HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/02/1995Cit
co"
AGENDA
Tuesday, May 2, 1995
6:30 P.M.
Regular Meeting
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Auditorium
21865 East Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, California
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
Phyllis E. Papen
Gary H. Werner
Council Member Eileen R. Ansari
Council Member Clair W. Harmony
Council Member
City Manager
City Attorney
City Clerk
Gary G. Miller
Terrence L. Belanger
Michael Jenkins
Lynda Burgess
Copies of staff reports, or other written documentation relating to agenda items, are on file in the Office of the
City Clerk, and are available for public inspection. If you have questions regarding an agenda item,
please contact the City Clerk at (909) 860-2489 during regular business hours.
In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990,
the City of Diamond Bar requires that any person in need of any type of special equipment, assistance or
accommodation(s) in order to communicate at a City public meeting, must inform the City Clerk
a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting.
io _
f 111 ,1�1t1�111�.11:
Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking
in the Council Chambers.
The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper
and encourages you to do the same.
DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING RULES
PUBLIC INPUT
The meetings of the Diamond Bar City Council are open to the public. A member of the public may address the
Council on the subject of one or more agenda items and/or other items of which are within the subject matter
jurisdiction of the Diamond Bar City Council. A request to address the Council should be submitted in writing to
the City Clerk.
As a general rule the opportunity for public comments will take place at the discretion of the Chair. However, in
order to facilitate the meeting, persons who are interested parties for an item may be requested to give their
presentation at the time the item is called on the calendar. The Chair may limit the public input on any item or the
total amount of time allocated for public testimony based on the number of people requesting to speak and the
business of the Council.
Individuals are requested to refrain from personal attacks toward Council Members or other persons. Comments
which are not conducive to a positive business meeting environment are viewed as attacks against the entire City
Council and will not be tolerated. If not complied with, you will forfeit your remaining time as ordered by the
Chair. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated. -
In accordance with Government Code Section 54954.3(a) the Chair may from time to time dispense with public
comment on items previously considered by the Council. (Does not apply to Committee meetings.)
In accordance with State Law (Brown Act), all matters to be acted on by the City Council must be posted at least
72 hours prior to the Council meeting. In case of emergency or when a subject matter arises subsequent to the
posting of the agenda, upon making certain findings, the Council may act on an item that is not on the posted
agenda.
CONDUCT IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The Chair shall order removed from the Council Chambers any person who commits the following acts in respect
to a regular or special meeting of the Diamond Bar City Council.
A. Disorderly behavior toward the Council or any member of the thereof, tending to interrupt the due and
orderly course of said meeting.
B. A breach of the peace, boisterous conduct or violent disturbance, tending to interrupt the due and orderly
course of said meeting.
C. Disobedience of any lawful order ofthe Chair, which shall include an order to be seated or to refrain from
addressing the Board; and
D. Any other unlawful interference with the due and orderly conduct of said meeting.
INFORMATION RELATING TO AGENDAS AND ACTIONS OF THE COUNCIL
Agendas for the regular Diamond Bar City Council meetings are prepared by the City Clerk and are available 72
hours prior to the meeting. Agendas are available electronically and may be accessed by a personal computer
through a phone modem.
Every meeting of the City Council is recorded on cassette tapes and duplicate tapes are available for a nominal
charge.
ADA REQUIREMENTS
A cordless microphone is available for those persons with mobility impairments who cannot access the public
speaking area. Sign language interpreter services are also available by giving notice at least three business days
in advance of the meeting. Please telephone (909) 860-2489 between 8 am. and S p.m. Monday through Friday.
HELPFUL PHONE NUMBERS -
Copies of Agenda, Rules of the Council, Cassette Tapes of Meetings (909) 860-2489
Computer Access to Agendas (909) 860 -LINE
General Information (909) 860-2489
NOTE: ACTION MAY BE TAKEN ON ANY ITEM IDENTIFIED ON THE AGENDA.
Next Resolution No. 95-20
Next Ordinance No. 05(1995)
1. CALL TO ORDER: 6:30 P.M. May 2, 1995
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Papen
ROLL CALL: Council Members Ansari, Harmony,
Miller, Mayor Pro Tem Werner and
Mayor Papen
2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES:
2.1 Proclaiming May, 1995 as "WATER AWARENESS MONTH."
2.2. Proclaiming May, 1995 as "GOODWILL INDUSTRIES MONTH."
2.3 Proclaiming the First Week of May as "HIRE A VETERAN
WEEK."
2.4 Proclaiming Saturday, May 13, 1995 as "LETTER CARRIER'S
FOOD DRIVE."
3. 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. Although the City Council values your comments,
pursuant to the Brown Act, the Council generally cannot take
any action on items not listed on the posted agenda. Please
complete a Speaker's Card and give it to the City Clerk
(completion of this form is voluntary). There is a five
minute maximum time limit when addressing the City Council.
4. COUNCIL COMMENTS: Items raised by individual
Councilmembers are for Council discussion. Direction may be
given at this meeting or the item may be scheduled for action
at a future meeting.
5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1 PLANNING COMMISSION - May 8, 1995 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD
Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.2 CITY COUNCIL GENERAL PLAN PUBLIC HEARING - May 9, 1995 -
6:30 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.3 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - May 11, 1995 - 7:00
p.m., AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.4 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - May 16, 1995 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD
Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
MAY 2, 1995 PAGE 2
6. CONSENT CALENDAR:
6.1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
6.1.1 Regular Meeting of April 4, 1995 - Approve as
Submitted.
6.1.2 Special Meeting of April 6, 1995 - Approve as
Submitted.
Requested by: City Clerk
6.2 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - for March 27, 1995 -
Receive & File.
Requested by: Community Development Director
6.3 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES - for March
9, 1995 - Receive & file.
Requested by: City Engineer
6.4 VOUCHER REGISTER - Approve Voucher Register dated May 2,
1995 in the amount of $479,763.31.
Requested by: City Manager
6.5 TREASURER'S REPORT - Approve and File Treasurer's Report
for March, 1995.
Requested by: City Manager
6.6 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES - Filed by Hassan Tehrani March 24,
1995.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council reject the request and refer the matter for
further action to Carl Warren & Co., the City's Risk
Manager.
Requested by: City Clerk
6.7 NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE LANDSCAPE
MEDIANS FROM THE WESTERLY CITY LIMIT TO LEMON AVENUE - On
September 20, 1994, the City Council awarded a contract
to Advanced Construction for construction of Golden Spgs.
Dr. landscape medians from the westerly city limit to
Lemon Ave. The final was conducted on April 13, 1995 to
determine the adequacy of all constructed improvements.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council accept work performed by Advanced Construction,
and authorize the City Clerk to file the Notice of
Completion and release any retention amounts.
Requested by: City Engineer
MAY 2, 1995 PAGE 3
6.8 AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR STREET MAINTENANCE SERVICES - On
March 30, 1995, a Request for Proposal for Contract
Maintenance Services was distributed to six firms. Three
proposals were submitted on April 14, 1995 and the lowest
responsible proposer was Charles Abbott and Associates of
Torrance.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council award a five-year contract to Charles Abbott and
Associates to provide street maintenance services subject
to completion of the actual contractual documents
including a specific works program/plan for FY 1995-96.
Furthermore, authorize the City Manager or his designee
to directly administer the contract as the Project
Administrator.
Requested by: City Engineer
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE
8. OLD BUSINESS:
8.1 PRESENTATION ON THE DESIGN OF PANTERA PARK - On March
13, 1995, the Planning Commission approved Conditional
Use Permit No. 94-4, which under County Code authorizes
the City to construct Pantera Park. Construction
drawings are now being prepared by R.J.M. Design Group.
The final design of Pantera Park includes two lighted
ball fields with lighted soccer field overlays, tot lot,
restroom/concession building, parking lot, picnic areas,
lighted rollerblade hockey court, lighted basketball
courts, lighted tennis courts and trails leading to the
existing natural trails that go up the slope adjacent to
the developed park. Construction drawings should be
completed and prepared for Council approval by late
October or early November, 1995.
Recommended Action: Receive and File Report.
Requested by: Community Services Director
9. NEW BUSINESS: None
10. ANNOUNCEMENTS:
11. ADJOURNMENT: In memory of Inez Vidal
u
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
TO: CITY CLERK c
FROM: 1 � -� - ,5,-
ADDRESS:
ORGANIZATION:
AGENDA #/SUBJECT: i::� . l • -2—
DATE: J _.'Z - C
19.09P►><%I
I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my
name and address as written above.
W
ure
9
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESSE CITY COUNCIL
TO: CITY CLERK
FROM: `'�J�'`'-- -- - DATE:
ADDRESS: `P °o ���^-� a PHONE: K
ORGANIZATION:
AGENDA #/SUBJECT: �--
I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my
name and address as written above.
%' ..E`i
ignature
40* VALUUTAAV rtc*uEST TO ADDRESS THE CIN COUNCIL
TO: CITY CLERK
FROM: nScC,r (-
ADDRESS:
ADDRESS:
ORGANIZATION:
AGENDA #/SUBJECT: (U b I (�. �� rte'?
DATE:
PHONE:
I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my
name and address as written above.
SC C-4.1 C�
Signature
I VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDIFIESS THE CITY COUNCIL
T
TO:
FROM:
ADDRESS:
ORGANIZATION:
AGENDA #/SUBJECT:
CITY CLERK
DATE:
PHONE: /
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
TO:
FROM:
ADDRESS:
ORGANIZATION
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA #/SUBJECT:
LfITPR l ry 4,x,,
CITY CLERK
DATE: -S'2-1q
PHONE: 4o9-q8g� 1055
F E�D 1�2 = ►�7pA,�1 t (r1C,2P°��MA.J �f�' YC�N,
a
1 expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my
name and address as written above.
A
Signature
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
APRIL 4,1995
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Papen called the meeting to order at 6:41 p.m. in
the AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance
by Mayor Papen.
ROLL CALL: Council Members Ansari, Harmony, Miller, Mayor Pro Tem
Werner and Mayor Papen.
Also present were Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; Frank Usher, Assistant City
Manager; Michael Jenkins, City Attorney; George Wentz, City Engineer; Jim
DeStefano, Community Development Director; Bob Rose, Community Services
Director and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk.
2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, ETC.:
2.1 Proclaimed April, 1995 as "Fair Housing" Month.
2.2 Proclaimed April, 1995 as "Fair Housing" Month. Accepted by Christina
Lopez representing the L.A. County Fair Housing Council.
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Max Maxwell, 3211 Bent Twig Ln., asked staff to
elaborate on Item 6.12 regarding Senate Bill 323 and the waiver on Item 6.14
regarding City Attorney conflict of interest.
Red Calkins, 240 Eagle Nest Dr., expressed concern that residents in north D.B.
are being treated differently than those in south D.B. and that new stop signs
should be installed in that area as well.
Wilbur Smith, 21630 Fairwind Ln., asked for clarification of Items 6.12 and 6.14
and expressed concern about mistakes in the amendment to the agreement with
Michael Brandman Assoc., Item 6.15.
Terry Birrell criticized the selection process used for selection of an auditor and
asked for the point system used by the Council in evaluating the proposers. She
also commented on the General Plan and reminded the Council that this is an
application to initiate proceedings.
Don Schad, 1824 Shaded Wood Rd., offered special thanks to Charrie Hunter, a
teacher at Maple Hill School, and residents who helped plant 60 trees and 11
cherry bushes at Peterson Park. He also thanked Bob Rose, Community Services
Director, who re-routed sprinklers to provide water for the trees. He announced that
on April 22, 1995 at Sycamore Canyon Park, a Nature Wilderness and
Entertainment Day will be held and anyone interested in going on wilderness hikes
APRIL 4, 1995 PAGE 2
can contact the Wilderness Conservancy or City Hall.
Steve Nice, Rising Star Dr., criticized MPT/Werner and his past actions.
4. COUNCIL COMMENTS: C/Harmony felt that the General Plan should be placed
on the ballot. He commended the Friends of the Library on their successful wine -
tasting soiree fund raiser and announced that the opening of the Dial -A -Ride
program will be held at Heritage Park on Tuesday, April 18, 1995 at 11:30 a.m.
C/Ansari also commended the Friends of the Library for the successful Soiree.
C/Miller commented on the Chamber installation. He also advised that he attended
the Governmental Organization Committee regarding Senate Bill 387, MRF issue
in Sacramento and that a number of legislators commented in favor of the City of
Industry.
M/Papen thanked residents for attending the Library Soiree and advised that she
threw out the first ball for the Little League and thanked all the volunteers for their
hard work throughout the community. She announced that there have been
sightings of mountain lions in "The Country" and asked staff to contact the
Department of Fish & Game to find out what steps are necessary for the safety of
the residents, as well as looking into the possibility of posting signs. Regarding
selection of an auditor, she stated that there were 10 applicants who were screened
in the selection process.
In response to C/Harmony, CM/Belanger reported that he had received a call from
the City's lobbyist, Joe Gonzalves indicating that it was the intention of Gonzalves
& Sons to represent the City of Industry in opposition to SB387. Further, Mr.
Gonzalves had previously agreed not to represent any one city in this matter.
5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1 JOINT MEETING - CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION April 6,
1995 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley
5.2 USED OIL PROMOTIONAL EVENT - April 8, 1995 - 10:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.,
Tim's Mobile, 22628 E. Golden Springs Rd.
5.3 PLANNING COMMISSION - April 10, 1995 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium,
21865 E. Copley
5.4 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - April 13, 1995 - 6:00 p.m.,
Heritage Park Community Center, 2600 Brea Canyon Rd.
5.5 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - April 18, 1995 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Auditorium,
21865 E. Copley
5.6 DIAMOND RIDE DIAL -A -CAB GRAND OPENING - April 18, 1995 11:30
a.m., Heritage Park Community Center
5.7 SCAG WORKSHOP - May 9, 1995, AQMD Room CC -6,21865 E. Copley
APRIL 4, 1995
PAGE 3
6. CONSENT CALENDAR: Regarding Item 6.10, CM/Belanger explained that
construction inspection services for traffic signal installations are provided by the
City on all public works projects. He stated that this item is on the Agenda because
Warren Siecke is going to be providing these services for each of the three projects
and because the total cost of providing of that service is greater than $10,000.
C/Ansari moved, MPT/Wemer seconded to approve the Consent Calendar with the
exception of Items 6.10, 6.12, 6.13, 6.14, 6.15, 6.16 and 6.17. With the following
Roll Call vote, motion carried:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony, Miller, MPT/
Werner, M/Papen
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
6.1 APPROVED MINUTES - Regular Meeting of March 7, 1995 - as submitted.
6.2 RECEIVED & FILED - Traffic & Transportation Commission Minutes of
February 9, 1995.
6.3 RECEIVED & FILED - Parks & Recreation Commission Minutes of February
23, 1995.
6.4 APPROVED VOUCHER REGISTER - dated April 4, 1995 in the amount of
$477,631.33.
6.5 APPROVED & FILED TREASURER'S REPORT - February, 1995.
6.6 RELEASED GRADING CASH BOND POSTED FOR 1805 TINTAH DR. -
Declared the obligations null and void and released the cash bond in the
amount of $1,530 and instructed the City Clerk to notify the Principal.
6.7 AWARDED CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW SIDEWALKS ON
DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD - to JDC, Inc. for construction between
Fountain Springs and Pathfinder Rds. in an amount not to exceed $24,300
with a contingency of $4,000 for project change orders to be approved by the
City Manager.
6.8 AWARDED CONTRACT FOR MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPE
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38 - to Mariposa Horticultural Enterprises,
Inc. in the amount of $38,400.
6.9 AWARDED CONTRACT FOR MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPE
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 - to Landscape West, Inc. in the amount
of $35,400.
APRIL 4, 1995 PAGE 4
6.11 APPROVED PANTERA PARK PROJECT AGREEMENT WITH LOS
ANGELES COUNTY REGIONAL PARK AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
SPECIFIED PROJECT GRANT PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $1.47
MILLION.
MATTERS WITHDRAWN FROM CONSENT CALENDAR:
6.10 AWARDED CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION SERVICES CONTRACT FOR
TRAFFIC SIGNALS INSTALLATION ON GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE AT
CARPIO DRIVE, GOLDEN PRADOS DRIVE AND PROSPECTORS ROAD -
MPT/Werner asked if this contractor was the lowest bidder and if the
consulting City Engineer was given an opportunity to bid on this project and
if not, why not.
CM/Belanger advised that because of the amount related to this project, the
City is required to request proposals and because of that, staff utilized
engineering firms that are on-call for the City.
SE/Liu advised that Warren C. Siecke was the lowest bidder and is the
engineer of design.
MPT/Werner asked if the installation process was being handled differently
because they are being installed in the northern part of the City.
CM/Belanger advised that because there are three signals, inspection costs
will exceed the City Manager's authority of $10,000 and was included on the
agenda for approval.
MPT/Werner expressed concern that the design engineer and the inspecting
engineer are the same.
CM/Belanger advised that any registered engineer has an obligation to
follow the codes which govern their activities.
C/Ansari asked that when the traffic engineers were selected, what kind of
fees were presented, i.e., hourly, monthly.
CM/Belanger advised that the engineers proposed for each inspection
services.
MPT/Werner moved, C/Ansari seconded to award a construction inspection
services contract for traffic signals installation on Golden Springs at Carpio,
Golden Springs and Prospector's in the amount of $13,230 plus a
contingency amount of $1,000. With the following Roll Call vote, motion
APRIL 4, 1995 PAGE 5
carried unanimously:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony, Miller,
MPT/Werner, M/Papen
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
6.12 SENATE BILL 323 AMENDING THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT - CC/ Burgess
advised that the proposed legislation for SB 323 could provide severe
difficulties for the public as well as Cities in accessing public records and
would eliminate provisions for privacy protection of individuals, opening up
arrest records for public inspection, etc.
In response to MPT/Werner, CC/Burgess advised that the League's position
is to oppose legislation and this is the request of the League. She also
advised that there is no way to calculate a cost at this time.
M/Papen advised that this Bill would affect any city that does not have their
records on computer as they would be forced to provide this type of public
access at great expense.
With consensus of Council, this matter was continued to April 18, 1995.
6.13 AUTHORIZATION TO DISPOSE OF SURPLUS CITY PROPERTY -
M/Papen reported that this item is to authorize the sale of four 15 -passenger
Dodge shuttle vans, originally purchased for $8,000, on consignment with
JM Int'I. Transportation for soliciting competitive bids.
In response to C/Harmony, CM/Belanger advised that the City evaluated its
transportation alternatives and in doing so, determined that use of these
vehicles is not viable and recommended that they be disposed of by sale
through consignment. He stated that they could be sold at the same price
for which they were purchased.
C/Harmony moved, C/Ansari seconded to (1) approve the City Manager's
declaration of surplus property; (2) direct the City Manager to place these
vehicles on consignment with JM Int'I. Transportation for the purpose of
soliciting competitive bids; and (3) authorize the City Manager to sell each
vehicle to the highest bidder. With the following Roll Call vote, motion
carried:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony, Miller,
MPT/Werner, M/Papen
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
APRIL 4, 1995 PAGE 6
6.14 CONFLICT OF INTEREST WAIVER FOR RICHARDS, WATSON &
GERSHON RELATED TO VTM 47850 - CA/Jenkins explained that in 1992,
an associate named Mark Lampkin from the firm of Richards, Watson &
Gershon prepared articles of incorporation, bylaws and CC&R's on behalf
of JCC Development in connection with tract map 47851. In connection with
the request for proposal for City Attorney services in September 1994, he
wrote a letter explaining that Mr. Lampkin had performed this service and
disclosed that Mr. Lampkin had done no other work on behalf of JCC in
Diamond Bar. Further, there is current litigation on a companion tract to
Tract Map 47850 CC&R's.
MPT/Werner moved, C/Ansari seconded to deny the waiver request and
direct staff to retain other legal services (perhaps Leonard Hempel) pursuant
to the purchasing policy for purposes of the review process for Vesting Tract
Map 47850. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, Ansari, MPT/Werner
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Harmony, M/Papen
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
C/Harmony asked if Leonard Hempel is prepared and has knowledge on
zoning issues.
CM/Belanger advised that Mr. Hempel is a City Attorney for the City of
Yorba Linda and has dealt with zoning issues.
M/Papen commented on the extra expenses for an additional attorney that
is not in the budget. She felt that Mr. Jenkins did not have a conflict of
interest in this tract issue.
M/Papen called for reconsideration of the motion. MPT/Werner moved,
C/Ansari seconded to deny the waiver request and direct staff to retain other
legal services (perhaps Leonard Hempel) pursuant to the purchasing policy
for helping the City get through the review process of Vesting Tract Map
47850. With the following Roll Call vote, motion failed:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, MPT/Werner
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Harmony, Miller, M/Papen
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
MPT/Werner moved, C/Ansari seconded to deny the waiver request, direct
the City Manager to retain legal services for this project (suggested Leonard
Hempel) within the scope of the purchasing Ordinance. With the following
Roll Call vote, motion carried:
APRIL 4, 1995 PAGE 7
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Miller, MPT/Werner,
M/Papen
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Harmony
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
6.15 AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH
MICHAEL BRANDMAN ASSOCIATES REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES FOR VTM 47850 - In response to MPT/Werner, CM/Belanger
reported that the costs are covered by the developer in monthly installments.
He stated that the agreement with the developer is verbal.
Also in response to MPT/Werner, CA/Jenkins stated that the Council could
approve this with the understanding that it would not be executed until or
unless a written agreement with the developer is executed providing that
there will be a binding commitment that the City will be reimbursed for these
expenses.
MPT/Werner moved, C/Miller seconded to direct staff to execute an
agreement with the developer for reimbursement to the City prior to
execution of this agreement. With the following Roll Call vote, motion
carried:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony, Miller,
MPT/Wemer, M/Papen
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
6.16 SUPPORT OF JOE VASQUEZ FOR THE POSITION OF CALIFORNIA
CONTRACT CITIES ASSOCIATION TREASURER - MPT/Werner reported
that the proposal was for the Council to endorse Joe Vasquez's candidacy
and that he supported Mr. De La Rosa and Mr. Vasquez for the candidacy.
He stated that with his and the Mayor's recommendation, he would like to
see this issue voted on to set a precedence for the future.
M/Papen moved, MPT/Werner seconded that the delegate be authorized to
vote for the appropriate candidate after the 2nd voting round. With the
following Roll Call vote, motion carried:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony, Miller,
MPT/Werner, M/Papen
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
6.17 APPROVAL OF PETERSON PARK AGREEMENT WITH LOS ANGELES
COUNTY REGIONAL PARK AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT PER PARCEL
DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM - CM/Belanger explained that there
APRIL 4, 1995 PAGE 8
has been some drainage problems at this park that has caused ponding of
water in several areas and this will be corrected with the retro -fit program
next year.
C/Harmony moved, C/Ansari seconded to approve the Peterson Park project
agreement with L.A. County Regional Park and Open Space District per
parcel discretionary Grant Program in the amount of $140,000. With the
following Roll Call vote, motion carried:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony, Miller,
MPT/Werner, M/Papen
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None.
8. OLD BUSINESS:
8.1 ORDINANCE NO. 03(1995): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING A TAXICAB OPERATION
SYSTEM AND REPEALING CHAPTER 7.80 OF THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY CODE.
Frank Dursa suggested that the City include in their dial -a -cab contract
service to FHP in Fullerton.
MPT/Werner advised that there is a 10 -mile radius from the city limits;
therefore these FHP locations are included.
Dr. Lawrence Rhodes, Fiber Ct., asked if the taxi cab will wait at a doctor's
office for a period of time.
CM/Belanger advised that persons need to pre -arrange the trips to and from
a doctor's appointment.
ACM/Usher advised that the ordinance provides regulatory process for both
dial -a -cab and conventional cab services. He explained that the City
Attorney's recommendations substantially changed the Ordinance but that
it accomplishes the same things as the first Ordinance introduced.
MPT/Werner moved, C/Harmony seconded to approve first reading of
ORDINANCE NO. 03(1995): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING A TAXICAB OPERATION
SYSTEM AND REPEALING CHAPTER 7.80 OF THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY CODE. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried:
APRIL 4, 1995 PAGE 9
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony, Miller,
MPT/Werner, M/Papen
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
8.2 GENERAL PLAN 1995; DISTRIBUTING OF FINAL DRAFT DOCUMENT,
ESTABLISHING OF PUBLIC HEARING IN MAY, AND REFERRAL OF
SPECIFIC MODIFICATIONS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR
RECOMMENDATIONS - CDD/DeStefano reported that all of the Council's
comments in regard to the Planning Commission's recommended General
Plan were ready to distribute for the 30 -day public review. He recommended
that Tuesday, May 9, 1995 be scheduled to begin the adoption process for
the General Plan. Further, he recommended that the Council refer the Plan
to the Planning Commission for review and recommendations in four specific
areas (primarily dealing with the Land Use and Housing Elements): 1)
establishment of a high density residential classification at 20 dwelling units
per acre; 2) addition of residential uses at a density of one unit to two acres
within the agricultural designation; 3) revisions to the Land Use Element
regarding the planned development classification and the areas so
designated; 4) modifications that need to be made to the land use map
reflecting these items mentioned previously. He also requested an April 27,
1995 response deadline for the Planning Commission's recommendations
for the Council's consideration for the May 9, 1995 meeting.
Wilbur Smith, 21630 Fairwind Ln., asked that once these recommendations
come back from the Planning Commission for Public Hearing, will the public
get the opportunity to discuss.
M/Papen responded that after the Planning Commission reviews Council's
recommendations, their review and recommendations will come back to the
Council for final approval and public comment will be provided for at the May
9 meeting.
Max Maxwell, 3211 Bent Twig Ln., asked about the timing of signing the
Ordinance to adopt the General Plan and if there would be a final
presentation to the public for review.
CDD/DeStefano advised that the purpose of the 30 -day review is to allow the
public an opportunity to review all of the changes that the Council had made
since beginning the process. He explained that it is hard to tell what kind of
time frame will be needed until the recommendations come back from the
Planning Commission. Once the recommendations are accepted by Council,
the approval of the Ordinance will take place on May 9, 1995.
Max Maxwell asked when will the public get to review the final draft before
APRIL 4, 1995 PAGE 10
signing the Ordinance.
M/Papen advised that once the Ordinance is adopted, there will not be
another Ordinance printed.
MPT/Werner moved, C/Ansari seconded to direct staff to distribute the
revised draft General Plan, establish May 9, 1995 for a Public Hearing, refer
the draft General Plan to the Planning Commission for recommendation on
the four specific issues and instruct them to return their recommendation to
the Council by April 27, 1995.
C/Harmony asked if the EIR would need expansion to expand to
accommodate the additional number of building units that are being
proposed in this version of the General Plan and what is the ultimate build
out according to the Plan.
CDD/DeStefano advised that the 1995 General Plan outlines a base of
residential dwelling units and commercial square footage, plus anticipated
growth as a result of the Plan's policies. The cumulative total of that growth
had been accessed with respect to the previously certified EIR. A
determination had been made by staff and planning consultants that an
addendum to the EIR, the appropriate environmental tool, based upon the
cumulative total residential dwelling units and commercial/industrial
development is within the scope and range of the environmental assessment
done within that final EIR.
C/Harmony reiterated that the old EIR provided a build -out of approximately
6,000 homes and the new General Plan is suggesting that the EIR provide
up to that number.
With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Miller, MPT/Werner,
M/Papen
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Harmony
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
Associate Attorney Montgomery explained that the terms "Resolution" and
"Ordinance" have been used inter -changeably. If the Plan is adopted by
Resolution, it must be acted upon on May 9, 1995, if it's done by Ordinance,
it will only be a first reading on May 9, 1995.
M/Papen advised that the Council's intent is adoption by Resolution.
RECESS: M/Papen recessed the meeting at 8:58 p.m.
APRIL 4, 1995 PAGE 11
RECONVENED: M/Papen reconvened the meeting at 9:08 p.m.
9. NEW BUSINESS
9.1 ORDINANCE NO. 04(1995): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR EXTENDING THE TERM OF THE CABLE
TELEVISION SYSTEM FRANCHISE, GRANTED UNDER THE COUNTY OF
LOS ANGELES - CM/Belanger reported that the Ordinance would extend the
term of the cable television system franchise for a period not to exceed 18
months. The service was inherited from L.A. County upon incorporation.
The cable ad hoc committee and staff met with principals from the cable
company and, subject to a series of conditions, it was recommended that the
Council extend the cable franchise in order to allow for certain activities to
take place in conjunction with the negotiation of a new cable franchise
agreement with Jones Intercable.
In response to M/Papen, CM/Belanger advised that an extensive public
needs assessment will be undertaken where the public will be able, through
survey research, to feed back to the City what they think of Jones Intercable.
No date has yet been set for a Public Hearing. He further stated that the
proposal was worded for 18 months; however, it was indicated to the cable
operator that it would be the City's intent to complete the study process
before the end of 1995 calendar year.
C/Harmony expressed concern as to why staff is now wanting to discuss this
matter when Jones Intercable asked for informal discussions last year.
CM/Belanger advised that the legal environment in which this negotiation
would have taken place created reticence by city staff.
MPT/Werner suggested that a date for Public Hearing be set regarding the
likes and dislikes with Jones Intercable. He asked staff if a shorter extension
was requested and can that extension be extended at a later date.
CM/Belanger advised that 18 -months is given for a cushion and that the City
can extend it as many times as they want.
Janet Spatz, General Manager of Jones Intercable, advised that her
company requested three years as a starting point, however 18 -months is
all right.
Max Maxwell, 3211 Bent Twig Ln., commented that a 30 -day notice should
be given to Jones Intercable because they have not serviced the community
as they should and indicated that he was against the contract.
APRIL 4, 1995 PAGE 12
Dr. Lawrence Rhodes, Fiber Ct., supported the 18 -month contract extension.
Steve Grimes commented that Jones Intercable does not give the variety of
channels as does other cable companies and recommended a 30 -day
notice, without extension, in order to make them come up with a fair value
service plan.
Frank Dursa opposed extension of the contract.
Don Schad, 1824 Shaded Wood Rd., opposed extension of the contract.
Mrs. Spatz explained that multiplexing cannot be done because there are no
more channels available to Jones.
MPT/Werner asked Mrs. Spatz that if there were additional channels
available, would that result in an increase of cable costs.
Mrs. Spatz advised that it would not increase the costs. She reported that
random surveys are completed to keep Jones Intercable advised of the
wants of the community.
In response to C/Harmony, Mrs. Spatz indicated that Future America
regularly displays their tapes on Channel 12 and that they must have a film
permit in order to air on Jones Intercable.
C/Harmony moved to give Jones Intercable a three-month extension with a
request for RFP's, bring them back to Council for selection and hire special
legal counsel knowledgeable in the laws in this regard. For lack of a
second, motion died.
C/Ansari asked for clarification on legal advice for this type of franchise.
M/Papen explained that if special legal counsel is required for
recommendations, it will be a long process due to various audits of the
agency as well as completion of a needs assessment.
CM/Belanger advised that the City Attorney cannot give this type of legal
advice and special legal counsel would be necessary.
CA/Jenkins advised that he has personally been involved with cable
renewals and this service can be provided.
In response to MPT/Werner, CM/Belanger stated three RFP's were received
in the fall of 1994 and that staff and the cable ad hoc committee agreed that
staff and the Council could make the decisions on their own.
APRIL 4, 1995 PAGE 13
MPT/Werner asked if our budget would allow the City to extend the cable
agreement, receive special legal assistance and receive RFP's for cable
service.
CM/Belanger advised that the Council would have to increase the budget to
allow for these services to be performed.
MPT/Werner moved, C/Miller seconded to approve a six month extension;
direct staff to survey other Southern California cable companies; schedule
a Public Hearing within six months for community input, performance of
audits by staff and in-house counsel and a presentation by Jones Intercable.
MPT/Harmony asked if our City Attorney sat in the meeting with the cable
company.
CA/Jenkins advised that he did not sit in on this meeting.
With the Following Roll Call vote, motion carried:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, MPT/Werner, M/Papen
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
10. ANNOUNCEMENTS: None
11. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to conduct, the
meeting was adjourned at 10:14 p.m. in memory of John Joseph Mahoney.
LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk
ATTEST:
Mayor
2
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL /Q
AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 6, 1995
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Papen called the meeting to order at 6:47
p.m. at the SCAQMD Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar,
California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance
by M/Papen.
ROLL CALL: Council Members Ansari, Harmony, Miller, Mayor
Pro Tem Werner and Mayor Papen.
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Fong, Schad, Vice -Chairman Huff and Chairman
Flamenbaum. Commissioner Meyer was excused.
Also Present: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; Leonard Hempel, Special Legal
Counsel; George Wentz, City Engineer; Michael Myers, Consultant Engineer; Jim
DeStefano, Community Development Director; and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk.
OLD BUSINESS:
2.1 CERTIFICATION OF MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO.
91-2 AND APPROVAL OF VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 47850,
LOCATED EASTERLY OF STEEPLECHASE LANE AND SOUTH OF
WINDMILL DRIVE ADJACENT TO THE PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY
KNOWN AS "THE COUNTRY" - WPapen introduced Leonard Hempel,
Rutan & Tucker, Special Legal Counsel, and asked him to discuss the
reason for the joint meeting. She stated that staff would make a presentation
regarding the project and lawsuit settlement. The meeting will be turned
over to the Planning Commission for consideration and recommendation,
after which the Council will discuss the project.
Mr. Hempel stated that it had been approximately one year since litigation
between D.B. Assoc. (DBA) and the City concluded with a settlement
agreement. Part of the settlement involved the Council adopting a motion
to reconsider a denial of VTTM No. 47850 which occurred in November,
1992. The denial was a result of the failure to present geotechnical data
responding to 24 points at issue. The Planning Commission previously
approved the map and because the City recognized there would be updated
data with respect to geotechnical and environmental information in the new
EIR, the settlement included a joint meeting between the Planning
Commission and the Council. Although a public hearing is not required, the
Planning Commissioners are being asked for their comments based on the
new information. At the conclusion of the Council public hearing, the Council
will determine whether to approve, deny, modify, or request additional data
on the map. The agreement did not obligate the Council beyond following
the State Subdivision Map Act, and City Codes and Ordinances in
April 6, 1995 Page 2
reconsideration of the map.
In response to M/Papen, Mr. Hempel stated that there is no conflict of
interest with M/Papen and C/Miller sitting in judgement of this project.
M/Papen and C/Miller were added as defendants in the initial lawsuit.
Demurrers were filed on behalf of Papen and Miller which were sustained
without leave to amend. The settlement did not resolve that issue and DBA
was free to appeal the dismissal of Papen and Miller from the lawsuit.
Although they initially appealed, they later dropped the appeal, thereby
making the decision of the trail court final, dismissing Papen and Miller.
There is no restriction and no conflict relating from that litigation.
In response to MPT/Werner, Mr. Hempel indicated that the project was
considered under Ordinance. No. 4, not under the General Plan. The
settlement specifically envisioned that the Council would have the right to
consider the project based upon the General Plan currently under
consideration pursuant to the State Office of Planning and Research (OPR)
extension of time. He stated that the Council should be considering this
project under what they believe the ultimate General Plan designation will
be for this property. The project will be vested under the terms of approval
and at the time of final map approval. Technically, there is no General Plan
under which the project will be vested, but the Council will be making
findings that the project is not inconsistent with the proposed General Plan.
Chair/Flamenbaum asked the extent of the current Planning Commission's
involvement in the review process since a previously -seated Planning
Commission had approved the project.
Mr. Hempel responded that the Planning Commission was not being asked
to re -approve the project or go through the detail of the conditions. Upon
request by the Planning Commission, the Council may grant the Commission
additional opportunity to consider the project.
Chair/Flamenbaum stated that no current Planning Commissioners were
members of the Commission when the project was approved and they do not
have specific knowledge of the details.
Mr. Hempel responded that, at the time the settlement agreement was
entered into, it was not known that a year would be required to process the
additional data and there would be a different Planning Commission.
Council will determine the outcome of the project. Legally, the Planning
Commission approved the project and the addition of the joint meeting was
to give the current Commission the opportunity to review the updated data.
Responding to MPT/Werner, CDD/DeStefano stated that the developer had
April 6, 1995 Page 3
paid all costs associated with reconsideration of VTTM No. 47850. He
further reported that the project began in November, 1989 with a submittal
to the City's acting planning staff at L.A. County. VTM No. 47850 was a
component of a three tract submittal that was given to the City. The three
tracts, 47850, 47851 and 48487, comprise a total of approximately 160 acres
within the southwest portion of 'The Country Estates" generally adjacent to
Steeplechase Lane and Wagon Train Lane, and Hawkwood Road and Bent
Twig Lane, and totalled about 120 dwelling units. In November, 1991 the
Planning Commission reviewed the project and recommended its approval.
The Council reviewed the project in early 1992 and in May, 1992, approved
VTTMs 47851 and 48487 and certified that portion of the Master EIR. Map
47850 received further review in May and June 1992, and again in
November and December 1992, and was subsequently denied. The Council
denied the Map without prejudice and encouraged the developer to respond
to outstanding issues and again present the project. As a result of litigation,
the settlement agreement was concluded about one year ago and
discussions ensued regarding the type of project presentation and
environmental documentation needed for resubmission to the City. As a part
of reconsideration of this project, the City held a widely publicized workshop
on Saturday, March 11, 1995 from 9:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m. City staff, the
City's consultants, development representatives and members of the
community participated in an information session. This was not a posted
public hearing.
Kurt Nelson, D.B. Assoc., 3480 Torrance Blvd., Torrance, stated that VTTM
47850 is part of approximately 280 acres known as "The Back Country"
which was intended as a third phase of development in "The Country
Estates" by Transamerica Development, now D. B. Assoc. In the mid 1980's,
through an agreement with 'The Country Estates", these back country
parcels obtained access rights for development and these rights have been
exercised with the Phase I development of Tract 47851. Negotiations
continue with 'The Country Estates" to effect full annexation. D.B. Assoc.
has a homeowners association with CC&R's to implement the special
conditions of approval which were a part of Phase I and which will certainly
be a part of Phase II. Full annexation will retain the declaration of CC&R's
so that all of the conditions of approval that the City's staff, consultants and
the Council visit on this project will be carried out. D.B. Assoc. has given
careful consideration to the 24 questions posed by Leighton & Assoc.
concerning the geologic stability of the project. Phase II will incorporate the
balancing of grading and re -vegetation used in Phase I.
Lex Williman, Planning Director, Hunsaker & Associates, 10179 Huntington
Street, San Diego, stated that this project was originally submitted to the
County. When the City incorporated, it changed some of the rules. The
Council adopted a Hillside Management Ordinance, the County's Oak Tree
April 6, 1995 Page 4
Ordinance and the SEA #15 boundaries. In addition, the City created a
Significant Ecological Area Technical Advisory Committee (SEATAC) which
reviewed this project. He indicated that his firm became involved in the
project as a result of the Hillside Management Ordinance. His firm's task
was to specifically recreate the project so that it met the Hillside
Management Ordinance criteria. He believed this had been accomplished.
This project has been reviewed by SEATAC on four occasions, and has
been through five Planning Commission hearings and five or six Council
hearings. The project is accessible from Steeplechase Ln. and Hawkwood
Rd. Tonner Canyon and the Boy Scout properties are to the south of the
project and Tract No. 47851 and No. 48487 are to the east of the project on
the opposite ridge. His firm employed a combination of contour and land
form grading techniques to the project. Balance was achieved by
considering the underlying topography, the geotechnical conditions, the
consideration of the General Plan, SEATAC input and the Hillside
Ordinance. In areas where shear keys must be created, slopes similar to
Tract No. 47851 are proposed to combine with the natural species. In
addition, fill areas are proposed for the canyon to shore up some
geotechnical instability in the slopes. There will be no construction in these
areas. Land form grading will be used for the grading to create a natural
look of the horizontal and vertical contours. The Uniform Building Code
requires terraces and down drains which are hidden with berms and
landscaping to preserve the natural look. In addition, all of the concrete
required to meet the conditions of approval will be in earth tones in concert
with the landscaping. He indicated that these issues have been addressed
because the City's staff and City Council held the developers to a higher
degree of standards than other cities. The 73 acre site proposes 57 lots.
The minimum lot size is 20,000 square feet and the average lot size is about
1.3 acres. The minimum pad size is 10,000 square feet and the average is
about 14,300 square feet. This conforms to the current Draft General Plan.
The average density is .75 dwelling units per acre with a maximum of 1
dwelling unit per acre. The underlying zoning is R-1-8000 and R-1-20,000.
This project adheres to the R-1-20,000 throughout the site. There is a gate
at Steeplechase Lane and Hawkwood Road. In addition, there is an
emergency access to the north through the Las Brisas condominium project
that connects to Hawkwood Rd. and provides secondary access to the
condominiums. It is intended that this access will remain and it will be gated
for emergency purposes only. The architecture of the gate will be enhanced
with a combination of brick and wrought iron to conform to the front entrance
gates for "The Country Estates".
Don Harrington, Harrington Geotechnical, 1938 North Batavia St., Ste. N,
Orange, stated that there were 13 exploratory borings drilled 120 feet deep,
40 test pits 15 feet deep and approximately 1400 lineal feet of trench
excavated with a bulldozer. All of these excavations were logged by the
April 6, 1995 Page 5
project geologist and samples were taken. The weak link at this project is
a thin layer of clay that was originally identified as bentonite. The material
was tested in the Harrington Geotechnical laboratory, as well as the
laboratory of another consultant and unusually high strength parameters
were obtained. A sample was sent to the Bureau of Mines and Mineral
Resources in New Mexico for analysis. It was determined that the material
was smectite which is a coarser grained stronger material than bentonite.
Realizing that there may be some uncertainties in sampling and testing,
based upon discussions with D.B. Assoc. and the Leighton & Associates, the
strength parameters were lowered by approximately 30%. The remedial
grading design and stability calculations were based upon these lower
values and a safety factor of 1.5 as required by code. Twenty four items of
concern regarding the project were compiled by Leighton & Assoc. These
items were reviewed and answered to the satisfaction of the consultant.
Craig Weber, Consulting Landscape Architect, D.B. Assoc., 790 Redondo
Ave., Long Beach, stated that his firm has been involved in this project since
1989 and they have conducted a thorough investigation of Tract No. 47850,
as well as Tract No. 47851. The initial studies that took place in 1989 and
1990 resulted in a detailed analysis of the site and its vegetation which
assisted in the development of criteria for mitigation. He indicated the
primary structure of this site is a combination of oak and walnut woodlands.
The primary tree, walnut, dominates the site at a ratio of four to one over the
oak tree. In spite of considerable grading of the site, approximately 240 oak
and walnut trees will be retained. As a result of grading, approximately 540
walnut trees and 23 oak trees will be removed from the site. The oaks will
be mitigated at a ratio of four to one, and the walnuts will be mitigated at a
ratio of two to one as determined by Michael Brandman & Assoc. The
developer will be responsible for on-site planting of 85 oak trees and 1,096
walnut trees, all of which will be irrigated and monitored for a period of five
years. Sycamore, willow and pine trees will be planted in the central portion
of the development, and the surrounding slopes will be mitigated with pure
native vegetation. All of the proposed material will be generated from seeds
and/or cuttings from the on-site gene pool. He referred the Council members
and Commissioners to the westerly canyon area of the site which will receive
a significant portion of hillside runoff into Tonner Canyon. He stated a series
of water management basins are being developed to insure the water quality
following a format currently being developed by the Center for Regenerative
Studies, Cal -Poly Pomona. He indicated that D. B. Assoc. will monitor the
growth and development of all proposed site vegetation for a period of five
years with an annual inspection and monitoring program.
David Smith, Leighton & Associates, stated his firm is the Geotechnical
Consultant for the City hired to review the geotechnical aspects of Tract No.
47850. The review began in 1992 with a submittal of the developers'
April 6, 1995 Page 6
geotechnical investigation and grading plan review which was prepared by
Harrington & Assoc. As a result of that review, Leighton & Assoc. issued a
review sheet which recommended that the project not be approved until 24
specific comments were addressed. Since that time, Harrington &
Associates has responded to the review comments which, in many cases,
generated additional review comments. Through the review process
involving several meetings between City's staff, the developer and his
consultants, as well as Leighton & Assoc., all 24 of the original geotechnical
review comments have been adequately addressed at this phase. He further
stated that it is important to continue the review through the grading and
construction phases to verify that the original geotechnical interpretation
continues to be accurate.
Tom Smith, Michael Brandman & Associates, 17310 Redhill, Irvine stated
that Tract 47850 was originally evaluated in an EIR that address three
tracts: 47850, 47851 and 48487. The EIR was certified for Tract No. 47851
and No. 48487. In the intervening two years since the EIR was filed,
regulations have changed with special regard to biological resources on the
site. In addition, there were changes in the air quality regulations that
required re -analysis to meet current standards. As a result, in October,
1994, the City initiated a second environmental review process for Tract No.
47850. In order that information compiled in the previous EIR, the City and
Michael Brandman & Assoc. determined that there were three primary issues
that the revised Draft EIR should address. These were the geological
factors, the biological resources and the air quality impacts of construction.
All other issues that were analyzed in the 1992 EIR were determined to have
been adequately addressed in that document and did not need to be re-
analyzed. All impacts evaluated in the revised Draft EIR were found to be
mitigated to a level that was not significant after mitigation was applied with
the exception of construction dust on the environment. South Coast Air
Quality Management set a standard of PM10 and because of the low
standards set for dust emissions from construction, that impact cannot be
mitigated through normal construction techniques of watering, etc.
Therefore, Council will be required to make a statement of overriding
considerations should the Council decide to approve this project. The
revised Draft EIR was released for public review in February, 1995, and the
review period ended on March 15, 1995. During the review period, written
comments were received from two public agencies, the Los Angeles County
Sanitation District and Caltrans, from three members of the community and
from the applicant. Responses to these letters have been included in the
document entitled "Response to Comments Received on Draft
Environmental Impact Report". He further stated that, as required by
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a mitigation monitoring
program has been prepared which lists all of the mitigation measures from
the revised Draft and from the 1992 EIR that are recommended for
April 6, 1995 Page 7
incorporation into the project to mitigate the impacts of its development.
CDD/DeStefano stated that the overall proposed land use for this project is
Single Family Residential, 57 units on 73 acres. The lot sizes range from
about 314 acre to over 5 acres with the average lot size in excess of an acre.
Average pad sizes are in excess of 14,300 square feet with a minimum of
10,000 square feet. The overall land use of the project is substantially the
same as that which was reviewed by the Planning Commission in 1991 and
the City Council in 1992. The project is generally consistent with the
General Plan as it existed in 1992 and as it exists in its present form. It is
consistent with the zoning in place on the site and with the caliber of homes
within "The Country Estates", the immediate neighbor to the proposed
project. Homes that will be created on a product of this nature range in size
from 5,000 to 10,000 square feet, are generally two stories, generally
provide substantial private amenities such as pools, tennis courts and other
types of recreational facilities. The project not only incorporates the Vesting
Tentative Map and related issues under discussion, it also involves, as a
result of City and County standards, a Conditional Use Permit for hillside
grading requiring the use of land form grading techniques and for the
mitigation of the loss of oak trees. The grading for the proposed site
comprises about 780,000 cubic yards of earth. He recommended that the
joint session receive public testimony, receive Planning Commission
commentary and for the Council to continue deliberation and direct staff
appropriately.
RECESS: M/Papen recessed the meeting at 8:02 p.m.
RECONVENE: M/Papen reconvened the meeting at 8:20 p.m.
M/Papen declared the Public Hearing open.
Wilbur Smith, 21630 Fairwind Ln., referred the Council to his letter
addressed to the City and requested it be made a part of the record. In
addition, he requested that answers to questions in his letter be addressed
by the Council and made a part of the final record. He cited the following
reasons he opposed approval of VTTM 47850: The developers' technical
documentation identified the cause of past and potential future landslides
due to a combination of smectite soil layers and ground water/pore water
pressure and the documents confirmed the presence of both items within the
tract boundaries; the documents do not include groundwater or pore
pressure in the Factor of Safety calculations which indicate the stability of
the slopes; County Code requires Factors of Safety of 1.5 or greater. These
documents report Factors of Safety of 1.5051, 1.5093, 1.5011, 1.5133 based
on normal conditions. These values should exceed the County requirement
April 6, 1995 Page 8
by a greater amount to allow for errors in the computational process. Also,
calculations should be made based upon abnormal conditions such as
adverse weather (50-100 year rain seasons), uncertainties in geologic
parameters, human deficiencies in workmanship, etc.; and the report
contains conflicting statements. The test states "groundwater was not
encountered in any exploratory borings drilled on the site...", whereas the
figures and tables show the presence of ground water. Because of these
contradictions, the truthfulness of these reports is questionable.
Don Greely, 22635 Ridge Line Rd., President of "The Country Estates"
association, stated the association had been involved with this project since
1988. Seven years after D.B. Assoc. requested full annexation, this has not
been accomplished. On behalf of the association, he asked the Council to
consider proposing a condition that, as per the Council Minutes dated
November 15, 1994, full annexation would be agreed to be involved parties
prior to any further deliberation with regard to this project. In addition, if
annexation does not occur, the developer will provide facilities such as club
house, tennis courts and pools for their community use. He indicated that
without annexation, the homeowners of Tract No. 47850 are not entitled to
the privileges of "The Country Estates." He further stated that although he
had previously been in favor of this project, he is now opposed to the project.
The developer placed a burden upon 'The Country Estates" by using and
damaging the paved roadways which have not been repaired. He asked that
the developer make the necessary repairs immediately. In addition, the
association anticipates there will be additional damage and requests a cash
fund be established by the developer in advance for repair of streets.
Responding to M/Papen, Mr. Greely stated that in the event of full
annexation of the development, 'The Country Estates" will build a larger club
house, a larger pool and additional tennis courts to accommodate the
additional homeowners. The current facilities are not adequate to
accommodate the new development.
In response to MPT/Werner, Mr. Greely indicated the association is looking
for a similar condition to that imposed on the Jerry Yeh project for
annexation with an associated fee.
M/Papen referred to a letter submitted by David Araujo dated March 11,
1995 wherein he stated that although he previously opposed the project,
after attending the Saturday meeting in March he is now in favor of the
project.
Martha Bruske, 600 South Great Bend Dr., stated the 6:30 p.m. Public
Hearing started about 6:40. The people in favor of the project had sufficient
time to discuss their views and the only person who was timed and
April 6, 1995 Page 9
interrupted was Mr. Wilbur Smith who lives in the area.
In response to Mrs. Bruske, M/Papen stated she gave Mr. Smith eight
minutes to speak and he took nine minutes which is nearly double the usual
time allocated for speaking during a Public Hearing.
Jack Healy asked that the City Attorney address the potential liability to D. B.
Assoc., the City, JCC Developers and Leighton Assoc. with respect to
slippage of the property. In addition, he asked whether D.B. Assoc. had
published any safety factors for the proposed lots. He asked for discussion
of the problem of burrowing animals which could cause seepage into the
smectite, and what impact the lack of pest control in Tonner Canyon might
have on this project since Tract No. 47850 borders 3500 acres of the
Canyon.
There being no further testimony offered, M/Papen closed the Public
Hearing.
M/Papen turned the meeting over to Planning Commission Chair
Flamenbaum.
A motion was made by VC/Huff that the Planning Commission recommend
that the Council return this project to the Commission as an agenda item for
consideration.
Comm./Schad did not feel it necessary to pursue the project further.
Comm./Fong stated that it is up to the Council to determine if they wish to
send the project back to the Planning Commission for review.
Chair/Flamenbaum stated that he had limited knowledge of the project and
felt it might be in the best interest of the City to send the project back to the
Planning Commission for review.
C/Ansari felt the wishes of the Planning Commission should be honored.
She indicated she had several questions as a result of issues raised during
the public hearing and felt the project should be returned to the Planning
Commission for recommendations.
Responding to C/Harmony, Mr. Hempel read the following provision
pertaining to the joint session from the settlement agreement with the
developer: "After conducting the joint session, or any continuance of the
joint session meeting, VTM 47850 shall be referred to the City Council to
take action on the re -consideration. Upon such reconsideration, the Council
shall exercise that degree of discretion permitted the Council by state
April 6, 1995 Page 10
statutes and local ordinances pertaining to approval of a subdivision tract
map. Further, the Council shall consider approval of VTM 47850 under the
recently obtained extension of the deadline for adopting a General Plan
issued by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research." Mr. Hempel
explained that agreement does not state anything about a referral back to
the Planning Commission, but the agreement does say the Council shall
exercise a degree of discretion permitted to Council by state statute. State
statute permits referral back to the Planning Commission, if in the Council's
judgement, there is significant new information that the Planning
Commission could assist in commenting on. He further stated that, in his
opinion, the Council has the right to return the item to the Commission even
though the agreement does not specifically address the issue. He
suggested that with the time constraints, the Council could obtain the
consent of the applicant and, in the event of referral to the Planning
Commission, provide the applicant with a time line of events.
C/Ansari expressed concern about whether the questions can be adequately
addressed during the joint session with responses from the City's
Engineering staff as to whether these are viable conclusions from the
applicant's consultants. She requested further clarification regarding safety
factors of 1.5 and water seepage.
Mr. Hempel responded to M/Papen that the meeting could be split with the
Council's portion continued to a later time and Planning Commission's
portion continued to the April 10 Commission meeting.
C/Miller suggested that the item be continued to the Planning Commission
meeting of April 24 giving them adequate time to receive and review the
pertinent materials. He requested the geotechnical investigation and
recommended scheduling the item for the first Council meeting in May.
M/Papen stated that the joint session would be used as an information and
question gathering session. The Planning Commission will review the
project at its April 24 meeting and return their recommendations to the
Council for deliberation at the first Council meeting in May. She asked
Planning Commissioners for their questions.
Chair/Flamenbaum asked if it is necessary to fill in the canyon on the west
side of the map if new houses are built on lots 20 through 28. How far to the
west could a house be built if a fill did not occur on the west side. What if
the map was split and houses were built only on the east side of the map
and not on the west side of the map. Aside from the CC&R's, what
assurances does the City have that the natural flora and fauna will not be
impacted by future residents. The booklet "Home Buyers Awareness
Package" indicates that homeowners should be warned and should not put
April 6, 1995 Page 11
in certain potentially invasive plant species (Page 3), but what assurances
are there that they will comply and what is the City's recourse if they do not
comply. Will there be a mitigation/monitoring program and if so, who will
maintain and pay for the program. Does the new Draft EIR consider the
impact of the two adjacent projects and, subsequent to the initial EIR, the
Jerry Yeh project was approved. What is the impact upon this tract as a
result of that project approval. Regarding Volume I of the Draft EIR, Page
42-3, Mitigation Measures for Air Quality, he asked if these were the same
measures used for other recently completed projects and what were the
results. He further stated that, throughout the EIR, there is no mention of
cougars or bobcats; however, the video concluded with a shot of a sleepy
cougar. Where was the picture taken and why was it in the video if there are
no cougars. Are all of the animals pictured in the video at the site. The EIR
makes mention of numerous animals but it also avoids a number of animals.
Is this area a part of a wildlife corridor. The EIR states that this is a
secondary corridor but it does not talk about the project's impact to the
secondary corridor. Additionally, inasmuch as the other tract maps are not
considered in the EIR, what is the impact of the other improvements upon
the site. Are the setbacks the same for each lot on the site. If not, how do
they vary, how much do they vary, do they vary side to side, and if they are
varied or not varied, does it have any significant impact in the EIR with
regard to aesthetics and geology. Page 4-15 of the EIR discusses
mammals, raccoons are not mentioned. The EIR does not mention bobcat.
Bobcat is mentioned in the supplement. On Page 4-17, the EIR talks about
mule deer and how there is no impact to the mule deer; however, it talks
about the fact that this is a loss of a bedding area. He stated he would like
to see an SEA #15 overlay on the project. He indicated the EIR is not
specific with regard to the SEA #15. He referred to the five year monitoring
of tree growth by the developer and wants to know what occurs at the end
of the monitoring period. Is the City then responsible for their care and
maintenance and is the City going to monitor and pay for their care. What
is the impact upon those trees and other native species caused by the runoff
from the resident's lawns and washing of cars. Are there any blue line
streams in the area. He further stated he noticed Schabarum Trail is on the
site. Who maintains the trail and what is the impact of the trail upon the
hillsides that are being modified. On Page A-22, the EIR says that no
wildlife movement was studied and in another section it states that there is
a wildlife corridor. These statements are in conflict. If a study is not
conducted, how can the report determine there is no wildlife corridor. On
Page A-25, the EIR states that the Catalina Mariposa Lily may be present.
Is it or isn't it? If there was a detailed study conducted, he stated he would
like to know if such things exist and what the impact might be. He further
asked about the impact to the City and to the homeowners if the project does
not annex to "The Country Estates". Does the City have any obligation to
provide for private homeowners or private residential communities to
April 6, 1995 page 12
improve their lot. EIR Volume II, Appendix E-1, #3, states that the addition
of berms to prevent water from spilling over the face of the slope is
important. He asked how the berms are going to be maintained. The EIR
discusses erecting walls and that the drainage should be back to the street.
In D.B., a wall of six feet or less does not require a permit. How does the
City know the walls are being built and what is the impact when the walls are
built. Although the EIR indicates no trees shall be planted on the hillsides,
the map shows that trees will be planted on the hillsides. What about slope
maintenance areas and are the hillsides being planted or are they not being
planted. He asked for an explanation of boring vermin and their impact on
the site. With regard to the damaged streets in 'The Country Estates", he
stated that those are private streets and it is a private matter between the
developer and owner of the streets. If the streets are open to public access,
then the Council could make a recommendation in support of street repair.
VC/Huff expressed concern with the amount of dirt that will be rearranged at
the site and the goal to maintain a natural look within that context. The
proposed site appears to contain meticulously placed plantings rather than
the irregular appearance of a natural site. Although the site proposes to
have blended hues of concrete, he indicated he does not recall that this is
a part of the current projects. He suggested placing rocks on the site with
trees around them for a more natural appearance. With respect to traffic
and circulation, according to the revised Draft EIR Volume I, there is no
impact. He objected to the proposal of the restriping of D.B. Blvd. to three
lanes.
C/Fong commented that there is no statement or recommendation in the EIR
regarding post construction fill sediment. In addition, he stated that he
visited the site and the canyon fill on the west side is for stability. He
proposed that a portion of the fill be eliminated and replaced with a shear
key along the west side of the project for lots 21 through 26. He indicated
he liked Chair/Flamenbaum's suggestion of reducing the number of units and
avoiding the fill altogether. He suggested that a condition of approval should
be that "a detailed geological mapping and measurement shall be performed
during site excavation to confirm the geologic conditions assumed in design
and if conditions encountered in the field during construction are different
from the conditions during design analysis, that appropriate reanalysis be
conducted and that the City Engineer and geotechnical engineer and
consultant review the analysis for approval." In addition he suggested that
a condition for approval of issuance of a building permit should be that "an
as -built geotechnical grading plan showing all limits of engineered fill,
compaction tests, stabilization fills, subterranean location and actual
geological conditions obtained during site construction and excavation be
submitted for review and approval by the City geotechnical consultants. The
plan should also show the elevation of final bottom of excavated areas and
April 6, 1995 Page 13
shear keys, as well as any required and proven building setbacks as dictated
by the geotechnical condition observed during construction." He asked if
Harrington re -calculated safety factors for fill slopes (back cuts for
stabilization fill using the lower strength parameter) when re -calculating the
stability analysis required by Leighton & Assoc. He felt that there was
confusion between smectite and bentonite in the report. He believed that
bentonite is a clay soil formed from the weathering of volcanic ash and
containing a large amount of clay mineral called montmorillonite, which is
also called smectite, therefore, montmorillonite and smectite are the same
thing. The EIR and the response to the geotechnical questions indicate that
the soil is not bentonite but smectite and infers that smectite is a coarser
grained material with higher strength. He stated that this may be true for the
sample taken in the test which contained greater amounts of stronger
constituents; however, in general, the strength of smectite could be much
lower if the constituents are weaker. He pointed out that pure smectite is
one of the weakest soil materials in existence. He suggested that the
vertical down drains be imbedded or buried in a trench under the final
graded surface so that they would not be visible. He asked for the basis for
the strength of C150 pounds per square foot and 50 degrees. He requested
to know the strength parameter used in the adjacent Diamond Ridge tract
and wanted to know if Leighton & Assoc. and the developer of Tract 47850
had looked at reports for Diamond Ridge to see if the parameters might be
applicable to Tract 47850. He believed that, with proper setbacks and by
reducing the number of lots to 37, the grading could be significantly reduced
which would minimize the impact to existing vegetation and environment.
MPTMlerner was concerned that there is a very generalized discussion of
zoning in the EIR and no map showing the zoning as it overlays the site.
Currently, three zone categories overlay on the site. These are R-1-8,000,
R-1-20,000 and A-2. The A-2 runs co-terminously with the 5 -acre reserved
parcel designated NAP (not a part of this project). However, the R-1-8,000
and R-1-20,000 overlay the remainder of the property that is subject to the
tract map. The current Draft General Plan designates this entire property
(Tract 47850) as RR (Rural Residential) which equates to 1 unit per acre
density. The overall project meets this requirement. He requested more
specifics on where the zoning falls and where the lot sizes fall in relation to
the zoning. Lot sizes range from 20,000 sq. ft. to more than an acre which
net down to 15,246 sq. ft. It exceeds the minimum 8,000 sq. ft. lot size, but
falls under the 20,000 sq. ft. lot size if it is in that zone. A zoning overlay
would address this question. A number of lots in the development are
proposed to be less than one acre and average about 1/2 acre. He stated
that CDD/DeStefano had advised him that lot averaging is permitted under
the City's zoning code. He asked to see the wording of the ordinance that
enables the lot averaging to occur. He felt he had a gap of understanding
between the conditions for approval for Tract Map No. 47851 and what is
April 6, 1995 Page 14
currently pending for the approval of Tract Map No. 47850. Among the
issues that the Council relied upon in denial of this project 1 1/2 years ago
was objections from at least one property owner to the grading that was
proposed to extend beyond the boundaries of the project. He asked what
had been done to resolve this issue. He stated it would be helpful to have
the Council minutes of previous meetings involving denial of Tract Map No.
47850 so that the issues can be specifically addressed by staff and the
developer in order to demonstrate how they have been resolved. He asked
that responses to the issues raised by Mr. Smith be presented to Council.
C/Miller stated he does not have the geotechnical report and would like a
copy in order to formulate his questions which he will put in writing and
forward to staff for their response.
C/Ansari requested to know why the same amount of grading would be
necessary for the project if 15 or 57 homes were placed on this site. She
requested written responses to Mr. Smith's questions. She expressed
concern about the project because of the amount of movement of dirt, the
shear keys and the amount of smectite on the property and what will happen
in 10 to 15 years with torrential rains and earth movement. She further
stated she would like to see fewer houses built on this site.
C/Harmony stated the project was denied for geotechnical aspects. He
indicated he respects Comm./Fong's comments and that he expects a
complete and full report back to the Council so that, in layman's terms, there
is full understanding of Mr. Smith's concerns. He asked for interpretation of
the arbitration provision in the Transamerica agreement (TADCO) with "The
Country Estates" association as it relates to this project.
M/Papen stated that she had reviewed the 31 pages of conditions of
approval and did not find a provision for the use of reclaimed water for
landscape irrigation or rubberized asphalt and asked if these are now City
standards and no longer need to be specified in the conditions of approval.
She wanted to be certain that they are included in this project.. She
expressed concern about the lack of good faith in the annexation to "The
Country Estates." Annexation was not written into Tract 47851; however,
during public hearings, it was made very clear by the applicant that it was
their intention to annex to "The Country Estates." During 7 years of
discussion, the annexation has not happened and the buyers awareness
package does not indicate a likelihood of this occurring. She requested that
a condition of annexation be included in the conditions of approval with
removal of the statement that the developer would not have to annex unless
the fees were in excess of those applied to Tract No. 47722. She believed
the Council listened to the developer and took them at their word that there
would be full annexation and they are selling the previously approved tract
April 6, 1995 Page 15
without having annexed and the lack of good faith to the Council is apparent.
She stated the following items should be audited for possible changes in
Tract No. 47850: 1) The footprint of the home on the pad. On Tract 47851,
the minimum side yard setbacks were changed from 10' to 20', 2) The buyer
awareness package contains no home diagrams, 3) wildlife and the City's
liability; 4) drainage; 5) When does the developer's 5 -yr. tree maintenance
program begin. In previous discussions, one of the alternatives in the EIR
was that approximately 15 homes would be built on the northeast corner.
Several Commissioners and Council members have asked questions about
eliminating the grading on the west side while still allowing the development.
She stated she had been told there had not been sufficient soils and grading
analysis to make such a determination. She was concerned that an
alternative in the EIR states that 15 homes will be built on the northeast
section; however, if the soil cannot withstand this construction, is the
alternative valid. Land form grading techniques being considered apply to
the outside of the project with the pads on a plateau. It appears that this is
a giant development surrounded 50 ft. below by a wildlife corridor, oak and
walnut trees. There is nothing in the specific project that retains the
appearance of country. In her opinion, there should be created hills and
berms to create a natural corridor to run through the entire project. She
indicated that if Lots 47 and 48 were removed, there would be a natural
corridor running the length of the project and if lot 24 was removed, the
corridor could be extended west, and if a lot was removed from lot 7 to 13,
perhaps a "country atmosphere" could be created within the project.
MPT/Werner requested that the builder recommend regulations as part of
the development code on the RR designated lands to address the building
envelope concerns.
Responding to M/Papen, Kurt Nelson stated that the developer would be
agreeable to the project being returned to the Planning Commission April 24.
Further, questions currently raised by Mr. Smith were virtually the same
questions raised by him on March 11, which should have been answered at
that time. He referred the Council and Commission to the written answers
given to Mr. Smith's March 11 questions. He indicated that he, Jack
Cameron, and Dan Buffington had several meetings with a subcommittee of
"The Country Estates, of which Mr. Greely was a member. "The Country
Estates" indicated they were fearful that they might not be able to get the
requisite percentage of roads required by their declaration to allow the
project to annex. Despite the fact that, as a result of the TADCO agreement,
a settlement of approximately $300,000 was paid by D.B. Assoc. (formerly
known as Transamerica Developers) to 'The Country Estates" to settle the
issue of impact upon the recreational facilities of "The Country Estates". In
addition to the lump sum cash payment, a per lot access fee of $3,000 would
be paid at the time the lots were developed. There is a covenant that runs
April 6, 1995 Page 16
with the land and binds every resident in 'The Country Estates" to the
contract. 'The Country Estates" has canceled at least two scheduled
meetings regarding annexation. Annexation would generate approximately
$800,000 of funds earmarked to enhance "The Country Estates" facilities.
Regarding the alleged street damage, Mr. Nelson stated he had suggested
retaining a third party paving expert to determine if there had been any
damage. Services of a mutually agreed upon third party were retained and
a report was presented to 'The Country Estates". He stated "The Country
Estates" rejected the offer of recompense. He further stated he was willing
to double and triple the amount to get the annexation done at a fair price.
He stressed that D.B. Assoc. had acted in good faith and did not believe the
project should be required to annex to'The Country Estates" even though
they believe it is a good option for the project. If annexation does not occur,
there is an arbitration clause contained in the TADCO legal settlement that
runs with the land. The City has no legal responsibility to enforce annex-
ation. He offered to meet with Comm./Fong, Leighton & Assoc. and
Harrington Geotechnical prior to the Planning Commission's April 24 meeting
to answer questions concerning geotechnical matters. He believed that
there is a condition for approval which addresses reclaimed water, and he
is not certain about rubberized asphalt. Regarding the footprints and
mansionization, even though annexation had not taken place, there is a
good faith review process in place with 'The Country Estates" architectural
committee. He stated, to his knowledge, a committee review had been
conducted for each house prior to submission to the City's Community
Development Department for its review. He further stated that, in his
opinion, the idea of elimination of some lots to create a more natural corridor
is a good one and could have been considered 2 1/2 years ago; however,
the current project conforms to the Council requirements set forth 2 1/2 years
ago for this design alternative. The number of lots is fewer than is allowed
by the zoning and the current proposed General Plan. As stated in the
Master EIR and the recent update revision, fewer lots would not significantly
reduce the amount of grading needed to reach an adequate factor of safety
set forth by the Council. Smectite is the on-site material, but the design
criteria (the parameters of shear strength, etc.) were for materials of lesser
strength more in keeping with the bentonite. The safety factors were derived
with strength parameters more conservative than industry standards
because at 1.50 strength, it is 1 1/2 times stronger than the minimum
necessary.
Responding to Mr. Hempel, CM/Belanger stated that the Planning
Commission would consider the matter April 24 and,May presuming6 or
Commission could reach consensus that evening, he suggested
Council consideration.
A motion was made by MPTNVemer, seconded by C/Ansari to refer Vesting
April 6, 1995 Page 17
Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 back to the Planning Commission for
reconsideration on April 24, 1995 and continue the matter to May 16, 1995
for Council. Motion was carried unanimously by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - MPT/Werner, Ansari, Harmony,
Miller, M/Papen
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
Responding to Chair/Flamenbaum, CM/Belanger responded that the
Government Code provides for the Counci I to refer such matters back to the
Planning Commission for their comments. The Commission has up to 45
days to make their comments or by a certain date, if directed by the Council.
Further response from the Council indicated that the project is being
returned to the Planning Commission for review and open to comments with
respect to any and all issues.
M/Papen stated the applicants' agreement for continuance of the project as
stated in the prior motion.
It was moved by Comm./Schad and seconded by VC/Huff to continue the
meeting to April 24, 1995 for purposes of commenting on the project. This
is not a public hearing. Motion carried 4-0 by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS - Schad, VC/Huff, Fong, Chair/
Flamenbaum
NOES: COMMISSIONERS - None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS - Meyer
4. ANNOUNCEMENTS: None
5. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to discuss, the
meeting was continued to April 24, 1995 for the Planning Commission and May 16,
1995 for the City Council at 10:22 p.m.
LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk
ATTEST:
Mayor
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 27, 1995
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Meyer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at the
South Coast Air Quality Management Auditorium, 21865 East Copley
Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Chairman
Flamenbaum.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners: Chairman Flamenbaum, Vice
Chairman Huff, Meyer, Schad, Fong.
Also Present: Community Development Director James
DeStefano; Assistant Planner Ann Lungu;
Associate Planner Robert Searcy; Recording
Secretary Carol Dennis
PRESENTATION:
Chair/Flamenbaum presented a plaque to C/Meyer commending
him for his services as Planning Commission Chairman for
the period June 14, 1993 to February 27, 1995.
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Minutes of March 13, 1995.
C/Fong asked that the first sentence, last paragraph
on Page 1 be changed to read: "C/Fong stated that he
felt adequate deliberation was not made at the last
meeting for the Commission to delete the water element
from the Draft Resolution, Page 4, Condition #1."
A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by C/Schad
to approve the minutes as amended. The motion was
carried 5-0.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
Chair/Flamenbaum reminded the Commission that he continues
to recuse himself from this agenda item and turned the
meeting over to VC/Huff.
March 27, 1995 Page 2 Planning Commission
1. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-7: A request to locate an
unmanned public utility substation for a cellular
telecommunication facility at an existing office building
located at 3333 Brea Canyon Road, west of the intersection
of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road. The
installation of the facility requires the placement of a 90
foot high steel monopole with three antenna arrays, a
microwave dish, and the construction of an enclosure to
house the equipment room and emergency generator.
Applicant: L.A. Cellular, Box 6028, Cerritos, CA 90702-
6028.
Property Owner: Metro Diamond Bar Properties, Inc., 2030
Main #1020, Irvine, CA 92714.
AstP/Searcy reported that the applicant requests that the
item be tabled. This project was originally presented to
the Planning Commission on January 9, 1995, continued to
January 13, 1995 and subsequently continued to this
meeting. As a result of the recommendation by the Planning
Commission, the applicant has been investigating
alternative sites. As a result, the applicant may submit
a revised application to the Commission. Staff supports
the applicant's request to table the item with an
indication that the public hearing will be renoticed when
the item is brought back to the Planning Commission.
VC/Huff declared the public hearing reopened.
Dan Hare, L.A. Cellular, stated that he was available to
answer questions from the Planning Commission.
C/Schad stated that several citizens have indicated they
are concerned about the site of the proposed tower. Mr.
Hare responded that the applicant created a computer model
of the radio signal based on the topography which supports
the school site. A live radio test was concluded last week
at that site and the applicant is currently in the process
of reviewing the data. If the conclusion is positive, the
applicant will request use of the school site.
Responding to C/Fong, Mr. Hare stated that although the
primary consideration is the school site, they wish to
leave all options open until the testing is completed. He
indicated that it would be approximately two months before
the item would again come before the Commission.
Seeing no one else who wished to speak, VC/Huff declared
the public hearing closed.
March 27, 1995 Page 3 Planning Commission
A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by C/Schad to table
the item. The motion was carried with the following roll call:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
PUBLIC HEARING - None
OLD BUSINESS - None
NEW BUSINESS - None
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
Meyer, Schad, Fong,
VC/Huff
None
Chair/Flamenbaum
None
1) Planning Commissioners Institute.
CDD/DeStefano reported that several members of the
Planning Commission and staff attended the meeting
last week and staff has provided the Commission with
copies of presentation papers provided at that
meeting. He asked if the Commissioners have requests
to purchase cassette tapes of any of the
presentations.
2) Update on Vesting Tentative Tract No. 47850.
CDD/DeStefano reported that this is a 57 unit 73 acre
site located off of Steeplechase Lane in "The Country
Estates". This project was previously before the
Planning Commission in November, 1991 and it was last
before the City Council in November, 1992. As a
result of a settlement agreement between the City and
the applicant, a task within the implementation
measures is a joint session between the Planning
Commission and the City Council for review of the
project. Staff has scheduled Thursday, April 6 at
6:30 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management
Auditorium for this meeting. The Planning Commission
is joining the City Council for the specific purpose
of receiving a presentation regarding the applicant's
compliance with 24 points that were raised in
November, 1992 pertaining to the geotechnical report.
In addition, the City Council has requested the
Planning Commissioner's comments regarding the project
in their capacity as land use advisers to the City
Council. Since the public hearing is with the City
Council, the Council will review the project in the
public hearing setting and move to take action on the
item.
March 27, 1995 Page 4 Planning commission
Responding to Chair/Flamenbaum, CDD/DeStefano stated
that the specific purpose of the joint session is to
review the applicant's compliance with the 24 points
raised in the geotechnical review sheet from the City.
The City Council will have the ability to exercise any
degree of discretion permitted by the Council through
state statute and local ordinances pertaining to
approval of the subdivision. The Planning Commission
is being asked to provide any comments on the project.
CDD/DeStefano asked the Planning Commissioners what
they would like their role to be.
C/Schad responded that the item has been reviewed by
the Planning Commission several times. He indicated
he does not feel the Planning Commission can add
anything further and sees to reason for the
Commissioners to be in attendance.
VC/Huff stated he agrees with C/Schad that he sees no
useful purpose in the Planning Commission attending.
If it is mandated, the Commission needs to attend. If
the Planning Commission is to review the project it
should be done in an official capacity with the
ability to take action.
C/Meyer indicated that it is his understanding that
the City Council denied the tract because of perceived
discrepancies between the geotechnical report and the
engineering review. If the Planning Commission
through the normal process makes a recommendation on
a subdivision, the matter would go to the City
Council. If the Council wanted to deviate
substantially from the recommendation of the Planning
Commission the Council would send the item back to the
Planning Commission for deliberation. The Planning
Commission would rehear the item with direction from
the City Council and would have a specified amount of
time to return a revised recommendation to the City
Council. In his opinion, this process is being
condensed into a joint session. He stated he does not
understand why the Planning Commission is involved in
the joint session.
C/Fong stated his comments are similar to those of
C/Meyer.
Chair/Flamenbaum asked CDD/DeStefano to convey the
Commission's concerns to the City Manager and the City
Council prior to the joint session and advise what is
expected of the Planning Commission.
CDD/DeStefano responded that he would relay the
concerns of the Commissioners to the appropriate
March 27, 1995
Page 5 Planning Commission
parties and attempt to clarify the purpose for
attendance by the Planning Commission.
3) Status Report on Draft General Plan
CDD/DeStefano reported that the City Council last
discussed this project on March 6, 1995. The Council
deliberated on the Land Use Element and directed staff
and the consultants to make the changes necessary to
compile a final draft for distribution for public
review. Staff intends to have the document ready for
nd of the week of Mar
pblication by the eCommission
stated there may be a need for Planning
review of some items that may have changed. Monday,
April 10, 1995 is scheduled for Planning Commission
review. City Council has stated that once the
document is published and 30 days has elapsed for
public review, the Council will review the document
the week of May 8. Staff anticipates orith of he document
be adopted sometime during ioa
1995.
Chair/Flamenbaum requested that the commissioners 9joint session
advise
him of the plans to attend
the April 6, meeting regarding Vesting Tentative Tract No. 47850. He
suggested that any Commissioner not attending the meeting
could forward his comments to Chair/Flamenbaum or to
CDD/DeStefano.
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS:
The Commissioners thanked the staff for coordinating their
attendance at the Planners Institute.
Responding to C/Fong, CDD/DeStefano stated that the City is
attempting to schedule a meeting with Chino Hills and Brea
to discuss transportation related issues that effect the
three cities. The City Council discussed the Chino Hills
letter in January and as a result of the Countcri re w re ea
of the letter and the Circulation Element,
number of changes made to the Circulation Element.d back
Yk
of the revised Circulation Element is being
to Chino Hills with reference to their letter of Novee ember.
There is a significant disagreement among
ties
with respect to the use of road through Tonn rCanyon.
Chino Hills is seeking a Scenic Highway designation i for
lity
Carbon Canyon Road in an attempt ac limit the a result of
of being widened to increase caepa Cany. on now loops rather
Chino Hill's General Plan, Soqu Y
than connecting with Brea Canyon's version the Canyon.
Chino Hill's General Plan indicates a Tonner Canyon Road
through the center of the valley floor.
March 27, 1995 Page 6 Planning Commission
Chair/Flamenbaum asked staff for a schedule of events for
the next few months.
CDD/DeStefano stated that the items scheduled for April 10
are the General Plan, the Intercommunity hospital secondary
road study and a review of the proposed signage for all
City parks. The only item currently scheduled for April 24
is a four lot subdivision on two and one-half acres across
from the JCC Development project on Steeplechase Lane
terminating at Hawkwood Road.
Chair/ Flamenbaum requested that the Diamond Ranch High
School road alignment be agendized for a future Planning
Commission meeting.
C/Schad thanked Steven Nice for assisting him in a tree
planting program on Sunday, March 26 at Petersen Park. He
stated that with the participation of approximately 40
students from Maple Hill School they planted 60 oak trees
and it wild cherry plants.
ANNOUNCEMENTS - None
Chair/ Flamenbaum, declared the meeting adjourned at 7:53
p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
/G/ JamAc ne-gi-efano
James DeStefano
Community Development Director
Attest:
/s/ Bruce Flamenbaum
Bruce Flamenbaum
Chairman
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
MARCH 9, 1995
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Ortiz called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. at the
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Hearing Room,
21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Chairman Ortiz.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners: Chairman Ortiz, Vice Chairman Istik, Chavers,
Leonard
Excused: Gravdahl
Staff: Senior Engineer, David Liu; Consultant
Engineer, Michael Myers; Administrative
Assistant, Tseday Aberra; Sergeant Rawlings;
and Recording Secretary, Carol Dennis
Chair/Ortiz welcomed Commissioner Joyce Leonard. C/Leonard
stated that she has been a Diamond Bar resident for 16 years.
She stated that she currently holds a Real Estate Broker's
license and is affiliated with Re -Max Realtors.
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Meeting of February 9, 1995.
C/Chavers indicated he is abstaining from approval of the
minutes due to his absence from the February 9 Traffic
and Transportation Commission meeting.
VC/Istik questioned the approval of the minutes of the
December 8, 1994 Traffic and Transportation meeting. He
stated he was a few minutes late and that was voted on 2-
0. He asked if 2-0 constitutes approval of the minutes.
SE/Liu responded that three commissioners were present
and that two constitutes a majority of those present.
Regarding the February 9, 1995 Traffic and Transportation
Commission minutes, VC/Istik submitted the following
corrections:
1) Page 4, sixth paragraph, fourth line, change
"adequate" to "advisable" so that the sentence
reads: "Some streets should have been designed as
Residential Collectors with no houses facing the
March 9, 1995 Page 2 T&T Commission
street and because of this he feels it would be
advisable.to tell people the grade of the street."
2) On Page 7, VII. Status of Previous Action Items, he
stated that the discussion of why the item had not
been before the City Council is close to what was
discussed at that time.
3) Regarding Page 8, second paragraph, he stated that
there was a discussion regarding receipt of the
City Council packets and since that time, he has
been receiving them on time. He indicated he also
stated at that meeting that Commissioner Chavers
had indicated that he was receiving his packet
sometimes on the Wednesday following the meeting.
He stated he indicated on February 9 that was not
reflected in those previous minutes and ironically,
neither was it included in the minutes of February
9, 1995 so he asked that the comment be added if it
is something that C/Chavers said.
C/Chavers stated that he received this week's Council
Meeting notice in yesterday's mail.
VC/Istick stated he received his the same day. It was
postmarked Santa Ana and dated -March 3.
4) With respect to the third paragraph on Page 8,
VC/Istick stated that was somewhat summarized.
There was nothing in the minutes besides a vote on
his part on those two issues. He feels strongly
about this and has talked to the representative of
the Evangelical Free Church and two Commissioners
who are present tonight about whether or not he had
something to say and if they recall any discussion
on that part and they do. So that goes back to his
statement on February 9 about the minutes being
condensed or summarized or are some parts being cut
out and he objects to some parts being cut out.
5) Regarding Page 9, paragraph five, what he recalls
is SE/Liu stating "Here are the rules that were
forwarded by Mayor Papen" and he further asked the
question, "would you want to receive the rules once
a year or in every packet?" And in response to
that, he stated that he didn't think it was
necessary to include the rules in every packet. He
March 9, 1995 Page 3 T&T Commission
stated he wants to leave in the question that was
asked.
A motion was made by VC/Istik and seconded by Chair/Ortiz to
postpone approval of the minutes until the revisions are made.
VC/Istik would like to see the revised minutes. The motion
was approved with the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Istik, Chair/Ortiz
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Chavers, Leonard
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Gravdahl
II. COMMISSION COMMENTS
C/Chavers stated he was able to get one copy of a handout
regarding the Chino Valley Freeway. He further stated that
many are pinning their hopes that when the freeway segment is
improved there will be improvements to traffic conditions in
Diamond Bar.
C/Chavers stated that he noted with interest that the traffic
signals at Golden Springs Drive/Golden Prados Drive and Golden
Springs Drive/ Prospectors Road and Golden Springs Drive/Carpio
Drive were on the agenda. He asked if those were authorized
by Council to be constructed. SE/Liu responded that Council
has authorized these projects as this year's capital
improvement projects. C/Chavers commented that the City is
now looking at another fiscal year and he believes those
particular signals were a part of the 1994/1995 fiscal year
and since the City is now approaching 1995/1996 it is his
understanding that the City Council will put money into the
budget for more traffic signals in fiscal year 1995/1996. He
stated he would like to see efforts expedited to get the
upcoming signals that are programmed into the budget
identified, get the Council to approve them, get the designs
put together and move as fast as possible. If there are funds
available for 1995/1996 he would like to see it spent early in
the fiscal year and have the benefit of the new equipment. He
asked staff to update the Commission on the warrant
information available, the current rankings, and what new
intersections are coming to light. He indicated that he had
witnessed an accident at Diamond Bar Boulevard and Goldrush
Drive. He believes there are some very real concerns
regarding this intersection and wants them addressed and acted
upon as quickly as possible.
March 9, 1995 Page 4 T&T Commission
SE/Liu responded that with respect to the traffic signals for
the next fiscal year the City is currently conducting traffic
signal warrant studies at 10 intersections. These are:
Diamond Bar Boulevard at Tin Drive, Goldrush Drive, Silverhawk
Drive, Acacia Hill and Palomino Drive; Golden Springs Drive at
Calbourne Drive and Raquet Club Road; Pathfinder Road at
Peacefull Hills Road; and Sunset Crossing Road at the
southbound SR 57. The warrant studies should be completed in
approximately three weeks and with the conclusion of the
studies, staff will bring this back to the Traffic and
Transportation Commission meeting as an agenda item. With the
blessing from the Commission, this will be forwarded to the
Council for budget approval.
Chair/Ortiz asked for a report on bike lane striping. SE/Liu
stated that one of the concerns raised by a resident is
whether the bike lane line should be dashed when it approaches
a private driveway. According to the CalTrans standard, "the
bike lane line may either be dropped entirely approximately
200 feet in advance of the intersection or a dash line carried
to the intersection or through the intersection". With
respect to the definition of an intersection, staff believes
that this can be interpreted to mean a public street. He
indicated that at this time, staff is not aware of any
specific requirements in the code.
Responding to Chair/Ortiz, SE/Liu stated that the driveway
opposite Montefino at Diamond Bar Boulevard is a private
driveway.
VC/Istik stated that the SR 57 Freeway southbound on/off ramp
at Sunset Crossing is under the jurisdiction of and should be
funded by CalTrans. He further stated that CalTrans would
probably let the City go in and pay the entire cost but since
it is used to a great degree for eastbound SR 60 access it
might be appropriate to ask CalTrans to think about funding a
portion or all of the project. He asked to see the warrant
study for Prospectors Road at Golden Springs Drive. SE/Liu
responded that he would include the warrant study as part of
the April Traffic and Transportation Commission packet.
VC/Istik stated that would be agreeable.
III. PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Craig Clute, 21217 Fountain Springs Road, asked what the
City's involvement is and how effective it might be in
expressing its concerns to CalTrans. He is concerned with
March 9, 1995 Page 5 T&T Commission
sound walls and the type of construction and design pattern
the soundwall might have. He stated he would not like to see
all of the greenery removed from the Diamond Bar Boulevard and
Pathfinder Road location just to accommodate a sound wall.
Responding to Mr. Clute, SE/Liu stated that the City gets
involved in the environmental process. Public meetings are
conducted prior to the project approval.
In response to Chair/Ortiz, SE/Liu stated that the March 8 Los
Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA)
meeting was a workshop dealing with the Long Range
Transportation Plan. LACMTA is soliciting public input for
the Los Angeles County plan.
C/Chavers stated that the project Mr. Clute is referring to
has been funded for several years and it was moved up through
efforts by Mayor Papen. The design is near completion. The
Project Development Coordinator is Lu Quan. The City can give
its input, however, CalTrans is not obligated to ask for input
from the City. CalTrans will meet the letter of the law when
it comes to the Environmental Impact requirements and the
Mitigation Measures. In order to widen the freeway and add
the lane, sound walls were a necessary mitigation measure
under the EIR and CalTrans will build them. If any City wants
to coordinate with CalTrans the City must proactively seek a
relationship with CalTrans. With respect to this specific
sound wall, CalTrans is widening the freeway from south of the
Diamond Bar Boulevard off -ramp eight. to 12 feet and north of
Diamond Bar Boulevard moving up and over the bridge and before
it catches grade again somewhere around the Pathfinder Road
interchange, pushing the freeway out. In order to retain the
fill land they will install a retaining wall with a sound wall
on top of it and the greenery will be destroyed. He
anticipates the wall will be plain concrete with a very plain
masonry wall. CalTrans may ask the City to pay for anything
additional to make the wall architecturally and aesthetically
pleasing. There are never any public meetings for
construction design. The public meetings were held during the
Environmental Impact review which was done approximately six
years ago about the time the City incorporated. C/Chavers
suggested that Mr. Clute contact CalTrans in coordination with
City staff to determine what they are doing for the
landscaping, retaining wall and block wall.
Mr. Clute asked if CalTrans has plans to widen the Grand
Avenue ramps. SE/Liu responded that he has no information for
March 9, 1995 Page 6 TiT Commission
that location. C/Chavers stated that it is a separate
project. CalTrans divides things into design and construction
packages. The SR 57 south of the SR 60 split will be one
package. What happens in the SR 57/SR 60 confluence and the
SR 60 extending up over the hill into Pomona will be a second
design and construction package. He offered his services to
staff with regard to contacting people at CalTrans.
SE/Liu provided Mr. clute with a copy of the Executive summary
from the March 8, 1995 MTA Long Range Transportation Plan
workshop.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: - None
V. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Neighborhood Traffic Management Study.
SE/Liu reported that to resolve the traffic problems in
a systematic areawide approach with the consensus
approval of the community for the triangle area bounded
by Pathfinder Road to the north, Diamond Bar Boulevard to
the east and Brea Canyon Road to the west. DKS and staff
have developed the proposed correspondence and the
questionnaire that will be sent to the residents next
week. Staff would like for the Commission to concur with
the enclosures. There are approximately 500 residents in
the area who will receive this mailing and they will have
at least four weeks to respond. Staff is also requesting
that the April Traffic and Transportation Commission
meeting be a joint meeting and workshop with the
neighborhood residents for this study.
Responding to Chair/Ortiz, SE/Liu indicated that in
addition to the workshop there are several items
scheduled for the meeting agenda.
Chair/Ortiz recommended two meetings for April with one
meeting designated for the workshop only.
C/Chavers stated he is comfortable with two meetings. As
an alternative he would be agreeable to starting the
meeting at 6:00 P.M. with the regular business being
conducted in the first hour. The public workshop could
be opened at 7:00 p.m. and a second meeting could be
scheduled if needed.
Page March 9, 1995 Pa e 7 T&T Commission
vC/Istik stated he would like to have one meeting.
C/Leonard indicated she would agree with one meeting
starting at 6:00 p.m.
Chair/Ortiz stated the next meeting would begin at 6:00
p.m. as opposed to 7:00 P.M.
SE/Liu asked for Commission input with respect to the
mailer which will be sent out next week.
vC/Istik stated that at the February 9 Traffic and
Transportation meeting it was brought up under "Old
Business" that this item would come before the Traffic
and Transportation Commission for approval at this
meeting. Responding to VC/Istik, SE/Liu stated that DKS
Associates has completed approximately 25% of the study.
The Diamond Bar Boulevard project has been completed and
DKS Associates has completed a review of the existing
data for the neighborhood traffic management study.
VC/Istik suggested that the residents could be told the
key issues the City is looking for and that these items
could be highlighted.
C/Leonard indicated that she approves of the question-
naire as written.
C/Chavers stated that Item 14 on the questionnaire seems
to be a fairly technical statement. He suggested
that
the item be rephrased to encourage a layman's response.
He feels the questionnaire might lead people to
exaggerate and therefore not elicit real opinions and he
encouraged staf f to work with DKS to f ind a more open
ended way to ask these questions.
VC/Istik suggested that on Item #3 people could be
encouraged to use a relative importance of 1 to 12.
C/Chavers stated that if the residents are asked to rank
the items in order of importance from 1 to 12 then they
have been asked to provide a measure of importance.
VC/Istik explained that he was involved with astudy
wherein some people listed all items as a problem
they put all 10's only to find out later when the
responses were averaged there was absolutely no input to
March 9, 1995 Page B T&T Commission
the final result.
Chair/Ortiz suggested that an example of how the
questionnaire is to be completed should be included on
the form.
A motion was made by C/Chavers and seconded by C/Leonard
to have staff work with the consultant to incorporate,
where possible, the comments by the Commission and get
the questionnaire out to the public. The motion wa's
approved 4-0 with the following roll call:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
Chavers, Leonard,
vC/Istik, Chair/Ortiz
None
None
Gravdahl
Mr. Clute suggested that owners and renters and the
Country Hills Town Center Management Company, the school
district and the school crossing guard company should be
invited to the meeting.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
A. Request for multi -way stop sign warrant analysis on
Palomino Drive between Diamond Bar Boulevard and Ballena
Drive.
AA/Aberra reported that the Department of Public Works
continues to receive complaints about speeding on
Palomino Drive. In the past, the Commission has
discussed the feasibility of installing stop signs on
Palomino Drive. Staff is requesting input from the
Commission and asking that the Commission concur with
staff's recommendation to conduct a warrant study for a
three-way stop sign on Palomino Drive at Ballena Drive
and Platina Drive.
VC/Istik stated he would concur with the recommended
action.
C/Leonard stated she would also concur with the
recommendation.
C/Chavers indicated that there is a traffic signal
warrant study being conducted on Diamond Bar Boulevard at
March 9. 1995 Page 9 TiT Commission
Palomino Drive. The information would be beneficial to
have as part of this study and he is concerned that a
three-way stop is treating the symptom rather than curing
the disease. He is concerned about even considering a
traff is signal at Palomino given how closely it is spaced
to the SR 60/Diamond Bar Boulevard interchange. Perhaps
the Palomino Drive/Diamond Bar Boulevard intersection
should be viewed as to how the problem is fixed as
opposed to putting stop signs down on Palomino
Drive
at
Ballena Drive and Platina Drive. He sugg
be
there are geometric configurations where the access could
be limited at the Diamond Bar Boulevardn ctnon..
Perhaps it could be made a right- in/right-out y
Perhaps it could be made left -in and not allow left turns
out. Some of those things would start to He change
ed the
traffic pattern fairly dramatically.
supports the idea that the warrant analysis be done but
he would like for an accompanying analysis to be done of
the intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Palomino
Drive to see if there isn't another option.
A motion was made by C/Chavers and seconded by VC/Istik
to approve staff's recommendation to conduct multi -way
stop sign warrant analysis on Palomino Drive at Ballena
Drive and at Platina Drive and that staff concurrently
investigate ways to improve the intersection of Diamond
Bar Boulevard/ Palomino Drive. The motion was approved 4
0 with the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: C/Chavers, VC/Istik,
C/Leonard, Chair/Ortiz
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: C/Gravdahl
B. Request by Jones Intercable to remove the existing red
curb on both sides of their second driveway on Brea
Canyon Road.
SE/Liu stated that at the February Traffic and
Transportation Commission meeting the Commission
requested that staff work with the business owner to see
if there might be any alternative solutions for the
loading/unloading condition that exists. Staff has
determined that the Jones Intercable business office and
March 9, 1995
Page 10 T&T COmmissiOA
the auto body shop are part of the same structure. The
Jones Intercable facility is approximately 19,400 square
feet of floor area. Jones Intercable has 31 employees on
an average daily basis and 34 employees who work outside
the facility for a total of 65 employees. The auto body
shop employs two people. According to the City's
Planning and Zoning Code, the parking requirement f ora he
structure is 48. There are currently 34 parking Street
es
in a parking lot which is accessed from Lycoming
and an additional 22 spaces are provided in the parking
lot which is accessed from Brea Canyon Road. This gives
a total of 56 parking spaces which exceeds the
requirement of 48. Staff has been in contact with
several people at Jones Intercable and tonighttheir
representative is present with a suggestion
that until
resolution to this situation. Staff suggests
the on-site parking facilities are
fully
further consider utilizedcity
should not grant any
Therefore, staff recommends that the Commission deny the
to work with Jones Intercable to
request and continue
assist them in better utilizing their on-site parking
facility.
Janet Spatz, General Manager of Jones Intercable and
resident of Diamond Bar, stated that she fully expected
the Commission to deny their request based on prior
comments by the Commissioners. She indicated that due to
the shifting during the day, the current parking facility
is empty part of the day. What the company has done is
to identify certain spaces in the parking lot that are
not used until the afternoon or evening shift by painting
them with different striping so the trucks will be able
to use those spaces in the morning hours. She stated
they are not certain how effective this will be, however,
they are trying to use this method to solve their own
t
problem. She indicated they would like the opportunity
to return to the Commission if this solution is not
workable. She stated some trucks will still be on the
street somewhat, however, much more of the traffic will
be off of the street.
VC/Istik asked Ms. Spatz if Jones Intercable is
withdrawing their request. Ms. Spatz re withdrawingndoed f
permanently". She indicated that they a
their request for the time being but they might wish to
return to the Commission if this solution doesn't work.
March 9, 1995
Page 11 TAT commission
VC/Istik stated he felt strongly about the issue.
Certainly with the testimony for parking and loading and
not somng ething the street
set precedent on the st and on if tsalllde, it is
possible.
not somet g
Ms. Spatz stated she would withdraw the request for the
time being.
flect
Chair/Ortiz asked that the
11 Commission comments s bees• Spatz
stopped.
request
C. Request by a resident to install flashing beacons or
pedestrian signal with a crosswalk on Diamond Bar
Boulevard at Quail Summit Drive.
SE/Liu stated that staff recommends that the Commission
discuss this matter and concur with staff to conduct a
warrant study on Diamond Bar Boulevard at Quail Summit
Drive to ascertain if a pedestrian crosswalk with
flashing beacon or pedestrian signal is warranted.
VC/Istik stated that having tried to cross there he
agrees with staff's recommendation.
C/Chavers stated that he views these types of solutions
with a great arranted at that location. wonders if a signal
might be
C/Leonard stated that at the minimum the location should
have a pedestrian crosswalk. She indicated she feels a
traffic signal might better serve the area and at the
minimum she would vote for a warrant study.
C/Chavers asked if it would be possible to do both
warrantsavailable. ly so SE/Liut the Commission statedaff would comply
the data
with C/Chavers request.
VC/Istik stated he has been involved recently with two
a stopped
flashing beacons in Walnut and so far they
the number of accidents on Grand Avenue.
Chair/Ortiz stated that crosswalks are false barriers
without educating the pedestrians and gement some kind
essence, they
are not safe. He suggested the City imp
of educational program to notify the proper method for
using crosswalks.
March 9, 1995
Page 12 T&T Commission
Responding to Chair/Ortiz, Sgt. Rawlings stated that upon
request of a school the Crime Prevention Unit will give
presentations on traffic safety.
In response to C/Chavers, Sgt. Rawlings stated that
Deputy Bryant teaches the Traffic Safety program. His
how to use
agenda dkss The program s not include teaching includes c
crosswa subst nce abuse and
gangs, etc.
Chair/Ortiz suggested the Commission
for school children.
edestrian safety education program
A motion was made by C/Chavers and seconded by C/Leonard
that the Commission concur with staff Is
recomimendatio crosswalk
a
conduct warrant studies regarding ped
at Diamond Bar Boulevard at Quail Summit Drive with an
amendment to include warrant analysis for traffic signal
purposes as well s° make at the evaluation on has all of the
available datato
VC/Istik asked if C/Chavers included flashing beacons as
part of the motion with traffic signals as a third item.
C/Chavers responded that to him, this is all a part of
the pedestrian crosswalk analysis.
The motion was approved 4-0 with the following roll call:
COMMISSIONERS: Chavers, Leonard,
AYES: VC/Istik, Chair/Ortiz
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT:• COMMISSIONERS: Gravdahl
VII. STATUS OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS.
A. Installation of stop signs at the Legs of residential T -
intersections (Cold Spring Lane at Barbi Lane, Cold
Spring Lane at Ambushers Street, and Gold Run Drive at
Running Branch Road).
SE/Liu stated this item was approved by the City Council
on February hould be installed in about a month given995. The work orr will be to the
County and
SE/Liu further stated that at the February 7, 1995
March 9, 1995 Paqe 13 TAT Commission
meeting the City Council awarded the construction
contract to Macadee Electric, Inc. for the Golden Springs
Drive traffic signals. Construction is scheduled to
begin in April and should be completed by June.
VIII.ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS
C/Chavers commended staff on the Diamond Bar Boulevard
Rehabilitation Project.
VC/Istik asked for a status on the change of speed limits for
some of the residential streets from 30 to 25 MPH. SE/Liu
responded that this item will likely be agendized for the
first week in April. He stated he has conveyed the wishes of
the Commission and the City Manager understands this will be
included in a future meeting. Staff is currently writing the
report. He indicated he will attempt to have the item placed
on the March 21 agenda, otherwise it will be on the agenda for
April.
VC/Istik stated that he favors going back to 25 MPH on the
double loaded streets in the City that have a very narrow
pavement in each direction.
VC/Istik stated he had a handout for the Commission so that
they could see what kind of report C/Chavers makes when he is
making a presentation to another City's City Council.
Chair/Ortiz asked VC/Istik to make a copy for staff.
C/Chavers stated it clearly presents what kind of records can
be kept in the way of meeting minutes. He indicated in some
instances City's he presents to will say "applicant
presentation made by Todd Chavers" and he may have talked for
30 minutes and answered 30 minutes of questions. Other times
he sees very complete meeting minutes like the one VC/Istik
has handed out. He encouraged the Commission and staff to
look at the handout from that perspective and get a feel for
whether or not this is a direction the Commission might take.
Chair/Ortiz stated that this is a further strengthening of
VC/Istik's comments on meeting minutes that they should be
complete and concise.
C/Chavers stated that he would use the term "salient".
VC/Chavers indicated that he had expressed some rather harsh
March 9, 1995 Page 14 T&T Commission
words because he was upset. He does not think it is the place
of the City Manager to stand between an advisory body and the
Council that appointed that advisory body. He stated he has
never seen anything like that reflected in the meeting
minutes. He further stated that he is certain that his words
were strong enough that they came through on the tape. He is
troubled that some things that he thinks should be there and
are salient are not getting included. He indicated he is not
sure he has the answer as to how to do that but this is a good
place to look at it and see if this is a better direction to
go. He stated he thinks we do a good job, we can always do
better.
Chair/Ortiz stated he remembers the meeting.
Chair/Ortiz inquired Sgt. Rawlings about the Sheriff's
Department policy on stop signs. He asked if enforcement
begins the minute the stop signs are installed or if there a
grace period. Responding to Chair/Ortiz, Sgt. Rawlings
responded that there is no written policy regarding stops sign
enforcement. Under hazardous situations, enforcement should
begin immediately for safety reasons. With respect to the
recently installed stop signs on Brea Canyon Road at Cold
Springs Lane, he stated the Sheriff's Department was asked to
issue warnings for the first week. For non -hazardous changes
in the law there is a procedure to give a grace period.
Chair/Ortiz stated that during weddings and funerals there are
usually about 20 cars parked along the red curb at St. Denis.
Even though there are citations being issued by the Sheriff's
Department, staff should generate a letter to St. Denis
stating that when there are funerals or special events, they
instruct the parties that are going to use the grounds that
they will be cited for illegal parking.
Sgt. Rawlings stated that the Sheriff's Department is writing
citations there.
IX. ITEMS FROM STAFF
SE/Liu stated that the Commission is required to elect a
Chairperson and Vice Chairperson for a term of one year at its
first regular meeting of March. He suggested that this item
be agendized for the April meeting.
CE/Myers presented the Commission with a copy of the
preliminary design report for the Golden Springs Drive Bike
March 9, 1995 Page 15 T&T Commission
Lane project. He said the item will go before the City
Council in April with a request for authorization to solicit
bids. The item will then be returned to the Council in May
with a request for authorization to award a contract.
Construction is scheduled to begin the middle of May and to be
completed the middle of June. This project and schedule is
expending some third year SBA 821 fund before they are lost.
At first blush the project seemed very straight forward. Upon
detail study, some complications did arise. The parking as it
exists in the northern end, particularly from Sylvan Glen Road
to Temple Avenue, makes it very difficult if not impossible to
fit all of the traffic lanes, bicycle lanes, parking lanes and
turn lanes into a 64 foot roadway. Staff recommends and is
proceeding to defer this portion to a second phase improvement
project allowing more time for study. The first phase will be
the introduction of the bicycle lane each side of Golden
Springs Drive from Diamond Bar Boulevard to Sylvan Glen Road.
Primarily this is a striping project. The portion of Golden
Springs Drive from Platina Drive to Diamond Bar Boulevard is
currently two to three hundred feet of posted "No Stopping".
CE/Myers asked that the "No Stopping Any Time" on Golden
Springs Drive from Diamond Bar Boulevard to Sylvan Glen Road
issue be agendized for the April Traffic and Transportation
Commission meeting and return to the April City Council
meeting for recommendation for authorization to advertise.
CE/Myers indicated he can anticipate the public concern about
no -stopping because it does remove a number of parking spaces
that are approximate to the school on Golden Springs Drive.
The overall available supply of curb parking spaces would not
be diminished below what is necessary to provide pickup and
delivery, although there is some inconvenience involved. Most
parents prefer to use the Golden Springs Drive frontage road
and Ballena Drive for loading and unloading. All of the other
immediately adjacent land uses do not take direct access from
Golden Springs Drive and do not appear to have pedestrian or
useable access but take access from the side streets or the
frontage roads.
C/Chavers asked why this was presented as an informational
item rather than an agenda item. CE/Myers responded the
design report was completed only over the last week and was
not ready for presentation at the time the agenda was prepared
for the Commission.
C/Chavers asked if staff would intend to have a public meeting
March 9, 1995 Page 16 T&T commission
in the hour prior to the public workshop at the next meeting.
CE/Myers responded that that is his recommendation. C/Chavers
asked if there has been a meeting scheduled with the principal
of Golden Springs Elementary School. CE/Myers responded that
prior to the next meeting he would do that. There are no
prepared plans available at this time. That will occur over
the next two to three weeks. C/Chavers stated that there are
no separate left turn lanes at Golden Springs Drive and High
Knob Road. Since there are two different street
configurations on Golden Springs Drive will staff consider
using what is at the north end as a template bringing that to
the south end. He asked how badly does the City need left
turn lanes and will that be a part of the analysis. CE/Myers
responded that it has not been a part of the analysis on Phase
I. The intention was to perpetuate the turning lanes that are
currently in existence. The reason for Phase II is because
there are many more issues to be dealt with than appeared at
the outset of the project.
C/Chavers stated that it is inevitable that someone will say,
"rather than lose the parking in front of the school, why not
do it like it is up north?". The Commission and staff need to
be prepared to answer that question prior to embarking upon a
public meeting or the Commission will look very foolish. He
encourage CE/Myers to meet with the principal, Mr. Mangham and
Kathy Nolan, the head of the PTA at the school.
vC/Istik stated that the school district can use the streets
for drop off and in so doing, it takes away the original use
for which the street was intended and that is to move people.
C/Leonard asked for clarification that the Phase I is
primarily the "no stopping" issue and Phase II is for
construction of the bike lanes. CE/Myers responded that Phase
II is to primarily be able to construct a bicycle lane from
Diamond Bar Boulevard to Sylvan Glen Road on both sides of the
roadway. The most significant complication is the necessity
to install "No Stopping Any Time" in areas which now enjoy
parking and particularly in front of the school.
Chair/Ortiz asked if funds were available for a bicycle safety
program for the local schools. CE/Myers responded that he
believes the funds are for constructing bicycle and pedestrian
facilities and improvements. He is not aware of funds for
educational programs. SE/Liu reiterated that the SB 821 funds
are not available for educational programs. Sgt. Rawlings
stated the Sheriff's Department could conduct educational
March 9, 1995 Page 17 T&T Commission
programs upon request. The Crime Prevention Deputy that the
City has under contract could perform those duties.
Chair/Ortiz asked staff to look into have this service
performed at the local schools.
C/Chavers asked if it changed the City's O&M and if the City
has to sweep the bike lanes more often and keep them clean so
that people will use them and does the street lighting have to
be changed in any way to accommodate the bike lane users.
CE/Myers responded that he is not aware of any requirement for
additional street lighting.
Responding to C/Chavers, Sgt. Rawlings stated that the
Sheriff's Department has pamphlets that address bicycle safety
and the text could be used in City publications.
Responding to Chair/Ortiz, CE/Myers stated he needs no action
from the Commission this evening and asked if the Commission
wishes to agendize this item for its next meeting.
C/Leonard asked if the agenda items could be accomplished in
the hour preceding the workshop. SE/Liu responded that he
believed it could be done.
C/Chavers stated he does not believe an hour will be
sufficient for the regular meeting agenda and would prefer a
meeting the week prior to the workshop meeting.
Chair/Ortiz stated he agrees with C/Chavers.
SE/Liu suggested that the regular meeting could begin at 6:00
p.m. and the workshop could begin at 7:30 or 8:00 p.m.
VC/Istik stated written comments could be accepted if people
have plans to be out of town.
SE/Liu indicated that the residents will have three and one-
half weeks to give their responses. He suggested that the
workshop could be moved to April 6.
C/Chavers stated he thought there was more urgency with
respect to the bike lanes. His preference would be to conduct
the regular meeting on April 6 and have the workshop on April
13.
C/Chavers indicated that he is concerned with the appearance
Page March 9, 1995 Pa a is TST Commission
of bringing an unagendized item before the Commission so that
the report to the Council can say staff ran it by the Traffic
and Transportation Commission and feels this would put the
Commission in a very embarrassing position.
VC/Istik stated he would hope that reports handed out at the
meeting are not forwarded to Council as reviewed items.
C/Chavers stated that the process leaves him very
uncomfortable. He indicated he can see people showing up for
a meeting asking why the Commission is bothering to have a
public meeting when the Council has already approved the item.
CE/Myers stated that the authorization to bid could be moved
to the April 18 City Council meeting and the award contract
could be moved to the second Council meeting in May.
C/Chavers stated the Commission could hold its public meeting
on March 30 which would put the item ahead of the Council
meeting.
VC/Istik suggested that if the Commission is having a separate
meeting and it is being done based on something the Council
has already talked about he would rather not have the meeting
or meet sooner.
C/Chavers suggested March 30 for the public meeting. Without
objection, the Commission concurred. CE/Myers responded that
he would have substantially completed plans and
specifications.
VC/Istik asked if the 30 MPH to 25 MPH streets that the
Commission voted on in December could be forwarded to the
Council. He stated he is concerned with what was discussed at
the last meeting about the item being put off until after the
General Plan is adopted. CE/Myers responded that it might be
appropriate for a member of the Commission work directly with
the Mayor and reiterated the importance of putting this matter
before the City Council. There has been a lot of businesses
before the City Council. The agenda is created, set and
published by the City Manager and the Mayor. SE/Liu
reiterated that the City Manager is aware of this item and has
given him direction to proceed and staff is compiling the
information which will be forwarded to the City Council on
March 21 or April 4.
C/Leonard stated her willingness to speak with the Mayor
March 9, 1995 Page 19 T&T Commission
regarding the item. vC/Istik responded that he does not want
to hang something on the timing of the General Plan. There
has been testimony from Mr. Clute this evening and others have
spoken regarding the item and there has been concurrence from
Sgt. Rawlings to take the 30 MPH down to 25 MPH where it used
to be.
SE/Liu recommended that the meeting be adjourned to March 30,
1995 at 7:00 p.m. at the south Coast Air Quality Management
District Building and the room number will be determined.
Chair/Ortiz requested that staff provide an updated list of
all Commissioners with their names, telephone numbers,
addresses and their appointors. SE/Liu responded since there
will be a reorganization of the Traffic and Transportation
Commission, the list will be provided following that meeting
with the updated information.
X. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS - None
XI. ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Ortiz declared the meeting to adjourned at 9:22 P.M.
Respectfully,
/s/ David G. Liu
David G. Liu
Secretary
Attest:
/s/ Tom Ortiz
Tom Ortiz
Chairman
City of Diamond Bar
I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Mayor Papen and Mayor Pro Tem Werner
FROM: Linda G. Magnuson; Accounting Manager
SUBJECT: Voucher Register, May 2, 1995
DATE: April 27, 1995
Attached is the Voucher Register dated May 2, 1995. 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 May 2, 1995 have been
reviewed, approved, and 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
115
Integrated Waste Mgt Fund
118
Air Quality Improvement Fund
125
Com Development Block Grant Fund
138
LLAD #38 Fund
225
Grand Ave Const Fund
250
CIP Fund
TOTAL ALL FUNDS
APPROVED BY:
��.�(L,✓ � h, y . 'jam-l-G�'1�
Linda G. Magnu on
Accounting Manager
1'";rTerrence L. Belanger
City Manager
i_`�r•1i,�a
$456,215.31
20,131.97
328.94
1,067.20
827.89
67.14
841.99
282.87
$479,763.31
Phyllis E. Papen
Mayor
-, y`i i. � �cn,Ci�i -�- -.
c c _ -' _
_r_ i_ _ c c� -_ _ - - -_
_-- _ _. _ d._._
._.. ___- J .1 �__ .. ._v_� •___
1_ � .___ t _. �'. _ _ _. _
7 rr
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
c,; - EN
as
I
4'f
M
p
41
-4�
ght' ng
T-TAL DUE - --------
-4
rj
DUE
--i1
5.
L Q R --------
4,
4
-- - - - - - - - - -
VUNTROR --------
40 -
JU
-- -- - - - - - - - -
LU;, 1
is
F AL TP,:MOUNT ----:
14,
c um Fiv p t r "-r
4.) 4
�7
77- ;C _FI OR - - - - - - - -
.3 &
Ll!; U
ar,
HL -U!E .EP DOR- - - - - - - -
7-T
Lwi
- - - - - - - - - -
4"-
K ----------
14 E, E C rLi Ell:- Mr;
4 S 2 2
----------
'4 7
2f- -
A L
Q H --iL-
N
T
1;f
-CAgrO fre
-7
DUE VEN" OR
U� L - V",@ ri - - - - -
7A.f
-7—
- - - - - — — —
— - - - - —
-7—
:L
—i'Llu
b" 7L i I i- INI
+'"a 'NT E
- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -- ----- ----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -
mon 4 a r P E? :-'ii
V i
-C A
i -1p
7
D-br-'r t
pp
mi.
A.
7
-';i- -45-
— -- - - - - E -----
----------
L CMj r
62
4
204
restDn-
i
34.
-- --------
A ri a r
orj
r7,- Jtp_
IENNR ---------
nL
U, r
AL DUE
-ni S OrLi
-
ij
f;-j-.7— ---------
--- -.=
—Aar
DJE
m--7
---- --------
T
-- - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - -
- - - --
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
7 7m.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
--------
xJ
r c
7 AL
7.1 j - - - - - - - -
L Uf, : --------
7 j
AL,
DU
21. J -L
uniffie ji, E
:7
4 2
1-4
ru
1 9
/2644
r
7�j
Em.
7
lit.
TE
t 7 t
'E
_-- ---------
-------------
L. ------------------------
-----------------------------
----------------------------------------
4090`21 C`j -r z
b
HL
- --- - - - - - - - -
CI 4'
uIr%
--- - - - - - - - -
;J TOE: 1104 040715
;:IHJR INIME VENDOR 0 -
!SOT OWE
—7-V EVCH P01:4:40-
--------------------------------------------------------
----------------------
-------------------------------------------------------
-
lop 7gr Ran
4 0
TCU--siL ---------
Carol1
,&
05A
,ilii
21 505CH
AQ
777n._ :_E .EN:,:R --------
-PcductivitY
-E
5 a� -
EN"COr ----------
OTAL VIL
A
7
:51:
4030
vyws Was
70TAL AMCUNT ----
37'3o*'I()
T!3 --------
r..ty-Sheriff 5 5ep f f
155-
-AL DUE VENDOR ----------
(""' -
--;Ci -4411-54-'A 1 50502D
L �,7
3 1 95
7
arociat= Leigh an wi A.S.
-alghton
040 0532 YA-
v:s-EN�5-071
'-emmn -;
-
145-�O
-23 2 -1
- '1. 7 F
5 j E E.:7 -,i"_ . _;
�7
463 A
T70. ME VENET
ravyg :K.
Engri Svcs-cC�-A-HastingB
17x32
'7.
'E-
T-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------- --------------
. LDIA2,
"i .-- - i.-. -
.. ..-1 .;7. ..- _-_ . -
- - - - - - - -
t, P-7 S
c -Apr
r.
3UE V'--"LiOF',
TSI L :iUc- VE.N[C-R --------
WT
Tu:.._ U— ic- L -OR
7�y iA
TE.M
i7f -'n - - - - - - - -
-a eb
T.;--.TAL -IOEt�Emnl'!R ---------
V iw-
7'7,-.
. � AL - --------
+°+
-� rlME� �1��4 �4/27�� '� � J � ~ � R � � G I S � E � TZE
INUE THR�............05J27�
WOR NOE VEN[OR ID.
4CCOUN7 PR0J.TX-N0 BATCH PO.LINE/WO. ENTRY/DUE IN CE DE5C' If -IOA AMOUNT DATE [�E�
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cbil
Mobil
Mobil
f��'21�0-1��
01'h0'hl
12 5WE
WMA2
2, ^
05i 02
k7h4C
FOl'P- 20. Do
����
���
01��2
O4/�
05/�
��7�
F�l'�k�� 33.88
V4i27
S�ec LEga1 Svcs-OakTree
1,�87.50
1425
51409>2310
24
N1'431O-23l;
6 50502E
O1/2582
04
V5
5 7
F � E-l'�~ec 21C0
001'4310'23Q
4 5O502E
01/2582
O4/26
05/02
53373O2
Fuel'Prk&Rec 35.7.
4033-23N
5 505 2E
O1/
14
5002E
73
13.20
S1 -4310'23N
3 5502E
01/2!82
4/
',5/02
22
Fuel-yrk&Rec 37.00
0C1'4310 -231O
l� 505�2E
C1/25E
O4'
2
12.00
20.0S
O01'4030 -23W
3 50502E
�1/2fV8
O4/2
0502
802
Fuel~Cmgr 11.�1
T3T1�� ';L.-VE��� ----} 19O.80
obil
��cnayl
Mobil
f��'21�0-1��
5
4 -'S 10
34
jFf_ EO1��r
146��'
�/��(���
����
F��'p�l��s
7.75
001-4090-2310
26
�,VF,02E
01/I847
V4i27
S�ec LEga1 Svcs-OakTree
1,�87.50
1425
51409>2310
24
50O2E
Qa847
W6
05M
k533745
Fe14:00n
14.23
V01-40+0'2810
:2
TG02E
01/2847
04/26
95/02
k5337743
Fuel-pcmlCars
L5.50
Q}1'40&Q3LO
14
5002E
ip2847
04/25
J5/02
SMAW
Fuel'poaKsrs
9.19
O01-40'�0'2310
22
O1/2847
O4/26
=2
k603543
Fue:-PoolCars
12.00
01'40904310
TO
50O2E
Oi,'2347
Ant
0502
WWI
FO�poolCars
11.43
00140942310
0
5V502E
01/2847
M/26
O5/02
k67383V3
Fuel-Poo}Cars
u.�O
0C1-40��'2310
�2
505���
O1/2E47
o4/I6
W2
k67WT
1-Pc� s
16.13
01-�9�231O
2
���E
O1/1�
�/26
�/�
0542
k���6
W W
��l'��L��
puel-Poa��ar�
12.06
1�.00
CC 1-40V>2312
'�O1'4O90'231Ci6
2T
5o5WE
5V5
J1,2S47
47
0426
J5''02
�
'7437:7:
17
T
0/:T4-
26
0572
k7«!TV
Fusi'poclCars
OV�-409�-23�0
2O
WK[
V1/A47
04/:��
05/1)2
x74372V5
Fupl-PoulCars
�C1'4�0'2310
4
5CFO2E
..11 2S47
k8115724
29
4��-�31O
o
5V�VZE
V1/2847
04/26
05/02
,8i357��
10.89
77-'L -fUE VENDOR ----> 207.46
�r��:ery,
��cnayl
��o tg�er
f��'21�0-1��
5
5V5�2E
04/27 05/02
mar Rowe Contrib
146��'
1ar ;e7:re ;edep,�s:r
�3�'402J-4020
1
50502[ 01/289!A
V4i27
S�ec LEga1 Svcs-OakTree
1,�87.50
Mary Legal S.cs
1,250.00
TO -4L DUE :ENC3R ---->
2.193.24
1:
J 1
50�12E
O4A 5502
Deductiops
50. 00
i MCS
4.3 Ol - r;
%
7r� q
EFtTr
j um
7
TOTAL "LE "NUIMP
-- --------
(Ift
d SM Fec�
...
--------
S
117AL ��--All -AVOUNT ---- 1
--------
HUE
12-8 44
7--
L Lu "'E C - - - - - - - -
- .
'Re
I—AL DUE "IE-NMOR --------
L
:'IL DUE
FPS'
4 -7 05
-11 NT ----
47
7 4
�mn 7 rPM
i i V
HL - --------i
44 1
A/ -'7 ;'-2
A i
HL - --------i
11-1u
�� r��.............S5'��.��
ENDOR NAME
VENDOR L.
� * PREPAID ^ +
A��� ��.TX'� PAT
_______--___----_—__---_--___-----_--_—_—____---___—________—_--_'
Ref nd sf
�.00
7]�� J-- ----`
52�0
chonpr' Elaine
1��
OOz-.347O14.W)
-;0 --'UE )ENDOR ---->
L4.0O
'-aw. Sharad
1��5
{0l-3478 24
505021.
04/27
O5/02 14
6acr;-,.-uon Refund
�incprely Inspired
S1n{nspire
125'4215-4VVV2
505�2E N/2765
04
of Svcs'CD83-4/1'13
817.O8
TOTAL DUE VENDOR ----}
817.00
mart & Final
Spor &Finl
001��13-2210 2
5V5V2E N/24SO
04/26
O5�� 2|41C�7
Hrtgcl-rkSupplics
o C a A s s o c. -a f Co d e
4210-2340
O4'26
TSTAL PREPAID AMOUNT --}
TO�AL GUE «[NDDR —^--'>
0.0
o. California R'egional
5oKegRail
112'��3'5533 6
5�5V2E O1/2771
04/26
05��
T'ansi,Pos�es'Ap'il
2,921.8�
�12-4553-5535 �
505V2E 02/277�
O4/2�
�jO2
Tra sitPasses'April
E� qL: JR---->
oiUthemCa8as Do
SocaGas
C�1'43�3-2|26 1
505V2E
0a
���C2
[�� Gv�s''�t�� Pr�
12�.77
T8TAL --EVEMDOR ---->
121.77
6 �
���
�/�
��
T,ff�c
E
L�-�rE :+'����
I��IC� �E3CRIpTION AP3U�T DA�E C�[C
ACCOUNT PROJ.TX�0 �JC� PO.LlNE�@. ENT�/��______________________________________
----------------------------
�and�d lnsuram� of Ore St�^uardI»
res
50502E
V4,26 S5��
�w L�f� ln� Prpms
.
N'1�5
2
VE4:---->
4=n.S0
ILE
State Com e»��zo» l»,
Fd ��ateCrmP
��/�ar�r�roCom Prem'88�0
2,�(�'15
�4/�� 05/kl
Jan/MarWrkrsCu—Prem'94\O
�`24
^00�-2110'1011
z �»�cu�
04/26 S5/O2
04/�6 2
J /�ar�r=sCo��Prem'94 0
6'08
+O61'4090-0�3
� 505�2E
T8TAL �E VENOOR ---->
4.682.47
S^�«*Y
C,/2� 05/07
�qpl'PibbnCutCermny4/l8
56.50 05 '01, 000025B28
0'2325
� 505�Su�way
A�O,4T
'
TOTAL DUE VENDUR --------
�unset Yi��age
S'^,setYi��
De t Re�und ' FP�5'022
��os
175'OO
7O7AL %Jc ---->
175.%J
TaU Mou�e
TallMo«se
2C� � S Flag� 4^x�,
145` 46
TOTALPREPA D AMOUNT -->
\45.46
TOTAi LIEVEN6O� ---->
'
0,{�
1431
R���i�
TD7l"'L ]UE VENDOR -----)
22.S0
'�e Planning �e��er
p�ngCen���
740 56
+118'4��'�*V
2 5�502E 0�/��3
04/2� 05/O�
�9421
p fS CMp
ro ,cs'
^
[nampsun �ublish�ng Gr«+P �hamp�m
3O� 5O
- l R lt H n�book
TOTAL DUE VENDOR ---------
3V9.5O
'`me G«� Perscn«el S«c'
7�4
04/-6 05/�2
�
221
TempSvc�'Receptnist
400.O0
*001'4'}40'400V
6 5V5v2� :�''z
a
�"TIwE: 11:1-v4*L jI5/E�
U E T.......2�����
�NOJR NAME VENDOR
4CCOUNT PROJ.TX�0 BAO� PO.�INE�0. �NTRY/�� I��ICE ]ES[RIP��GN �MUUNT DATE C�ECK
_--__----__—__-_----_----_—_--_'___---_—_-----_—'_—_---_—_—_—_—__---
orres' Reyoaldo
TorresR
S0�-3441
00�-34l1
6 50502E
�4/26
V502
SLaFF Charyps
C�1'3412
1 5
eu"d'-1s!ms�ng Fees
O.15
001'3413
2 5O502[
O4/26
V5/02
Refund'�lect1ca] F�s
26.60
J�1'3414
1 5O5O�E
04/26
V5/O2
�e�znd'Mechan�cl Fees
26.0O
TUTAL DUE VENDOR ----)
216.25
o�e C�t� TravelTo�s�ce
h01'�40-2�3V
1 5O5O2A
O4
Clk COnf 2/22'Burgess
116.O0 05/V2/Y5 O00OO�582�
T3TAL -��PAID AU[:NT
T3TAL OU[ YENDOR
nocal
�ruca�
001-4415'23106
5O502A 01/287i
04/26
05/02
O24516
FueL Seoior Patrol
23.O0
�0�'403O'231O
7 �653IE ��/1`6�
(��/26
V5/O2
1I97O8
�uel'���r
20.00
001-44|5-231V
2 5O5O2A 01i�71
O4/26
05/02
Z245�5
�el Senior Patrol
2V.00
C01'4213'2310
3 50�C�E t1/�C00
C�,'26
C5/�2
4��'�6O
Fuel'P�ng
22,04
�V
00i-4415-2'1310/28
4 505O2A 0171
04/26
O5/02
51401, 2
� elE8;ior Patrol
24,45
001'421O'230
1 ��5�2 C1/�CCC
�`4/26
i5/V2
71351
5el-Plng
20.46
m}1-421 0
2 50502E 2080
04/26
05/V2
82462
Fuel-Plng
20.6J
QTAL �LE �ENC3R —' '—'>
153.38
ald1e. L-rry
Wal�zeL-r
001-4411-l325
� 50�02E
04/26
O5/O2
Reimu��� */4
23.95
`
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
---alnut
a I.n+ i rrire ection
Co WalrutFire
C01-4415-�20O
� 5O5O2E
04/26
05/02
Fire Exting-SnrPtr'IVehcle
28.69
7-7AL --------
8.69
��e mmageaent
WastpMa@ag
��0'4310-6415 065Y5
4 5;5�2E 01/2676
04/2�
05,'O2
82�a�S3�2
Fe'.ce'nastrara/Bowcree�
20C.00
';UTA! "JE VENDOR >
2O0,0O
est g Cc.
�esc°uz
Cm1'4;40-232�
2 ���� O1/�759
04/l6
05/v2
[� �g1s �� 95 ��s
I{5.O0
`�1'��w}-232�
� 5��O2E C1,27�9
�4,'�6
0�/�2
.�diczal Bosks
�02.76
TOTAL E VENDOR ---->
217.76
TIME �1114O4 21 /5;� - VO'UCHER RES}STER P��� �9
-.N-DOR NAME VENDOR
AMCUNT
-----------------------------------------------------------------'
--7^L PRZ'P4ID ------}
TOr� R[F�R ------� wv
11W{6270� "ZJCAE18��� 746E �
rUxD S^�XAR� REP�RT
0SDURSE �''L -,:EW�LL yOST �E �S POSTED
FUTUR TF --S
�0 710TAL PQ 1 K CIE UE
------------------------------------------------------------------
7271L------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
u' FAIDS �9,�8.3l 69' 7.5S 1,�W4 MN.�Wn4
- t
CITY OF DIAMVNU ZAK
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. CD.j
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: May 2, 1995 REPORT DATE: April 26, 1995
FROM: Linda G. Magnuson, Accounting Manager
TITLE:
Treasurer's Report - March 31, 1995
SUMMARY:
Submitted for Council's review and approval is the Treasurer's Statement for
the month of March 1995.
RECOMMENDATION:
Review and approve.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:
X Staff Report
Resolution(s)
Ordinances(s)
Agreement(s)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
Public Hearing Notification
_ Bid Spec. (on file in City Clerk's Office)
_ Other
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote?
3. Has environmental impact been assessed?
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission?
Which Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report?
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
REVIEWED BY:
Yes_ No
Yes X No
Yes X No
Yes X No
Frank M. Usher/
Linda G. Mla4huson
A"Terrence Belanger
City Manager
Assistant City Manager
Accounting
Manager
uosnu ew •O tpuTZ
AS aaavdaud
•astaTaa s,xoago
agq TTqun qun000t Ttaauab aqq oquT p9aa83sutag qou aaaM put pagsanuT
pauTtutaa xoago sTgq aanoo og spun3 •gquout aqq 3o pua aqq qt pastaTaa
uaaq qou ptq goTgM xoago t oq anp ST sTgs • goaRN UT qunoiut anTgtbau
P smogs aoutTtq xutq qun000t Ttaauab aqq gtgq agou aseaTd •squauzgsanuT
WOa3 pauata pTaTA 9nT409339 aqq put saoutTtq qun000t quaUugsanuT
'saoutTtq qun000t xutq 3o uMopxtaaq a ggTM 'spun3 snoTatn agq ao3
seoutTtq gsto aqq smogs 4u9ma4t4s sTgs •5661 'goaRW 3o gquom aqq ao3
guautagtgs s,aaanstaay agq ST Ttnoaddt put MaTnaa s,TTouno' ao3 paggTutgns
: Mmo,doxoYH
• gotda[T Tt3sT3 ON
:7ciViDtns IMIDUT19I3
•quauzagtgs s,aaanstaay 5661 'WARN aqq anoaddy
: NOISfiaAiamKooffa
•Ttnoaddt put MaTnaa s,TTounoO AgTO aqq ao3 quamagtgg
s,aaanstaas ATgquom aqg squasaad quamgatdap 80utuT3 aqq 'AOTTod A4TD aad
:IKENRIVss snssl
966T 'TE gDJRK - quauzagtgs s,aaanstaay :SOgrans
Jabtuvw AgTO :Nog,l
TTounoO AgTO aqg 3o saagmaw put aoApw aTgtaouoH :OS
966T 'Z Mini :21ya DNIMERN
'ON VaNaDy
IROMM rl][Z)xnoa AM
Al!o e43 ;o suol;e6114o leloueul; s,4;uow >xeu e4l;eew 0) elgellene spun; l,ueloUns eJe OJe41
%£6'9 5661 'tienJgej Jo; plelA BAIIO8113 - j'I'V-1
-Aollod Juewl,senui pe;dope
AIlewjo; s,AlIO ay; J9pun pemolle sl pund;ueua;s9Aul AOueBV 18301841 w;u9was9Aul "smo4 4Z u1411M IBMBJP4)!M Jo;
elgellene eJe spun; IIV -pun j;ueua;senul Aoue6V l000l s,J9JnseeJl ejejS e4; ul pelsenul sl Jee puowe10;o A110 e41 :810N
L4'09Z'98L'£ L$
HSVO IV101
09'994'6L9'£ 1
S1N3W1S3ANI 14101
09'S94'6L9'£L
d 1N3W1S3ANI AON30V IVOOI
00'0
H3dVd IVIOH3WW00
00'0$
S31VOIJUH30 31411
95'9£9'9£1
:S1N3W1S3ANI
(6vwS '48$)
S11SOd30 ONVW30 IV101
00'009
1NnOOOV HSVO A113d
00'9LL
ONn:J 30NVH0
55'646'£1
1Nf1000V IIOHAVd
(41'619'96$)
1Nf1000V l"3N3O
41'614
:SllSOd30 ONVW30
ONni 1SNOO AV ONVHO
:HSVOA
L4'09Z 961 n$
00.0$
44'991 4££ L$ £4'£89 Z98$
Z4.9£L 941 4L$
SIV101
49'409'414
00,05E
49'458'414
ONn=i 3ONVHml dI3S
95'9£9'9£1
(00'000'0£)
99'9£S'99L
ONn=i LZ9 BS
LO'9ZL'8LZ
94' L£Z'SLS
94' LEZ'£09
LO'9ZL'90£
Oj fad 1N3W3AOadWI dVO
59'999'ZO4
41'614
6L'400'£04
ONni 1SNOO AV ONVHO
L1'9ZS'94L
91'694'9
££'486'151
0j L4# 1SIO 3dVOSONVI
(09'099'1)
4E'£LO'L
49'ZS£'S
OJ 6£# 1510 3dVOSONVI
(Z£'SLZ'6)
(99,51S'15)
9Z,£LE'ZL
Z9'£L9'49
0d 8£# 1SI0 3dVOSONVI
(99'401'Z£)
(OZ'LOZ'Z)
LZ' 1Z4'4 91'L99' 1
(6Z'£4£'1Z)
Oj 1NVHO X0018 A30 WOO
(ZO'910'8£)
(L8'009)
(S L'9L4'L£)
0d (V dHd)1NVHO SXHVd S
6£'LL9'99£
6£'LL9'99£
ONni S33zl XHVd
991194'91
8L"99Z'S 81804'£1
9Z'SZE'99
Od 1NWAHdWI A11IVf10 HIV
LO'9L L'O4
56'OOE'4 S9'495'9
144,991£
01 lO1N 31SVM 031VHO31N1
90'946'66Ll
(06'6£8'661)
00'8LO'06
96.60L'60£'L
OJ (0 dOHd) XL lISNVHl
£L' 19£'669
90'Z6L'ZZ 09'90Z'SZ
6Z'146'969
0j (V dOHd) Xl lISNVHl
6Z'£6L'60L'Z
(£8'L9O'L6Z)
E£ -99V £L'SZ8'0LZ
ZL'009'16L'Z
ONn:i XVi SVO
L9'£4£' LZ
L5'£4£' LZ
ONn=i A13dVS 01djVHl
9L'4LL'95L
00'009'Z5
5L'4LZ'60Z
ONn=i S301AHM AHVH8II
OL'869'4£0'3
L9'£E9'4L9$ 6Z'E9L'4£9$
90'6LL'4LO'L$
ONnj IVH3N30
}i
....,....:... ...... .. r ....;.... r....S. J..:%:i , r. r`:t:•: r::4}f ?•:r.}.. .r..}} ... ..n} Y?r'l•.,, •..
t•:td: r
980L ' L£ 43JBW
1N3W31V1S HSVO AIHINOW
S.m3unSV3211
INN ONOWVIO =10 All3
CARL WARREN & CO.
Acff- Insurance Adjusters
Claims Management and Administration
750 The City Drive
Suite 400
Orange, CA 92668
Mail: P.O. Box 25180
Santa Ana, CA 92799-5180
(714)740-7999
(800)572-6900
FAX: (714) 740-7992
TO: City of Diamond Bar
Attention: Tommye A Cribbins, Deputy City Clerk
RE: Claim:
Claimant: Hassan Tehran
D/Event: 12/09/94
Rec'd Y/Office: 03/24/95
Our File: S 82306AB
CID
95 APR 13 PM 3: 10
April 12, 1995
We have reviewed the above captioned claim and request that you take the action
indicated below:
XXX CLAIM REJECTION: Send a standard rejection letter to claimant.
CLAIM INSUFFICIENCY: In accordance with the telephone conversation of
. 19 a notice of insufficiency must be mailed to the claimant
no latter than _ 19---, . THIS MUST BE MAILED TO THE
CLAIMANT WITHIN 20 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THE ORIGINAL CLAIM IN
YOUR OFFICE. DO NOT SUBMIT A "REJECTION LETTER See
Government Code Section 910 and/or 910.2 and/or 910.4.
AMENDED/SUPPLEMENTAL CLAIM: Send a standard rejection letter to the
claimant, rejecting this additional/amended claim.
LATE CLAIM RESPONSE: Return the original claim material to the claimant,
advising that the claim is late and that their only recourse is to file a written
"Application for Leave to Present a Late Claim". (Retain copies in your file.)
THIS MUST BE MAILED TO THE CLAIMANT WITHIN 5 DAYS OF
REC EWT OF THE CLAIM IN YOUR OFFICE. DO NOT SEND A
' EMCTION " LETTER. See Government Code Section 911.4.
APPLICATION REJECTION: Reject claimant's "Application for Leave to
Present a Late Claim". See Government Code Section 911.8.
TAKE NO ACTION: Defer any written response to the claimant pending
our fwther advice.
Page 2
Please provide us with a copy of the notice sent, as requested above. If you have any
questions, please contact the undersigned.
very truly yours,
CARL WARREN A COMPANY
4"1
cc: SCJPIA
Attention: General Manager
V Li`l 1 i N ►. r 1 *%. 1 411 1, -
TO
TO PERSON OR PROPERTY
WSTRbCTIONS
1. 11040r,
pe"M Or to personal pmpab must be filed not
atter6 thtt eelus (Gov. Code Sec. 911.2)
ZHai 7 loo be filed not tater than I year atter the
3. Ra�ct-,a,►. Sed 911x)
claifn : alias%
4. See 2 for upon Which't locate place of accident.
S. Thisp= fora: sn be an page 2 at bottom.
e. Attach; egparates�, t!� io dive full detals SIGN EACH SIFT.
T. Claim :mast be filed rrith X& Cler %Gov. Code Sec. 915a)
To: The C ty of ;Diamond. Bair
Name of Claimant _
CLAIM
95f1` 24 Py' t:32
Age '[ Claisam tiff rotural person)
Home Address at Claimant, City and State I1=24 Telephone Number
.2 CSG dC/! Jifl 3, b� 9
Business Add#en Add'bf Claimint City and State Telephone Number
Gine addrawlo which yo1 a esire Qotio" ori p=Mwicatiam to be sent reg this49
f
INI+.1�r.F�Y
How did DAMAGE or IN�UAY sect Givie iu11 particulars --
Pao< dae to
i
_ ' Wh did Duiwaz or JURY i ccur? GiV&' fullc" Ad&ta time of day:.
7ell If A /f�,
Where did n A*AG$ arr INJURY'° occur? Destribe fully, and locate on diagram en revearse side of hem appropriate. give
: and ad and tneasuren*ms (rata Ian ts:
street namesr
, ���r �Lt'� / �r,✓�c�r.! � � ti�,1�. ,�.,.-d � � i°
What particilas ACT or WSSIR aio yds alairn caused the Wury or damage' Give names of C employees causing the injury o:
damage, if lonown: /
ire C ons{�1bk74-6
'
'lrai'DAW dr Irti'tMM dbydu claipt, resin ! Give full extent ag injurk* or dinu4ift, ! .
b , A% i,AA t -e %C Illy "It r /-(Opt ": Al
%liat AMOL(. do you glaim on account of each item of injury or damage as of date of presattlation ad this ciao°, fit g basis o
coutputati� ` �
i�d�N�1' �y/,r,N t� oYy 1�
��'
Gil a ESTiOXATED AMC as far as avn you claim on amunt of each item of Proepaetive injury or damage. giving basis c
computatilirf j
SEE PAGI:•2 {p`rEik) r TRIS CLAIM MUST $E SIGNED ON, REVERSE SID
MSUrance payments received, if an, id names of Insurance Company:
Expenditures made on account of a4i cident or injury: (Date —Item)
(Amour
Name and address of Witness" Do tore. and Hospitals:
A 1 1 7 3
A/V 6 f 77
READ CAREFULLY
For all accident 0aims- piaci oaf oUowihg diagram names of streets, including North, East, South, and West; indicate place
accident bi, "t" and by showinj hWse numbers or distances to street 'corners.
If Citi 'Ve4icle was inyolvedy de*gnat� by letter "A" location of City vehicle when you first saW it, and bY location of yourse
or your Vel*cle when you first saw City Vehicle; location of City vehicle at time of accident bY "A-1- and location of yourself or yo'
vehicle Wthd time of the;nccidant liy and the point of impact by -X- U
NOTE: If diagrams below do'nik fit the situation, attach hereto a proper diagram 4igned by e*Wh%Wt
FOR AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENTS
5
-FOR OTHER ACCIDENTS
Signayure of (:Wmant or person filing on his behalf giving
relatianship th Claimant: Typed Name:
f1A5 541V
=Aras -hu.§r BE nub'wim ctw azpx (Gov. aDDE sic. 915a)
-i74 nate
v -5
C iTY O'er' 'C�i�MOIVI"� uAu
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO. o
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: May 2, 1995 REPORT DATE: April 25, 1995
FROM: George A. Wentz, City Engineer
TITLE: Notice of Completion for Golden Springs Drive Landscape Medians from the Westerly City Limit
to Lemon Avenue
SUMMARY: The City Council, on September 20, 1994, awarded a contract to Advanced Construction for
the Construction of Golden Springs Drive Landscape Medians from the Westerly City Limit to Lemon Avenue.
The final job walk was conducted on April 13, 1995 to determine the adequacy of all constructed
improvements.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council accept the work performed by Advanced
Construction, and authorize the City Clerk to file the proper Notice of Completion and release any retention
amounts per previously approved plans and specifications.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:X Staff Report
Resolution(s)
_ Ordinances(s)
Agreement(s)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
_ Public Hearing Notification
_ Bid Specifications (on file in City Clerk's office)
X Other: (Notice of Completion)
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
by the City Attorney? N/A Yes _ No
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:
Fo I4- Terrence L. Efelanger Frank M. Usher eorge Ag-
City Manager Assistant City Manager City Engineer
c:\NP60\LindaKay\A9enda-9\GLdSprsF.NAL
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: May 2, 1995
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Notice of Completion for Golden Springs Drive Landscape Medians
from the Westerly City Limit to Lemon Avenue
ISSUE STATEMENT
File and Submit for recordation a Notice of Completion for the Golden Springs Drive
Landscape Medians from the Westerly City Limit to Lemon Avenue.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council accept the work performed by Advanced
Construction and authorize the City Clerk to file the proper Notice of Completion.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
This process of filing Notice of Completion has no financial impact on the City's 1994-1995
budget.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The City Council, at their regular meeting of September 20, 1994, awarded the contract for
the Golden Springs Drive Landscape Medians from the Westerly City Limit to Lemon
Avenue to Advanced Construction, the lowest responsible bidder. The final construction
contract amount, including change order items, was $280,404.20. On April 13, 1995, a final
job walk was conducted with Advanced Construction to determine the adequacy of all
constructed improvements. Staff has determined that the work is in accordance with the
plans and specifications prepared and approved by the City.
Prepared By:
David G. Liu
C: \WP60\LINDAKAY\CCR-94\oLDSPRSP.NAL
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR c�
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.: ,3
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: May 2, 1995 REPORT DATE: April 26, 1995
FROM: Frank M. Usher, Assistant City Manager
TITLE: Award of Contract to Charles Abbott and Associates to Provide Street
Maintenance Services in the City of Diamond Bar.
SUMMARY: On March 30, 1995, a Request for Proposal for Contract Maintenance
Services was distributed to six firms. Three proposals were submitted on
April 14, 1995 and the lowest responsible proposer was Charles Abbott and
Associates of Torrance. In guaranteeing a high level, timely and cost
effective street maintenance service to the Diamond Bar Community, staff
believe Charles Abbott and Associates represents the best qualified choice.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council award a five-year contract to Charles
Abbott and Associates to provide Street Maintenance Services in Diamond Bar,
subject to completion of the actual contractual documents including a
specific work program/plan for Fiscal Year 1995-96. Furthermore, it is
recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager or his designee
to directly administer this Street Maintenance Contract as the Project
Administrator.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report
_ Resolution(s)
_ Ordinances(s)
_ Agreement
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
Public Hearing Notification
_ Bid Specifications (on file in
City Clerk's Office)
X Other: Proposals (on file in
City Clerk's Office)
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed _ Yes X No
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority
3. Has environmental impact been assessed? _ Yes X No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes X No
Which Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report? X Yes _ No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY SERVICES
REVIEWED BY:
fs►,--Terrence L. Belanger Fran sh
City Manager Assistant City Manager
MEETING DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
ISSUE STATEMENT
vrr� cvvrrciL iii -viz r
AGENDA NO.
May 2, 1995
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
Award of Contract to Charles Abbott and Associates to provide
Street Maintenance Services in the City of Diamond Bar
The City desires to provide quality and cost effective street maintenance
services for the Diamond Bar Community. On March 30, 1995, a Request for
Proposal for Street Maintenance Services was distributed to six firms. 3
proposals were submitted on April 14, 1995 and the lowest responsible
proposal was from Charles Abbott and Associates of Torrance.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council award a five-year contract to Charles
Abbott and Associates to provide Street Maintenance Services in Diamond Bar,
subject to completion of the actual contractual documents including a
specific work program/plan for Fiscal Year 1995-96. Furthermore, it is
recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager or his designee
to directly administer this Street Maintenance Contract as the Project
Administrator.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
For FY 94-95, the budget for the street maintenance related activities totals
$351,500. It is anticipated that the budget for FY 95-96 street maintenance
activities will not exceed this amount.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The City of Diamond Bar has been contracting with the Los Angeles County
Department of Public Works since June 11, 1990 for street maintenance
services which includes activities such as routine and emergency street
repairs; pothole patching; catch basin cleaning; storm patrol/debris clean-
up; curb -gutter -sidewalk inspection and repairs; pavement striping; signage
and curb markings. This was a five-year contract and is due to expire on
June 30, 1995. At the March 21, 1995 City Council meeting, the City Council
authorized the distribution of a Request For Proposal for providing street
maintenance services. On March 30, 1995, staff distributed this Request For
Proposal to 1)Los Angeles County Department of Public Works; 2)the City of
Brea; 3)MCE Corporation from San Ramon 4)Charles Abbott and Associates from
Torrance; 5)Hawkins/Mauk-Tell Project Information Services; and 6)Integrated
Marking Systems. Staff received three proposals on April 14, 1995 from Los
Angeles County, City of Brea and Charles Abbott and Associates.
Staff from the City Manager's Office, the Department of Community Services
and the Department of Public Works reviewed all three proposals and
interviewed all three firms on Tuesday, April 25, 1995.
1
-p-li .
MAY 2, 1995
STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACT
upon completion of the interviews, staff agreed that a)due to the County's
higher overhead costs, b)because certain work program activities have been
difficult to control, and c)because billings for services rendered have not
been timely, the existing contract with the Los Angeles County Department of
Public Works should be allowed to expire on June 30, 1995.
Staff believed that the City of Brea's approach to this Street Maintenance
Contract appeared to be reactive as opposed to proactive, and needed a
greater sense of program planning.
Charles Abbott and Associates are offering all of the facets which the City
staff Review Committee believe are critical in guaranting a high level,
timely and cost effective street maintenance service to the Diamond Bar
community. CAA's cost sheet reflects the lowest cost of all three firms for
a comparable level of service. As shown in CAA's Exhibit 1, the savings are
in excess of $73,000/year when compared to the second lowest firm Brea (See
Brews Exhibit 1). CAA proposes to establish a local maintenance yard/office
in the City of Diamond Bar on June 1, 1995. CAA will equip this yard with a
flatbed truck (with Diamond Bar logo) and other necessary routine street
maintenance equipment for use by the two "local" crew -workers whom CAA will
hire to work full-time in Diamond Bar, with CAA's longtime street
superintendent, who will spend 20 hours a week in Diamond Bar. These
individuals will perform routine tasks such as patch potholes, repair signs,
install curb markings, respond to citizen calls and inspect streets and
sidewalks. Also, whenever possible, CAA has committed themselves to using
local subcontractors to perform specialized maintenance work, such as
concrete finishing, sign fabrication, pavement striping, etc., at less cost
than performance by the County's in-house staff.
As part of their review of CAA's proposal, staff contacted the Cities of
Laguna Niguel and Rancho Palos Verdes, where CAA has worked in a similar
capacity in street maintenance contract services. Both Cities were
exceptionally satisfied with CAA's performance and the increased quality of
all street maintenance related activities.
For the City of Diamond Bar, all street maintenance activities will be co-
ordinated with a member of City staff on a weekly basis to ensure accuracy of
work program and consistency with budget.
Key CAA project staff will be available on a 24-hour basis to ensure that
they may be contacted and are capable of responding to critical or emergency
situations within minutes of notification. The sub -contractors hired by CAA
will also be available on a 24-hour basis to provide street maintenance
emergency response services. This arrangement would be an improvement over
the City's current emergency coverage by the County, in which the County
crews must complete emergency work at the County's priority locations before
providing assistance to their contract cities.
Currently, the City of Diamond Bar's City Engineering/Public Works services
is being performed by Mr. George Wentz (Senior Vice -President of CAA). As
a result, to ensure appropriate separation of functions, staff recommends
that direct administration of this Street Maintenance Contract be the
exclusive responsibility of the City Manager or his designee, thereby
preventing any perceived conflict of interest for Mr. Wentz.
2
PAGE 3
MAY 2, 1995
STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACT
The City's Street Maintenance Service Agreement with the County requires that
they be notified no later than May 10, 1995 should the City wish to renew the
existing Agreement. Without any action of intent, this Agreement will expire
on June 30, 1995. In the month of June, CAA staff will implement a
transition street maintenance program to ensure continuous street maintenance
services during the County's withdrawal.
CONCLUSION:
Subject to completion of the actual contractual documents including a
specific work program/plan for FY 95-96, staff anticipate savings of
approximately $50,000 during FY 95-96 by contracting with CAA for street
maintenance services. One time start-up costs will be borne by CAA and future
year budgets for street maintenance are expected to have annual savings due
to efficiencies of CAA as well as competitive bid prices from subcontractors
performing the speciality work.
3
X - r iovce GRAND TOTAL =
GoFd//in�.v �CtnR/�ss.� � • fLc
OPTIONAL BID ITEM ANNUAL QTY UNIT COST TOTAL COST
WATER TRUCK HOUR 400 x $55.00 = $22,000.00
7
EXHIBIT 1
G144
CONTRACT SERVICES COST SHEET
'
FOR STREET MAINTENANCE SERVICES
FOR THE CITY
OF DIAMOND BAR
(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
(C)"(D)
UNIT OF
ANNUAL
UNIT
TOTAL
'
WORK AMTM-11 S
MEASURE
QUANTITY
COST
COST
ROAD MAI NTEN, ,NCE
I
PATC H POT -TOLE
SQ. FT.
5,000
x
$6.50 =
$32500.00
REMOVE & I YXLACE PAVEMENT
SQ. FT.
3,000
x
$4.20 =
$12,600.00
X LITTER/DEE RLS REMOVAL
PASS MI.
200
x
$49.00 =
$9,800.00 A-
}'HAND STRE ET SWEEPING
LOCATIONS
10
x
$49.00 =
$490.00 k'
'
)( SILT & MUD REMOVAL
LOCATIONS
20
x
$32.00 =
$640.00 )1-
INLETS
EACH
200
x
$24.90 =
$4,980.00
)YCLEA.N
GRIND PCC GUTTER
LIN. FT.
1,000
x
$3.50 =
$3500.00
'
CURB & GU TER REMOVAL
LIN. FT.
1,000
x
$4.90 =
$4,900.00
CURB & GU TER INSTALLATION
LIN. FT.
1,000
x
$23.10 =
$23,100.00
SAW CUTTT 4G
LIN. FT.
2,000
x
$1.30 =
$2,600.00
'
/ZpJ
STRIPING/SIGNI vG
4" SOLID LA NE STRIPING
LIN. FT.
50,000
x
$0.07 =
$3500.00
'
4" SKIP LANE STRIPING
LIN. FT.
370,000
x
$0.06
$22,200.00
8" SOLID WINE
LIN. FT.
10,000
x
$0.20
$2,000.00
DOUBLE YELLOW STRIPING
LIN. FT.
20,000
x
$0.20
$4,000.00
RED CURBING
LIN. FT.
1,000
x
$0.61 =
$610.00
LEGENDS/STENCILING
LETTER
700
x
$6.50 =
$4550.00
RAISED PAVEMENT MARKERS
EACH
500
x
$2.40 =
$1,200.00
REMOVE & REPLACE SIGNS
EACH
80
x
$25.00 =
$2,000.00
INSTALL NEW SIGN & POST
EACH
25
x
$49.00 =
$1,225.00
4 fl,.X -5
PARKWAY MAINTENANCE
GRADE DIRT SHOULDERS
SHLD. MI.
10
x
$80.00 =
REMOVE & REPLACE DRIVEWAYS
SQ. FT.
500
x
$6.80 =
,00.00
$3,44 00.00
REMOVE SIDEWALK
SQ. FT.
4,000
x
$1.20 =
$4,800.00
$18,000.00
INSTALL SIDEWALK
SQ. FT.
4,000
x
54.50 =
EMERGENCY TEMP. PATCH
EA. LOC.
100
x
$22.50 =
$2,250.00
MISC. CONCRETE WORK
HOURS
200
x
$31.00 =
$6,200.00
WEED REMOVAL
CURB MI.
360
x
$41.25 =
$14,850.00(
�(
,0' -is,, �S o
OTHER ROAD MAINTENANCE
REPLACE GUARDRAIL (NEW)
LIN. FT.
70
x
$16.00 =
$1,120.00
TRAFFIC CONTROL
HOUR
200
x
$49.00 =
39,800.00
EMERGENCY CALL OUT
HOUR
130
x
$49.00 =
$6,370.00
INSPECTIONS
HOUR
300
x
$38.75 =
$11,625.00
ROADWAY CREW - 2 PEOPLE
CREW HR
800
x
$57.25 =
$45,800. 00
MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR
HOUR
1,000
x
$38.75 =
$38,750.00
X - r iovce GRAND TOTAL =
GoFd//in�.v �CtnR/�ss.� � • fLc
OPTIONAL BID ITEM ANNUAL QTY UNIT COST TOTAL COST
WATER TRUCK HOUR 400 x $55.00 = $22,000.00
7
L f4 fl
EXHIBIT 2
CONTRACT SERVICES COST SHEET
FOR STREET MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
DL'SCR:IPTION
MAINTENANCE SUPERINTENDENT
MAINTENANCE FOREMAN
LIAADWORKER
HELPER
EQUIPMENT RATES
REGULAR
Flatbed truck
I
Pickup truck
HOURLY
Arrow Board
$50.75
Mower (21")
$85.00
Chain Saw
$58.13
Bloy4er „
$30.50
Trailer
$61.00
2 ton truck
$39.30
Roller
REGULAR
Air Compressor
'
Tractor Loader
HOURLY
Front end Loader
'
Other Equipment
'
$6.25
$6.25
SUBCONTRACTOR COSTS:
$3.75
$3.75
$3.75
$3.00
$3.00
$3.00
$3.10
$3.10
REGULAR
OVERITME
HOLIDAY
HOURLY
HOURLY
HOURLY
$50.75
$75.00
$85.00
$38.75
$58.13
$77.50
$30.50
$45.75
$61.00
$26.20
$39.30
$52.40
REGULAR
OVERTIME
HOLIDAY
HOURLY
HOURLY
HOURLY
$8.75
$8.75
$8.75
$6.25
$6.25
$6.25
$3.75
$3.75
$3.75
$3.00
$3.00
$3.00
$3.10
$3.10
$3.10
$1.90
$1.90
$1.90
$2.50
$2.50
$2.50
$65.00
$65.00
$65.00
$51.00
$51.00
$51.00
$37.50
$37.50
$37.50
$72.00
$72.00
$72.00
$90.00
$90.00
$90.00
ACTUAL COST PLUS 14%
ACTUAL COST PLUS 14%
EXHIBIT 1
CONTRACT SERVICES COST SHEET
FOR STREET MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
(A)
(B)
(C)
SQ. Fr.
(D)
REMOVE SIDEWALK 4"
(C)'(D)
4,000
UNIT OF
ANNUAL
4A00
UNIT
EA LOC.
TOTAL
V703 LK ACTIVTrIES
MEASURE
QUANTITY
WEED REMOVAL '
COST
360
COST
R0) D MAINTENANCE
time.
OTHER"itOAD MADTMANCE
REPLACE GUARDRAIL (NEW)
LIN. FT.w /post M
PATCH POTH OLE
SQ. Fr.
SAM
x $
4.24
=
$ 21,250-00
REMOVE & RI MACE PAVEMENT
SQ. FT.
3AW
x
24.88
=
-74,640.00
* LITTER/DEBFIS REMOVAL
PASS ML
200
x
no bid
-
no bid
* HAND STREE r SWEEPING
LOCATIONS
10
x
no bid
=
no bid
-
* SILT do MUD REMOVAL
LOCATIONS
M
x
no bid
=
no id
*CLEANINIErS
EACH
200
x
no bid
=
no bid
GRIND PCC G1JTTER
LIN. FT.
1,000
x
7.57
7,570.00.
CURB & GUTTER REMOVAL
LIN. FT.
1AW
x
5.33
=
5,330.
CURB do GUTTER INSTALLATION
LIN. FT.
1,000
x
22.67
=
22,670.00
SAW CUTTING
LIN. Fr.
2.000
x
1.78
:
3,560.00
*riore details required - no bid
at this time,
of o
STRIPINGISIGNI IG
4" SOLID LANE STRIPING
LIN. Fr.
SOAM
x
.099
4,950.00
V SKIP LANE STRIPING
LIN. Fr.
370,000
.099
4,950.00
8• SOLID WHM
LIN. FT.
10A00
.14
DOUBLE YET—L STRIPING
LIN. FT.
20A00
—1,400.00
.17
3,400.00
RED CURBING
LIN. FT.
1,000
x
.50
500.00
LEGENDS/5STENCMING
LE TER
700
x
3.63
=
2, 541.00
RAISED PAVEMENT MARKERS *
EACH
500
x
2:42
=
1,210.00
REMOVE do REPLACE SIGNS
EACH
80
x
2 9.04
=
2,323.20
INSTALL NEW SIGN do POST
EACH
25
x
58.08
1,452.00
*nonreflective
0 2 x, 72a.l
PARKWAY MAINTENANCE
GRADE DIRT SHOULDERS SHLD. ML
10
REMOVE & REPLACE DRIVEWAYS (8") �)
SQ. Fr.
500
REMOVE SIDEWALK 4"
SQ. Fr.
4,000
INSTALL SIDEWALK 4"
SQ. Fr.
4A00
EMERGENCY TEMP. PATCH
EA LOC.
100
MISC. CONCRETE WORK *
HOURS
200
WEED REMOVAL '
CURB ML
360
*more details required — no bid
at this
time.
OTHER"itOAD MADTMANCE
REPLACE GUARDRAIL (NEW)
LIN. FT.w /post M
TRAFFIC CONTROL
HOUR
200
EMERGENCY CALL OUT * w/ truck
HOUR
130
INSPECTIONS
HOUR
300
ROADWAY CREW - 2 PEOPLE w/ truck
CREW HR
800
MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR
HOUR
1A00
*2 hr. minimum at $29.38/hr.
x 170.30 -
x 15.80 -
x 0.96 =
x 3.03 =
x 24.88 =
x 58.75 =
x no bid —=
x 20.21 =
X. 85.00
x 52.00
x 54.18 =
x 81.42 =
,x '38.79 =
1.7.03.00
7,900.00
3,840.00
12,120.00
2,488.00
11,750.00
nn hid
1,414.70
17,000.00
6,760.00
16.254.00
65,1_ 36.00
38,790.00
GRAND TOTAL = (3:4:2:,�901.00
OPTIONAL BID ITEM ANNUAL QTY UNIT COST TOTAL COST
WATER TRUCK HOUR 400 x 74.88 = $29,952
00; i43 -N< E OA -I
EXHIBIT 2
CONTRACT SERVICES COST SHEET
FOR STREET MAn rl H ANCE SERVICES FOR THE CTIY OF DIAMOND BAR
DI.SCRIPTION REGULAR OVERITME HOLIDAY
HOURLY HOURLY HOURLY
M.AIIVTENANCE MANAGER $ 51.82
MAINIINANCE SUPERVISOR 38.75
CREWLEADER 31.52
MAINTENANCE SERVICES WORKER II 26.15
*note - all OT has a 2 hour minimum on callout.
EQUIPMENT RATES
Flatbed truck (daily only)
Pickup truck
Arrow Board
Mower (21")
Chain Saw
Blower
Trailer (daily only)
2 ton truck (daily only)
Roller (3 ton)
Air Compressor
Tractor Loader
Front end Loader (daily only)
REGULAR
HOURLY
65.00
7.80
19.50
8.45
7.15
7.15
35.10
91.00
32.50
18.20
53.30
422.50
$ 51.82
* 58.14
* 47.28
* 39.23
OVERTIME
HOURLY
same
$ 51.82
* 58.14
* 47.28
* 39.23
HOLIDAY
HOURLY
same
Other Equipment message boards 260.00/day ea.
*all equipment has a 2 hour minimum on callout.
SUBCONTRACTOR COSTS:
Insurance cost per RFP at $6,125/year.
e,e--1
L.A. L'OoNTY
EXHIBIT 1
L-,4. G'OU.v1 y
CONTRACT SERVICES COST SHEET
FOR STREET MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
(A)
WORK ACTIVITIES
ROAD MAINTENANCE
PATCH POTHOLE
REMOVE S& REPLACE PAVEMENT
X LITTER/DEBRIS REMOVAL
X HAND STREET SWEEPING
X SILT & MUD REMOVAL
X CLEAN INLETS
GRIND PCC GUTTER
CURB & GUTTER REMOVAL
CURB & GUTTER INSTALLATION
SAW CUTTING
STRIPING/SIGNING
4" SOLID LAND STRIPING
4" SKIP LANE STRIPING
8" SOLID WHITE
DOUBLE YELLOW STRIPING
RED CURBING
LEGENDS/STENCILING
RAISED PAVEMENT MARKERS
REMOVE & REPLACE SIGNS
INSTALL NEW SIGN & POST
PARKWAY MAINTENANCE
GRADE DIRT SHOULDERS
REMOVE &. REPLACE DRIVEWAYS
REMOVE SIDEWALK
INSTALL SIDEWALK
EMERGENCY TEMP. PATCH*
MISC. CONCRETE WORK
NEED REMOVAL
*Normal Working Hours - No Call Out
OTHER ROAD MAINTENANCE
REPLACE GUARDRAIL (NEW)
TRAFFIC CONTROL
EMERGENCY CALL OUT (4 HR MIN.)
INSPECTIONS
ROADWAY CREW - 2 PEOPLE
MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR
NOTE 1 -min. $900
NOTE 2 -min. $350
NOTE 3 -min. $400
NOTE 4 -min. $200
SHLD. MI.
(B)
(C)
548.10 =
(D)
500
UNIT OF
ANNUAL
SQ. FT.
UNIT
x
MEASURE
QUANTITY
4,000
COST
4.76 =
SQ. FT,
5,000
x
18.86 =
HOURS
SQ. FT.
3,000
x
3.21 =
360
PASS MI.
200
x
30.77 =
LOCATIONS
10
x
53.22 =
LOCATIONS
20
x
98/hr =
EACH
200
x
15.00 =
LIN. FT.
1,000
x
7.72 =
LIN. FT.
1,000
x
10.20 =
LIN. FT.
1,000
x
25.67 =
LIN. FT.
2,000
x
6.20 =
NOTE 1
LIN. FT.
50,000
x
0.12 =
NOTE 1
LIN. FT.
370,000
x
0.12 =
NOTE 1
LIN. FT.
10,000
x
0.12 =
NOTE 1
LIN. FT.
20,000
x
0.12 =
NOTE 2
LIN. FT.
1,000
x
0.35 =
NOTE 3
LETTER
700
x
3.50 =
NOTE 3
EACH
500
x
2.50 =
NOTE 4
EACH
80
x
85.00 =
NOTE 4
EACH
25
x
125.00 =
PARKWAY MAINTENANCE
GRADE DIRT SHOULDERS
REMOVE &. REPLACE DRIVEWAYS
REMOVE SIDEWALK
INSTALL SIDEWALK
EMERGENCY TEMP. PATCH*
MISC. CONCRETE WORK
NEED REMOVAL
*Normal Working Hours - No Call Out
OTHER ROAD MAINTENANCE
REPLACE GUARDRAIL (NEW)
TRAFFIC CONTROL
EMERGENCY CALL OUT (4 HR MIN.)
INSPECTIONS
ROADWAY CREW - 2 PEOPLE
MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR
NOTE 1 -min. $900
NOTE 2 -min. $350
NOTE 3 -min. $400
NOTE 4 -min. $200
SHLD. MI.
10
x
548.10 =
SQ. FT.
500
x
7.14 =
SQ. FT.
4,000
x
2.38 =
SQ FT.
4,000
x
4.76 =
EA. LOC.
100
x
15.00 =
HOURS
200
x
43.13 =
CURB MI.
360
x
50.00 =
(C)*(D)
TOTAL
COST
94,300
9,630
6,154)C
532X
1,960k
3,000,K
7,720
10,200
25,670
12 40
615, 9.2 O
6,000
44,400
1,200
2,400
350
2,450
1,250
6,800
3,125
.0 67.975
5,481
3,570
9,520
19,040
1,500
8,626
18,000,K
7-3-7
LIN. FT.
70
x
20.00 =
1,400
HOUR
200
x
53.22 =
10,644
HOUR
130
x
125.00 =
16,250
HOUR
300
x
65.27 =
19,581
CREW HR.
800
x
59.40 =
47,520
HOUR
1,000
x
53.94
= 53,940
GRAND TOTAL
,,Y- rc,..aT /it/GGl.�/.�c�G7 lb/? Gd/"�i�9•C�fw✓ �sR,oalE .
OPTIONAL BID ITEM
ANNUAL QTY
UNIT COST
TOTAL COST
WATER TRUCK HOUR
400 x
39.00 =
15,600
967
LA COUNTY
CONTRACT SERVICES COST SHEET
FOR STREET MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
EXHIBIT 2
.4: A • Goc..v1,�'
DESCRIPTION
REGULAR
OVERTIME
HOLIDAY
HOURLY
HOURLY
HOURLY
MAINTENANCE SUPERINTENDENT
65.27
65.27
65.27
MAINTENANCE FOREMAN
53.97
53.97
53.97
LEADWORKER
34.89
34.89
34.89
HELPER
26.61
26.61
26.61
EQUIPMENT RATES
REGULAR
OVERTIME
HOLIDAY
HOURLY
HOURLY
HOURLY
Flatbed truck (2 1)
25.00
25.00
25.00
Pickup truck
.57/mile
.57/mile
.57/mile
Arrow Board
N/C
N/C
N/C
Mower (21 ")
60.00
60.00
60.00
Chain Saw
N/C
N/C
N/C
Blower
N/C
N/C
N/C
Trailer
N/C
N/C
N/C
2 ton truck
16.00
16.00
16.00
Roller
39.00
39.00
39.00
Air Compressor
27.00
27.00
27.00
Tractor Loader
41.00
41.00
41.00
Front end Loader
34.00
34.00
34.00
Other Equipment
See Attachment A
SUBCONTRACTOR COSTS: Lowest Bidder
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. V
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: May 2, 1995 REPORT DATE: April 28, 1995
FROM: Bob Rose, Community Services Director
TITLE: Presentation on the Design of Pantera Park
SUMMARY: On March 13, 1995, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit No. 94-4,
which under County Code authorizes the City of Diamond Bar to construct Pantera Park. Construction
drawings are now being prepared by R.J.M Design Group. The final design of Pantera Park includes
two lighted ball fields with lighted soccer field overlays across the outfields, a tot lot, restroom/concession
building, parking lot, picnic areas, lighted rollerblade hockey court, lighted basketball courts, lighted
tennis courts and trails leading to the existing natural trails that go up the slope adjacent to the developed
park. Construction drawings should be completed and prepared for City Council approval by late October
or early November, 1995. Larry Ryan, Landscape Architect for R.J.M. Design Group will be present
at the meeting to give a presentation on the design of Pantera Park.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and File Report.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report Public Hearing Notification
Resolution(s) Bid Specifications (on file in City
Clerk's Office)
Ordinance(s) X Other: Illustrative Park Plan
Agreement(s) C.U.P. 94-4
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 vote? _Yes X No
3. Has environmental impact been assessed? X Yes No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? X Yes No
What Commission? Parks & Recreation Commission and Planning Commission
5. Are other departments affected by the report? X Yes No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
Community Development Dept. and Public Works Dept.
REVIEWED BY:
f�errence L. elanger Frank M. Us er Bob Rose
City Manager Assistant City Manager Community Services Director
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: May 2, 1995
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrance L. Belanger, City Manger
SUBJECT: Presentation on the Design of Pantera Park
ISSUE STATEMENT:
This is an information item for staff to present the current design and status of Pantera
Park to the City Council. Larry Ryan, Landscape Architect for R.J.M. Design Group, will
be available at the meeting for a presentation and to answer questions.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Receive and File Report
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
$1.47 million dollars in Proposition A - Safe Parks Act funds are available for the design
and development of Pantera Park. Construction drawings are being prepared in a manner
that will allow the development of the park to be phased, if necessary, to stay within the
allocated budget for this project.
BACKGROUND:
On March 13, 1995, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit No. 94-4,
which under County Code, authorizes the City of Diamond Bar to construct Pantera Park.
The C.U.P. was issued after the completion of a public workshop process before the Parks
and Recreation Commission and public hearing process before the Planning Commission.
DISCUSSION:
The final design of Pantera Park includes two adult -size softball fields with full size soccer
field overlays across the outfields, a tot lot, restroom/concession building, large on-site
parking lot, picnic areas, large multi-purpose hard court area where rollerblade hockey and
basketball may be conducted, two additional half -court basketball courts, two tennis courts,
trails leading to the existing natural trails up the slope adjacent to the developed park, and
lighting for the ball fields, hard court areas and tennis courts, plus security lighting in the
parking lot and throughout the park. Construction drawings are now being completed by
R.J.M. Design Group. Since the park area includes a large easement for a Los Angeles
Council Report
Pantera Park
Meeting Date: May 2, 1995
Page 2
DISCUSSION: (continued)
County debris detention basin, approval of construction drawings must come from Los
Angeles County Flood Control. This approval process will add three to four months to the
time needed to complete construction drawings. It is anticipated that the Construction
drawings will be back before City Council for approval to solicit bids for a construction
contractor in late October or early November, 1995.
The funds necessary to develop Pantera Park were obtained from a grant funded by
Proposition A, the Safe Parks Act. There is $1.47 million dollars available for the design
and development of Pantera Park. The construction drawings are being prepared so that
the project may be phased, if necessary. Phase I will include the ball fields, tot lot,
restroom building, parking lot, picnic areas and rollerblade hockey court. The remaining
elements of the park will be developed as funds become available.
PREPARED BY:
Bob Rose
Community Services Director
PARK
PANTERA
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
PC RESOLUTION NO. 95-4
A RESOLUTION OF THECONDITIONAL COMMISSION
USE POF THE ERMIT NO. 94-4,
OF
DIAMOND BAR APPROVING
A REQUEST TO DEVELOP A 23.8 ACRE SITE WHICH INCLUDES THE
s. MULTI -USE HARD
DEVELOPMENT OF TWO LIGHTS PICI��IC AREAS, A TOT LOT, AND A
BALL FMD ,
COURTS, TENNIS CO DRIVE
TRAIL SYSTEM LOCATED EA�S�T OA D�AIAMOND BARAND SO 9'H 65.
OF
BOWCREEK AT 700-800 P
A. B CITALS.
(i) The City of Diamond Bar, 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite #100, Diamond Bar,
CA 91765 has filed an application for a Conditional Use Permit as listed in the
title of this Resolution, for property located at 700-800 Pantera Drive,
Diamond Bar, California. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Conditional Use Permit application is referred to as "the Application".
(1i) On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was established as a duly
organized municipal corporation of the State of California. Thereafter, the
City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No. 14
(1990), thereby adopting the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of
the City of Diamond Baz.Code of the County of Los Angeleee 21 and 22 of the Los s now County u entdly
contain the Development
applicable to development applications, including the subject Application,
within the City of Diamond Bar.
(iii) The City of Diamond Bar lacks an operative General Plan. Accordingly,
action was taken on the subject application, as to consistency to the future
adopted General Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of an Office of
Planning and Research Extension granted pursuant to California Government
Code Section 65361(a).
(iv) On January 9, 1995 the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar
conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and continued the
public hearing to February 27, 1995 and concluded said public hearing on that
date.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined d resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts
set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that a Mitigated
Negative Declaration has been prepared and presented for the review
and approval by this Commission in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines
promulgated thereunder, pursuant to section 15070(b)(1) of Article 6 of
Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and determines
that, having considered the record as a whole including the findings set
forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated
into and conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the
application, there is no evidence before the Planning Commission that
the project proposed herein will have the potential of an adverse effect
on wild life resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends.
Based upon substantial evidence, the Planning Commission hereby
rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5 (d)
of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
4. Based on substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the
public hearing, and by written and oral testimony provided -at the
hearing, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
(a) The Application applies to property presently zoned RPD -
20,000 -2U Zone, located at 700-800 Pantera Drive, on the east
side of the street;
(b) Generally, the property is located in a residential neighborhood
and is surrounded by single-family homes, to the north,
northwest, and south. The houses along Bowcreek Drive and
across Pantera Drive overlook the park site as it is located at a
lower elevation, below the street grade. A large vacant site on a
hillside to the west of the project, across Pantera Drive, is
designated for school use. To the east and southeast the site
adjoins a hillside developed with Walnut Valley Water District
water tanks and a Los Angeles County Fire Department
Helispot;
(c) Notification of the public hearing for this project has been made
in the San Gabriel b alley 16 1994Tribunand alle and tpropert Inlandowners ley within a
aily
Bulletin on Decem
1000 ft. radius of the project site were notified by mail;
(d) The Application is for development of a 23.8 acre park located
east of Pantera Drive and south of Bowcreek Drive. The
requested master plan for the park includes development of two
ball fields, multi -use hard courts, tennis courts, picnic areas, a
tot lot, and a multipurpose community center approximately
7,500 square feet in size;
(e) The nature, condition, and size of the site has been considered
and determined to satisfy all applicable standards;
(� There is substantial evidence in the record that the Application
is consistent with the contemplated General Plan as it will
satisfy the need for active and passive park facilities and will not
be detrimental to or interfere with the preparation of the future
adopted General Plan;
(g) That the site is physically suitable for the type of development
requested, as 15.5 acres of the park will be developed with a
mixture of active and passive uses and 8.3 acres will be
maintained in an undeveloped state;
(h) - That granting the Conditional Use Permit is not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat;
(i) Notwithstanding any previous Subsection of this Resolution, if
the Department of Fish and Game requires
and Game Code, payment
pursuant to Section 711.4 of the Fish
thereof shall be made by the applicant prior to the issuance of
any building permit or any other entitlement;
(j) The design and layout of the proposed development is consistent
with the applicable elements of the contemplated General Plan,
design guidelines and architectural criteria of the.appropriate
district as it will satisfy the need for active and passive park
facilities;
(k) The design and layout of the proposed development will not
unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of the
neighboring existing and future developments, and will not
create traffic ora Drive and Bowedestrians c reek Drive and ws as the site is ill uately
served by Panterl provide a
minimum of 130 parking spaces on-site;
1
(1) The design of the development is compatible with the character
of the surrounding current and proposed developments and will
maintain the harmonious, orderly, and attractive development
contemplated by this Chapter and the contemplated General Plan
of the City;
(Ivn The proposed use could not be detrimental to the public health,
safety or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or im-
provements in the vicinity.
5. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and
4 above, the Planning Commission hereby approves the application subject to
the following conditions as to use:
(1) The subject property shall be developed and maintained
in substantial compliance with the plans presented to the
Planning Commission on February 27, 1995 and marked
Exhibit "A", except that the ball fields shall be lighted in
conformance with the analysis presented. The community
multi-purpose building and the water element shall be
deleted from the master plan elements;
(2) This grant will expire unless used within two- (2) years of
the date of approval. A one year extension may be
requested before the expiration date;
(3) This grant allows the establishment and maintenance of a
community park. Outdoor lighting shall be designed so
that it does not adversely illuminate adjacent residential
property;
(4) Unless otherwise apparent from the context, terms
"permittee" shall include the applicant and any other
person, corporation, or other entity making use of this
grant;
(5) The subject facility shall be developed and maintained in
compliance with requirements of the Los Angeles County
Department of Health Services. Adequate water and
sewage facilities shall be provided to the satisfaction of
the Public Works Director;
(6) Upon receipt of this letter, the permittee shall contact the
Fire Prevention Bureau of the Las Angeles County
Forester and Fire Warden to determine what facilities
may be necessary to protect the property from fire
hazard. Any necessary facilities shall be provided as may
be required by Public Works Director;
() All structures shall conform with the requirements of the
Division of Building and Safety and the Department of
Public Works;
(8) The daily hours of operation for the park shall be limited
to one half hour before sunrise to 10 p.m., ball field
hours with lights shall be limited to 8 p.m. Sunday
through Thursday and 9 p.m. on Friday and Saturday;
(9) The project shall comply with all elements of the
Mitigation Monitoring Program adopted as a part of the
Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted for this project;
(10) The entrance to the parking area shall be re -designed to
provide dual points of ingress and egress, to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Director and
the Public Works Director;
(11) All activities at the park shall comply with applicable
City ordinances;
(12) The property shall be maintained in a condition which is
free of debris both during and after the construction,
addition, or implementation of the entitlements granted
herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse,
whether during or subsequent to construction, shall be
done only by the property owner, applicant or by a duly
permitted waste contractor who has been authorized by
the City to provide collection, transportation, and
disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial,
construction, and industrial areas within the City. It
shall be the applicant's obligation to insure that the waste
contractor utilized has obtained permits from the City of
Diamond Bar to provide such services;
(13) Access shall be provided to the existing trails in the
undeveloped portion of the park in such a manner so as
to comply with the ADA standards.
�J
6. The Planning Commission Secretary is hereby directed to:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution and,
(b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by
certified mail, return receipt requested, to City of
Diamond Bar to the addresses on file with the City.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 13th day of March, 1995
Chairman
I, Robert Searcy, Acting Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission
of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the
13th day of March, 1995, by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: 'CI OMMSSIO RS:
ATTEST:
Obert Searcy, Acting etary
C. U -H rERS I RES0UMCUP9i{.RES
Huff, Fong, Flamenbaum, Schad,
and Meyer
1
1
1
E'ATHFINDERCHEVRON it
17F.l, t•;AL.NUT SHF SAN GABRIEL
f FIRE
IBJ SF' �;AN GABkJ lA, VAI, I'l ltF.
PJ I:1'
F,5;AP ] 0 `;61- "J 1 1 ,:
1 04/22/95 0'3:06:S2
00:00:00 000-0000
03: 11 :26 03
0.1 - i H 1 E B 1 C. 0604 04 :.�9
( ; : 1 tiD-,i1 F COL I MA kU RWLNU
HTS CA 077; RESD
f ]0-u604 APT 106 H,Ajjjw1'
.Ilr' AIj GABRIEL VAL FIRE DISP
SAN GABRIEL
VAL FIRE; DIST'
04/22/()5 0_'• :3.3 :33
00:00:00 000-0000
03 :33; 55 04
'-!M, t; GREAT BENii DR IjjMND
FEAR CA 077 RESD
:GI-O{GG 9171,5 WAI.NIIT 1111•'
::AN GAP: -']EL VAL FIRE DISP SAN
GABRIEL VAL
i'1RE DISP
,jsr
S GOLDEN PPADOS DR DMND
BAR CA 077
1'L:�'•L� ,i�-£,�61 917£.6 F;I.I.IJlt1'
i:1,1' �:),I:� C:ABF'IEL VAL FIkE LTSP
SAN GABRIEIG
VAL EIRE DISP
P�,AP l - 0 h60-Es2E>1 0:;
ii% : ! 0:!-, � 04/22/95 04:11:02
00:00:00 000-0000
] ��
Wt,
S GREAT BEND DR DMND
BAR CA 077 RESD
86)--6343 91765 WALNUT S,1411'
S.AN i_RY1:1E;L VAL FIRE DISP SAN
GABRIEL VAL
FIRE DISP
1'0AP 1 - 0 t,E l-E:j4`; 0''.
4:J 1 : ;0 04/22/95 04:11:35
00:00:00 000-0000
04:11 :45 01
I'::•AP l 0 C•1
0' 04/22/9') 04:10:41
04:10:5£ All
04:11:49 07
(909) 661- 5682 :1L
01/-Y t.r•:' S GRFAT BEND DR DMND
BAR CA 077 RESD
E•1-Sbc2 91?65 WhLXT F.Hf'
r.i,li i l.l;l '•1:L VAL FIRE DISP SAN
GABRIEL VAI.
Plk,E U15P
F" AP 1 - 0 $E 1-56f:�; i�'
(. 9 : 1 1 :` '• 04!22/95 04:11 :55
00:00:00 000••0000
04:11 :59 06
GREAT BEN[, OR DMND
BAR CA 077 PE:811
t'cl 568' 9]7n5 WA].Nfl'1' ::1 11'
A,1� 1-P,1'1:lEL VAL FIRE DISP SAN
GABRIEL VAL
I t 11E D l LI)
- r pily i r_:r; l • :.c.: u r0
F, GREAT £ENI., DR DHND
13AR CA 077 RESD
£E1-2E•?9 SJ?E,5 WAT.I.1M J,f;l
Ai., ('J:f;1l::L• VAL FIkE DISP SAN
GABRIEL VAL
PIRE DISP
PSAP 1 - 0 661-56E':.' 01
(.-1JF 04/22/95 04:11:57
00:00:00 000-0000
04:12:06 06
]':"'.AP 1 0
1 :! (• 04,'22/95 04 :11 ;59
00:00:00 000-0000
04:12:09 02
()l • (06 ,) E;60 -E,-;?'' : �.: 11:
(.; .:'.:. �. �. CREAT SEND UR DHND SAP CA 077 RESD
t:60 -6,'Z'72 9J?65 WihUllUi !�Hl`
;Jlk Ch.hi']F'I. VAL FIRE TJJSP 5AN
GABRIEL VAI:
PIkE L11SP
P., AE' l - 0 O1
(.',:1:::0'_, 04/22/9S 04:12:07
00:00:00 000-0000
04:12:15 OA
0± - (909) a'.I,1-9GE''I U!• : ] v
c. /I ::. r.' t GREAT LtE:t:i.' UR DMND SAW CA 077 RESD
x;61-9607 91"6S. WALNUT lJT
1.1•.1, r:,.1:1 11a_. VAL FIRE DISP SAN
GABRIEL VAL
EIRE 111SP
PSAP 1 - 0 861-9607 n 1
(i4 : t .'' ;17 04/22/95 04; 12.:2.1
00:00:00 000-0000
04:12:27 03
f l 1 - ( 909) U-6 ] -£1926 U`_, :. 19
O9 :'2 2 : i !i E TI OGA DR DHND BAR CA 077 RESD 861-8926
01765 WALNUT SHF SAN GAHI-111.
VAL. !'JRE DISP SAN ("ARRIEL VAL FIRE DISP
(`r - ( 909', 861-F)56F 0', :1 i' GREAT REND DR DMND BAF! CA 077 RESD
Rr.t-55n9 91755 WALM111T F•III' ::•At-' I=AI'k1EL VAL FIRE UISP SAN GABRIEL VAL
i t l•' P D I 11P
PSAP 1 - 0 661-892(: 01 04:1;':4 04/22/95 04:12:49 00:00:00 000-0000 04:13:00 05
04/22/95 04:12:50 00:00:00 000-000D 04.,13:01 CM
Ol - (i(09) ?96-1690 0'.:),, 04/i:' ',19 GREAT DENU DR DMND BAR CA 077 RESD
{SSE•,• -1690 91'/6`, WALNUT FI1' x.1,1' (;J;h1,II:I, VAL FIRE: [DISP SAN GABRIEL VAL.
I'IRF: L)1rE,
E,�:AP 1 0 3Clb- 1 :,y : , U4; 22/9S 04 : 13 :00 00-00-00 000-0000 D4 : 13 :06 O 1
A
(818) 333-9751 03:56 04/22 15709
E �((�
q 008 RESD
POCONO
INDUSTRY SHF44SAN GABRIEL VAL FIRE DISP SAN G�
19690049 04:01:34 021-04:01:41 ..................
9
A
(818) 969-0049 04:07 04/22 145
N
CA 025 BUSN
AZUSA AV
AZU
CIRCLE MOBILE MART
969-0049
91702
i AZUSA PD SAN GABRIEL VAL FIRE DISP SAN GABRIEL VAL FIRE DISP
06381266 04:05:37 003-04:05:46 .........................
04:07:35 001
A
(310) 638-1266 04:05 04/22 19009
DOMNGUEZ
CA 003 RESD
LAURELPARK RD
638-1266
UNIT SP 50 638
R1
CARSON SHF EASTERN AVE FIRE DISP EASTERN AVE FIRE DISP
06959622 04:10:46 003-04:10:53 .........................
.,
04:1:17 013
A
(310) 695-9622 04:16 04/22 5447
S
CA 063 RESD
ROCKNE AV
WHIT
695-9622
90601
WHITTIER PD EASTERN AVE FIRE DISP EASTERN
AVE FIRE DISP
06236323 04:14:36 009-04:14:42 .........................
04:17:JD2
039
A
(909) 623-6323 04:20 04/22 750
E
CA 052 RESD
THIRD
P11A
623-632:
APT 016 91766
POMONA P.D. POMONA FIRE DEPT POMONA FIRE
DEPT
13340660 04:17:18 003-04:17:28 .........................
04:22:24
034
A
(818) 334-0660 04:22 04/22 140
E
CA 025 RESD
NEWBURGH
AZU
334-0660
APT 30 91702
AZUSA PD SAN GABRIEL VAL FIRE DISP SAN GABRIEL VAL FIRE DISP
03276109 04:45:48 003-04:45:58 .........................
04:53:51
OQ3
A
/ (310) 327-6109 04:45 04/22 14921
CA 003 RESD
STANFORD AV
CPT
327-6109
APT 237I
/ CARSON SHF EASTERN AVE FIRE DISP EASTERN
AVE FIRE DISP
08610596 05:11:42 014-05:11:55 .........................
05:12;34
036
A
/ (909) 861-0596 05:17 04/22 546
S
CA 077 RESO
GREAT BEND DR
DMND BAR
861-0596
91765
0 WALNUT SHF SAN GABRIEL VAL FIRE DISP SAN
GABRIEL VAL FIRE DISP
38749458 05:15:08 012-05:15:15 .........................
05:15:58
025 ;
A
(213) 874-9458 05:15 04/22 1205
N
CA 022 RESD
FULLER AV
WH
874-9458
APT 5
WEST HOLLYWOOD SHF EASTERN AVE FIRE DISP
EASTERN AVE FIRE DISP
09477109 05:28:10 003-05:28:18 .........................
05:30:50
015
A
(310) 947-7109 05:33 04/22 11410
CA 016 RESD
SANTA GERTRUDES AV
WHIT
947-7109
APT 202 90604
NORWALK SHF EASTERN AVE FIRE DISP EASTERN
AVE FIRE DISP
06209677 05:34:08 003-05:34:16 .........................
05:34:46
038
A
(909) 620-9677 05:39 04/22 3024
TFMPIF AV
PMA
CA 052 COIN
-1..____ .... ._J ......_.1
INC Number:
Received
Entered
Dispatched
Enroute
Onscene
Closed
$LAC95059430 IC Name:
04/22/95 05:12:45 BY CT14
04/22/95 05:13:12 BY CT14
04/22/95 05:13:25 BY TR08
04/22/95 05:14:39
04/22/95 05:15:30
04/22/95 08:47:04
Initial Type: STR Initial Alarm Level:
Final Type: STR (STR FIRE) Priority: 1
Battalion: B12 Dispatch Zone: 12012B
TB Map Page: 680B1 CoMap: 0390
First in Station: LAC120 Law Jur.: WAL.S
Location: 546 GREAT BEND DR ,DBAR
btwn E GOLDRUSH DR
& E STIRRUP DR
Lat/Lon: 34.01540/117.81020 ,
DBA: Phone: 9098610596 Source: 9
GREAT BEND IC
429940
429940
270789
1 Final Alarm Level: 1
Ambulance: CR
M
/0513
/0513
/0513
/0513
/0513
/0513
/0513
/0513
/0513
/0513
/0513
/0514
/0514
/0515
/0515
/0515
/0515
/0516
/0516
/0516
/0520
/0520
/0521
/0521
/0521
/0523
/0525
/0530
/0531
/0535
/0537
/0538
/0551
/0552
(429940)
TEXT:
ACROSS THE STREET
$ALIDATA
LOC: 546 S GREAT BEND DR
PHONE: 9098610596 CITY: DMND BAR
SERVICE:RESD
MISC DATA: 91765
(270789)
DISP
E120
ASNINC
E120
$LAC95059430
DISP
E121
DISP
E119
DISP
T118
DISP
5119
DISP
EST145
DISP
BC12
DISP
P120
(******)
*ENROUTE
EST145
*ENROUTE
T118
*ENROUTE
E119
*ENROUTE
E120
*ONSCNE
5119
*ENROUTE
S119
*ENROUTE
P120
*ENROUTE
E121
*ENROUTE
BC12
*ONSCNE
E120
(411904)
MISC
,2 ST FAM. DWELLING FULLY INV
STAT
WF
INCMD
E120
ICNAME
[GREAT BEND IC]
(******)
*ONSCNE
S119
*ONSCNE
BC12
(411904)
INCMD
BC12
MISC
,45 MIN ... UNITS OUT STARTING MOVE UPS
(270789)
MISC
, E61/FS61, T49/T118.
(411904)
MISC
,CODE N
(270789)
MISC
,CORRECTION/E61/120, T49/T118. IN CALL H
IST.
(411904)
STAT
UC
,NOTIFY THE ALL UTILITIES
MISC
,GAS CO NOTIFIED
RECEIVED OY/10 10:23 1995 Al 613!1.)
04/10/1995 10:01 9096231952
�I
17;
US POSTAL SERVICE PAGE 01
FACSIMILE
TRANSMISSION
TIME;
`rot 1 pages including cover sheet:
Deliver T .:- b LO.
POMONA POST OFFICE
580 W. Monterey Avenue
Pomona, CA 91766-9998
ax number............................(909) 623-1962
Telep one number............................(909) 6234476
Ca en
.
00:!10/1995 10:01 9099231952 US POSTAL SERVICE PAGE 02
11
WHEREAS:
WHEREAS:
WHEREAS;
WHEREAS:
NOW'
OCLAMATION
EREFIORE
The National Association of Letter Carriers (NALC)
will sponsor a nation-wide Food Drive on Saturday,
may 13, 1995; and
Branch 1100 Letter Carriers have worked over the
years to provide needed services to the community,
including annual work on the Food Drive; and
NALC Branch 1100 strives to make a major impact
on the supply of food in food banks across our
county, helping to feed those in need; and
The City of Diamond Bar is proud to recognize the
significant and important contributions of NALC
Branch 1100 to the community.
I, , Mayor
of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby Proclaim
Saturday, May 13, 1995 as LlfltK Canler's Food
Drive" in the City of Diamond Bar. In doing so, I call
upon all citizens to Join NALC Branch 1100 in working
to aid those in need in our Communities by participat-
ing in the annual food drive.
Sincerely,
March 6, 1995
Serving the People of California
Refer To: John Gili , LVER
Honorable Ms. Phyllis Papen
Mayor, City of Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, California 91765
Honorable Ms. Papen:
t(05- q.,yq
The first full week in4W is annually c -(!
Although the Employment Developmei - certed
effort to assist veterans in obtaining err` "w""� -.� (forts
are made to stress to employers those c
servicewomen good candidates for em
r.
In keeping with this observance, we a L—Z xlarin
g
as "Hire A Veteran Wee m y .- to call
Mr. John Gili if you have any questions. Attached is a copy of a proclamation issued by your
office last year to use as an example.
M
Your cooperation will be greatly appreciated by the veterans in your M unity. Should you
need to contact Mr. Gili, you can reach him by calling (90'9 392-2682.
Sincerely.
Charles Edwards
Manager
Atch: Copy of Last Year's Proclamation
Employment Development Department / 150 East Arrow Highway / Pomona, CA 91767 (909) 392-2659
r'v
x.�
x_
s
Employment Development Department / 150 East Arrow Highway / Pomona, CA 91767 (909) 392-2659
A ,
W
IRE -A- VETERAN WEEK"
4 �''$ '� k
MAY 1-7, 1994���.`,; :.
WHEREAS, the people of our city wish to expres
gratitude to those men and women who served in the armed''fA e`
to preserve our freedom and honor; and
WHEREAS, many veterans, particularly the vie am
veterans who have sufferedhardshi reat t $.
g p, emotional se .a7:d
physical pain, and who, upon discharge, have experienced, y
difficulty making the readjustment to civilian life;¢:';
WHEREAS, veterans possess special qualities;'' sU1.1 sand
self-discipline that make them ideal candidates for a*plbysen p
that will accelerate their readjustment; and
c11'1�`� lNMe
-
Encl. Suggested Proclamation
Ar 1 17 99i
He �rabl( P1 vll,, P_)t_
M� or, C y (f I laii-icilld
21, 3O E. '.opey Dr., its
Di. land gar, C,91 ►
De Mai )r llap,ii
,Pxn-
W( at GodxNill lndu,tnc of
lol-lila 11)N10 ld to
�)()l H11 (W11
joij With is in d,xlaring \lav
(Jo0clk"'lil has
P UjIn
beci serx rig Southland
1919 by pi-midino
1 \p, r I
handicapped individuals with imicii
CCLICIJ vocational gaining,
rehabilitation, employmew, and iiiaiiI.
services. W are proud
I Omni,
to work with you for the hentit of
he
,on G0111
It i, your support and the support of
local individuals and
bu,,iiiesses that allow us 10 SUCCCS1,11111V
continue these efforts.
Isom
ksSns
0 KILL
YOU can help us celebrate 76 years of
successes and bring our
U Lod,
accomplishments and services to the
attention of the public by
lei
M I
issuing an official proclamation for
Goodwill Industries Month.
11ac I'llel,
I Mann
VcOuitl
your you for taking time from yo
busy schedule to help us.
You may call me at (213) 223-1211.
ext. 221 if you have any
Net,e
Offin il,
questions.
Pence. 11
F: Reed
len Re,
� R I—
Thank you for your continued support
of Goodwill Industries of
RLISICH
L. Steve,
Southern California.
lanaka
'ILI I e I il'a,
Tai n b I I I I
1 .1 Turner
Very truly yours.
bill mace.
Vogl
V We I c11
L W1"1<<,''cholas
Panza
President/CEO
Encl. Suggested Proclamation
5000ESTED PROCLAMATION
GOODWILL INDUSTRIES MONTH, MAY 1995
WHEREAS, the people of this community (or city, county, etc.) value
hard work and support the right of individuals to provide for
themselves and their families and,
WHEREAS, some members of our community require additional
services, help and training to aid them in accomplishing that goal
and,
WHEREAS, among those most in need of vocational services are those
whose job options are limited due to illiteracy, a criminal past, and
total lack of work experience, and those with mental, emotional and
physical disabilities and,
WHEREAS, Goodwill Industries is Southern California's leading
nonprofit provider of vocational services for people with special
needs and is the largest private -sector employer of people with
disabilities and,
WHEREAS, vocationally disadvantaged local residents have received
vocational evaluation, vocational adjustment, job -seeking skills and
placement assistance or sheltered employment through Goodwill
Industries of Southern California and,
WHEREAS, the investment made by this community (or city, etc.) in
Goodwill Industries has resulted in the agency providing a working
solution to many of the social problems facing our citizens and,
WHEREAS, Goodwill Industries of Southern California is celebrating
its 76th year of service and Goodwill Industries Month during May,
1995
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that I, (name and title), do hereby
proclaim May, 1995 as Goodwill Industries Month in and for
(community, city, etc.), and urge all citizens to give support to
Goodwill Industries in recognition of its ability to maximize an
individual's contribution to self, family and community.
(signature)
.f i f I t 1 n
Foclam
"GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
MAY 1995
WHEREAS, the people of Diamond Bar value hard we
the right of individuals to provide for themsel
families; and
4
WHEREAS, some members of our community re
services, help and, training to aid them in accompl
and
WHEREAS, among those most in need of vocational;
those whose job options are limited due to illiterl,
past, and total lack ,of work experience, and :those i
emotional and physical disabilities; and
WHEREAS, Goodwill Industries is Southern Cali.
nonprofit provider of vocational services for peol
needs and is the largest private -sector employer
disabilities; and
WHEREAS, vocationally disadvantaged local 2
received vocational evaluation, vocational adjustm
skills and placement assistance or sheltered emp
Goodwill Industries of Southern California; and
WHEREAS, the investment made by this Ci
Industries has resulted in the agency providing a
to many of the social problems facing our citizen
WHEREAS, Goodwill Industries of Sou
celebrating its 76th year of service.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the Citl
hereby proclaims May, 1995 as Goodwill industries
all citizens to give support to Goodwill Industri
of its ability to maximize an individual's cont
family and community_ I
J
a' is
Bar
MurXMIrlon
elf,
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Edward N. Layton
President
Election Division III
William G. Wentworth
Vice President
Election Division I
Donald L. Nettles
Vice President
Election Division IV
Richard C. Engdahl
Assistant Treasurer
Election Division It
Keith K. Gunn
Director
Election Division V
STAFF:
Edmund M. Biederman
General Manager
Secretary
Norman R. Miyake
Treasurer
LEGAL COUNSEL:
H. Jess Senecal
WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
271 South Brea Canyon Road • P.O. Box 508
Walnut California 91789-3002 • (909) 595-1268 • (818) 964-6551
FAX (909) 594-9532
�f
March 16, 1991
Mr. Tern Bclangu
City Manager
Cite of Diamond Bar
2100v E. Copicy Drive. Suite iiiil
Diamond Bar. California 91765
Dear Mr. Belanger
Rc: Water Awareness Month - May [995 b�
EnclosLA is a sample hrocl.nnauon in support of Water Awarcncss Month. May 199-5, {'� S`=A
yInch lias b>:cn adopt,.:x[ by our Bo;urd of Directors and which we vNould appreciate your
submitting to the DILtmond Bar City Council fol- cndorscmcnt. [f the Council responds
favorable to this request. picric notiiv LIS Of the date .utcl time of the meeting at which
the action will be taken so that ;i rcprescntativc of our District can be present to accept
the proclamation.
As 1995 marks the 21st anniversary of the Safe Drinking Water Act and our
commitment to provido the liighcst quality vrat(;r available at the lowest cost possible in
an cnvironntcntally respousiblo manner. wo sincerely appreciate the ongoing support
received from the C ttv TO th:utk you for this support_ \ve would like to extend an
invi=t"kion- 10- OLt to be our f;ucst at our District Open House. to be held on Thursday,
N4ay 44 IQC),� at :j 3U p.ni. kindly RSVP to MS. Diana Elliott of' our Community
0!ts st:ifffon or bcl')rc April 2=4. 1995"
Vcry tr lily )'ollCS.
WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
l
KAKL:N POWEkS
,Assistant Gcj�c�ai :�lana��,ri
K P _} a
EIICIOSnr�:
4,
s
Rc: Water Awareness Month - May [995 b�
EnclosLA is a sample hrocl.nnauon in support of Water Awarcncss Month. May 199-5, {'� S`=A
yInch lias b>:cn adopt,.:x[ by our Bo;urd of Directors and which we vNould appreciate your
submitting to the DILtmond Bar City Council fol- cndorscmcnt. [f the Council responds
favorable to this request. picric notiiv LIS Of the date .utcl time of the meeting at which
the action will be taken so that ;i rcprescntativc of our District can be present to accept
the proclamation.
As 1995 marks the 21st anniversary of the Safe Drinking Water Act and our
commitment to provido the liighcst quality vrat(;r available at the lowest cost possible in
an cnvironntcntally respousiblo manner. wo sincerely appreciate the ongoing support
received from the C ttv TO th:utk you for this support_ \ve would like to extend an
invi=t"kion- 10- OLt to be our f;ucst at our District Open House. to be held on Thursday,
N4ay 44 IQC),� at :j 3U p.ni. kindly RSVP to MS. Diana Elliott of' our Community
0!ts st:ifffon or bcl')rc April 2=4. 1995"
Vcry tr lily )'ollCS.
WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
l
KAKL:N POWEkS
,Assistant Gcj�c�ai :�lana��,ri
K P _} a
EIICIOSnr�:
Toclam
WATER AWARENESS
MAY 1995
WHEREAS, water is California's most precious na
resource; and
WHEREAS, the drought years of 1987-1993 have r
all Californians the importance of conserving water
health and welfare of the state; and
WHEREAS, residents, local government,.and b
worked together diligently to, decrease water use
and
WHEREAS, these conservation efforts have prove
successful and all Californians need to continue to�c
water and to use water wisely; and
f
WHEREAS, during the month of May, the Diamond b Ci
Council joins with he Walnut Valley Water District"' its f
to increase the understanding of water and to mak
conservation a way of life through community educ
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Ci
does hereby proclaim May 1995 as Water Awareness
all citizens to join in supporting local water o.
the effort to help Californians "Use Water Wisel.
Life."
DATED: May 2, 1995?