HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/20/1995C it NJ
couytcl/
AGENDA
Tuesday, June 20, 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
Council Member
Phyllis E. Papen
Gary H. Werner
Eileen R. Ansari
Council Member Clair W. Harmony
City Manager
Terrence L. Belanger
City Attorney
Michael Jenkins
City Clerk
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.
f 1)[VIONII BAIL 1
Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking "r 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 dum 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 EDEN-nr-" ON THE AGENDA.
1.
2.
CALL TO ORDER:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
ROLL CALL:
Next Resolution No. 95-30
Next Ordinance No. 06(1995)
6:30 p.m. June 20, 1995
Mayor Papen
Council Members Ansari, Harmony,
MPT/Werner and Mayor Papen
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES:
2.1 Certificate of Recognition to the Diamond Bar Jr. Women's
Club on its 20th anniversary and commending the Club on
its efforts to sponsor the Annual Spelling Bee.
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 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - June 22, 1995 - 7:00
p.m., AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.2 HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE ROUNDUP - June 24, 1995 -
9:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m., L.A. County Fairgrounds, 1101 W.
McKinley Ave., Pomona (enter roundup from Gate 15 off
Arrow Hwy.)
5.3 PLANNING COMMISSION - June 26, 1995 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD
Auditorium, 21685 E. Copley Dr.
5.4 4TH OF JULY HOLIDAY - July 4, 1995 - City Offices will be
closed in observance. Will reopen Wednesday, July 5,
1995.
JUNE 20, 1995
PAGE 2
5.5 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - JULY 11, 1995 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD
Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR:
6.1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of May 16, 1995 -
Approve as submitted.
Requested by: City Clerk
6.2 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES:
6.2.1 Regular Meeting/Neighborhood Traffic Mgmt.
Workshop #1 of April 13, 1995 - Receive &
File.
6.2.2 Regular Meeting of May 11, 1995 - Receive &
File.
6.3 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
6.3.1 Regular Meeting of May 8, 1995 - Receive &
File.
6.3.2 Regular Meeting of May 22, 1995 - Receive &
File.
Requested by: Community Development Director
6.4 VOUCHER REGISTER: Approve Voucher Register dated June
20, 1995 in the amount of $411,515.93.
Requested by: City Manager
6.5 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES:
6.5.1 Filed by Hildegarde C. Shaw May 2, 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.
6.5.2 Filed by Alarcon Sons, Inc. May 31, 1995.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that
the City Council reject the request for
Indemnity and refer the matter for further
action to Carl Warren & Co., the City's Risk
Manager.
Requested by: City Clerk
6.6 ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS PERTAINING TO GENERAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 7, 1995 - Pursuant to the
California Elections Code, the Council must adopt
JUNE 20, 1995 PAGE 3
resolutions calling and giving notice of the holding of
an election and requesting the Board of Supervisors to
consolidate the City's election with School Elections on
November 7, 1995. In addition, the Council must adopt
regulations pertaining to the filing of candidates'
statements.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council adopt the following Resolutions:
(A) RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA,
CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A
GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY,
NOVEMBER 7, 1995, FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN
OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS
OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW
CITIES.
(B) RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA,
REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY
OF LOS ANGELES TO CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 7, 1995, WITH THE
SCHOOL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO
SECTION 10403 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE.
(C) RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA,
ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE
OFFICE PERTAINING TO CANDIDATES STATEMENTS
SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION TO BE HELD
ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1995.
6.7 CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL SERVICES AGREEMENT - Since
incorporation, the City has maintained a General Services
Agreement with L.A. County for miscellaneous services
which may be requested from time to time from the County
to the City. The current agreement will expire on June
30, 1995. The County Chief Administrative Office has
submitted an Agreement which will continue such services
through June 30, 2000.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council approve and adopt the General Services Agreement
between the County and the City beginning July 1, 1995
through June 30, 2000.
Requested by: City Manager
JUNE 20, 1995 PAGE 4
6.8 RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE LAW ENFORCEMENT
SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AND
THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, AND REQUESTING SAID SERVICES
PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT - Since incorporation, the
City has provided law enforcement services with the L.A.
County Sheriff's Department through a Law Enforcement
Services Agreement with the County. The current
agreement will expire on June 30, 1995. The Sheriff's
Department has submitted an agreement which will continue
law enforcement services through June 30, 1999.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council adopt Resolution No. 95 -XX approving the City -
County Law Enforcement Services Agreement from July 1,
1995 through June 30, 1999.
Requested by: City Manager
6.9 EXTENSION OF BUS SHELTER CONTRACT - The City has
contracted with Metro Display Advertising, Inc. to
provide 23 bus shelters in the City since July 1990. The
five year term of the original contract expires on July
1, 1995. Section 15 of the contract provides an option
to extend the contract for an additional five year term.
Staff has negotiated the conditions of the extension with
Metro Display Advertising, Inc. The City will receive an
annual $24,000 franchise fee and will incur no costs for
repair or maintenance of the bus shelters.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council approve extension of the Bus Shelter contract
with Metro Display Advertising, Inc. for a period of five
years, effective July 1, 1995.
Requested by: Community Services Director
6.10 AGREEMENT FOR AUDITING OF DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX
PAYMENTS - It is estimated that up to 12% of a City's
transfer tax revenue may be misallocated to other
jurisdictions. The firm of Hdl, Coren & Cone proposes a
service to audit the Documentary Transfer Tax allocated
to the City by analysis, through verification of real
estate transfer documents, if the City is receiving its
appropriate share of transfer tax. If errors have
occurred, Hdl, Coren & Cone will initiate the proper
paperwork to recover the City's misallocated portion of
the tax.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council approve and direct the City Manager to execute an
JUNE 20, 1995
PAGE 5
agreement with Hdl, Coren & Cone to perform a review of
Documentary Transfer Taxes paid to the City.
Requested by: City Manager
6.11 CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION/INSPECTION SERVICES FOR
GRAND AVENUE REHABILITATION - DEWAN, LUNDIN & ASSOCIATES
- In preparing for the Grand Ave. Rehabilitation Project,
staff distributed Requests for Proposals for Construction
Administration and Inspection services. After review of
the proposals, interviews and reference checks, the
committee ranked the proposing firms. Staff recommended
Harris & Assoc. as the most qualified. On June 13, 1995
Harris & Assoc. withdrew their proposal. Staff's
subsequent recommendation is Dewan, Lundin & Associates
(DLA) .
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council authorize the Mayor to enter into a Professional
Services Agreement with Dewan, Lundin & Associates for
Construction Administration and Inspection Services for
Grand Ave. Reconstruction in an amount not to exceed
$28,600 and provide a contingency amount of $2,500 for
contract amendment(s) to be approved by the City Manager,
for a total authorization amount of $31,100.
Requested by: City Engineer
6.12 AWARD OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO RJM DESIGN GROUP
FOR THE MAPLE HILL PARK RETROFIT PROJECT - The Council
awarded a 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 to review time
schedules, interpret plans and specifications, process
submittals, review payment requests, conduct construction
inspections, prepare the final "punch list" and produce
"as -built" drawings.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council award project management services for the Maple
Hill Park retrofit project to RJM Design Group in an
amount not to exceed $9,500.
Requested by: Community Services Director
7. PUBLIC HEARING:
7.1 RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AND ADOPTING A
BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
JUNE 20, 1995 PAGE 6
COMMENCING JULY 1, 1995 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 1995
INCLUDING MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS, SPECIAL FUNDS AND
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR
ACCOUNTS, DEPARTMENTS, DIVISIONS, OBJECTS AND PURPOSES
THEREIN SET FORTH - The City Council is required to
annually adopt by resolution a budget which sets forth
the estimated revenues, appropriations, personnel and
programs which are anticipated for the forthcoming fiscal
year. The Council has held public hearings to discussed
the proposed FY 95-96 budget.
Recommended Actions: It is recommended that the City
Council:
(A) Approve use of the City's population percentage change
and use of the California Per Capita Income percentage
change for calculating the FY 1995-96 Appropriations
Limit; and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF
LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SETTING THE
APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995-1996 FOR THE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF
DIVISION 9 OF TITLE 1 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE;
(B) Renewal of Animal Care and Control Services
Agreement - The City's agreement with the Pomona
Valley Humane Society expires on June 30, 1995. In
addition to renewing their agreement, the Humane
Society is requesting consideration of an increase
to certain animal control, shelter and licensing
fees. This fee is being proposed in order to
offset the increased cost of animal control
services.
It is recommended that the City Council (1) approve
Supplement No. 4 with the Pomona Valley Humane
Society extending their agreement for an additional
12 -month period; (2) consider the following options
relating to the proposed increase in costs: (a)
increase the annual supplemental payment to the
Humane Society from $54,169 to $59,150 and amend
the City's proposed FY 1995-96 budget accordingly
or (2) set a public hearing to consider an increase
to certain animal control, shelter and licensing
fees.
(C) Adopt RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING
AND ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JULY 1, 1995 AND
ENDING JUNE 30, 1996 INCLUDING MAINTENANCE AND
JUNE 20, 1995
PAGE 7
OPERATIONS, SPECIAL FUNDS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR ACCOUNTS, DEPARTMENTS,
DIVISIONS, OBJECTS AND PURPOSES THEREIN SET FORTH.
Requested by: City Manager
7.2 (A) RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 23382 AND MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 95-2 FOR A REQUEST TO
DIVIDE ONE PARCEL INTO FOUR RESIDENTIAL LOTS
LOCATED AT THE EXTREME NORTHWESTERN EDGE OF TONNER
CANYON/CHINO HILLS SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREA
(SEA) NO. 15, AT 3000 BLOCK (NORTH SIDE) OF
STEEPLECHASE LANE.
(B) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR APPROVING HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT AND
SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 92-1, OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 95-2, AND MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 95-2 FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP NO. 23382 WHICH IS A REQUEST TO DIVIDE ONE
PARCEL INTO FOUR RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED AT THE
EXTREME NORTHWESTERN EDGE OF TONNER CANYON/CHINO
HILLS SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREA (SEA) NO. 15, AT
3000 BLOCK (NORTH SIDE) OF STEEPLECHASE LANE - The
proposed project is requested by the Dolezal Family
Limited Partnership to approve subdivision of a
22.5 acre parcel into four residential lots ranging
from .55 to .90 acres. The project site is located
in the 3,000 block (north side) of Steeplechase
Ln., at the terminus of Hawkwood Rd. adjacent to
"The County Estates."
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council adopt Resolution Nos. 95 -XX and 95 -XX approving
Tentative Parcel Map No. 23383, Conditional Use Permit
No. 92-1, Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2, Negative Declaration
No. 95-2, Findings of Fact, and conditions.
Requested by: Community Development Director
OLD BUSINESS:
8.1 RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ADOPTING THE 1995 GENERAL PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - On May 9, 1995, the Council
held a public hearing on the draft 1995 General Plan.
The public hearing was opened, testimony received and
corrections and changes were made by the Council.
Resolution No. 95-21 incorporating Resolution 92-43 by
JUNE 20, 1995 PAGE 8
reference and certifying the adequacy of the Addendum to
the General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report was
adopted. On May 9, 1995, Council discussed the possibil-
ity of placing the General Plan on the ballot. The
meeting was continued to May 23, 1995 in order to provide
options to the Council regarding adoption of the 1995
General Plan. The May 23, 1995 discussion was continued
to June 20, 1995.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council receive a presentation from staff, review the
General Plan materials and adopt Resolution No. 95 -XX.
Requested by: Community Development Director
8.2 LIBRARY SERVICES FOR FY 1995-96 - The L.A. County
Librarian has asked each of the cities in the County,
that have library branches within their boundaries, to
consider either providing funding for or taking over
operation of the libraries. The Librarian has asked for
a response by June 23, 1995.
Recommendation Action: It is recommended that the City
Council direct the Council subcommittee on library
services (Mayor Papen and Council Member Ansari) and
staff to meet with representatives from the County to
discuss library service alternatives and bring back a
recommendation to the City Council.
Requested by: Mayor Papen
9. NEW BUSINESS:
9.1 EXTENSION OF CONTRACT WITH CAROL A. DENNIS FOR MINUTE
SECRETARY SERVICE - In October, 1994, the City
distributed Requests for Proposals (RFP) for Minute
Secretary Services. A contract was awarded to Carol A.
Dennis for Minute Secretary services for Planning and
Traffic & Transportation Commission Meetings. The City
has a one year renewal option for the extension of that
contract. Based upon the quality of service and
performance of Carol A. Dennis, staff desires to utilize
the one year renewal option.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council authorize the City Manager to extend for one year
the agreement with Carol A. Dennis for Planning and
Traffic & Transportation Commission meetings for $14,000
for the period of July 1, 1995 to June 30, 1996.
Requested by: Community Development Director
JUNE 20, 1995 PAGE 9
10. ANNOUNCEMENTS:
11. CLOSED SESSION: CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL (Anticipated
Litigation, G.C. 54956.9(b))
The City Council finds, based on advice from the City
Attorney, that discussion in open session will prejudice the
position of the City in the litigation.
A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the City
Council on the advice of its legal counsel, based on the
below -described existing facts and circumstances, there is a
significant exposure to litigation against the City Council:
Statement made by Mr. Patel outside an open meeting of the
City Council regarding Tract Map No. 51253; bond requirement.
A record of the statement was made by Michael Myers and is
available for public inspection in the City Clerk's office.
12. ADJOURNMENT: To July 5, 1995.
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, June 20, 1995.
Items for consideration are listed on the attached agenda.
I, LYNDA BURGESS, declare as follows:
I am the City Clerk in the City of Diamond Bar; that a copy
of the Regular Meeting of the Diamond Bar City Council, to be
held on June 20, 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 16th day of
June, 1995, at Diamond Bar, California.
/s/ Lynda Burgess
Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
TO: CITY CLERK
FROM:,
ADDRESS: ?_A-.a_J. PHONE• ,6'�4i�.J✓:�`__
ORGANIZATION:
AGENDA #/SUBJECT: % i % • % % ,
I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my
name and address as written above.
Signature
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
TO: CITY CLERK
FROM; /ry ri C�� L�� / �S DATE:
ADDRESS: �U ��� (�,�E'S� J)LL. Uri PHONE: U j^r sl�Pcb
ORGANIZATION:
AGENDA #/SUBJECT:
I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my
name and address as written above.
I
V ,
Signature
#.I VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
TO
17R(: A:
ADI' IESS:
OR - 41VIZATION:
AGE JDA NSUBJECT.
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:
ADDRESS:
ORGANIZATION:
AGENDA #/SUBJECT:
v
DATE:C'��D
PHONE:����lY
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
4* VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
I —
TC
FR DM:
AC DRESS:
OF GANIZATION:
AC SNDA #/SUBJECT:
CITY CLERK
DATE:
PHONE:
I e<pect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my
nai ne and address as written above.
W :L� 4". F/L
Signature
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
TO
FR, A:
AD. :ill—SS:
DR: ANIZATION:
AG'- qDA #/SUBJECT:
CITY CLERK �x{
DATE:
`oZ 63 D2�- PHONE:
G ? ,.
expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my
narne and address as written above.
(.�
Signature
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
i�
L�
TO: CITY CLERK
FROM: OCC a- �C'L''�'!`'� DATE:
ADDRESS: f,`� O-Q PHONE:
ORGANIZATION: ` n
AGENDA 4d6p) �G
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
P 4"3 v
DATE: 6/ " L a
PHONE: e6/' "7 V Z
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 Signatturre.
FA
TO:
FROM:
ADDRESS:
ORGANIZATION
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA #/SUBJECT:
CITY CLERK 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.
Si ature
'A
VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
I
TO
FR 'M:
AD )RESS:
OR 'IAN IZATION:
AG ----NIDA #/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.
TO:
FROM
ADDRE=SS:
ORGANIZATION:
AGENDA #JSUBJECI
VU_JNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
('11Y .C/LERK
6v"
/
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
g�f
8 - DATE:
a -
PHONE: l�iv�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.
l
i
Signature
MEMORANDUM
City of Diamond Bar
To: Terry Belanger, City Manager
From: Mike Myers tL'4�
Date: June 16, 1995 `
Subject: Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 (Sasalc/Patel)
CC: Frank Usher, Assistant Citv Manager
George Wentz, City Engineer
Today I spoke with Amrut Patel regarding a letter of credit he advises
-that Foothill Independent Bank has prepared and will be submitting to the
City next week. This letter of credit is to be offered as security for
performance of that condition requiring the remedy of adverse geological
and soils aspects of the site that the Council imposed in considering
Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 at its meeting on May 17, 1995. As the
conditions require _that security to guarantee performance be provided to
the City within seven days from that action on May 17, 1 again reminded
Mr. Patel that more than seven days had passed. While I would receive his
letter of credit, I could not accept it as satisfaction of the condition
requiring posting within seven days. Mr. Patel advised me that, if I did not
accept this letter of credit in satisfaction of the conditions, he would sue
the City.
Ar7FAC
Diamond Bar Juniors
GFWC DIAMOND BAR JUNIORS PRESS
Helen Selfridge
1225 Mahogany Court
Diamond Bar, CA 91789
Christine Miller - President
Today's date: June 16, 1995
RE: 20th Annual Spelling Bee Proclamation
RELEASE
The GFWC, Diamond Bar Junior Woman's Club recently held their 20th
Annual Spelling Bee which was held at Chaparral Junior High School
May 19th.
In honor of this being our 20th year hostessing our Annual Spelling
Bee for local 3rd and 4th grade students, we thought it appropriate
to acknowledge the Diamond Bar Junior Woman's Club involvement in.
local educational development.
I hope the following information will aide you in preparing the
Proclamation.
HISTORY
The Diamond Bar Juniors were organized in 1963 through the encourage-
ment and leadership of Mrs. Eleanor McMillan, Founding President.
The Diamond Bar Junior Woman's Club is sponsored by the Diamond Bar
Woman's Club and.s-F65one out of five Junior Clubs in the San
Gabriel Valley District.
The Diamond Bar Junior Woman's Club is part of the GFWC (General
Federation of Woman's Clubs) California Juniors. The GFWC California
Juniors are members of the GFWC California Federation of Women's
Clubs with Junior Clubs in cities and towns throughout the State.
The National Organization, the General Federation of Women's Clubs
is the largest volunteer service organization of women in the world
with a membership over 10 million.
-Matto: _7 ti y in Diversity
Motto on -Club Pin: Strength United is Stronger
The Diamond Bar Junior Woman's Club is open to area women over the
age of 18 who live in Diamond Bar, Pomona and Chino Hills. We hold,
monthly_me-e-tings -on the- first Mon -daft--- e-f--e"aehr--m0-nt+r at 7 :30pm at th-e
Southern California Air_._._a1-}ty Managcmcnt- District min f7ffzee,
`2,1865 Cnp1 Py pE. , Diamond. Bar.
f 91735
We are a non-profit organization; money raised by various events is
returned to our community through various projects and donations.
We hold a,,.- -An=al _in April.
WHO 1.8 A_. -=R?
A Junior is someone who is interested in people, who finds fulfillment
in volunteer work in her community, who is interested in broadening
her horizons and is looking for new friendships with an exciting
group of women who enjoy a wide variety of interests and goals.
OUR OBJECTIVES
The advancement of culture and Education and Community Service.
CLUB PROJECTS
All funds raised from any of our fund raising events are returned to
our community through various projects in The Arts, Conservation,
\ Education, Home Life/Health, International Affairs and Public Affairs/
Safety as well as, 2 Annual Scholarships given to Mt. San Antonio
College Students (Gloria Johnson and Iris Grimes Scholarships) and
3 High School Scholarships (Teen Citizen, Visual Arts andr,_Sean
Lowry - Journalism. $200.00 each. 'Ki1ut�
Other Projects: Annual Spelling Bee
Annual Spring Arts and Crafts Fair
Annual Fall Arts and Crafts Fair
* See attached list of Club Projects
PPELL1,,u e CL
20th A"nnual Spelling Beela�1d_Qn_May-1-9- at.-��apa�-� Jun Lor High
SPrnoi--T-he-Spelling-Bcc i% held fo-iV*local 3rd and 4th grade students -4-
All pparticipates receive a "goody bag" and prizes and trophys are
awarded for ist,-2nd-and 3rd place.
The Juniors solicit the community for -prizes and goodies. We serve
cookies, punch and coffee at intermission.
We try to get a Prominent figure in the Community to moderate. The
last few ,years that person has been Gary Werner. This year due to
Mr. Werner being out of town on business, Fred Scalzo honored our
request.
Each of the approximately 90 students who participate each year have
been chosen by his or her teacher as an outstanding speller.
_QTJJB PLEyCLe
I/pledge my loyatly to the Junior Clubwomen, by doing better than
ever before, what I have to do, by.bL-ng rompt, honest, .
courteous, by living eac day, trying to acco lish somethi-ng, n t
merely to exist. ,
,The ;�zamond Bar Junior Woman's Club is proLd-of their involvement in
ell Community and Educational Development.
-end- cltUc) 5qY--Ar13S
SCHOLARSHIP EXPLANATIONS
High School
Michael Sean Lowry Scholarship - Applicant must be a senior student of
a California High School, either public or private, with at least one
year of journalism credits. During the student's enrollment in
journalism classes he/she must have been on the editorial staff for
at least one semester. This Scholarship is in memory of a past
State President's (Charlene Lowry) son who died of cancer at a
young age.
Mount San Antonio College
The Iris Grimes Scholarship was the first scholarship to be
established in Diamond Bar in 1965. This award is given annually
to a local arts student. This award was established in memory of
a talented artist and active member of the Diamond Bar Junior
Women's Club who was killed along with her husband and two out of
six children in December 1964.
The Gloria Johnson Scholarship is awarded annually to a local public
and safety service student. This award was established in 1973 in
memory of Gloria Johnson who was a social service student at Mt. Sac
and also an active member of the Diamond Bar Junior Women's Club.
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MAY 16, 1995
CALL TO ORDER: MPT/Werner called the meeting to order at
6:34 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 MPT/Werner.
ROLL CALL: Council Members Ansari, Harmony, Miller, and
Mayor Pro Tem Werner. Mayor Papen was excused.
Also present were Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; Frank Usher, Assistant
City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City Attorney; George Wentz, City Engineer;
Bob Rose, Community Services Director; James DeStefano, Community
Development Director and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk.
2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS, ETC.:
None.
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Elizabeth Hodges, 1604 Morning Sun, asked
the Council to do something about the water line breakage in her area caused
by the landslide behind her home.
Mike Collins, 1612 Morning Sun, stated that there is a definite safety problem
because of the hill's slide. He advised that the hill is moving approximately one
to two inches per day and asked the Council for immediate testing. He
expressed concern that the main gas line may break, that fire protection may not
be possible because the hydrants are out of service, and that a 2" temporary
water line does not adequately accommodate 10 homes. He displayed photos
evidencing the movement of the land and gave copies to the City Clerk.
Barbara Beach-Courchesne, 2021 Peaceful Hills Rd., requested the City to
inform homeowners of any decisions that will impact their property, specifically
items 8.1 and 8.2.
Oscar Law, 2150 Pathfinder, advised that Karl Rosen is aware of a proposal
writer that will support the City in its desire for a 10,000 sq. ft, senior citizen
building. Further, there are builders with land holdings off of Golden Springs
that would consider donating it to the City for this purpose. He requested the
City Manager to contact the above persons to get this project under way.
Dr. Lawrence Rhodes, Fiber Ct., expressed concern that the government is
increasing HUD housing rent to renters when properties are worth less. He
requested the City to look into this problem.
Dr. Corigliani requested that developments 1 and 61 in the Summit Ridge area
be stopped and not continued.
MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 2
Nellie Reyes, 1728 Morning Sun, stated that she had never experienced any
damage or movement of the hillside until the Patel development started
construction. She introduced pictures of her property and property damage to
her fence, jacuzzi and block wall. She advised that her hillside has moved
considerably and expressed concern regarding her pool, equipment and gas
lines. She asked the City to discontinue the development project until the
County can approve it.
Terry Birrell requested that the minutes reflect all of the Morning Sun residents'
comments and concerns. She expressed concern that the Council changed land
use element 1-18 issues specifically outlining commercial development without
GPAC consideration. She disagreed with the Mayor's Notes in the May issue of
the Windmill.
Max Maxwell, 3211 Bent Twig Ln., agreed with Terry Birrell's comments and
expressed concern with Council being able to change the General Plan.
MPT/Werner moved item 8.1 for the next topic of discussion.
8. OLD BUSINESS
8.1 (A) RESOLUTION OF NO -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE
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. -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.
CM/Belanger reported that Council had not approved any development activity,
grading activity or any activity of any kind east of Morning Sun. He advised that
activities taking place east of Morning Sun were outside authoritative control of
the City.
MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 3
ACM/Usher stated that, with respect to tentative tract map 51253 by the Sasak
Corp., represented by president Amrut Patel and Jan C. Dabney, proposed a 21
unit single family subdivision on a 6.7 acre site immediately adjacent to Morning
Sun. He advised that this site was a part of the overall master plan. He
presented and reviewed maps of the projects along with two resolutions: 1) for
the approval of an addendum to the final environmental impact report for the
project; 2) for approval of the tract map allowing 21 units on Sasak land and
approval of a hillside management conditional use permit along with an oak tree
permit. He reviewed special conditional use permits that are also required
before development.
CE/Wentz recommended three alternatives to address the land slippage in the
Morning Sun neighborhood: 1) the matter could be handled through nuisance
abatement proceedings where it can be taken through the property maintenance
ordinance which would take as long as 90 days; 2) condition any map approval
on the applicant to take action; however, it would be difficult to place any time
restrictions on the applicant in terms of how quickly the City would demand that
such corrections be made; 3) demand of the applicant that geotechnical
matters and any resolution that the applicant may propose to take care of the
land slippage and the grading would be accomplished prior to any type of
approval of the map.
In response to MPT/Werner, CA/Jenkins explained that if the City decides to
declare an emergency, the scope and extent of private property damage would
need to be determined and whether or not public forces should be involved to
assist in the emergency.
Jan Dabney, Sasak Project Manager, stated that the failure of the slope was
brought to his attention by the City and he immediately went out to the site. He
advised that, at that point, the only failure was basically isolated to a rupture in
the water line with small slippage along Morning Sun and the Patel property. He
stated that his soil consultant engineer reviewed the slippage and the water line
problem and completed a preliminary review suggesting that the existing slope
drain, which was broken, be scarified and reshaped to allow run off down the hill
into the storm drain. He advised that this problem was rectified by his
contractors including the reshaping of the hill, cleaning the ditch, and concrete
placed in the broken up ditch line the following day. It was not determined at
that time that the hill side would continue to slip and cause additional problems.
He advised that the following Monday, he received a call from Mr. Collins stating
that the problem had escalated. He advised that he went to the site and saw
that the problem had indeed escalated. He stated that Mr. Patel has contracted
and responded to this problem as quickly as he could to protect the local
development and the residents.
Frank Stillman, Triad Geotechnical Consultants, advised that his company
MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 4
completed the preliminary investigation and that his findings indicated that it is a
bedding plane failure which has unfavorable geological conditions in which the
bedding planes are sloping toward the street. He also stated that there had not
been any further investigation on the slippage.
C/Ansari asked when the geological study was completed and if core drillings
were complete.
Mr. Stillman advised that the geological study was completed in 1994. He also
advised that test pits were dug with a backhoe which is also considered core
drilling.
C/Ansari asked if the large amounts of dirt sitting on the school property has
anything to do with the bedding plane failure.
Mr. Stillman stated that that was impossible to cause the bedding plane failure.
C/Ansari asked if Mr. Patel had any plans to do any core drilling.
Mr. Stillman stated that they have not had any negotiations for future work.
C/Ansari asked if his firm would be testing the ground with manometers to
determine the movement of the slope.
Mr. Stillman stated that he doesn't believe that that would determine anything
since it has been determined that the land is moving. He advised that the
mechanism causing the movement in the bedding planes needs to be
determined.
MPT/Werner asked Mr. Stillman if he has ever experienced this large of a hill
slide problem, and if so, where.
Mr. Stillman stated that his company was involved with the large hill slide on
Montecito in Hacienda Heights.
MPT/Werner asked what Mr. Stillman's game plan would be to stop the bedding
plane failure.
Mr. Stillman suggested that test pits need to be placed on this hill side to
determine the steepness of the bedding plane and determine where the
movement is coming from. He also stated that he feels that it's a matter of
removing a mass and not water.
MPT/Werner asked what the time frame would be to determine where the
slippage is coming from so that residents can go back to living normally.
MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 5
Mr. Stillman indicated that a couple of weeks for exploratory is sufficient time to
submit a report and recommendations to Council.
In response to MPT/Werner, Mr. Stillman advised that the land will continue to
move; however, the gas line is on the other side of the street and because the
land slide is shallow, it will probably not affect the line.
C/Harmony asked if Mr. Stillman was aware of the surcharge load bearing
weight placed on the school district property and how it would affect the slide.
Mr. Stillman stated that he had not studied the load weight on the school
property; however, his basis was directed toward bedding planes, angle of
bedding planes and there is no way that that dirt load, that far of a distance,
given this geology, could be on top of a bedding plane that is acting on the
street.
C/Harmony asked if he did any of the core drilling or identification of the school
property's ancient slide where 400 cubic yards were replaced. He also asked if
he is familiar with any of the geological maps that relate to the school district's
property.
Mr. Stillman responded that he was not a part of the core drilling for the school
district nor was he familiar with their geological maps. He advised that drill pits
and core drilling had been accomplished some time ago on the Patel property.
Fire Chief Lockhart advised that he had spoken with ACM/Usher and directed
the Engine Company Captain for that jurisdiction to inspect the site tonight. He
reported that Engine Company #119 received a letter from the Walnut Valley
Water District advising that the hydrant on Morning Sun is out of service. It was
determined that another hydrant is approximately 800 ft. to the last house on the
block and there are adequate hoses on fire trucks to accommodate a problem.
He stated that while they are at the site inspecting, they will determine if the
hydrant that will be servicing these homes is, in fact, in service and will not be
affected by the landslide.
MPT/Werner asked the Chief Lockhart to comment on the prospect of a gas line
breakage.
Fire Chief advised that the Gas Co. had inspected the site and that the City
needs to talk with the Gas Co. to make sure that the gas lines are not in any
danger. If gas lines break, there will be no service to those homes, and there is
a chance that ignition will happen depending upon the type of gas running
through the line.
M/Papen arrived at 7:30 p.m. and asked if there was a recommendation for the
MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 6
gas line to be ran above ground like the water line.
Chief Lockhart indicated that they would go along with the recommendations of
the Gas Co.
M/Papen asked the Chief Lockhart to coordinate with the Gas Co. on their
recommendations for the gas lines.
MPT/Werner requested staff to coordinate with the appropriate county
departments to address issues involving the Morning Sun hill slide.
C/Harmony advised that there is a major gas line running through the Arciero
property and asked where the major gas line runs through this property.
C/Miller advised that the major gas line runs through Arciero's property and
across Brea Canyon Rd., going in a northwesterly direction, which is 1/2 mile
away from the landslide.
Clay Chaput, WN.U.S.D., reported that he was notified of this problem by Mr.
Dabney and that he contacted the soils engineer who performed all of the work
on the 400,000 cubic yard of dirt moved, and asked him to visit the site and
report if the dirt had anything to do with the hill slide. He stated that he received
a verbal report from the soils engineer and geologist and was assured that
movement of the 400,000 cubic yards could not have impacted this particular
area. He explained that, because of this report, the School District had no
responsibility for the slide; however, they are a property owner in that vicinity to
the extent that they are involved in the problem and they will be involved in the
solution.
C/Harmony asked Mr. Chaput if staff could talk to his engineering people on a
one-on-one basis to resolve issues regarding the blue line stream.
Mr. Chaput reported that they had not been near the blue line stream in any
construction completed on their property.
MPT/Werner requested staff to keep the school district informed of the issues
and solutions.
Mr. Chaput asked Ms. Reyes to contact him in order for him to look at her
property in connection to the school district's property.
Barbara Beach-Courchesne, 2021 Peaceful Hills Rd., expressed frustration with
Council for not acting on this problem. She also stated that only 18 homes
should be built on the Patel property, not 21.
MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 7
Bob Roberts, 1600 Morning Sun, requested the Council to declare a state of
emergency.
MPT/Werner requested staff to call the Gas Co. during the meeting for an
update on the gas line.
Mr. Yung Kim presented photos indicating the land slippage affecting all of the
Sasak and school district property.
In response to C/Ansari, Mr. Kim advised that his ground started buckling
approximately May 1, 1995 and has not stopped since.
George Barrett thanked Council for listening to the problems regarding Morning
Sun. He advised that he is a board member of the Pathfinder Homeowners
Assn. and advised that Sasak homes will fall under this association and required
to pay association dues and must adhere to the CC&R's. The Assn, has filed a
lien against the Sasak property.
Mike Sharbarel, 1645 Morning Sun, advised that their first indication of
something being wrong was on March 17, 1995 when the water main broke in
front of their home and then broke again one week later. He urged Council not
to approve development of the Sasak property until the land slippage problem is
resolved.
Don Schad, 1824 Shaded Wood Rd., stated that he had hiked that hilly area for
the past year and is well aware of the geology of that hill. He reported that there
is a very large crack on top of the ridge which is moving steadily every day. He
expressed concern that the fire hydrant that services the homes is out of order
and asked the fire department to lay down and leave a large water hose in case
the gas main breaks.
Max Maxwell, 3211 Bent Twig Ln., asked Council to reject the development of
the Sasak property.
Terry Birrell reminded Council that there is no existing General Plan; therefore; it
is unknown that the future land use designation of this area is consistent with the
General Plan. She also advised that after her review of the environmental
impact report it did not address any sluffage; therefore, she suggested that the
environmental impact report and the addendum are insufficient and asked the
Council to investigate the bedding plane problem before anymore grading is
completed. She suggested that staff require the developers to complete the
research necessary to help the residents of Morning Sun Avenue.
Wilbur Smith, 21630 Fairwind Ln., expressed concern that neither the Council or
staff have addressed bedding plane problems in other developments. He asked
MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 8
the Council to stop passing the buck and start talking about how to stop the
earth from moving and protect the residents of Morning Sun.
CM/Belanger explained the due process procedure by an expedited nuisance
abatement proceeding where it is essentially declared a nuisance by the
property owner and the property owner will abate it. He also advised that the
City does not own or maintain any public property within this subject private
property area, including the school district site and the Sasak site; therefore, it is
essentially not the City"s responsibility. Before the tentative map can ever be
approved, the property owner must rectify the problem but not be allowed
bonding or patching of the damaged area. He also stated that a time frame can
be placed on the property owner. He also advised that, before the passage of
this tentative tract map, all of the geotechnical work will be completed prior to
that time including the nature of the remediation.
MPT/Werner reiterated that abatement could be accomplished two ways through
a nuisance abatement and the tentative map process which would suggest the
conditions of approval of the problems that have been created as a result of•this
landslide are resolved, otherwise a final map cannot be recorded. He asked that
since the City has no public structures at risk, can the City process a nuisance
abatement.
CA/Jenkins advised that the absence of a public facility at risk does not affect
the City's legal authority to proceed with a public nuisance.
MPT/Werner asked if the City has a viable option of doing nothing about this
problem or if the City has a public responsibility.
CA/Jenkins advised that the City has no legal duty to take action with respect to
private property as long as the City has no responsibility for causation and as
long as City property is not being affected.
MPT/Werner asked if the City does something about this problem, then does the
City put itself at risk for exposure.
CA/Jenkins stated that there is no risk for exposure on the part of the City. He
advised that the agendized item is approving the tentative map, not the
abatement of the landslide. He stated that if there is a lack of sufficient
information about the condition of the property and whether or not the property
can be subdivided the way that it's being proposed, then that is basis for
continuing this discussion and requesting further information. The City can
impose conditions on the map to require remediation of the landslide.
CE/Wentz emphasized two ways in dealing the issue of the map would be either
in writing a condition as part of a map approval which can address remediation
MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 9
of the landslide with time constraints; or indicate to the applicant that a map will
not be considered unless all of the geotechnical and geological matters are
resolved prior to any type of map approval.
Jan Dabney advised that Mr. Patel is also discussing a nuisance abatement;
however, this could take years while damage continues to affect the Morning
Sun residents. It is unclear why the bedding planes are failing and it has not
been determined that it is Sasak's responsibility. It is known that the failure is
caused by the material above the curb and gutter on the east side of Morning
Sun and this project recommends that the hill be removed down approximately
two to three feet of the height of the curb and gutter. He expressed his concern
over the residents' homes and inconvenience to them and asked that no one
jump into litigation because it will freeze up all projects and nothing will be done
to correct the problem. He reported that, in 1967/68, the adjacent property was
developed along Morning Sun and during the grading operation for that tract, the
failing hill sites were created to benefit the down hill homes. In addition, the
Pathfinders Assn.'s CC&R's clearly state that the Assn. is liable and responsible
for all drainage structures that benefit the Assn. within their boundaries.
In response to MPT/Werner, Mr. Dabney advised that by agreement with Mr.
Patel and City engineering staff, a condition would be placed prior to approval
that if remedial grading and resolution to off-site issues cannot be resolved, then
Mr. Patel must either come back to the City, modify his project, decrease his
project or whatever is necessary to ensure that Mr. Patel does not get involved
in a major off-site grading remediation that cannot be identified. He suggested
that prior to a final map, a geophysical consultant investigate and report his
findings to protect the residents as well as Mr. Patel's interest.
MPT/Werner asked what happens when a resident remediates the problems on
properties that have sustained damage.
Mr. Dabney reminded everyone that D.B. has been involved in two major rain
seasons since 1971 and it will be hard to pinpoint who is responsible for the land
slippage.
C/Harmony stated that if the City does not take action, we are liable because we
have been placed on notice of the problem. He stated that the City needs to
take action and asked the City Attorney that if the City cannot take action
tonight, can the Council call for an emergency meeting to declare a public
nuisance.
CA/Jenkins stated that the City does not have any liability whether the City takes
action or not.
C/Harmony disagreed with the City Attorney's opinion that the City does not
MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 10
have any liability.
CA/Jenkins responded that the City does not have liability; however, the City
does have responsibility and should exercise its police power authority to
resolve this community problem. He recommended that if the Council wants to
respond expeditiously, the Council can direct staff this evening to proceed with
whatever methods are available to direct the property owner to take the
necessary steps to abate the problem.
C/Harmony asked how long should the City wait for the property owner to
respond to resolving this problem.
CA/Jenkins advised that if the property owner agrees with the procedures, then
the wait should not be long. He stated that the City can give the property owner
a schedule to abide by.
C/Harmony asked if there is any legal doubt that this a public nuisance and if so,
can the City declare a public nuisance tonight or schedule a public hearing.
CA/Jenkins advised that a public hearing can be scheduled.
In response to M/Papen, CE/Wentz reported that the hill would have to be
removed; however, it is unknown how much. The dirt could be temporarily
stored on-site if the land is capable of handling it or removed and stored off-site.
Testing and a plan could be completed within a few weeks with work to be
completed in approximately 90 days, depending upon the amount of dirt to be
removed.
Mr. Dabney agreed with Mr. Wentz under the assumption that the failure is
isolated to this specific site.
M/Papen stated that she would like to see the remediation completed as soon as
possible and removing the dirt in order to stabilize the soil. She suggested
placing a condition of approval for the tentative tract map of time lines for the
completion of testing and reporting.
CA/Jenkins stated that this is a reasonable course of action.
M/Papen stated that she would like to see the conditions placed on the applicant
before any public nuisance is filed. She suggested that the Council move onto
another item and let staff prepare a condition for review.
C/Ansari again expressed concern over the merits of this project on its own. The
Council should require Sasak and the School District to complete additional and
extensive geotechnical testing. She suggested that Council reject the project,
MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 11
take care of the geotechnical problems and bring it back at a later date.
C/Harmony moved, C/Ansari seconded to deny Tentative Tract Map 51253 and
immediately declare a public nuisance.
C/Miller asked if the applicant is required to repair the property and doesn't do
so, what recourse does the City have against the applicant.
CA/Jenkins advised that the City could perform the necessary work to at least
keep the property from affecting utilities and the roadway and lien the Sasak
property for the cost.
C/Harmony requested that C/Miller be removed from the discussion due to a
possible conflict of interest.
C/Miller stated that residents need to be aware that just because the City
declares a public nuisance, that doesn't mean their property will be repaired
over night. The source of the problem is unknown and, at this point, it is not the
applicant's responsibility. He was concerned that the motion would not affect or
include the residents' homes directly under the school district's property. He
suggested that a motion of action accommodate all of the residents, not just
residents involving the Sasak property. He also recommended that the motion
be tabled for five minutes to allow staff to come back with a timeline in the best
interest of all of the residents.
C/Harmony asked staff to consider if the geological process is much more
severe, how will the Council deal with that and declare the issue as an
emergency.
RECESS: MPT/Werner recessed the meeting at 9:37 p.m.
RECONVENE: MPT/Werner reconvened the meeting at 10:11 p.m.
CM/Belanger reported that abatement of imminently dangerous public nuisances
would involve another property owner and depend upon what is found during the
study. Once a public nuisance is filed and is not corrected by the applicant, then
it becomes the responsibility of the declarer to take the necessary steps to abate
the problem and all of the costs would be incurred by the declarer. He stated
that if the City is the declarer, then the City has the right to lien the applicant's
property in an effort to receive its monies back upon the sale of the property.
Everyone should understand that if a public nuisance is filed and the applicant
does not rectify the problem, then the City could bear the complete burden of
completing and paying for the work. In order to maintain leverage over Mr. Patel
to perform a duty to abate the landslide would involve either denying the
MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 12
tentative tract map or stating that the tract map will not be approved until such
work is complete or place conditions on the map that would terminate the map if
the applicant didn't do what was promised.
C/Ansari moved, MPT/Werner seconded to amend her second of C/Harmony's
motion to continue the project for two weeks and require that a geotechnical
report be filed with the City.
In response to MPT/Werner, CA/Jenkins explained that there was no immediate
deadline in terms of acting on this problem and that the statutory deadlines have
been extended by the property owner.
Jan Dabney reported that it is not the owner's desire to continue the matter and
asked if the issue is continued and the slope fails, who is responsible.
CA/Jenkins again advised that whether or not the City approves the map, it is
still the applicant's responsibility if the slope fails.
MPT/Werner withdrew his second of C/Ansari's amendment to C/Harmony's
motion.
M/Papen commented on the amended motion in that staff indicated that it would
take at least 30 days to complete the testing and the reporting.
C/Ansari moved to amend her original motion to continue the matter for 30 days.
Motion failed for lack of a second.
CE/Wentz presented wording for the conditions applied to the applicant
regarding the land slippage as follows: "owner agrees that, at owner's sole cost
and expense, owner will make all investigations, analyses, recommendations
and reports as required by the City Engineer concerning all geotechnical
aspects of this site along with preparation of all plans and specifications
necessary for the remediation of all adverse geological and soils aspects of this
site. All reports, plans and specifications shall be submitted to the City Engineer
for review and approval. All approvals and permits shall be obtained and all
earth work and other construction necessary shall be performed by the owner to
make this property safe from landslides, settlement slippage and all other unsafe
geological and soils conditions that cause this property to pose no danger or
hazard to or have any other adverse affect on any adjacent properties."
M/Papen requested that a time period be included in which the studies would be
completed and submitted and addition of the words "if such was not done, the
project is deemed denied."
MPT/Werner suggested inclusion of "to exclude the prospect of bonding for
MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 13
those improvements."
M/Papen agreed with MPT/Werner.
CA/Jenkins stated that Council can impose a condition that this requirement not
be bonded and that a final map cannot be approved or recorded unless the
condition is satisfied. He further stated that a time limit can be imposed but
cannot be enforced.
In response to MPT/Werner, CM/Belanger advised that Council needs to select
a period of time and provide direction to staff that if the property owner does not
perform within a certain period of time, then staff is directed to institute the
appropriate public nuisance proceedings.
MPT/Werner asked that the motion requiring time frames and conditions be
separate from the tentative tract map issue and if the Council would be in
violation of the Brown Act if the slippage issue is addressed tonight.
CM/Belanger advised that the motion needs to be kept separate from the
tentative tract map.
CA/Jenkins stated that Council is only giving direction to staff to do what staff
already has the legal authority to do.
As requested by M/Papen, CE/Wentz again read the proposed conditions as
"Owner agrees, at owner's sole cost and expense, that owner will make all
investigations, analyses, recommendations and reports as required by the City
Engineer concerning all geotechnical aspects of this site along with a
preparation of all plans and specifications necessary for the remedy of all
adverse geological and soils aspects of the site. All reports, plans and
specifications shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval.
All approvals and permits shall be obtained and all earth work and other
construction necessary shall be performed to make the property safe from
landslides, settlements, slippage and all other geological and soils conditions
and to cause this property to not pose any danger or hazard to nor have any
adverse effect in the adjacent properties. All work shall be performed in a time
frame and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Should the applicant fail to
perform this condition in the time frame stated herein, the application shall
become null and void. The final map shall not be approved without this
condition being met."
Jan Dabney explained that the project will not be funded until the final map is
approved; therefore, the applicant cannot afford to start the grading necessary to
abate the landslide. He stated that Mr. Patel agreed with the other conditions.
MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 14
CM/Belanger stated that unless he does the work, Mr. Patel would not get his
final map.
CE/Wentz advised that a condition can be written that would indicate that the
City would permit Mr. Patel to either bond or to provide the City with a letter of
credit; however, it still does not assure that Mr. Patel will complete the work and
the City would have to call the bond and put the improvements in place. If the
City has assurance that the work is going to take place before Mr. Patel has the
map, then the City has better leverage of getting the work completed.
MPT/Werner stated that, in prior hillside projects, grading had been completed
prior to recordation of the final map because of field adjustment.
CE/Wentz stated that banks do not require recordation before the work is
completed --it's more of an economic situation on the applicant's part.
Mr. Dabney recommended keeping the condition of project as stated; however,
remove the circumstance for the cash bond. Upon return of the soils report, Mr.
Patel provide $25,000 for immediate remediation efforts to keep the road from
moving toward the Morning Sun homes.
MPTNVerner agreed to remove the suggested provision with the additional
understanding that Council would authorize staff to initiate the nuisance
approach if remediation doesn't move along as quickly as needed.
M/Papen agreed to the above.
CE/Wentz again read the proposed conditions as "Owner agrees at owner's sole
cost and expense that owner will make all investigations, analysis,
recommendations and reports as required by the City Engineer concerning all
geotechnical aspects of this site along with a preparation of all plans and
specifications necessary for the remedy of all adverse geological and soils
aspects of the site. All reports, plans and specifications shall be submitted to
the City Engineer for review and approval. All approvals and permits shall be
obtained and all earth work and other construction necessary shall be performed
to make the property safe from landslides, settlements, slippage and all other
geological and soils conditions and to cause this property to not pose any
danger or hazard to nor have any adverse effect in the adjacent properties. All
work shall be performed in a time frame and to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. Should the applicant fail to perform this condition in the time frame
stated herein, the application shall become null and void. The final map shall
not be approved without this condition being met."
In response to MPT/Werner, CE/Wentz advised that the time frame for
completion will be left to the discretion of the City Engineer.
MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 15
CA/Jenkins stated that the last two conditions are inconsistent with what the
applicant is willing to do insofar as, during the processing of the tentative map
toward bringing a final map back to the City, he does all of the necessary studies
and reports and then come back at some point within the next year or two with a
final map and a proposal to enter into an improvement agreement, guaranteed
by a bond, for the work necessary to satisfy this condition. He also stated that it
is not a temporary fix and a time schedule could be put into effect for the
preparation of the necessary reports and geotechnical data. If the City wants to
impose the condition and take the $25,000, it can be done.
M/Papen suggested that receipt of the $25,000 from the applicant be included in
the conditions. Regarding Exhibit C, page 5, number 10, she stated that in other
development projects when trees were transplanted, they died. Therefore, as in
the Arciero conditions, she asked the Council to consider revising this paragraph
to "receiving a sum of money in lieu of transferring those oak trees, the City
could put other trees in other areas of the City."
CDD/DeStefano advised that the majority of the trees and mitigation are
consistent with that which was imposed on the Arciero project. Arciero's
conditions also required an expert be hired to determine which trees were
healthy enough to transplant, location of the transplanting, etc.
M/Papen asked staff to rewrite this condition to include another phrase that
states "or the applicant would relocate or donate an equal amount of funds or
trees to other locations."
M/Papen moved, MPT/Werner seconded to approve the conditions "Owner
agrees, at owner's sole cost and expense, that owner will make all
investigations, analyses, recommendations and reports as required by the City
Engineer concerning all geotechnical aspects of this site along with a
preparation of all plans and specifications necessary for the remedy of all
adverse geological and soils aspects of the site. All reports, plans and
specifications shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval.
All approvals and permits shall be obtained and all earth work and other
construction necessary shall be performed to make the property safe from
landslides, settlements, slippage and all other geological and soils conditions
and to cause this property to not pose any danger or hazard to nor have any
adverse effect in the adjacent properties. All work shall be performed in a time
frame and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Should the applicant fail to
perform this condition in the time frame stated herein, the application shall
become null and void. The final map shall not be approved without this
condition being met." He further amended Condition 10, Exhibit C to indicate
"receiving a sum of money in lieu of transferring those oak trees, the City could
put other trees in other areas of the City or the applicant would relocate or
donate a equal amount of funds or trees to other locations."
MAY 16, 1995 PAGE 16
11. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to conduct,
the meeting was adjourned at 11:05 p.m. to May 17, 1995 at 6:30 p.m.
ATTEST:
Mayor
LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
AND NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP #1
APRIL 13, 1995
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Istik called the meeting to order at 6:10 p.m. at the
Heritage Park Community Center, 2900 South Brea Canyon Road,
Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Vice -
Chairperson Leonard.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners: Chairman Istik, Vice Chair Leonard,
Commissioners Gravdahl, Ortiz
Staff: Senior Engineer, David Liu; Administrative
Assistant, Tseday Aberra; Sergeant Rawlings;
and Recording Secretary, Carol Dennis
Also Present: Bob Close and Mario Sanchez of DKS Associates
Commissioner Chavers arrived at 6:15 p.m.
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Meeting of March 9, 1995.
A motion was made by C/Ortiz and seconded by VC/Leonard
to approve the minutes as presented. The motion was
approved 4-1 with the following roll call:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
II. COMMISSION COMMENTS:
COMMISSIONERS: Ortiz, VC/Leonard,
Chavers, Chair/Istik
COMMISSIONERS: None
COMMISSIONERS: Gravdahl
COMMISSIONERS: None
C/Ortiz requested that the Commission recommend that the
$325 Handicapped Parking space fine be posted throughout the
City so that offenders may be warned/fined. He also cited
the parking problems at Lorbeer Junior High School and
requested that an enforcement officer be present at the
beginning and at the end of the school sessions. He further
requested that a tally report of citations and accidents.
He further stated that he needs to be excused around 7:45
April 13, 1995 Page 2 T&T Commission
p.m.
VC/Leonard suggested that traffic lights be considered for
Diamond Bar Boulevard at Silver Hawk Drive and Diamond Bar
Boulevard at Goldrush Drive.
C/Gravdahl suggested that, in accordance with C/Ortiz's
request, all City Handicapped Parking signs should reflect
the appropriate fine for non-compliance.
C/Chavers commented that he believes that approximately 95%
of the Handicapped Parking signs are on private property,
therefore making it a private matter rather than a City
matter. He recommended that the item be referred to the
Planning Commission.
SE/Liu stated that the fine can be indicated on the Heritage
Park Handicapped Parking space signs.
III. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. Request by Tallywood Homeowners Association to park on
northbound Diamond Bar Boulevard, between Riowa Crest Drive
and Morning Canyon Road.
AA/Aberra reported that on behalf of Tallywood Homeowners
Association located on Diamond Bar Boulevard at Kiowa Crest
Drive, Lordon Management Company has contacted the
Department of Public Works to request parking on northbound
Diamond Bar Boulevard, between Kiowa Crest Drive and Morning
Canyon Road, between April 17 and April 21, 1995.
It is the Department's understanding that the asphalt within
the Tallywood homes complex will be resurfaced between April
17 and April 21, 1995. Lordon Management Company has asked
the Department if vehicles could be permitted to park on
northbound Diamond Bar Boulevard, between Kiowa Crest Drive
and Morning Canyon Road during this resurfacing project.
They have requested residents be permitted to park between
the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.
There are 109 condominium units in the Tallywood Homes and
Lordon Management Company anticipates that approximately 20
April 13, 1995 Page 3 T&T Commission
residents will utilize Diamond Bar Boulevard during the
project. The remaining residents will be able to park
within the complex during the resurfacing project since one
half of the complex will be resurfaced at a time.
Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation
Commission approve Tallywood Homeowners Association's
request to park on northbound Diamond Bar Boulevard between
Kiowa Crest Drive and Morning Canyon Rod between April 17
and 21, 1995 from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Staff recommends
that the "No Parking" signs on said street be appropriately
covered and taken down by Lordon Management Company.
Peter Fahey, Vice President Tallywood Homeowners
Association, stated that the request was for 24 hour parking
rather than 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. for the designated dates
only.
A motion was made by VC/Leonard and seconded by C/Ortiz to
allow the Tallywood residents 24 hour parking on northbound
Diamond Bar Boulevard between Kiowa Crest Drive and Morning
Canyon Road beginning on April 17, 1995 at 7:00 a.m. and
ending April 21, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. In addition, Lordon
Management Company will cover and uncover the "No Parking"
signs on said street for the appropriate dates. The motion
was approved unanimously with the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Leonard, Ortiz,
Chavers, Gravdahl,
Chair/Istik
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
V. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Progress update of the Neighborhood Traffic Management
Study.
SE/Liu recommended that the Commission hold this matter for
the 7:00 p.m. workshop at which time the Commission would
receive and file the report. The Commission concurred.
B. Left -Turn Signal Phasing Warrants and Prioritization.
April 13, 1995 Page 4 T&T Commission
SE/Liu stated that staff has provided, for the Traffic and
Transportation Commission's review, a summary of the left -
turn signal phasing warrants and prioritization for the
intersections of Brea Canyon Road at Golden Springs Drive,
Golden Springs Drive at Diamond Bar Boulevard, and Diamond
Bar Boulevard at Mountain Laurel Way.
Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation
Commission receive and file the report.
Chair/Istik stated that he would be abstaining from this
item and turned the meeting over to VC/Leonard.
C/Chavers indicated that he has concerns about
protective/permissive types of conclusions to warrant
studies and suggested that the Commission should reject the
study. He suggested that the study did not go far enough
and that staff should look into the matter further.
C/Gravdahl concurred that the matter should be further
investigated.
C/Ortiz stated he agrees with the summary. However, he also
believes that the matter should be looked into further.
VC/Leonard indicated she agrees that the matter should be
further investigated.
Responding to C/Gravdahl, SE/Liu stated that the Left -Turn
Signal Phasing was included in this fiscal year's CIP. He
further stated that staff would request a further study in
the design phase to see if an alternative can be
implemented.
C/Chavers asked staff to consider exclusive phasing. He
stated he would like to see a Left -Turn Phasing study
recommendation brought back to the Traffic and
Transportation Commission for consideration.
In response to C/Gravdahl, SE/Liu indicated the item could
be carried over to next year's fiscal budget.
A motion was made by C/Chavers and seconded by C/Ortiz to
direct staff to make a more in-depth study of the types of
left -turn operations and return to the Traffic and
April 13, 1995 Page 5 T&T Commission
Transportation Commission with its report and
recommendations and the basis for the recommendations. The
motion was approved 4-1 with the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Chavers, Ortiz, Gravdahl,
VC/Leonard
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Istik
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
VI. NEW BUSINESS - None
VII. STATUS OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS:
SE/Liu reported that staff is seeking clarification on the
legislative intent between Sections 445 and 40802 of the
California Vehicle Code.
VIII.ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS:
C/Ortiz stated he had been approached by more than one
person regarding the person who stands at the intersection
of Golden Springs Drive and Grand Avenue exhibiting signs.
He asked if there had been any investigation of who he is
and why he is there. He indicated he is concerned that
there might be accidents at the intersection as a result of
people being sidetracked by the signs. SE/Liu responded
that the Sheriff's Department has received inquiries,
however, there have been no formal complaints to the City's
Code Enforcement Officer. He stated he would investigate
the matter further to determine if there had been any
complaints filed with the City. C/Ortiz further stated that
all complaints or lack of complaints need to be recorded for
purposes of potential liability to the City.
C/Gravdahl stated that with regard to the bicycle lane on
Golden Springs Drive in front of Golden Springs School, he
cited Page 27, Article 463 of the Vehicle Code. He
requested to know how the Sheriff's Department would
interpret this item for purposes of enforcement. Sgt.
Rawlings responded that it is legal to load and unload in a
"No Parking" zone. It would not be legal to load and unload
if the area was posted "No -Stopping Anytime".
April 13, 1995 Page 6 TAT Commission
IB. ITEMS FROM STAFF - None
B. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS - None
Chairman Istik declared the 6:00 p.m. regular meeting of the
Transportation Commission adjourned at 7:02 p.m.
BI. PUBLIC MEETING
Chair/Istik called the Public Meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.
A. Neighborhood Traffic Management Workshop #1
SE/Liu stated that three goals have been set for this study:
1) Identify the through traffic and other
neighborhood traffic problems;
2) Attempt to identify the specific location, nature
and cause of the problems; and
3) Develop neighborhood traffic management plans that
will resolve the traffic problems in a systematic
way, with the consensus approval of the
neighborhood residents.
He indicated that the critical component of achieving these
stated goals is the involvement of the residents. Tonight's
meeting is to preview the study and review the range of
possible solutions that might be contemplated. Information
will be collected from the neighborhood residents to create
an inventory of problems and concerns. Ideas regarding
mitigation measures that the residents feel should be taken
or should not taken will be recorded and mapped. He stated
that staff would also like to identify volunteers from the
neighborhood who would be willing to work with the City and
the consultants in developing the Neighborhood Traffic
Management Plan.
Bob Close, DKS Associates, emphasized that this study is
conducted primarily to consider the input from the community
and, in particular, the neighborhood residents. It is
imperative that the residents understand the study and agree
April 13, 1995 Page 7 T&T Commission
with the findings and solutions. The study was initiated by
gathering technical information regarding the traffic
statistics and other data, truck movement, conditions of
roadways, etc. The next step involved gathering information
from the residents through the use of a questionnaire and
through tonight's public meeting process. This meeting may
be followed by a second questionnaire explaining what has
been done and asking for further input from the residents.
This information will then be analyzed from a traffic
standpoint, from an public input standpoint and a consensus
building standpoint as to what is seen as key issues and
what types of things might be done to solve the problems.
From this information, a draft report will be generated
which will identify everything that has been done and make
recommendations for types of improvements or actions to
resolve the issues. After the report is generated, a second
public meeting will be held in order to gather input and
from this meeting, a final document will be prepared to
answer all questions and concerns. He reiterated SE/Liu's
request to have volunteers from the neighborhood work with
the City and his firm in a small group setting in order to
work through the project.
Mr. Close referred the residents to graphic displays which
offer potential traffic solutions that have been utilized
for other projects. He stated that 592 questionnaires were
sent to neighborhood residents and approximately 58
questionnaires have been returned. He pointed to a graphic
display of concerns generated by the questionnaires. In
order of importance, the primary concern is speeding and the
second concern is school traffic. The third concern is a
combination of items such as stop signs, traffic noise,
parking problems, etc. The fourth concern is cut -through
traffic and the fifth concern is truck traffic.
Mr. Close pointed to a map of the area and indicated that
certain items have been identified and catalogued. These
are, classification of the roadways, posted speed limits,
traffic counts, location of traffic signals, and four-way
stop signs.
Mario Sanchez, DKS Associates, stated that the locations
used for traffic counts, were conducted at Castle Rock Road,
Evergreen Springs Drive and Fountain Springs Road. In
addition, vehicle classification counts were conducted at
April 13, 1995 Page 8 TiT Commission
Fountain Springs Road to determine the percentage of trucks
that are utilized. Results indicate counts of 2-4% of the
traffic traveling on Fountain Springs is commercial trucks.
He indicated it appears that most of the commercial truck
traffic is headed for the Country Hills Towne Center. By
traffic engineering standards, the count indicates that
Fountain Springs functions as a Residential street rather
than a Collector. Responding to C/Chavers, Mr. Sanchez
stated a truck is any vehicle above and beyond six wheels.
Mr. Close referred to additional generic graphics which
offer solutions to general neighborhood traffic problems.
He stated that some of the easier solutions include such
things as signing, better enforcement of speed limits, truck
routing. Shown on the graphs are hardscape solutions such
as chokers, traffic converters, and closed streets with
walkways for emergency vehicles, traffic circles in the
middle of streets with parking bumpers.
RECESS: Chair/Istik declared the meeting recessed at 7:25 p.m.
RECONVENE: Chair/Istik declared the meeting reconvened at 7:35
p.m.
Commissioner Ortiz left the meeting at 7:27 p.m.
Chair/Istik announced that C/Ortiz had been excused from the
public meeting at 7:27 p.m.
Chair/Istik asked the attendees to indicate their names,
addresses and telephone numbers on the sign-up sheet at the
front entrance. He requested that the consultants from DKS
Associates provide copies of the graphs as handouts within
the meeting packets. He asked for input from the
neighborhood residents noting that the results of the
meeting will be forwarded to the City Council and that the
Traffic and Transportation Commission is acting as an
advisory board only.
C/Chavers stated that this is the first time the City of
Diamond Bar has held this type of public workshop and as
such, this is a test case being observed by the City Council
and the citizens in general. He indicated he was glad to
see such a good turnout and hoped that everyone would give
their input and participate in the process. He further
April 13, 1995 Page 9 T&T commission
stated that the process is intended to result in a series of
measures that will likely require funds to implement. The
Traffic and Transportation does not spend the City's money.
The City Council must authorize the expenditure of funds.
If the neighborhood reaches consensus with respect to what
needs to be done to improve the traffic situation, the next
step would be to appear before the City Council to reiterate
the importance of the implementation of solutions and to
state to the City Council that the neighbors agree and that
there is consensus that these solutions need to be
implemented to improve the neighborhood. C/Chavers referred
to the proposed solutions indicating that several gave the
appearance of narrowing the street. He cited an example of
lane narrowing barriers on freeways under construction which
serves to dramatically slow traffic.
C/Gravdahl requested a copy of the area map. Mr. Close
responded that C/Gravdahl could obtain a copy from SE/Liu.
Chair/Istik stated there are a number of solutions which
neighborhoods utilized. He suggested that the residents
imagine themselves going to the area to buy a house and
visualize solutions that would not appear severe or out of
place but would fit into the surroundings and not detract
from the value of the homes.
Responding to Chair/Istik, Mr. Close stated that the
original area street design may not have contemplated major
street connections.
Chair/Istik declared the public testimony portion of the
meeting open and invited the residents to speak.
Karl Fekete, 2220 Evergreen Springs Drive, stated that his
primary concerns have to do with the parking and congestion
at Diamond Bar High School. He indicated he has spoken to
the principal and advised him that the residents have
difficulty getting up and down the street because the
students interfere with traffic by making u -turns in the
middle of the street. He further stated that once the SR 57
freeway was built, traffic became a problem in the area. If
the traffic stayed on the major roads instead of cutting
down Fountain Springs and if traffic was routed to Diamond
Bar Boulevard from the freeway and from the high school, it
would cut down the through traffic considerably. Once the
April 13, 1995 Page 10 T&T Commission
back gate was opened (the freeway and Pathfinder Road) it
created a bottleneck at Evergreen Springs Drive.
Joe Johnston, 3177 Castle Rock Road, stated that at night
trucks are pulling off of the freeway and going to Denny's
restaurant. The residents get a lot of peak traffic in his
location. Drivers are pulling off of the freeway at Brea
Canyon Road and cutting through Brea Canyon Road and jumping
back on the freeway at Pathfinder Road to save time. He
talked about a neighborhood resident who has turned a garage
into a guest house and has had guests living there for 12 to
18 months at a time. In addition, he stated the guests have
a number of cars which are blocking driveways. He further
stated that there are occasions when his wife cannot get out
of her driveway.
In response to Mr. Johnston, Chair/Istik stated that the
question of how many people can occupy a residence is a
matter of Land Use. He referred Mr. Johnston to the
Planning Commission and Code Enforcement.
Ted Cross, 21310 Hidden Pines Drive, thanked the City for
the four-way stop at Cold Springs Lane and Brea Canyon Road
stating it is a definite improvement and it has slowed the
traffic on Brea Canyon Road. He stated that his concerns
for his neighborhood include the fact that his street is
only 30 feet wide and traffic is parked on both sides of the
street permitting only one-way traffic. He indicated he is
not sure what would be a satisfactory solution because if
parking is limited on one sides, the residents on that side
will be unhappy. In addition, the corner of Hidden Pines
Drive to Sunbright Drive is less than a 90 degree radius and
as vehicles approach the corner in a westerly fashion shave
the corner to the left. On many occasions there have been
near -miss collisions. He suggested that an inexpensive
solution would be to stripe the middle of the street so that
the traffic would hug the line rather than hug the curb. He
also suggested four-way stops for Cold Springs Lane and
Castle Rock Road, and at Fountain Springs Road and Castle
Rock Road.
Ted Thurlo, 21245 Cold Springs Lane also thanked the City
for the four-way stop at Cold Springs Lane and Brea Canyon
Road. He indicated he would like to see a stop sign at Cold
Springs Lane and Castle Rock Road. He also cited a problem
April 13, 1995 Page 11 T&T Commission
with the signal at Cold Springs Lane and Diamond Bar
Boulevard stating that there is a five minute wait at the
red light to merge onto Diamond Bar Boulevard and when the
signal turns green from Cold Springs Lane it turns yellow
before you can get into the intersection. He asked that the
City look into resetting this signal.
Ken Anderson, 2628 Rising Star Drive, thanked the City for
the traffic signal on Fountain Springs Road at Diamond Bar
Boulevard. He stated that he believes installation of four-
way stops at the two locations previously mentioned would
solve much of the traffic problem. He cited the Evergreen
Springs Drive problem indicated he had no solution to offer
because of the downhill speed reached by students leaving
the Diamond Bar High School. He indicated that a turn -out
is needed at the high school for student loading and
unloading. He requested copies of the generic solution
graphs be included in the record. He stated he particularly
likes the choker which he believes would work well at the
Country Hills Towne Center driveway which spills onto
Fountain Springs Road. He further stated it was his
understanding that one of the conditions for approval of the
shopping center was that there would be no driveway from the
shopping center onto Fountain Springs Road and that the
location was to have been redesigned following completion of
the center and if any additional development was completed
within the center, the driveway would be limited to inbound
traffic only. The late night traffic dumping onto Fountain
Springs Road is a major problem for the residents. This
traffic could better be redirected to the large
entrance/exit on Diamond Bar Boulevard.
Michelle Hunter, 2749 Sunbright Drive, thanked the Traffic
and Transportation Commission for conducting the public
meeting. She stated that it was exciting to see that a
number of items that she and her husband have been
discussing over the past year showed up on the survey and it
is encouraging to them that other residents feel the way
they do. She stated their greatest concern is their street
width. Parking on the street is a problem and if two
vehicles are attempting to pass each other going in opposite
directions, one car must pull over and come to a complete
stop in order for the other to pass by. She indicated she
is also very concerned about children in the area because
the congestion of traffic prevents clear visibility and
April 13, 1995 Page 12 T&T Commission
makes it very difficult to see if children are leaving their
yards and entering the street. She further stated that they
are concerned with diminishing property values. There are
large campers parked on her street 24 hours a day and with
that and the congestion of parked cars, she feels it is not
appealing for property values and encouraging people to move
into the area. She indicated she would like to have an
ordinance preventing 24 hour parking on her street, however,
she is concerned that the neighbors would then park in their
yards and she does not want that to occur. She said she has
seen this happening in the neighborhood.
VC/Istik stated he believes there is an ordinance regarding
parking of cars on the street in excess of 72 hours.
Responding to VC/Istik, Sgt. Rawlings cited a County
Ordinance which prohibits the parking of vehicles in the
same spot for more than 72 hours. If the Sheriff's
Department is notified that there is an offender, they will
go to the site and mark the vehicle tires and return
sometime after 72 hours to see if the vehicles is still
there. If the vehicle has not been moved at all, the
Sheriff's Department can tow the vehicle. Generally
speaking, in many cases, the individual who owns the vehicle
will move it forward or backward a few feet and the
Sheriff's Department cannot tow the vehicle. The County
Council states that the Sheriff's Department may not tow a
vehicle that has been moved even slightly or the Sheriff's
Department will pay the storage.
Joe Johnston stated that when he first moved to Diamond Bar,
the Sheriff's Department cleaned up the street because there
was no overnight parking allowed and he does not understand
why they cannot do the same thing now.
Sgt. Rawlings responded that the City of Walnut Sheriff's
station has three City contracts. They are, Diamond Bar,
Walnut and San Dimas. The Cities of Walnut and San Dimas
have "No Overnight Parking" ordinances and the City of
Diamond Bar does not. When the matter was brought before
the City Council several years ago, the standing room only
residents vehemently opposed a "No Overnight Parking"
ordinance. The Sheriff's Department is charged with
enforcing applicable City ordinances.
C/Gravdahl stated that there is a maintenance ordinance
April 13, 1995 page 13 T&T commission
which prohibits parking on yards and this can be enforced by
citizen's reporting the incident to the Code Enforcement
officer at City Hall.
Bill Lovell, 2660 Crooked Creek Drive, stated his complaint
is that his street dead ends at the Evergreen Elementary
School. At the corner of Fountain Springs Drive and Crooked
Creek Drive, a business is being conducted from a house and
eight or nine vehicles are constantly parked at that
location. As long as the vehicles are moved every 72 hours,
there is no recourse. He indicated he would like to have
"No Parking" on Fountain Springs Drive between Diamond Bar
Boulevard and Castle Rock Road. There are no driveways
dumping onto Fountain Springs Drive in that area with the
exception of Country Hills Towne Center driveway which is a
problem that has been discussed.
Chair/Istik asked DKS Associates to obtain a copy of the
minutes from this meeting in order to arrive at suggestions
for mitigation. This could include parking restrictions in
and near the Country Hills Towne Center. He suggested that
this item be included in the second questionnaire going out
to the residents.
C/Chavers stated that he is aware of a number of complaints
regarding traffic around Diamond Bar High School. He
suggested that a "Parking Permit Program" could be
implemented. The City Council has stated that if citizens
wish such a program instituted in their area and they are
willing to pay for the program, the City Council will
consider the proposal.
David Rubakaba, 2319 Evergreen Springs Drive, stated his
home is located between Lost River Drive and Sunbright
Drive. He indicated he is concerned about the speed of the
vehicles. It is a steep hill and Diamond Bar High School is
located at the top of the hill. Evergreen Springs
Elementary School is located at the bottom of the hill and
there are speeding vehicles both coming down the hill and
going up the hill with speeds reaching upwards of 50 miles
per hour. He further stated he has witnessed drag racing on
the hill and since moving there in 1986, he has personally
suffered two accidents. He recommended the installation of
a stop sign at the corner of Evergreen Springs Drive and
Sunbright Drive.
April 13, 1995 Page 14 T&T Commission
Craig Clute, 21217 Fountain Springs Road thanked the Traffic
and Transportation Commission for conducting the meeting at
Heritage Park allowing more residents to participate in the
process. Most of his concerns have been stated at previous
meetings of the Traffic and Transportation Commission. In
addition, the residents have again voiced many of his
concerns this evening. He stressed the traffic cut -through
problems on Fountain Springs Drive which is an ongoing
problem going beyond rush hour traffic. He recommended
closure of the north entrance to the County Hills Shopping
Center and he requested that DKS Associates supply the
citizens with the various products available with emergency
access for this location. He stated his belief that most of
the traffic problems on Fountain Springs Drive are generated
by the shopping center, cut -through traffic and the high
school. Mr. Clute recommended that parking be limited on
streets such as Sunbright Drive to better allow larger
emergency vehicles access. In addition, although there is
adequate lighting in the neighborhood, some residents have
mentioned to him that lighting was inadequate. There is a
problem with no sidewalk on Brea Canyon Road and children
pedestrian safety. He stated he sees children walking down
Brea Canyon Road every day in the dirt. He does not like
walking in the dirt with his four year old so they take the
long way around to the park. Mr. Clute also recommended a
school crossing at Fountain Springs Road and Castle Rock
Road, as well as a reduction of speed to 25 miles per hour
on Fountain Springs Road. He asked DKS Associates for a
count of access traffic at the Fountain Springs Road
entrance off of Diamond Bar Boulevard. He also questioned
the validity of the traffic counts.
Mr. Close requested a copy of Mr. Clute's written comments.
Chair/Istik asked Mr. Clute to forward his comments to
SE/Liu.
Responding to Mr. Johnston, SE/Liu stated that the issue of
Brea Canyon Road improvement plan is proposed in the
1995/1996 fiscal year Capital Improvement Program. He
indicated there are two conceptual plans for Brea Canyon
Road. One plan is to maintain the existing two lanes with turn
lanes at intersections and the existing parkway areas would be
proposed to be utilized as pedestrian lane facility in
conjunction with a bikeway. The other conceptual plan is to
widen Brea Canyon Road to four lanes (two lanes in each
April 13, 1995 Page 15 T&T commission
direction). At this time, staff does not believe that the second
plan is necessary. The improvement proposal includes Brea Canyon
Road between Fountain Springs Road to the north down to the
southerly City limit line.
Mr. Cross stated his wife would greatly appreciate a
sidewalk on Brea Canyon Road. He feels that the Heritage
Park area lags behind on improvements and that it has been
generally ignored by the City. He requested consideration
of a drop-off zone for the rear of Castle Rock Elementary
School. He stated that dropping off kids at the school in
the mornings is an absolute nightmare. He extended his
sympathies to the people living in the area of the school.
He feels the principal would be very cooperative in getting
this accomplished. As far as a potential gate for the north
entrance of the Country Hills Towne Center, he stated he is
a Los Angeles County Firefighter and they carry what is
called a "master key". It is a pair of bolt cutters about
five and one-half feet long and he hasn't found a gate yet
that he cannot open in an emergency. If Country Hills Towne
Center is using emergency access as an excuse, it doesn't
wash. He stated that to him, to have a shopping center dump
its traffic onto a residential street seems ludicrous,
especially with the tremendous traffic carrying potential of
Diamond Bar Boulevard. Since he lives behind the shopping
center it would be inconvenient for him, but it would be
well worth the trade-off in his opinion to support the
neighborhood and get the traffic off of Fountain Springs
Road. He further stated that it is ridiculous to have 150
cars dump onto a residential street at 11:30 p.m. and he
does not blame the residents for being upset.
Marlies Worley, 21339 Hipass Drive, stated she lives on the
corner of Castle Rock Road and Highcrest Drive and between
Cold Springs Lane and Fountain Springs Road and she would
like to see a four-way stop at both of the intersections.
She indicated that getting from her house to Castle Rock
Elementary School is horrendous.
Chair/Istik asked DKS Associates to take each comment and
consider it as an issue for their next questionnaire. In
this way, the issues can be quantified on an area -wide
basis.
Responding to C/Gravdahl, Mr. Close stated that 592
April 13, 1995 Page 16 T&T commission
residences were targeted for the initial questionnaire
mailing and the same number would be targeted for the second
mailing.
Responding to C/Chavers, Mr. Cross stated he personally
measured his street and it is 30 feet wide curb to curb with
a seven foot parkway to the sidewalk. C/Chavers suggested
that the parkway could be reclaimed as an option to a
parking restriction for one side.
In response to C/Chavers, Mr. Sanchez stated that in order
to meet a warrant, there have to be at least 500 vehicles
entering an intersection during any eight hours of any given
day. A study was conducted at the intersection of Castle
Rock Road and Cold Springs Lane and it did not meet the
requirements for a warrant study. There are also thresholds
of volume and there has to be at least five accidents in a
twelve month period.
C/Chavers stated there are standards that are adopted
throughout the State of California and those standards are
community standards that everybody buys into and if a
community chooses to deviate from those standards in
singular instances the community may accrue a liability or
risk. If a study is conducted at one intersection and an
accident occurs at another intersection having the same
unusual form of risks, the injured party could claim
negligence on the part of the City for not recognizing all
intersections equally. Therefore, it is very important that
the City live by the standards so as not to unecessarily
assume the liabilities of that risk. If you put a stop sign
in a location that obviously does not need the stop sign,
people are often times encouraged to violate the stop sign.
Mr. Close stated that if a stop sign or other traffic device
is installed where it is not warranted, and there are
specific rules on how it is warranted, it is not
enforceable. Traffic standards are set to mitigate traffic
and to be enforceable.
Mr. Clute stated he feels that the residents deserve a four-
way stop at Castle Rock Road and Fountain Springs Road and
he asked DKS Associates to take another look at past
studies.
April 13, 1995 Page 17 T&T Commission
C/Chavers requested that staff share the concept drawings
for Brea Canyon Road with the consultants and bring them to
the next workshop for the residents to view and support.
SE/Liu stated that staff will meet with DKS Associates and
discuss all of the information and concerns accumulated
during this meeting. Using the information gathered, a
second questionnaire will be generated and brought before
the Traffic and Transportation Commission for their approval
at the May 11, 1995 meeting. Staff anticipates the
questionnaire will be mailed to the residents at the end of
May along with a notification of the second workshop.
C/Chavers suggested that the Commission back into the
schedule by tentatively targeting the second workshop for
June so that everything can be fit into the next 60 day
period.
Chair/Istik stated he would like to see the questionnaire
before it is mailed out.
Mr. Close stated he would have the questionnaire ready for
the May 11 Commission meeting. He would like to have at
least one steering committee meeting prior to the second
workshop.
In response to VC/Leonard, Mr. Close indicated he would like
six residents to volunteer for a steering committee to meet
with staff and DKS Associates.
Chair/Istik asked for three volunteers from the audience and
asked that each volunteer bring one additional resident from
the area to serve with them on the steering committee. The
following people volunteered:
Craig Clute, 21217 Fountain Springs Road
Ted Cross, 21310 Hidden Pines Drive
Michelle Hunter, 2749 Sunbright Drive
Mr. Clute encouraged the City to conclude the traffic counts
prior to school summer recess.
Chair/Istik thanked the participants and stated that they
would be notified regarding time and place for the proposed
June workshop. This matter will be discussed at the May 11,
April 13, 1995 Page 18 TiT Commission
1995 Traffic and Transportation Commission meeting.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
Chair/Istik declared the Neighborhood Traffic Management
Workshop #1 adjourned at 8:55 p.m.
Respectfully,
/s� David G. Liu
David G. Liu
Secretary
Attest:
/s/ Jack Istik
Jack Istik
Chairman
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
MAY 11, 1995
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Istik called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at the
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Hearing Room,
21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Commissioner
Gravdahl.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners: Chair Istik, Vice Chair Leonard, Commissioners
Chavers, Gravdahl, Ortiz
Staff: Senior Engineer, David Liu; Consultant
Engineer, Michael Myers; Administrative
Assistant, Tseday Aberra; Sergeant Rawlings;
and Recording Secretary, Carol Dennis
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1.
Meeting of March 30, 1995.
A motion was made by C/Chavers and seconded by C/Ortiz to
approve the minutes as submitted. The motion was
approved unanimously with the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
2. Meeting of April 13, 1995.
Chavers, Ortiz, Gravdahl,
VC/Leonard, Chair/Istik
None
None
None
Chair/ Istik indicated that the minutes do not reflect the
conversation on the 25 MPH streets and he had made
comments which should be reflected in the minutes under
VII. STATUS OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS.
A motion was made by C/Chavers and seconded by C/Ortiz to
approve the minutes as amended. The motion was approved
unanimously with the following roll call:
May 11, 1995 Page 2 T&T Commission
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
II. COMMISSION COMMENTS:
COMMISSIONERS: Chavers, Ortiz, Gravdahl,
VC/Leonard, Chair/Istik
COMMISSIONERS: None
COMMISSIONERS: None
COMMISSIONERS: None
C/Ortiz stated that he responded to Frank Dursa's inquiry
regarding posted radar enforcement signs as follows: There
are posted radar enforcement signs within the City limits at
Pathfinder Road and Brea Canyon Road, Brea Canyon Road and
Diamond Bar Boulevard, Grand Avenue and Longview Drive, Temple
Avenue and Golden Springs Drive, Temple Avenue and Diamond Bar
Boulevard, and Lemon Avenue and Golden Springs Drive. C/Ortiz
continued that the second item he researched for Mr. Dursa was
whether there is a boundary line sign indicating the City of
Diamond Bar on Brea Canyon Road and there is none. He further
stated that he recalls there used to be such a sign at that
location. Mr. Dursa is requesting a City of Diamond Bar
boundary sign at that location.
C/Ortiz stated that he and VC/Leonard attended a Contract
Cities Workshop. He offered a copy of the Commissioner's
Handbook received during the seminar as a guide for the rules
and regulations for the Traffic and Transportation Commission.
VC/Leonard stated the Contract City's event that she and
C/Ortiz attended was outstanding and informative. She
continued that there was some interesting information
regarding Youth Commission Program's which she will give to
SE/Liu.
C/Chavers stated that in driving Diamond Bar Boulevard, there
seems to be varying interpretations of the "No -Parking" and
"When Parking is Allowed" in front of some of the Churches.
It seems to him that there is parking in front of St. Denis
Church on days other than the allowable Sunday parking days.
In particular, there were parked vehicles in front of St.
Denis on the west side of Diamond Bar Boulevard on Monday, May
8, 1995 in the evening. He indicated he is concerned that the
City went out of its way to provide Sunday parking and he
feels that the parishioners may think that anytime the Church
is busy it is okay to park on the street. He asked staff to
contact the Church and find out what occurred on Monday, May
8, 1995 in the evening and to remind St. Denis not to
May 11, 1995 Page 3 T&T Commission
misinterpret the policy of
Parking" or whenever there ar
because abuse of the privilege
Sunday parking privilege.
"...Except on Sundays", "No
Church activities occurring
could result in a loss of the
Chair/Istik asked staff to draft an appropriate letter to both
St. Denis and the Evangelical Free Church on behalf of the
Commission to advise them about the potential for problems if
the hours that were set for parking on Diamond Bar Boulevard
are not followed.
C/Ortiz stated he supports C/Chavers, comments and further
stated that during a Sunday afternoon activity, St. Denis
neglected to cover the "No -Stopping Any Time" signs. He
reminded staff that during the March 30, 1995 meeting, he had
requested that a letter be forwarded to the Monsignor
referencing the parking at the fire zone/red curb. He
indicated he had recently contacted the Monsignor and the
Monsignor stated he had not received the letter. He discussed
the parking situation with the Monsignor and asked that the
the parties attending functions at the Church be notified of
the parking stipulation. He stated that the Monsignor
response was that there was no way the Church could control
the actions of Church guests.
VC/Istik thanked Sgt. Rawlings for the 1995 California Vehicle
Code books presented to the Commissioners.
III. PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Craig Clute, 21217 Fountain Springs Road, stated that with
respect to the April 13, 1995 minutes for the Neighborhood
Traffic Management Workshop he did not suggest limiting
parking to one side of Fountain Springs Road. He was speaking
of streets like Sunbright Drive. He further stated that he
does not believe there is a lighting problem, he was only
reflecting concerns from other citizens. In addition, he does
not understand the minutes regarding Mr. Sanchez's statement
about Commercial trucks. He indicated he believes the minutes
should reflect two to five percent of Commercial traffic or 60
to 160 Commercial vehicles on Diamond Bar's streets. He asked
for further clarification of "Commercial Trucks" and "truck
route".
Responding to Mr. Clute, Chair/Istik asked if it would be Mr.
Clute's desire to have Diamond Bar Boulevard designated as a
May 11, 199s Pag• 4 T&T Commission
truck route to which Mr. Clute responded in the affirmative
indicating Diamond Bar Boulevard was the designated truck
route. Chair/Istik stated that Diamond Bar Boulevard was not
designated as a truck route because it was thought that
commercial trucks would avoid the congested freeway and use
the street for a cut -through to get to Chino Hills or Pomona.
The truck routes were designated for Lemon Avenue and Brea
Canyon Road for exiting south from the City of Industry to get
to the freeway. Sgt. Rawlings stated that the way the
ordinances are written, trucks are allowed to deviate from a
truck route in order to get to a place of pickup or delivery.
Mr. Clute stated that, in his opinion, the City has an
obligation to clearly post the City's ordinance and desires
with respect to commercial traffic.
In response to Mr. Clute, C/Chavers stated that Mr. Clute is
referring to two levels of control for trucks. The first
level is what the City currently has as an ordinance and the
signs regarding what truck routes are and are not truck routes
and are posted at the City's limits. This keeps the bigger
vehicles from cutting through the City. The second level
includes trucks that have a right to be in the City with the
required bill of lading, then it is a matter of how their
paths are controlled. At that point, it is up to the City to
define, neighborhood by neighborhood and posting accordingly,
as to whether commercial vehicles traffic is allowed.
Typically, postings are seen which prohibit truck traffic over
10,000 GVW. Therefore, carriers such as Federal Express vans
and UPS vans are not prohibited from travelling those
neighborhood streets since such vehicles are under the 10,000
GVW. With regard to Mr. Clute's earlier statement about Mr.
Sanchez's response to C/Chavers, he inferred that with regard
to pneumatic hoses which are activated by vehicle tires, Mr.
Sanchez could not tell if it was a four or six -wheeled vehicle
that passed over the hose. All he could count is axles.
C/Chavers further stated that he had read the minutes and the
minutes accurately reflected the question put forth. He
indicated that if Mr. Clute wants to stop commercial traffic
from going into his neighborhood, that can be at an ordinance
level and posted to say "commercial vehicles over certain
pounds weight prohibited". These signs can be posted at the
gateways to the neighborhood and then it becomes an
enforcement issue.
SE/Liu stated, in response to C/Chavers, that he is not aware
of any enforcement signs in the City.
May 11, 1995 Page 5 T&T Commission
C/Chavers indicated these issues should be taken up at the
June Neighborhood Traffic Management Workshop since it is a
neighborhood by neighborhood issue.
Chair/Istik stated that if this was a Citywide issue and most
of the City was not in favor, none of the City would get the
signs. The place to begin is with the Neighborhood Traffic
Management study and address this item at the next workshop.
Mr. Clute stated his second concern is with enforcement of the
neighborhood street speed limits.
Chair/Istik suggested that some answers to his concerns may
come out of the Neighborhood Traffic Management Workshop.
Mr. Clute reiterated that he would like to see something done
with respect to the prima facia issue. SE/Liu responded that
the City spoke with a judge of the Pomona traffic court and
according to him, the definition under Vehicle Code Section
40802, the criteria for local streets is not more than 1/2
mile of uninterrupted lane and interruptions shall include
official traffic control devices, which he concludes are
traffic signals, as defined in Section 445. The City attorney
has been requested to give his opinion with respect to this
issue.
Mr. Clute asked the Commission to look at the following three
Sections of the Vehicles Code: 21450, 445 and 440. Sgt.
Rawlings responded that Section 40802 states that traffic
signals must be included in "things that are interruptions".
It does not say that these interruptions are exclusive. Some
courts consider a cross street sufficient to constitute an
interruption.
Chair/Istik stated that radar can be used at the current
posted speed of 30 miles per hour. He again referred to the
June Neighborhood Traffic Management Workshop for solutions to
these items.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. San Gabriel Valley Bikeway Master Plan.
AA/Aberra stated that approximately one month ago, the
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority
(LACMTA) gave cities who are participating in the San
Gabriel Valley Bikeway Master Plan study an opportunity
May 11, 1995 Page 6 T&T Commission
to review and comment on the proposed bikeway map.
In correspondence dated April 21 and May 3, 1995, staff
requested LACMTA include the comments expressed in the
letters. Copies of the correspondence are attached for
the Commission's information.
Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation
Commission receive and file this report.
Responding to Chair/Istik, AA/Aberra stated that this
plan deals with the County of Los Angeles and a bike path
from Diamond Bar to Brea could involve Orange County.
However, in working with LACMTA, the San Gabriel Valley
Bikeway Masterplan involves cities in L.A. County.
In response to C/Chavers, CE/Myers indicated the second
paragraph under bullet one in the April 21, 1995 letter
from the City of Diamond Bar to Art Cueto, LACMTA, should
be a new paragraph. The City has requested that the San
Gabriel Valley Area Bikeway Master Plan include the Brea
Canyon Road route, the Grand Avenue, the Chino Hills
Parkway and Chino Avenue, as well as the upgrading of the
existing Class III bike route along a portion of Golden
Springs Drive between Diamond Bar Boulevard and Sylvan
Glen Road.
Chair/Istik ask that the connection through the Sphere of
Influence and an extension to the City of Brea to
complete the bikeway be included in future letters.
CE/Myers responded that contained within the General Plan
a directive that the City shall prepare a master plan of
bikeways. Such a plan would be agendized for the Traffic
and Transportation Commission with opportunities for
public comment. In addition, there may be public
workshops held with respect the master bikeway plan.
Chair/Istik instructed staff to receive and file the
report.
In response to Mr. Clute, Chair/Istik stated this is a
first effort to get the cities to work together.
C/Chavers indicated that the counties work within the
agencies of their respective jurisdictions and the
boundary agencies are left to work with boundary agencies
from the next county to make connection. Because the
City of Diamond Bar is on the cusp of two county
May 11, 1995 Page 7 TAT commission
boundaries, it is up to the City to extend the San
Gabriel Valley Plan to neighboring jurisdictions.
Similarly, Brea is charged with integrating the Orange
County master plan with Diamond Bar.
Chair/Istik stated that it would be an advantage to
connect a cut -through bike path with the existing Chino
Hills State Park bikeways.
B. Neighborhood Traffic Nanagement Study. Area bounded by
Pathfinder Road, Diamond Bar Boulevard, and Brea Canyon
Road.
AA/Aberra reported that the Traffic and Transportation
Commission, staff and DKS Associates held the first of
two public workshops and met with residents in the
subject Neighborhood Traffic Management Study area on
April 13, 1995. Residents had the opportunity to express
and discuss their concerns.
The Department of Public Works mailed out the second
questionnaire on April 28, 1995 for the second public
workshop to be held on June 8, 1995. The questionnaire
is included in the Commissioner's information packet.
The questionnaire and attachments have been reviewed by
both the Steering Committee and the Chairman of the
Traffic and Transportation Commission.
Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation
Commission receive and file the report. Chair/Istik so
ordered.
V. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Policy on Protected -Permissive Left -Turn Signal Phasing.
SE/Liu stated that the Design and Operational Guidelines
established by the Orange County Traffic Engineering
Council regarding protected/permissive left -turn signal
phasing is included in the Commissioner's packets for
their review. The guidelines, dated April, 1995, were
prepared by the Orange County Traffic Engineer Council.
He further stated that this is an information report
which represents the current majority opinions of the
Committee. Staff recommends that the guidelines be
reviewed by the Traffic and Transportation Commission.
C/Chavers ask how the City is going to develop a policy
May 11, 1995 Page 8 TAT commission
for determining left -turn signal warrants. Currently,
the CalTrans guidelines is for either extreme of no left
turn indication or exclusive phasing. The current
proposal is to look to what other states are doing and
that is to have the in-between opportunity of Protective -
Permissive (green arrow followed by green ball). He
stated he has reviewed the report and likes what is
states.
Responding to C/Chavers, SE/Liu stated the process
utilized by the City for the past three years is that
each time a signal warrant study is conducted, the City
requests the designer/traffic engineer to consider the
Protective -Permissive option. This option is considered
prior to implementation of the exclusive protected left
turn operation. As a result of the request from the
Traffic and Transportation Commission, the City has
requested Austin -Foust to provide a feasibility of
utilizing Protective -Permissive left turns for the
intersections of Brea Canyon Road at Golden Springs
Drive, Diamond Bar Boulevard at Golden Springs Drive and
Diamond Bar Boulevard at Mountain Laurel Way. The
conclusion of the report by Joe Faust is that Protective -
Permissive left turn phasing may be used for these
intersections.
C/Chavers stated his understanding that Mr. FoustIsfirst
letter recommended Exclusive phasing and that he had not
considered Protective -Permissive until staff went back
and asked Mr. Foust to consider this alternative. He
indicated he was upset by what had been recommended by
the consultant without consideration of whether there was
a need for Exclusive phasing. SE/Liu responded that this
consideration can be made during the design phase.
C/Chavers suggested the Traffic and Transportation
Commission recommend to staff that warrant studies for
potential signals include a complete left turn evaluation
(i.e., (1) whether a signal is warranted; (2) whether
left -turn signalling is warranted, and (3) what variety
the signalling could or should be).
Responding to C/Gravdahl, C/Chavers stated that the left
turn onto north Golden Springs Drive should be an
Exclusive left turn phasing. He indicated he would never
make a dual left turn for a Protective -Permissive
phasing. The Golden Springs Drive left turn has a
May 11, 1995 Page 9 T&T Commission
Protective -Permissive lead left arrow turn. He stated he
prefers Protective -Permissive for both the north and
south approaches of Golden Springs Drive at Diamond Bar
Boulevard.
In response to C/Gravdahl, Chair/Istik stated he would
not take an existing Protective left turn and turn it
into a Protective -Permissive Left -Turn Signaling.
Accidents occur more frequently immediately after a
Protective left -turn is turned into a Protective -
Permissive left turn. C/Chavers concurred with
Chair/Istik. He indicated that once a control is
Exclusive, he would never backup into a Protective -
Permissive control. The correct method is to start out
with Permissive and move up to more restrictive measures.
SE/Liu stated travelling northbound on Golden Springs
Drive there is one left turn pocket with a Protective -
Permissive phasing. Mr. Foust recommends a Protective -
Permissive phasing for the southbound left -turn lane on
Golden Springs Drive. With respect to the Diamond Bar
Boulevard/Golden Springs Drive intersection, SE/Liu
indicated he would not change the current signal on
Diamond Bar Boulevard.
Responding to C/Gravdahl, C/Chavers stated the cost to
upgrade from Permissive to Protective -Permissive would be
approximately $500.
In response to Chair/Istik, SE/Liu stated that the
guidelines established by the Orange County Traffic
Engineering Council will be incorporated into new signal
designs. He indicated he is not aware of any similar
studies now in circulation.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
A. Mid -Block Pedestrian Crossing on Grand Avenue.
CE/Myers stated that Councilman Harmony requested that
this item be agendized for the Traffic and Transportation
Commission. The request is for a mid -block pedestrian
crossing on Grand Avenue from the Daisy Apartments to the
Library/medical office buildings. Upon receipt of the
request, staff conducted a field investigation and the
results are contained in a report included in the
Commissioner's packets. If a pedestrian crossing was
May 11, 199s Page 10 T&T commission
considered directly across from the driveway/front door
of the Library, approximately 660 feet (2 x 3001) would
be saved for those residents of the apartments crossing
Grand Avenue. Consideration of a cross -walk in this
location is not recommended by staff. Staff further
recommends a targeted promotion of the hazards of
jaywalking, particularly within the Daisy Apartment
complex. the Library and the businesses on the south side
of Grand Avenue.
CE/Myers continued that the hazards of a mid -block
crossing on a street such as Grand Avenue are much
greater than the inconvenience to the citizenry. There
are currently signalized cross -walks at Grand Avenue and
Diamond Bar Boulevard, as well as Grand Avenue and
Montefino Avenue.
Responding to C/Chavers, Sgt. Rawlings indicated he was
not aware of any pedestrian accidents or enforcement
issues at this location.
In response to C/Chavers and in accordance with
Councilman Harmony's request, CE/Myers stated the
analysis was conducted with respect to the
Library/medical office building driveway and the Daisy
Apartments driveway.
Chair/Istik suggested a pedestrian crossing that vehicle
traffic might not be expecting mid -block could be a
liability to the City.
CE/Myers, responding to C/Chavers, indicated he had not
witnessed any pedestrians crossing at the location.
C/Chavers stated he agrees with Chair/Istik and further
suggested placement of "Not a Pedestrian Crossing" signs
should be placed at the location during the resurfacing
and restriping of Grand Avenue.
C/Gravdahl suggested that a request could be addressed to
the manager of the Daisy Apartments for inclusion of
jaywalking information in the complex's newsletter.
C/Ortiz stated that he met with Councilman Harmony who
stated that he was forwarding this request from one
resident who was notified to be present at tonight's
meeting. C/Ortiz further stated that he feels that such
May 11, 1995 Page 11 T&T Commission
a cross walk is totally unsafe because it gives a false
sense of security assumed by the pedestrians.
A motion was made by C/Ortiz and seconded by C/Gravdahl
to accept staff's recommendation. The motion was
approved unanimously with the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
Ortiz, Gravdahl, Chavers,
VC/Leonard, Chair/Intik
None
None
None
VII. STATUS OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEM - None
VIII.ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS:
C/Ortiz suggested that the City upgrade the traffic signal
control box at the K -Mart Shopping Center on Diamond Bar
Boulevard. Chair/Istik indicated the sprinkler could be
adjusted to avoid promotion of rust on the box.
IB. ITEMS FROM STAFF:
A. Future Agenda Items.
Chair/Istik again requested that the issue of Prima Facia
25 Mile Per Hour speed limit be forwarded to City Council
for consideration.
Chair/Istik stated he would like the issue of the City's
street maintenance contract agendized for the next
Traffic and Transportation Commission meeting.
X. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
C/Ortiz stated the Southern California Automobile Club will be
moving to Diamond Bar. He indicated he spoke with Mrs. Ann
Gonzales who stated the Club has training and educational
materials regarding pedestrian safety, bicycle safety and
vehicle inspection, drivers training for senior citizens, etc.
which they will be offering the City.
VC/Leonard announced she will not be present for the June 8,
May 11, 1995 Page 12 T&T commission
1995 Traffic and Transportation Commission meeting.
%I. ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Istik declared the meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
Respectfully,
/s/ David G. Liu
David G. Liu
Secretary
Attest:
/s/ Jack Istik
Jack Istik
Chairman
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 8, 1995
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 Owen; 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 continuing of the public hearing for New Business
Item Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382.
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:
May 8, 1995 Page 2 Planning Commission
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
OLD BUSINESS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
VC/Huff, Schad,
Meyer
None
Flamenbaum
None
Fong,
1. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47850 and Master Environmental
Impact Report No. 91-2. Consideration of Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 47850 and Master Environmental Impact Report No.
91-2 for review and comment pursuant to Government Code
Section 65857. 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 #301, 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 developer's 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
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.
May 8, 1995 Page 3 Planning Commission
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
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
May 8, 1995 Page 4 Planning Commission
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
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
May 8, 1995 Page 5 Planning Commission
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 of the 57 unit project 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 is designed to meet all design standards.
The design was reviewed and approved by the City. The site
extensively implements conservative measures to account for
worst case scenarios. For example, the site is designed as if
materials such as bentonite are 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
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
May 8, 1995 Page 6 Planning Commission
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's 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,and upon dissolution, the assets
shall be distributed to a governmental or non-
profit charitable entity (Subdivision B)."
May 8, 1995 Page 7 Planning Commission
The State of California issued a tax exemption to the
Conservancy on October 20, 1992. The United States
government issued 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.
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
May 8, 1995 Page 8 Planning Commission
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 subdivision 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.
CDD/DeStefano, in response to C/Meyer, stated that the "Buyer
Awareness Package" was established approximately four 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 within the
May 8, 1995 Page 9 Planning Commission
tract of homes. For example, this project is adjacent to a
significant ecological area that has sensitive species of
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 project would
indicate the type of fencing material that would permit these
types of animals to traverse the site. In addition, the
package would indicate the buyer needs to be aware that there
are animals present that may "eat your cat". Therefore, food
should not be left outside. Additionally, the buyer would
also be advised that careful consideration should be given
toward the use of pesticides and other chemicals which might
be hazardous to the immediate environment. He further stated
that the package goes beyond that required by the 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 there must be evidence that every buyer and
potential buyer has received the package.
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
until October, 1990. This developer chose to adopt some of
the standards of the Hillside Management Ordinance and
incorporate them in their product even though they were not
required to do so.
C/Fong suggested that a reduction in density should result in
a reduction of the amount of grading required.
C/Fong stated his concerns regarding shear strength value and
requested further explanation of staff's comments that lower
shear strengths were used in adjacent tracts.
C/Fong recommended that the developer and consultant should
state in writing their understanding of Smectite 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.
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."
May 8, 1995 Page 10 Planning Commission
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 regarding the lower parameters used in
analyzing the reports on the adjacent tract, that 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
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
May 8, 1995 Page it Planning Commission
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 would 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.
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.
