO. 1813 IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FOR FUTURE OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND IMPROVEMENT, AND AUTHORIZE THE TRANSFER AND CONVEYANCE THEREOF - Private Drain No. 1813 was constructed in 1984 as part of the improvements on Tract 42535 in the Montefino City of Diamond Bar 09/30/93 Meeting Agenda For Page: 4 October 5, 1993 7,,�ESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY Condominium Complex. Subsequently, the drain was inspected and approved by L.A. County Department of Public Works in June, 1993. Based on satisfactory completion of the improvements per approved plans. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX requesting L.A. County Department of Public Works Flood Control District to accept the transfer and conveyance of Private Drain No. 1813 for future operation, maintenance, repair �-- and improvement. 7. NDME T TO CHARLES ABBOTT & ASSOCIATES CONTRACT R SOLID WASTE MONITORING - Troy Recommended Action: 8. PUBLICO HEARINGS: V..1 RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA DETERMINING THAT UNDERGROUNDING, IN THE SPECIFIED AREA, IS IN THE GENERAL PUBLIC INTEREST AND ESTABLISHING THE DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 2 - This item relates to a proposed project to underground utility line between Temple Ave. and Gold Rush Dr. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX establishing the district. 8DEVELOPMENT 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 28, 1993. This is a request for approval of a mixed use project, known as 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 sq. ft.; approximately 200 single-family detached residential dwelling units, a 28 acres neighborhood park; and the construction of a middle school. Recommended Action: Receive presentations from staff, City consultants, and project developers; open the Public Hearing, receive testimony and continue the Hearing. City of Diamond Bar 09/30/93 Meeting Agenda For Page: 5 October 5, 1993 9. OLDINESS: r'" 9.1 ,+DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT �-- Recommended Action: �i LEYLAND DRIVE - HOW SHOULD ENCROACHMENS IN THE RIGHT -OF-WAY ON LEYLAND BEST BE HANDLED? Recommended Action: Enforce applicable codes and ordinances to remove or mitigate any encroachments that may exist. 9,e RESOLUTION NO. 93 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY /� COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MODIFYING A 112 -HOUR PARKING, 7:00 A.M.-6:00 P.M." PARKING RESTRICTION TO A "NO STOPPING, 6-8:00 A.M. & 4-6:00 P.M., EXCEPT SATURDAY AND SUNDAY" SUPPLMENTED WITH A "2 -HOUR PARKING, 8:00 A.M.-4:00 P.M., EXCEPT SATURDAY AND SUNDAY" RESTRICTION, RED CURBING ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PATHFINDER ROAD BETWEEN SR 57 OFF -RAMP AND BREA CANYON ROAD - Proposed signing and striping for the south side of Pathfinder Rd. between SR 57 off -ramp and Brea Canyon Rd. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 93 -XX and approve the design to include a right -turn lane at Brea Canyon Rd. from eastbound Pathfinder Rd. 9y4 PUMB STATION DESIGN FOR "COUNTRY SEWERS" - This item relates to the design of the Indian Creek Pump Station. Recommended Action: Authorize an expenditure of up to $40,000 for the design of the Indian Creek pump station. 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS: 11. ADJOURNMENT: John Nobles 13426 Tedemory Drive • Whittier, CA 90602 (310) 945-9999 • (310) 409-4630 pager September 25, 1993 To the Citizens of Diamond Bar: I had been working in The Country development of your city taking photos for real estate appraisals on Friday, September 24, at 5:00 P.M. On Diamond Bar Boulevard, at the main entrance to the Country frills Shopping Center, r came -upon a serious two -car accident with multiple injuries. Your police, the Los Angles County Walnut Sheriff's Department, arrived on the scene within three minutes. There was a motorcycle unit and a police car. Two officers and another man, who I thought was a third officer in plainclothes, quickly got to work. This accident occurred at a busy intersection, and there was considerable traffic. Both vehicles had multiple occupants. One of the cars contained a family with small children. Because there were multiple injuries, a second ambulance had to eventually be called which took several minutes to arrive. Broken glass was everywhere and automobile parts were thrown about. People were hurt, and there was a lot of blood. I would like to commend the quick and professional action of the Sheriffs deputies, the paramedics, and as it turns out, one of your local citizens. Apparently, one of your City Council candidates, Mr. Nick Anis, was doing a "ride along" with one of the units of the Los Angeles County Sheriff s Depart- ment. Due to the immediate need for assistance, Mr. Anis personally involved himself by setting up flares, directing traffic, and helping the victims and their families. This type of immediate and responsible action, whereby citizens go the extra mile to assist o-ar public safety personnel, speaks well for your city, the Sh zriff s department, and all the individuals involved. All too often we hear of cries for help going unaided because people don't want to get involved. It is nice to see someone doing something positive for a change. Again, congratulations to all involved. You did a great j ob. I bet the families of those you helped think so, too. I'm enclosing some photos I took at the scene. Sincerely, John Nobles VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NO. 9;3 DATE: / a TO: City Clerk FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: i ..•�1 � P - SUBJECT: v S S �/� ,L'rr✓/Z '. C I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written,above. Signature NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING c�AGENDA ITEM No. DATE: TO: Cit., �i Iry FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and addres written above. NOTE: All persons may attend meetings and address the City Council. This form is intended to assist the Mayor in ensuring that all persons wishing to address the Council are recognized and to ensure correct spelling of names in the Minutes. 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 a Closed Session at 5:00 p.m. and a Regular Meeting at the South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium, located at 21865 E. Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, California at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 5, 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 Regular Meeting of the Diamond Bar City Council, to be held on October 5, 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 1st day of October, 1993, at Diamond Bar, California. 1s/ Lynda Burgess Lynda Burgess, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar