Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05/17/1995
Cit COU�Rcll/ AGENDA Tuesday, May 16, 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. IIA ,1 Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking ' The City of Diamond Bar uses re cled paper in the Council Chambers.`, , - 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 a.m. and 5 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. THIS MEETING IS BEING BROADCAST LIVE BY JONES INTERCABLE FOR AIRING ON CHANNEL 12, AND BY REMAINING IN THE ROOM, YOU ARE GIVING YOUR PERMISSION TO BE TELEVISED. Next Resolution No. 95-21 Next Ordinance No. 05(1995) 1. CALL TO ORDER: 6:30 p.m. May 16, 1995 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Papen ROLL CALL: Council Members Ansari, Harmony, Miller, Mayor Pro Tem Werner, Mayor Papen 2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES: None 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 Council - members are for Council discussion. Direction may be given at this meeting or the item may be scheduled for action at a future meeting. 5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 CITY -ON-LINE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE - May 17, 1995 - 7:00 p.m., Heritage Community Center, 2900 S. Brea Canyon Rd. 5.2 PLANNING COMMISSION - May 22, 1995 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.3 CITY COUNCIL MEETING (GENERAL PLAN) - May 23, 1995 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.4 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - May 25, 1995 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.5 MEMORIAL HOLIDAY - May 29, 1995 - In observance City Offices will be closed. Will reopen Tuesday, May 30, 1995. MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 2 5.6 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - June 6, 1995 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.7 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - June 8, 1995 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR: 6.1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of April 18, 1995 - Approve as submitted. Requested by: City Clerk 6.2 VOUCHER REGISTER - Approve Voucher Register dated May 16, 1995 in the amount of $378,371.75. Requested by: City Manager 6.3 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES - Filed by Big O Tires/Patti Schoe April 21, 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 6.4 NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD/ REHABILITATION PROJECT BETWEEN GRAND AVENUE AND BREA CANYON RD. - On October 4, 1994, the City Council awarded a contract to Griffith Co. for the construction/ rehabilitation of Diamond Bar. Blvd. between Grand Ave. and Brea Canyon Rd. The final job walk was conducted on April 28, 1995. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council accept work performed by Griffith Company, and authorize the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion and release any retention amounts. Requested by: City Engineer 6.5 AWARD OF DESIGN SERVICES FOR LEFT -TURN SIGNAL PHASES AT THE INTERSECTIONS OF GOLDEN SPRINGS DR. AND DIAMOND BAR BLVD., GOLDEN SPRINGS DR. AND BREA CANYON RD., AND DIAMOND BAR BLVD. AND MOUNTAIN LAUREL WAY - Proposals for design services for left -turn signal phases at the intersections of Golden Spgs. Dr. and Diamond Bar Blvd., Golden Spgs. Dr. and Brea Canyon Rd., and Diamond Bar Blvd. and Mountain Laurel Way were solicited from the City's On -Call traffic engineering consultants. Four proposals were received from DKS Associates, Warren C. MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 3 Siecke, Linscott, Law and Greenspan Engineers, and Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council award the left -turn signal phases design services at the intersections of Golden Spgs. Dr. and Diamond Bar Blvd., Golden Spgs. Dr. and Brea Canyon Rd. and Diamond Bar Blvd. and Mountain Laurel Way to DKS Associates, in an amount not -to -exceed $8,600. Requested by: City Engineer 6.6. LANTERMAN DEVELOPMENT CENTER FOR SUPPLEMENTAL WEED/LITTER ABATEMENT - For the past five years, the City has contracted with Lanterman Development Center for supplemental weed and litter abatement services. This contract provides for service in areas that are known to accumulate litter more rapidly than other areas of the community and for weed control in the public right of way in areas not serviced by other contracts. The total annual cost of the contract is $16,483, the same amount the City paid in FY 1992/93, 1993/94 and 1994/95. No increase is being sought for the contract extension. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council approve the extension of the contract for supplemental weed and litter abatement services with Lanterman Development Center in the total amount of $16,483 for FY 1995/96. 6.7 REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURES FOR GENERAL PLAN SERVICES - The General Plan budget allocation will soon be exhausted. Ongoing staff tasks and consultant services will require additional expenditures to complete the General Plan. The additional expenditures include $5,000 for Cotton/Beland Associates and $10,000 for other necessary services. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the expenditure of $15,000 toward completion of the General Plan. Requested by: Community Development Director 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 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 DR. ADJACENT TO THE PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY KNOWN AS "THE COUNTRY" - At the conclusion of the April 6, 1995 Joint Session with the Planning Commission, the Council referred the project to the Commission for MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 4 comments. The Commission has completed their review and forwarded their comments back to the City Council for consideration. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council open the continued public hearing, receive a presentation from staff, receive public testimony, close the public hearing and direct staff as appropriate. Requested by: Community Development Director 8. OLD BUSINESS: 8.1 (A) RESOLUTION OF NO -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE AN ADDENDUM TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 92081040) AND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51253, TO DEVELOP A 21 UNIT SUBDIVISION, LOCATED EAST OF MORNING SUN AVENUE AND NORTH OF PATHFINDER ROAD, IN DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. (B) RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH. NO. 92081040) AND APPROVAL OF HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-12 AND OAK TREE PERMIT 92-9, ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51253, LOCATED EAST OF MORNING SUN AVENUE AND NORTH OF PATHFINDER ROAD IN DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - On November 1, 1994 the City Council directed the preparation of project conditions and resolutions of approval for the applicants proposed 21 unit, 6.7 acre project. The project is presented for final City Council review and consideration. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council review the attached draft Resolution No. 95 -XX and Resolution No. 95 -XX approving TM 51253, CUP 92.12 and OT 92 and direct staff as appropriate. Requested by: Community Development Director 8.2 MODIFICATION OF THE DEDICATED RIGHT TO PROHIBIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS WITHIN A PORTION OF LOT 1, TRACT NO. 31479 - This matter requests the Council's approval of a request to modify the right that the City now has to prohibit the construction of residential buildings on Lot 1, Tract No. 31479 to a less restrictive right to prohibit the construction of not more than one residential building within a portion of Lot 1, Tract No. 31479 MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 5 Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council consider the matter as presented and act accordingly. Requested by: City Engineer 8.3 UPDATE ON INVESTIGATION OF FIRE ON GREAT BEND. Requested by: City Council 9. NEW BUSINESS: 9.1 AWARD OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO RJM DESIGN GROUP FOR THE MAPLE HILL PARK RETROFIT PROJECT - On April 18, 1995 the City Council awarded the construction contract for the Maple Hill Park ADA Retrofit. The City believes the RJM Design Group can offer the best quality of service for this specific project. RJM is currently under contract with the City for on-call landscape architect services and completed the construction drawings for the Maple Hill Park project. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council award the project management services for the Maple Hill Park retrofit project to RJM Design Group, Inc. for an amount not -to -exceed $9,500. Requested by: Community Services Director 9.2 CITY ENTRANCE SIGNS - With the completion of the new center medians on Golden Springs Dr. at the west city limits, the City has two locations that are appropriate for the placement of City entry signs. The City Council requested staff to present entry sign design options for their consideration. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council review and comment on the conceptual City entry Signs and direct staff appropriately. Requested by: Community Services Director 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS: 11. ADJOURNMENT: Adjourn to May 23, 1995 at 6:30 p.m. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK FROM: % e r 10.5 ADDRESS: /J I ,:�e ,�, N �( ORGANIZATION: AJ C. r. .e AGENDA #/SUBJECT: � - Z. DATE: /l6/Q �- PHONE: 4/SG_vSfP� I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL 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. I � S nature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: (1; �' 2_ 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 VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK DATE: -� r PHONE: - J 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 FA TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA #/SUBJECT CITY CLERK c2 y' 303 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. 9r7l 4/ Signature 121 TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE 6ITY COUNCIL 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 �I VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT CITY CLERK A',, s/c 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 VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK When i 1 S'L)MMIT C I A; C e. 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 Ll YRii-i-i-ir ne,vvGQT T4 ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK (J fA� 811 DATE: b I I (, i,? t� PHONE:�,H -o-tion 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 ✓ ,,Sq , I AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK DATE: �lZ- cti`-o•� �� ��� PHONE:��o� <N� G _ C�� I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature p4 VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK FROM: p ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: DATE: PHONE: ,t"-' .)-." I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY/ 'CLERK So .d l.�a� CY 7Y,3^C7 DATE: 5'- /-C - 9,.S— PHONE: ,S^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. tj -�e� 4'. Signature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK f° DATE: :a PHONE: �l I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature CITY OF DIAMOND BAR NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING AND AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ) The Diamond Bar City Council will hold a Regular Meeting at the South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium, located at 21865 E. Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, California at 6:30 p.m., on Tuesday, May 16, 1995. Items for consideration are listed on the attached agenda. I, TOMMYE A. NICE, declare as follows: I am the Deputy City Clerk in the City of Diamond Bar; that a copy of the Regular Meeting of the Diamond Bar City Council, to be held on May 16, 1995 was posted at their proper locations. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this Notice and Affidavit was executed this 12th day of May, 1995, at Diamond Bar, California. /s/ Tommye A. Nice Tommye A. Nice, Deputy City Clerk City of Diamond Bar cit'19o,�,Rci; AGENDA Wednesday, May 17, 1995 6:30 P.M. Adjourned 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. 111,1!11111) HAN, � Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking �. ��.1,f�' The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper in the Council Chambers. and encourages you to do the same, THIS MEETING IS BEING BROADCAST LIVE BY JONES INTERCABLE FOR AIRING ON CHANNEL 12, AND BY REMAINING IN THE ROOM, YOU ARE GIVING YOUR PERMISSION TO BE TELEVISED. Next Resolution No. 95-21 Next Ordinance No. 05(1995) 1. CALL TO ORDER: 6:30 p.m. May 17, 1995 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Papen ROLL CALL: Council Members Ansari, Harmony, Miller, Mayor Pro Tem Werner, Mayor Papen 2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES: None 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 Council - members are for Council discussion. Direction may be given at this meeting or the item may be scheduled for action at a future meeting. 5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 CITY -ON-LINE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE - May 17, 1995 - 7:00 p.m., Heritage Community Center, 2900 S. Brea Canyon Rd. 5.2 PLANNING COMMISSION - May 22, 1995 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.3 CITY COUNCIL MEETING (GENERAL PLAN) - May 23, 1995 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.4 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - May 25, 1995 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.5 MEMORIAL HOLIDAY - May 29, 1995 - In observance City Offices will be closed. Will reopen Tuesday, May 30, 1995. MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 2 5.6 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - June 6, 1995 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.7 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - June 8, 1995 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR: 6.1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of April 18, 1995 - Approve as submitted. Requested by: City Clerk 6.2 VOUCHER REGISTER - Approve Voucher Register dated May 16, 1995 in the amount of $378,371.75. Requested by: City Manager 6.3 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES - Filed by Big O Tires/Patti Schoe April 21, 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 6.4 NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD/ REHABILITATION PROJECT BETWEEN GRAND AVENUE AND BREA CANYON RD. - On October 4, 1994, the City Council awarded a contract to Griffith Co. for the construction/ rehabilitation of Diamond Bar. Blvd. between Grand Ave. and Brea Canyon Rd. The final job walk was conducted on April 28, 1995. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council accept work performed by Griffith Company, and authorize the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion and release any retention amounts. Requested by: City Engineer 6.5 AWARD OF DESIGN SERVICES FOR LEFT -TURN SIGNAL PHASES AT THE INTERSECTIONS OF GOLDEN SPRINGS DR. AND DIAMOND BAR BLVD., GOLDEN SPRINGS DR. AND BREA CANYON RD., AND DIAMOND BAR BLVD. AND MOUNTAIN LAUREL WAY - Proposals for design services for left -turn signal phases at the intersections of Golden Spgs. Dr. and Diamond Bar Blvd., Golden Spgs. Dr. and Brea Canyon Rd., and Diamond Bar Blvd. and Mountain Laurel Way were solicited from the City's On -Call traffic engineering consultants. Four proposals were received from DKS Associates, Warren C. MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 3 Siecke, Linscott, Law and Greenspan Engineers, and Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council award the left -turn signal phases design services at the intersections of Golden Spgs. Dr. and Diamond Bar Blvd., Golden Spgs. Dr. and Brea Canyon Rd. and Diamond Bar Blvd. and Mountain Laurel Way to DKS Associates, in an amount not -to -exceed $8,600. Requested by: City Engineer 6.6. LANTERMAN DEVELOPMENT CENTER FOR SUPPLEMENTAL WEED/LITTER ABATEMENT - For the past five years, the City has contracted with Lanterman Development Center for supplemental weed and litter abatement services. This contract provides for service in areas that are known to accumulate litter more rapidly than other areas of the community and for weed control in the public right of way in areas not serviced by other contracts. The total annual cost of the contract is $16,483, the same amount the City paid in FY 1992/93, 1993/94 and 1994/95. No increase is being sought for the contract extension. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council approve the extension of the contract for supplemental weed and litter abatement services with Lanterman Development Center in the total amount of $16,483 for FY 1995/96. 6.7 REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURES FOR GENERAL PLAN SERVICES - The General Plan budget allocation will soon be exhausted. Ongoing staff tasks and consultant services will require additional expenditures to complete the General Plan. The additional expenditures include $5,000 for Cotton/Beland Associates and $10,000 for other necessary services. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the expenditure of $15,000 toward completion of the General Plan. Requested by: Community Development Director 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 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 DR. ADJACENT TO THE PRIVATE GATED COMMUNITY KNOWN AS "THE COUNTRY" - At the conclusion of the April 6, 1995 Joint Session with the Planning Commission, the Council referred the project to the Commission for MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 4 comments. The Commission has completed their review and forwarded their comments back to the City Council for consideration. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council open the continued public hearing, receive a presentation from staff, receive public testimony, close the public hearing and direct staff as appropriate. Requested by: Community Development Director 8. OLD BUSINESS: 8.1 (A) RESOLUTION OF NO -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE AN ADDENDUM TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 92081040) AND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51253, TO DEVELOP A 21 UNIT SUBDIVISION, LOCATED EAST OF MORNING SUN AVENUE AND NORTH OF PATHFINDER ROAD, IN DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. (B) RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH. NO. 92081040) AND APPROVAL OF HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-12 AND OAK TREE PERMIT 92-9, ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51253, LOCATED EAST OF MORNING SUN AVENUE AND NORTH OF PATHFINDER ROAD IN DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - On November 1, 1994 the City Council directed the preparation 'of project conditions and resolutions of approval for the applicants proposed 21 unit, 6.7 acre project. The project is presented for final City Council review and consideration. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council review the attached draft Resolution No. 95 -XX and Resolution No. 95 -XX approving TM 51253, CUP 92.12 and OT 92 and direct staff as appropriate. Requested by: Community Development Director 8.2 MODIFICATION OF THE DEDICATED RIGHT TO PROHIBIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS WITHIN A PORTION OF LOT 1, TRACT NO. 31479 - This matter requests the Council's approval of a request to modify the right that the City now has to prohibit the construction of residential buildings on Lot 1, Tract No. 31479 to a less restrictive right to prohibit the construction of not more than one residential building within a portion of Lot 1, Tract No. 31479 MAY 17, 1995 PAGE 5 Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council consider the matter as presented and act accordingly. Requested by: City Engineer 8.3 UPDATE ON INVESTIGATION OF FIRE ON GREAT BEND. Requested by: City Council 9. NEW BUSINESS: 9.1 AWARD OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO RJM DESIGN GROUP FOR THE MAPLE HILL PARK RETROFIT PROJECT - On April 18, 1995 the City Council awarded the construction contract for the Maple Hill Park ADA Retrofit. The City believes the RJM Design Group can offer the best quality of service for this specific project. RJM is currently under contract with the City for on-call landscape architect services and completed the construction drawings for the Maple Hill Park project. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council award the project management services for the Maple Hill Park retrofit project to RJM Design Group, Inc. for an amount not -to -exceed $9,500. Requested by: Community Services Director 9.2 CITY ENTRANCE SIGNS - With the completion of the new center medians on Golden Springs Dr. at the west city limits, the City has two locations that are appropriate for the placement of City entry signs. The City Council requested staff to present entry sign design options for their consideration. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council review and comment on the conceptual City entry Signs and direct staff appropriately. Requested by: Community Services Director 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS: 11. ADJOURNMENT: Adjourn to May 23, 1995 at 6:30 p.m. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK FROM: W / 1,4 v i-- 5�y,� * 1f4 ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: 8 ✓ R. Z G /l/ DATE: 5 %,7 -. 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. 6 Signature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK FROM: P AX t-zL . - ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: 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 �j 'TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK DATE: NOWLe1>14 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 FA TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK cod,/, " L,'Pk- X41� l �d���Ie PA, DATE: - 17 `K - PHONE: 9PHONE: - y 6 7, V 7 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 FA TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK ' l J DATE: - { / - Y5 PHONE:Jq',,q 7 > 1/6 - 1/( 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 OOUNOIL AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK ,U( ON DATE: sj' 7 - i S PHONE: U L 3,F I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL '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. Sig nit z FA TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK I` DATE: 7, J PHONE: I expect to address the Council on the subject a enda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signa�u- re ,2, 4-e 2- VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL 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 VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK FROM: ` �{ l: "�\ -' k. T'� r, DATE: `�Y ✓' f Gf ADDRESS: PHONE/ -ke l0 t ' fp ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: # (d 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 CITY CLERK Ll DATE: :% ' - PHONE:--�'/%n� I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL V TO: CITY CLERK FROM: IJ r, Q w a 4,t Q J DATE: 1 C ADDRESS: PHONE -90 ° �`7� ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: Ir `v I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL 'TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK I �6 `5 DATE: J w PHONE: �? c7Qti ��cJG I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE OITV OOUNOIL TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK T2/�/"C�-c�JA, vM6 k17 S 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 VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRE55 TME CITY C6UN61L V �~ TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK 1-f lk-- x C, k3 tA c CC) WL$/1 rr? S 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: CITY CLERK C L f F I"IV C MP U r DATE: IgD S • L rm 014 PHONE: uivoD M b PW /#6 5 vi(/ I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK FROM: DATE: ADDRESS: ��I �,�,�,'1.-✓ �� _S PHONE: ORGANIZATION: /' r� �/L_770/V� AGENDA #/SUBJECT: ,-� ��'''C�,nG'�=v� 'r/ 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 / �I TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA #/SUBJECT CITY CLERK KI M I 101` DATE: V/05— PHONNE: /6�P 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 U TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA #/SUBJECT: A CC- Rs" cv5 CITY CLERK �' �/ �� �Oi� rc.�i fc' �Cv �v• v 8= 1 DATE:�l6/,/9 S" PHONE: 6-"9' S-- k001 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 F'A TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL � I AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK 4,4,4� DATE: /409, 414-rlcI)W73 wv.-,,) t -O PHONE: Slis- -a 3 f e I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council M' es reflect my name and address as written above. r `�✓� Signature 11 VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK FROM: �a x`%25 /�� / 50,E E y�5 DATE: S l 71gS ADDRESS: l 7i�8 �a�e�1,',J6� SctiN �- PHONE: 9oq- 9g- y8o ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT:f R' O��R y 0� 1y)6R4)j'1J6-' �&/v LAA,3 �I' VEME, _ I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. i ture VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK FROM: ADDRESS: tit (Pp itU ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT:wd( 4110"i DATE: V/ ? Y), PHONE: 4°`t mac' 02��- I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature FA TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK DATE: Sy- 17 - PHONE: 7 -PHONE: Yzi I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Vgnature )1P VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: FROM: ADDRESS: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: CITY CLERK W l' 1 b v,,- AtJ Al 4,r 7 R5, DATE: S - /7 - 9�) 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. W &,w "Lll Signature 2 J. MIND) !=S DF Tl -16 CITY COL/NCIL REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APRIL 18, 1995 ��► 4 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Papen called the meeting to order at 6:35 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 Pro Tem Werner. ROLL CALL: Council Members Ansari, Harmony, Miller, Mayor Pro Tem Werner and Mayor Papen. Also present were Terrance L. Belanger, City Manager; Frank Usher, Assistant City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City Attorney; George Wentz, City Engineer; Don Hensley, Parks Superintendent; Rob Searcy, Associate Planner and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS, ETC.: 2.1 Proclaimed April 23 - 29, 1995 as the "General Federation of Women's Club Week." Certificate accepted by Ruth Castillo, President of the Diamond Bar Women's Club. Ms. Castillo announced that the Women's Club meets every third Wednesday of each month at the Royal Vista Golf Club at 10:30 a.m. 2.2 Proclaimed April 30 through May 6, 1995 as "Small Business: Building America's Future." Certificate accepted by Fred Scalzo, President, D.B. Chamber of Commerce. 2.3 M/Papen announced that on April 30, 1995, there will be a blood donor drive to find a bone marrow match for leukemia victim Inez Vidal. Jacqueline Ramirez, American Red Cross Marrow Donor Program, thanked the City for providing an opportunity to coordinate a marrow donor campaign and showed a video describing the Red Cross' marrow donor program. Walter and Gloria Vidal expressed their gratitude to the City in cooperating with the Red Cross and the family for coordinating the marrow donor campaign. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Don Schad, 1824 Shaded Wood Rd., advised that the Dial -A -Cab went into effect today for Seniors. Further, that security lights were installed at Sycamore Canyon Park which should discourage night time activities, graffiti and vandalism. He expressed concern that the rains have caused the stream to undermine the largest and oldest Sycamore trees and that one of the largest Sycamore trees toppled over due to the heavy rains. He recommended that steel safety rails be installed for the trees' survival and safety for the park users. Regarding Item 6.9.3, he stated that the parkway trees APRIL 18, 1995 PAGE 2 should be secured with ties and suggested that the City make sure that these trees remain. Regarding Item 6.9.4, he stated that some of the parks are not being taken care of properly and that the trees need special attention for their survival. Jack Healy, 23041 Aspen Knoll, commented that the MRF issue has been mishandled by the City and lobbyist Joe Gonsalves. He suggested that the City hire a new lobbyist that is against the MRF to defend the City. He asked who appointed Joe Gonsalves as lobbyist. M/Papen advised that Joe Gonsalves was hired as the City's lobbying firm by the original City Council and has helped the City lobby several very important issues that the City was faced with during its first year of incorporation. C/Miller stated that he met with several officials during his Sacramento visit and will push this issue before the Assembly. He stated that Senator Mountjoy and Assemblyman Horcher both support the fight against the MRF; however, when this issue went before the Senate Committee, it failed. C/Ansari reported that she was also in Sacramento during the lobbying of the MRF issue. She advised that the Gonsalves firm stayed neutral until the day before the decision and the firm took sides with the City of Industry. She advised that everyone was very surprised. C/Harmony agreed with Mr. Healy that by keeping the Gonsalves firm, it was a conflict of interest. Steve Nice, Rising Star Dr., expressed frustration in that the Council did not take his recommendations seriously in getting a new lobbyist to represent the City in the MRF issue. He also expressed frustration in not hiring Mr. Montgomery as the City Attorney because of a perceived conflict of interest and the hiring of Mr. Jenkins as the City Attorney with a definite conflict of interest. MPT/Werner commented that he has never worked with Mr. Jenkins at the City of La Habra or retained his services privately. C/Miller stated that Mr. Montgomery did have a conflict of interest with Mr. Miller's company and with Mr. Werner. M/Papen advised that Mr. Jenkins was hired behind closed session with a 5-0 vote and with high regard. C/Harmony advised that he did not vote in favor of hiring of Mr. Jenkins, but that he voted to consider and to have contracts prepared after the executive session. APRIL 18, 1995 PAGE 3 C/Ansari advised that Mr. Montgomery was not considered to have conflicts of interest and was cleared by the FPPC. Red Calkins, 240 Eagle Nest Dr., stated that he wants to see the City keep up the fight against the MRF and that more citizens need to get involved. C/Ansari stated that the Council and staff are all working together to beat the MRF issue. Bob Huff thanked the City and M/Papen for the support the City is giving to the Vidal family. He commented in favor of the General Plan goals by suggesting the enhancement of the City's entrance signs by sprucing them up with flowers or planters underneath them; increasing City bike paths and their usability and helping to solve traffic problems regionally by actively pursuing a bypass highway. M/Papen commented that the San Gabriel Valley has been conducting a regional study on bikeways not including Brea Canyon Rd. She advised that the City requested that Brea Canyon Rd. be added. Barbara Beach-Courchesne, 2021 Peaceful Hills Rd., commented negatively on keeping Gonsalves & Sons as lobbyist. She expressed concerns with the City becoming a Sister City with a city in China and China not having the same philosophies as D.B. She requested an apology by MPT/Werner in his comments to an audience member. M/Papen stated that when lobbyists were interviewed five years ago, one of them would have charged the City twice the fee with additional fees on each bill to be lobbied. Gonsalves & Sons was not fired because there was more at stake in local government in our being a City than just the MRF Bill. MPT/Werner stated that when these issues were at the forefront last year, the City offered to the City of Walnut to join forces in hiring a collective team and the City of Walnut chose to go on their own. Albert Perez, Pantera Dr., commented that when hiring a new lobbyist, the City needs to ask if they are already involved in a specific event. He also asked staff to try and get a refund from Gonsalves & Sons for breach of contract. Terry Birrell endorsed the comments of Mr. Nice and Mr. Healy regarding issue 6.5. She advised that she attended many finance committee meetings and the conflict of interest with Gonsalves & Sons was discussed and acknowledged by committee members. She asked why the City of Walnut is the lead city in the MRF issue. APRIL 18, 1995 PAGE 4 M/Papen again advised that the City of Industry distributed an Environmental Impact Report giving the City 45 days to respond; the City hired an environ- mental consultant to respond to the EIR; our comments were so critical of the EIR, Industry had to revise their EIR and circulate it a second time and that the City raised numerous issues that Industry was unable to mitigate. She also explained that during the process, a decision was made to try and fight the MRF in a legislative manner as well as through the system of approvals. She advised that the Cities of D.B. and Walnut are working on a two -prong approach to seek legislation which will allow the Cities to have legal input in the decision making process and are continuing to oppose the MRF during the permit application process. In response to C/Ansari, CM/Belanger explained that, originally, there was not a conflict of interest between Gonsalves and the City of Industry and the City of D.B. because they remained neutral. He received a telephone call on March 31, 1995 from Mr. Gonsalves who advised that his firm was representing the City of Industry in the MRF issue; therefore, he terminated the contract with Gonsalves & Sons at that time. C/Harmony asked the City Manager to investigate the City of Walnut and how much they paid the additional lobbyist. He expressed concern that other monies have been spent toward other issues for which Gonsalves & Sons charged an exorbitant amount. M/Papen corrected C/Harmony's comment in that the City of Walnut took $300,000 out of redevelopment funds for their activities and that the City of Industry and D.B. worked together in covering the expenses for Gonsalves & Sons during the Diamond Ranch High School lobbying. 4. COUNCIL COMMENTS: C/Ansari announced that she is a member of the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments and that meetings have been scheduled for citizens within the San Gabriel Valley to discuss their needs within their communities. The first meeting will be held on May 9, 1995 - 6:30 - 9:30 p.m. at the AQMD. Further, she reminded everyone of the City's 6th Anniversary Celebration on Sunday, April 30, 1995, 1:00 - 5:00 p.m. with lots of games, food and the blood donor booth. C/Harmony announced that today was the ribbon cutting ceremony for the City's Dial -A -Ride Cab Service servicing handicap persons and senior citizens within a 10 mile radius with a minimal charge of $0.35 a mile. He expressed concern that the Council's version of the General Plan has moved far beyond the GPAC's version. He stated that the Council should be interested in what the citizens want and proposed that the Council put both the GPAC version of the General Plan and the Council version of the General Plan on the ballot. He also APRIL 18, 1995 PAGE 5 commented on people picking up recyclables illegally and asked citizens to report incidences to the Sheriffs department. C/Miller stated that the negative people in D.B. need to be more positive with each other and remain focused on talking more positively when addressing Council meetings. MPT/Werner felt that he did not undermine Mr. Nice's comments. M/Papen asked that this meeting be adjourned in memory of Husna Ansari, Councilwoman Ansari's mother-in-law. She announced that on Saturday, April 29, 1995, 8:00 a.m. - 8:00 p.m. in the AQMD, the 3rd Annual Information Super Highway Summit will be presented with preferred tickets at $20.00, general admission at $7.50. She read a letter received from Jack Cameron, President of Diamond Bar Associates stating that his firm never accused M/Papen or C/Miller of committing any illegal acts. She also stated that the Council doubled the amount of designated open space in regard to the General Plan. 5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 PLANNING COMMISSION - April 24, 1995 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.2 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - April 27, 1995 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.3 CITY 6TH BIRTHDAY CELEBRATION - April 30, 1995 - 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., Peterson Park, 24142 E. Sylvan Glen Dr. 5.4 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - May 2, 1995 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.5 CITY COUNCIL GENERAL PLAN HEARING _ May 9, 1995 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Miller moved, MPT/Werner seconded to approve the Consent Calendar. 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 City Council Minutes of Regular Meeting of March 21, 1995 - as submitted. APRIL 18, 1995 PAGE 6 6.2 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: 6.2.1 Regular Meeting of January 23, 1995 -Received & filed. 6.2.2 Regular Meeting of February 13, 1995 - Received & filed. 6.2.3 Regular Meeting of February 27, 1995 - Received & filed. 6.2.4 Regular Meeting of March 13, 1995 - Received & filed. 6.3 APPROVED VOUCHER REGISTER - dated April 18, 1995 in the amount of $306,611.50. 6.4 REJECTED CLAIM FOR DAMAGES - Filed by Jon Lanier on March 28, 1995 and referred matter for further action to Carl Warren & Company, the City's Risk Manager. 6.5 TERMINATED THE LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY AGREEMENT WITH GONSALVES & SONS - directed staff to notify Gonsalves & Son that the termination would be effective April 1, 1995. 6.6 AWARDED CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF HANDICAP ACCESS RAMPS AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS - to Keiter Construction Co. of D.B. for construction of handicap access ramps, in an amount not to exceed $55,200 with a contingency amount of $8,000 for project change orders to be approved by the City Manager. 6.7 AWARDED BID FOR MAPLE HILL PARK ADA RETROFIT -to Allied Engineering & Construction, Inc. for construction of ADA modifications at Maple Hill Park in the amount of $154,661.84 plus an additional amount not to exceed $6,000 to serve as a contingency. 6.8 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 95-19: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF MONUMENT SIGNS IN THE CITY PARKS IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS. 6.9 CONTRACT EXTENSIONS: 6.9.1 APPROVED EXTENSION OF CONTRACT FOR CITY-WIDE STREET TREE MAINTENANCE - to West Coast Arborists, Inc. in the amount of $45,000 for July 1, 1995 to June 30, 1996. 6.9.2 TERMINATE GRAFFITI REMOVAL CONTRACT WITH SAN GABRIEL VALLEY BOYS CLUB AND APPROVED EXTENSION OF CONTRACT WITH GRAFFITI CONTROL SYSTEMS - Directed staff to draft a letter to the San Gabriel Valley Boys Club to terminate the agreement for graffiti removal effective June 30, 1995 APRIL 18, 1995 PAGE 7 and approved extension of the contract with Graffiti Control Systems for FY 1995196 in an amount not to exceed $25,000 (833 sites). 6.9.3 APPROVED EXTENSION OF CONTRACT FOR WEED CONTROL /SIDEWALK AND PARKWAY MAINTENANCE - with Landscape West, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $54,742 for FY 1995/96. 6.9.4 APPROVED EXTENSION OF CONTRACT FOR MAINTENANCE OF EIGHT (8) CITY PARKS - with Accurate Landscape & Maintenance Corp. in an amount not to exceed $102,600 for FY 1995/96. 6.10 AWARDED CONTRACT TO THE CITY OF BREA TO PROVIDE RECREATION SERVICES FOR CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FOR 1995/96 FISCAL YEAR - with projected expenditures of $440,613 and projected revenues of $345,740 for FY 1995/96. 6.11 AWARDED CONTRACT FOR PLAN CHECKING SERVICES FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 51169 IMPROVEMENT PLANS AND FINAL MAP - to Bryan A. Stirratt & Associates in an amount not to exceed $15,986. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None 8. OLD BUSINESS: 8.1 SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 03(1995): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULATING AUTOMOBILE FOR HIRE AND TAXICAB OPERATION SERVICES AND REPEALING CHAPTER 7.80 OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE - MPT/Werner moved, C/Miller seconded to approve for second reading by title only, Ordinance No. 03(1995) entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULATING AUTOMOBILE FOR HIRE AND TAXICAB OPERATION SERVICES AND REPEALING CHAPTER 7.80 OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE. 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 18, 1995 PAGE 8 8.2 SECOND READING OF 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 MASTER CABLE TELEVISION ORDINANCE NO. 12,137 AS AMENDED AND HERETOFORE ADOPTED BY THE CITY FOR PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 6 MONTHS - In response to C/Harmony, CM/Belanger reported that the procedural plan will be forwarded to the Council in a few days. The plan is to advise Council as to how staff will proceed in negotiations with Jones Intercable. MPT/Werner moved, C/Miller seconded to approve for second reading by title only and adopt Ordinance No. 04(1995) entitled: 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 MASTER CABLE TELEVISION ORDINANCE NO. 12,137 AS AMENDED AND HERETOFORE ADOPTED BY THE CITY FOR PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 6 MONTHS. 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 9. NEW BUSINESS: 9.1 LOCAL GOVERNMENT EDUCATION - ACM/Usher reported on a curriculum developed by the Institute for Local Self -Government and the League of California Cities which includes a course on local government including three parts for elementary students, middle school students and high school students. A partnership between the City and the school districts will be established with the City paying the cost of 6 teachers, three from each district in the elementary, middle and high school levels , to attend an institute in Sacramento so that they may train other teachers to address the issues of local government in their civics and government classes. In turn, the school districts would pay the cost of acquiring the materials to be used in the classrooms where local government issues are studied. Funds for this project are currently available in the budget from monies left over from a previous program along with additional funds from economic development. MPT/Werner stated that the City was involved in this program in 1990 and asked ACM/Usher what the results were in that effort. APRIL 18, 1995 PAGE 9 ACM/Usher advised that teachers did participate and local government was addressed in the schools; however, that was five years ago and there has not been an active program since to continue that education. C/Ansari asked if brochures are available for Council review. C/Miller moved, MPT/Werner seconded to approve reallocation of the $3,665.84 returned to the City from the DFYIT, Drug Free Youth In -Town Program as well as $2,400 to be transferred to Account No. 001-4095- 2355, Contributions to Community Groups, from Account No. 001-4095- 4260, Economic Development, to provide funds for Local Government Training Institute attendance by six teachers, three from each District, serving D.B. students. 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 9.2 PROPOSAL FOR COMMUNITY CENTER - CM/Belanger reported that a the Sheriff has asked that a community service center be established in the Country Hills Town Center as a pilot program and recommended that the Council hold this over until May 16, 1995 in order that the Captain can speak on behalf of the program. Martha Bruske, 600 So. Great Bend, introduced a newspaper clipping from the Progress Bulletin regarding the new community service center. She stated that she is against this location for a Sheriff sub station. Dr. Lawrence Rhodes, Fiber Ct., stated that he was in favor of the proposal and supported the location at the Country Hills Town Center. C/Ansari asked that furniture and office supplies be added to this budget. She also asked if there are other areas that are available for the sub- station that might be more strategic. C/Harmony expressed concern that patrol hours will not be taken away because there is a facility to go to. He asked that North D.B. be considered for the sub -station location. MPT/Werner commented on Ms. Bruske's comments and asked her to keep an open mind until she hears the report from the L.A. Sheriffs Captain. He also asked that the Captain take into consideration of opening second and third sub -stations. APRIL 18, 1995 PAGE 10 M/Papen advised that this request did not come from the Sheriffs Department but rather the Shopping Center. She also expressed concern in keeping the deputies out on patrol as much as possible and an administrative office not be set up to remain open. She explained that this is not a sub -station, but rather a Community Service Center to be used by a variety of City staff. She asked staff to report on the intended usage of the Community Service Center. C/Ansari reported that the Community Service Center in Rowland Heights is staffed by a volunteer group who gives out community information. With consensus of the Council, the matter was continued to May 16, 1995. 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS: None 11. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. in memory of Husna Ansari. ATTEST: Mayor LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk 1-c:. , L— 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 16, 1995 DATE: May 10, 1995 Attached is the Voucher Register dated May 16, 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 16, 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 139 LLAD #39 Fund 141 LLAD #41 Fund 250 CIP Fund 510 Self Insurance Fund TOTAL ALL FUNDS APPROVED BY: Linda G. Ma son Accounting Manager r;r"^j'errence L. B61angl6r City Manager AMOUNT $146,807.82 1,598.85 99.04 870.05 2,857.00 4,943.42 6,472.54 3,665.40 210,849.85 207.78 $376,371.75 12 Phyl is E. Papen Mayor #* City or Diamond Bar ## RUN TIME: 09:2905/1/95 VOUCHER REG IST ER DUE THRU.............05/16/95 PAGE 1 VENA NAME VENDOR ID. * * PREPAID * * ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK' ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ AAA Flag & Banner Company AAAFlag *001-4095-1200 10 50516C 01/2879 05/10 05/16 S038043 -In Flags with City Logo 1,515.50 TOTAL DUE VENOM --------) 1,515.50 AT & T AT&T April Maint-HrtgePrk 750.00 *001-4311-5300 *118-4098-2125 2 50516A 05/10 05/16 Internet Svcs -April 40.05 05/10 05/10 37227 *001-4316-5300 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 40.05 AT & T AT&T 2 505160 01/2093. 05/10 05/16 37227 *001-4090-2125 2 50516A 05/10 05/10 Long Dist Phne Svcs -April 15.62 2 50516C 05/2093B 05/10 05/10 37227 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 15.62 AT & T AT&T *001-4331-5300 2 50516C 08/2093B 05/10 05/16 *001-4331-2125 3 50516D 05/10 05/16 Sycamore Cyn -Long Dist 1.10 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 1.10 Accurate Landscape Accurate *141-4541-2210 2 505160 03/2640 05/10 05/16 37127 April Rodent Cntrl-LLA041 295.00 *138-4538-2210 2 50516C 01/2640 05/10 05/16 37175 April Rodent Cntrl-LLAD38 100.00 *139-4539-2210 2 50516C 02/2640 05/10 05/16 37178 April Rodent Cntrl-LLAD39 295.00 Accurate Landscape Accurate April Maint-HrtgePrk 750.00 *001-4311-5300 2 50516C 06/2093B 05/10 05/16 37227 *001-4313-5300 2 50516C 02/2093B 05/10 05/10 37227 *001-4316-5300 2 50516C 04/2093B 05/10 05/10 37227 *001-4319-5300 2 505160 01/2093. 05/10 05/16 37227 *001-4322-5300 2 50516C 03/20938 05/10 05/10 37227 *001-4325-5300 2 50516C 05/2093B 05/10 05/10 37227 *001-4328-5300 2 50516C 07/20938 05/10 05/16 37227 *001-4331-5300 2 50516C 08/2093B 05/10 05/16 37227 Accurate Landscape Accurate *138-4538-2210 4 50516C 01/2205 05/10 051116 37004 Accurate Landscape Accurate *001-4319-2210 4 50516C 01/22078 05/10 05/16 37005 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 690.00 April Maint-Paul Grow 1,100.00 April Maint-HrtgePrk 750.00 April Maint-Maple Hill 900.00 April Maint-Peterson 1,200.00 April Maint-RonReagan 1,000.00 April Maint-Starshine 500.00 April Maint-SumtrdgePrk 1,500.00 April Maint-Sycaeore Cyn 1,600.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 8,550.00 March Maint Dist #38 280.42 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 280.42 March Maint Peterson Prk 152.52 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 152.52 *** City of Diamond Bar * * * RUN TIME: 09:29 05/12/95 V 0 U C H E R R E G I S T E R PH 2 DUE THRU.............05/16/95 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. * * PREPAID ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Accurate Landscape Accurate *001-4310-1200 9 50516C 01/2471 05/10 05/16 37079 Accurate Landscape Accurate *139-4539-5500 2 50516C 01/2642 05/10 05/16 37174 Accurate Landscape Accurate *138-4538-5500 2 50516C 01/2641 05/10 05/16 37173 Airtouch Cellular Airtouch *001-4030-2125 1 50516A 05/10 05/16 All City Management All City *001-4411-5531 4 50516D 01/2080A 05/10 05/16 000223 AmeriComp AmeriComp *401-4090-2205 8 50516C 01/2894 05/10 05/16 34747 Aramark Refreshment Aramark *001-4090-2130 12 50516C 02/2309A 05/10 05/16 353550 Austin Faust Assoc Inc. AustinFaus *001-4553-5222 4 505160 01/2581 Best Lighting Products . BestLtg *001-4322-2210 2 50516D 01/2917 05/10 05/16 8117 05/10 05/16 L44272 Bill's Lock & Safe BillsLock *001-4313-2210 5 505160 07/2055A 05/10 05/16 66672 *001-4319-2210 5 50516C 06/2055A 05/10 05/16 66672 Tissue/Towels-Parks 252.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------1 252.00 April Maint-Dist 39 5,920.22 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 5,920.22 April Maint-Dist 38 3,648.80 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------1 3,648.80 Cell Phone Svcs -4/15-5/14 36.38 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------1 36.38 Crossing Guard Srvcs-Aprl 1,421.73 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------1 1,421.73 Printer Toner Cartridges 73.56 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------1 73.56 June Equip Rent 29.00 TOTAL OLE VENDOR --------1 29.00 EngrSvcs-LftTrnSignlStdy 1,880.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------1 1,880.00 LightReplcmnt-RonReagan 440.91 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------1 440.91 Locks -Heritage Park 49.30 Locks -Peterson Park 8.25 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------1 57.55 * * * City of D i a m a n d Bar *** RUN TIME 092905/12/95 VOUCHER REGISTER PAGE 3 DUE THRU.............05/16/95 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. * * PREPAID ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/N0. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bays Club/San Gabriel Vly BoysClub *001-4558-5520 4 50516C 01/2036 05/10 05/16 1286 Graffiti Rmvl-March 550.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 550.00 Bryan A. Stirrat & Assc BryanStirr *001-4551-5223 2 50516B 01/2804 05/10 05/16 95540 P1nCkSvc-G95-263-Feb/Apr 450.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 450.00 Burgess, Lynda BurgessLyn *001-4040-2330 2 W516C 05/10 05/16 Reimb-CC1kConf 4/27-28 231.15 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 231.15 Charles Abbott & Asc Inc CharlesAbb *001-2300-1010 21 50516E 05/11 05/16 031 CondOfAppvIFPL92-030 957.00 +001-4510-5500 2 50516E 01/2486 05/11 05/16 031 Dec94EngSvcs-NonFee 13,068.50 *001-4551-5223 8 50516E 01/2460 05/11 05/16 031 P1anCkSycsTR31977 487.50 *001-4551-5227 7 50516E 01/2393 05/11 05/16 031 InspSvc-1823Cliffbranch 90.00 *001-4551-5227 9 50516E 01/2370 05/11 05/16 031 InspectSvcs-SylvnGln 90.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------> 14,693.00 Cintas Cintas *001-4310-2130 7 50516D 01/2774A 05/10 05/10 640344490 Wkly Uniform Rent -4/17 16.65 *001-4310-2130 9 50516D 01/2774A 05/10 05/10 640346371 Wkly Uniform Rent -4/24 16.65 *001-4310-2130 I1 50516D 01/2774A 05/10 05/10 640348245 Wkly Uniform Rent -5/1 16.65 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 49.95 Coco's Coca's *001-2300-1013 1 50516C 05/10 05/16 Refund-TempSignDep-95-6 100.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 100.00 Community Disposal Co. CamDisposl *001-4510-5501 4 505168 01/2061 05/10 05/16 April Street Sweep Svcs 7,949.88 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 7,949.88 Computer Applied Systems CAS *001-4050-4030 2 505168 01/2159 05/10 05/16 950504 May Computer Maint-Fin 832.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 832.00 �*# Citof Diamond Bar *** RUN TIME: 09 y 29 05/12/95 V O U C H E R R E G I S T E R PAGE 4 DUE THRU.............05/16/95 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. * +� PREPAID ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Computer Upgrade CompUpgrad *001-4090-6235 2 M16C 02/2750 *118-4098-6230 2 50516C 01/2750 Conrad & Associates Conrad *001-4050-4010 2 50516C 01/2736 D&J Engineering D&JEngine *250-4310-6415 06695 6 50516B 01/2738 DKS Associates DKS *001-4553-5222 2 50516D 01/2448 Day & Night Copy Center Day&Night *001-4415-2110 2 50516C 01/2895 *001-4510-2110 2 505161) 01/2921 *001-4553-2110 2 505160 02/2921 De Stefano, Jim Destefano *001-4210-2330 1 50516A 05/10 05/16 7768 Filemagic-Install/Traing 3,350.50 05/10 05/16 7768 Filemagic-Install/Traing 830.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 4,180.50 05/10 05/16 95-5079 Ping/Interim Audit Svcs 3,000.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 3,000.00 05/10 05/16 955-003 P1nRvw-ADAMpleHlRtroFit 275.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 275.00 05/10 05/16 17742 Trfc Engr Svcs -Apr 2,756.08 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 2,756.08 05/10 05/16 0872-2 Prtg-SrVoluntrPtrlManuals 99.32 05/10 05/16 08747 PrtgSvcs-TrfcMgmtStudy 37.19 05/10 05/16 08747 PrtgSvcs-TrfcMgmtStudy 223.69 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 360.20 05/10 05/10 Reimb-Plnrslnst-3/22-24 321.76 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------- } 321.76 Diamond Bar Business Asa DBBusAssoc *+)01-4090-2140 2 50516B 01/1952B 05/10 05/16 *001-4090-2210 4 505168 02/1952B 05/10 05/16 Diamond Bar Junior Womens DBJrWomens *001-4010-2325 9 50516A Rent -Suite 190 -May 5,707.80 CAM -Suites 100,190 -May 1,495.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------1 7,202.80 05/10 05/16 Fshn Show 5/6-Ansari,Papn TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ---- TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------- 40.00 05/16/95 :9:0+ 40.00 0.00 Diamond Bar Little League DBLittleLe *001-2300-1002 2 50516D 05/10 05/16 Security Deposit Refund 100.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 100.00 x*a City of Diamond bar *# RUN TIME: 09:29 05/12/95 V O U C H E R R E G I S T E R PAGE 5 DUE THRU.............05/16/95 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. * +� PREPAID ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Diamond Bar/Walnut YMCA DBWalYMCA +125-4215-2355 3 505160 01/1954 E.C. Scott Detail *001-4440-2200 EPC Fund *001-4440-2340 ECScott 2 50516D 01/2931 EPCFund 1 50516A Eastman Inc. Eastman *001-4095-4260 9 50516D 01/2836 Engineering -Environmental EngEnvGeal *001-2300-1012 12 50516B Engineering -Environmental EngEnvGeol *001-2300-1012 13 505161) GTE California GTE *001-4040-2125 3 50516C GTE California GTE *001-4316-2125 1 50516B GTE California GTE *001-4322-2125 1 505169 GTE California GTE #001-4319-2125 1 50516B 05/10 05/16 CDBG-ChldcreAsstnce-March 2,126.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 2,126.00 05/10 05/16 9262 Detail Svcs -EDC Trailor 80.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 80.00 05/10 05/16 Seminar-EmerPrep-Btzlff 25.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 25.00 05/10 05/16 014324939 Colored Copy Paper 52.61 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 52.61 05/10 05/16 0504281A-188 ProfSvcs-EN 95-67 260.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 260.00 05/10 05/16 G504281A-172 Prof Svcs -EN 94-63 260.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 260.00 05/10 05/16 Phone Svcs-Modum 25.95 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 25.95 05/10 05/16 Install/PhneSvcs-MapleHii 227.41 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 227.41 05/10 05/16 Phone Svcs -Ron Reagan 44.35 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 44.35 05/10 05/16 Phone Svcs -Peterson Prk 40.74 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 40.74 Citof y Diamond Bar #+�+� RUN TIME: 09:29 05/12/95 V O U C H E R R E G I S T E R PAGE 6 DUE THRU .............05/16/95 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. * * PREPAID # ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK GTE California GTE *001-4090-2125 3 505169 05/10 05/16 Phone Svcs-Bldg&Sfty 179.99 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 179.99 Geiger, Donna GeigerD *001-4040-4000 10 50516B 01/2264 05110 05/16 095-95020 MntSec-CC Mtg 4/18 120.00 *001-4040-4000 8 50516B 01/2264 05/10 05/16 09a95019 MntSec-CC Mtg 4/4 140.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------} 260.00 Graphics United GraphicUni *001-4095-2357 5 50516D 01/2852 05/10 05/16 5517 Prtg-Bone Marrow Tstg 430.29 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 430.29 Griffith Company GriffithCo *250-4215-6420 09595 2 505168 02/2342A 05/10 05116 CIP Bus Pads -DB Blvd 1,103.32 *250-4510-6411 06495 2 505168 01/2342A 05/10 05/16 CIP-Impry Grd/BrCyn 208,529.28 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 209,632.60 Hall & Foreman Hall&Forem *001-4551-5223 4 50516D 01/2662 05/10 05/16 029564 Plan Check Svcs-IndnCreek 144.00 *001-4551-5223 6 50516D 01/2521 05/10 05/16 029565 Plan Check Svcs-IndnCreek 94.50 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 238.50 Highlander Publications Highlander *115-4515-2115 2 50516B 01/2823 05/10 05/16 542695395096 Motor0ilRecyclAd-4/6 99.04 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 99.04 Hinderliter Be Llamas Hinderlitr *001-4090-4010 1 505168 01/2254 05/10 05/16 1021 Prof Svcs -1st Qtr 95 900.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 900.00 ICMA Housing Bureau ICMAHouse *001-4030-2330 4 50516A 05/10 05/16 ICMAConf9/15-20-Belanger 129.69 05/16/95 0000025851 TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----) 129.69 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 0.00 Image Awareness ImageAware *001-4095-1207 12 50516C 01/2727 05/10 05/16 6th Anniv Pins 1,099.61 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 1,099.61 *#* City of Diamond Bar *** RUN TIME: 09:29 05/12/95 V O U C H E R R E G I S T E R DUE THRU.............05/16/95 PAGE 7 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. *001-4411-5401 * * PREPAID * * ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ENTRT/M INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK Image IV Systems Inc. Image4Sys TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 258.00 Kens Hardware Kens *001-4090-2100 4 50516E 02/2010 05/10 05/16 177739 Mar Copy Charges 158.69 *001-4090-2200 6 50516B 01/2010 05/10 05/16 177739 Mar Base Maint Charge 100.00 32.81 *001-4319-2210 2 50516B 05/2373 05/10 05/16 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 258.69 Inland Valley Dly Bulletn IVDB 05/10 05/16 Maint Supplies-Summitridg 2.08 *001-4331-2210 *001-2300-1010 18 505168 05/10 05/16 125208 legal Ad -FPL 94-025 149.42 *001-2300-1010 17 50516E 05/10 05/16 126863 legal Ad -FPL 95-007 80.67 *001-4210-4220 6 505168 01/2858 05/10 05/16 132570 GenPlanHrg-5/9/95 319.01 *001-4040-2115 2 50516D 01/2131 05/10 05/16 137921 Pub Hrg-Bids Moment Sign 47.67 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 596.77 Int'l Business Equipment InBusEquip *001-4090-2100 6 50516C 01/2146 05/10 05/16 8840 May Copy Charges 402.10 *001-4090-2200 8 50516C 02/2146 05/10 05%16 8840 May Maint Base Charge 281.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 683.10 Jack's Lock k Key Jack'sLock *001-4411-5401 *001-4090-2210 2 50516A 01/2890 05/10 05/16 Rekey/Deadbolt-Ste100,190 258.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------> TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 258.00 Kens Hardware Kens *001-4331-5300 *001-4310-1200 7 50516E 01/2373 05/10 05/16 Gen Supplies-Prks 194.81 *001-4313-2210 4 505168 03/2373 05/10 05/16 Gen Supplies -Heritage 32.81 *001-4319-2210 2 50516B 05/2373 05/10 05/16 Maint Supplies -Peterson 65.39 *001-4328-2210 2 505168 08/2373 05/10 05/16 Maint Supplies-Summitridg 2.08 *001-4331-2210 4 505168 09/2373 05/10 05/16 Maint Supplies-SycamoreCy 6.14 1001-4510-1200 4 505168 05/10 05/16 Supplies -Pub Wks 23.51 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 324.74 L.A. County -Sheriff's Dep LACSheriff *001-4411-5401 2 50516C 05/10 05/16 32776 March Helicopter Svcs 722.58 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------> 722.58 L.A.County Public Works LACPubWk *001-4331-5300 4 50516C 01/2039A 05/10 05/16 9500007822 Sump Pump Maint-March 198.99 TOTAL DLE VENDOR --------) 198.99 LA Cellular Telephone LACellular *001-4440-2125 2 50516C 05/10 05/16 Cellular Svcs-EmerPrep 17.24 *001-4440-2125 3 50516C 05/10 05/16 Cellular Svcs-EmerPrep 17.24 *001-4440-2125 4 50516C 05/10 05/16 Cellular Svcs-EmerPrep 17.24 *001-4440-2125 5 50516C 05/10 05/16 Cellular Svcs-EmerPrep 17.24 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------> 68.96 ++# City o Diamond Bar# RUN TIME' 0929 05/12/95 V O U C H E R R E G I S T E R PAGE 8 DUE THRU .............05/16/95 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. * * PREPAID ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK. LG&E Power Engineers LG&EPower *001-2300-1011 1 50516A 05/10 05/16 97839 ProfSvcs-FER 92-2 47.52 05/16/95 0000025850 *001-2300-1011 2 50516A 05/10 05/16 97839 Prof Svcs-FER 92-1 409.86 05/16/95 0000025850 *001-2300-1011 3 50516A 05/10 05/16 97839 Prof Svcs-FER 92-4 136.62 05/16/95 0000025850 *001-2300-1010 16 50516A 05/10 05/16 97893 Prof Svcs-FER 9-2-2 784.49 05/16/95 0000025850 *001-2300-1011 4 50516A 05/10 05/16 97893 Prof Svcs-FER 92-1 6,766.18 05/16/95 0000025850 *001-2^300-1012 11 50516A 05/10 05/16 97893 Prof Svcs-FER 92-4 2,255.39 05/16/95 0000025850 *001-4210-4240 1 50516A 05/10 05/16 97893 Credit Memo-Environ Analy 1,980.00- 05/16/95 0000025850 TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----) 8,420.06 TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------) 0.00 Landscape West LandscapeW *001-4518-5508 2 50516C 01/2123 05/10 05/16 15519 April Weed Abate Svcs 4,561.84 TOTAL DIN= VENDOR--------) 4,561.84 Landscape West LandscapeW *141-4541-5500 2 50516D 01/2643 05/10 05/16 15578 April Maint-Dist 41 3,336.85 TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------) 3,336.85 Lewis Engraving Inc. LewisEngra *001-4095-1200 6 50516B 01/2892 05/10 05/16 018280 Engraving Svcs-Placques 295.52 *001-4095-1200 8 50516B 01/2497 05/10 05/16 018280 Engraving Svcs-Tile Plate 17.32 TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------) 312.84 Linscott,Law & Greenspan Linscatt *001-2300-1010 20 50516E 05/11 05/16 02 PrecAlign-FPL95-026 1,223.50 *250-4310-6415 06595 8 50516C 01/2626 05/10 05/16 29417541 PanteraTrfcStdy-2/20-3/19 860.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 2,083.50 Los Angeles County LACIntSvc *001-4090-2130 8 50516B 01/2751 05/10 05/16 838 Pager Svcs-March 140.08 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 140.08 Mitchell Pest Control Inc MitchellPe *001-4558-5509 2 50516C 01/198 05/10 05/16 0018252 Tree Spraying Svcs-March 500.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------) 500.00 Mobil Mobil *001-4415-2310 9 505168 05/10 05/16 k53336892 Fuel-SrPatrolVehicle 31.60 *001-4415-2310 10 505168 05/10 05/16 k5336435 Fuel-SrPatrolVehicle 9.46 *001-4090-2310 36 505168 01/2847 05/10 05/16 k5336833 Fuel-PoolCars 8.16 *001-4310-2310 22 50516E 01/2582 05/10 05/16 k6037275 Fuel-Prk&Rec 33.70 *001-4310-2310 14 50516B 01/2582 05/10 05/16 k6037404 Fuel-Prk&Rec 20.50 *001-4210-2310 5 50516E 01/933 05/10 05/16 0432493 Fuel-Ping Truck 18.45 ** City of D i a a o n d Bar *** RUN TIME: 09:29 05/12/95 V O U C H E R R E G I S T E R DUE THRU.............05/16/95 PAGE a VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. * * PREPAID * * ACCOUNT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/ND. ENTRV/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK: Mobil Mobil (CONTINUED) *001-4090-2510 38 50516B 01/2847 05/10 05/16 k7432795 Fuel-PoolCars 19.20 #001-4310-2310 16 505168 01/2582 05/10 05/16 0432806 Fuel-Prk&Rec 30.88 *001-4310-2310 18 505168 01/2582 05/10 05/16 k7433160 Fuel-Prk&Rec 20.51 *001-4310-2310 20 50516B 01/2582 05/10 05/16 k7433516 Fuel-Prk&Rec 30.18 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 222.64 Mt. SAC Foundation MtSacFound *001-4010-2325 7 50516A 05/10 05/16 95CAIssuesDinner-Harmony 50.00 05/16/95 0000025(349 TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----) 50.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 0.00 Myron Manufacturing Corp. MyranManuf *001-4095-4260 7 50516B 01/2851 05/10 05/16 15224082 Pens w/ Logo/200 Oft Bois 1,169.10 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 1,169.10 Nextel Communications, Nextel *001-4090-2130 10 505168 01/21686 05/10 05/16 747412 2 Way Radio Svcs -April 169.57 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 169.57 Northland Rental NorthRent *001-4095-2353 14 50516A 01/2935 PERS Member Services Div. PERSDeliq *001-4090-0093 2 50516E 05/10 05/16 NRIO4766 GeneratorRent-AnnvCeleb TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ---- TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------- 05/12 05/16 M0000028M AdmnChrg PR7/93/4 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------- 118.53 05/16/95 COXX` `A-� 118.53 0.00 200.00 200.00 Payroll Transfer PayrollTr *001-1020 2 50516B 05/10 05/16 Payroll Transfer-PP9 46,700.00 05/16/95 )WIlk w■.w TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----) 46,700.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 0.00 Pitney Bowes Credit Corp. PBCC *001-4090-2130 6 505168 01/2343C 05/10 05/16 1444744-AP95 EquipRent-Fldr/Insrtr-Apr 99.59 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 99.59 *#� Citof Diaaond Bar *�* y RUN TIME: 09:2 9 05/12/95 V O U C H E R R E G I S T E R PAGE 10 DUE THRU .............05/16/95 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. * * PREPAID # # ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BATCH PO.LINE/N0. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK Pomona Judicial District Po"dDist *001-322.3 1 50516C 05/10 05/16 March Parking Fines 685.04 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 685.00 Pomona Valley Mane Soc. PVNS *041-4431-5403 2 505168 01/1949 05/10 05/16 AnimalCtrlSvc-May 4,514.09 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 4,514.09 PostNet and Printing PostNet *001-4090-2110 8 50516B 01/2866 45/10 05/16 950079 Stationary Suppl-Envelops 104.79 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 104.79 Postage By Phone PostByPhon *001-4090-2120 2 50516C 05/10 05/16 Postage Replenishment 1,500.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 1,500.00 Public Empl Retirement PERS *001-2110-1008 7 50516B 05/10 05/16 PP9 Retire Contrib-Emplye 3,332.95 *001-2110-1008 8 50516D 05/10 05/16 PP9 Retire Contrib-Emplyr 3,002.06 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 6,335.01 Rancho Cucamonga, City of RnchoCucam *001-4010-2330 3 50516A 05/10 05/16 3/29 -Legis Dinner-CCncl 39b.92 *001-4030-2330 5 50516A 05/10 05/16 3/29 -Legis Dinner-Cmgr 99.23 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 496.15 Repro Graphics ReproGraph *001-4090-2110 10 50516C 01/2888 05/10 05/16 7202 BusinessCardImprints 121.70 *001-4050-2110 2 50516D 01/2923 05/10 05/16 7214/7217 Prtg-StandrdFinanceForms 721.17 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 842.87 Ritz Camera Ritz Camer *001-4095-2110 2 50516B 04/2225C 05/10 05/16 1108797 Prtg-Summer Newsletter 28.92 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 28.92 Robbins Precast Inc. RobbinsPre *112-4553-5527 2 50516D 01/2675 05/10 05/16 1806 Bus Bench Replacement - 3 1,598.85 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 1,598.85 *** City of Diamond gar * * * RUN TIME: 09:29 05/12/95 V O U C H E R R E G I S T E R WAGE 11 DUE THRU.............05/16/95 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. * * PREPAID ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION ALIT DATE CHECK ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ San Gabriel Vly Tribune SGVTribune *001-4210-4220 8 50516C 01/2857 05/10 05/16 09507 GenPlanHrg-5/9/95 285.44 *001-2300-1010 19 50516C 05/10 05/16 19405 Legal Ad -FPL 95-008 115.84 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 401.28 Siecke, Warren C. SieckeW *250-4510-6412 07495 2 50516D 01/2272 05/10 05/16 34108 TrfcEngr5vcs-GrdAve-March 82.25 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 82.25 Sincerely Inspired Sinlnspire *125-4215-4000 4 50516D 01/2765 05/10 05/16 3 CDBG Svcs -4/17-4/28 731.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 731.00 Smart & Final Saart&Finl *001-4350-1200 6 505160 01/2069 05/10 05/16 21488% Supplies -Tiny Tots 58.31 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 58.31 Soroptimist Int'l DB/Wain Soroptimis *001-4010-2325 8 50516A 05/10 05/16 Fashion Show 5/7-Ansari 23.00 05/16/95 0000025852 TOTAL PREPAID AMOIAtlT ----) 23.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 0.00 Southern Ca. Edison SoCaEdison *001-4510-2126 2 505168 05/10 05/16 Elect Svcs-Trffc Control 216.69 *139-4539-2126 1 505168 05/10 05/16 Elect Svcs -Dist 39 222.54 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 439.23 Southern Ca. Edison SoCaEdison *001-4325-2126 1 50516E 05/12 05/16 Elect Svcs-Starshine Prk 33.00 *001-4510-2126 5 50516E 05/12 05/16 Elect Svcs -Traffic Contrl 1,720.82 *138-4538-2126 2 50516E 05/12 05/16 Elect Svcs -Dist 38 722.19 *139-4539-2126 2 50516E 05/12 05/16 Elect Svcs -Dist 39 34.78 *141-4541-2126 1 50516E 05/12 05/16 Elect Svcs -Dist 41 33.55 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 2,544.34 Southern California SCPC *001-4210-2315 1 505168 05/10 05/16 Member Renewal-CoaDvlpDir 50.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 50.00 Citof Diamond Bar *�# RUN TIME: 09 y 29 05/12/95 V O U C H E R R E G I S T E R PAGE 12 DUE THRU.............05/16,'95 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. PREPAID ACCOUNT PRDJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/N0. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK. --------------------------------------t--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sports Chalet SportChale +001-4350-1200 9 50516D 01/2630 Staightline Spats Straightln '001-4350-1200 7 50516D State Compensation Ins Fd StateComp *510-4810-7200 1 505168 Time Out Personnel Svc. TimeOut '001-4040-4000 12 50516B 01/2744 Unocal '001-4415-2310 }001-4440-1200 '001-4030-2310 Unocal 8 50516B 01/2871 3 50516B 9 505168 01/1963 Walnut Vly Water Dist WVWaterDis 1138-4538-2126 1 505168 dalnut Vly Water Dist WVWaterDis X001-4440-2126 1 50516C 05/10 05116 2279 05/10 05/16 40205 05/10 05/16 05/10 05/16 238 05/10 05/16 113658 05/10 05/16 713088 05/10 05/16 713827 05/10 05/16 05/10 05/16 8049 West Coast Arborist Inc. WCArba +001-4558-5509 4 50516C 01/1929A 05/10 05/16 9437 Wright, Paul WrightP '001-4090-4000 4 50516C 01/2766 05/10 05/16 Softballs-RecreationSvcs TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------- Baseball Equipment Rplmnt TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------1 Add'l Deposit Premium TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) TempSvcs-Recptnist 4/10-1 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------! Fuel-SrPatrolVehicle Propane-EOC Trailor Fuel-CMgr TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------! RecycledWater-Dist#38 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) ElectPwrEstgte-12/28-4/7 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------- Tree Trimming Svcs -4/12 TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------- Audio/Visual Svcs TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------- 485.48 485.48 48.71 48.71 207.78 207.78 160.00 160.00 11.67 6.50 21.18 39.35 192.01 192.01 31.54 31.54 965.00 965.00 375.00 375.00 +�** Citof Diamond Bar +** RUN TIME: 09:29 05/12/95 V O y U C H E R R E G I S T E R PAGE 1:3 DUE THRU.............05/16/95 VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. # * PREPAID ACCOUNT PROJ.TK-NO BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yosemite Waters YosemMater *001-4310-1200 11 50516C 0212021A 05/10 05/16 375021/39858 Water -Parks 13.90 *001-4310-2130 5 505160 01/2021A 05/10 05/16 550270Mar EquipRent-Water-April 12.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------} 25.90 TOTAL PREPAID -----------} 55,481.28 TOTAL DUE ---------------} 322,890.47 TOTAL REPORT ------------} 378,371.75 �*# City RUN TIME: 09:29 05/12/95 V O U C H E R R E G I S T E R "AGE 1 FUND SUMMARY REPORT DUE THRU.............05/16/95 DISBURSE G/L GJE WILL POST GJE HAS POSTED FUTURE TRANSACTIONS FUND TOTAL DIRECT PAY REVENUE EXPENSE REVENUE EXPENSE REVENUE EXPENSE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 001 General Fund 146,807.82 66,681.50 685.00 79,441.32 118 Air Quality Iop 870.05 870.05 141 LLAD 141 Fund 3,665.40 3,665.40 138 LLAD Ka Fund 4,943.42 4,943.42 139 LLAD 139 Fwd 6,472.54 6,472.54 250 C.I.P. Fund 210,849.85 210,849.85 125 CDBG Fund 2,857.00 2,557'00 115 Int Waste Mgmt F 99.04 W'04 112 Prop A -Transit F 1,598.85 1,593.85 510 Self Insurance F 207.78 ?07.78 TOTAL------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ALL FUNDS 378,371.75 66,681.50 685.00 311,O0S.:` ��fin+4✓a sd i_. // CARL WARREN & CO. In, -i mcc Adlusrers � I i,;— ManaKrmenc and Admini,c:an"11 95 ��� ^ 7 Pill i l 35 ni c a L TO: City of Diamond Bar April 25, 1995 ATTENTION: Lynda Burgess, CMC/AAE, City Clerk RE: Claim Big O Tires/Schoe v. Diamond Bar claimant Big O Tires/ Patti Schoe D/Event 11/17/94 Recd Y/Office 04/21/95 Our File S 82358 ABK We have reviewed the above captioned claim and request that you take the action indicated below: [EZ] CLAIM REJECTION: Sand a standard rejection letter to the claimant. [ ] CLAIM INSUFFICIENCY; In accordance with the telephone conversation of * a notice of insufficiency must be mailed to the claimant no later than *, 19*. THIS MUST BE MAILED TO THE CLAIMANT WITHIN 20 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THE ORIGINAL CLAIM IN YOUR OFFICE. DO NOT SUBMIT A "RrTECTION LETTER. See Government Code Sections 910 and/or 910.2 and/or 910.4. [ ] AMENDED/SUPPLEMENTAL CLAIM: Send a standard rejection letter to the claimant, rejecting this additional/amended claim. [ ] LATE CLAIM RESPONSE: Return the ori#nal claim material to the claimant, advising that the claim is late and that, ,their only recourse is to file a written "Application for Leave to Present a Late Claim". (Retain copies in your file.) THIS MUST BE MAILED TO THE CLAIMANT WITHIN 45 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THE CLAIM IN YOUR OFFICE. DO NOT SP -RD A "RMTRCTION" LETTER. See Government Code Section 911.4 [ ] APPLICATION REJECTION: Reject claimant's "Application for Leave to Present a Late Claim. See Government Code Section 911.8. [ ] TAKE NO ACTION: Defer any written response to the claimant pending our further advice. Please provide us with a copy of the notice sent, as requested above. If you have any questions please contact the undersigned. very truly yours, C CNY Dwigh J.rW7� cc: SCJPIA w/enc. CI4JM No ----------- -- — TO PERSON OR PROPERTY a. hi STRUCTIONS 1. Claims for death, injury to person or to personal property r.tust be filed not J' later than, "os. after the occurrence. (Gov. Code Sec. I11.2) �� •' i ? •., 2. Claims for damages to real property must be filed not later than 1 year ai .er the occurrence. (Gov. Code Sec. 911.2) 3. Read entire claim before filing. 4. See page 2 for diagram upon which to locate place of acc.dent. 5. This claim form must be signed on page 2 at bottom. 6. Attach separate sheets, if necessary, to give full details. SIGr EACH SHEET. 7. Claim must be filed with City Clerk. (Gov. Code Sec. 915x) To: The City of Diamond Bar N'arpe of Claimat}�t /: 1 Age of Claimant (if natural person) Home Address of Claimant Cit,/ and State home Telephone Number Bqpine,ss Addresp of Claimant Citi and State B mess Telephon)e N ber_ Give/address to which you desire notices or communicat' ns to be sgnt regarding this claim: ��i!fialrr!>f� �c�41f7j' 6,z 616% How did DAMAGE or INJURY occur? Give full particulars. �� y �'`- - L�C C1 tl" J, r //)rrf/{ 141 /)UI �111�_� fC SICJ�� `yk1�(t)C� 1(i'< l� (,�(ii( i When did DAMAGE or INJURY occur? Give full particulars, date, time of day: Where did DAMAGE or INJURY occur? Describe fully, and locate on diagram on reverse side of this sheet, where appropriate, give street names and addresses and measurements from landmarks: r - 6CA-11C( What particular ACT or OMISSION do you claim caused the injury or damage? Give names of City employees causing the injury or damage, if known: �.��c� fr(''r) A�ok/Ct -C i� 'V --at DAti'_.?GE cr INJtiRIES do you claim resulted? Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed; W0 It ,1 i?c_ ���� What AItiOCNT do you claim on account of each item of injury or damage as of date of presentation of this claim, giving basis o'f computation: )L')) j % 'C..1)P �}i !7 i �l t = 1 ,39 �, 7 r7 C�(i C Z/. Give ESTIMATED AMOUNT as far as known you claim on account of each item of prospective injury or damage, giving basis of computation: C� SEE PAGE 2 (OVER) THIS CLAIM MUST BE SIGNED ON REVERSE SIDE Insurance payments received, if any. na.: es �j: ....,.: CH99 910 DRAFT INQUIRY 0 1.8/95 UACD6100 CLAIM NUMBER: 411 4 A0940 SFX: 1 CURRENT RESERVE: PAYEE 01 BIG O TIRES & ASSOCIATED GLASS 02 BIG O TIRES & ELITE AUTOBODY LINE NUMBER: DRAFT NO 5112871092 5112871083 AMOUNT ISSUED ID ST $385.99 12/03/94 22 $736.48 12/03/94 21 PFI-> PREV PF5-> SRCH FORW PF10-> SPLIT DRAFT ENTER-> DETAIL NO MORE DRAFTS I., AM, 1�4 'k ALrrO 0 A110CIALC GLASS & TINTING 20241 Valley Blvd. Suits -E' Walro, CA (714) 595-4047 om ADDRESS r. mmE PHONE ma3m "*,ows Lm LOT ff mmnr r- f j < -t446 ; 0 TAX I UNDERSTAND THAT THE DRIVER AND PASSENGER &-5-r(O, 4 7-1c WINDQVJSAAF R-LLPIGALT09ET4MTFn THFA%,r VW400WS MW ALSO UECIA1 WL"X TWO F rL TOTAI AMOUNT I., AM, 1�4 'k 13833 CHIEF E -Z LINER Fame Repair 938 Nogetles St. City o1 IndLlatry, CA 91748 (818) N4-10.41 NAM[ -"`ti DAT[ aTR[a T - v[AR QGLOIe 61AX--19»�» MCCOL OWSISTRA110N NO. lIAaI NO, OOLMN.Ta11 pTIMA [MA[D [v .NeURANQECO Ap.IUeTDiI aNILAoe MPAN4 0aror►au _ PAAre 60M P TON" OUMT rz olt- ,: � yG A 1, Air c I (� Go IQ�t ,��1LL.wl,,,,...�'.S� �l i C t � ♦�C�r1 X37 S � ;� V � �j� �Y7 f The above Is an e;iltimate oawo on .aur inspoation and does not cover any additlonid parts or labnr which rnsy be required after the work has been started. Oocaaio'ally, worn or dame9ed team, are discovered whit ti may not fes evidont bn the first inspection. Beebuta or this. the abov i p •lees are not qI-wenteed. Quotations on carts and tabor are current and sublect to uharrje. AUTHORIZATI-ON FOR HEMP, You aro hereby aulhoriied to make the above •epalre : SIGNED: DATE: Tarue 7o sr, TOTAL. PARTS ................ $ TOTAL LABOR ............. . .. s ? ! 7, 2 O TOTAL REFIMBH ...............$ .� j n ` O`J TOTAL E16JBLET ............... $ r& 5', {s I TAX ... 4..l /o - `gam........ s 331 YQ : ` MMR R mss. 'i O roc pith igr "tD) SqI - 8831 &P, CLs. ), Hs? -E )"s 14r CDN QF Wffrr' rile- goocb &cpb t it_G —jrTe-- DA'%,t C)F- ` c l le.- AcCO t DISI', P6 4DO W -moo 6 ND PDpt� C.L oN i�R.w TJWE-bt 61�wIR7� w; 1 ._r. ! '.'..�_ ...r.� _�-.• .rr� � X Yom.. '.rv�I �� ��,,//.�` �-At"1 �� r Dr�►►oNo B� �rua� ARTHUR J. GALLAGHER & CO. SWUWM M MOMS SFauAMau, W. NOV 17, 1994 TO: CONTINENTAL INSURANCE BY FAX TO COSTA MESA FROM: STEMITE NARDELLI, CPCU RE: BIG O TIRES #5579 DOL: 11 17 94 .................... F_I R S ?-!.. page 1 of 2 R'm P O It T .................. contimmtion of emplanatiou from ACXWD: IV was turning right when a worker motioned for her to go back. She backed up and started to go straight across the street which is a divided road. When she started to go across the second part of the divided road, she looked right (no traffic) then proceeded. Unfortu- nately there was a car coming from her left (the opposite way from normal traffic) which she hit. The reason that the car was coming from the wrong direction is because the construction company working on the street had diverted traffic but had failed to put up a sign saying %two way traffic•. Our driver called out Sheriff Walker. He instructed the construction workers to put up signs. They immediately put a flagman out there. Our drzver contacted the city of Diamond Bar engineering department and spoke with David Liu (909 660 2489). He told her that the con- tract that the city has with that particular contractor indicates that they are to be responsible for traffic flow. He also told her that the original contract stated that they were only to close one lane on each side at a time, but had called the city back for an exception to close both lanes on one side and divert traffic which the city granted. A woman who works in the apartment complex office at that intersection noted to our driver that there had been three accidents there since construction began. THIS MAX NOT BE A VERY LARGE CLAIM BUT WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO SURROGATE AGAINST THE CONTRACTOR. 4301 HACIENDA DFM SIJITB 300 • PL EASANITON, CA 94588 Ra BO% 9101 • PL.EAUNT0N, CA 94588.9ICM 1510) 46D.9900 • FAMIMLL L (510)847-8831 • VOICE MAIL15101460.9995 NOV-17-1994 15:12 - 510 B47 8831 P.01 ( ITV OP DTAkVAM n ky) AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. �° f TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 REPORT DATE: May 9, 1995 FROM: George A. Wentz, City Engineer TITLE: Notice of Completion for Diamond Bar Boulevard Reconstruction/Rehabilitation Project Between Grand Avenue and Brea Canyon Road SUMMARY: The City Council, on October 4, 1994, awarded a contract to Griffith Company for the reconstruction/rehabilitation of Diamond Bar Boulevard between Grand Avenue and Brea Canyon Road. The final job walk was conducted on April 28, 1995 to determine the adequacy of all constructed improvements. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council accept the work performed by Griffith Company, 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? 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: Terence. Belanger F M. s er City Mana` er Assistant City Manager c:\WP60\LindaKay\Agen95\DBRehab.516 N/A —Yes _ No Majority N/A —Yes _ No N/A Yes No N/A —Yes _ No eorge A. Wentz .City Engineer CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Notice of Completion for Diamond Bar Boulevard Reconstruction/Rehabilitation Project Between Grand Avenue and Brea Canyon Road ISSUE STATEMENT File and Submit for recordation a Notice of Completion for Diamond Bar Boulevard Reconstruction/Rehabilitation Project between Grand Avenue and Brea Canyon Road. RECONEMIENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council accept the work performed by Griffith Company, and authorize the City Clerk to file the proper Notice of Completion and release any retention amounts per previously approved plans and specifications. 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 October 4, 1994, awarded the contract for the Diamond Bar Boulevard Reconstruction/Rehabilitation Project between Grand Avenue and Brea Canyon Road to Griffith Company, the lowest responsible bidder. The final construction contract amount, including change order items, was $1,255,032.11. On April 28, 1995, a final job walk was conducted with Griffith Company 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\LMAKAY\CCR-95\DBRehab.516 CITY of DIAMOND RAR AGENDA REPORT TO: Terrence L. Belanger, MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 FROM: George A. Wentz, City AGENDA NO. ' City Manager REPORT DATE: May 9, 1995 Engineer TITLE: Award of Design Services for Left -Turn Signal Phases at the intersections of Golden Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard, Golden Springs Drive and Brea Canyon Road, and Diamond Bar Boulevard and Mountain Laurel Way. SUMMARY: Proposals for design services for left -turn signal phases at the intersections of Golden Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard, Golden Springs Drive and Brea Canyon Road, and Diamond Bar Boulevard and Mountain Laurel Way were solicited from the City's on-call traffic engineering consultants. Four (4) proposals were received from DKS Associates, Warren C. Siecke, Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, and Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council award the left -turn signal phases design services at the intersections of Golden Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard, Golden Springs Drive and Brea Canyon Road, and Diamond Bar Boulevard and Mountain Laurel Way to DKS Associates, in a not -to -exceed amount of $8,600.00. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Resolution(s) Ordinances(s) X Agreement(s) (On file in City EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: _ Public Hearing Notification Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office) X Other: Proposals (On file in City Clerk's Office Clerk's Office) 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed by the City reviewed by the City Attorney? X Yes _ No 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? N/A _ Yes -No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? N/A _ Yes _ No Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? N/A _ Yes _ No Report discussed with the following affected departments: N/A REVIEWE BY: T renceelanger Frank M. U9 er �ec�fge K. t4LrntT_ City Mana a Assistant City Manager f-*4City Engineer CITY MUNOTL D13D8!!R2 MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 AGENDA NO. TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Award of Design Services for Left -Turn Signal Phases at the intersections of Golden Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard, Golden Springs Drive and Brea Canyon Road, and Diamond Bar Boulevard and Mountain Laurel Way. ISSUE STATEMENT: To award a contract to DKS Associates for left -turn signal phases design services for the intersections of Golden Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard, Golden Springs Drive and Brea Canyon Road, and Diamond Bar Boulevard and Mountain Laurel Way. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council at the intersections Golden Springs Drive Mountain Laurel Way $8,600.00. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: award the left -turn signal phases design services of Golden Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard, and Brea Canyon Road, and Diamond Bar Boulevard and to DKS Associates, in a not -to -exceed amount of The design services for the left -turn signal phases at the intersections of Golden Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard, Golden Springs Drive and Brea Canyon Road, and Diamond Bar Boulevard and Mountain Laurel Way will be funded by Capital Improvement Project (Traffic Control Improvement) Fund. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Based on a Request for Proposal dated March 24, 1995, the Department of Public Works solicited proposals from the City's on-call traffic engineering consultants to provide design services for left -turn signal phases at the intersections of Golden Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard, Golden Springs Drive and Brea Canyon Road, and Diamond Bar Boulevard and Mountain Laurel Way. The design services for the left -turn signal phases, which are to follow the standard and specifications of the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) encompass field survey/ inventory, traffic signal timing, and preparation of the plans, specifications, and engineer's estimate. Four (4) proposals were received for the design services. They were from DKS Associates, Warren C. Siecke, Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, and Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. The proposed costs for said services were $8,600.00, $11,100.00, $11,196.00, and $13,250.00, respectively. Prepared by: David G. Liu Tseday Aberra DK5 Associates 2700 North Main Street, Suite 900 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Phone: 17141543-9601 Fax. (714)648-0402 April 26, 1995 Mr. David Liu Senior Engineer 21860 East Copley Drive, Suite 190 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Subject: Design Services for Traffic Signals at Golden Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard, Brea Canyon Road and Golden Springs Drive, Diamond Bar Boulevard and Mountain Laurel Way Dear Mr, Liu - Introduction A94x2000 This proposal is being submitted by DKS Associates in response to the Request for Proposal issued by the City of Diamond Bar for Design of Traffic Signals at Golden Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard, Brea Canyon Road and Golden Springs Drive, Diamond Bar Boulevard and Mountain Laurel Way. The scope was verbally altered to include design services only. DKS Associates has established a strong reputation in the planning, design and deployment of traffic signals and interconnect systems. With our local staff, DKS can provide qualified personnel for the design and construction management services on these projects. DKS staff possesses in-depth knowledge of all design issues and, therefore, can most cost- effectively address any design changes necessitated by unforseen or changed conditions in the field. Per your request, we are submitting our fee estimates with the understanding that each design effort could be issued under a separate notice to proceed but that all work will be awarded and designed concurrently. The scope of work is essentially the same with all locations with the exception of the level of effort required at Golden Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard. The fee estimates for each of the three locations are summarized below and are based on the Scope of Work to follow: S0:9I S61 9E dc" Z0d 858 1,1Nnoo 35t4ud'o s>ic Fet77-8b9-t7U,-T C (Z 39th 031NI8d) Z 39Hd LIIEI9 1U 5661 6Z:9I 92/h0 a3AI333t1 7 Mr. David Liu April 26, 1995 Page 2 Fee Golden Springs Drive at Diamond Bar Boulevard Total (not to exceed) $2,400 • Brea Canyon Road at Golden Springs Drive Total (not to exceed) $3,100 N Diamond Bar Boulevard at Mountain Laurel Way Total (not to exceed) $3,100 Work Program The intent of this work program is to allow DKS Associates to act as an extension of City staff in the implementation of the three construction projects. DKS Associates' knowledge of these projects and in-house background will allow our staff to best perform this function. The task descriptions contained in the following pages outline the objective and activities for each major work element. TASK 1, TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION TASK 7. f: Meetings/Correspondence DKS Associates will arrange a meeting with City staff to discuss the proposed traffic signal design modification and also determine any necessary design features and other issues that may arise and could possibly effect the final design. Task 1.2 - Field Survey and Inventory DKS Associates will conduct a field survey of the intersection to establish existing site conditions and verify those with the as -built signal design drawing. The existing traffic signal design (as -built) for the intersection and other pertinent information will be acquired from the City. Task 1.3 - Preliminary Plans, SpecfFicadons, and Estimate DKS Associates will prepare base plans from the "as -built" information acquired from the City. Base plans for the traffic signal design will be prepared at 1 20' scale in Autocad format. 90:9T S6. 9E NCH 20d 999 ),iHnoD 3DN D SNQ Z017O-8179-PTL-T C (E 39Hd 031HIdd) E 33Rd LTIE19 id 5661 OE:9I 92/6© a3AI3338 J W. David Liu April 26, 1995 Page 3 The preliminary design plans showing new pole locations (if necessary), conduit runs, loop locations, etc., will be submitted to all pertinent utility companies to perform the necessary utility research of all underground facilities at the Intersection. Four (4) sets of preliminary traffic signal modification plans, specifications, and preliminary cost estimate will then be submitted to the City for first plan review. A meeting will be initiated between DKS Associates and the City to review comments Task 1.4 - Final Plans, Specifications, and Estimate The plans will be revised based on comments made by City staff on the preliminary design plans, specifications, and estimates. Four (4) sets of the final package will be submitted for second plan review. The plans, specifications, and estimate will be then finalized based on any "last-minute" comments made by City staff. The finalized plans, specifications, and estimates will be stamped and signed for final signature by the City. One (1) set of mylars and fifteen (15) sets of bluelines will be submitted to the City. We look forward to working with the City of Diamond Bar on this exciting project as part of our continuing On -Call Contract. Sincerely, DKS ASSOCIATES A California Corporation -for Robert J. Close, P.E. Principal 40206.dil""pro S3:91 S6. 92 adu bed 899 AiNnoD 3DNdZ'0 SAA ZPbB-8b9-bIL_l C (h 39Hd 43iN18d) h 399d G11E19 1N 5661 ©E:91 92/hO 93AI3338 ] CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. 6, TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 REPORT DATE: May 11, 1995 FROM: Bob Rose, Director of Community Services TITLE: Extension of contract with Lanterman Developmental Center for Supplemental Weed/Litter Abatement. SUMMARY: For the past five years, the City of Diamond Bar has contracted with Lanterman Developmental Center for supplemental weed and litter abatement services. The contract calls for 10.8 miles of public right-of-way litter abatement on a monthly cycle for $839.44 per month and weed abatement in a variety of areas once per month for $2,136.38 per four months. This contract provides for service in areas of Diamond Bar that are known to accumulate litter more rapidly than other areas of the community and for weed control in the public right of way in areas not serviced by other contracts. Also, Lanterman Developmental Center has the flexibility to allow the City to substitute emergency work for regularly scheduled work areas on an as -needed basis. The total annual cost of this contract $16,483, is the same amount that the City paid to Lanterman for this service in fiscal years 1992/93, 1993/94 and 1994/95. There is no increase being sought for the 1995/96 fiscal year contract extension. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the extension of the contract for supplemental weed and litter abatement services in Diamond Bar with Lanterman Developmental Center in the total amount of $16,483 for the 1995/96 fiscal year. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X_ Staff Report _ Resolution(s) _ _ Ordinances(s) X_ X Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: Public Hearing Notification Bid Specifications (On File in the City Clerk's Office) Other: Letter of Agreement 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed Yes _ No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? _ Yes X No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes X No Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes X No Report discussed with the following affected departments: REV WED BY: Te ren Belanger Frank M. U her ob Rose City Manager Assistant City Manager Community Services Director CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Extension of contract with Lanterman Developmental Center for Supplemental Weed/Litter Abatement ISSUE STATEMENT: To provide on-going weed/litter abatement services in association with Lanterman Developmental Center, along 10.8 miles of right-of-way in the City of Diamond Bar. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the extension of the contract for supplemental weed and litter abatement services in Diamond Bar with Lanterman Developmental Center in the total amount of $16,483 for the 1995/96 fiscal year. FINANCIAL SUNIMARY: Weed/litter abatement is budgeted in the proposed 1995/96 fiscal year budget in the amount of $16,483, the amount necessary to fund this contract. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Lanterman Developmental Center has provided litter abatement services in the City of Diamond Bar for the past five years. Staff has found their efforts to be responsive and flexible to meet the needs of the community. Areas that will be serviced by Lanterman Developmental Center under the terms of this contract extension are known to accumulate litter more rapidly than other areas of the community. The weed control is in areas of the public right-of-way that are not serviced by any other contractor. The services provided by this contact result in a more aesthetically pleasing community. Litter abatement is proposed to be completed three times per month and weed abatement, once per month. The frequency of these services is expected to provide clean, vegetation free right-of-way in the areas of service. Flexibility in the contract allows as -needed work in other areas of Diamond Bar if an emergency arises. Emergency work is completed as a temporary replacement for scheduled locations and therefore is provided at no additional cost to the City of Diamond Bar. PREPARED BY: Bob Rose Community Services Director RECEIVED NS/10 oy.Ny 7145951221 COMMUNITY INDUSTRIES 676 P02 MAY 10 195 08:45 City of Diamond Barr 2166C L Copley Drive, Suite 100 • Diammnd liar, CA 01?61 1" `� -• �_ (!0!� a6�FSi#li9 Fox (M) "I,ifi17 Phyllis l:: Papen Mayor Gary K. Wermer Mayor Pro —Iern Eileen FL Amari Counc-1 Member Qalr W, Harmany Council Member Cary Q MESer CDvndl Member Raqdd0qw May 9, 1995 Rick Dickerson Community ludaatrfes Laaan MIA Clevelapm64t 01MOOT 3330 Pomona Blvd, Pomon:, CA 917H RF: EXTF,11T5 OK 4F WEED/UrM ABATMUM CONTRACT Dear Mr. Dicicarwn: 'the City of Dianmd $ar is interasted in exwnding alta 'WWdli, Wr Abalemeni Ccmtra,-t with Unterman Developmental Conner from My 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996. 711e contewt will reattain the rAme mnourd as the 1994195 connect, $839.44 pct motub for llt�r abatement and $2,136.36 per four months fbr wv-d ' abaterawit ar a total coat of 416,483. Upon appl'oval of • this amtract extension by Diamond Bran City cotmil, a purrhtacs order in the arhmint not to excea-d $15.483. will be processed and fa mudw to yota. uiikOffIlly, Sob Diets, Dimtor Ccmrimunity 3orvitos 0rp4rtmmt By, opltg WOW, the p*' rdm a to the alboae ftrms. Mayor City of Dian= -d' 8- M,779 City Clerk Diane Whim DiLus Dimm of V=tionlrf 5arvlces Approved as to Forms Fiij—Attorney Date - CONTRACT PROPOSAL This proposal to the City of Diamond Bar is for the Community Industries program of Lanterman Developmental Center to provide litter and weed abatement, per attachments A and B, in the City of Diamond Bar. Community Industries will also provide: Transportation to and from job sites Insurance coverage for employees Payroll for employees Job Coach foremployees to assure supervision, training and lob performance per the expectation of the City of Diamond Bar. All necessary equipment and supplies to perform designated tasks. City of Diamond Bar will provide: Compensation to Community Industries at a rate of $839.44 per month for litter abatement and $2,136.38 per four (4) months for weed abatement. Invoice will be submitted monthly for litter abatement and per service rotation for weed abatement. The City of Diamond Bar reserves the right to change assigned work locations due to emergency need, on a mile for mile basis. Timothy Hagen, Director Community Industries Lanterman Development Center 3530 W Pomona Blvd Po ona, CA 91768 ccepted as proposed Terrence L. Belanger, 'ty Manager City of Diamond Bar STATE OF CALIFORNIA -DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES COMMUNITY INDUSTRIES A PROGRAM OF LANTERMAN DEVELOPMENTAL CENTER 3530 W POMONA BLVD POMONA, CA 91768 714) 595.1221 EXT 2177 ATTACHMENT "A" CURRENT DIAMOND BAR LITTER ABATEMENT 1. DIAMOND BAR BLVD: TEMPLE TO 60 FREEWAY MILES: WEST SIDE- 1.4; EAST SIDE- .7 PETE WILSON � .e 2. STEEP CANYON RD.: DIAMOND BAR BLVD TO CLEAR CREEK RD MILES: NORTH SIDE- .2 3. DIAMOND BAR BLVD. TO GOLD RUSH MILES: EAST SIDE - .7 4. GRAND AVE: 57 FREEWAY TO GOLDEN SPRINGS MILES: SOUTH SIDE- .2 5. GOLDEN SPRINGS: GRAND AVE TO BREA CYN RD MILES: NORTH SIDE- 1.9 6. BREA CNYN RD: PATHFINDER TO COLIMA MILES: EAST SIDE- .7; WEST SIDE- .9 7. BREA CNYN RD: PATHFINDER TO DIAMOND BAR CITY LIMITS (SILVER BULLET DR) MILES: EAST SIDE- 1.3; WEST SIDE- 1.5 S. GOLDEN SPRINGS/ARMITOS: 60 FRWY TO FIRE STATION MILES: EAST SIDE- .5 9. PROSPECTORS: DIAMOND BAR BLVD TO ROCK RIVER DR MILES: EAST SIDE- .3; WEST SIDE- .3 10. COLD SPRINGS: DIAMOND BAR BLVD EAST UP HILL MILES: SOUTH Ski DE- .1 11. SYCAMORE CANYON PARK: ALONG TRAIL IN UNDEVELOPED AREA. MILES: .1 $839.44 PER MONTH EACH AREA SERVICED THREE (3) TIMES PER MONTH ACCREDITED BY THE COMMISSION ON ACCREDITATION OF REHABILITATION FACILITIES PECEIVED 115/09 09:39 1995 AT 613117 PAGE Z (PRINTED PA6a Z) _ 7145951221 CSMMUNITY INDUSTRIES STATE OF CALIFORNIA—DEPARTMENT OF D"LOPMENTAL SERVICES COMMUNITY INDUSTRIES A PROGRAM OF LANTERMAN DEVELOPMENTAL CENTER 3530 W. POMONA BLVD_ POMONA, CA 41768 (714) 395.1221 EXT, 2177 "Attachment B" DIAMOND BAR WEED ABATEMENT JOB DESCRIPTION 668 P02 MAY 09 195 09:15 Perform general weed abatement and general landscaping maintenance in the fallowing ureas 1 tint monthly and other areas as requested performed during billable work hours. 1. Pantera Park - 830 Pantera to 752 Bow Creek 2. Loyland - along sidewalk - at Bonfield 3. Area between Summit Ridge Park & mini -park 4. Sycamore Canyon park Trail and undeveloped,area at Diamond Bar Blvd. 5. Flintgate Drive between Caibourn and Belbury 6. Maple Hill - outside Hills Club 7. Mountain Laurel - West Side of Diamond Bar Blvd. S. Golden Springs/Armitos - 613 fwy to Fire Station 9. Sunset Crossing - at Navajo Springs 10. Flintgate to Moscada on Walnut Drive - North side Compensation to be t29136.38T once every hour months to Community Industries. ACCREDITED BY THE COMMISSION ON ACCREDITATION OF REHABILITATION FACILITIES CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 REPORT DATE: May 11, 1995 FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director TITLE: REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURES FOR GENERAL PLAN SERVICES SUMMARY: The general plan budget allocation will soon be exhausted. Ongoing staff tasks and consultant services will require additional expenditures to complete the General Plan. The additional expenditures include five thousand dollars ($5,000) for Cotton/ Beland/ Associates and ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for other necessary services to complete the General Plan . RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize an additional expenditure of $15,000 toward completion of the General Plan. EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed N/A _ Yes _No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? MAJORITY 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? N/A _ Yes —No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? N/A _ Yes —No Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes _2L No Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: fb" crrence L. Belanger Frank M. Usher James DeStefano City Manager Assistant City Manager Community Development Director CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURES FOR GENERAL PLAN SERVICES RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize an additional expenditure of $15,000 toward completion of the General Plan. SUMMARY: The general plan budget allocation will soon be exhausted. Ongoing staff tasks and consultant services will require additional expenditures to complete of the General Plan. The additional expenditures include five thousand dollars ($5,000) for Cotton/ Beland/ Associates and ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for other necessary services to complete the General Plan. DISCUSSION: Since January, 1994, Cotton/ Beland/ Associates and City staff have been facilitating the development of the 1995 General Plan through General Plan Advisory Committee workshops, Planning Commission and City Council Public Hearings. The City Council directed the retention of Cotton/ Beland/ Associates to assist in the development of the General Plan. The Fiscal Year 1994-95 Budget contains $35,000 for the services of Cotton/ Beland/ Associates. In order to finalize the General Plan, an additional $5,000 is required. In addition to the Cotton/ Beland/ Associates services, there are additional expenditures and services that will be required to complete the General Plan. This includes printing, professional services, legal advertising and transcription services. An increase expenditure level of $10,000 is necessary for these remaining services. Approval of the $15,000 additional expenditure will bring the total Fiscal Year 1994-95 budget appropriation for General Plan services to $73,000. Prepared by: Kellee Fritzal Administrative Assistant CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT TO: Mayor and City Council MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager AGENDA NO. REPORT DATE: May 11, 1995 TITLE: 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 Dr. adjacent to the private gated community known as "The Country". SUNR4IARY: At the conclusion of the April 6, 1995 Joint Session with the Planning Commission, the Council referred the project to the Commission for comments. The Commission has completed their review and forwarded their comments back to the City Council for consideration. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council open the continued public hearing, receive a presentation from staff. receive public testimony and close the public hearing. Thereafter it is recommended that the City Council continue del iheracion and direct staff as appropriate. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification _ Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerks Office) X Other MEIR and VTM 47850 transmitted under separate cover. EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: The project applicant, Diamond Bar Associates. SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed _ Yes _ No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? X Yes _ No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? X Yes _ No Which Commission? Planning Commission 5. Are other departments affected by the report? X Yes _ No Report discussed with the following affected departments: Engineering REVIEWED 'Terrence L. Belanger Frank 1 Oer es DeStefano City Manager Assistant City Manager Community Development Director El CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 ISSUE STATEMENT: This matter requests approval of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850, a proposed 57 lot subdivision of a 73 acre site located on Steeplechase Lane, adjacent to "The Country", and within Significant Ecological Area No. 15. and certification of the draft Environmental Impact Report prepared to address the project impacts. BACKGROUND: At the conclusion of the April 6, 1995 Joint Session, the City Council continued the public hearing and referred the project to the Planning Commission for review and comments pursuant to Government Code Section 65857 and continued the public hearing to the May 16, 1995 regular session. The Planning Commission concluded their review of the project at the May 8, 1995 meeting. The Planning Commission had requested the additional time to the review the project because of a lack of familiarity with the project. The Commission forwarded an itemized list of questions via public testimony to the staff prior to the meeting. Staff prepared responses to the issues and responded to additional questions extended by the Commission At the conclusion of their review on May 8, 1995 the Commission transmitted all its comments to the City Council for its use and consideration, this includes all previously prepared project conditions and issues raised by the Commission ( 33 conditions of approval from the Community Development Department, the 52 conditions recommended by the Engineering Department and the five additional conditions recommended by the City Engineer via previously transmitted memorandum and the conditions contained within PC Resolution No. 91-23). The Commission additionally directed statf to forward the remaining concerns and comments expressed via their review of the project. Attached are the draft conditions of approval and comments from the Commission meeting in the form of draft minutes PREPARED BY: Robert Searcy Associate Planner Attachments: Draft Conditions of Approval Plapning Commission Staff Report Dated April 24, 1995 Draft Planning Commission Minutes For May 8, 1995 City Council Staff Report April 6, 1995 City Council Minutes for April 6, 1995 QaErrMt5UtE"75Uccnaso.COV 1 City of Diamond Bar PITEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council and Chairman and Planning Commissioners VIA: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development SUBJECT: DRAFT PROJECT CONDITIONS for VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 47850 DATE: April 4, 1995 On Thursday, April 6, 1995, the City Council will conduct a Joint Meeting with the Planning Commission and begin its reconsideration of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850. Attached please find draft project conditions as prepared by the staff. In addition for your use and information we have provided a copy of the Planning Commission Resolution No. 91-23 recommending approval of the project. JDS\mco attachments IDN= 16138 VTM 47850 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL April, 1995 A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: 1. This approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 shall not be effective for any purpose until a duly authorized representative of the applicant has filed with the Community Development Department an Affidavit of Acceptance, thereby accepting all the conditions of this approval which Affidavit shall be filed within 15 days of the date of approval. 2. In accordance with Government Code Section 66474.9(b)(1) and (2) and (e). The subdivider shall defend, indemnify and hold harrnless the City, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, an approval of the City, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37. Any condition imposed pursuant to this subdivision shall include the requirement that the City promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action, or proceeding and that the City cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action, or proceeding, or if the City fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. 3. 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 refuse hauler who has obtained a permit for such refuse hauling from the City of Diamond Bar. It shall be the applicant's obligation to insure that the waste hauler utilized is one which has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar. B. PLANNING REQUIREMENTS: That three (3) copies of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 presented at the public hearing and marked Exhibit "A" and conforming to such of the following conditions as can shown on a plan, shall be submitted to the C:IL TTERSIM47MCON Community Development Director. Thereafter, the 57 lot residential subdivision with one (1) common lot shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map. 2. The approval of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 is granted subject to the approval and certification of Master Environmental Impact Report No. 91-2. 3. That all requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and of the underlying zoning of the subject property must be complied with, unless otherwise set forth in the permit or shown on the approved plan. 4. The applicant shall satisfy the Park Obligation by contributing land acreage or the in -lieu fee to the City prior to recordation of the final map per code section 21.24.340. 5. Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) and Articles of Incorporation of Homeowner's Association are required and shall be provided to the Community Development Director and the City attorney for review and approval prior to recordation of the final map. A Homeowners Association (HOA) shall be created and responsibilities thereof shall be delineated within said the CC&R's: The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. 6. The project shall be designed so as to substantially comply with the CC&R's implemented by the adjacent development heretofore known as "The Country". The CC&R's should incorporate at a minimum, provisions which would establish a maintenance program for urban pollutant basins, and all mitigation measures within the Mitigation Monitoring Program, such that wildlife movement corridors are left in an undisturbed and natural state. The CC&R's will, to the fullest extent possible, be consistent with the CC&R's of "The Country". 7. A clause shall be incorporated into the CC&R's which requires disputes involving interpretation or application of the agreement (between private parties), to be referred to a neutral third party mediation service (name of service may be included) prior to any party initiating litigation in a court of competent jurisdiction. The cost of such mediation shall be borne equally by the parties. A lIomeowners Association (IIOA) shall created and responsibilitics thcroof shall be dclincated said CC&R's, such as maintcnancc of common arcus. 8. The applicant shall prepare and submit to the Community Development Director for approval prior to the sale of the first lot of the subdivision, a C:1ETTERT1 YTM47850. CON 2 "Buyers Awareness Package" which shall include, but not be limited to, information pertaining to geologic issues regarding the property, wildlife corridors, oak and walnut tree preservation issues, the existence and constraints pertaining to SEA No. 15 and Tonner Canyon, explanatory information pertaining to restrictions on use of properties as necessary and similar related matters. The applicant shall institute a program to include delivery of a copy of s4d the "Buyers Awareness Package" to each prospective purchaser and shall keep on file in the office of the applicant a receipt signed by each such prospective purchaser indicating that the prospective purchaser has received and read the information contained within the "Buyers Awareness Package'. The applicant shall incorporate within the CC&R's a reference to the availability of the "Buyers Awareness Package" and the fact that a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar. 9. The applicant shall obtain approval by County Sanitation on the location of the structures affecting County Sanitation easements and submit written evidence to the City prior to issuance of a grading permit. 10. The Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) outlined within Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR) No. 91-2 shall be submitted to and approved by the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of the grading permit. Should a conflict exist between the Conditions of Approval, the MMP as outlined in the MEIR- No. 91-2, and the SEATAC Final Report dated April 8, 1991, 964 the conflict will be presented to the Community Development Director for resolution. 11. Prior to approval of the final landscape plan the applicant shall demonstrate that the landscaping palette for the project emphasizes the use of drought tolerant, native plant species with low water requirements adapted to the inland Southern California climate. In order to limit the potential threat of wildland fires, low -fuel volume plants shall be incorporated into the revegetative plan. The final landscape plan shall substantially comply with the recommendations of the Final SEATAC Report, MEIR No. 91-2, and the preliminary landscape plan submitted and approved by the Planning Commission and marked Exhibit "A-1" and shall be submitted to the Community Development Director prior to issuance of any building permits. Indicate fence details, tree staking, soil preparation, planting details, an automatic irrigation system and the incorporation of xenotropic landscaping wherever feasible. 12. All irrigation equipment, slope planting and revegetated areas shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer or HOA until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that the planting, is in satisfactory condition. C: U.EMA51 YTNt7&W. CON 3 11ll� •1 /- � ; �Ii 13. Exterior grading and construction activities (framing and roofing, etc.) shall be restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday, except that interior building construction activities shall not be. limited. All construction equipment shall be properly muffled to reduce noise levels. 14. Transportation of equipment and materials and operation of heavy grading equipment shall also be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. All equipment staging areas shall be located on the subject property. Dust generated by construction activities shall be reduced by watering the soil prior to and during grading activities. Use of reclaimed water shall be used whenever possible. 15. Dust control mitigation measures shall comply with MM No. 91-2 and shall be included and enforced under the Mitigation Monitoring Program approved by the Community Development Director. Measures may include but not be limited to reducing dust by watering the soil prior to and during grading activities. Use of reclaimed water shall be used whenever possible. 16. The use authorized by this approval shall be commenced or construction necessary and incidental thereto shall be started on or before the time limit specified herein and thereafter diligently advanced on or before two (2) years after the expiration of the appeal period. A one year extension may be requested and granted. 17. The applicant shall pay development fees (including, but not limited to, Planning, Building and school fees) at the established rates, prior to issuance of Building or Grading Permits, as required by the Community Development and Public Works Directors. 19. Comply with all conditions of approval listed by the Engineering Dept. as exhibited on Exhibit "B-2." 19. Prior to any occupancy permit being granted, these conditions and all improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and City Engineer. 20. The applicant shall contribute a pro rata share for the study of Tonner Canyon and SEA No. 15. 21. All residences will be required to receive approval via the Development Review process by the Planning Commission or Community Development Director prior to issuance of building permits. 22. The owner shall make a bona fide application to Diamond Bar Country Estates Association to annex this subdivision to that Association. The owner shall be required to annex if all fees assessed by the Diamond Bar Country Estates C. VE77FRSI Y7V473SO. CON 4 IID 4/3/PS Association do not exceed the fees assessed per lot for annexation to the Diamond Bar Country Estates Association for Tract No. 47722. 23. All down drains and drainage channels shall be constructed in muted earth tones so as not to impart adverse visual impacts. Terrace drains shall follow land form slope configurations and shall not be placed in exposed positions. All down drains shall be hidden in swales diagonally or curvilinear across a slope face. 24. The applicant shall participate in an oak and walnut tree replacement program substantially conforming to the ratios and locations exhibited in MSIR No. 91- 2 prior to issuance of occupancy permits. 25. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the Los Angeles County code and so noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. 26. Prior to recordation or issuance of any permits, the applicant shall pay all environmental and development fees at the established rates as required. All Mitigation Monitoring Program fees to defray the cost of implementation and monitoring by City staff and consultants retained by the City, are to be deposited with the City prior to the issuance of building or grading permits and all costs related to the ongoing monitoring shall be secured by the City prior to Final Map approval. 27. The final map shall clearly delineate and dedicate to the City the right to prohibit the construction of buildings (or other structures) within those areas to be designated on the map as building restriction areas. 28. The location of the fences demarcating the construction rights prohibited area shall be clearly delineated on the final map. 29. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient improvement plans shall be completed beyond the phase boundaries to assure secondary access and drainage protection to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative map. 30. The use authorized by this approval shall be commenced or construction necessary and incidental thereto shall be started on or before two (2) years after the expiration of the appeal period. A one (1) year extension may be requested and granted. 31. Lot Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 15, 16, 17, 18, 34, 35, 36, 46, 47. 48 and 49 shall provide a minimum lot/street frontage of 60 feet at the property line, as C.UETn SIVTNf7MCON 5 defined in Title 22 of the City's Subdivision Code. All other lots shall have a minimum lot/street frontage of 125 feet. 32. All lots shall be constructed with a minimum pad size of 10,000 square feet. 33. In compliance with Section 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code, a qualified biologist shall determine the presence of any raptor nests prior to or concurrent with grading activities, the project applicant(s) shall contact the California Department of Fish and Game, shall obtain and comply with all appropriate procedures relative to grading operations in proximity to those nests, and shall provide verification of same to the City. J4 The applicant is to contribute $10.000 to the Los Angeles County Fire Department in lieu of providing an alternative location for the helipad on - Site. C: UXTTEiLSW Ml7M CON MEMORANDUM CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DATE: March 28, 1995 (Revised April 3, 1995) TO: Jim DeStefano, Community Development Director FROM: Mike Myer* yer Gorge Wentz, City Engineer SUBJECT: Vesting Tentative Tract Map N0.47850; Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions as Recommended By Planning Commission Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 41850 has been recommended for approval by the Planning Commission with conditions in accordance with its -Resolution 91-23 approved November 25, 1991. The City Engineer suggests modification of those conditions as follows. Deletions are shown with "strikeout" and additions in italics. SUBDIVISION 1. All easements existing prior to final map approval must be identified. If an easement is blanket or indeterminate in nature, a statement to that effect must be shown on the final map in lieu of showing its location. 2. Subdivider shall submit aA title report/guarantee and a subdivision guarantee showing all fee owners and interest holders must be submitted when a final map is submitted for pla-nmap check. This account with the title company must remain open until the final map is filed with the County Recorder. An updated title report/guarantee and subdivision guarantee must be submitted ten (10) working days prior to final map approval. 3. The dcvcloper subdivider shall submit to the City Engineer the total detail cost estimate of all off-site improvements, prior to approval of the final map. 4. The subdivider must submit recorded documents indicating that tithe project will have proper/adequate right -of -entry to the subject site via from the private streets within "The Country". 5. The tract shall be annexed to the Lighting and Landscape Maintenance Assessment District 38) and the City widc lighting diEtrict. 6. Street centerline monuments shall be set to mark the intersections of streets, intersections of streets with the Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.47850 March 28, 1995 (Rev 4/3/95) Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions Page 2 tract boundary and to mark either the beginning and end of curves or the points of intersection of tangents thereof, or other intermediate points to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. New centerline monument ties set as part of this subdivision must be approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with City Standards, and centerline monument tie notes shall be submitted to the City engineer prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Where subdivision boundary monuments are not found at the time of making the survey for the final map, nNew boundary monuments must be set in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, State law, the City Subdivision Code and City Standards and are subject to approval by the City Engineer prior to approval of building permits. 8. If any required public improvements have not been completed by the developer and accepted by the City prior to the approval of the final map, the dcvolopersubdivider shall enter into an subdivision agreement with the City to complete the improvements and shall post the appropriate security. 9. All site grading, landscaping, irrigation, street improvements, sewer, - water and storm drain improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval. 10. A detailed on cite lighting plan shay_ be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the iscusnco of building permit. Such plan ehall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of ehiclding, eo ae not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 11. Street names shall be submitted for City review and approval prior to approval of the final map. These names must not be duplicated existing street names within the City of Diamond Bar's postal service zip codes. 12. House numbering clearance is rcqu-rcd by the City Engineer, is required prior to approval of the final map issuance of building permits. 13. The detail drawings and construction notes shown on the submitted plans are conceptual only and the approval of this map does not constitute approval of these notes and details. GRADING, GEOLOGY & SOILS 14. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Ordinance fll (1990) .No. 7 (1992), Hillside Management Ordinance or as amended and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.47850 March 28, 1995 (Rev 413195) Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions Page 3 acceptable grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approvod grading pla4l- shown as a material part of the tentative map as approved. The maximum grade of driveways serving building pad areas shall be 15%. 15. h coils report shall be prcparcd by a qua_lificd cnginccr licensed by the State of California to perform cuoh work. 16. A geological report ehzll be prcparcd by a qualified cnginccr or geologist and cubmitted at the time of application for grading plan check. At the time of submittal of the 40 -scale grading plan for plan check, a detailed soils and geology report shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval. Said report shall be prepared.by a qualified engineer and/or geologist licensed by the State of California. The report shall address, but not be limited to, the following: (a) Stability analyses of daylight shear keys with a 1:1 projection from daylight to slide plane; projection plane shall have a minimum safety factor of 1.5. (b) All soils and geotechnical constraints (i.e., landslides., shear key locations, etc.) shall be.delineated in detail with respect to proposed building envelopes. Restricted use areas and .structural setbacks shall be considered and delineated prior to recordation of the final map. (c) Soil remediation measures shall be designed for a "worst case" geologic interpretation subject to verification in the field during grading. (d) The extent of any remedial grading into natural areas shall be clearly defined on the grading pians. (e) Areas of potential for debris flow shall be defined and proper remedial measures implemented as approved by the City Engineer. (f) Gross stability of all fill slopes shall be analyzed as part of geotechnical report, including remedial fill that replaces natural slope. (g) Stability of all proposed slopes shall be confirmed by analysis as approved by the City Engineer. (h) All geologic data including landslides and exploratory excavations must be shown on a consolidated geotechnical map using the 40 -scale final grading plan as a base. 17. Grading plan (24"x36") must be designed in compliance with recommendations of the soils and engineering geology reports. All remedial earthwork specified in the final report shall be incorporated into the plans. 18. Grading plan must be signed a: -,d stamped by a California registered Civil Engineer, Soils Engineer and registered Geologist. Vesting Tentative Tract Map NO.47850 March 28, 1995 (Rev 4/3/95) Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions Page 4 19. All identified flood and geologic hazards areas associated with this proposed development est which cannot be eliminated and restricted uec areas ac approvod by to the satisfaction of the City Engineer must be indicated on the final map as "Restricted Use Area". The subdivider shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit the erection of buildings or other structures within the restricted use areas on the final map. 20. As a custom -lot subdivision, the following requirements shall be met: a) Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all grading and on-site drainage facilities necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department City Engineer prior to final map approval and prior to the issuance of grading permits. b) Appropriate easements for safe disposal of drainage watcr flows that are conducted onto or over adjacent parcels, are,to be delineated and recorded shown on the final map to the -satisfaction of the City'e Public Works Department, Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. C) On-site drainage improvements, necessary for dewatering and protecting the subdivided properties from drainage flows, are to be installed prior to issuance of building permits for construction upon any parcel that may be subject to drainage flows entering, leaving, or occuring within a parcel :clativc to for which a building permit is requested. d) All slope banks in excess of five (5� feet in vertical height shall be seeded with native grasses or planted with ground cover for erosion control upon completion of grading or some other an alternative method of erosion control shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In addition, a permanent irrigation system shall be provided. 21. Completion and stabilization of all man-made slopes, removal of all landslide materials and .reconstruction of slopes must comply with the Los 11ngclec County City Building Code, all other provisions of this tentative map approval and Ordinances including those requirements for erosion protection and landscaping. 22. The geotechnical consultant of record, Harrington Geotechnical Engineering, Inc., must provide written confirmation of their acceptance of the geotechnical data and information provided previously by other consultants for the vesting tentative tracts which has been utilized or relied upon in preparation of their geotechnical reports. A further vesting Tentative Tract Map No.47850 March 28, 1995 (Rev 4/3/95) Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions Page 5 etatcmcnt is required accepting data and information in Lockwood Singh report dated Novcmbcr 3, 1989 for Tract 17851 and Lawmaster reporte dated July 13, 1987, May 25, and October 12, 1989 ac being valid and applicable to the current 100 ecalc vesting tentative tract mape dated September 19, 1991. 23. The following geotechnical issues must be addressed and approved by the City, prior to approval of the grading plan: a) Areas of potential for debris flow need to be defined and proper remedial measures recommended. b) Croes stability of a 150 foot high fill slope in Tract 47851 needs to be analyzed ac part of gcotcohnioal report. C) Stability of all proposed slopes must be confirmed by analysis. Unstable slopes shall be redesigned or stabilized utilizing slope reinforcement. d) All landslides must be shown on a consolidated geotechnical map. Specific remedial measures shall be implemented pursuant to requirements of Loc Angelos County City Code and Ordinances. e) Stability of back cuts (i.e. excavation of natural slopes) must be analyzed. ROAD 24. Street improvement plans (24"x36"), prepared by a registered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval. 25. Cul-de-sacs, in accordance with all applicable City Standards, must be constructed at the terminus ends of Hawkwood Road (public) and Steeplechase Lane (private). 26. Install street name signs at all intersections within the Tract. 27. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. vesting Tentative Tract Map No.47850 March 28, 1995 (Rev 4/3/95) Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions Page 6 28. Street improvement plans for all private streets shall be designed with a maximum slope grade of 12%, shall be provided for review and approval by the City Enginoer. Prior to any work being performed on the private streets, fees shall be paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required 29.. Construct base and pavement on all streets and access roads to pump station, and the emergency access road to southerly property line in accordance with the City approved soils report and City Standards. Vehicular access must be provided to all "Urban Pollutant Basins" with a minimum width of 15', with 12' of pavement and with a maximum clopo grade no greater than 20%. 30. Prior to approval of the final map, the developer shall contribute $8,550.00 towards the construction of sidewalk along the east side of Diamond Bar Boulevard across from the Country Hills Shopping Center. DRAINAGE 32. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval. All drainage facilities shall be installed designed and constructed as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with the County of Los Angeles Standards. Private (and future) easements for storm drain purposes shall be offered and shown. on the final map for dedication to the City. The private storm drain facilities shall be maintained by the homeowners association and this shall be assured through the CC&R's. 33. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk. 34. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient improvement plans shall be completed beyond the phase boundaries to assure secondary access and drainage protection to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative map. 35. Prior to placement of any dredged or fill material into any U.S.G.S. blue line stream bed, a 404 permit shall be obtained from the Army Corps of Engineers -muet rcvicw and approve such action subject to the provisions of nation wide permit for discharges of dredged or fill materials into water ways of the United States. Not withstanding a permit to place any .fill in the U.S.G.S. blue line stream bed a written permission from affected property owners must be obtained Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.47850 march 28, 1995 {Rev 4/3/95} Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions Page 7 prior to approval of the final map and issuance of a grading permit. An agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game shall be obtained and submitted to the City Engineer prior to approval of the final map and issuance of a grading permit. SEWER 36. Each dwelling unit shall be served by a separate sewer lateral which shall not cross any other lot lines. The sanitary sewer system serving the tract shall be connected to city sewer system.. Said system shall beof the size, grade and depth approved by the City Engineer, County Sanitation District and Los Angeles County Public Works Department, prior to approval of the final map. 37. The subdivider must obtain a sewer connection permit from the City and County Sanitation District. The subdivision must be annexed into the County Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District and appropriate easements for all sewer main lines and pump station must be provided and accepted by the Geunt-y eF Los Angeles p ib e+_Wor-ks Department City, r- riro with approval of the final map. 38. Prior to approval of the final map, the subdivider must conduct an engineering analysis to determine the capacity of sewer lines from the site to the County Sanitation District trunk line. If the system is found to be of insufficient capacity the problem must be resolved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 39. Subdivider, at his sole cost and expense, must construct the sewer system including the pump station in accordance with the City, Los Angeles County Public Work Department and County Sanitation District Standards. TRAFFIC 40. Q-4, - - r tO a! map app 1eBs, the e•+ yeiei herewith 41. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for approval in conformance with adopted policy. vesting Tentative Tract Map No.47850 .larch 28, 1995 (Rev 4/3/95) Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions Page 8 42. The b= id-eF sha11EepaEe t-_a€€is esetr-A! si . h e St T r f f' manual r.+- ' G �- o '� l 9f f i .+ a l e" � P- 43. Pavement striping, marking and street name signing shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 44. a1, dGw G -.,...,.. Az—D13a.vF3E�--$+�* vvQIPVard—ter:d e::avo.� oa= T r�,s 'siic-r 45. A - 3�i�eE$2vcf6�i-A€�}23E1Ai3� $&� $ALi�e•�T 'a •� n L1.f ' ..rlery..�A 46. An additional left -turn lane shall be striped and appropriate signs installed in the southbound direction at the intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road. 47. A stop sign shall be installed at the intersection of Wagon Train Lane and Steeplechase Lane. The stop sign shall be installed on Wagon Train along with fifty feet- of double yellow striping, Type D pavement markers, stop legend and limit line. 48. Stop signs shall be installed at the intersection of Steeplechase Lane and street "A", subject to the approval by the City Engineer. 49. Developer shall contribute $28,500.00 towards the installation of a traffic signal at intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Shadow Canyon Drive prior to approval of the final map. UTILITIES 50. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the respective utility companies standards. Easements shall be provided 'as required. All utilities shall be placed underground. 51. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary and placing them underground. Facilities within that easement owned by General Telephone Company shall be relocated as necessary to allow telephone company to relinquish its easement. Subdivider shall, at it's own expense, cause General Telephone Company to relinquish this easement. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.47850 March 28, 1995 (Rev 4/3/95) Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions Page 9 52. Prior to recordation of the final map, a written certification shall be submitted to the City from Walnut Valley Water District, GTE, SCE, SCG and Jones Intercable stating that adequate facilities are or will be, prior to issuance of building permits, available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to theCityand they have no objection to recording of the map. Such letter must be issued by the utility companyies at least 94 30 days prior to final map approval. RESOLUTION NO. 91-23 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 91-2 AND APPROVAL OF VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 47850, FOR A 57 LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN NORTHERN TONNER CANYON, WITHIN SEA N0. 15, SOUTHERLY AND EASTERLY OF STEEPLECHASE LANE AND WAGON TRAIN LANE, IN DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals• (i) Diamond Bar Associates, Inc., 3480 Torrance Blvd., Torrance, California, have heretofore filed an application for certification of a Master Environmental Impact Report and approval of a Vesting Tentative Tract Map, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution' referred to as "the application". (ii) On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was established as a duly organized municipal corporation of the State of California. On said date, pursuant to the requirements of the California Government Code Section 57376, Title 21 and 22, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted its Ordinance No. 1, thereby adopting the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City of Diamond Bar.. Title 21 and 22 of the Los Angeles County Code contains the Development Code of the County of Los Angeles now currently applicable to development -applications, in- cluding the subject application, within the City of Diamond Bar. (iii) Because of its recent incorporation, the City of Diamond Bar lacks an operative General Plan. Accordingly, action was taken on the subject application, as to consistency to the proposed General Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of California Government Code Section 65360. (iv) On September 23, 1991, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar concluded said public hearinguon1Novemberg25n the application an 1991. (v) .All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Plan- ninq Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that Allo thise facts set forth in e Part A, o Resolution are true and correct. 2. 3. 4. The City Planning Commission hereby finds that the an project has been required to prepare Environmental Impact Report in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines . promulgated mission thereunder, and further, this.Planning idered the information in has reviewed and cons reference to the application. Commission hereby specifically finds The Planning and determines that, based upon the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned uon the proposed project set forth in the app no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. Based on the substantial evidence above-referenced referenced public this Commission .during hearing on September 23, 1991, and concluded on November 25, 1991, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, and in conformance with the terms and provisions of California Government Code Sections 65360, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The project is located within SEA NO. 15 to lechase Lane and Wagonof Train the southeast of Steep e Lane adjacent community known eastern to the s 'The country". private g and b. The use is compatible with adjacent uses the is in compliance with the zoning Community General Plan, and the mitigation measures cited in the SEATAC Final Report and MEIR 91-2. C. The surrounding land uses to the north and lY west are single .residential and to thefamily nll south and east thelandis primarily vacant and natural. d. Granting the vesting tentative maps with conditions and restrictions hereinafter menticom- will not be the roposed General Plan;with any ponents of P The proposed site has adequate traffic access and said site is adequately served by other public or private service facilities which it requires, and; The location of the proposed land use does not adversely. affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons residing or working in the sur- rounding area, and will not be materially detri- mental to the use, enjoyment, or valuation of pro- perty of other persons located in the vicinity of the site, and will not jeopardize, endanger, or otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare. e. The City of Diamond Bar is presently reviewing its draft General Plan and the final General Plan is to be adopted within the statutory time period as extended. It is reasonably probable that the project and land uses proposed by the Applicant will be consistent with the final General Plan on the basis of comparison of the same with the draft General Plan and the comments generated in respect to the same. Given the development abutting and adjacent to the subject site, and the conditions and design standards applied to this project proposals, there is little or no' probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the finally adopted General Plan if the project is ultimately inconsistent with the General Plan. The project, as conditioned, is in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, policies and standards. f. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council review and certify that Environmental Impact Report No. EIR 91-2 has been completed in compliance with the California and Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, and, further, that the Planning Commission has revi and considered the information contained in said Environmental Impact Report No. E.I.R. 91-2. 5. Based on the findings thisset Commission 4 above,conclusions paragraphs 1, 2, , andand hereby recommends that the City Council approve the application subject to the restrictions and "B-1, conditions listed on the attached Exhibits B-2, and B-3" as to use. 6. The Planning Commission Secretary shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Transmit this recommendation to the City Clerk for submittal to the City Council. (c) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Reso- the address lution, to Diamond Bar Associates at as set forth on the application. DAY OF APPROGVCOMMIS ON OV DT HI CI H OF THOND BARVEMBER, 1991 BY THE PLANNIN 3 , BY: J ck Grothe, C airman ATTEST James DeStefanb, Secretary I, James Destefano, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolu- tion was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Com- mission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting• of the Planning Commission held on the 25th day. of November, 1991, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES• (COMMISSIONERS:] GROTHE, HAR*10NY, MACBRIDE, SCHEY NOES: [COMMISSIONERS:) ABSTAIN: [COMMISSIONERS:] ABSENT: (COM:iISSIONERSO LIN EXHIBIT B -1A. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPHENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 47850. 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved Vesting Tract Map and plans reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council as revised by these conditions of approval. 2. The approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 is granted subject to the approval of Hillside Management and Significant Ecological Area Conditional Use Permit/Oak Tree Permit No. 89- 582. 3. The approvals incorporate all mitigation measures and conditions listed within the SEATAC Final Report Dated April 8, 1991 and Master Environmental Impact Report No. 91-2. 4. A mitigation monitoring program outlined within MSIR 91-2 shall be prepared by the developer and submitted to the City for review and approval 30 days prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 5. Should a conflict exist between the conditions or mitigation measures outlined within the Master Environmental Impact Report, SEATAC Report on Project Conditions,. said conflict will be presented to the Director of Community Development for resolution. 6. The preparation of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of Homeowners' Association are required and are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions and the City Attorney.. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. 7. The project shall be designed so as to substantially comply with the CC&Rs implemented by the adjacent development heretofore known as "The Country". The CC&Rs should incorporate, at a minimum, provisions which would establish a maintenance program for the urban pollutant basins, and all mitigation measures within the SEATAC report, such that wildlife movement corridors are left in an undisturbed and natural state. en .y L r 9. Exterior construction activities (grading, framing, etc.) shall be restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday, except that interior All building constructionnstruction equipment shall activities shall be limited. be properly muffled to reduce noise levels. Transportation of equipment and materials and operation of heavy _ Transp a equipment shall also be limited to the hours of 7:00 grading 00 .m. All equipment staging areas shall be sited on a.m. to 5s p . Dust generated by construction activities the subject Propertysoil prior to during shall be reduced by water f d reclaimed water shall be used grading activities. Use whenever possible. ation plan, including slope 10. A detailed landscape and irrig shall be prepared by a planting and model home landscaping review and licensed landscape architect and submitted for City or prior to approval prior to the issuance of buildingtree staking, soil final map approval. Fence details, reparation, planting details and the automatic irrigation p oration of xenotropic landscaping shall be systems and the incorporation incorporated wherever feasible. 11 All down drains and drainage � iart adverse visual impacannes shall be t. 12. muted earth tones so as to no 1 2. All oak trees and walnut trees shall be replaced at the ratios and locations exhibited in E required to be preserved in place shall be 13. Existing trees so noted on the grading plans. The protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the os Angeles County Code, and reserved in place and new location of those trees to be p locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. 14. access from Tract 47850 shall be provided in Emergency secondary "Fire Protect accordance with on District Standards an requirement of the City Engineer.i all 15. Prior to issuance of any permits the applicant shall pay environmental and development fees at the established rates. for tracts 47850, 47851, and 48487 shall 16. The applicants 000 as their pro rata share for the Ecological contribute $20, er Canyon and SEA No. 15• Concept Study for Tonnbut not licant shall pay development fees and (including, incl d fees) at the 17. The aPP planning, Building, Park, Permits, as limited to, riot to iss required by uance of Building established the Community the Director. Street addresses shall be provided by the City Engineer after 18. ermits. tract map recordation and prior to issuance of building Permits - tract to hall be completed and approved prior 19. The f inal grading plans spermits. issuance of building hal shall clearly delin a nd dedicate to(oreo ity the rig 20. The final to prohibit the construction structures) within those areas to be designated on the map as building restriction areas. 21. The location of the s construction rig prohibited area shall be clearly delineated on the final map and the locations line clearly shown on the final map. 22. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient s shall be completed beyond the phase boundaries improvement plannd drainage to assure secondary accesEn aineer. Phase boundaries shall satisfaction of the City 9 roved tentative map. correspond to lot lines shown on the app CITY OF DIAMOND BAR I N T E R O F F I C E K E M O R A N D U M DATE: March 27, 1992 TO: Department of Community Development, Planning FROM: Department of Public Works, Engineering /XV SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAF N0.47850 DATE SEPTEMBER 19. 1991 Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 has been recommended for approval by the office of the City Engineer subject to the following conditions: SUBDI71SION 1. All easements existing prior to final map approval must be iature, is statement to that effectif an easement is lmust be shown oet or n the final inate in nature, a s map in lieu of its location. 2. A title report/guarantee showing all fee owners and interest holders must be submitted when a final map is submitted for plan check. This account must remain open until the final map is filed with the County Recorder. An updated title report/guarantee must be submitted ten (10) working days prior to final map approval. 3. The developer shall submit to s fcity all of fEngineer .site timprovementshe total t estimate for bonding purpose prior to approval of the final map. 4. The subdivider must submit fudocuments indicating that they will have proper/adequate right -of -entry ent rY to the subject site from the Country. 5. The tract shall be annexed to the Landscape Assessment District 38; and the City-wide lighting district. 6. New centerline ties set as part of this subdivision must be approved by the City Engineer, in accordance with City standards. 7. New boundary monuments muss broval b the City Engineers set in accordance with thCity standards and subject to pp Y 8. If any required public improvements have not been completed by the developer and accepted by the City prior to the approval of the final map, the developer shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the city and shall post the appropriate security. 9. All site grading, landscaping, irrigation, street improve- ments, sewer and storm drain improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to final map approval. 10. Street names shall be submitted for city review and approval prior to approval of the final map. These names must not be duplicated within the City of Diamond Bar's postal service zip codes. 11. House numbering clearance is requireby the city Engineer, prior to issuance of building permits. s shown on the 12. The detail drawings and conceptual tual only and thection eapproval of this submitted plans areP royal of these notes. map does not constitute -app GRADING GEOLOGY & SOILS of the subject property shall be in accordance with 13. Grading the Uniform Building Code, City g Gradin Ordinance #14-(1990) or as amended and acceptable grading Practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance: with the approved grading plan. 14. In preparation to construct the fill slope at section SG -SG', the stability of the slope on the landslide debrishe bentonite shear plane shall be accomplished by removing 15 . Creep -prone materials shall be s t b thick ized bbl h eco construction of of shear keys. Minimum 10 f ills are required to eliminate sshallbe cracks extending extended -through thee 1 land - surfaces. The shear key slide behind lots 42 and 43. 16. Grading plan (24"x36") must be designed in compliance with recommendations of the final detailed soils and engineering geology reports. 17. Grading plan must be signed and stamped by a registered Soils Engineer and registered Geologisk-. 18. All geologic hazards associated with the proposed development approved b mthe must be eliminated tn and indi indicated Son areas the f inal map. y The city Engineer y ht to prohibit subdivider shaof buildings orll dedicate to b other t uctures within the the erection restricted use areas. 19. All landslide debris shall be completely removed prior to fill placement. 20. From the preliminary data and analyses presented to date, the proposed project is feasible from a geotechnical point of view. At the time of application for a 4o -scale grading plan check, a detailed soils and geology report shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval and said =-port shall be prepared by a qualified engineer and/or geologist licensed by the state of California. The report shall contain, but not be limited to the following: a) .The locations and orientations (including the depth and extent) of the bentonite bed shall be delineated on a 40 - scale map and stability analyses shall be provided for further evaluation. b) Stability analysis of the daylight shear keys. For daylight shear keys, a 1:1 projection from daylight to slide plane shall be used in design and the projection plane shall have a minimum factor of safety of 1:1. c) All soils and geotechnical constraints (i.e., landslides, shear key location, etc.) shall be delineated in detail with respect to proposed building envelopes. Restricted use areas and structural setbacks shall be considered and delineated prior to recordation of the final map. 21. As a custom -lot subdivision, the following requirements shall be met: a) Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all. on-site drainage facilities necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department prior to final map approval and prior to the issuance of grading permits. b) Appropriate easements for safe disposal of drainage water that are conducted onto or over adjacent parcels, are to be delineated and recorded to the satisfaction of the City's Public Works Department, prior to issuance of grading permits. c) On-site drainage improvements, necessary for dewatering and protecting the subdivided properties, e tso for be installed prior to issuance of building per construction upon any parcel that may be subject to drainage flows entering, leaving, or within a parcel relative to which a building permit is requested. d) All slope banks in excess of five (5) feet in vertical height shall be seeded with native grasses or planted with ground cover, shrubs, and trees for erosion control upon completion grading o other alternative to tthe method of erosion cone shallbe completed .satisfaction of the City Engineer. In addition, a igation system shall be provided. permanent irr 22. Completion and stabilization of all man-made slopes, removal of all landslide materials and reconstruction of slopes must comply with -the Los Angeles County Building .Code and Ordinances including those requirements for erosion protection and landscaping. 23. The geotechnical consultant of record, Harrington Geotechnical Engineering, Inc., must provide written confirmation of their acceptance of the geotechnical data and information provided previously by other consultants for the tracts. A further statement is required accepting data and information in Lockwood -Singh report dated November 3, 1989. for Tract 47851 and Lawmaster reports dated July 13, 19871 May 25, and October 12, 1989 as being valid_and applicable to the current 100 - scale tract maps dated September 19, 1991. 24. The following geotechnical issues must be addressed and approved by the City, prior to approval of the grading plan: tL) Areas of potential for debris flow need to be defined and proper remedial measures recommended. b) Gross -stability of a 150 foot high fill slope in Tract _ T 47851 needs to be analyzed as part of geotechnical report. c) Stability of all proposed slopes must be confirmed by analysis. Unstable slopes shall be redesigned or stabilized utilizing slope reinforcement. d) All landslides must be shown on a consolidated geotechnical map. Specific remedial measures shall be implemented pursuant to requirements. of Los Angeles County Code and Ordinances. e) Stability of back cuts (i.e. excavation of natural slopes) must be analyzed. ROAD 25. Street improvement plans (2411x3611), prepared by a registered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the City hall be posted and an agreement executed Engineer. Security s to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval. 26. Cul-de-sacs, in accordance with all applicable City Standards and to the satisbe faction of the City Engineerand construc Zed at the terminus ends of Hawkwood Road (public) Steeplechase Lane (private). 27. Install street name signs at all intersections within the Tract. 28. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's office in addition to any other permits required. 29. Street improvement plans for all private streets with maximum slope of 12%, shall be provided for review and approval by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being performed on the private streets, fees shall be paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. 30. Construct base and pavement on all streets and access roads to pump station, 'and the emergency access road to southerly property line in - accordance with the City approved soils report and City Standards. Vehicular access must be provided to all "Urban Pollutant Basins"with a minimum width of 15', with 12' of pavement and with a maximum slope no greater than 20%. 31. Prior to approval of the final map, the developer shall contribute $8,550.00 towards the construction of sidewalk along the eastside of Diamond Bar Boulevard across from the Country Hills Shopping Center. DRAINAGE 32. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with the County of Los Angeles Standards. 33. Trees 'are prohibited within 5 feet of the utertside edge ofaaeter of mature any storm drain pipe neasured from the tree trunk. 34. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient improvement plans shall be completed beyond the phase boundaries to assure secondary access and drainage protection to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall, correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative map. 35. Prior to placement of any dredged or fill material into any U.S.G.S. blue line stream bed, the Army Corps of Engineers must review and approve such action subject to the provisions of nation into permit for ways of discharges Unitedd States.redged Not - materials withstanding a permit to place any fill in the U.S.G.S. blue line stream bed a written must be obtained prior to approval of mission to grade f rom affected property own the final map. SEWER unit shall be served by a separate sewer lateral 36. Each dwelling which shall not cross any other lot lines. The sanitary sewer system serving the tract shall be connected to city sewer system. Said system shall be of the size, grade and depth approved by the City Engineer, County Sanitation District and Los Angeles County Public Works Department, prior to approval of the final map. 37. The subdivider must obtain connection pe inion must from tbecity and County Sanitation District. T he into the County Consolidated o a all sewermain Sewer l nce linesDistrict and pump appropriate easementthe County of station must be provided and acceptedb to to approval of the Angeles Public Works Department, prior 'final map. 38. Prior to approval of the f incl map, the subdivider must Y conduct an engineering anal sis to determine the capacity of sewer lines from the site to the County Sanitation District trunk line. 39. Subdivider, at his sole thcost �ansin accordance with the e, must construct the sewer system including PlP station City, Los Angeles County Public Work Department and County Sanitation District St TRAFFIC 40. Traffic improvement plans prepared by a registered Traffic Engineer and signed by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and agreement executed to the satisfactieeing Of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guarant royal completion of etatedimprovements herewith.prior to final map app unless otherwise 41. Intersection line of sight designs shall be ce with adopted Policy- subdivider olicy wed by the City Engineer for conform traffic control signing and 42. The subdivider shall prepare striping plans in accordance ith requi approvaltof finalSmape of California Traffic Manual Prior 43. Pavement striping, marking ion of the city Engineerg and street name signinShall be installed to the satisfac 44. A separate right -turn lane shall be striped and appropriate signs installed in the northbound direction at the intersection of Diamond Bar -Boulevard and Shadow Canyon Drive. 45. A separate right -turn lane signs installed in the intersection of Diamond Bar shall be striped and appropriate southbound direction at the Boulevard and Pathfinder Road. 46. An additional left -turn lane shall be striped and appropriate signs installed in the southbound direction at the intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road. 47. A stop sign shall be installed at the intersection of Wagon Train Lane and Steeplechase Lane. The.stop sign shall be installed on Wagon Train along with fifty feet of double yellow striping, Type D pavement markers, stop legend and limit line. 48. Stop signs shall be installed at the intersection of Steeplechase Lane and street "A", subject to the approval by the City Engineer. 49. Developer shall contribute $28,500.00 towards the installation of a traffic signal at intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Shadow Canyon Drive prior to approval of the final map. UTILITIES 50. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the respective utility companies standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 51. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 52. Prior to recordation of the final map, a written certification from Walnut Valley Water District, GTE, SCE, SCG and Jones Intercable stating that adequate facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to the City. Such letter must be issued by the utility company at least 90 days prior to final map approval. MEMORANDUM City of Diamond Bar DATE: March 29, 1995. TO: Jim DeStefano, Community Development Director FROM: Mike Myers via: George Wentz, City Engineer SUBJECT: Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850; Recommended Changes to Engineering Conditions as Recommended By Planning Commission and Other Considerations Attached is memo of March 28, 1995 regarding recommended revisions to the Engineering Conditions as those conditions were approved by the Planning Commission at its November 25, 1991 meeting for the subject vesting tentative map. Following is discussion of other. issues related to Council approval of the vesting tentative map including suggested language for additional conditions. It is understood that all streets within the development are intended to be private streets with the lots extending to.the centerline of the streets. However, neither the tentative map nor the Planning Commission's recommended Conditions of Approval address this matter. It is recommended that the Council's approval of this map expressly include approval of private streets for this subdivision (except as shown on the tentative map as a public street dedication at the westerly terminus of Steeplechase). It is understood that street lights are not to be constructed within this subdivision. While §21.32.140 of the -Subdivision Code requires street lights, §21.32.150 provides that they may be waived if the Advisory Agency finds that they are not in keeping with the neighborhood pattern. The Planning Commission's resolution recommending approval does not address this matter. It is recommended that the Council's approval of this map expressly include a finding of "not in keeping and waive the requirement for street lights for this subdivision. Grading is shown offsite (westerly) and is critical to the development of the subdivision as shown on the tentative map. It is understood that the subdivider has obtained easements to grade from the affected owners. These easements should be provided for Staff's review prior to Council approval of this subdivision. Numerous easements of record are shown and referenced on the tentative map. Many of these easements would appear to Revisions to Planning Commission Conditions March 29, 1995 Other Considerations Re: VTTM No. 47850 Page 2 significantly affect the realization of clear buildable residential pad areas as shown. With respect to easements shown which were offered to the public (LA County), the City has the authority under §66499.20 1/2 of the subdivision Map Act to vacate such. These are generally those indicated on the tentative map as A, B and V. The notice of the public hearing for this map before the Council should clearly identify, as necessary to satisfy requirements for public notice and hearing on the matter, the Council's intention to vacate these easements and offers of easements. Private easements, however, cannot be addressed -in this manner. Unless these easements, many of which are for access and utility purposes along the same lines as the public easements and offers, are cleared from the property, they may subsequently affect the subdivided property owner's ability to utilize his lot. Recommend the following Condition be considered: On all lots where the effect of existing easements may reduce the usable building pad area to less than that shown on the tentative map, such easements shall be relocated or otherwise removed from the required building pad area to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and City Engineer prior to approval of the final map. It is suggested that Lot A (lift. station site) be conveyed in fee to the Homeowners Association. The City Engineer will require that an easement be dedicated over the necessary portion of this lot for sewer lines and a lift station purposes (also water lines). It is further suggested that the right to prohibit buildings and other structures on Lot A be dedicated to the City. Recommend the following Condition be considered: • Lot A shall be conveyed to the Homeowners Association and the owner shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit the erection of buildings and other structures thereon. It is recommended that the "Remainder Parcel" shown on the tentative map not be approved as such. This parcel does not have suitable access from existing or proposed streets. Recommend the following Condition be considered: • On the final map Lot 13, Lot 15 and/or Lot 16, as shown on tentative map, shall be modified to include the entirety of the "Remainder Parcel". It was noted in the public comments received in recirculating the Draft EIR that some were concerned about possible construction Revisions to Planning Commission Conditions March 29, 1995 Other Considerations Re: VTTM No. 47850 Page 3 traffic entering the project area public streets is possible to the the City Council desires to limit existing public streets leading t following addition to Condition 7 Exhibit B—lA) be considered. via Hawkwood. This access via westerly project boundary. If these short term impacts on the the project, recommend the (Planning Commission Resolution No construction equipment nor related construction traffic shall be permitted to enter the site from Hawkwood Drive. In considering recent tentative maps, the City Council has concerned itself with the matter of reclaimed water service to the subdivision. If the Council remains concerned about this matter, recommend the following Condition be considered: As reclaimed water supply is not currently available, Subdivider shall agree to design and construct, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Walnut Valley Water District, main and service lines capable of delivering reclaimed water to all portions of the subdivision and the system shall be designed to permit "switch over" of nondomestic services on each lot at such time a reclaimed water supply is available to the subdivision. Security shall be posted to guarantee the performance of this agreement. Subdivider shall install, prior to approval of final grading, a portion of the system consisting of main and service lines capable of delivering reclaimed water to those portions of the subdivision for which the homeowners association is responsible for irrigation and/or .landscape maintenance. This portion installed shall provide for switchover from domestic service to reclaimed service at such time as it is available. MEMORANDUM City of Diamond Bar DATE: March 31, 1995 TO: Jim DeStefano, Community Development Director FROM: Mike Myers Via: George Wentz, City Engineer SUBJECT : Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850; Additional Recommended Condition In addition to those issues and additional conditions contained in my memo of March 29, 1995, consider the following. Regarding grading offsite westerly: The March 29 memo (page 1, 4th paragraph) discussed the necessity for Staff to review those "easements to grade" that the subdivider had previously obtained for that grading work proposed offsite westerly. The subdivider has submitted copies of those recorded documents granting permission for J.C.C.-Diamond Bar to grade as obtained from the owners of those affected properties, except for permission from the owner of Lot 1 of Tract No. 33602. These documents suffice as necessary to permit the grading offsite. However, applicant must provide similar document relating to Lot 1 of Tract No. 33602. An additional issue has been raised regarding the future repair and maintenance of the storm drain pipes and inlets which are also an integral part of the necessary grading in this area and which are outside the boundaries of the subdivision. These letters of permission "for the purposes of grading" (which reasonably also includes the construction of drain pipes and inlets) may be consider as granting of a "temporary" right and therefor terminate when the work is completed. Consideration must be made for the ongoing, long term maintenance that is necessary to keep these pipes and inlets functioning properly. The HOA will be responsible to provide for the maintenance of storm drains throughout the subdivision and the requirement to maintain these facilities outside the limits of the subdivision can be included within this responsibility. However, there are no present provisions to assure that the HOA will have or can obtain the necessary access to these pipes and :n}.ets to perform this maintenance and repair. it is recommended that the following condition be included: Prior to approval of the grading plan and final map, Subdivider shall submit permission to grade from all affected property owners outside the boundaries of the subdivision and shall submit documents granting necessary easements for maintenance and repair of inlets and storm drains to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: REPORT DATE: MEETING DATE: CASEXILE NUMBER: APPLICATION REQUEST: PROPERTY LOCATION: APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: BACKGROUND: City of Diamond Bar PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report 7.1 April 19, 1995 April 24, 1995 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 The project is a request for approval of a Vesting Tentative Tract Map and related approvals including a Hillside Management Conditional Use Permit and Oak Tree Permit for development of 57 lots for custom home development within the area adjacent to "The Country". The project is located in northern Tonner Canyon, south of Steeplechase Drive and south of Windmill Drive. Diamond Bar Associates 3480 Torrance Blvd., Ste. 300 Torrance, CA. SAME This project has been referred back to the Planning Commission at the direction of the City Council pursuant to the action taken at the conclusion of the joint session held on April 6, 1995. The Planning Commission expressed the desire for further information to provide clarification on issues and perceived inconsistencies related to development of the project. The Planning Commission cited a lack of familiarity with the project, as there are no current members from the 1992 Commission that approved the project. The Commission forwarded an itemized list of questions via public testimony to staff for responses. Staff has compiled answers to the expressed issues as attachments to this overview. 1 History The project was reviewed by the Planning Commission in a series of public hearings beginning in September of 1991. At the October 28, 1991 Planning Commission hearing, testimony was taken from the public, staff and the applicant. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Commission directed staff to prepare Resolutions of Approval and to amend the draft conditions of approval to most notably preserve an additional 7 oak trees in the western most canyon. The project was returned to the Commission on the November 25, 1991. The Commission took action to certify the Master Environmental Impact Report for the purpose of approving the hillside development/SEA Conditional Use Permits and Oak Tree Permits and to recommend approval of the VTM 47850, 47851, and 48487 in addition to the Certification of the Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR). The City Council began deliberation on the project in January of 1992 concluding after a series of public hearing over several months. In June of 1992 the Council certified the lvIEIR and approved VTM 47851 and VTM 48487 as recommended by the Planning Commission. Several issues arose out of the public hearing that focused on the geotechnical information on VTM 47850. The Council required the applicant to provide extensive information in order to respond to the questions. In November of 1992, the Council set a public hearing to deliberate on the project. The applicant had not provided the required information to respond to the plan check review questions in time for the public hearing and requested an extension of time to respond to the issues. The Council took action to deny the requested extension of time and additionally took action to deny the application without prejudice. In doing so, the Council found that they could not approve the project without definitive information on the geotechnical issues but allowed the applicant to submit a new application for the project once the information had been gathered. Subsequently, the applicant filed a lawsuit to appeal the decision. The lawsuit was resolved when the City and the developer entered into an out of court settlement agreement. The settlement agreement required the City to re-initiate processing of the project commencing with a Joint Session to be conducted with the Planning Commission. In anticipation of the renewed processing, a revised environmental document was prepared. The revised document updated information related to air quality and biological resources, as regulations and standards have changed, and to the geotechnical information related to the 24 outstanding issues that served as the foundation for denial of the project. The revised draft MSIR was then circulated to responding agencies and for public review in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). At the conclusion of the Joint Session the City Council remanded the project back to the Planning Commission for review. Attached is the opinion of the City Attorney representative as to the scope of review available to the Commission as a part of this review as provided in the Settlement Agreement. In short, the Settle Agreement provided for the Commission's review of "... any other new matters or alternatives which the Joint Session deems appropriate" and did not preclude the Commission or Council's review in conformance with local ordinances or state statue. 2 APPLICATION ANALYSIS: Pro! ct Description Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 is a 73 acre site located in northern Tonner Canyon. The 57 lot subdivision is proposed for a site which currently developed with extensive oak and walnut woodland. This project contains the most valuable biota of the three tracts proposed for development. VTM 47850 contains significant walnut woodlands that cover approximately 34 acres contain almost 700 trees. Approximately 110 oak trees are primarily found within two stands comprising 2.5 acres. The trees located in the southwest portion of the tract have been identified to be protected and contain some of the oldest and healthiest trees on-site. Sixteen oak trees have been marked for removal as a part of this project. These oak trees will be replaced at a 4:1 ratio as will all walnut trees• removed as part of the project. The replacement trees have been grown from seeds collected on-site in order to ensure the continuation of the genetics of native plant community. The landscape plan for the project has been crafted to reproduce an environment that is compatible with remaining vegetation and natural habitat to be complementary with residential development and the mitigation measures recommended by the SEATAC. General Plan/Vesting The project was submitted and deemed complete in 1989 and is vested in the standards in effect at that time. The government code (section 65360) allows actions to be taken in the absence of a General Plan with approvals of the projects requiring the City to make findings of consistency with the future adopted General Plan. The map as proposed is consistent with the zoning classifications which traverse the site. Approximately 50 percent (35 acres) of the site is within the R-1-8,000 zone classification with the remainder of the project to be developed within the R-1-20,000 zone. The project proposes development of the site with a total of 57 units, although the total number units under the zoning entitlement for the R-1-8,000 acreage (net acres) would be approximately` 142 units. The applicant designed the project to conform to the 1 unit per acre density (RR/Rural Residential) classification proposed in the draft General Plan and the Community General Plan previously approved by the County of Los Angeles. If the most restrictive application of density, 1 unit per acre, were to be applied to the project, the project would be entitled to 72 units. The proposed density is .73 units per acre. The concept of clustered development has been utilized to maximize open space opportunities withi-; hillside projects throughout the City. The subject project does not cluster development in the sense that all of the proposed lots meet or exceed the minimum lot sizes required by the zone. T:-.; applicant has provided additional open space by simply reducing the density. The project as a who! conforms to the land use designation (RR) as proposed within the draft General Plan. 9 Issues Staff has responded to the questions related to geotechnical and environmental issues and has provided responses which are intended to resolve perceived inconsistencies. Staff and City's professional consultants have provided an itemization of responses that were generated by the comments made at the Joint Session. The ;eotechnical issues primarily revolve around soil stability and the calculations which were used to design the project. The design parameters and factor of safety for the site were calculated by using state of the art industry standards. The site has been designed to meet all design standards and the design has been reviewed and approved by the City. The site has extensively implemented conservative measures to account for worst case scenarios. For example, the site was designed as if materials such bentonite were found on-site. All sheer strength calculations were performed using lesser sheer strength values associated with this material. Additionally, the project will be overgraded with a 10 ft. blanket fill. The standard overfill depth is typically 3 ft. The environmental issues raised at the Joint Session reflect that staff needed to highlight the environmental documents that include technical appendices which supplement the presentation within the revised EIR. The primary issues staff identified as being raised are centrally related to the animals found or thought to be found on-site. All of the animals found on-site cannot be observed in the surveys that can be conducted on-site in a couple of visits therefore staff compiled lists of animals expected to be on-site or traverse the site based on historical surveys. The site may be used by certain animals at certain times but because,of the development surrounding the site on three sides, the value of the site as a primary corridor is negligible. The site does however provide limited habitat for certain animals that will be reduced as a part of the development of the site but the proximity of Tonner Canyon provides a viable area for relocation. RECONIlVIF.NNDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the project as submitted and direct staff as appropriate. PREPARED BY: Robert Searcy, Associate Planner ATTACBWNTS: Memorandum from City Engineer, Dated April 20, 1995 Leighton and Associates, Geotechnical Response to Citizen Comments, Dated April 19, 1995 Michael Brandman Associates, Response to City Council and Planning Commission Response to Comments, Dated April 20, 1995 Draft Conditions of Approval Memo from Robert Owen, Rutan & Tucker dated April 18, 1995 C:\LETTERS\REPORTS\VTM47850.STT MEMORANDUM CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DATE: April 20, 1995 "r 0: Jim DeStefano, Community Development Director FROM: Mike Myers VIA: George Wentz, City Engineer SUBJECT: Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850; Response to Public, City Council and Planning Commission Questions from the Joint Meeting of April 6, 1995 The following questions were noted from the Joint Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission held on April 6, 1995. In addition to the responses to these questions herein, the City's Geotechnical Consultant (Leighton and Associates) has prepared a written response to written questions submitted at that meeting by Mr. Wilbur Smith. Their response, dated April 29, 1995, is transmitted herewith. Question: Can the proposed fill in westerly canyon be eliminated if some lots are eliminated? And, more generally, can the extent of the area disturbed by grading be reduced by reducing the number of lots? Answer: Intuitively this is a very reasonable expectation. Certainly the earthwork necessary to create the landform for access and the building pads is reduced very directly with the size and extent of the project. However, the magnitude and necessary extent of remedial earthwork can only be determined by detailed analysis of a specific proposed project. No project other than that now proposed has been submitted for review. While it is reasonable to assume that a significantly reduced project would likely require less remedial earthwork and impact a smaller area it does not necessarily follow that a project half the size of that proposed would impact half the area; it may impact somewhat more than this. And there may be a project that could be designed in such a way to impact less. Question: Can the proposed canyon fill in westerly canyon be eliminated if that proposed adjacent shear key (parallel easterly on the westerly facing slope of this canyon) is constructed deeper? Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 April 20, 1995 Memorandum, Response to Questions Page 2 Answer: It may be possible to eliminate the presently proposed canyon fill by constructing a deeper and larger shear key along the slope. However, it is probable that the shear key "front -cut" would extend significantly further downslope toward the canyon into areas which are now shown to be undisturbed. Also, as the site presently balances and the amount of material in the proposed canyon fill may not be able to be accommodated elsewhere onsite, a significant earthwork imbalance might be created. Question: Has the Developer published any safety factors for individual lots or are safety factors cited for entire project? Answer: A safety factor (SF) is applicable in the analysis of an entire slope and is not lot dependent. To the extent that a single lot is supported by that slope the SF- is applicable to that lot. Question: How can burrowing animals be kept away from the site which -is immediately adjacent to the SEA? Answer: Burrowing animals are a concern where water is directed into the burrows which can then cause a detrimental effect on the surficial stability of slope faces. Animal burrows are not likely to be a conduit for water to depths that would cause a detrimental effect on the gross stability of the slopes. The manufactured slopes are immediately above the undisturbed natural slopes around the perimeter of the project and the natural slopes are all within an area to be dedicated to the HOA for slope maintenance purposes. Burrowing animal abatement programs are well understood and can be readily implemented by the homeowner. Such services are also available commercially. The control of burrowing animals will be required of the homeowner by the C,C & R's for this project. Question: How will a 10 feet "blanket" fill assure that water will not infiltrate from the surface into any of the lower natural joints and fissures. Answer: This is discussed in the City's Geotechnical Consultant's (Leighton and Associates) Response to Citizen (W ibur Smith) Comments dated April 19, 1995, Response Item C. Question: If proposed structure setbacks are varied, does this affect the geotechnical stability of the site? Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 April 20, 1995 Memorandum, Response to Questions Page 3 Answer: The geotechnical stability of this site is not affected by the location of residential or accessory structures or the setback of these structures from property lines. However, in addition to the structure set back requirements in the planning and zoning codes, the setback of structures and foundations to/from slopes (both top and bottom) is regulated by the Uniform Building Code (UBC). Question: Are "blue -line streams" affected by this project? Answer: Yes. Two intermittent "blueline" streams are within the project area (see EIR page 3.2-3). Only the westerly canyon (intermittent "blueline" stream) is affected by grading and the construction of drainage improvements. Question: Did the project Geotechnical Report analyze and make recommendations regarding post -construction fill settlement? Answer: No. On Tract 47851 (grading recently completed) the City Staff in analyzing the final geotechnical report required Subdivider's Geotechnical Engineer to monitor a deep (approximately 110') fill similar, but deeper, than that proposed for this subdivision. The City has not yet given final grading approval for those lots supported by that fill and will not until a longer period (perhaps an additional 3 months) of settlement monitoring is completed. The fill on this project (approximately 80') and any requirement for settlement monitoring will be handled in the same way. Question: Can the conditions of tentative map approval require an "as -graded" plan and report and include a requirement that elevations of "bottom excavations" be shown? Answer: Yes. Conditions may be included to require this, however, the City's standard General Grading Notes require a final report and as -graded geotechnical map prior to approval of final grading, therefore Staff did not recommend a condition of tentative map approval. Question: As different geotechnical conditions may be encountered during grading, can the conditions of tentative map approval require detailed geotechnical mapping be performed during grading operations and require that any different conditions discovered be re -analyzed? Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 • April 20, 1995 Memorandum, Response to Questions Page 4 Answer: Yes. Conditions may be included to require this, however the grading operation is subject to continuous supervision by the Subdivider's professional geotechnical consultants. The City's inspection will require that regular reports (daily, weekly and monthly) be filed by the Subdivider's geotechnical consultants. Given the requirements for a final report and as -graded geotechnical map (as noted above) Staff did not recommend a condition of tentative map approval. Question: Did Subdivider's geotechnical consultant analyze the safety factor of "back cuts"? Answer: Yes. Minimum factors of safety were in excess of 1.25 for these temporary slopes. This exceeds industry standards for these slope conditions that only exist for short periods of time during the construction process. Question: Can slope downdrains can be buried? Answer: Yes. However, buried pipes and associated inlets are more susceptible to clogging and therefore are a greater potential for creating conditions which could cause water to flow over the face of slopes. It is preferred, from maintenance standpoint, to have such drains on the surface, readily visible and easily accessible for cleaning. Question: How were the values for cohesion (C = 150) and friction angle (o = 15°) established? Answer: This is discussed in the City's Geotechnical Consultant's (Leighton and Associates) Response to Citizen (Wilbur Smith) Comments dated April 19, 1995, Response Comment Item F. Question: What were the values for cohesion (C) and friction angle (o) that were used in the adjacent development (Tracts No. 29053 and 32974, adjacent westerly)? Answer: C = 200 and o = 10°. This is discussed in the City's Geotechnical Consultant's (Leighton and Associates) Response to Citizen (Wilbur Smith) Comments dated April 19, 1995, Response Comment Item H. Question: Explain apparent contradiction in the project Geotechnical Report regarding report of no groundwater when Lawmaster Boring (DH -A-1) made in November, 1988 encountered seepage. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 . April 20, 1995 Memorandum, Response to Questions Page 4 Answer: Yes. Conditions may be included to require this, however the grading operation is subject to continuous supervision by the Subdivider's professional geotechnical consultants. The City's inspection will require that regular reports (daily, weekly and monthly) be filed by the Subdivider's geotechnical consultants. Given the requirements for a final report and as -graded geotechnical map (as noted above) Staff did not recommend a condition of tentative map approval. Question: Did Subdivider's geotechnical consultant analyze the safety factor of "back cuts"? Answer: Yes. Minimum factors of safety were in excess of 1.25 for these temporary slopes. This exceeds industry standards for these slope conditions that only exist for short periods of time during the construction process. Question: Can slope downdrains can be buried? Answer: Yes. However, buried pipes and associated inlets are more susceptible to clogging and therefore are a greater potential for creating conditions which could cause water to flow over the face of slopes. It is preferred, from maintenance standpoint, to have such drains on the surface, readily visible and easily accessible for cleaning. Question: How were the values for cohesion (C = 150) and friction angle (o = 15°) established? Answer: This is discussed in the City's Geotechnical Consultant's (Leighton and Associates) Response to Citizen (Wilbur Smith) Comments dated April 19, 1995, Response Comment Item F. Question: What were the values for cohesion (C) and friction angle (o) that were used in the adjacent development (Tracts No. 29053 and 32974, adjacent westerly)? Answer: C = 200 and o = 10°. This is discussed in the City's Geotechnical Consultant's (Leighton and Associates) Response to Citizen (Wilbur Smith) Comments dated April 19, 1995, Response Comment Item H. Question: Explain apparent contradiction in the project Geotechnical Report regarding report of no groundwater when Lawmaster Boring (DH -A-1) made in November, 1988 encountered seepage. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 April 20, 1995 Memorandum, Response to Questions Page 5 Answer: This is discussed in the City's Geotechnical Consultant's (Leighton and Associates) Response to Citizen (Wilbur Smith) Comments dated April 19, 1995, Response Item I. Question: Can the conditions of tentative map approval require rubberized asphalt paving? Answer: Yes. Conditions may be included to require this. Should the Council desire that rubberized asphalt concrete pavement be required in the construction of street improvements it is recommended that the Planning Commission recommended Conditions, Engineering (Road) No. 29 be modified by adding the words "rubberized asphalt concrete" before the word "pavement". Question: What are the impacts of this project on the Shebarum Trail? Answer: Grading of the project will erase portions of the present trail and on the lower portions of Lots 18, 19 and 20 make the present trail impassible. In the final mapping for Tract 47851 portions of the present actual trail were found to be outside of the present easement dedicated to the County of Los Angeles. The present easement was abandoned with the recording of the final map and concurrently an alignment was dedicated to the City that matched the physical alignment of the existing and in some areas realigned/regraded trail. Continuity of the trail through the project was maintained and a passable trail within the easement was established. These same issues are expected in the final mapping of this project and will be handled in the same way. Question: . What provisions have been made for the grading shown offsite westerly? Answer: Grading easements have been obtained from all affected properties and recorded by the subdivider. Additionally Staff has recommended that a specific condition regarding this issue be added to those conditions of tentative map approval previously recommended by the Planning Commission. Question: Can the design of drainage swales incorporate rocks? Answer: Yes. However, this will adversly affect the hydraulic capacity of any design. Also, this will create a greater potential for trapping debris and increasing the effort in maintaining these necessary drainage facilities. Michael Brandman Associates PLANNING • Rtsocxc1S �L1L'4.W .ALN1* April 20, 1995 MEMORANDUM TO: James De Stefano, City of Diamond Bar FROM: Tom Smith and Steve Nelson, Michael Brandman Associat aoll� SUBJECT: Responses to Comments on Revised Draft EIR for VIVI 47850 by Planning Commission and City Council at Meeting of April 6,1995 Michael Brandman Associates has prepared responses to the comments on the Revised Draft E1R (non -geotechnical comments) provided by members of the Diamond Bar Planning Commission and City Council at the April? 6 meeting. The Responses are organized to refer to the commentor's question, the page number of the April 6 meeting minutes wbcre the question occurs, followed by our response. Steve Nelson and I will attend the April 24 Planning Commission, and City Council meeting in May to provide additional explanations as requested. Planning Commission Comments ChairMamenbaum (page U): 1. What assurances does the City have that the natural flora and fauna will not be impacted by future residents? There are no absolute assurances that the City has in this regard. This situation exists throughout the City in existing developed areas. The CC&Rs for VIM 47850 could be revised to add a statement concerning this issue; the Homeowner's Association for the development could then handle any violations by residents. Will there be a mitigation monitoring program and if se, who will maintain and pay for the program? Yes, there is a mitigation monitoring program for YI'M 47850 as required by CEQA. A copy of the program was provided to the Planning Commission and City Council in the materials for the April 6 meeting. The applicant is responsible for paying for the implementation and monitoring of the program. 17310 Kod HE Irtiilll. I !NF ANGUh, I)ffCI) IM:RAMIN-t) $.�.NJost 3. Does the new Draft EIR consider the impact of the tan adjacent projects? Yes, the impact of the two adjacent projects (VTM 48457 and VIM, 4785 1) was considered in both the revised Draft EIR as well as the original EIR. In the current revised Draft EIR, the graded condition of VTM 47851 was considered as an impact to the natural environment; VTM 48487, although not graded presently, was assumed to be developed in the next 3-5 years, and its resulting impact on the natural environment, as described in the earlier certified EIR, was considered. From a cumulative impact standpoint with respect to the natural environment, the prior approvals of the adjacent projects committed this area to urban uses 4. 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? Because the Jerry Yeh development (TM 51169) is north of, and not contiguous to, this development, there is no impact on this tract from that project approval. 5. Regarding Volume I of the revised Draft EIR, page 7, Section 4.23, Mitigation Measures for Air Quality, are these the same mitigation measures that were used for the other recently completed projects and what were the results? Generally, the mitigation measures listed in this section are from the same source as air quality mitigations in other recent projects: the 1993 Air Quality Handbook, approved by the SCAQMD. Each project was evaluated using the procedures specified in this handboolq the mitigation measures listed in the revised Draft EIR are speed in the SCAQMD Handbook The EIR.s for previous projects have included similar mitigation measures, but not nec=riily identical to those for this project, since each project is unique. 6. Throughout the EIR there is no mention of cougars or bobcats; why did the video include a shot of a sleepy cougar? As is standard practice, the EIR text summarizes the findings contained in the Technical Biological Report provided in Appendix A of the document. Potential use of the site by mountain lions is discussed on Page A-22 of the technical report under the heading'V+'ddlife Movement Corridors'. As indicated in Table 2, Faunal Compendium of the techEcal report, mountains lions arc expected to be on the site sporadically, but was not observed during the field surveys. Similarly, discussions oa bobcats can be found in the technical report. Specifically, bobcats are mentioned on Pages A-6, A-22 and in the Faunal Compendium. Bobcats, while not observed, are expected to use the site in low numbers. 7. Are all of the animals pictured in the video at the site? All of the animals pictured in the video were either observed or are expected to use the site with varying degrees of regularity. ja%;& zz.tej 2 & The EIR makes mention of numerous animals, but it also avoids a number of animals. The BIR text represents an expanded summary of the technical report By referring to the Faunal Compendium of the technical report, the reader will see that numerous animals were observed or'are expected onsite. Cbair/Flamcnbaum (page 14): 9. 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. To clarify, the site may be, at best, part of a secondary corridor to and from the Tonner Canyon valley floor (see page 4-17 of the EIR and page A-22 of the technical report). However, it is more likely not to play a marked role in regional wildlife movement The impact of the project on regional ,wildlife movement is discussed on Page 4-20 of the EIR, and Pages A-27, 28 of the technical report. Implementation of the project is not expected to substantially prevent or inhibit wildlife movement in the Tonner Canyon area. 10. Inasmuch as the other tract maps are not considered in the FIR, what is the impact of the other improvements upon this site? The other tract maps are considered in the rcvised Draft EIR for VIM 47850 in Section 5, Cumulative Impacts. In that section, the cumulative impacts of the proposed project, when cowidcrcai in conjunction with 19 other recently approved or completed projects throughout the City, were considered for the three key environmental issues evaluated in this EIR: Geology, Air Quality, and Biological Resources. 11. If the setbacks for lots arc varied or not varied, does it have any significant impact in the EIR with regard to aesthetics and geology? Varying of the setbacks on lots (or not varying them) will have no impact on the geology of the site or the impact and mitigation discussion in the EIR. The building pads are designed to accommodate budding placement anywhere on the pad. From an aesthetic perspective, varying lot setbacks in a development can add visual interest when compared to repetition of identical setbacks. However, the differences are not significant on a development of this size and in this location that is visible to very few residents of the City. 12. The EER discusses mammals - raccoons and bobcats are not mentioned. Page 4-15, and all of Table 4-4 of the EIR summarizes the obsened or expected occurrence of 'Special Status Species on the Project Site". Raccoons and bobcats have no special status as defined in the biological assessment On pave 4-5 of the technical report provided in Appendix A, raccoon and bobcat are indicated as being expected onsite, although not observed. Bobcat is again mentioned on page A-22 of the technical report. The Faunal Compendium in the technical report indicates that raccoons are expected to be fairly common onsite and bobcat are expected in low numbers. To the bac of the author's knowledge, the EIR tent and technical report do not indicate that these species are not expected. is&=zIeA APR -29-1995 12:19 P.25 13. The EIR refers to no impact to the mule deer, however, it refers to a loss of a bedding arca Because mule deer are not afforded any special status, impacts to this species are addressed under the headings 'Direct Impacts to Wildlife" and "Impacts on Wildlife Movement" in the EIR In both cans, the analysis found that these impacts were less than significant. Due to the large open spaces and available habitats within Tonuer Canyon and further to the east and south of the site, the loss c. the site as a bedding area was not found to be significant for wide ranging, highly mobile mule deer populations in the area. 14. Where is the project site in relation to the boundaries of SEA #15? An overlay of the SEA #15 on the project site is needed. Such an overlay exlu'bit was displayed and discussed at the March 11 public meeting, and was available at the April 6 meeting. The exhibit will be discussed at the April 24 meeting of the Planning Commission. The technical report does discuss the project's potential impacts to SEA #15 on page A-23. Thesc include the potential for a decline in habitat value and the potential for genetic isolation of plant and wildlife populations caused by habitat fragmentation. In response to potential impacts on the resources within SEA #15, virtually all of the 31 mitigation measures outlined on pages 420 through 4-27 of the EIR address impacts to these resources. Based oa the comprehensive coverage of these measures, it is concluded that the proposed project will not result in any significant adverse impacts to biological resources. 14. WMt happens at the end of the 5 -year monitoring period for tree growth? The 5 -year monitoring period is a requirement used by the California Department and f=ish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in their mitigation programs. After 5 years, and with tree growth meeting the performance standards specified in the mitigation monitoring program, it is assumed that the trees will continue to prosper as they would in natural settings. At the conclusion of the 5 year period, the trees are the responsibility of the Homeowver's Association, as is all other common areas in the development. The City has no responsibility for their continuing maintenance. 16. What is the impact upon those trees and other native species caused by the runoff from the residents' lawns and washing of cars? There should be no impact on trees or other native species from car washing or lawn irrigation runoff from residents. Pads are graded to drain toward the streets of the development. Any runoff from tots will be conveyed to the storm system and to the water quality ponds designed to catch the first flush runoff from the development. 17, Are there any blue line streams in the area? As noted in the original EIR ccrtiCed for VTM 47551 and VTM 48;537 and applicable to the current revised Draft EIR for V111 47850, there is one blueUne stream that traverses the western edge of VTM 47850. Appropriate permits will be obtained by the applicant from the U.S. Almy Corps of Engineers and the Department of Ftsh and Game for impacts to this drainage, as noted in the revised draft EIR (pages 1-3 and 1-4). j;s,aw 4 M On page A-22 the EIR says that no wildlife movement was studied and in another section it status that there is a wildlife corridor. These statements ate in conflict. If a study is not conducted, how can the report determine there is no wildlife corridor? Page A-22 of the EIR states, in relevant part: "Wildlife movement through Tonner Canyon has not been studied in detail, to the best of MBA's knowledge. However, a review of aerial photographs and topographic maps indicates that Tonner Canyon is likely a primary corridor. The project site has limited importance for wildlife movement because the onsite drainages originate on the site near existing development and, therefore, only provide a connection with open space to the south in Toner Canyon.... -.Identification of wildlife corridors or bedding areas was determined by the observation of wildlife and scat, tracks, and other signs of wildlife activity. On the project site, it appears that mule deer use the site as a bedding area rather than a movement corridor --However, due to the development of the ridgeline, the site does not serve as a corridor by which wildlife move from one habitat area to another' As noted above, the site was evaluated with respect to its potential as it wildlife movement corridor and determined to not be one. It does appear that Tonner Can)�on is a wildlife movement corridor, although this has not been studied as part of the revised Draft EIR analysis. 19. On page A-25, the EIR states that the Catalina Mariposa Lily may be present. Is it or isn't it present? This page of the EIR notes- that focused studies were not conducted for specific sensitive plant species. To do so would have added considerable expense to the effort that was not warranted, in the opinion of the MBA biologists. Instead, a habitat analysis was used to predict the potential for the occurrence of sensitive sp--cies. While the Mariposa Lily was predicted to be potentially present onsite due to the presence of supportive habitat and site conditions, the EIR concluded that any impacts to the Mariposa Lily, if it were present, would not be considered significant because "the proposed project will not remove a significant amount of habitat for these species" (page A-25). Chair/Flamenbaum, page 15: 20. 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? As a point of clarification, the EIR does not state that trees shall not be planted on the hillsides. Mitigation measure 1(Walnut Woodlands) and measure 6 (Oak Woodlands) require the preparation of revegetation programs that will specify where the replacement trees will be located, and the specific requirements to ensure their long term survival. It is anticipated that some tree replacement will occur in slope maintenance areas, as long as appropriate woodland habitat is assured. The mitigation measures are intended to provide for replacement of habitat, not just trees. ju:dbarr2c.1eA City Council Comments Mayor Papen (page 19): 1. When does the developer's 5 -year trca maintenance program begin? Five year maintenance/monitoring programs begin upon completion of the installation of 80 trees and other elements of the mitigation monitoring program for biological resources impacted by site development 2 One of the alternatives in the EIR is that approidmately 15 homes would be built on the northeast corner. Concern was expressed 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? This altemative was originally dc: Final cnlxd in the nal EIR certified for VTM 48951 and VM 48487 and repeated in the revised draft EIR. The analysis of this alternative in the current ETR states (page 6-7) that although there would only be 15 residences built onsite, the same impacts to geological factors would occur as with the proposed project, because 'the onsite soil and geologic instabi litim on the entire site would need to be remediated". Although this alternative is therefore valid since geological stability ,of the lots would be achieved, the economic feasibility of such an alternative may be questionzbte. ia.s:db=a: +es LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechniwl and Environmental Engineering Consultants April 19, 1995 Project No. 2910164-60 To: City of D .amond Bar 21660 Eact Copley Drive, Suite 190 Diamond Bar, California 91765 Attention: Mr. George Wentz Subject: Geotechrical Response to Citizen Comments Regarding (Revision No. 2) Tract 47850, City of Diamond Bar, California In response to your request, we have reviewed the letter dated March 14, 1995 (Revision No. 2), by Mr. Wilber Smith which includes comments regarding the geotechnical issues within Tract 47850. Our responses are lettered sequentially, corresponding to Mr. Smith's comments A through R Mr. Smith's letter is attached. A. • This comment should be directed to the City Attorney. B. The geotechnical reports associated with the development of Tract 47850 have been reviewed by Leighton and Associates. During the review process, comments were prepared by Leighton and Associates regarding various aspects of the geotechnical report The review comments were subsequently responded to by the developer's geotechnical consultants, Harrington Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. Through an iterative process involving our review of the responses to our comments, preparation of additional review comments and subsequent responses to those comments by Harrington, all geotechnical issues were resolved. On August 23, 1994, Leighton approved Tract 47850 from a geotechnical standpoint (Leighton, 1994e). It is our opinion that the geotechnical issues associated with the development of Tract 47850 have been adequately addressed. C. The assumption that there will be no static ground water table or phreatic surface which would would create pore pressures within the subject slopes is a valid assumption. Shear keys, incorporating heel and back cut drains, will be constructed around the perimeter of the site which will effectively prevent the buildup of water. In addition, it is standard practice to overexcavate the lots located above slope stability shear keys or buttresses and replace the overexcavated material with compacted 61L The standard practice is to overexcavate the lots 3 feet This reduces the potential for surface water seeping directly into adverse bedding planes and/or adverse joints. Within Tract 47850, the lots above the shear keys will be overexcavated a minimum of 10 feet below finish grade; in excess of the standard practice. It is, however, possible that the materials onsite will undergo fluctuations in moisture content Strength parameters developed for the earth materials onsite, including the smectite layer, are based on saturated conditions. Thus, it is our opinion that the analyses performed to evaluate the stability of the site are appropriate. 659 BREA CANYON ROAD, SUITE 4, WALNU 1, CALIFORNIA U.S.A. 91789 (9091869-6382 a (800) 777.2286 FAX (909) 8696387 2910164-60 Douglas E Moran, Inc. performed laboratory testing of a representative sample of the smectite obtained during Harrington's field investigation. They were provided with the sample and performed the test Moran makes the following statements: "In using such parameters to represent the strength of the material tested, it is appropriate to recognize that shear strength is effectively reduced by pore water pressure which tends to neutralize confining pressure on which a significant portion of shear strength depends. This effect needs to be considered in an analysis of stability in which such parameters are used to represent material strength". Since Moran has never been to the site or reviewed the geologic and geotechnical data associated with the development, their comments must be viewed as general in nature. In fact, pore water was considered by Harrington. It was determined that pore water pressures would not be a factor. Furthermore, the shear strength parameters used by Harrington (150 psf cohesion and 15 degrees friction angle) in the analysis of slopes onsite are significantly less than those recommended by Moran. D. In order to mitigate the potential effect of downhill bedrock creep on the development, a series of daylight shear keys will be constructed around the perimeter of the development In effect, the creep effected material will be removed in the vicinity of the shear keys and replaced with compacted fill. To reduce the potential for water accumulating in the shear keys, drains have been incorporated in the design. Also, all lots will be capped with compacted fill to reduce the potential for surface water infiltration. In our opinion, these measures are state -of -the -practice and adequately address the drainage issues associated with stabilization of the slopes onsite. 1~ The City of Diamond Bar and the County of Los Angeles require. a minimum static factor of safety of 1.50 when analyzing the stability of permanent manufactured and natural slopes. This is also an industry standard. Tract 47850 has been designed such that all slopes meet the minimum required stability standards. Slope stability analyses are performed on cross-sections in areas where worst-case conditions exist. The results of the analyses are not lot dependent, but - reflect the minimum factor of safety for the slope analyzed F. As with most hillside developments, the most significant geotechnical issues with respect to the development of Tract 45850, are those associated with slope stability. The smectite layers onsite were considered by Harrington as the material which controlled the site stability. Harrington conducted numerous laboratory tests to determine the strength of this material, both in house and by others. Based on the results of their testing program, they established strength parameters for the smectite materiaL However, based on our review of the geologic units onsite and on our experience, we questioned (by review comment) whether other, weaker materials could be present onsite. After several discussions, Harrington agreed to reduce the strength parameters to those which they had originally assumed based on the assumption that the controlling material onsite was a weaker clay material. -2- O� IFIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES. INC Slope stability analyses were performed for the site utilizing the weaker strength parameters. Based on the analyses, shear keys were designed to stabilize the parameter slopes. The construction of drains within the shear keys and capping of lots with compacted fill are measures taken to reduce the potential for water buildup within the shear keys, as discussed in our response to Comment D. Bowing animals can have a detrimental effect on the surficial stability of slope faces. Burrowing animals tend to loosen the upper soil on the face of slopes which can result in soil slump type failures during periods of heavy r � I� very uect � c � �b�ryum" locaof the te on the building pad, within the fill cap, willonsite. The future homeowners, or the homeowner's association, should develop a slope maintenance program, one aspect of which should be the control of burrowing animals. G. See our response to Comment B, above. H. Considerable laboratory testing was performed by Harrington and others onsite to determine the shear strength of the earth materials onsite, including the smectite material. The final shear strength parameters utilized in slope stability analyses in Tract 47850 are Significantly M ee rrat n S. the laboratory test results indicate. Lower strength parameters were used by Associates, Inc. during their geotechnical review of Tracts 29053 and 32974 (Mendall, 1976). However, there are no reports by Medall on file with the City of Diamond Bar which support the use of the lower parameters with laboratory testing. In their October 4, 1976 report, Medall ' states, "The parameters c and * that appear in the above equation define the strength of the material that is present along the bedding plane under consideration. Since it is not possible to determine with certainty the values of these parameters for each and every bedding plane along which sliding might tend to occur, it is common practice to assume the worst, that the lowest values obtained are characteristic of each and every bedding plane. This assumption is generally conservative". Thus, it appears that the strength parameters used by Mendall were conservative i assumptions. L Seepage was encountered in the Lawmaster Boring DH -A-1, drilled November 21, 1988 (Plate C-45, Brandeman, 1995). The seepage, encountered at depth of 71 feet, was described as emanating from slightly open joints. This was ens minorperched ,�� P condition. ,�A-1 andic ground d TPA -2 water was encountered. Seepage was also (Plates C-11, C-47 and C-48, Brandeman, 1995). These latter three test pits were excavated in the bottom of, or adjacent to, active stream channels. We would anticipate water in these locations. This has no significance with respect to potential pore water pressure buildup and the stability of the slopes onsite. Thus, we do not see any contradiction to Harrington's conclusion that pore water pressure need not be included in the stability analysis of the slopes onsite. �' 1 •sem 1 L The burden placed upon the homeowners, or a homeowner's association within Tract 47850 is no greater than those put upon any other homeowners or homeowner's associations within a hillside residential development. It is common practice for the geotechnical consultant to recommend preventative measures to control burrowing animals, maintenance of proper drainage devices and landscaping, and prevention of excessive watering to reduce the potential for surficial slope instability and erosion. K The shear strength parameters used by Harrington, consisting of a cohesion of 150 psf and a friction angle of 15 degrees, are more conservative than zero cohesion and 22 degrees as recommended by Moran as a lower bound. L Harrington's conclusion that long-term creep may continue below the shear keys refers to the natural slopes downslope of the shear keys. Shear keys have been designed and recommendations provided by Harrington to mitigate the affects of long-term creep on the development Creep affected materials are being removed and replaced with compacted fill along the daylight cut and on the building pads. Severe seasonal moisture changes which can contribute to long-term creep in expansive soils can be controlled by proper landscaping, irrigation, and slope maintenance within the development M. No response from the geotechnical consultants required- If equired If you have any questions, please call us at your convenience. Q Respectfully submitted, IMGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. No. 46,222 g Exp.W3VW av>L David C. Smith, RCE 46222 of MLVd? Manager of Operations DCS/rsh Attachment: Appendix A - References Appendix B - better dated March 14, 1995 Distribution: (2) Addressee References Harrington Geotechnical Engineering, Inc., 199'1, Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation and Grading Plan Review, Vesting Tentative: Tract 47850, Diamond Bar, California, Project No. 91-01-0109B, dated September 3, 1.992 , 1993, Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation and Geotechnical Report Review Response, Vesting Tentative Tract 47850, Diamond Bar, California, Project No. 91- 01-0109B, dated April 28, 1993. 1994x, Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet for Vesting Tentative Tract 47850, Diamond Bar, California, dated May 17, 1994. , 1994b, Material Shearing Strength, Vesting Tentative Tract 47850, Diamond Bar, California, dated June 14, 1994. , 1994c, Revised Slope Stability Analyses for Vesting Tentative Tract 47850, Diamond Bar, California, Project No. 91-01-0109B, dated July 6, 1994. , 1994d, Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet for Vesting Tentative Tract 47850, Diamond Bar, California, Project No. 91-01-0109B, dated August 1, 1994. , 1994e, Response to Geotechnical Review Sheet for Vesting Tentative Tract 47850, Diamond Bar, California, dated August 16, 1994. Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1992, Geotechnical Review Sheet, Vesting Tentative Tract 47850, Report dated September 3, 1992, Diamond Bar, California, Project No. 291016419, dated October 29, 1992 , 1994a, Geotechnical Review Sheet, Tract 47850, Report dated April 28, 1993, Diamond Bar, California, Project No. 2910164-60, dated April 29, 1994. 1994b, Geotechnical Review Sheet, Tract 47850, Report dated June 14, 1994, Diamond Bar, California, Project No. 2910164-60, dated June 15, 1994. , 1994c, Geotechnical Review Sheet, Tract 47850, Reports dated September 3, 1992 and Revised October 16, 1992, April 28, 1993, and July 6, 1994, Diamond Bar, California, Project No. 2910164-60, dated July 21, 1994. 19944, Geotechnical Review Sheet, Tract 47850, Report dated August 1, 1994, Diamond Bar, California, Project No. 2910164-60, dated August 12, 1994. , 1994e, Geotechnical Review Sheet, Tract 47850, Report dated August 23, 1994, Project No. 2910164-60, dated August 23, 1994. A-1 APPENDIX A References (Cont'd.) 1994f, Geotechnical Response to Citizen Comments Regarding Tract 47850, City of Diamond Bar, California, dated March 23, 1995. Michael Brandeman Associates, 1995, Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report, Vesting Tentative Map 47850, (State Clearinghouse No. 90010861), Volume 11, dated January 1995. S.E. Medall & Associates, Inc., 1976, Soil Engineering and Geologic Review of Tentative Tract 29053 and Tract 32974, Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, California for Weatherfield Homes, dated October 4, 1976. , 1978a, Supplemental Subsurface Exploration, Tracts 29053, 34160 and 34161, Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, California for County of Los Angeles, W.O. 605D, dated March 7,197& , 1978b, Addendum Report for Tracts 29053, 34160 and 34161, County of Los Angeles, California for Weatherfield Homes, W.O.605D, dated May 5, 197& 1979, Rough Grade Report; Lots 48-100, Tract 34160, Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, California, W.O. 605D, dated February 1, 1979. A-2 Wilbur G. Smith 21630 Fairwind Lane Diamond Bar Ca. 91765 909-861-0742 March 14,1995 To: City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar Ca. 91765 Attn: Mayor P.Papen,City Council Members,J.DeStefano Subject: Vesting Tentative Track Map 47850 - Revision No.2 (ten new references,six additions to ATTACHMENT B, identification of additional conflicting statements) Ladies and Gentlemen: Information (Attachment A) suppilied by the Cities Community Development and Engineering Departments has been reviewed for the purposes of providing citizen comment at Public Hearings to be held on the Crystal Ridge Development (VTTM 47850) and its Draft Environmental Inpact Report (Ref.5). Attachment B presents my citizen comments on the subject that I will present at these hearings and requests for actions to be taken by the City Council before voting on approval of the VTTM 47850. Please include this letter with attachments A and B in the final documentation of the Public Hearincs. Thank You 0 V,,L�x/ Wilbur G. Smith lrV 11�.L Vr City of Diamond Bar, 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190, Diamond Bar, CA 9r!65 (909) 396-5676 C ty proP�y Owners within a 500 foot radius of subject site .OM: City of Diamond Bar . t to Stale Law, that the Ciry Council and Plaaaiag Commission wul conduct a joist public YnCE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pur n shall be roved under the provisions of State Law �g on the following item to determine whether or not the subjat request approved 3 the City of Diamond Bar- kTE AND TIlHE OF HEARING: Thursday, April 6, 1995 630 P.M. South Cant Air Quality Managemsat District Auditorium ,ACE OF BEARING: 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 'TRACT NUP NO.47856 and ENVIRONMENTAL WACT REPORT No' 92-1. �gJE�; yESTII�IG TENTATIVE roximately 73 2--•e site in the City of Diamond Bar. The a residential development on a EQUEST• .he aPPli=t proposes s appt 3i= _ amed ProjocL, if approved, would allow for the development of 57 custom at single-family resiro 9,391L 341 square feet to Zl 391 vposed , vary m 0.4,4 to 5.47 acres with an average lot size of 1.05 gross a=- Pad sizes will range mare feet. is 0.78 waits per gross acre- The project site will have two ams points from Steeplechase Lane and will verall project deasity • will haverly 47 a-res.�+illbe graded for the lotswith 16 ares iclwde an internal loop roadway system with four onsite cuMe-sacs• APP rded for a fuel modification zone. ty i 47850 was a component of a three ed Ves tract development consider y dee ity �o 992. mapa�M 4785 )t which snow being -entutive Tract Map Nos. 47851 and 48•+87. In November 1992 City to the mems of the California ,ansidered by the City and has been the subject of additional enviroameatal document:non, Pursuantw25 Ac.,. the City has determined that this project requires an Environmental 1==t Report (ETR). An E]R .vitonmeatal Quality ` zpartd for this project in 1991 (S CH Noect and conditiotis. The Revised . 90010861) and �� �u�t sc1� th the developmentf VTM 41850 _t bas bn prepared to assess the individual and collective d to establish mitigation measures for those impacts• a noticed was held Sublic asturday, March 11, 1995.bop designed to reidThe April 6, 995 scheduled forum for public input regarding the proposal and the Revised to cormrat upon the project. :blit hearing on the proposed development provides as additional opportunity Po t AFFLICA,mriOWNER: Diamond Bar Assocstates' near iates. Inc.oc• 3480 Torrent' Blvd. eTorrance, CA 905031« PROPERTY ADDRESS: Lane and 'fie project is located within 'The Country near the intersection of Steep Wagon Train Lane. Punlished in: Sea Gabriel Valley Tribune: March 24, 1995 Tom;; ;d Valley Daily Bulletin: Mar's 24. 1995 r v are unable to attend the public heating, but wish to send written coc�ea�, please write to the City of Diamond Bar l ou P - ais or for rsrther iriormation on this su�)� C.— mt;niry Develoom�t D'-pattaeat at t�.e addrss gives below. X96-Sb7t6w �` pi= -%c contact the Community Develov=tnt De?arttneat at (909) C �11e� /his i' 0�r /675 Chace °1°�°se f�o.le O T `S J (see re.erse for Site Map) ou may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone ese f lou challenge this application and project in court, y_ �`# �...rn_nnnr�P"!`P 4p1;Tpq_vA tn fhP rnmmimifvPPVPlnnment — ATTACHMENT A REFERENCES 1) Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation and Geotechnical Report Review Response for Subject Project, Dated April 28, 1994 by Harrington Geotechnical Engineering,Inc. 2) Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation and -Grading Plan Review, Dated October 16,1992 by Harrington Engineering Inc. 3) Geotechnical Review Sheet for VTTM 47850, Dated October 29, 1992 by Leighton & Associates Inc. 4) Compilation of Geotechnical Report Review Sheets and Responses for Vesting Tentative Track 47850 dated August 29,1994 by Harrington Geotechnical Engineering Inc. 5) Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report for Vesting i Tentative Map 47850 Vol 1 and 2 dated January 1995 by Michael Brandman Associates. 6) Case No. 71 16 84 filed in SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE of CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE; DATE 21 JUNE 1993. 7) Letter from DOUGLAS E.MORAN,INC to Harrington Geotechnical Engineering: Subject :Results of Shear Tests Performed Tentative Tract No.47850 ,dated April 14,1993. 8) Leighton and Associates letter to City of Diamond Bar: Subject: Tract Map No. 47851 dated August 2,1994. 9) Harrington Geotechnical Engineering,inc Report NO.91-01-0109A (Tract 47851) 10) Harrington Geotechnical Engineer_4ng,Inc. letter to B.Mazur of D.B.A. dated July 6,1994. 11) Harrington Geotechnical Engineering,Inc letter to B.Mazur of D.B.A. dated May 17,1994. 12) Addendum Report for Tracts 29053,34160,34161 for Weatherfield Homes by S.E.Mendall and Associates,Inc. dated May 5,1978 13) Supplemental Subsurface Exploration Tracts 29053,34160 and 34161 for Weatherfield Homes by S.E.Mendall and Associates,Inc. dated March 7,1978 14) Soils Engineering and Geologic Review of Tentative Tract 29053 and Tract 32974 for Weatherfield Homes by S.E.Mendall and Associates,Inc. dated Oct.4,1976 15) SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT between DIAMOND BAR CITY and D.B.A , No.16396-00002,F:\Doc\166\94030005.A10,dated 03-24-94 ATTACHMENT B COMMENTS and ACTIONS REQUESTED OF TEE CITY COUNCIL BEFORE APPROVAL OF TRACK 47850 A) Direct the city attorney to give a legal opinion on the liability (degree and time periods) of D.B.A., City of Diamond Bar, 3.C.C, and Leighton Associates for losses incurred by homeowners due to geologic hazards or errors in geotechnical calculations or assumptions. B) Reference 3 contains 24 specific questions that Leighton and Associates asked regarding Track 47850. These questions were elements in the law suite(Ref 6) filled by D.B.A against the city. D.B.A. responded to these questions in Reference 1. The city should now direct Leighton to make a definitive statement on each of the responses as to its adequacy and Leightons acceptance of the response. This request is consistent with the settlement agreement between The City OF DIAMOND BAR and D.B.A. (Ref. 15, section 2 Reconsideration of VTM 47845,page 3)which suspended the law suite. C) Stability analysis calculations are not adequate because they assume no groundwater and/or pore water pressure (Ref. 1 page 11}. This assumption is not valid because it is physically possible for water to reach the smectite layer. To support this,Section 4.4 (Analysis of the Smectite Layer),page 10 states "other factors such as different topography and/or ground water buildup must also have existed at the time of failure and contributed to the slides". A clear contradiction exists here. Page 11 states no water, whereas page 10 indicates the existence of ground water buildup in the past. Therefore the Council should require that all stability analysis and Factor of Safety calculations are made with assumptions of finite amounts of groundwater and/or pore water pressure.Supporting this opinion is the statement in Ref.7 (page 3)"In using such parameters (cohesion and angle) to represent the strength of the material tested it is appropriate to recognize that shear strength is effectively reduced by pore water pressure which tends to neutralize confining pressure on which a significant portion of shear strength depends -This effect needs to be considered in an analysis of stability in which such parameters are used to represent material strength." D) Another deficiency in the reports is that Reference 2 (page 10) identifies a condition of bedrock creep (to depth of 100 ft.) caused by 1) cyclic changes in moisture content and density due to seasonal wetting and drying, 2) water in tension/shrinkage cracks, ...., 4) deep-seated,very thin bentonite (smectite) bed. However,Ref.2 page 11 states " ground water was not encountered in any of the excavations made at the site and is not expected to be a matter of future concern to the project under normal conditions .It is not reasonable to assume that because water was not encountered in these excavations that in will not occur at some future time, especially since there is evidence (land slides) that water was there in the past. Also the NO GROUNDWATER statement is qualified by NORMAL CONDITIONS. the fortunes and lives of so many people certainly should consider abnormal conditions such as adverse weather (50-100 year rainy seasons), uncertainties in geologic parameters, human deficiences in workmanship etc.,etc. The city council should require D.B.A. to conduct an error analysis of the Factor of Safety and other stability analysis computations using reasonable uncertainties in all system parameters (presence/amount of water,efficiency of blacket fills, geologic parameters. etc.,etc.) E) The COUNTY BUILDING CODE requires slope Factors of Safety greater than 1.5. The references presented Factors of Safety values of 1.5051, 1.5039, 1.5011, 1.5133, 1.5218,1.5602 ,1..6092. These values indicate that the tract design is very marginal from the COUNTY Factor of Safety prespective. Small errors in the computational process,the data used or assumptions made could cause many of these values to be less than the requirement which means the project would not be safe by County standards. The City Council should require D.B.A. to conduct an error analysis of the Factor of Safety computational process . Also the Council should require D.B.A to publish the Factor of Safety for each lot. F) The most significant aspect of Track 47850 is the presence of a smectite layer which lies from 30 to 100 ft. below the surface.If water reaches this layer earth movement (landslides) could occur. Existing landslides are evidence of this . The developers approach to preventing this is to place 10 or 3 ft. earth blankets on each lot to prevent the infiltration of surface water down to the smectite layer. Ref.9(page 26) states "Most of the instability of existing slopes (landslides and downslope creep) are believed to be attributed,at least in part,to the infltration of surface water into the underlying bedrock. In order to minimize water infiltration we have recommended that all lots,pads and graded slopes be covered with at least ten feet of compacted fill." Unforunately the developer presents no analysis of the effectiveness of this measure. He strongly recommends that the homeowner eradicate burrowing animals (Ref.5 Vol II page E-5) or resort to impractical measures of filling the burrows with concrete (Ref.5 Vol II page E-6) because the burrows; in conjunction with the many faults,cracks,fractures and joints identified in Ref.5 (VOL II, plates C-1 thru C-58) provide easy passage for water to the smectite layer. The City Council should require D.B.A. to find pest control professionals who will state the degree to which burrowing animals can be controlled in areas that are adjecent to much larger wilderness areas (3500 acres of Tonner Canyon) where no attempt at control is made. Also D.B.A. should be required to access the effectiveness of the blanket fills in conjunction wit':, the many open cracks,fractures,joints and faults below the fills as a means of preventing water reaching the smectite layer. G) Before approval of VTTM 47850 require Leighton and Associates to write a letter stating approval of the geotechnical conditions as was done for VTTM 47851 (Ref.6). H) The low Factor of Safety values of 1.5051,1.5039,1.5011,1.5133 values (see Ref.10) were based upon cohesion values and angles c-- 150 : 150 and 15 degrees respectively. Reference 12 states "... smecti-.e these tracts .... layers of relatively weak material with significantly lower shear strenths are known to exist within other areas of the Puente Formation ... to date none have been identified within the limits of this project or the adjecent adjecent tracts to the east ....^. However, the soils reports (References 12,13,14) on the adjacent Weatherfield Homes Tracts to the southwest of 47850 used cohesion values and angles of 200 and 10 degrees respectively and identified the presence of bentonite. The use of these values for Tract 47850 could reduce the Factors of Safety to something considerable less than the County required values of 1.5. Please ask D.B.A. to calculate Factors of Safety using these values and Leighton to review the results. I) Ref -1 page 11 states "...the potential for groundwater buildup and/or pore water pressure buildup within confined smectite silt strata that could affect the stability of the site is extremely remote. As a result, the inclusion of groundwater and/or pore water buildup was not considered appropriate for inclusion in the stability analysis performed as part of this investigation. This conclusion is based in part on the following: * Groundwater was not incountered in any of the exploratc_•; borings drilled on the site ..." These statements are contradicted by plates C -11,C -45,C-47 and C in Ref.5 VOL II which shows water and/or seepage:Also Ref.7(page clearly states that pore water pressure should be considered (see statement C in this Attachment). Consideration of VTTM 47850 shc--:: not be continued until these contradictions are resolved. J) A heavy burden is placed upon the homneowner to prevent potentia': geotechnical/earth movement problems by the need to ; 1) eradicate burrowing animals 2) have proper drainage of water from the lot 3) having and maintaining landscapeing 4) prevent excessive watering 5) proper design and maintainence (no leaks or cracks) of pools or spas. The potential homeowner should be advized that failures in the above areas could result in serious earth movement problems because they are mechanisms whereby water can reach the smectite layers. R) Concerning shear strenth parameters, Ref.7 (page 3) states " Values on the order of 22 degrees and zero cohesion could be used as a conservative lower bound." Please ask Harrington to calculate Factors of Safety using these recommended values and Leighton to evaluate the results. L) The Conclusions. and Recommendations section Ref.2( page 17) states " Long-term creep which might continue below the shear key should be effectively mitigated up-slope because: 1) Surface water infiltration into any tension/shrinkage cracks which now exist will be essentially eliminated, 2) volume changes in the expansive materials resulting from seasonal moisture changes will be essentially eliminated,....". This is a THRUST ME STATEMENT because the document presents no evidence that either surface water infiltration or volume chances will be eliminated. The reality is that these can never be eliminated because they are controlled by the following characteristics of Nature laws of gravity b) Seasonal moisture changes are a result of weather. The only way to isolate expansive materials from the weather is to place it in a closed system such as a refrigerator,heater,thermos,etc.,etc. c) The tension/shrinkage cracks which are the means whereby water reaches the shear planes and causes the creep are continually being formed by the seasonal temperature changes resulting from weather. it is totally impossible to isloate this entire developement from the effects of nature or the weather. M) Reference 15 states "The Joint Session (City Council plus Planning Commission) may also consider VTM 47850 in light of the proposed General Plan". The General Plan requires a minimun of one (1) acre per dewelling unit . However VTM 47850 has lots as small as 0.43 acres. How will this difference be resolved ? C RECEIVED 93/31 15:02 1995 AT 613117 JCC DEVELOPMENT :D: MAR 31'95 14:28 No.010 ='.J2 Rob Searcy March 29, 1995 City of Diamond Bar Via Facsimile to (909) 881-3117 Re: Overview of 24 questionslcomments by Leighton & Associates and responses by Harrington Geotechnical, conceming Tract 47850 Geology S Solis Report of October, 1992 Dear Rob, This letter is written to provide the further detail and background which you requested concerning questions No. 5, 9 and 12. ted No. 5 -The intersection of two of the the801091c Cross historic landslide lons in the central by Harrington placed the ba (approximate 20 f!. discrepancy). canyon at slightly different elevations (app In response to Leighton's comment, �uratetecedfhearea Consistent y data reviewed. the noted, and revisions drawn which a Y P at the Intersection of the two cross-sections. Fill depth was also adjusted to reflect the correction. No. 9 -Remedial grading was than designed relyingfor on this ore area borin9 reflect provide data more conservative scenario, rather which might or might not excuse the need for same. No. 12 - The shear key for stabilization of the sewer pump station area Is a part of the remedial grading plan for the tract. DIAMOND BAR AS=IATES, INC. 3480 Torrance EM., Suite 301, Torrance, California 90503 Telephone (213) 540.3990 * FAX (213131 g-7133 " " -v- MAR 31'95 14:28 No.010 P,03 Mr. Rob Searcy, City of Diamond Bar 3-29-95, page 2 Please let me know if you would like further detail on any of the other questions. I've tried to strike a balance in this "translation" whereby laymen can understand the principals without having to spend a great deal Of time becoming educated in the details. We would of course be happy to provide more detailed information to anyone who is interested. Sincerel C � Kurt elson Diamond Bar Associates MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 8, 1996 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Flamenbaum called the meeting to order at 7:12 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; Associate Planner Robert Searcy; Assistant Planner Ann Lungu; Assistant City Attorney Michael Estrada; Consultant Engineer Mike Myers; Special Counsel Robert Owens; and Recording Secretary Carol Dennis. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: Lydia Plunk, Diamond Bar resident, respectfully requested that the Commission give due consideration to go beyond the legalities and consider the appearance of having the highest ethical standards in discussions and decisions. When a public official serves on the board of an organization which stands to benefit in value, in her opinion, the Commissioner should step down as a member of the Planning Commission and address the item as a private citizen. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Minutes of April 24, 1995. VC/Huff indicated the minutes should reflect the opening and closing of the public hearing for New Business Item Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382. May 8, 1995 Page 2 Planning Commission A motion was made by VC/Huff and seconded by C/Schad to approve the minutes as amended. The motion was approved 4-1 with the following roll call: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Huff, Schad, Fong, Meyer NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Flamenbaum ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None OLD BUSINESS: 1. vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 and Master Environmental Impact Report No. 91-2. A request for approval of a Vesting Tentative Tract Map and related approvals including a Hillside Management Conditional Use Permit and Oak Tree Permit for development of 57 lots for custom home development within the area adjacent to "The Country Estates". At the joint session on April 6, 1995, consideration of the project was continued before the Planning Commission for their review and comments. Applicant/Owner: Diamond Bar Associates, Inc., 3480 Torrance Boulevard 1301, Torrance, CA 90503 CDD/DeStefano stated that, during this meeting, the Planning Commission will be discussing Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850. In addition to staff, Tom Smith and Steve Nelson, Environmental Consultants from Michael Brandman and Associates and the developers team are present. Also present is Robert Owen, Special Legal Counsel, Rutan & Tucker, who was retained to provide the City with specific legal advice regarding this project. He further stated that since this is not a public hearing item, the Commission has the discretion to entertain public comments. Staff recommends that the Commission provide comments regarding the project which will be forwarded to the City Council for the May 16, 1995 public hearing. AP/Searcy stated that this project has been referred back to the Planning Commission at the direction of the City Council pursuant to the action taken at the conclusion of the Joint Session held on April 6, 1995. The Planning Commission expressed the desire for further information to provide clarification on issues and perceived inconsistencies related to development of the project. The Planning Commission cited a lack of familiarity with the project, as there are no current members from the 1992 Commission that approved the May 8, 1995 Page 3 Planning Commission project. The Commission forwarded an itemized list of questions via public testimony to staff for responses. Staff has compiled answers to the expressed issues as attachments to this overview. The project was reviewed by the Planning Commission in a series of public hearings beginning in September of 1991. At the October 28, 1991 Planning Commission hearing, the Commission directed staff to prepare Resolutions of Approval and to amend the draft conditions of approval to most notably preserve an additional seven (7) oak trees in the western most canyon. The project was returned to the Commission on November 25, 1991. The Commission took action to certify the Master Environmental Impact Report for the purpose of approving the hillside development/SEA Conditional Use Permits and Oak Tree Permits and to recommend approval of the VTM 47850, 47851, and 48487 in addition to the Certification of the Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR). The City Council began deliberation on the project in January, 1992 following a series of public hearings over several months. In June of 1992, the Council certified the MEIR and approved VTM 47851 and VTM 48487 as recommended by the Planning Commission. Several issues arose out of the public hearing that focused on the geotechnical information on VTM 47850. The Council required the applicant to provide extensive information in order to respond to the questions. In November of 1992, the Council set a public hearing to deliberate on the project. The applicant had not provided the required information to respond to the plan check review questions in time for the public hearing and requested an extension of time to respond to the issues. The Council took action to deny the requested extension of time and additionally took action to deny the application without prejudice. In so doing, the Council found that they could not approve the project without definitive information on the geotechnical issues and allowed the applicant to submit a new application for the project once the information had been gathered. Subsequently, the applicant filed a lawsuit to appeal the decision. The lawsuit was resolved when the City and the developer entered into an out of court settlement agreement. The settlement agreement required the City to re-initiate processing of the project commencing with a Joint Session to be conducted with the Planning Commission. AP/Searcy further RAFT May a, 199s Page 4 Planning Commission stated that the City Attorney's recommendation for following the settlement agreement is included in the Planning Commission packets. As a result of the April 6, 1995 joint session, the public hearing for this project has been set by the City Council for May 16, 1995. The Planning Commission's comments from tonight's meeting will be forwarded to the City Council for the public hearing session. AP/Searcy continued that this project is a 73 acre site located in Northern Tonner Canyon. The 57 lot subdivision is proposed for a site which currently developed with extensive oak and walnut woodland. This project contains the most valuable biota of the three tracts proposed for development. VTM 47850 contains significant walnut woodlands that cover approximately 34 acres contain almost 700 trees. Approximately 110 oak trees are primarily found within two stands comprising 2.5 acres. The trees located in the southwest portion of the tract have been identified to be protected and contain some of the oldest and healthiest trees on-site. Sixteen oak trees have been marked for removal as a part of this project. These oak trees will be replaced at a 4:1 ratio as will all walnut trees removed as part of the project. The replacement trees have been grown from seeds collected on-site in order to ensure the continuation of the genetics of native plant community. The landscape plan for the project has been crafted to reproduce an environment that is compatible with remaining vegetation and natural habitat to be complementary with residential development and the mitigation measures recommended by the SEATAC. The project was submitted and deemed complete in 1989 and is vested in the standards in effect at that time. The government code (section 65360) allows actions to be taken in the absence of a General Plan with approvals of the projects requiring the City to make findings of consistency with the future adopted General Plan. The map as proposed is consistent with the zoning classifications which traverse the site. Approximately 50 percent (35 acres) of the site is within the R-1-8,000 zone classification with the remainder of the project to be developed within the R-1-20,000 zone. The project proposes development of the site with a total of 57 units, although the May 8, 1995RA j Page 5 Planning Commission total number units under the zoning entitlement for the R-1- 8,000 acreage (net acres) would be approximately 142 units. The applicant designed the project to conform to the 1 unit per acre density (RR/Rural Residential) classification proposed in the draft General Plan and the Community General Plan previously approved by the County of Los Angeles. If the most restrictive application of density (1 unit per acre) were to be applied to the project, the project would be entitled to 72 units. The proposed density is .73 units per acre. The concept of clustered development has been utilized to maximize open space opportunities within hillside projects throughout the City. The subject project does not cluster development in the sense that all of the proposed lots meet or exceed the minimum lot sizes required by the zone. The applicant has provided additional open space by simply reducing the density. The project as a whole conforms to the land use designation RR as proposed within the Draft General Plan. The geotechnical issues primarily revolve around soil stability and the calculations which were used to design the project. The design parameters of this project meet or exceed state of the art factors of safety which are traditionally set at 1.5. The site has been designed to meet all design standards and the design has been reviewed and approved by the City. The site has extensively implemented conservative measures to account for worst case scenarios. For example, the site was designed as if materials such as bentonite were found on-site, although none has been identified. All shear strength calculations were performed using lesser shear strength values associated with this material. Additionally, the project will be overgraded with a 10 foot blanket fill. The standard overfill depth is typically three (3) feet. The environmental issues raised at the Joint Session reflect that staff needed to highlight the environmental documents that include technical appendices which supplement the presentation with the revised EIR. The primary issues staff identified as being raised are centrally related to the animals found or thought to be found on-site. All of the animals found on-site cannot be observed in the surveys that can be conducted on-site in a couple of visits. Therefore, staff compiled lists of animals expected to be on-site or traverse the site based on historical May a, 1996 Page 6 Planning commission surveys. The site may be used by certain animals at certain times but because of the development surrounding the site on three sides, the value of the site as a primary corridor is negligible. The site does, however, provide limited habitat for certain animals that will be reduced as a part of the development of the site but the proximity of Tonner Canyon provides a viable area for relocation. CDD/DeStefano reiterated that the - City's staff and consultants, as well as the developer consultants are present to assist the Planning Commission in its deliberation. The project has been returned to the City as a result of a settlement agreement. This matter was the focus of a Joint Session held by the City Council and the Planning Commission on April 6, 1995. The project was also the subject of a community -wide study session held March 11, 1995 to outline the project and related issues. The project is before the Planning Commission tonight as a result of City Council's direction requesting Planning Commission comments. Responding to C/Meyer and public comment by Lydia Plunk, CA/Owen stated that he agreed with the conclusion of the legal opinion from ICA/Montgomery that C/Schad may participate in any deliberations regarding this project. In response to VC/Huff, C/Schad asked that ICA/Montgomery's memo be entered into the record. It reads as follows: "The mayor has asked if Commissioner Schad is disqualified from voting on a zoning application, if the developer may decide to donate to the Tonner Canyon Wilderness Conservancy as part of its mitigation of the environmental impact. Based upon the documents that I have been provided with, the Tonner Canyon Wilderness Conservancy was incorporated effective April 30, 1992, by Commissioner Schad as sole incorporator as a tax exempt, charitable corporation, pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3). Paragraph V(A), of the articles of incorporation recites: "The property of this corporation is irrevocably dedicated to charitable purposes and no part of a net income or assets of the corporation shall every inure to the benefit of any director, trustee, member, or officer of this corporation, or to any private person", May 8, 1995 RAFT Page 7 Planning Commission and upon dissolution, the assets shall be distributed to a governmental or non-profit charitable entity (Subdivision B). The State of California issues a tax exemption to the Conservancy on October 20, 1992. The United States government issues its tax exemption on July 19, 1993. Commissioner Schad stated for the record at a public Planning Commission Meeting on June 13, 1994, that he does not, has never, and will not in the future, take any personal remuneration of any nature from the Conservancy. Based upon the foregoing, the Fair Political Practices Commission, on June 15, 1994, issues a telephonic opinion, that Commissioner Schad has no present financial or incompatibility conflict of interest, with respect to the Tonner Canyon Wilderness Conservancy, and pending applications, wherein the applicant retains the final decision as to which environmental preservation entity will receive the mitigation payments.,, C/Schad stated that he has never made a penny from this Conservancy. His goals, gains and enjoyment have been achieved by working with the children and assisting them in understanding and enjoying nature. He further stated he has run this Conservancy out of his own pocket and it has never made a cent. VC/Huff requested C/Schad to respond to whether the conditions in effect at the time are still in effect including the fact that there are no bylaws, directors or employees of the Conservancy. C/Schad responded that these facts or currently in effect. Responding to C/Meyer, AP/Searcy stated the recommendations from the staff are now before the Planning Commission for comment and recommendation to the City Council.' Mr. Owen, responding to C/Meyer, stated that, at this meeting, the Planning Commission cannot make a formal recommendation to approve or deny the project. This can only be done at a public hearing under the City's local subdivision ordinances and tonight's meeting is not a public hearing. May 8, 1995 Page 8 RAFT Planning commission C/Meyer recommended that the City Council be encouraged to determine whether it wants land or money as meeting the Quimby Act. In response to C/Meyer, CDD/DeStefano stated that the question of project reduction in relation to the amount of grading required had been addressed in the EIR. In addition, the project is consistent with the density provisions of the Draft General Plan being reviewed by the City Council on May 16, 1995. AP/Searcy stated, in response to C/Meyer that the common lot is the lift station to be given to the Homeowners Association for maintenance. C/Meyer asked if the street easements proposed for the project would affect the density projections, to which AP/Searcy responded that the project would still be in conformity with the proposed General Plan even if the easements for the streets are subtracted from the equation. In response to C/Meyer, AP/Searcy stated that the project must conform to the minimum 10,000 square foot building pad size. Regarding annexation to "The Country Estates", AP/Searcy stated that a provision of approval states that the developer must actively seek annexation. CDD/DeStefano stated that based upon the approval of the companion tract it is the City's expressed desire that this property become a part of "The Country Estates" Homeowners Association. However, the City Council did not specifically mandate annexation. The Council said that there shall be an application for annexation and a good faith effort toward annexation. The Council also indicated that the annexation fees should not exceed those fees which were paid by the developers of Tract No. 47722. Responding to Chair/Flamenbaum, CA/Owen stated that the City Council can make reasonable conditions on its approval. Often, with respect to s"bdivision maps, there is a requirement that a homeowners association be formed. Regarding this map, the matter is under consideration for the project to join an existing homeowners association. The City does not have the power to force the existing association to accept new development. However, as a condition of approval, the City Council can require that the developers of this project make their best efforts to annex to the existing homeowners association. May 8, 1995 Page 9 Planning Commission CDD/DeStefano, in response to C/Meyer, stated t ly f the "Buyer Awareness Package" was established app our years ago by the City of Diamond Bar for all new subdivision tracts. The idea of the package is to provide an additional means of information to the potential buyer of any given lot a within to tract of homes. For example, this project is adj ect of significant ecological area that has sensitive sp flora and fauna, predatory animals and a number of different items unique to the subdivision immediately adjacent to this project. The "Buyer Awareness Package" for this prermit thct ese indicate the type of fencing material that would p the types of animals to traverse the site. In addition, package would indicate the buyer needsto at aware and that there are animals present that may "eat y " the buyer food should not be left outside. Additionally, Y would also be advised that pesticides lconsideration should be and other chemicals which given toward the use of er might be hazardous to the immediate environment. He further stated that the package goes beyond that required by Department of Real Estate and is prepared by the developer and designed to be specific to the tract. The City must sign off on the package and sethe package her must be evidence that every buyer and potential buyer h Again responding to C/Meyer, CDD/DeStefano stated the application was submitted as a Vesting Tentative Tract Map in 1989. The City did not have a Hillside Management Ordinance of until October, 1990.the This Hillsidedevelop Management o ordinance er chose adopt Band the standards of were not incorporate them in their product even though they required to do so. C/Fong suggested that a reduction in density should result in a reduction of the amount of grading required. and C/Fong stated his concerns ofstaff's comments thatar strength ulower requested further explanation shear strengths were used in adjacent tracts. C/Fong recommended that the developer and consultant should state in writing their of Smect to and Bentonite and clarification of the actual element contained in the project site. C/Fong stated that the project should implement the spirit of the Hillside Management Ordinance. _ -DRAFT May 8, 1995 Page 10 Planning commission VC/Huff recommended that the sentence referring to fences on Page 2, Paragraph 2 under Wildlife Habitat of the Buyers Awareness Package" be changed to read: "No fences or other barriers can be constructed within these areas except for fences approved by the City of Diamond Bar." Chair/Flamenbaum requested clarification of the response to his question regarding planting of trees on the hillside. He stated the response indicated that the EIR does not state that trees shall not be planted on the hillsides. ' He read from the EIR as follows: "In general the planting of trees on slopes is not recommended since the individual root systems, although very deep, are limited in extent and the process of normal growth may loosen the soil and create channels for the ingress of water into the soils". Chair/Flamenbaum again requested to know what happens at the end of the five year monitoring program for tree growth. Responding to questions from the Commission, CE/Myers stated that the issue of reduction in density/grading is addressed in his memo to CDD/DeStefano dated April 20, 1995. He further stated that since there has been no five to fifteen lot proposal submitted to the City, he is not in a position to state conclusively, that a smaller project would involve less grading disturbance. With regard to the shear strength, CE/Myers stated that it is his understanding that the lower parameters used in analyzing the reports on the adjacent tract, there is no more information contained in the reports other than that those parameters were assumed. This project incorporates a body of work and tests which recommend higher parameters than are being used in the analysis. The applicant was pressed to stand by his earlier conservative assumptions in reviewing this project. cE/Myers asked for further clarification of C/Fong's concern for clarification of the definition of Smectite and Bentonite. In staff's opinion, the relevant information is being utilized in the geotechnical analysis and the definition of the material is academic. CE/Myers stated that the vesting status of this project map gives the City limited ability to require compliance with the Hillside ordinance. Staff feels that the applicant has RAFT May 8, 199s Page li Planning Commission attempted to comply with the Hillside Management Ordinance at the perimeter of the project. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the meeting open to public comments. Lydia Plunk stated that in her opinion, when dealing with a sensitive area the idea of donating property to a Conservancy is good. She requested that the Commission recommend to the Council that the criteria would assure that any property set aside would be used for the purposes stated in perpetuity and in good repair. Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public comment portion of the meeting closed. RECESS: Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 8:17 p.m. RECONVENE: Chair/Flamenbaum reconvened the meeting at 8:27 p.m. Kurt Nelson, Diamond Bar Associates, stated that as a result of conversations with CDD/DeStefano and the City Council, the "Buyer Awareness Package" originally prepared for Tract No. 47851 has been revised and upgraded for Tract No. 47850. He further stated that if the oak tree plantings have survived for five years they should have reached their full native state thereby allowing them to survive on their own from that point. The homeowners association that is being established will be charged with further custody beyond the five year program. Regarding annexation, Mr. Nelson stated that, as a result of recent discussions with the board of directors of "The Country Estates", an agreement is forthcoming. Diamond Bar Associates paid "The Country Estates" in excess of $300,000 in the mid 1980s in settlement of a legal action concerning the back country tracts which included Tract No. 47850. In addition to the lump sum payment the lots must pay $3000 for access rights as they are built out. There is an optional payment of $4,500 per lot that the owner must pay if they wish to avail themselves of "The Country Estates" recreational facilities. Mr. Nelson stated the applicant has offered to make the $4,500 mandatory for uniformity of annexation. In lieu of the $4,500, the applicant has offered to meet with the board of directors of "The Country Estates" to determine what figure would be agreeable. CRAFT May 8, 1995 Page 12 Planning Commission Mr. Nelson further stated that as a result of project alternative studies conducted in 1987, the EIR states that a 15 lot subdivision would not significantly lessen the remedial grading. Given the studies and the fact that the 57 lots were 50 percent of the allowable number of lots under the ordinances in effect at the time the map vested, no further consideration was given to a 15 lot subdivision. Mr. Nelson indicated that, in the spirit of the Hillside Management Ordinance, the tract was completely redesigned by Horst Shore in 1990. The project alternative before the Planning Commission is the result of a radical tract redesign by the engineering firm of Hunnsaker & Associates to accommodate a large portion of the Hillside Management Ordinance. Responding to VC/Huff, Tom Smith, Michael Brandman Associates, stated that the replacement- ratio for oak trees is 4:1 and for walnut trees is 2:1. The intent of the monitoring program is that at the end of the monitoring period there will be as many living trees as there were planted. Mr. Smith agreed that the wording could be clarified to indicate this outcome. Mr. Smith stated, in response to VC/Huff, that a condition of approval is that a specific mitigation plan is to be developed to determine where the buffer areas are in relation to other requirements such as, fuel modification, and biological restoration and habitat. There are a number of areas that are overlain by a number of different requirments. VC/Huff requested that the language be revised to limit the non-native plants to the pad. Referring to Page 28 of the Mitigation Monitoring Program, VC/Huff read that "all trash and manmade materials shall be removed from natural open space areas on a regular basis" and he asked to know who would remove the trash. Mr. Nelson responded that the homeowners association would have the authority to respond to such conditions. C/Schad commended the applit-ant for attempting to develop a project that is aesthetically balanced with the existing environment by gathering seeds for approximately 5,00o plants from the project site, and having nurseries develop plants that are indicative to the area. Again responding to C/Fong's concern regarding the reduction of the number of units for the project, CDD/DeStefano stated May 8, 1995 DRAFT Page 13 Planning Commission that the City Council retains full discretion with respect to approval or denial of this project and if the Council feels that it is appropriate to reduce the number of dwelling units, it has the authority to impose such conditions. C/Fong recommended that the number of building lots be reduced to 34 thereby, in his opinion, significantly reducing the amount of necessary remedial grading; that these lots be removed from the westerly and southerly portions of the property where the most complicated geotechnical problems exist; development should be confined to the easterly portion of the site in those areas most generally covered by lots 1 through 12, 27 through 36 and 45 to 57 where the geotechnical conditions are most favorable. A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by Chair/Flamenbaum to recommend that the City Council approve the project subject to the 33 conditions from the Community Development Department, the 52 conditions recommended by the City,s Engineering Department, the five (5) conditions recommended by CE/Myers in a memorandum dated March and addressed to the Community Development Director, the recommendations contained in Resolution No. 91-23, consideration of the Quimby Act, as well as other recommendations stated by the Planning Commissioners at this meeting. GENERAL COMMENTS: VC/Huff stated that, in his opinion, if a developer came before the Planning Commission today with this project he would be shown the door. The rights were granted to this project some time ago and yet, it has been returned to the Planning Commission for recommendations. He further stated that he has difficulty recommending this project because he does not like the standards under which project approval might be granted. The residents have been clearly stating they want more open space and less housing. In spite of the fact that development does not stop, it should be shaped to the needs of the City. He indicated he would like to see the project go back to the developer. The fact that the developer does not want to do a project of 34 units does not mean he cannot do it and still make a profit. He stated he believes there will be significant impact to the project site. In response to VC/Huff, C/Meyer commented that the Commission is dealing with standards that were set in 1988 and 1989. The applicant applied for the map and had it vested in 1989. The proposed density was over double of that now proposed. The project is consistent with the three draft general plans that the Commission has looked out. DRAFT May 8, 1995 Page 14 Planning Commission Special Counsel Robert Owen reminded the Commission they are free to make any recommendations they desire to the Council, but the Commission is not free to take a formal vote of approval or denial of the subdivision map, as is normally done for every subdivision map in the City, because it is not a noticed public hearing. C/Fong recommended that the shear keys be eliminated on lots 3, 4 and 5 to save the oak grove. C/Schad called for the question. C/Fong recommended that the Hillside Management Ordinance be implemented for this project. C/Fong recommended that the lots be staggered and that spaces be left between the lots. Chair/Flamenbaum restated the motion. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve all the conditions as presented by staff and transmit all comments and recommendations stated at this meeting tonight. The motion was approved 5-0. RECESS: Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 9:17 p.m. RECONVENE: Chair/Flamenbaum reconvened the meeting at 9:27 p.m. CDD/DeStefano introduced the new Assistant City Attorney, Mike Estrada, with the law firm of Richards, Watson & Gershon. NEW BUSINESS: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 95-1 and Development Review No. 95- 1. A request to amend Conditional Use Permit No. 1634(1) in order to approve construction of a two story sanctuary structure with a cellar and two temporary modular units; and to ensure compliance with applicable design standards. Property Location: 3255 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar Property Owner/Applicant: Evangelical Free Church of Diamond Bar, 3255 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar VC/Huff announced that he would be recusing himself from this agenda item and left the dais. CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: April 6, 1995 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 ISSUE STATEMENT: This matter requests approval of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850, the subdivision of a 73 acre site located adjacent to "The Country" in upper Tonner Canyon and within Significant Ecological Area No. 15. and certification of the draft Environmental Impact Report to prepared to address the project impacts. Purpose of the Joint Public Hearing: VTM 47850 was component of a Draft Master Environmental Impact Report prepared in 1991 to address three proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Maps No. 47850, 47851 and 48487. In May 1992 the City approved VTM 47851 and 48487. In November 1992 the City Council denied VTM 47850. A lawsuit fled by the applicant in 1993 and a Settlement Agreement was entered into in April 1994. In accordance with the Agreement the purpose of the Joint Session is to consider VTM 47850, the applicant's compliance with geotechnical concerns raised in October 1992 and any other matters deemed appropriate. The Planning'Commission recommended City Council approval of VTM 47850 in November 1991. BACKGROUND: Vesting Tentative Tract Map 47850 was initiated in 1989 by the applicant, Diamond Bar Associates, 3480 Torrance Blvd. Ste. 300, Torrance, CA. as a subdivision request with related applications for 57 lots proposed for custom home development. The subject map was one of three maps (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47851 and No. 48487) submitted encompassing 160 acres and proposing 120 units. Initial processing and review was completed by Regional Planning and the project was then transferred to the City of Diamond Bar. The project is located in northern Tonner Canyon and within Significant Ecological Area (SEA) No. 15. The application necessitated that a Conditional Use Permit be acquired in order to develop in the SEA and hillside areas and an oak tree permit to remove 16 oak trees. The proposed project was required to prepare a Master Environmental Impact Report (MSIR) as a result of the evaluation initial study. The MEIR addressed the impacts related to development of the three tract subdivision as one project with different components. The MEIR addressed the proposed project and the Preferred Alternative which became the project of record. The preferred design alternative featured the incorporation of contour and landform grading whereas the initial project exhibited conventional grading techniques. Additionally, the project reflected measures identified by the Significant Ecological Area Technical Advisory Committee (SEATAC) to reduce the impacts germane to residential development in an SEA and in response to the City adopting a Hillside Management Ordinance (Ord. No. 14, 1990) which mandated grading techniques more aesthetically pleasing and favorable to hillside development. The project was reviewed by the Planning Commission in a series of public hearings beginning in September of 1991. At the October 28, 1991 Planning Commission hearing, testimony was taken from the public, staff and the applicant. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Commission directed staff to prepare Resolutions of Approval and to amend the draft conditions of approval to most notably preserve an additional 7 oak trees in the western most canyon. The project was returned to the Commission on the November 25, 1991. The Commission took action to certify the Master Environmental Impact Report for the purpose of approving the hillside development/SEA CUP's and oak tree permits and to recommend approval of the VTM 47850, 47851, and 48487 in addition to Certification of the MEIR. c:UErrERSWP0RrsIVM47 W-cov 1 pub ic The City Council began deliberation on the project in January of 1992 concluding fter a series f and 1VTMa48481over several months. In June of 1992 the Council certified the MEIR and app that on the recommended by the Planning Commission. Several Counciliressues arose out of the uired the applicant o provide extenlic sive information�in order geotechnical information on VTM 47850. Th q to respond to the questions. In November of 1992, the Council set a public hearing to deliberate on the project. The applicant had not provided the an required information to respond to the plan check questtookons in time for the action t deny the request ublic a extension of timeing and �and extension of time to respond to the issues. The Council additionally took action to deny the application without prejudice. In doing so, the Council found that they could not approve the project without definitive information on the geotechnical issues but allowed the applicant to submit a new application for the project once the information had been gathered. Subsequently, the applicant filed a lawsuit to appeal the decision. The lawsuit was resolved when the City and the ty to re-initiate developer entered into an out of court settlement agreement. be onductedment agreement with the Planning Commed ission. ° ` In anticipation processing of the project commencing with a Joint Session information of the renewed processing a revised environmental document and ePaztandards have hanged and to the ed document �geotechn cal related to air quality and biological resources asregulationsthe project. information related to the 24 outstanding issues thatserved ruedapublic rview ation for denial f compliance with the California Environmental MSIR was then circulated to responding agencies an Quality Act (CEQA). PrnieCt DeSC['IDtiOR 57 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 is a 73 acre siteose ed mannortherntTv° Canyon -This The �II subdivision proposed for a site which currently developed with extensive significant valuable biota of the three tracts proposed for developmeioxit. m ely 1g 0 oak 50 Mees azns Pr. arily f u thin t`'�'o s�'ds approxirnately 34 acres ontain almost 700 trees PP cotract have been identfied to b mprising 2.5 acres. The trees located in the southwest portion oak trees have been marked fort emoval as a part this contain some of the oldest and healthiest trees on-site. project. ment These oak trees will be replaced at a 4:1 ratio as we � l delnutr to pure the ed is art o of hf the genetics of nativee project. The plant veer have been grown from seeds collected on-site community. The landscape plan for the project has been crafted hto reprodal dan elopmeenvironmennt and the t is compatible with res remaining vegetation and natural habitat to. be complementary recommended by the SEATAC. thered The critical information that comprised the basis for the CityEngineer.l'There were 24 outstanding s denial of the project is 1992 ssues that focused on and analyzed by the City's geotechnical consultant and City subsurface issues related to following areas: 1) identification soil materials thoughsion of a map dent to be tifybentonite loccatio�n of the and extent of shear keys to stabilize the ddev�elo development; d 4) Supplemental information on the stability of proposed cut geologic features and surficial slump an and fill areas. In the intervening period the applicant has provided the required information to the City and hag gond �� additional zed, the app the outstanding issues. In order for the information to be gathered and with rous laboratory tests and analyses physical explorations by deep boring and trenching of the site and concludedlica itwaass sanumble to refine the information and to As a result of the information generated by the additional the app earth material that had previously been thought provide a more definitive understanding of the geology. y ammeters of the material to be bentonite clay was found to be smectitic silt. Analysis of the material found the strength p C. 1srrWuesrox731vrM47aso.cov 2 to exceed those of the bentonite clay. The analysis assumed the most conservative parameters and conducted tests in a manner that assumed the material to have the weaker bentonite characteristics. GradinLy The grading required to implement this project is substantial and requires approximately 783,000 cubic yards of earthwork. Total grading for the revised project will entail approximately 45 acres with about 2.5 acres of off-site grading. The canyon to the west of VTM 47850 will be graded and reconfigured to a state closely resembling the existing topography with slopes approximating a range from 4:1 to a 2:1 maximum vertical incline. The grading will be balanced on-site and with the incorporation of landform grading techniques, the project site will reflect many of the same physical characteristics that are visible today. The grading plan has been revised from the 1992 plan to reflect adjustments to the design parameters. The majority of the grading previously proposed has not been affected and overall there will be additional grading on approximately two acres. The additional grading will be conducted on the east and west facing slopes of the project. The east facing slope has grading redesigned to not encroach as far west off-site and to become more focussed along the upper portion of the canyon and upper areas around the building pads. On the east facing slope additional grading is proposed to extend north and south and to primarily add additional buttressing and support to the pads. The adjustments to the grading plan are not significant and do not dramatically change the previously identified impacts of the project. All grading activities are required to take place outside the nesting season and all of the heavy equipment will be staged on-site. No access to the adjacent public residential streets will be afforded to the construction equipment and will only access the site via "The Country". Biota The project is located in SEA No. 15 in northern Tonner Canyon. All development projects within an SEA are required to obtain a conditional use permit. Review by the SEATAC is required prior to issuance of the CUP and that review was conducted in concert with the MEIR preparation. SEATAC reviewed the project from the perspective of actual and potential impacts to the ecosystem of the entire SEA. Although the project itself comprises less than 1.5 percent of the entire SEA, the potential impacts are not proportional and can impart adverse impacts on a geometric scale to the biology of the entire SEA. As a result of the issues identified by the SEATAC, the deficiencies in the design of the 1989 pro)e,--t became evident the applicant redesigned the project in its present form. Extensive information on the biological resources of the site and the site's relationship to the Tonner Canyon ecosystem have been collected and evaluated for this project. At the impetus of the SEATAC a Tonner Canyon Study was initiated and completed in 1991. The information brought together in that report in addition to the information collected within the MEIR for this project serve to provide a very clear understanding for staff of the value of this site. Additional information related to flora and fauna has been collected from the proposed project area. In 1994 three extensive surveys of the site were conducted by the City's environmental consultant to document the biological resources on-site. Extensive walnut and oak woodlands were found to be present on-site and were surrounded by coastal sage and chaparral scrub as well as non-native grasses. The surveys also identified an expected variety of wildlife species that primarily use the site for breeding, cover and food. Based on the size, location and other constraints to the site, the site is not considered a primary wildlife corridor. That is not to say that the site is not use for animals to traverse to other locations but that there is no significant resource other than Tonner Canyon and the SEA for the site to provide a connection to. The disruption to the site will displace wildlife during the grading and construction phases. With the recreation of hahitat areas with native plants species and maintenance of the habitat areas until they are reestablished, most of the displaced wildlife will again utilize vast portions of the project site in the future. The removal of the oak and walnut trees will be mitigated by imposing a 4:1 replacement ratio. The remainder of the biota to be replanted in the restricted use areas w ell be reflective of the plant species which are native to the site. C: U-677sxst tEPM73tVTM47&v.cov rading The SEATAC recommended that the applicant collect seeds and plants on-site priorovation of the same activities in order thwithinat replacement plants ce ould be grown in nurseries. The result of this action is a perp the species of plants. The emphasis of this replacement procedure is reduce the impacts to the environment and to assist in transition of the plants back into the ecosystem. Vesting Tentative Man e VTM 47851 Staff has reviewed the tentative map for conformance ed tthatheequire the Council's approval attention. The City Engineer f nds 48487. There are some issues that have been that there are numerous easements referenced onthe tentative map. These ements which have been offerednto the Coents areunty ofuLos Angelles private s nature. The City has the ability to vacate the easements is accomplished via the public hearing process, approval of the tentative map as proposed and recording of the final map The private easements however may not be vacated in this manner. To relinquish the private easements the applicant will be required to relocate those easements which mays have adverse guazpana�o�� thetiuseable � ithinarea. bdiv Sion has can be rafted a condition for consideration of this action. Th developed to the greatest extent possible. recommends that the lift Lot "A" is the common lot identified on the tentative as the location of the lift station. Staff f ownership and station be conveyed to the Homeowners Association for the purpose o�nof ofthe lot. dd Additionally, prescribed manner. An easement for sewer purposes will be dedicated over the necessary portion this lot should have a restriction to preclude residential building. Lots within the gated community approved by the City Council have been required to provide minimum lot frontages of 125 feet on all lots with the exception of cul-de-sac lots. These lots have been approved with 60 feet minimum lot frontages. This tract has been designed with -de-sac streets. These there are two lots which requirae ve an increase in the lot frobeen designed with lots get However, primarily conform to the minimum standard. applicant can adjust the Staff finds that there are two alternatives that can be investigated to achieve compliance. The aPP reduce adjacent lot lines to substantially conform to the requirement thor eRempaindertcan join two lots to form one Parcel located in the southeastern portion the overall number lots by one. Additionally, of the tract should be joined with and adjacent lot (Lot No. 13, 15 or 26). This action would be consistent with the Remainder Parcel on VTM 47851 and will guarantee suitable access to the parcel. ing The site is currently the location of a Los Angeles Countysnih�Dre�eended �� thelipad for emergency fire Council consider requiringthe especially for wildland fires. The Planning Comm applicant to work with the LACFD in funding applicant to either provide an alternative location on-site or require the app the development of an alternative site. The proposed map does not indicate that an. alternative was identified on-site but staff recommends that the option remain. Alternative Projects The draft MEIR is required to analyze alternative projects to evaluate a comparison of potno ential impacts- tiVe this project there were a total of seven alternatives generated for review and analysis-dentifiedeimpact. Two somewhat less benign project site will remain in the current state with no change in any alternatives were put forth that essentially look at development of the site in two commercial agricultural uses. The "commercial agriculture -vineyard" use is a project scenario that requires some minimal grading although minimal slope stabilization would be required. The impact of this type of development would create no more significant impacts than the project of record. The "commercial agriculture -area inwith access" oternative os and struuctural ires if�acile gradu�� The major . Grading would primarily be required to stabilize slopes in the detrimental impact associated with this type of land use o wo da duce thesen of atio�impacts to ae plant tlevel less than the overgrazing cattle. The mitigation measures necessary for this scenario project. C:VEnWIRLPM73i VM4W0.COV 4 Development projects were reviewed at various degrees of density and design criteria. The 1989 project was presented as a realistic development alternative. Under this scenario, which proposed 57 single family units on the 73 acres, the project proposed conventional grading with linear grading techniques. Grading quantities for this concept would be less than the project of record but the visual and aesthetic impacts would be more apparent. The 50 percent reduction in density scenario would decrease the project to approximately 29 units. The design scheme would primarily reflect the same circulation system but would feature larger estate type lots. The overall impact of this alternative is consistent with the impacts associated with the current proposed development because the geotechnical corrections necessary for slope stabilization are the same. With the associated grading necessary for geotechnical stabilization, impacts to the biota would remain consistent as well. The "15 unit (74 percent reduction)" alternative would appear to reduce the project impacts in a manner corresponding to the density reduction. This is however not the case. Development of the 15 unit project requires that geotechnical stabilization be undertaken in the same manner similar to the grading plan proposed under the current project. As such, the grading required to stabilize the site would generate impacts that can be mitigated to a level of less than significant, as do the mitigation measures for the project of record. In summary, the alternatives identified vary in the extent of adverse impacts imparted on the site. The no development and agricultural uses generate less of an impact on the environment but are consistent with the land uses identified within the draft General Plan currently under consideration. These uses do not develop the site to its highest and best use and are not within the character of development within the area of the project. The reduced density projects do not yield projects with less cumulative impacts. The projects are still required to remediate the unstable soils conditions and in doing so impacting the biota of the site. The reduced density projects again deliver less development but do not reduce the environmental impacts and deliver projects that are less than the highest and best utilization of the project site. Conclusion: Staff has processed this application in conformance with the settlement agreement that mandated the City Council reconsider the project. In the intervening period the draft MEIR has been modified to address environmental standards that have changed since the project was initially reviewed. Additionally, the applicant and the staff have worked diligently to provide definitive information on the issues related to geology and geotechnical concerns. Staff has reviewed the voluminous information that the applicant has gathered by physical exploration and extensive analysis and has concluded review of the information as it relates to 24 unanswered questions that served as the foundation of the Council's denial of the project. The analysis has been deemed to fulfill the requirements set forth by the City. The applicant has developed a map which identifies the areas that contain surficial and subsurface landforms of note. The applicant has definitively resolved the issue surrounding bentonite on-site and has found the material to be a clay as smectitic silt. The strength of which exceeds that of bentonite and has revised the remedial work to correspond to these factors. The draft MEIR has been updated with current biota surveys. The surveys have identified no new issues and no new impacts have been identified. The mitigation measures identified for revegetation of disturbed areas are proposed to remain unchanged. The plants will be collected from the native plants and seeds on-site and will be planted and maintained until they are re-established (project maintenance for a maximum period of not less than five years). The draft MEIR also analyzed the alternative project designs. The projects with no development and commercial agriculture use do not have the same level of environmental impacts as the residential development projects. The land uses are not consistent with the land uses proposed within the draft General Plan and do no seem to be compatible with adjacent residential development. The reduced density projects yield less development but do not reduce commensurate environmental impacts proportionately. The required remedial grading is the same for the reduced density projects as C: ILEMASUWFOR7S1 VTMl7&W.COV 5 is required for the project of record. PREPARED BY: Robert Searcy Associate Planner Attachments: Wilbur Smith Letters Dated March 30 and March 31, 1995 Response To Comments Mitigat,;,on Monitoring Program Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 c:usrrERsW,POR731V7Mn&0.cov 6 MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL 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. 2. 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"- M/Papen 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, '►392. 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 April 6, 1995 Page 2 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 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 P;3nning 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. April 6, 1995 Page 3 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 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 April 6, 1995 Page 4 were a part of Phase I the declaration ofncertainly CC&R's so that all ofPhase he Full annexation will retain 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 1. 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 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 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 itys staff and CityCcities. Theounc held the developers to a higher degree of f standards than othe 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 April 6, 1995 Page 5 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 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. Asa result April 6, 1995 Page 6 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' 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 April 6, 1995 Page 7 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 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 3/4 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 April 6, 1995 Page 8 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 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...", whersas 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 April 6, 1995 Page 9 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 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 tc ok. 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 publ Phed 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 April 6, 1995 Page 10 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 vreturn this the Planning Commission project to the Commission as recommend that the Council P 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 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 Governors 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 April 6, 1995 Page 11 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 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 April 6, 1995 Page 12 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 ndin 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 e o Il ner rAppendix residential private #3 comunities to improve their lot. EIRhomeowners V 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 April 6, 1995 Page 13 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 April 6, 1995 Page 14 show the elevation of final bottom of excavated areas and 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. MPT/Werner 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 April 6, 1995 Page 15 number of lots in the development are proposed to be less than one acre and average about 112 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 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 willShe f n in 10 to 15 years further stated she would like to setorrential fewer and earth movement. 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 April 6, 1995 Page 16 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 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. April 6, 1995 Page 17 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 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 wh*ch 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 21/2 years ago; however, the current project conforms to April 6, 1995 Page 18 the Ccuncil 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, presuming the Commission could reach consensus that evening, he suggested May 16 for Council consideration. A motion was made by MPT/Werner, seconded by C/Ansari to refer Vesting 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 Council 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 Lith 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: April 6, 1995 Page 19 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 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 REPORT DATE: May 11, 1995 FROM: George A. Wentz, City Engineer TITLE: Modification of the Dedicated Right to Prohibit the Construction of Residential Buildings within a portion of Lot 1, Tract No. 31479. SUMMARY: This matter requests the Council's approval of a request to modify the right that the City now has to prohibit the construction of residential buildings on Lot 1, Tract No. 31479 to a less restrictive right to prohibit the construction of not more than one residential building within a portion of Lot 1, Tract No. 31479. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council consider the matter as presented and act accordingly. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification Resolution(s) _ Bid Specifications Ordinances(s) (on file in City Clerk's Office) — Agreement(s) _ Other: EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been N/A Yes No reviewed by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? MAJORITY 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? N/A Yes _ No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? N/A Yes No Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? X Yes _ No Report discussed with the following affected departments: - Community Development REVIEWED BY: NFerre L` nce Belanger Frank M. Usher G rg A. Wentz City Manager Assistant City Manager City Engineer CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: George A. Wentz, City Engineer SUBJECT: Modification of the Dedicated Right to Prohibit the Construction of Residential Buildings within Lot 1, Tract No.31479 ISSUE STATEMENT Approval of a request to modify the right that the City now has to prohibit the construction of residential buildings on Lot 1, Tract No. 31479 to a less restrictive right to prohibit the construction of not more than one residential building within a portion of Lot 1, Tract No. 31479. RECOMMENDATION Consider the matter as presented and act accordingly. FINANCIAL SUMMARY No impact on the City's budget. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The owner has previously made application (Lot Line Adjustment No. LL -95-002 ) to adjust the lot line between Lot 1, Tract No. 31479 and Lot 61, Tract No. 42557; between Lot 1 and Lot 28, Tract No. 42561; and between Lot 1 and Lot 7, Tract No. 30093. The requested lot line adjustment (LLA) would reduce the total number of separate lots from four to three. The applicant expressed his reasons for this request in correspondence dated March 27, 1995 (copy attached). City Council Report Meeting May 16, 1995 Request to Modify Building Restriction Right Page 2 This request, to adjust the lot line between two or more adjacent parcels where the land taken from one parcel is added to an adjacent parcel and where a greater number of parcels than originally existed are not created, is exempt from the Subdivision Map Act as described in Government Code §66412.0). This LLA application was reviewed in accordance with §22.56.1756, "Lot Line Adjustments" of the City of Diamond Bar Planning and Zoning Code Los Angeles County Code Title 22). In that review the City is limited to a review of those aspects related to planning and zoning and building codes. This proposed adjustment is, shown on Exhibit "A". Staff is prepared to give favorable consideration to this request for a lot line adjustment. All easements and restrictions which existed prior to any lot line adjustment will continue unaffected by the adjustment of the property lines. Lot 1 was also previously considered in an application, along with Lot 61, for a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM 24031). This application was submitted primarily to accomplish the merger of Lot 1 and Lot 61 and eliminate the building restriction that exists on both lots. This map was recommended for denial by the Planning Commission and subsequently denied by the Council. The adjusted parcel shown as Parcel "C" on Exhibit "A" is of particular interest regarding this current request before the Council. This Parcel consists of all of Lot 7, Tract No. 30093 ( 1.1 ' acres) and a portion of Lot 1 (60.4 of the 66.6 acres) as described in the Lot Line Adjustment. The owner has requested that the present building restriction which exists over this portion of Lot 1 be modified. As such restriction was accepted by the governing local agency (LA County, 1981) at the time of recording the map it can only be rescinded or modified by the present governing local agency (City Council). Lot 1 is zoned RPD -20000-2U and is presently vacant. Lot 7 is zoned R-1-40000 and is presently built upon with one single family residence that is uninhabitable. The Land Use Element of Draft General Plan classifies Lot 7 and a portion of Lot 1 as RR (Rural Residential, max. 1 du/acre) and the remaining portion of Lot 1 as OS ( Open Space). The portion include in this request is only that portion classified RR. In addition to the other building restrictions (i.e. due to flood hazard) and various easements which encumber various portions of Lot 1, all of Lot 1 is subject to the right of the City to "prohibit the construction of City Council Report Meeting May 16, 1995 Request to Modify Building Restriction Right Page 3 residential buildings" as such right was dedicated on the map of Tract No. 31479. The owner desires a lesser restriction than presently exists; a restriction that would allow him to build no more than 1 single family residence anywhere within the total of the ownership shown as Parcel "C". Access to this parcel would be from Lodgepole Road via private streets through "The Country". The Land Use Element of Draft General Plan (Strategy 1.5.4) recommends that matters such as this be "subject to a process established by the City Council prior to removal of such restrictions" and further that "(v)acant land burdened by non open space restrictions shall be required to be subject to at least one public hearing before the City Council before any action...". CONCLUSION This matter is submitted to the City Council for its discussion and action accordingly. The Council has a range of options including no action (present restrictions remain in place), action only to set a Public Hearing, action to modify the present restriction (say to prohibiting no more than one residential structure), and action to remove all restrictions. Action to set a public hearing would be returned to Council for future action ori the request. Action to modify or remove restrictions should include direction to Staff to prepare a resolution and other related documents to be returned to Council for final approval. PREPARED BY: Michael D. Myers, E. for George A. Wentz, P.E. City Engineer J.C.D. J. C. DABNEY & ASSOCIATES LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS & ENGINEERS 671 S. BREA CANYON ROAD SUITE 5 WALNUT, CALIFORNIA 91789 909 594-7568 FAX - 909-594-5090 March 27, 1995 Mr. George Wentz Director of Public Works City of Diamond Bar - 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100 Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177 Reference: Lot Line Adjustment No. 95-002 D & L Properties Inc./Abeyta Lot 1, Tr. 31479; Lot 61, Tr. 42557; Lot 28, Tr. 42561; Lot 7, Tr. 30093 Dear Mr. Wentz, The requested Lot Line Adjustment has been submitted to resolve three distinct issues by assigning varies portions of Lot 1, Tr. No. 31479 to adjacent lots. The issues are outlined as follows: 1. To assign all open -space encumbered properties held by D & L Properties Inc., after the Lot Line Adjustment, to Lot 61, Tr. No. 42557 (Proposed Parcel "A"). The entire area of Proposed Parcel "A" would be within Lighting & Landscape District No. 39, would have no development rights and would be deeded as such. The County Assessor would be instructed to evaluate the parcel as such and weed abatement would be handled through the district as is the current situation. 2. In 1993, Mr. Abeyta approached.Mr. Forristerwith a request for the acquisition of property adjacent to his Lot 28, Tr. No. 42561. Mr. Abeyta, who has a very large family, was seeking additional property for rear yard use and gardening. I reviewed the requested area for Mr. Forrister and advised him that the area that Mr. Abeyta was seeking fell outside of any development plans that Mr. Forrister had for the property at that time. Mr. Forrister advised Mr. Abeyta that he would transfer the property as part of his approval process for the development of Lot 1 and Lot 61. During 1994, the City denied development consideration on the property in question and thus the Lot Line Adjustment request between D & L Properties Inc. & Mr. Abeyta . C (Parcel "B"). 3. D & L Properties Inc. owns Lot 7, Tr. No. 30093 within the Country Estates and would like to adjust the remaining area of Lot 1, Tr. No. 31479 to this parcel for his own personal use (Parcel "C"). D & L Properties Inc. currently is a member of The Country Estates Homeowners Association and pays fees for a single family residence. The proposed Lot Line Adjustment would not remove or modify any existing easements of record, result in any additional density, change any existing land use, cause or require any additional services to the City or the Homeowners Association and is consistent with the General Plan. D & L Properties Inc. is currently processing a demolition permit for the residence on Lot 7, Tr. No. 30093, which has been condemned due to a foundation failure brought about by underlying soils failures. Access to Proposed Parcel "A", the open -space parcel, is currently from Summitridge Drive, access to Proposed Parcel 'B' is from Longview Drive, and access to Proposed Parcel "C" is from Lodge Pole Road. None of the Proposed Parcels require any up grading of existing access or utility services. Res ectfulllly�, �® (. ' 6,,� J n C. Dabney, RCE EXHIBIT 11C11 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TRACT NO. 51253 A. GENERAL REQ TS: 1. The applicant is required to submit authorization of all property owners with interest in the project. The approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 shall not be effective for any purpose anti( a duly authorized representative of the applicants) has filed with the Community Development Department an Affidavit of Acceptance, thereby accepting all the conditions of this approval which Affidavit shall be filed within 15 days of the date of approval. 2. All requirements of this Resolution, the applicable Zoning District, the City Codes, City departmental policies, rules and regulations and applicable law, Policies and regulations of any State, Federal or local agency with jurisdiction thereof shall be complied with by the Applicant. 3. In accordance with Government Code Section 66474.9(b) and (c), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, an approval of the City, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37. Ae City Mug v notify the subdidram,vidOr o c� rh QCtiU11 OT DrnC -od „o and rbnll f'g` �- t�'� �feRSe B. FIRE DEPARTMENT REQUI , S: 1. Provide and locate water mains, fire hydrants and fire flows as required by Fire Department and Fire Code. 2. Prior to recordation of a final map, emergency secondary access shall be provided in accordance with Fire Protection District Standards and approved by the City Engineer. 3. Fire Department access shall be extended to within 150 feet distance of any portion of structure to be built and shown on the final map. 4. Access shall comply with Section 10.207 of the Fire Code (all weather access). 5. Driveways shall include, as necessary, turnarounds suitable for fire protection equipment use and shown on the final map. Turnarounds shall be designed, constructed and maintained to insure their integrity for Fire Department use. 6. All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted prior to construction of on-site improvements. Vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable throughout construction. 7. All hydrants shall be brass or bronze and conform to current AWWA standard AC503 or approved equal. All hydrants shall be installed a minimum of 25 ft. from a structure. C. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUIREMENTS: 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved Tentative Tract Map and plans approved by the City Council as revised by these conditions of approval. 2. Prior to the recordation of the final map the applicant shall pay a park in -lieu fee, or dedicate park land to the City's satisfaction. 3. Exterior construction activities (grading, framing, etc.) shall be restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, except that interior building construction activities shall not be limited. All construction equipment shall be properly muffled to reduce noise levels. Transportation of equipment and materials and operation of heavy grading equipment shall also be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:00, Monday through Saturday. All equipment staging areas shall be sited on the subject property. Dust generated by construction activities shall be reduced by watering the soil prior to and during grading activities. Use of reclaimed water shall be used whenever possible. 4. Each parcel shall provide a minimum of 7,200 square feet and a minimum pad size of 6,000 square feet. Each lot shall provide a minimum frontage of 60 feet and 40 feet on cul-de-sacs and knuckles. Front setbacks shall be a minimum 16 feet from right of way with an average of 18 feet. Side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 5 feet and 10 feet clear with rear setbacks of 20 feet, as measured from the structure to top of slope of building pad. Homes shall be staggered with a minimum 18 feet average front setback to prevent a series of similar front setbacks. 5.. Applicant shall pay development fees (including, but not limited to, planning, building and school fees) at the established rates prior to recordation of the final map and issuance of building permits. 2 D. (. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant/ subdivider shall prepare and submit to the Director of Community Development for approvalforrBuyer Awareness Package which shall include, but not be limited to, ation pertaining to geologic and environmental issues regarding the property, freeway noise, proximity to bus routes and oak tree preservation issues, explanatory information pertaining to building rights restrictions and other restrictions on use of properties as necessary and similar related matters. The Applicant shall institute a program to include delivery of a copy of the "Buyer Awareness Package" to each prospective purchaser and shall keep on file in the office of Applicant, with copies to the City and a receipt signed by each such prospective purchaser indicating that the prospective purchaser has received ando e the within the iect information contained "Buyer Awareness Package-" —3---=-- ,. ..nelrno - the Q A' �ereb re not ti�� rir" oc rrences in 7. Prior to the issuance of building permits the variety of materials and colors to be used on the exteriors of residential structures shall be approved in form and color by the Community Development Director as a part of the Development Review of the model homes. occu c permit being gated, these conditions and all 8. Prior to any Pan Y Pe improvements shall be completed and bonded for, to the satisfaction of the City. 9. The use authorized by this approvalshall tarte�d o momennce e thd or co to limit on necessary and incidental thereto shall second specified herein and thereafter diligently advanced on or before the (2) year after the expiration of City Council approval. d City Project review and processing fees all remaining prorate 10. Applicant shall pay b prior to recordation of the tract map as required Y the Community Development Director. 11. Any real property subsequently assembled with the lots created t �P� of this action will retain all restrictions to use that may be in place 12. The applicant is required to forward all outstanding fees to the City related to the processing of this application within 30 days of approval of this project. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN REQUHLEMENTS 1As a means of mitigating potential environmental impacts, the applicant shall . suspend construction in the vicinity of a cultural resource encountered during 3 development of the site, and leave the resource in place until a qualified archaeologist can examine them and determine appropriate mitigation measures. The applicant shall comply with mitigation measures recommended by the archaeologist and approved by the Community Development Director. Upon initiation of grading activities, a paleontological grading observation schedule by a Certified Paleontologist shall be maintained when grading in bedrock units to further evaluate the fossil resources of the site. Salvage operations shall be initiated and coordinated with the project applicants if significant concentrations of fossils are encountered. 2. Plant street trees as directed and approved by the City Engineer. 3. No underground utilities shall be constructed within the drip line of any mature tree preserved on-site except as approved by a registered arborist. 4. The mitigation monitoring program contained in EIR No. 92-1 (SCH 91081040) and approved by the City shall be implemented and rigorously complied with. Applicant shall deposit and maintain with the City, a fund in such amounts required by the Director of Community Development to defray the cost of implementation and monitoring by City staff and consultants retained by City. 5. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. Fence details, tree staking, soil preparation, planting details and an automatic irrigation system and the incorporation of xerotropic landscaping shall be incorporated wherever feasible. The Applicant shall pay all processing fees associated with plan review. 6. All terrace drains and drainage channels shall be constructed in muted earth tones so as to not impart adverse visual impacts. Terrace drains shall follow land form slope configuration and shall not be placed in exposed positions. All down drains shall be hidden in swales diagonally or curvilinear across a slope face. 7. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits all oak trees to be replaced shall be replaced at the ratios, locations and palette mix specified in EIR No. 92-1 (SCH 91081040). ReFlacement oak tree ratio shall be 2.1 and shall consist of the ollowing mix n sizes: a. 5°% seedlings: b. 15% I5 gallon: c. SO% 24 inch box. 8. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the Los Angeles County Code and so 4 noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. 9. Prior to grading, seed collections shall be made from many of the native species on-site, concentrating on areas to be impacted by the project. These seeds shall be propagated and their offspring, in seed or container plant form, shall be used in the revegetation program. Seeds of species in short supply on-site shall be increased prior to planting and/or all seeds shall be grown in containers for planting on-site. Applicant shall provide proof of compliance with this Section to City Engineer prior to grading and again, prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy. 10. Prior to the issuance of permits for site grading, two (2) eight (8) suitable oaks for transplanting shall be selected, tagged and recommended to the City for relocation by a qualified arborist. Selection criteria shall include access, health, structural feasibility for transplantation and cost. In order to maintain wildlife food sources, an effort will be made to select some specimens for transplanting marked to indicate compass and slope orientation. Trees shall be boxed by a method which minimizes shock and allows for the inclusion of the maximum feasible amount of root hairs and associated soil. Indigenous mycorrhizae shall be included with the root hairs and associated soil. Siting of transplanted oaks and detailed transplanting methodology shall be coordinated by a qualified licensed arborist. The number of oaks to be transplanted and their specific locations shall be approved by the Community Development Director. 11. Prior to the issuance of grading permits the applicant shall obtain approval of a Feral Pet Trapping Program by the Community Development Director. A feral pet trapping program shall be administered by the Applicant during and after construction. The feral pet trapping program shall provide for the trapping and disposition of former domestic pets that have gone back to the wild, to the specifications of the Pomona Valley Humane Society. 12. Prior to approval of project landsc^ne plan the applicant shall demonstrate that the landscaping palette for the project emphasizes the use of drought tolerant, native plant species with low water requirements adapted to the inland Southern California climate. Also, plants used in perimeter or common area landscaping shall include those which provide nectar, fruit or seeds as food for native wildlife 5 species. With the proper selection and placement of native plants, the proposed development would retain some of its natural value. Recommended plants for landscaping include: Big -Leaf Maple Bigberry Manzanita Coyote Brush Ceanothus Redbud Toyon Honeysuckle California Sycamore Holly -leaved Cherry California Coffeeberry Holly -leaved Redberry Sugarbush Chaparral Currant Our Lord's Candle California -Fuchsia Acer macrophylla Arctostaphylos glauca Baccharis pilularis Ceanothus spp. Cercis occidentalis Heteromeles arbutifolia Lonicera spp. Platanus racemose Prunus ilicifolia Rhamnus californica Rhamnus ilicifolia Rhus ovata Ribes malvaceum Yucca whipplei Zauschneria californica 13. In compliance with Section 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code, a qualified biologist shall determine the presence of any raptor nests prior to or concurrent with grading activities, the project applicant(s) shall contact the California Department of Fish and Game, shall obtain and comply with all appropriate procedures relative to grading operations in proximity to those nests, and shall provide verification of same to the City. Resulting mitigation measures may include: (1) modifying the design of utility poles, if any, for the protection of raptors and other birds; (2) restricting construction activities near raptor nesting sites during and immediately following the breeding season; and (3) constructing artificial nesting platforms for raptors and other birds. 14. Prior to issuance of building permits, if applicable, -Los Angeles County Fire Department requirements for development in a wildland fire area shall be incorporated to reduce potential fire hazards. These provisions include, but may not be limited to: (1) fire -resistive protection of exterior walls/openings; (2) fire - retardant roof covering; (3) fire -resistive construction for decks, balconies and support structures; and (4) chimney screens installed on each chimney flue. 15. Project design and maintenance activities shall comply with brush clearance programs administered by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. 16. Prior to the initiation of construction activities, building permits or recordation, the project applicant(s) shall submit and the County Forester and Fire Warden shall approve a fire hazard reduction/fuel management plan to minimize brush fire 6 hazards on-site. That plan shall include, but may not be limited to: (1) use of fire retardant construction materials; (2) brush clearance and maintenance activities within 100 feet surrounding individual structures; (3) irrigated planting areas with provisions for maintenance activities; and (4) the provision and maintenance of fire breaks. 17. In order to limit the potential threat of wildland fires, low -fuel volume plants shall be incorporated into the revegetative plan. 18. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicants shall review development plans with the Los Angeles County Department of Parks and Recreation to facilitate implementation of the County's regional trail system. Adequate provisions (e.g. trail dedication, signage) shall be provided to ensure the dedication of any City or County ordinance required trail links. 19. Prior to the approval of the grading plan, the project applicant(s) identify appropriate measures to be undertaken during grading activities to minimize disruptions to school activities and shall address potential health and safety considerations relative to pedestrian activities in the project area. 20. Prior to the initiation of grading activities and building permits a replacement plan for the loss of existing oak trees shall be submitted by the project applicant(s) and approved by the City. 21. Applicant should consider a united biological resource removal program, prior to grading, to allow persons to remove selected vegetation at their own expense. E. APPLICABLE EIR NMGATION MEASURES (not addressed in subsections a, b, c or d) The following conditions are EIR mitigation measures not covered by the tract conditions listed in subsections a, b, or c which apply to the project site. 1. All grading, earthwork and associated development activities shall be designed and conducted in accordance with applicable City and County standards and shall conform with recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Engineering Investigation for Tentative Tract No. 51253, County of Los Angeles and such other Geotechnical reports as may be prepared for the site and/or required by the City and County. 2. The project applicant shall be financially responsible for the following items: (1) the construction or advancement of funds for the construction of any required on- site drainage improvements as contained in the Master Plan of Drainage Facilities approved by the City Engineer and County Engineer of Los Angeles County; (2) the construction of in -tract and off-site storm drain system improvements; (3) prorated mitigation fees of contributed flows and/or (4) any permits or other assessments customarily imposed by the County Engineer. 3. Drainage shall be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the City Engineer. The design and installation of project drainage facilities shall be in accordance with the flow criteria, design standards and construction requirements of both the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works and the City of Diamond Bar. 4. Prior to the approval of the final tract map(s), a special maintenance district or other funding mechanism acceptable to and approved by the City shall be established for the maintenance of on-site storm drainage facilities. Terraces and down drains will be part of the Landscape and Lighting District. The main drainage system shall be accepted into the Los Angeles County or City of Diamond Bar Maintenance District. 5. Prior to the initiation of grading operations, the project applicant(s) shall obtain all applicable construction, stormwater and NPDES permits as may be required by the City, the County of Los Angeles and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board for the discharge of urban pollutants. 6. Prior to the issuance of grading permits the applicant shall illustrate to the satisfaction of the City Engineer how the following mitigation measures recommended by either the City or the South Coast Air Quality Management District to minimize air quality impacts during the construction phase of the proposed project have been incorporated into project construction guidelines: a. Apply approved chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for four days or more). b. Replace ground cover in disturbed areas per City specifications. C. Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply approved soil binders, according to manufacturers' specifications, to exposed stockpiles (i.e., gravel, sand, dirt). d. Water active sites at least twice daily. e. Suspend all excavating and grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour (mph). f. Monitor for particulate emissions according to South Coast Air Quality Management District speciFed procedures: For information call (909)396- 3600. g. In field trailers, use portable air conditioning units with non -diesel. 8 h. Sweep streets at the end of day if any visible soil material is carried over to adjacent thoroughfares (recommend water sweepers which use reclaimed water). i. The City may require that gravel be used in unpaved areas utilized as either construction roads or staging areas for construction equipment. j. Apply water twice daily for chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications to all unpaved parking or staging areas and unpaved road surfaces, if required for dust control. k. Install wheel washers where vehicles exit unpaved roads onto paved roads, or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site every trip in designated areas on the site. 1. Traffic speeds on all unpaved roads surfaces to be reduced to 15 mph or less. M. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil or other loose materials are to be covered and should maintain at least six inches of freeboard (i.e., minimum required space between top of the load and top of the trailer) based upon a level load. n. Pave construction roads that have a traffic volume of more than 50 daily trips by construction equipment, 150 total daily trips for all vehicles, for 12 consecutive days. o. Pave all construction access roads at least 100 feet onto the site from the main road. P. Use methanol or low -sulfur pile drivers. q. Use low -sulfur fuel for stationary construction equipment pursuant to Rule 431.2. r. Suspend use of all construction equipment operations during second stage smog alerts. For daily forecast call: (800) 242-4022 (L.A. and Orange Counties) or (800) 367-4710 (San Bernardino and Riverside Counties). S. Use construction equipment that has catalytic convertors (for gasoline powered equipment). t. Prevent trucks from idling longer than two minutes. U. Configure construction parking to minimize traffic interference. V. Provide temporary traffic control during all phases of construction activities to improve traffic flow such as providing a flag person to direct traffic and ensure safe movements off the site as directed by the City Engineer. W. Schedule construction activities that affect traffic flow to off-peak hours (i.e., between 7:00 PM and 6:00 AM and between 10:00 AM and 3:00 PM) with approval from the City. 7. • The following mitigation measures are recommended by the SCAQMD to minimize long-term emissions associated with the project: a. Use solar or low -emission water heaters. b. Use central water heating systems. 9 C. Use built-in energy efficient appliances. d. Building and subdivision orientation should be to the north for natural cooling. e. Provide shade trees to reduce building heat. f. Use energy efficient and automated controls for air conditioners. g. Use double -glass paned windows. 8. Construction and maintenance activities, including the repair and maintenance of equipment, shall conform to and comply with applicable provisions of the City of Diamond Bar's Noise Ordinance. 9. When feasible, construction equipment shall be stored on-site to eliminate and/or reduce heavy -equipment truck trips. 10. Project security features which shall be incorporated into the final design may include: (1) residential dwelling unit orientation which facilitates "neighborhood involvement" activities; (2) exterior security lighting; (3) well-designed access for police patrols to provide optimum observations; and (4) illuminated street addresses to ensure visibility from the street for better patrol observation. . 1, I 11. Prior to final tract map approval, the project applicant(s) shall submit a sewer study to both the County and City Engineer identifying project wastewater flow and tributary flow to the existing County trunk and local sewer lines. This study shall identify: (1) the location, phasing, bonding and details of any proposed sewer facilities and improvements by street configuration, lot layout and gravity flow; (2) any current capacity shortfalls of the County trunk and/or City sewer lines; and (3) specific design recommendations to provide additional lines or sizing upgrade, if required. 12. The project applicant(s) shall convey access and property easement and rights-of- way to the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, as deemed necessary by the County and City Engineers, for the construction and maintenance of sewer lines and associated facilities, prior to final map approval. 13. The project applicant(s) shall contribute an equitable share of cost, as established by the City, to fund improvements to the area's main lines, pumping stations, etc. required as a result of project development, prior to final map approval. 10 14. The project applicant(s) shall provide to the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County information regarding the construction and/or building schedule of the project so that the timing of the County Sanitation Districts' expansion may be coordinated with the project increase in demand. 15. In order to minimize the impact of project development on the County's solid waste disposal system and to facilitate the attainment of source reduction standards for the City of Diamond Bar as contained in the California Integrated Solid Waste Management Act of 1989, Me "Act") the project applicant(s) shall: (1) consult with the City of Diamond Bar, the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works regarding implementation of technologies to reduce and recycle solid waste both during construction and after completion of the project; and (2) consult with the current refuse removal collection company(ies) regarding design standards for access to, location and construction of trash container enclosures in order to facilitate implementation of automated refuse collection. 16. The project applicant(s) or subsequent homeowners' association(s) shall comply with those source reduction and recycling and composting requirements as may be adopted by the City of Diamond Bar in accordance with AssemWy Bim the Act. 17. The project applicant(s) through the Buyer Awareness program, shall encourage the segregation of green wastes for reuse as specified under the City's Source Reduction Recycling Element and County Sanitation Districts waste diversion policies. d EM NO. 92 1 wAfigafieft measures -.- 18. A Homeowners Association shall be created and made a party to the Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) for this project. A copy of the CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners Association, subject to the approval of the City Attorney, shall be recorded with this map and placed on file with the Planning Department. 19. Each lot shall be developed in substantial compliance with the final map and applicable CC&R's. 20. Any lighting fixtures adjacent to interior property lines shall be approved by the Community Development Director as to type, orientation and height. 21. All slope planting and irrigation shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied 11 by the buyer. Prior to any occupancy permit being granted, these conditions and all improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and City Engineer. 22. All down drains and drainage channels shall be constructed in muted earth tones so as to not impart adverse visual impacts. 23. All residences will be required to receive approval via the Development Review process by the Planning Commission subsequent to approval of the final map. 24. All grub material shall be stored on-site until such time the material is mulched and incorporated into the grading. The storage of the grub material shall be in compliance with City standards which may require a separate permits, Los Angeles County Fire Department requirements, and dust control requirements. 25. Prior to any occupancy permit being granted, these conditions and all improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City. C: ZfiTTMUITM51253. c oN 12 ,-II RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 92081440) AND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51253, TO DEVELOP A 21 UNIT SUBDIVISION, LOCATED EAST OF MORNING CANYON ROAD AND NORTH OF PATHFINDER ROAD, IN DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals (i) Amrut Patel, SASAK CORP., 858 West 9th Street, Upland, California (the Applicant hereinafter), has heretofore filed an application for approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 shall be referred to as the "Application." (ii) 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, by ordinance, the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City of Diamond Bar. Titles 21 and 22 of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended, contain the Development Code of the County of Los Angeles now currently applicable to development applications, including the subject Application, within the City of Diamond Bar. (iii) The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar conducted duly noticed public hearings on the project and its environmental documentation on September 14, September 28, October 3, and November 16, 1993; and May 2, May 9, May 31, June 21, June 6, and June 13,1994 on the subject matter of the Application. (iv) The City of Diamond Bar lacks an operative General Plan. Action was taken on this application, as to consistency to the 1995 draft General Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Office of Planning and Research extension of time granted pursuant to California Government Code Section 65361. (v) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. This City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The City Council hereby finds that the addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was presented to the City Council, and that the City Council reviewed and considered the information contained therein prior to deciding upon any aspect of the project, and based thereon, so certifies that the addendum to the Final EIR No. SCH 92081040 has been prepared for this project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended, and the guidelines promulgated thereunder. Further, the addendum to the Final EIR No. SCH 92081040 reflects the independent judgment of the City of Diamond Bar. Additionally, the City Council certifies the addendum to the EIR is complete and adequate in that it fully addresses all environmental effects of the project. 3. The City Council hereby specifically finds and determines, based on the findings set forth below, that changes and alterations have been required in or incorporated into and conditioned upon the project specified in the application, which mitigate or avoid significant adverse environmental impacts identified in the addendum to the Final EIR No. SCH 92081040 except as to those effects which are identified and made the subject of a Statement of Overriding Considerations which this City Council finds are clearly outweighed by the economic, social and other benefits of the proposed project, as more fully set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. 4. The City Council hereby adopts the Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program attached hereto as Exhibits "A" and "B" and hereby incorporated by reference. 5. The Applicant shall make payment of any and all fees which the Department of Fish and Game may require to be paid prior to the issuance of any building permit or further entitlement. 6. The approval of this Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 is contingent upon all other approvals associated with this project. 7. Based on substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above - referenced public hearings, including written and oral staff reports, public testimony and the record of the Application, this City Council hereby specifically finds as follows: N (a) The Application applies to a parcel generally described as being situated west of the Orange (SR -57) Freeway and Brea Canyon Road, east of the corporate boundaries of the City (Tract 27141) and Morning Sun Avenue, north of Pathfinder Road and the adjacent existing residential area (Tract 32576) and south of existing residential and vacant land located southerly of Golden Springs Drive, consisting of 47.4 acres, and zoned R-1 15,000. (b) Surrounding properties' zoning and land use are: East: Brea Canyon Road and 57 Freeway; South: RPD 10,000 6U/vacant; West: R-115,000/School; North: R-1 8,000/Single family residential (c) The Application is for a 21 residential lot subdivision to construct 21 single family units and common open space lots and the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. (d) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed and has access to public highways and streets. Further, the property shall be served by sanitary sewers, provided with water supply and distribution facilities with sufficient capacity to meet anticipated domestic and fire protection needs and shall have geologic hazards and flood hazards mitigated in accordance with the requirements of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. (e) The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantial and avoidable injury to fish or wildlife or to their habitat, and while the proposed development will have a significant adverse effect on biological resources, oak tree mitigation measures have been included as project conditions to reduce the impact of oak tree loss and a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been made on these unavoidable impacts. (f) Neither the design of the subdivision nor the types of improvements will cause serious public health problems, since sewage disposal, storm drainage, public services and geological and soils factors are addressed in the conditions of approval appended hereto. (g) The subject site lies within the 1992 General Plan RL/PD (Low Density, 3 du/ac, Residential Planned Development) land use designation. The proposed map is consistent with the 1992 General Plan and will not be in conflict with the 1995 draft 3 General Plan, which maintains the same land use classification of RL (Low Density, 3 du/ac) or with zoning standards. (h) The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. The design of the subdivision is based on the size and shape of the parcel. (i) The proposed subdivision does not contain or front upon any public waterway, river, stream, coastline, shoreline, lake or reservoir. (j) The subdivision and development of the property in the manner set forth on the map will not unreasonably interfere with the free and complete exercise of public entity and/or public utility rights-of- way and/or easements within the area covered by the map, since the design and development as set forth in the conditions of approval and on the tentative map provide adequate protection for any such easements. (k) The discharge of sewage from this subdivision into the public sewer system will not violate requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (Sections 13000, et seq.) of the California Water Code. (1) The housing needs of the region have been considered and balanced against the public service needs of local residents and available fiscal and environmental resources. (m) On October 26, 1992, January 25, February 8, February 22, February 25, April 12, April 26 and May 10, 1993, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the subject matter of the Application. (n) This 6.7 acres project was a component of the South Pointe Master Plan. Granting this application removes all restrictions to development on the real property within the boundary of Tentative Tract No. 51253. Any real property subsequently assembled with the lots created as a part of this action will retain all restrictions to use that may be in place at that time. (o) The City determined that the Project and those discretionary actions identified therein or required thereunder constituted a "project" pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended ("CEQA") and the guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act ("guidelines"). 4 (p) The City, based upon the preliminary findings contained in an Initial Study prepared by the City, determined that the Project could result in significant environmental impacts, commenced preparation of an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") and prepared and disseminated a Notice of Preparation ("NOP"). (c) On November 30, 1992, pursuant to the noticing obligations delineated in CEQA guidelines, the City prepared and disseminated both a Notice of Completion ("NOC") and the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the South Pointe Master Plan, SCH No. 92081040 ("Draft EIR"), commencing a 45 -day review period which concluded on January 14, 1993. (r) The City published legal notice regarding the availability of the Draft EIR and solicited public comments thereupon in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Bulletin on December 3, 1992. (s) On January 7, 1993, the City's Parks and Recreation Commission held a noticed public meeting to discuss the Project and the Draft EIR. On January 14, 1993, the City's Traffic and Transportation Commission conducted a noticed public meeting to discuss the Project and the Draft EIR. (t) Noticed public meetings were conducted by the City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission on December 14, 1992; January 25, February 8, May 10, May 17, and May 23, 1993; and May 24, 1994. (u) On May 24, 1993, the City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending to the City Council approval of the Project and certification of the H, # Ad Dmh EIR. (v) The City of Diamond Bar City Council conducted noticed public hearings on the Project and its environmental documentation on September 14, September 28, October 3, and November 16, 1993; and May 2, May 31, and June 3, 1994. On June 3, 1994, the City Council certified the ngi � DFa# EIR, but elected to take no action upon the Project. (w) On June 4, 1994, the City prepared a Notice of Determination ("NOD") documenting its actions certifying the Final EIR and posted the NOD at the office of the County Clerk and forwarded a copy of the NOD to the State Clearinghouse, in the form and manner prescribed under CEQA guidelines. (x) The Final EIR consists of the following documents: (1) Annotated Draft EIR (November 1992, annotated May 1994); (2) Response 5 to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for t South Pointe Master Plan (February 18, 1993); () Technical Appendix -Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the South Pointe Master Plan (May 18, 1993); (4) Volume II -Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the South Pointe Master Plan (November 1993); (5) Volume III -Response to Comments on the Draft Environmentalon Impact Report for the South Pointe Master Plan (May ); City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission staff reports, minutes and public testimony; and () City of Diamond Bar Council staff reports, minutes and public testimony. (y) Following certification of the Final EIR, the City Council conducted additional public hearings and meetings to consider each of the discretionary actions identified therein. On July 5, 1994, the City Council directed staff to prepare Findings of Fact, a Statement of overriding Considerations, a mitigation reporting and monitoring program and a revised NOD, in furtherance of those disclosure obligations contained in CEQA guidelines, authorizing the City Council to take subsequent actions upon all or a portion of the Project, including the alternatives identified in the Final EIR. 8. Based upon substantial evidence presented to specific Council sof factthe setforth ve referenced public hearing and upon the spec g above, pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code 65361, the Council hereby finds and determines as follows: (a) The action proposed (Tentative Map) was initiated and processed in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No. 4 (1992) of the City of Diamond Bar and pursuant to the Extension of Time conditions granted to the City of Diamond Bar by the Office of Planning and Research. (b) The Application as proposed and conditioned herein complies with all other applicable requirements of State law and local ordinances. 9. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this City Council hereby approves the Application subject to the following conditions which are set forth in Exhibit "C" hereto and are incorporated by reference. C6i The City Clerk is hereby directed to: (a) to certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, return receipt requested, to Amrut Patel, SASAK CORP., 858 W. 9th Street, Upland, CA 91785-1153 Approved and adopted this the 16th day of May, 1995, by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar. Mayor I, Lynda Burgess, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 16th day of May, 1995, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: [COUNCIL MEMBERS:] NOES: [COUNCIL MEMBERS:] ABSTAIN: [COUNCIL MEMBERS:] ABSENT: [COUNCIL MEMBERS:] ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar 7 RESOLUTION NO. 95 -MK A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH N0.92081040) AND APPROVAL OF HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-12 AND OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 92-9, ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51253, LOCATED EAST OF MORNING CANYON ROAD AND NORTH OF PATHFINDER ROAD IN DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, AND MAG FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals (i) Amrut Patel, SASAK CORP., 858 West 9th Street, Upland, California (the "Applicant" hereinafter), has heretofore filed an application for approval of Hillside Management Ordinance Conditional Use Permit for land form modifications and Oak Tree Permit involving the removal 50 oak trees with replacement both on and off the project site as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject project shall be referred to as the "Application". (ii) 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, by ordinance, the Los Angeles County Code as the ordinances of the City of Diamond Bar. Titles 21 and 22 of the Los Angeles County Code, as amended, contain the Development Code of the County of Los Angeles now currently 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. Action was taken on this application, as to consistency to the draft 1995 General Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of an Office of Planning and Research extension of time granted pursuant to California Government Code Section 65361. (iv) The City Council of the Cita of Diamond Bar conducted duly noticed public hearings on the project and its environmental 'documentation on September 14, September 28, October 3, and November 16, 1993; and May 2, May 9, May 31, June 1, June 3, 1994, June 6, 1994 and concluded the public hearings on June 13, 1994 on the subject matter of the Application. (v) The Conditional Use Permit for the hillside development relieves the applicant from compliance with the Hillside Management Ordinance because of topographic constraints and is granted pursuant to this action. (vi) Granting this application removes all restrictions to development on the real property within the boundary of Tentative Tract No. 51253. Any real property subsequently assembled with the lots created as a part of this action will retain all restrictions to use that may be in place at that time. (vii) As identified as a mitigation measure in the EIR (Biological Resources), prior to initiation of grading activities, the project applicant(s) shall implement the eenditions Of aMoval forthe Oak Tree Permit standg,�(,f in accordance with Part 16, Chapter 22.56 of Title 22 of the Los Angeles County Code. fil}is-aetie� (viii) On October 26, 1992, January 25, February 8, February 22, February 25, April 12, April 26 and May 10, 1993, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the subject matter of the Application. (ix) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. This City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The City Council hereby finds that the addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was presented to the City Council, and that the City Council reviewed and considered the information contained therein prior to deciding upon any aspect of the project, and based thereon, so certifies that addendum to the Final EIR No. SCH 92081040 has been prepared for this project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended, and the guidelines promulgated thereunder and further that the Addendum reflects the independent judgment of the City of Diamond Bar. 2 Additionally, the City Council certifies the addendum to the Final EIR is complete and adequate in that it fully addresses all environmental effects of the project. 3. The City Council hereby specifically finds and determines, based on the findings set forth below, that changes and alterations have been required in or incorporated into and conditioned upon the project specified in the application, which mitigate or avoid significant adverse environmental impacts identified in the a addendum to the Final EIR No. SCH 92081040 except as to those effects which are identified and made the subject of a Statement of Overriding Considerations which this City Council finds are clearly outweighed by the economic, social and other benefits of the proposed project, as more fully set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. 4. The City Council hereby adopts the Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program attached hereto as Exhibits "A" and "B" and hereby incorporated by reference. 5. The applicant shall make payment of any and all fees which the Department of Fish and Game may require to be paid prior to the issuance of any building permit or further entitlement. 6. The Hillside Management Ordinance Conditional Use Permit is required by Section 18 of the City of Diamond Bar Hillside Management Ordinance. 7. Based on substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above - referenced public hearing, including written and oral staff reports, public testimony and the record of the Application, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The Application applies to a parcel located in an area generally described as being situated west of the Orange (SR -57) Freeway and Brea Canyon Road, east of the corporate boundaries of the City (Tract 27141) and Morning Sun Avenue, north of Pathfinder Road and the adjacent existing residential area (Tract 32576) and south of existing residential and vacant land located southerly of Golden Springs Drive. (b) Surrounding properties' zoning and land use designations are: East: Brea Canyon Road and 57 Freeway; South: RPD 10,000 6U/vacant; West: R-1-15,000/School North: R-1-8000/Single Family Residential (c) The Application is for a Hillside Management Ordinance Conditional Use Permit and Oak Tree Permit and is compatible with the objectives, policies and programs specified because the parcel and land use proposed by the project are consistent with statistical analysis and development standards contained within the South Pointe Master Plan. The Oak Tree Permit involves the removal of 50 oak trees, 3 inches or more in diameter at a height of five feet, and the replacement of removed trees at a 2:1 ratio both on and off the site. (d) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed and has access to public highways and streets. Further, the property shall be served by sanitary sewers, provided, with water supply and distribution facilities with sufficient capacity to meet anticipated domestic and fire protection needs and shall have geologic hazards and flood hazards mitigated in accordance with the requirements of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. (e) The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantial and avoidable injury to fish or wildlife or to their habitat, and while the proposed development will have a significant adverse effect on biological resources, oak tree mitigation measures have been included as project conditions to reduce the impact of oak tree loss and a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been made on those unavoidable impacts. (f) The permitted improvements will not cause serious public health problems, since sewage disposal, storm drainage, public services and geological and soils factors are addressed in the conditions of approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 51252 filed concurrently with this project. (g) Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 involves the development of 21 single family residential dwelling units. The project provides for the provision of necessary infrastructure and public services to the development and for the payment of fees to mitigate development impacts upon the City and its residents. 4 (h) The land use contained within the project is residential, as permitted in the zone and complies with all applicable provisions of the City of Diamond Bar Municipal Code. In addition, the land uses, subdivision design and subsequent grading are compatible with the surrounding built environment but inconsistent with the goals and policies of the Hillside Management Ordinance. (i) The proposed development and grading plan will not impair the integrity and character of the zone in which they are to be located because the development proposal includes similar standards to those existing in adjacent neighborhoods. (j) The City of Diamond Bar ("City") accepted and subsequently processed an application for numerous land use entitlements upon an approximately 171 acre property within the City, comprised of multiple real property ownership interests, including Arciero and Sons, Inc., R/N/P Development, Inc., the Walnut Valley Unified School District ("District"), Sasak, Inc., and the City, collectively identified as the South Pointe Master Plan ("Project"). The subject application (Tentative Tract No. 51253) was a component of the South Pointe Master Plan. (k) The City determined that the Project and those discretionary actions identified therein or required thereunder constituted a "project" pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended ("CEQA") and the guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act ("guidelines"). (1) The City, based upon the preliminary findings contained in an Initial Study prepared by the City, determined that the Project could result in significant environmental impacts, commenced preparation of an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") and prepared and disseminated a Notice of Preparation ("NOP"). (m) On November 30, 1992, pursuant to the noticing obligations delineated in CEQA guidelines, the City prepared and disseminated both a Notice of Completion ("NOC") and the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the South Pointe Master Plan, SCH No. 92081040 ("Draft EIR"), commencing a 45 -day review period which concluded on January 14, 1993. (n) The City published legal notice regarding the availability of the Draft EIR and solicited public comments thereupon in the San 5 Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Bulletin on December 3, 1992. (o) On January 7, 1993, the City's Parks and Recreation Commission held a noticed public meeting to discuss the Project and the Draft EIR. On January 14, 1993, the City's Traffic and Transportation Commission conducted a noticed public meeting to discuss the Project and the Draft EIR. (p) Noticed public meetings were conducted by the City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission on December 14, 1992; January 25, February 8, May 10, May 17, and May 23, 1993; and May 24, 1994. (c) On May 24, 1993, the City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending to the City Council approval of the Project and certification of the Draft EIR. (r) The City of Diamond Bar City Council conducted noticed public hearings on the Project and its environmental documentation on September 14, September 28, October 3, November 16, 1993; and May 2, May 31, and June 3, 1994. On June 3, 1994, the City Council certified the Draft EIR ("Final EIR"), but elected to take no action upon the Project. (s) On June 4, 1994, the City prepared a Notice of Determination ("NOD") documenting its actions certifying the Final EIR and posted the NOD at the office of the County Clerk and forwarded a copy of the NOD to the State Clearinghouse, in the form and manner prescribed under CEQA guidelines. (t) The Final EIR consists of the following documents: (1) Annotated Draft EIR (November 1992, annotated May 1994); (2) Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the South Pointe Master Plan (February 18, 1993); (3) Technical Appendix -Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the South Pointe Master Plan (May 18, 1993); (4) Volume II -Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the South Pointe Master Plan (November 1993); (5) Volume III-Respon-e to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the South Pointe Master Plan (May 1994); (6) City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission staff reports, minutes and public testimony; and (7) City of Diamond Bar Council staff reports, minutes and public testimony. Z (u) Following certification of the Final EIR, the City Council conducted additional public hearings and meetings to consider each of the discretionary actions identified therein. On July 5, 1994, the City Council directed staff to prepare Findings of Fact, a statement of overriding considerations, a mitigation reporting and monitoring program and a revised NOD, in furtherance of those disclosure obligations contained in CEQA guidelines, authorizing the City Council to take subsequent actions upon all or a portion of the Project, including the alternatives identified in the Final EIR. Hillside Management (v) The proposed project is located and designed so as to protect the safety of current and future community residents, and will not create significant threats to life and/pr property due to the presence of geologic, seismic, slope instability, fire, flood, mud flow, or erosion hazard. (w) The proposed project is compatible with the natural, biotic, cultural, scenic, and open space resources of the area. (x) The proposed project is conveniently served by (or provides) neighborhood shopping and commercial facilities, can be provided with essential public services without imposing undue costs on the total community, and is consistent with the objectives and policies of the draft General Plan. (y) The proposed development demonstrates creative and imaginative design, resulting in a visual quality that will complement community character and benefit current and future community residents. Conditional Use Permit (z) The proposed project will not be in substantial conflict with the draft General Plan, local ordinances, and State requirements. (aa) The proposed project will not adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding area. 7 (bb) The proposed project will not be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the site. (cc) The proposed project will not jeopardize, endanger or otherwise constitute a menace to public health, safety or general welfare. (dd) The project site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parldng and loading facilities, landscaping and other development features prescribed within City ordinances, or as otherwise required in order to integrate the use with uses in the surrounding area. (ee) The project site is adequately served by highways or streets of sufficient width and improved as necessary to carry the kind and quantity of traffic such use would generate. Oak Tree Permit (ff) The proposed project will be accomplished without endangering the health of the remaining oak trees. (gg) The removal or relocation of oak trees proposed will not result in soil erosion through the diversion or increased flow of surface waters which cannot be satisfactorily mitigated. (hh) The removal or relocation of the oak trees proposed is necessary as continued existence at present locations frustrates the planned improvement or proposed use of the subject property to such an extent that alternative development plans cannot achieve the same permitted density or that the cost of such alternative would be prohibitive. 8. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above -referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of fact set forth above, pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code 65361, the Council hereby finds and determines as follows: (a) The application as submitted, was initiated and proposed in accordance with provisions of Ordinance 4 (1992) of the City of Diamond Bar and pursuant to the Extension of Time conditions granted to the City of Diamond Bar by the Office of Planning and Research. E:3 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM CITY OF DIAMOND BAR TO: Mayor and City Council VIA: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager l� FROM: Frank M. Usher, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Fire at 547 Great Bend Drive, on April 22, l 5 DATE: May 11, 1995 (Meeting of May 16, 1995) This report will address the issues of response, cause investigation, and clean-up and security. I have reviewed the logs of 14 calls to 911 and the resulting dispatch and arrival log of the L.A. County Fire Department. I have also personally interviewed five individuals who called 911, and who contacted me in response to a letter from the Mayor Pro Tem requesting information. The Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) for calls to 911 from Diamond Bar telephones is located at the Walnut Station of the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department. (Calls to 911 from cellular telephones go directly to the California Highway Patrol at another location.) The source, time, and date of all calls to 911 is recorded automatically, by computer. On the morning when the incident occurred, the 911 computer clock was running five minutes fast, thereby recording calls five minutes later then actual receipt. This was not known by Sheriff personnel at the time, and it has since been corrected by the telephone company. The 911 times referred to in this report are corrected for that difference. The times indicated on the Sheriff computer aided dispatch system, the voice recorder, and on the Fire Department logs have been determined to be accurate relative to Greenwich Mean Time and actual local time. I have identified the calls of all the persons whom I interviewed on the 911 logs. While some believe that they called earlier than the logs. indicate, others have an estimation of call time very close to that recorded (as corrected) on the 911 logs. The 911 logs were searched from 12:00 mid -night forward. The first call regarding this incident was received at 5:11:42 a.m., 911 transmission to the Fire Department was at 5:11:55 a.m., and transmission was complete at 5:12:34 a.m. After resource identification, Fire Department dispatch occurred at 5:13:25 a.m., simultaneously to 5 NOTICE OF ADJOURNMENT Notice is hereby given that the City of Diamond Bar City Council, at their meeting of May 16, 1995, adjourned said meeting to May 17, 1995 at 6:30 p.m., in the AQMD Auditorium, located at 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. Said adjournment was passed by the following votes: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Ansari, Harmony, Miller MPT/Werner and M/Papen NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None /s/ Lynda Burgess Lynda Burgess, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar Dated: May 17, 1995 stations. The first Fire unit rolled in response at 5:14:39 a.m. Meanwhile, two Sheriff units were dispatched at 5:12 a.m., and they arrived at the scene at 5:15 a.m. and 5:17 a.m. At 5:17 a.m., the Sheriff deputies asked for Fire Department estimated time of arrival (E. T. A.), and they were told 3 to 5 minutes. The first Fire unit arrived at the scene at 5:20 a.m., with additional Fire units arriving 1 to 3 minutes later. I have found that the total time from the first 911 call to the arrival of the first Fire unit was 8 minutes. The time from Fire dispatch to arrival of the first Fire unit was 6-1/2 minutes. Investieation The preliminary indications are that the cause of the fire was electrical in origin. Further investigation is being done to try to reaffirm the exact location of start of the fire and to determine the possibility of other contributing factors. A further report will be provided when this is complete. n -un ana recur A car which was partially burned and removed from the driveway in order to fight the fire has been removed at the direction of the Sheriffs Department. The Diamond Bar Building Department has directed the owner of the property and the insurance company to secure the property with a temporary fence, and to further secure the existing fire place. These measures have been completed. Remaining personal belongings are to be removed by the resident by May 14, 1995. nbw CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. 1. / TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 REPORT DATE: May 11, 1995 FROM: Bob Rose, Community Services Director TITLE: AWARD OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO RJM DESIGN GROUP FOR THE MAPLE HILL PARK RETROFIT PROJECT SUMMARY: The City Council awarded the construction contract for the Maple Hill Park ADA Retrofit on April 18, 1995. To administer the construction project the City desires to retain the services of a professional project manager. The Project Manager will review time schedules, interpret plans and specifications, process submittal's, review payment requests, conduct construction inspections, prepare the final "punch list" and produce "as -built" drawings for the City. The City believes the RJM Design Group can offer the best quality of service for this specific project. RJM is currently under contract with the City for on-call landscape architect services and completed the construction drawings for the Maple Hill Park project. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council award the project management services for the Maple Hill Park retrofit project to RJM Design Group, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $9,500. EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed _ Yes X No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? MAJORITY 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? N/A _ Yes —No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? N/A _ Yes —No Which Commission? 5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes X No Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: f*errence L. Belanger Frank M. Usher ' City Manager Assistant City Manager Bob Rose Community Services Director CITY COUNCIL REPORT MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 AGENDA NO. TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager SUBJECT: AWARD OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO RJM DESIGN GROUP FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE MAPLE HILL RETROFIT PROJECT RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council award the project management services for the Maple Hill Park retrofit project to RJM Design Group, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $9,500. SUMMARY: The City Council awarded the construction contract for the Maple Hill Park ADA Retrofit on April 18, 1995. To administer the construction project the City desires to retain the services of a professional project manager. The Project Manager will review time schedules, interpret plans and specifications, process submittal's, review payment requests, conduct construction inspections, prepare the final "punch list" and produce "as -built" drawings for the City. The City believes the RJM Design Group can offer the best quality of service for this specific project. RJM is currently under contract with the City for on-call landscape architect services and completed the construction drawings for the Maple Hill Park project. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: There are adequate funds available in the current Community Services Department budget. DISCUSSION: The ADA Maple Hill Park Retrofit Project will commence construction soon. The project consists of demolition, replacement of playground equipment, placement of matting and sand, restroom retrofit, grading and pouring of cement walkways. Due to this being a ADA compliance project, special emphasis needs to be placed on the concrete form work for site access to insure that the design intent and allowable slope percentages are achieved prior to the placement of concrete. To ensure that the contractor is strictly adhering to all aspects of the plans and specifications and ADA compliance standards staff requested RJM Design Group to provide a proposal for Project Management services. Attached is the proposal of RJM for these services. The not to exceed amount of the project will be $9,500 which includes both field observation and office administration. RJM DESIGN GROUP, INC. ,, PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE April 10, 1995 Mr. Bob Rose Director of Community Services City of Diamond Bar 21660 East Copley Drive, Ste 100 Diamond Bar, California 917654177 RE: Construction Observation for Maple Hill Park ADA/Tot Lot Improvements 97MVI-.. Pursuant to our recent discussions we are pleased to submit this letter of interest regarding construction administration and observation for Maple Hill Park. t i, ru= M, 1 1 During the Construction Phase we shall provide those services, as outlined, for the administration of the construction contract. A. Review and approve contractor's timeline schedule. B. Prepare weekly summary report on contractor's construction status. C. Interpret plans and specifications. D. Preparation of change orders. E. Processing of submittals, including receipt, review oZ and appropriate action on Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples and other submittals required by the Contract Documents F. Distribution of submittals to Owner, Contractor and/or field representative as required. G. Review and approve contractor payment requests. H. Prepare Notice of Completion Maple Hill ADA/Tot Lot ImprovemenW995-30 272$5 LAS RAMBLAS, SUITE 250 e MISSION VIEJO, CA 92691 . (714) 582-7516 • FAX (714) 582-0429 Nte 1 2. Construction Field Observation Services consisting of visits to the site at intervals appropriate to the stage of construction to become generally familiar with the progress and quality of the Work and to determine in general if the Work is proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents. A suggested schedule for site visits is as follows: A. On-site pre -construction meeting. B. .Review limits of demolition. C. Review layout of site elements (play area, walks, play equipment, etc.). (*See Special Note) D. Grading/Drainage review. E. Irrigation layout/coverage test. F. Review completion and prepare "Punch List" items to be completed prior to commencement of the maintenance period. G. Final review and approval at end of maintenance period. H. Obtain from the Contractor As -Built drawings produced from contractors printed "As-Builts" and submitted on Amt mylar reproducibles (option per City direction). SPECIAL NOTE: It is our experience that there are occasions in which the design intent and specific information contained within the construction drawing package is not 'strictly" adhered to. With the increase in awareness regarding providing ADA compliance we propose to "field" review concrete form work for site access with a "Smart Level" to insure that the design intent and allowable slope percentages for site access (walkways, ramps, tot lot access, etc.) are achieved prior to the placement of concrete. Based upon our current understanding and experience of this project, it is our recommendation to proceed with this work on an hourly basis for an estimated amount of $9,500. This will provide for 12 hours of field observation and 4 hours of office administration per week. This work shall be billed per our hourly fee schedule. We look forward to maintaining our close working relationship with you on this exciting project. If you have any questions or comments after reviewing this proposal, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, RJM Design Group, Inc. LarryVent &L.. Vice LPR/le Maple Hill ADArrot Lot Improvements/995-30 Page 2 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.�- TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 REPORT DATE: May 12, 1995 FROM: Bob Rose, Community Services Director TITLE: City Entry Signs SUNEWARY: With the completion of the new center medians on Golden Springs at the west city limits, Diamond Bar has two locations that are appropriate for the placement of City Entry Signs. (The second location is Grand Avenue at the 60 Freeway where a previously installed entry sign was damaged in an auto accident and had to be removed.) The City Council requested staff to present entry sign design options for their consideration. Several designs have been completed and reviewed by the City Council entry sign sub -committee. The sub -committee preferred sample #1 as its first choice and sample #2 as its second choice. The design samples and the sub -committee preferences were then forwarded to the City Council for their information. Staff is seeking City Council direction on the design to use for City Entry signs proposed to be installed at the two sites in Diamond Bar. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review and comment on the conceptual City Entry Sign designs and direct staff appropriately. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report Public Hearing Notification Resolution(s) Bid Specifications (on file in City Clerk's Office) Ordinance(s) X_ Other: Conceptual Designs Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed _ Yes X No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority vote? X Yes No 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? _ Yes X_ No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes X No 5. Are other departments affected by the report? Yes X No Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: �� f ro,' Terrence L. Belanger Frank . Usher Bob ose City Manager Assistant City Manager Community Services Director CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrance L. Belanger, City Manger SUBJECT: City Entry Signs ISSUE STATEMENT: Staff is seeking City Council direction on the design to use for City Entry signs proposed to be installed at two sites in Diamond Bar. Also, if a new design is selected, shall staff replace the three existing entry signs with the new design? RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review and comment on the conceptual City Entry Sign designs and direct staff appropriately. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: It is estimated that, depending on the design selected, the cost to design, construct and install each City Entry Sign will be between $1,300 and $6,000. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Five sites in the City of Diamond Bar have been identified as appropriate locations for City Entry Signs. These sites include: 1. West City limits at Golden Springs and Calbourne 2. Northwest City limits at Grand Avenue and 60 Freeway 3. North City limits at Diamond Bar Blvd. near Temple Avenue 4. East City limits at Grand Avenue and Longview 5. South City limits at Diamond Bar Blvd. near Brea Canyon Road Each of these sites are entry ways into the community on major boulevards that are heavily travelled and have landscaped center medians on which to construct the entry sign. Three of the above sites already have entry signs in place. Two sites, West City limits at Golden Springs and Calbourne, and Northwest City limits at Grand Avenue and the 60 Freeway, do not presently have entry signs. With the recent completion of the landscaped center median at Golden Springs and Calbourne, these two sites are now ready to have entry signs installed. (Note - there was once an entry sign at Grand Avenue and the 60 Freeway, but it was damaged in an auto accident and had to be removed.) In order to provide the City Council with an option on the type of entry sign to install, staff has developed several conceptual drawings for review. City Council Report City Entry Signs Meeting Date: May 16, 1995 Page 2 BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: (continued) The drawings were reviewed by the City Council Entry Sign sub -committee that was in place at that time (the sub -committee has since been disbanded). The sub -committee selected design sample "1" as their preference. That preference and all the cone r Dual drawings were then forwarded to the City Council for review. Since that time, the City Council has approved the plans and specifications for monument signs to be placed at the City's parks. The City Council may wish to consider a design similar to the park monument signs for the City Entry Signs with the verbiage "Welcome to Diamond Bar" in place of the name of the park. The sample conceptual drawings included in this packet include: 1. First choice of the sub -committee - Metal Diamond Bar sign mounted on low profile river rock base. 2. Second choice of the sub -committee - Metal Diamond Bar sign mounted on high profile river rock base. 3. Narrow profile metal Diamond Bar sign protruding from top of stone monument wall. 4. Metal Diamond Bar sign mounted on pole that rises above river rock base - Can support banners,. S. Wide profile metal Diamond Bar sign protruding from top of stone monument wall. 6. Three dimensional pyramid shaped monument with metal or concrete "Diamond Bar" 7. Sample of approved park monument sign. Park name would be replaced with "Welcome to Diamond Bar" 8. Copy of photo of existing entry sign. Staff is seeking City Council direction on the design to use for the proposed construction of entry signs at the two available sites. The options available that the City Council may wish to consider include: 1 Select one of the conceptual designs and direct staff to develop plans and specifications for the construction of the two new City Entry Signs. 2. Direct staff to install two new City entry signs that are consistent in design to those already in place. 3. Direct staff to remove the three existing City Entry Signs and replace them with the design selected by the City Council. 4. Re-establish the City Council Entry Sign sub -committee to study the available options in more detail and to bring back a recommendation to the City Council. PREPARED BY: Bob Rose Community Services Director 0 t7l j cn r- 0 rt 't (D (D =W - (D 0 0 (D 0 t7l j cn r- 0 rt 't (D M all In 'T—' �j Ul 1 L l I a m d N LQ n m tr "o L a E rn a £ o goo 51(D SZ w o �j " ;D rr f ,d sat�zs Qz��N�S 60:17T 5=6, Photo of existing Entry Sign UITY Y Or DIAMUINI) BAK AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 REPORT DATE: May 12, 1995 FROM: Bob Rose, Community Services Director TITLE: City Entry Signs SUMMARY: With the completion of the new center medians on Golden Springs at the west city limits, Diamond Bar has two locations that are appropriate for the placement of City Entry Signs. (The second location is Grand Avenue at the 60 Freeway where a previously installed entry sign was damaged in an auto accident and had to be removed.) The City Council requested staff to present entry sign design options for their consideration. Several designs have been completed and reviewed by the City Council entry sign sub -committee. The sub -committee preferred sample #1 as its first choice and sample #2 as its second choice. The design samples and the sub -committee preferences were then forwarded to the City Council for their information. Staff is seeking City Council direction on the design to use for City Entry signs proposed to be installed at the two sites in Diamond Bar. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review and comment on the conceptual City Entry Sign designs and direct staff appropriately. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report Public Hearing Notification Resolution(s) Bid Specifications (on file in City Clerk's Office) Ordinance(s) X Other: Conceptual Designs Agreement(s) EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: 1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed — Yes X No by the City Attorney? 2. Does the report require a majority vote? X Yes No 3. Has environmental impact been assessed? _ Yes X No 4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes X No 5. Are other departments affected by the report? Yes X No Report discussed with the following affected departments: REVIEWED BY: l Foy Terrence L. Belanger Frank Usher Bob IRose City Manager Assistant City Manager Community Services Director CITY COUNCIL REPORT AGENDA NO. MEETING DATE: May 16, 1995 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Terrance L. Belanger, City Manger SUBJECT: City Entry Signs ISSUE STATEMENT: Staff is seeking City Council direction on the design to use for City Entry signs proposed to be installed at two sites in Diamond Bar. Also, if a new design is selected, shall staff replace the three existing entry signs with the new design? RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review and comment on the conceptual City Entry Sign designs and direct staff appropriately. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: It is estimated that, depending on the design selected, the cost to design, construct and install each City Entry Sign will be between $1,300 and $6,000. BACKGROUNDIDISCUSSION: Five sites in the City of Diamond Bar have been identified as appropriate locations for City Entry Signs. These sites include: 1. West City limits at Golden Springs and Calbourne 2. Northwest City limits at Grand Avenue and 60 Freeway 3. North City limits at Diamond Bar Blvd. near Temple Avenue 4. East City limits at Grand Avenue and Longview 5. South City limits at Diamond Bar Blvd. near Brea Canyon Road Each of these sites are entry ways into the community on major boulevards that are heavily travelled and have landscaped center medians on which to construct the entry sign. Three of the above sites already have entry signs in place. Two sites, West City limits at Golden Springs and Calbourne, and Northwest City limits at Grand Avenue and the 60 Freeway, do not presently have entry signs. With the recent completion of the landscaped center median at Golden Springs and Calbourne, these two sites are now ready to have entry signs installed. (Note - there was once an entry sign at Grand Avenue and the 60 Freeway, but it was damaged in an auto accident and had to be removed.) In order to provide the City Council with an option on the type of entry sign to install, staff has developed several conceptual drawings for review. City Council Report City Entry Signs Meeting Date: May 16, 1995 Page 2 BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: (continued) The drawings were reviewed by the City Council Entry Sign sub -committee that was in place at that time (the sub -committee has since been disbanded). The sub -committee selected design sample "1" as their preference. That preference and all the conceptual drawings were then forwarded to the City Council for review. Since that time, the City Council has approved the plans and specifications for monument signs to be placed at the City's parks. The City Council may wish to consider a design similar to the park monument signs for the City Entry Signs with the verbiage "Welcome to Diamond Bar" in place of the name of the park. The sample conceptual drawings included in this packet include: 1. First choice of the sub -committee - Metal Diamond Bar sign mounted on low profile river rock base. 2. Second choice of the sub -committee - Metal Diamond Bar sign mounted on high profile river rock base. 3. Narrow profile metal Diamond Bar sign protruding from top of stone monument wall. 4. Metal Diamond Bar sign mounted on pole that rises above river rock base - Can support banners,. 5. Wide profile metal Diamond Bar sign protruding from top of stone monument wall. 6. Three dimensional pyramid shaped monument with metal or concrete "Diamond Bar" 7. Sample of approved park monument sign. Park name would be replaced with "Welcome to Diamond Bar" 8. Copy of photo of existing entry sign. Staff is seeking City Council direction on the design to use for the proposed construction of entry signs at the two available sites. The options available that the City Council may wish to consider include: 1 Select one of the conceptual designs and direct staff to develop plans and specifications for the construction of the two new City Entry Signs. 2. Direct staff to install two new City entry signs that are consistent in design to those already in place. 3. Direct staff to remove the three existing City Entry Signs and replace them with the design selected by the City Council. 4. Re-establish the City Council Entry Sign sub -committee to study the available options in more detail and to bring back a recommendation to the City Council. PREPARED BY: Bob Rose Community Services Director rt C) x 0 0 (D 0 rn txj rr rt ft rt ka J1 � I ro m N I (D n O n 1 m � ka J1 a ro W -� � N r a 0 cn Pi F— (D K/ F' d N LQ 0 n n 1-0m �j F_ r� �(D n U �-, r o rt n � dZ Fl- m n x 0 0 � wm � a o fi ti --470 i Sd1J25 �?r-,+�NtiS 60bI 96, 9 •�� _ 'd Photo of existing Entry Sign 1 0 • 2.1 ADDENDUM TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE SOUTH POINT MASTER PLAN STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 92081040 Prepared For: CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 21660 EAST COPLEY DRIVE DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA 91765 (909) 861-3117 FAX (909) 396-5676 Prepared By: ULTRASYSTEMS ENVIRONMENTAL INCORPORATED 26461 CROWN VALLEY PARKWAY, SUITE 140 MISSION VIEJO, CALIFORNIA 92691 (714) 367-8890 FAX (714) 367-8888 May 1995 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section page 1.0 INTRODUCTION......................................................1 1.1 Project Chronology 1.2 Statement of Objectives ............................................. 3 1.3 Statutory Authority ................................................ 4 1.4 Intended Use of Addendum .......................................... 5 1.5 Agencies/Organizations.............................................. 6 1.6 Incorporated by Reference ........................................... 7 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................. 8 2.1 Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 ....................................... 8 2.2 Master Plan Project Site ............................................ 11 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ........................................ 12 3.1 Introduction.....................................................12 3.2 Environmental Impacts ............................................ 13 3.2.1 Land Use.................................................13 3.2.2 Earth Resources............................................14 3.2.3 Water Resources ........................................... 15 3.2.4 Biological Resources . . .. .................................... 15 3.2.5 Traffic/Circulation.......................................... 16 3.2.6 Air Quality ................................................ 18 3.2.7 Noise....................................................19 3.2.8 Public Services/Utilities...................................... 19 3.2.9 Archaeology/Paleontology.................................... 19 3.2.10 Aesthetics ................................................. 19 3.2.11 Growth Inducement ......................................... 20 4.0 MINOR TECHNICAL CHANGES AND ADDITIONS ...................... 20 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 ....................................... 9 Tentative Tract ,Vlap No. 51153 Page i 4664/Staff Report TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Draft Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program Attachment 2: Preliminary Soils and Geologic Investigation Attachment 3: Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 -Oak Tree Survey Attachment 4: Traffic Impact Study - Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 page Tentative Tract Map No. 5125 4664/Staff Report 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 -Proi� Chronology The City of Diamond Bar (City) previously received and subsequently processed a number of erty applications for various land use entitlements ureal pon aroperty ownerships interests incn approximately 17 t ± acre luded, separate lications and corresponding P No. 32400); (2) within the City. Those app but were not limited to: (1) Arciero and Sons, Inc. (Vesting Tentative Tract Map oration assed by those ownership R/N/P Development, Inc.(Vesting Tentative Tra MP areas enc0om�p and (3) Sasak Corporation (Tentative Tract Map No. 51253). The real property inclusive of adjoining properties under the ownership of th i WoalnucoVabiried development interests, Unified School in District (District) and the City, were consolidated bythe y proposals and subsequently entitled the South Pointe Master Plan (Master Plan Project). therein that the Master Plan Project and those discretionaryactions Env ronmentaldQual Quality The City determined"project" ect" pursuant to the C or required thereunder constituted a P J findings contained mended (CEQA) and the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Act, as a based upon the preliminary g Environmental Quality Act (Guidelines). The City, rmined that the Master Plan Project coudresult t significant environmental in an initial Stud1deteof an environmental ImpaPrand prepared and impacts, commenced preparation subsequently disseminated a Notice of preparation (NOP) • •n Guidelines, the City On November 30, 1992, pursuant to the noticing obligations delineated 1 Draft Impact prepared and disseminated both a and the ft review Notice of Completion (NOCK commencing a 45-day ar 14, 1993. The City published legal notice regarding the period which concluded on January Report for the South Pointe Master Plan, SCH No. 92081040 (DEIR), y it of the DEIR and solicited public comments thereupon in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune availabil y and Inland Valley Bulletin on December 3, 1992. Commission on public meetings were conducted by the City of Diamond Bar Planning 17, 1993; May 23, Noticed p 1993 • February 8, 1993; May 10, 1993; May of Diamond Bar Planning Commission December 14, 1992; January 25 � 1993 the City royal of the 1993 and May 24, 1994. On May 24, adopted a resolution recommending to the City of Diamond Bar City Council app P Master. Plan Project and certification of the DEIR. Diamond Bar City Council conducted noticed public hearings on the Master Plan The City of DSeptember 28, 1993; October Project and its environmental documentation on September 994 and June 3 1994. On June 3 , 1994, 3, 1993; November Ba City May it 1994; May ut ed to take no action upon the City o f Diamond Bar City Council certified the DEIR (FE'a Noticeof Determination (NOD) the Master Plan Project. On June 4, 1994, the City preparedCounty le under documenting its a ctions certifying the FEIR, posted the NOD at the office of the County Clerk and to the State Clearinghouse, in the form and manner forwarded a copy of the NOD Pnoe 1 4664IStaff Report CEQA and Guidelines. The FEIR consists of the following documents: (1) Annotated Draft EIR (November 1992, annotated May 1994); (2) Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the South Pointe Master Plan (February 18, 1993); (3) Technical Appendix -Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the South Pointe Master Plan (May 18, 1993); (4) Volume II -Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the South Pointe Master Plan (November 1993); (5) Volume III -Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the South Pointe Master Plan (May 1994); (6) City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission staff reports, minutes and public testimony; and (7) City of Diamond Bar Council staff reports, minutes and public testimony. Following certification of the FEIR, the City Council conducted additional public hearings and public meetings to consider each of the discretionary actions comprising the Master Plan Project. On October 18, 1994, the City Council recertified the FEIR, prepared a second NOD, disseminated that document in the manner prescribed by CEQA and Guidelines, adopted Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program authorizing the City to undertake subsequent discretionary actions upon all or a portion of the Master Plan Project. The City subsequently elected to take formal actions concerning specific aspects of the Master Plan Project (e.g., approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32400), while electing to take no action concerning other project components. Those project activities left unaddressed at that time included, but were not limited to, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 (R/NIP Development Inc.) and Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 (Sasak Corporation), including each of the related discretionary actions associated therewith. Following certification of the FEIR, the Walnut Valley Unified School District subsequently acquired from R/N/P Development Inc. an approximately 77 ± acre portion of the 171 ± acre Master Plan Project site, inclusive of the boundaries of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407. In taking that action, the District's acquisition resulted in a cessation of the further processing of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407. As originally proposed, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 formed the westerly boundary of Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 and provided a proposed vehicular linkage (i.e., "A" Street) between Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 and Brea Canyon Road. With the cessation of further processing of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407, secondary vehicular access to Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 was eliminated. Subsequent to the District's acquisition of that property, identified as Lot 49 of Tract 32576 and Lot 53 of Tract 35742, the District undertook grading activities upon that site to accommodate surplus soil materials which had been previously stockpiled upon the grounds of the District's South Pointe Middle School, which formed the northern and western boundaries of the Master Plan Project site. The removal of that soils material from the school site and its subsequent deposition Page 2 Tentative Tract ;Nap No. 51253 4664/Staff Report ns within the Project upon the acquired acreage resulted in both landform. altlothe South Poi �aMiddlPlan e S hool site in and facilitated the District's independent efforts improve accordance with the District's approved facility plan for that campus. ap No. Subsequent to the District's acquisition of the area of Vesting addit oval Tentative public meeting (November le City Council of the City of Diamond Bar conducted 1994) concerning Tentative Tract Map No. 51253. In acting upon components of the Master Plan Project, ve Tract Map Nor 51253, an ludingc(but not approval, conditional approval or denial of Tentativeuse limited to) associated actions upon a requisite zoneh Ordinange,ance ondandlt oakl t ee pemovalCpermrt required under the City's Hillside Management Additionally, the District's election to acquire the area of an pro Project and the depontative Tract sition of surplus the subsequent elimination of that site from the Master Plan J soil material upon that property has altered both the existing and potential future environment adjoining Tentative Tract Map No. 51253. The long-term open space retention of the area defined as V We g Tentative Canyon Preservation Al . 51407 was addressed as a project alternative in the FEIR (i.e., East/ Y however, the precise configuration of open space retention and approvatherein 1 of a 21 -lot subdivision (Tentative Tract Map No. 51253) was not specifically examined 1.2 -Stamnt ofhi n mectives On June 3, 1994, the City certified FEIR and on October lg, 1994 subsequently recertified the FEIR for the Master Plan Project. In taking that action, the City satisfied provisions of CEQA and vironmental basis for Guidelines and established an enec the consideration discretionary u si e to the implementation of that actions upon all or a portion of the Master Plan Prof q and procedural changes development plan or components thereof. As described above, physical landform alteration; to both the Master Plan Project Tentatithe a Tract Map No. 51407)(e.g.,ster Plan Projet site landform occurred following cessation of processing of Vesting ve certification of the FEIR. I has this envirom-nental The City, continuing to act in its capacity as Lead Agencyal revisions tertaken o the FEIR which may be analysis for the purpose of identifying those minor technic re uired to accurately describe the environmental effects t s 10EQA ting m thGuidel neserhas been q actions. This addendum (Addendum), Prepared pursua prepared to: hIdentify those physical and procedural changes which revisions to Plan Project site following certification of the FEIR and to set forth any technical FEIRwhich may be necessary to fully disclose those changes to the existing and reasonably Page 3 Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 4664/Staff Report foreseeable future physical environment upon and proximal to the project site; Provide an expanded analysis of those potential environmental enial impacts ract Map Nowh ch may manifest from the approval or conditional approval of Tentative Provide an environmental basis for the City's approval or conditional approval of Tentative • Tract Map No. 51253, including a zone change, Hillside Management Ordinance conditional use permit, oak tree removal permit for the subdotisionlscretionary of the projectts t sand the as may be required from the City of Diamond Ba subsequent improvement of the property thereupon. It is not, however, the purpose of this Addendum to identify and describe the potential environmental impacts associated with the development emT The development of that project entative Tract Map No. 51253 site that portion of the Master Plan Project site addressed has been previously analyzed and thoroughly addressed in the focuses upon those Aminorddendum is technical intended to augment but not replace the information presented therein and ental analysis which may be a ro riate to describe revisions or additions to the previous erooand the physical environment prto the project and address both the changes to project site. 1,3 Statutory Authorit Pursuant to Section 15164 of Guidelines, codified in the CaliforniaVol certifiie EIR if: Regulations of (1) noneeOf the Lead Agency is authorized to prepare an addendum to a pre Y tion of a subsequent EIR conditions described in Section 15162 of the CCR calling for Teen necesspreparary to make the EIR under have occurred; (2) only minor technical changes or additions a eEIR made b consideration adequate under CEQA; and (3) the changes n theenv orunenty the addendum do not raise important new issues about the significant effects An addendum can be completed where only minor technical changes or additions to the previously certified EIR or the project described therein are proposed or required. Referencing the Discforussion an following Section 15164 of the CCR, this section is designed provide addendum as a way of making minor corrections in EIR,without to aan EIR'e ircul aing ththe addEIR The addendum is the other side of the coin from the supplement ired under Section 15162 of Guidelines, where as EIR has been previously prepared which Asre qwMaster Plan Project), no additional EIR is required unless: addresses a particular project activity(e.g., ill require ortant revisions of the Subsequent changes are proposed in the project which environmental impacts not considered previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant in a previous EIR on the project; Page 4 Tentative 7 fact Nil 4664/Staff Report er which the ject is nces Substantial changes occur with respect to the circ e airaqualitynwhere the p ojecctowill be undertaken, such as a substantial deterioration in th q located which will require important revisions in the previoe�iousREIR;tor he involvement of new significant environmental impacts not covered in a p New information of substantial importance to the project becomes available and the the time previous was information was not known and could not have been known o of the followings (1) the project will certified as complete and the new information shows previously in the EIR; (2) significant effects have one or more significant effects not discussed p y mitigation previously examined will be substantially more eve be feas ble would ire than shown In n fact Rbe3feasib and measures or alternatives previously found no mitigation would substantially reduce one or more significant effects ered iof n the EIR would e project; or substantially measures or alternatives which were not previously const lessen one or more significant effects on the environment. is required to prepare either a subsequent ent EIR Should any of these conditions exist, the Lead Agency q CCR) for (Section 15162(b), CCR) or a supplement to the prvious tEIRhe (paraectgon of that companion document. of addresses the issues or circumstances which predicate curred; therefore, a None of the conditions or events described above have nor technical changes and subsequent supplemental EIR is not required to address and disclose t he mi R or the project which are needed to demonstrate full compliance with CEQA and to the FEI Guidelines. 1.4 T *fflded Use of Addendum on with lowin a encies are anticipated to utilize this Addendum,on the pending proin conjunctim .ect: FEIR, as The folg g the environmental basis for subsequent discretionary actions up recommendations on a project to the Cit of Diamond Bar. Section 15025( c) of Guidelines indicates that where an advisory City Commission) is required to mak body (e.g., Planning shall review and consider the environmental decision-making body, the advisory body requires that prior to taking documentation in either draft or final form• cos der the addendum with the action, the decision-making body (i.e., City Council) shall previously certified FEIR. a decision upon the project, other Other Responsible Agencies. Prior to realawnu on the project site or the resources Responsible Agencies having jurisdiction by p project as shown in the contained the must consider the environmental s bleAgencies,oas lidentified in the FEIR and environmental impact report. Those Rep this as listed herein, may utilize the information contained in the FEIR, as amended by Addendum, as evidence of CEQA compliance. entativ p No. 51 4664/Staff Report 1 5 Age— s��r�aniza i n The following agencies and organizations are associated with the proposed project: Lead Agency: City of Diamond Bar ' Attn: Rob Searcy, Associate Planner 21660 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar, California 91765 (909) 396-5676/(909) 861-3117 FAX Sasak Corporation Applicant: Attn: Amrut Patel P.O. Box 1153 Upland, CA 91785-1153 (909) 981-6449/(909) 985-7520 FAX Applicant Representative: JA.C. DaabnCe D ssey, P Ee president 671 S. Brea Canyon Road, Suite 5 Walnut, CA 91789 (909) 594-7586/(909) 594-5090 FAX City's CEQA Consultant: Ultrasystem ewnviron e Panc corporated Attn: Peter Lndowal 26461 Crown Valley Parkway, Suite 140 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 (714) 367-8888/(714) 367-8890 FAX Responsible Agencies: U. S. Department of the Army Corps of Engineers (COE) Branch Los Angeles District - Regulatory Chief Attn: Diana Noda, Acting Regulatory 300 North Los Angeles Street (P.O. Box 2711) Los Angeles, CA 90053-2325 (2 13) 894-5132/(213) 894-5312 FAX California Department J f Regional Manager and Game (CDFG) Attn: Fred A. Worth! y, 330 Golden Shore, Suite 50 Long Beach, CA 90802 (310) 590-51321(310) 590-5193 FAX Tentative Tract Map No. 51 4664/Staff Report Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region (RWQCB) Attn: Robert P. Ghirelli, Executive Officer 101 Centre Plaza Drive Monterey Park, CA 91754.2156 (213) 266-7607/(213) 266-7600 FAX County of Los Angeles (County) Department of Public Works Attn: Harry W. Stone, Director 900 South Fremont Avenue Alhambra, CA 91803-1331 (8 18) 458-4014/(818) 458-4022 FAX Walnut Valley Unified School District (District) Fiscal and Facilities Management Attn: Clayton Chaput, Assistant Superintendent 880 South Lemon Avenue (P.O. Box 469) Walnut, CA 91789 (909) 595-1261 x 328/(909) 595-9626 FAX 1.6 In r Borated by Referen e Section 15150 of Guidelines allows environmental impact reports or portions of other documents that area matter of public record. W document is incorporated by reference, the incorporated pits to incorporate by reference all in full as part of the text of the environmental Incorporated act here all or a portion of another Ian shall be considered to be set forth P report. The information presented in this Addendum is based, inP art upon other environmental documents Prepared subsequent to the certification of the FEIR which include the the environmental issues germain to the proposed project. reference herein, include: Project site or which address These documents, incorporated by ' A Resolution of the Ci Environmental Impact Report for the South Point Adopting Findings of Fact, a Statement uncil Of the � of Diamond Bar Certi in Pointe Master plan �' g the Final Reportin ent o , SCH No. 92081040 g and Monitoring f Overriding Considerations and a and Statement o Program, including Findings and Facts in SupportMitigation f Overriding Considerations Regarding the Final Environmentaof l Report for the South Pointe Master Plan, State Clearinghouse Diamond Bar, October 18, 1994} al Impact g se No. 92081040 (City of ' Findings and Facts in Support of Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Tentative Tract,Vap No 5/253 4664/StaffReport Regarding the Placement of Fill Upon Portions of Lot 49 of Tract 32576 and Lot 53 of Tract 35742 Located Generally West of Brea Canyon Road, North of Pathfinder Road and Peaceful Hills Road, East of Morning Sun Avenue, City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, State of California (Walnut Valley Unified School District, July 5, 1994). The above referenced documents, which are independent of the FEIR (but based, in part, upon information contained therein), represent formal declarations by the City of Diamond Bar and the Walnut Valley Unified School District disclosing, in part, the supportive rational of those agencies for approving specific discretionary actions upon the Master Plan Project site and for undertaking specific actions which have directly or indirectly resulted or may result in physical changes upon that site. Copies of these documents can be viewed at the office of the Lead Agency (relative to the above referenced resolution) or the office of the Walnut Valley Unified School District (relative to the above referenced findings and facts) at the address referenced above during the regular business hours of those agencies. 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 Although the FEIR examined the potential environmental effects associated with the development of an approximately 171 ± acre site within the City, the project which is examined herein and which is the subject of this Addendum constitutes only a 6.7 ± acre component of the Master Plan Project area. That project, which was previously addressed as both a component of the Master Plan Project and as a separate and distinct alternative in Section 6.6 of the FEIR (Tentative Tract No. 51253), constitutes a 21 -lot residential subdivision bordered on the north by an existing residential area (e.g., Tract No. 30899) located in an unincorporated area of the County of Los Angeles, on the west by Morning Sun Avenue and on the south and east by the previously proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 which is now owned by the Walnut Valley Unified School District (District). Relative to this 6.7f acre component of the Master Plan Project, the project examined in the FEIR was identified as a 26 -lot residential subdivision. The project evaluated herein (i.e., 21 -lot subdivision) was, therefore, previously and thoroughly addressed and described in the FEIR; albeit, based upon a reduction in the project's density, the potential environmental effects resulting therefrom will be incrementally lower that identified in that earlier environmental analysis. Proposed is the approval and subsequent development of Tentative Tract Map No. 51253, as illustrated in Exhibit 1 (Tentative Tract Map No. 51253), including a zone change (City), issuance of a CUP as required under the City's Hillside Management Ordinance (City), issuance of an oak tree removal permit (City), execution of a Streambed Alternation Agreement (CDFG), issuance of a Section 401 water quality certification (RWQCB), obtainment of Section 404 permit (COE), if required, and such other discretionary actions as may be requisite to the development and subsequent habitation of that subdivision map area. Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 Page 8 4664/Staff Report Project implementation will further require the following actions by the Walnut Valley Unified School District: (1) conveyance of a slope easement to accommodate off-site grading; (2) conveyance of additional real property along the northeastern boundary of the project site (i.e., 20 -foot wide lot line adjustment); (3) vacation of an existing 20 -foot wide easement transversing the project site; and (4) acceptance of an alternative easement in the southwestern comer of the project site. Although no lot sizes have been included on the subdivision map, it appears that parcel sizes will range from a minimum of approximately 7,314 square feet (Lot 8) to a maximum of over 21,000 square feet (Lot 10). The project site is currently zoned "RPD 10,000 6U," requiring a minimum lot size of not less than 10,000 square feet or a density greater than six dwelling units per acre. To accommodate the proposed use, a zone change to "R1-8000" has been proposed. Similarly, the site's general plan designation is "Planned Development (Low -Density Residential, Park, Open Space, General Commercial)." Under that designation, residential development at a maximum density of 3.0 dwelling units per acre are authorized. As proposed, residential densities exceed 3.1 dwelling units per acre (21 units/6.7± acres). Existing public policies may allow for this minor deviation subject to specific findings of conformity by the City. Grading quantities for the tract map area have estimated and include 145,760 cubic yards of cut, 98,270 cubic yards of fill and 47,490 cubic yards of export. In order to create building pads and an internal street system, grading activities will extend off-site and include the placement of engineered fill upon District property south and east of the subdivision map area. These activities include the deposition of "dredged or fill material" into an intermittent (blue -dot) stream located eastemly of the site and the removal of oak trees and associated vegetation upon the project site and proximal to that watercourse. Upon implementation, up to 21 single-family detached homes will be constructed upon the tract map area. Since no unique development standards are proposed, any subsequent development activities which would occur on-site would be subject to the then existing zoning provisions of the City. Vehicular access to each of the parcels will be provided by means of double -loaded cul-de-sacs, connecting to a T -intersection (Sasak Place) near the terminus of Morning Sun Avenue. Two typical street sections are illustrated on that tentative map. Reference to "Street `A"' (although not specifically designated on the tentative map) appears to equate to that segment of the internal street system which intersects with Morning Sun Avenue. That segment is designated as a 60 -foot two-lane right-of-way separated by a center landscaped island with 5 -foot wide sidewalks adjoining both travel surface. The remaining "Typical Street Section" illustrates a minimum 56 -foot right-of-way with two 18 -foot travel lanes and 5 -foot wide sidewalks along both street frontages. The radii of the cul-de-sacs are not indicated. Currently, an existing 20 -foot wide easement transverses the project site in a east -west direction, providing a physical linkage between the area that was Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 and Tentative Tract ,Clap No. 51153 Page 10 4664/Staff Report Morning Sun Avenue. As proposed, that existing easement would require vacation (by the District) and consolidated within the tract boundaries (to become a portion of the proposed street system and lot layout). An alternative easement would be provided in the southwestern corner of the subdivision; however, neither the existing nor proposed alignment readily serves a functional purpose. Surface drainage, inclusive of the majority of the tract map area and the off-site slope easement located southerly of that tract, will be conveyed via the internal street system to a storm drain to be installed near the terminus of the northernmost cul-de-sac. Stormwater runoff would then be transported off-site to a point of discharge north of the project boundaries. Storm flows then enter an existing off-site inlet which drains to an existing 36 -inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) in Fairlane Drive, which is part of Los Angeles County drainage facility P. D. 1467. Limited surface runoff generated within the subdivision (from isolated slope areas) and from portions of the off-site slope easement easterly of the tract will discharge to the existing watercourse located within the boundaries of the adjoining District property. 2.2 Master Plan Proiect Site Effects analyzed under CEQA must be related to a physical change to the environment. The determination of potential project impacts is, therefore, based upon both a clear understanding of the physical environment as that environment exists prior to the commencement of the pending project and an assessment of those physical changes to the environment which may result from project effectuation. A change in the physical environment is, therefore, defined as the difference between an existing or "baseline" condition and that future condition anticipated to exist following project implementation. Both the project (Tentative Tract Map No. 51253) and the baseline conditions were previously described in the FEIR; however, as indicated in Section 1.1 (Project Chronology) herein, a number of events have occurred since the certification of the FEIR which have altered either the existing physical environment proximal to the project site, the anticipated future environment adjoining that site and/or the project which is examined therein. These changes were contemplated, in part, in the FEIR (e.g., East/West Canyon Preservation) and in those related documents incorporated herein by reference. The relevant events which have occurred following certification of the FEIR include, but may not be limited to: • Following certification of the FEIR, the Walnut Valley Unified School District subsequently acquired from R/N/P Development Inc. an approximately 77± acre portion of the 171± acre Master Plan Project site, inclusive of the boundaries of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407; • The District's real property acquisition efforts resulted in the cessation of processing of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407, including the elimination of the then proposed "A" Tentative Tract dllap No. 51253 Page 11 4664/Staff Report Street which, if developed, would have provided a vehicular linkage between Morning Sun Avenue and Brea Canyon Road and which would have provided the project (Tentative Tract Map No. 51253) and adjoining established residential area a secondary means of vehicular access; Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 was subsequently revised to delete the then proposed connection to "A" Street, including a reduction in the number of lot proposed within that subdivision area; Subsequent to the District's acquisition of that property, identified as Lot 49 of Tract 32576 and Lot 53 of Tract 35742, the District undertook grading activities upon that site to accommodate surplus soil materials which had been stockpiled upon the grounds of the District's South Pointe Middle School; and The removal of surplus soil material from the South Pointe Middle School site facilitated the District's efforts to improve the South Pointe Middle School in accordance with the District's approved facility plan. 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 3.1 Introduction Presented herein is an analysis of the potential impacts upon those environment issues identified in the FEIR resulting from both the changes to the project (Tentative Tract Map No. 51253) and the physical environment in which the project is proposed. Each of the environmental issues which were addressed in the FEIR have been re-examined to determine whether those changes will result in additional new impacts upon the environment beyond those levels previously identified in the FEIR. Mitigation measures contained in the FEIR have been examined to determine the continuing application of those conditions for the project evaluated herein. In compliance with Section 21081.6 of CEQA, a draft mitigation reporting and monitoring program has been developed (for the proposed project) for the purpose of documenting the City's efforts to ensure compliance with those mitigation measures identified through this CEQA process and adopted as conditions of project approval in order to avoid significant or potentially significant environmental effects. That draft mitigation reporting and monitoring program is included in Attachment 1 (Draft Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program) of this Addendum. Based upon the findings of this environmental analysis, no additional mitigation measures have been identified herein and no mitigation measures previously found to be infeasible have been subsequently determined to be feasible. Additionally, based upon those events which have occurred following certification of the FEIR, a number of the mitigation measures identified therein have been determined to no longer directly apply to the project as now proposed. As a result, certain mitigation measures contained in the FEIR have been recommended for deletion herein. As illustrated in Attachment 1, Tentative Tract .Uap No. 51253 Page 17 466419taff Report those mitigation measures or portions thereof which have been recommended for deletion have been highlighted to represent the measures or portions thereof which are recommended for elimination; modifications to those mitigation measures presented in the FEIR, as may be required to address project -specific impacts, have been delineated by [brackets]. 3.2 Environmental Impacts The following information is submitted for the purpose of augmenting that existing environmental analysis presented in the FEIR. Prior to taking action upon the proposed project (Tentative Tract Map No. 51253), the City's decision -makers are required to consider the information presented herein in combination with the information provided in that previously certified environmental impact report. 3.2.1 Land Use Although originally proposed as a integral component of the Master Plan Project, the previous approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 32400 (Arciero and Sons, Inc.), the acquisition of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 site area by the District, the District's subsequent cessation of processing of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 and the deposition of surplus soil materials upon that site to accommodate the development of the South Point Middle School have resulted in changes to the broader project analyzed in the FEIR (i.e., .South Pointe Master Plan). As a result, Tentative Tract Map No. 51253, as proposed by the Sasak Corporation, no longer constitutes a component of that larger project; rather, the pending tract map application must now be reexamined in the context of both the current and reasonably anticipated future environment. The FEIR previously addressed both the independent development of Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 as a separate and distinct activity (i.e., Tentative Tract No. 51253 Alternative) and the open space retention of the area of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 (i.e., East/West Canyon Preservation Alternative). Under the analysis of the Tentative Tract No. 51253 Alternative, the project was assumed to represent a26 -lot subdivision. The project's subsequent reduction to only 21 -lot tentative map would, therefore, produce a comparable (albeit incrementally lesser) impact that examined in the FEIR. As proposed, the project exceeds the allowable densities specified under the site's existing "RPD 10,000 6U" zoning designation (requiring a minimum lot size of not less than 10,000 square feet or a density greater than six dwelling units per acre). Lot sizes as small as approximately 7,314 square feet are currently proposed. Additionally, under the site's general plan designation of "Planned Development (Low -Density Residential, Park, Open Space, General Commercial)," residential development are restricted to a maximum density of 3.0 dwelling units per acre. As proposed, residential densities exceed 3.I dwelling units per acre (21 units/6.7f acres). A slope density calculation has not been submitted for the project site, pursuant to the City's Hillside Management Ordinance. Under this ordinance, affected properties (or portions thereof) are Tentative Tract Map No. 51753 Page 13 4664/Staff Report categorized based upon the characteristics of the site's natural slope. Under the category which defines an area exhibiting the least slope characteristics (i.e., percent natural slope between 10 and 14.9 percent), site development standards require special hillside architectural and design techniques that minimize grading. The proposed site plan does not exemplify these standards; therefore, a CUP (as authorized thereunder) may be required to authorize the proposed development. As stated above, project implementation will necessitate specific actions by the Walnut Valley Unified School District. Those actions include, but may not be limited to: (1) conveyance of a slope easement upon District property to accommodate off-site grading; (2) conveyance of additional real property along the northeastern boundary of the project site (i.e., 20 -foot wide lot line adjustment); (3) vacation of an existing 20 -foot wide easement transversing the project site; and (4) acceptance of an alternative easement in the southwestern corner of the project site in substitution for the vacated easement. No documentation has been provided to the City stating the District's concurrence with this development application or acknowledging the District's willingness or ability to undertake these above described actions. The City previously concluded that the landform alterations contemplated as part of the Master Plan Project constituted a significant environmental impact. No relevant mitigation measures designed to address land use impacts were, however, included in the FEIR or have been recommended herein. 3.2.2 Earth Resources A site-specific geotechnical investigation was prepared for the project site in 1984, but was not received by the City until May 9, 1995. That report, entitled "Preliminary Soils and Geologic Investigation - Proposed Single Family Residences, Morning Sun Avenue, Los Angeles County, California" (Triad Foundation Engineering, Inc., July 13, 1984), does not specifically address the pending project (Tentative Tract Map No. 51253). Although the above reference preliminary investigation has been included as Attachment 2 (Preliminary Soils and Geologic Investigation) herein, the information presented below is based upon previous studies conducted for the Master Plan Project site and not upon the information contained in that study. Any and all recommendations as may be stated therein should, however, be considered by the project's decision -makers and, where applicable, adopted as conditions of project approval. As outlined in the FEIR, the Master Plan Project site contains a number of known geotechnical constraints which must be clearly defined and, as necessary, remediated as part of the development process. As illustrated in Figure 13 (Geologic Map) in the FEIR, both a known (ancient) landslide and a concealed earthquake fault exist easterly of the project site; however, neither the landslides delineated boundaries nor suspected fault alignment appear to encompass any on-site acreage. Both these and other known constraints were to be remediated through the development of the larger Master Plan Project. Based upon events which have occurred subsequent to the certification of the FEIR (e.g., the District's acquisition of the area of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407), no plan Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 Page 14 4664/Staff Report is currently in place to address those off-site issues. Implementation of those measures identified in the FEIR , as modified herein (see Attachment 1) and as augmented to include those recommendations contained in the site-specific soils and geologic investigation, will mitigate potential project -related and cumulative environmental impacts upon this topical issue to a level which is deemed to be less -than -significant. 3.2.3 Water Resources The introduction of impervious surfaces upon the project site will increase the quantity of stormwater runoff discharged from the project site and decrease the quality of the off-site drainage (e.g., runoff coming into contact with contaminants deposited upon roadway surfaces). Post -development stormwaters discharged from the project site will be primarily conveyed through on-site improvements (i.e., curbs; gutters; storm drain facilities) to P.D. 1467 located in Fairlance Drive. Referencing the FEIR, "the storm drain facility in Fairlance Drive (P.D. 1467) was designed around 1980 to convey discharge of 93 cfs" [cubic feet per second]. Existing pre -development discharge to that facility has been calculated at 109 cfs (Q25) and 122 cfs (Q50). Based upon these known conditions, the FEIR concluded that "County drainage facility P.D. 1467, located in Fairlance Drive, will require subsequent improvement to accommodate projected design discharge." In recognition of this potential capacity constraint, a mitigation measure specifically addressing P.D. 1467 was included in the FEIR. Proposed off-site grading activities, as illustrated in Exhibit 1 (Tentative Tract Map No. 51253), will result in physical disturbance of that existing intermittent blue -dot stream (and associated watercourse) located directly east of the project site. The placement of dredged or fill material within that watercourse may result in either the ponding of water or the subsequent realignment of drainage flows within the existing southeasterly to northwesterly draining watercourse. Should drainage volumes be sufficient to induce surficial erosion at the toe of those proposed engineered slopes, localized slope disturbance may occur. Implementation of those measures identified in the FEIR, as modified herein (see Attachment 1), will mitigate potential project -related and cumulative environmental impacts upon this topical issue to a level which is deemed to be less -than -significant. 3.2.4 Biological Resources In order to quantify project -related impacts upon those oak tree resources now located both within the tract map boundaries and upon those adjoining areas where grading/slope easements have been identified, a oak tree survey has been conducted by a qualified arborist. That survey, included in Attachment 3 (Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 - Oak Tree Survey) herein, concluded that 45 specimen -sized oak trees would be impacted by project development. Based upon a prior site survey (November 20, 1992), included in the FEIR, a total of 53 specimen - Tentative Tract ,Wap No. 31253 Page 15 4664/Staff Report sized oak trees where identified and tagged within the boundaries of Tentative Tract Map No. 51253. During the May 11, 1995 investigation (Attachment 3), it was observed that each of the previous tags had been removed; therefore, no direct correlation exists between the numbering systems utilized in these separate site investigations. Additionally, the differences between the two tree counts may be attributable to a number of factors, including: (1) the subsequent death of specific trees due to both fire damage and other causes (e.g., wood rot; insect damage); and (2) field survey errors resulting from a lack of on-site survey documentation (e.g., flagging). Notwithstanding the existence of an established mechanism to compensate for the loss of existing oak tree (i.e., Oak Tree Ordinance), the City has previously concluded that the elimination of existing mature oak trees cannot be fully mitigated through the provision of replacement resources. 3.2.5 Traffic/Circulation A project -specific traffic study has been prepared for Tentative Tract Map No. 51253. That report, entitled "Traffic Impact Study - Tentative Tract No. 51253, Diamond Bar, California (Linscott, Law and Greenspan, Engineers, May 10, 1995) and included as Attachment 4 (Traffic Impact Study - Tentative Tract Map No. 51253) herein, was not received by the City until May 11, 1995. As a result, the information presented herein is based primarily upon material presented in the FEIR. Any and all recommendations as may be stated in the above referenced traffic study should, however, be considered by the project's decision -makers and, where applicable, adopted as conditions ofproject approval. As originally proposed, the internal street system within Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 was designed to both access each of the single-family lots contained therein and provide a linkage between those residential areas located westerly of the Master Plan Project site to Brea Canyon Road on the east. This linkage was to be provided through the subsequent development of "A" Street which was intended to serve as a local collector through Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 and connect Morning Sun Avenue with Brea Canyon Road. With the subsequent purchase of the area of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 by the District and the cessation of tract map processing by that agency, "A" Street has been eliminated and no direct linkage to Brea Canyon Road is now proposed or illustrated on Tentative Tract Map No. 51253. Morning Sun Avenue is a component of an existing local street system providing access to an existing residential neighborhood in a County unincorporated area located westerly of the City limits. Although the residential enclave framed by the City limits on the north and east, Colima Road on the north and west and Brea Canyon Cutoff on the west and south includes three points of access to streets located upon the County's Highway Plan, Morning Sun Avenue and Shepards Hills Road are also single route areas lacking addition points of secondary vehicular access. With the elimination of "A" Street, no secondary vehicular (or improved non -vehicular) access opportunities are now provided from this tract map area. Additionally, as a result of the project site's Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 Page 16 4664/Staff Report location (i.e., contiguous with the City's westerly corporate boundaries), access to the project site and access from the project site to the City requires motorists to transverse a local street system located external to the City within a County unincorporated area. As proposed, the maximum cul-de-sac length (measured form Morning Sun Avenue to the end of southern segment of "Patel Place") is estimated to be approximately 710 feet and will service up to 21 dwelling units. Although offering only a single route of ingress and egress to the subdivision area, this length and dwelling unit total is not greater than the access restrictions established under Section 21.24.020 of the Los Angles County Code. As a result, the provision of secondary vehicular access is not specifically mandated under existing Los Angeles County Code or Uniform Fire Code policies. Although further consideration of additional vehicular and/or emergency access would enhance and promote public health and safety, existing site constraints (e.g., topographic considerations) and present street patterns may preclude the subsequent provision of that additional linkage. Section 21.24. 100 of the Los Angeles County Code stipulates that "no highway or street shall have a grade of more than six percent, except for short stretches where the topography makes it impractical to keep within such grade, and in no event shall the grade exceed 10 percent, except where evidence, with is satisfactory to the advisory agency, is given that a lower grade is not possible.'' As indicated on the tentative map, grades of up to 12 percent are proposed. As proposed, an estimated 47,490 cubic yards of exported soil material will be removed from the project site (not inclusive of associated organic materials which will also require off-site disposal). The exportation of this material constitutes only a component of construction -related traffic; however, these activities will be concentrated during the initial phase of the construction process. In order to quantify the number of heavy truck trips associated with this activity, it is assumed that 24 -ton capacity trucks are utilized, a conversion factor of 1.3 tons/cubic yard is assumed and, at maximum capacity, each haul truck can accommodate an estimated 31.2 cubic yards of soil. Based upon these assumptions, export activities will generate an estimated 3,044 truck trips (1,522 full; 1,522 empty). If all grading activities require two months to complete and it is further assumed that each month contains 25 work days and each work day is comprise of 8 work hours, up to 8 heavy truck trips per hour can be estimated. No included in the above estimate are employee trips, trips associated with the delivery and removal of related heavy equipment, delivery of construction materials and removal of refuse and associated construction debris. As an alternative to the export of surplus soil materials to a local landfill or other acceptable off-site depository, accessed via Morning Sun Avenue and Shephard Hills Road, export material could be placed upon the adjoining District property, subject to concurrence by that entity. No documentation has, however, been provided indicating the District's willingness to authorize the disposal of surplus soil material upon that site. Although the District's acquisition of the area of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 has resulted in a cessation of the processing of that subdivision application, the District's property continues to Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 Page 4664/Staff Report retain the current general plan and zoning designations which are shared by the project proponent's property. As a result, the District retains the right to develop that property in accordance with the land use policies in place at the time of any future development application. While the existing 20 -foot access easement connecting the District's site to Morning Sun Avenue is inadequate to accommodate a future vehicular linkage between the District's property and that existing roadway, the development of Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 in its current configuration (notwithstanding the provision of a substitute easement in the southwestern corner of that tract map area), minimizes any future opportunities to obtain vehicular access from that roadway. Although this action will not, in and of itself, preclude the future development of that adjoining site, it may limit the range of development options which are available to the District. 3.2.6 Air Quality No specific grading term or equipment utilization projection has been provided by the project proponent. As a result, the following equipment assumptions and corresponding emission projections have been utilized for this analysis. In addition, as disclosed in the FEIR, fugitive dust emissions are assumed to average 55 pounds/day/acre graded. For the purpose of this analysis, it is assumed that not more than one acre of land area will be disturbed on a daily basis. Construction -related emission projects are presented below: Construction -Related Exhaust Emissions (lbs/day) Type of Equipment Quantity of Equipment Carbon Monoxide Reactive Hydrocarbons Nitrogen Oxides Sulfur Oxides Particulates (PMio) Dozers 2 36.0 3.8 83.3 6.9 3.3 Scrapers l 12.5 2.8 38.3 4.6 4.1 Loaders 1 5.7 2.5 18.9 1.8 1.7 Water Truck 1 18.0 1.9 41.6 4.5 2.6 Misc. 1 6.7 1.5 16.9 1.4 1.4 Subtotal 6 78.9 12.5 199.0 19.2 13.1 Fugitive Dust - - - - - 55.0 Total 78.9 12.5 199.0 19.2 68.1 SCAQMD Threshold - 550 75 100 150 150 As indicated in the above table, based upon the extent of grading activities which will be required to accommodate the proposed development and the equipment assumptions presented herein, Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 Page 18 4664/Staff Report construction -term emissions are projected to exceed established South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) criteria for significance for nitrogen oxide emissions. Conversely, based upon the size of the proposed project, long-term emission projects associated with site habitation are not anticipated to exceed established threshold criteria. Implementation of those measures identified in the FEIR, as modified herein (see Attachment 1), will minimize but will not result in the avoidance of significant environmental impacts upon this topical issue. 3.2.7 Noise No significant long-term noise impacts were identified in the FEIR for the Master Plan Project. Since Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 constitutes only a small increment of the project analyzed therein, the potential noise impacts attributable to that subdivision would constitute only a subset of the cumulative environmental impact identified therein. Implementation of those measures identified in the FEIR , as modified herein (see Attachment 1), will continue to mitigate potential environmental impacts upon this topical issue to a level which is deemed to be less -than -significant. 3.2.8 Public Services/Utilities The Walnut Valley Water District has indicated that, based upon existing infrastructure systems servicing the Morning Sun Avenue area, inadequate fire flow capacities may currently exist to accommodate the additional services demands imposed by the proposed subdivision. Notwithstanding this potential deficiency, mitigation measures are contained in the FEIR and presented herein to ensure the future availability of adequate fire flow capacity. Subject to the implementation of those mitigation measures recommended therein, the FEIR disclosed no significant environmental impacts upon other services or delivery systems in the project area. Implementation of those measures identified in the FEIR, as amended herein, will continue to mitigate potential environmental impacts upon this topical issue to a level which is deemed to be less -than - significant. 3.2.9 Archaeology/Paleontology No paleontological or archaeological resources are known or suspected to exist upon or proximal to the project site which will be impacted by project development. As a result, no mitigation measures have been identified in either the FEIR or recommended herein. 3.2.10 Aesthetics Based upon the larger Master Plan Project, the FEIR concluded that both those landform alterations as required to implement that activity and the removal of existing on-site vegetation (e.g., oak tree Tentative Tract AL1ap No. 51253 Page 19 4664/Staff Report resources) would produce significant aesthetic impacts which could not be mitigated below a level of significance. Although the proposed project will result in both landform changes and the elimination of existing oak trees upon the project site, the magnitude of those physical changes cannot be compared to the potential environmental effects attributable to the implementation of the larger South Pointe Master Plan project. Assuming that the District site is retained as open space during the near term and assuming that export material is not deposited upon that site (or if deposited, placed in such manner as to retain natural landform characteristics), impacts upon visual resources would be less - than -significant. 3.2.11 Growth Inducement The evaluation of whether a project will yield growth -inducing effects focuses on the consideration of several factors, including an assessment of whether the project: (1) provides a potential for population in -migration to fill project -related employment opportunities which, in turn, could induce additional residential development; (2) results in an increased localized demand for goods and services at levels sufficient to induce additional commercial development; (3) results in the removal of economic, physical or political obstacles or constraints to development; and (4) facilitates peripheral development through the extension of facilities or services to areas presently devoid of those features. Neither the 1faster Plan Project nor Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 are anticipated to produce conditions which would significantly influence any of the above described variables. 4.0 MINOR TECHNICAL CHANGES OR ADDITIONS Based upon an evaluation of the potential direct, indirect and cumulative environmental impacts anticipated to occur should Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 be approved or conditionally approved as proposed, no new significant environmental impacts (not previously disclosed) have been identified, no substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken have occurred and no new information or issues of substantial importance (which were not previously addressed in the FEIR) have been identified through this environmental review. The FEIR, together with the minor technical changes and additions identified herein, adequately analyze the potential environmental consequences anticipated from the approval or conditional approv,al of Tentative Tract Map No. 51253. This Addendum, in combination with the FEIR, provides both the Lead Agency and other Responsible Agencies with an adequate environmental basis for subsequent discretionary actions concerning the proposed project. Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 page 20 4664/Staff Report ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM Tetnative Tract Map No. 51253 4664/9taff Report M w � U a _ 0 R v L y Cd z � y w ^p y � � ^ O c,3 o � cLe o C. cyj • � vi U ' � � w � C om= •= b C p U '� b y OD .� L C U > o U > U o`D co cz CA C wi En w aj c a CC OD = .O p bpq U o a OLD L DD O y w p O, bD c d G U U CG •""3 . V ry,n C43 m ctir a+ = Et vi O CL 0 0 al rn Q�4I w svr' vy ej o C o e°d d v o C ° OD u a C c`� ` Ci ;a o o 14 •c ' L y '"1 Q 4r W: is C .cu •� cd .N..� c=C .a eDcdC i c 3 c oEG Ln �_ O cit H 3 ro4. �a ° U °, 'O Ca 'b :4. a0i U yEn •� a� R iC b O N+, U^ • O y o v y U o a, D c 0 ca u 'L y R z U..o O O y y O� C� .ate a°i Y•� .D . N p. aEi E 4 0 o = O W u 0 W to >>,O.° ..�rCi U Cd 0. T U 0 ^ 0C, O - cc O � .bU N C d ' 6p.1 � r Uq° Oa roCaN"i' oiy•C o UNNro bb " o ro o ro o c '� u w_ 'ro ro E U L �a ai •Ua U �, H 4. W U W 'C7 ro y b Cl ro ro U ed ro U C w p w O c - U > ad cd c E C rn ro U p � U CL) � C ° cz Q w ci to a` L w w C T .r Om c c c c � CU W Y a b t o Q ° v a� S •D c Z o y aci N O c Rt o -p C ro Q O O cts ,� ao Q c Fz CU U 03 o o h c., ° J .E y U ro y • U O M Q� W �' Y DOD O � cq 7 tU L, L�"i � 4. y° w W c ro CW 4. L. ro L CApLn L W E ^. c O.0 d E O L. N C u 14.. O <O, N CQ O U O R7 O > O L) > ai CZ O.ow� b b c a E m LZ cc Uw y U R A � G 0 V •L y LQ z ai V L ci U L w ° C O C O L y i0 a> vCi vCi >O G. E m•.., T a •... �+ Q fl. E C R U W 'cEtl E E V E E a> te„ Q a - a. C o E =. R II. a 0 E LL vVi R O iC O y R •r o� R L U N .-. o° R .� U CZ O ° a` Q h U ov c°, a` U U R R R �i R h t:4 C om_. � LS. E o an o on o .O .� L .O a cn a oo a s. R ° o 0� o ami (j � > Q E 0 o 0 on ew U� UCa U a"i,7� a R 'o = o._ bv�w a EUO �s a y iC o0A eei 4. M O L a� cz E E id y i •� b O - ❑ 0 O N C vi y rn cd w ❑ o C; aa- R E.,= o 3 o as i E co Q, w Q E V] V O i w o G. 5. eu co 3 C '� iV. vi cz N "d Q fl., y O V �/ R —,d Y W.14N 7 y ..v. cv L y b E 0 0 cz V i 0 w a0CL cw �° � j Lv � v on _ Cw C b R R V w• E 0 O° OJ O C R y U E O, .E R OL `n ^p V ca E o. O ti >O O d ° o cz on 3 w L L C ° o aj 0 7 `. p a a� rn `tea cCc _ R : 4W & r L _ `� L V o !S dn.E aro o •- Cqqa cca •> r^i a a a �° o N °c. aLi i•� j s: a� .0 L CO 2° O L U O ^�� G cw:.0 3 ° v co ccz X ° E '9 o ° a T .S k. c ro Y ca a M' w d E -- C7 a a o U a R E .5 .. m° v v U ca C � c 0 :. C13 u tp L y cc R z N U L L U L• C4 �' y, a.TQ OA � Q YO ° ro ,RS fl- G C ro .ro �., 0 is �.. cd U R ° O > e C t 0 U C o a� [� U Q V3° .2 s � W O y U O 0 ro N O N y4,5y pip - O aci C O cw E O E L F w O � u v, L 0 0 0 c o 0 0 0 rocn a� o N =o ao 0 0 3 •� R 3 0 �; c � a� U� b•_4. 3 co s 3 y 0..N. N c O O `•'� 0 0 s o b R N � a `° -t� o ''> r. •tea ° a °' � = i � O � ro � Q •c6ro n cn � U C U � O S?, � y •U ,� � � �.., U .U. ro d C CID �' vi ro N h y .tj U CD ° Ci vii U C R w; C 0 v �" ro N cc w p y .y% Q U ro 0 C. •G ro m 0 idC ro M y p, R cd _ [C ro a. ^ O . V '-' -d c0 y G� Ucc �n•+S �?, N tD U L Pa a a 3U aci o�QCa E, o �a ivy c WUUw°'Fxu --i 4 C b a N h z �o v as 0 u L:. 'L y Gd z o 'CE chi '� o C p 0 QE O •O ° y tO a > ° w.^UA ° U > w o d N � U ro n A v^ ao 0 p .-+ p .— �s U o „ L.u Q 0 to 0 to 'OO •° � o � O iG a o`n ci o`n U o L 4°i 4.a O L L �ri Ci C) n e,: c W E � • .� U Q U a i� v o c c `� s° b o �'� o U c Ln0 Q 5 w CTS y 7 ca� 0 -CZ co U C --% " O ti LL o 0 O O t5 O o a. o '0) u 4" Q C (m, O E 0 6) .'O-� Q) ^p +' O a. O O E �•+ (� O rte+ s a Y ' O O cC L am.+ 'Ci CE Q y a' N N U N CC O OL y Q 0 7 O m U p o L aSz V •O•'U a' C cd V] A ti V] O Q" •y UC U Oq u w c�O G. •° 'C rte. N E cq ,CU `;tv •�, O O�C d y SS y p .� ed O v 'r? 'a ° V O v O c fi fi O CS v oD v G • u O p b y M vi ❑ a� 0 N O. `n b o O ^. C C v h Y •S S '� O 4. •p .D co ❑ O , y a� :tj LL U C co y ��-'' �.' U DA O N M C y O O = U U ° °�' oLA p �, u co O L -.: ' o u CL ca U i o a t ai n° T a� m �e�-rn to 'L N b y 'O 'n id C O A W C .D N cC •– eO °A w -- c >; o _ Y Q o •E _ cc a v v° Y °' 4. OD UN> Cj C lCoi UO GU'oN 0. O 42 .0 a- Tx 0.o' � ° cts c` � . �C N .ym r. a 0 U c E Q � °UxU o N h z �o > U � C a 0 w ca u 3.: L j y E z L 'fl ti4 Q O ❑ O w cc F W � U C7 O 0 • cC C E m •.'� -0 U G •0. U L :d -p U .O ¢ L j: UR Lo_ mz E> "" E E E o C i E a. o ri .= U Q h° U> o U> o C y U � ❑ L O cl c = E 3 3 o L v D o c bD O bDU UO GL" Q a CID ccl o U ca o L w 0 (LI O O .� p • L Ca v, u •C - —api � .C, .0. O � O N >QO Ln o V qO 4)o aSa; m'o`d .. a -' " , �' �. U C's8 bD cd .O C ... gad to . ;ta 'N �,+ .O.i °. �+1%� 3to. O d z +'�• N w S� cid ,;. C p ;� o E .�. 7O a o <.G b a �" v" sivaLuy o = Q, 3 E o u" C Q L o tw .h0 N w v Ld �r + OL O 3 ca .� �y O O } w L a> o a a fl a• G ird a v O 0 to N -0 U L p fl o M M w N p L N o w W i� .L7 L L by00 cc N• 0 SO a> cdU u O o � ''�-' N 5 m o to w "i;a cd Y o O. O W C N .L'i W Ll,: y d7•., MQ.> E Uy C C)'i: .�} _ otb X it H cd N 'cj .x zy y N aS Q" td R. `d) m ��+ V O !d Gi U O fUd n o W a' - "�' ' avi v o, c a� c� o t .0 O U ��. ° a oD _co to Q E bD Q , '3, u > Uw c^r_. cl y �'�qv ' w 0 0 y cd7i cc p i C p CS, L..:� Or O NN A. U a Ca m C O u R z O cep C O p O L' O t t y 1.. y C y 0 c4 U O C h O a v O❑ c„ O C U 7 C OC C� h U 7 ' C V O U O � -p U O U O U p O w ° =°O L.' 't`°° E' N '°aE 6EIn 4 Na N Ew�1.,CL o u U> o. ❑ U> o v�a. U> o O ma > O UU a . > O U> o cl w C C C C C w m Vi �. ❑ cz +. G �. C r.. G'.s. a> bA O bA O oq O oq O Oo O b1J O a c U OU CO c c cn U O O c c cn cU cO G cu cO cO C i U o U O U �O U O L U U O c U O V 0 4 O O O. p r a. O C o.. O C a O a O, o a d U co O U cC O U cz O U cd O U c0 O U co O L 4. iO 14 V5 j U V U U U U a o — O to = a — 4- to Z) -o c o g o O "vOi o 0� y — .c 03 O. o -o �- C o p O Ar w y y o O _ vCz ° o v� b o a� O. f1 y C � > d o 4)w . y w v Q, C bo U O. co �' Q' O. CZ d b U Q ctl cn �m CZ Oi O U Ou p w lw.. U b a O w v ca n vN O N V L O c� i U 7 MU>co U V V b O O m wi. V h It C6o ;' 3 n b i L p '" o U a D o c Y .i '� O—..+ ❑ •O v 'b o o C U •��.. •X � ",� O. tu � Y � CCS C ca U ti `n O d bo rn U 0 C L'. V w vi '17 O viO cz p L U o 7 y 0 U t.� C U �.. ce W ... U 0 .a: p � U cu '•' cd _� .�.. r> .b t0 O U E 0. ca d ❑ U yyO., p ca U cd �3 U U U CO > v O cd vOi C� H c0 G y C U C U O y ,� ❑ O ❑ U ❑ U C Uw C. d 0 � V.� CL c E L o O �° '> o 3 0. oo v 14cc CIS o0 3 ° o °u ^o " a ° eo 3 0 oo .� > .5 c '� d .^ a c c c v g Q.. Q CJ3 Q O Q GO Q Q rn cC U O, U eC cn m tr U O R y c O w O U � CJ fpC U Cl. U F r- O. " bD 0 C OA y �• C Pl V 7 N U U `o 0 C V� C O cNe = G y LL ej � cd •C N O y iC U 10) > v U P7 a b y c w O w O U U C fpC p r- O. " bD 0 C OA y �• w p `o 0 ou r O � a> ej U 10) > v U P7 a b Y fln y N U cNC QP U y O L y N 2U O -C) c O N "fl CO C w y W O Y • U CO r X � w ..0 E C X s C �� o v u o •" v c u c c .a o °L' 3 cca n c�a aui 2 s v= c L 4� W O � � L CG v L d •p •R fl. S 43 W 0 y L i CQ N d O 7 cv OD i" O _ v ... ¢ a"y y c Ur R a .bD Q o h 0 � a U a � Ca C c i u u � z > a Y ° s =° •3 c N o� i t Cd G= y ccz W o •.� U •O O O cC L V Q. N 7JE� N 1: G Cl fO •S7 � a w o ° ,h � G • dor '- c N O iG ocqj U L U A a a Q o w o � i i Fes/ O O L bA O •L O d y �_ m > U O H F C 0 _cd ed C O 0 0 Qj a> C y W 'O y tNd v'i O F- S 3 a� a..- E °� o .gI w �, � o h c° c 'b id CS •�;, p '� O O U O r-� H N U >, ..d d 5A Cl.Cc O O Q •" O U R c0 U u in = ca C7 =. Cy N u> Ga N oa c v c s o c 3 ca b' x ce N U N 2 L o 3° o Lai' = b ¢° o a s c o c °u' c�° L o o E o U o co S. OL y Ij y CO .L p L i LnCA .p •� O '.O.J ❑ CLQ "0 Ua iN° ro y 3 5 ai E N c° o s C7 N toi s f]a o C° U C Vi = u❑ N fl R 4� N��- CC- 04 Lml M. O Cd CC .gE c0 y b6 G oq aU'x o C U Y �+ y C C O C > 7 si L %� .� �•' O U td ran-,tDV] O U ex O v° -p .0 p '= y rY1 :,3 W a s$0> N v o v= U 3 ° A7 o t. y �77 s Ei z V) > > O C i Et C" 2 b o i 'L' T � _ CdLv .D F-• N C S N .r � � Q -� r y Q Cd = 0 '•p � � d .d ro � ¢ N � > app a N w C N U'z O C Y '� > W .N I •O •i' C U O O Y L CC CC 0 `° ct o f a> E a c c' 'x •°A b 3 U c ca y a a c. �, 0 � a a+ J P. m L -S �, ce U � ,,.., •y N ca It cc N (� Y u n❑ 3 °' „ N CotU W o o E c c o a :. n c��a w o> N c,4 co � u ' o OL c¢ a c a Y° L i v aoi "an s b Oma. c N 4.) ct$ o d W oCd C U L CO \ E p�• p � i y Q, N y R. � '6 v a� E cC b y L i a c y c c •L O T x fJ F .-• O a� a� cc c� ^ �I O m C � " •� yNj � O L 7 p rnN H y [-. �q a� C7, ca 0 O R E Q C C C." 0 0 O. a0i y E 3 ' �. w c) •y ce a� :3 o C'D cLnP1 c4.� °c_° r -vs a v.. > •'. N .0 3 .� � ❑ � a� N C=1 3 oEl u 4 e 3 fl "o o f N c c W E a cG E c U U O b N R > >�� ° o aitc^p"a, C" a cc c °N' M ° o E. E �' o r o c3 7 O p N O U G N C, O .O Opp E cG0 s0._ p Q c va fy O D U iYi L d a A 0C13 C13 T .5 � U .0 ti a O :5v U �y � a�G o a�gNa Z. w a d o b b O N O a A04 cc g � �••�,�'acav: ob c °'U OL. o Om ebAe b � Ov fl b NCJ*F. U I N- R L J< - r4 19 w U a A � a 0 c� v L y d z w 'b > a oa°i 3 =cz ° ° m o `° Q> v L C y U p a c.., d a G41 L o y "Ll V co ¢..— f0• O N N 3 b cz c y cUa a c 3� •`d aoi u y W U cz C's o a� eo v c m o o,°.. aW 3 cl, cd ob aob��b� OL. a ALU p. a ccs W ° a> w ° fd d % a vOi cE U G N U C � U O 4r i In tr p W Y y a C U d > U x 42 -IP. v�;51 v O i w ,Cc ai y .'_ " > U wbaa U 03 N 'o o w 6r) A p �+ 4, CD U 3 o ani cz °� O C y� O> 0 d: v to y'. . cd d ' N F 3 w N � O U a � � A a a c 0 R v w e► U U Y U d y � U z b ro- oA x O M r p ' 3 aAi 0i > " w "Cl O p '~ ccdd d � V > `" �UU H cVa ❑T❑ b�0 • ami p iG O s�`�. U> id O U > p ed � bn b G b = o y cQ a en o v o c �� o I v o •.� I a �U.. •� O o �. �, Q� U w z w N � O � � a a w U U Y U U z w U � >, A e 0 w R V Lr: 'L y o > y°'c w K o v C A o 3 'RO ti R 3 R N p R 'C❑S Q a• y v O v dl O U❑p � � R � h ° Rao a� •� a w, ti) ° a> In N cts w R = o Or L � U �7 O r. 'a. R. O O C 40. p N ��b o Z. 4 a U , a b ' ..N. 4.0U U44.�- o ocd 0 cz in uo 04 cn y O C O G L" O 0. U w❑ G Zn o c, �. 2 a>+ y w C� U i U R vi C L 3 ? •�: o ° � y d c! >, A rn q O 0 cC O C w Ct 0 w o O, w o z O C's 4+ OCq � d 0 ca v R z G U' � S Fj- Lol U W Z w C� U i 'b O U .moi y vi C L 3 ? •�: o ° � y d c! rn O 0 cC O di >' U w Ct 0 w o O, w o z O C's 4+ OCq � d U W Z o CD CO CD a s et co^► d nom f c co �p .%• CD b A lD A m g 5 vy — � 'q Y 0 to ('D p co 0 cc On as a A� � � l9 �• ? � .�. O fyi d CD (ID C CD °�' ¢ CA a QCs v a G `=9 n o cc w p A 0 '. � (D O0 y n O A A DD a G, C d b w ^o CD 0 o ce y A Co -s 7Q w CD F � y � H � 0 o M A 'J• A v' o 'c3 `r ElA dao CoA A P n A mCD o coo p a b 0 ry N G %1 d l�9 Arb CD z c A d o' 0 d T T A a oo ~n ►C � � n p :y cD .y N O —• to cD p CD p � "'� p n b ti✓ O CD CD 0 w CD M `his• 'C"'`d y c y C.. w Q b a a .-� O fs, ❑ O 0 C) C. C UQ a '» CD _ten cD iD , O F a r .t � A w :a-C� ro G y rn (tiD �R R P N CD [<D W 0- On y CD CD 90 CD CD p m CDCD C Q• y O O " CD O CDa. Co z d CDCD < y H cD O CDD O n p G O a• CD R a~°o » aao o to b CD y .. 0 co Cc) 00 D fjQ lu ac°CD CSD CD _f N `C C CD D 5 �, a C1 �. d oo �• d °° Q, �a o y Q n � O^ � �' O O✓ z a' m v n tofo f Wp� bG y tv �.'� zi 5 a. ,d o N p� o' oc a o v eu o a G w 3I ,Q '... G 'd D. �. O 9 »' A7 co ❑ '� y O HN .� o ooc E N N N Al 0 .7 � � N � .fl � \ 1 N CD rte.. C „'J„ CCD JG �, �. r•1 (C fi �• 0 0et CD •, o o "fl — IQ CD CD CD cD r C 5 o b p o o n .- -. ft n n y p CCDD c�D o c ° CD a s < N 7 CD CD �. w � A. � �, :; �G o � R• ,� R• CSD-' c5 co �'�'' a y .�� 'i7 b CC C.7. Q' �G . OGQ N p Ct9 y a b N 'T C9 O. N •s fo o o b c 0 0o aCDCD CD co CSD CD a rc '" w o w y o a O O P N a ~ 7 d CD G" � G `q p G r N n .-. G w �. N O � O• CD vi C �< `< N CD C'" Z R n .y y � o -n �a.w�-. CD CD CD C)' �• tin N M CJQ CD Cu (ND I CD co W "ICD b ro CD o N t CD O =y O CD CO R d w Cr1 CCD o CD O CD M R d B 3I ,Q g o ooc E m b is SCD co fi O CD I Q •, o (ND I CD co W "ICD b ro CD o N t CD O =y O CD CO R d w Cr1 CCD o CD O CD M R d B g o ooc E m b is SCD co o co cD :; � •, o CD O CD M R d B n 0 y CD O O a CD Y G CD a O Cil o <° ►j Cn �, a -. cn aro• r" co � G. O `G n O � M C+o��• � M cc E" a A R f7 G w z n CD' E eD w v� f) "L70 vyy' O O cc a o. CD n n rti co =ora � y ,d (J co ru o w coo 7� rn � CD m n -e b � CD G � ID to p C G o 'U y "� cOo - n O o C.s R'moi O r» •, C11 0 -r �y R y w w b;� .. o w o CA O 0 y CD CW w y b O w w co •' Q rte+ ^• y r^5 ray co a clo Cb E5 -1 n 51 CD p CD Fr CD 0 0 z co M s d toCD CZ C a CD Y G CD a a � � �' o � yy �• o � C1 �' d o E'r ":,, cD p �r C1 O ft O CCD `G O p O c)CD m �. o tD p vn ° p b ° "M! o cru n o c G O w Oyy O d , •�• A 050 5 R r7 � �' N O d O Oa C OGO " a- 'rg w TQ OQ CL n W5 �• w 5' 0 Cna O G ". rNi, 5' in G O•. O ° O y 5 CD 'A-. N CD CDD _ ,., ,,., w • k G rn •�- CD CD n vi, n ,.., G� aC CD A r . ,^� ;; d Co .°•n Ory O CL o a o o a rs a o o �ap� y< zz O go wG O _ b fD ° w 5� CD y CD 0 0 M r•1 r'h _ ny O A O 5 CA+7 5 O p A�7 0G0 '* GCD �• 0O � O CD - ^ n W o A y °��' °° �' o °, cmc a O O M :d uq OY °CD cAD CDfDy °° O .y Y am v^ a. o• � a• y o � � to CD n w i w CD o " WIW b b ° 0 r O w� G o' ��� moo' �S <o CID 00 =0 CD cf aq CD cs < y ------------------- "00. T�7� . o cD o w 0 5 w cr a p gi � 0 a a R o N F.�' ° A n CD a 0 �o •v � w °b too RL d 0 � o .a b a^ w p G ' 4 ^ rn " � a o C7 ° Ci ° 3 _ CC _ c CD y 0 E. H y CSD OC) UU C/] A� ct 5 o o^ a_ a m cD -1 CD c co 0 o W rb . CL CA H 0 nom Nci G O N F G !C �••! CD N .Fy N P�Y�y. Cp CD cr '10 CD W an VQ CD CD ry CD �_ ZG N' �, W p a n faD c b O• ° n e C. iv y ° cc N i�1 N_ co cD C➢ 0 y C) < f =.o R Q�Q n' n• CD CD C n c G -cj O. 0. O O o O Cro OQ ° 'C1 w • N � CA CD ZD 'J n CCD O CCD CD ° o eD ° ��•• n Cn b m �' •o ° z z 0 0 y CD CaD ° w���° CD C N ^ . ° ° CD w � G 0. 5 o c , " °�5 ., = n CD g 0 CD CD n FI- trQ to a N CD CD CD CD �' ti ^ z m C ft eb 12 12 0 O tz d a� n I d C7 O (D O (D p (D m CD CDCD in o 0OQ 0 ti y c9 07• l9 .0 G. c9rp Cy 3 CD :. v .00 � ° �� n� a n o. y� G w p CDC 0 CD " �a fD b! W t 0 Q 0 a C m $' a b o bCI- Ca9Ix O -ti' hn•1 •0 p.:�'t (o y y 0? Co ti y.. `.r CD y b • ver -�' Vi � � p rn"1 ."% p: G (D (D..w �G C (D CD ry p CD n n �° o .�• er �+ o b � b CD o ccn ° R 0 0, eoo CD ro d CD y n.+ (D O CD O CD h �a CD 10, o ry o �• ^ 'U �. � b to G' �•• d � ~o �' n7 � o a• CD O 0 ft z (D a n m 0 0 W aD n R eD :: a Attachment A (Continued) MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM Page 24 Tentative Traci Map No. 51253 4664/9afjReport Responsibility for Verification By City Name Date Mitigation Measure Verification of h Mitigation anon Milestone g Standard Educational Facilities Grading activities anticipated to occur adjoining the South City Engineer Prior to the initiation of Compliance to be Pointe Middle School site shall be coordinated with the Walnut grading operations. verified prior to the Valley Unified School District to-rumimiz'disruptiog5 to commencement of site grading. current school operations. Prior to the implementation of the grading pian, the project City Engineer Concurrent with grading Prior to the proponent(s) shall submit a safety planto the City of Diamond operations. commencement of site Bar. Said safety plan shall identify, appropriate measures to be grading, the City during grading activities to-nirnize disWV ieps to undertaken hii Engineer shall: school activities, shall address on-site seddtity plan's to limit receive and, when unauthorized access upon the site, acid shall address potential adequate, accept a health and safety considerations relative to pedestrian activities safety plan; and (2) in proximity to those construction operations. verify the adequacy of the project proponent(s) safety plan; and (3) if required, require select modifications to the safet lan. Page 24 Tentative Traci Map No. 51253 4664/9afjReport Attachment A (Continued) MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM Page 25 Tentative 1'ract Map No. 51253 4664ISta,(f Report