May 8, 1995 Page 12 Planning Commission
Mr. Nelson indicated
Management Ordinance,
Horst Shore in 1990.
Planning Commission is
by the engineering
accommodate a large
Ordinance.
that, in the spirit of the Hillside
the tract is completely redesigned by
The project alternative before the
the result of a radical tract redesign
firm of Hunnsaker & Associates to
portion of the Hillside Management
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 are 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 applicant for attempting to develop a
project that is aesthetically balanced with the existing
environment by gathering seeds for approximately 5,000 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
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
May 8, 1995 Page 13 Planning Commission
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. 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 veszted 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 at.
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.
May 8, 1995 Page 14 Planning Commission
C/Fong suggested with respect to lots 3, 4 and 5 that the
designer and consultants recheck their design on the shear
keys. It appears that the geotechnical conditions on lots 3,
4 and 5 are rather favorable and there is no need for a shear
key as it is shown on the grading plan. He suggested the
change is to not impact the adjacent existing grove of oak
trees in the area. He stated it is a matter of changing a few
lines on the map.
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 to have clear
areas between the structures so a passerby or someone driving
down the street can see between the houses down to the open
areas.
Chair/ Fl amenbaum 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 with the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Huff, Schad, Fong,
Meyer, Chair/Flamenbaum
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
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
May 8, 1995 Page 15 Planning Commission
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.
Ann Lungu stated the applicant is requesting approval to
construct a two story sanctuary structure with a cellar and
install two temporary modular classroom units. The modular
units will be removed when the Certificate of Occupancy is
issued for the two story sanctuary structure. The applicant's
request also includes lifting the time constraints and
deleting irrelevant conditions of approval in the original
Conditional Use Permit.
The project site is a 2.37 acre triangular shaped lot. The
project site is zoned R-1-7,500 and has a draft General Plan
designation of Commercial ( C) . Since this facility is located
in a residential area, a Conditional Use Permit is required to
insure that the development of this church is well integrated
with the existing development in the area within the
residential zone.
The reason for the applicant's current request is twofold.
First, the applicant desires to lift the time constraints of
the original Conditional Use Permit. Since the Council's
approval for the extension of time, Phase II was completed.
Consequently, it is reasonable to suggest that substantial
construction and completion of the project has occurred. Once
substantial construction occurs within a grant's specified
time limit, a grant is in full force and effect.
Additionally, land use entitlements, which meet this
requirement remain with the land. Therefore, the Commission
could nullify the time constraint. The applicant wants the
nullification in order to accumulate enough money to construct
a debt free sanctuary structure. The applicant hopes to begin
Phase III's construction at the end of 1997 or the beginning
of 1998.
Since the applicant is applying for revisions to the original
Conditional Use Permit grant by the County, staff feels it is
appropriate to delete conditions of approval which are no
longer relevant. These conditions restrict the construction
of a tower and/or spire and limits evening activities to twice
a week. The applicant is not applying for a tower or spire,
so that condition is no longer applicable. In the evenings,
the Church provides community services by allowing Cub Scouts
and Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, as well as church
activities. Therefore, it is not in the community's best
interest to eliminate these services.
May 8, 1995 Page 16 Planning Commission
In December 1994 the City Council approved on -street parking
along southbound Diamond Bar Boulevard from 100 feet south of
the curb return at Crooked Creek Drive to the northerly
driveway of the project site. The permitted time for parking
along Diamond Bar Boulevard is Sunday from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00
p.m. However, the on -street parking is only permitted until
installation begins for double left turn/intersection
modification on southbound Diamond Bar Boulevard at Brea
Canyon Road.
Presently, the project site maintains 41 on-site parking
spaces, two of which are handicapped spaces. The code allows
a ratio of one parking space for every five occupants based on
the largest assembly area of the Church. The largest assembly
area of the sanctuary structure will have an occupancy of 390
persons. Therefore, based on code, 78 parking spaces are
required, two of which are required to be handicapped spaces.
AstP/Lungu pointed out the current plan which allows for 76
on-site parking spaces. Compact parking spaces could be added
to allow for the additional two on-site parking spaces needed
to meet the code. The Fire Department is reviewing the
proposed plans and their comments will be a requirement for
this project.
The parking lot construction causes the removal of three
Aleppo Pine trees and one Canary Island Pine tree. The
applicant is proposing to replace three of the four trees
within the parking lot area.
Proposed grading quantities for the sanctuary excavation for
the cellar includes 2,960 cubic yards of soil. 172 cubic
yards of the excavated soil will be deposited in the western
portion of the parking lot. Exported soil quantities will be
2,788 cubic yards. Due to the expected excavation, the
applicant is required to make an application for a grading
permit and submit a grading plan prepared by a Civil Engineer
for review and approval by the City Engineer.
An application for Development Review is required for this
project because it is an institutional type use and the
applicant is adding more than 10,000 square feet to the
existing structure.
The proposed project's development standards comply with the
City's development standards. The architectural style of the
proposed sanctuary structure will match the existing
structures on-site. The colors and material utilized will
match the existing structures which have red tile roofs and
off-white colored stucco. As such, the proposed sanctuary
May 8, 1995 Page 17 Planning Commission
structure will be compatible with existing on-site structures
and other structures in the area.
The applicant is also requesting to install two -24 feet by 60
feet temporary modular classroom units to be utilized until
construction of the sanctuary is completed. Before the
issuance of the sanctuary's Certificate of Occupancy, the
temporary classroom units will be removed. In addition, the
area will need to be paved to accommodate the temporary
modular classroom units.
Pursuant to the Development Review Ordinance, an application
approved or conditionally approved automatically expires if
not exercised within one year. However, the Planning
Commission, subject to appeal to the City Council, may extend
any such approval for two successive periods not to exceed six
months each.
Since construction of the proposed sanctuary depends on the
Church's financial status, staff recommends that the
Commission consider granting a two year Development Review
approval. If construction does not begin within this two year
period and the design of the sanctuary structure is not
altered substantially, staff recommends that the Commission
require the applicant apply for an Administrative Development
Review application to ensure compliance with current design
standards and the Commission's approval.
The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed project
will not have a significant effect on the environment and a
Negative Declaration has been prepared pursuant to the
guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approval
Conditional Use Permit No. 95-1, Development Review No. 95-1,
and Negative Declaration No. 95-1, Findings of Fact, and
conditions as listed within the resolution.
Responding to Chair/Flamenbaum, AstP/Lungu stated that if the
applicant does not exercise the CUP within two years the
project will be referred back for Administrative Review.
Staff is recommending that the time constraints be lifted.
The applicant has made a substantial completion of the project
and only one phase is left to be completed. The reason staff
recommended Administrative Development Review is to assure
that the applicant has complied with the conditions.
Chair/Flamenbaum indicated that the lifting of time
constraints appears to be granting the applicant special
privileges that have not been granted to any other applicant
in the past. AstP/Lungu responded that staff feels that the
May 8, 1995 Page 18 Planning Commission
applicant has substantially complied with the CUP. This
agenda item is an amendment to the original CUP approval.
In response to Chair/Flamenbaum, AstP/Lungu indicated the
proposed 78 on-site parking spaces complies with the code for
a ratio of 1 parking space for every 5 occupants. The
sanctuary accommodates 390 occupants. Chair/Flamenbaum
questioned whether the 78 spaces would be adequate. In
addition, he indicated that the City has shied away from
adding compact parking spaces. AstP/Lungu stated the
applicant may be able to increase the parking area to
accommodate the two additional required spaces to comply with
the Code without adding compact parking spaces.
CE/Myers responding to Chair/Flamenbaum stated he did not feel
it was necessary to conduct a traffic study for this
Conditional Use Permit.
AstP/Lungu responding to Chair/Flamenbaum stated she believes
that the Church has had conversations regarding parking with
the owner of the adjacent commercial property located across
the flood channel. At this time, she indicated she is not
aware of any agreement for parking.
C/Schad commented that he believes in extending the time for
the applicant since they have made a good faith attempt to
comply with the Conditional Use Permit. He suggested the mesa
area could be "stepped" for future parking. He indicated that
some of the older pines along the storm drain may represent a
hazard and may need to be removed. He cited the historical
value of the property in the knoll area and suggested that the
applicant should consult with the City's historical group to
see if there is anything on the property that should be
preserved prior to further construction. He stated that the
trash on the northwest corner of the property adjacent to the
residences should be removed without cost to the Church.
C/Schad suggested a northerly left turn lane from the Church
property.
Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing open and
requested that those in opposition to the project approach the
podium.
Larry Fry, 3155 Cherrydale Drive, stated he has been a
resident of Diamond Bar for 21 years and has lived on
Cherrydale Drive for 11 years. He indicated he does not
oppose the Church. However, he does have a concern about the
knoll area and the trees which are situated on the site of the
original Diamond Bar Ranch ranch house. If the trees are
taken out, they cannot be replaced in kind. In addition, red
May 8, 1995 Page 19 Planning Commission
tailed hawks
proposed to
converted to
location.
live in the trees. He suggested the area that is
be used for office space by the Church could be
classrooms and sublease office space in another
Responding to C/Meyer, Mr. Fry stated he has no problem with
removing the night meeting restriction. He indicated he has
no problem with the bell tower as long as it is not used in
the night hours. He further stated that he has no problem
with the sanctuary. His only concern is the knoll area.
Ronald Jung, 3163 Cherrydale Drive, stated he has been a
resident of the area since 1981. He indicated that when he
bought his property in Diamond Bar he was told by the
developer that the area was protected and the trees would
remain along with the country feel. He further stated he is
not opposed to building of the sanctuary but he is totally
against any building on the knoll area.
In response to C/Meyer, Mr. Jung stated he is opposed to
lifting the restriction on the evening meetings and on the
bell tower.
Nora Jean Jung, 3163 Cherrydale Drive, stated she would have
a problem with meetings five nights a week and she is opposed
to the spires. She further stated she is concerned with the
wildlife that live on the knoll and she is opposed to any
building on the knoll area.
Christine Fry, 3155 Cherrydale Drive, stated that she is
surprised that the staff report does not include a negative
environmental impact. She indicated she is very concerned
with the wildlife in the knoll area and is opposed to any
building in that location. She further stated she has no
problem with evening Church meetings and she has no problem
with a spire/tower for the sanctuary.
Seeing no one else who wished to speak in opposition to the
project, Chair/Flamenbaum invited the proponents to speak.
Mark Hopper, Pastor, Evangelical Free Church of Diamond Bar,
3255 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard, referred the Commission to the
original site plan for the project adopted under the
Conditional Use Permit which included a two-story building in
the knoll area. The original building was completed in 1983.
In 1990 the Church received a five year extension and since
the building has not been completed, an extension is being
requested at this time. He indicated that approximately
$100,000 building funds have been raised and with the
estimated cost to be in excess of $1,000,000, there are
insufficient funds to complete construction. Pastor Hopper
May 8, 1995 Page 20 Planning Commission
stressed that the Church has a desire to develop the grassy
knoll and that this should be reflected in the staff's report.
He asked that the addendum to the staff report be changed to
read as follows: "In the event that future expansion of the
Church facilities into the knoll is needed, the applicant
shall protect and preserve and/or relocate and replace ...1'
He stated that the building for the knoll has been reduced
from two-story to one story which would be approximately the
height of a residence. He further stated the Church would be
willing to help grade down the knoll to reduce the nuisance
and visibility, whether for building or for the parking. In
addition, most of the trees are located on the perimeter of
the knoll area and would not be disturbed. The two or three
trees that would be disturbed would be replaced by the Church.
C/Fong suggested that the proposed knoll area classroom
structure could be redesigned to be built into the hill to
preserve the terrain and aesthetic value for the adjacent
residents.
Ron Clark, 20940 Ambusher Street, requested that the Planning
Commission favorably consider the recommendation by staff.
Pamela Watkins, resident of Pomona and Church attendee, cited
numerous Church sponsored programs which impact the facility.
She stated the Church is currently renting space at a facility
on the opposite side of Brea Canyon Road to accommodate the
overflow.
Al Smith, Church Elder, emphasized the importance of providing
facilities for the youth of Diamond Bar.
Michael Beard, Associate Pastor, Evangelical Free Church of
Diamond Bar, stated there are no written agreements for
parking at neighboring locations.
Mr. Fung entered photographs of the project site into the
record.
Jim Thayer, Architect for the Church, indicated the majority
of trees at the site would be preserved. He stated the 5 to
1 ratio for parking appears to be inadequate and the ratio is
closer to 3 1/2 to 1.
Larry Fry stated that, in his opinion, the restriction
originally imposed by the County should remain on the project
and that the Commission should consider restricting further
building in consideration of the areas adjacent to the project
site.
May 8, 1995 Page 21 Planning Commission
Responding to Mr. Fry, Pastor Hopper stated that the Church
has needs and that they are attempting to move forward in a
responsible manner, with due consideration to the neighbors.
Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing closed.
A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by Chair/Flamenbaum
to direct staff to prepare a Resolution of Approval for
Conditional Use Permit No. 95-1 and Development Review No. 95-
1 which prohibits development on the grassy knoll, removes the
time constraints of the original Conditional Use Permit,
removes the spire constraint, and removes the restrictions on
evening meetings.
The motion was approved 4-1 with the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Meyer, Chair/Flamenbaum,
Fong, Schad
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Huff
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
VC/Huff returned to the dais.
RECESS: Chair/Flamenbaum recessed the meeting at 11:05 p.m.
RECONVENE: Chair/Flamenbaum reconvened the meeting at 11:10 p.m.
2. Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382, Conditional Use Permit No. 92-
1, and Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2. A request to subdivide one
parcel into four residential lots.
Property Location: 3000 Block (north side) of Steeplechase
Lane, Diamond Bar
Property Owner: Dolezal Family Limited Partnership, 4251
S. Higuera Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Applicant: Warren Dolezal, 4251 S. Higuera Street,
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Applicant's Agent: Hunsaker and Associates, 10179 Huennekens
Street, San Diego, CA 92121
CDD/DeStefano stated that staff has provided the Planning
Commission with an extensive package on this item including a
lengthy staff report, environmental documentation, mitigation
monitoring program as part of the negative declaration, maps,
etc. This is an application for a four lot subdivision behind
the gates of "The Country Estates" located on a 2.55 acre site
May 8, 1995 Page 22 Planning Commission
directly across the street from the JCC project discussed
earlier this evening. The four proposed lots range in size
from about 24,000 gross square feet to a little more than
39,000 gross square feet. The pad sizes range from about
5,600 square feet to about 6,500 square feet. The zoning for
the property is R-1-8,000. Therefore, the proposal is
consistent with the zoning. The project is consistent with
the draft General Plan which permits up to three dwelling
units per acre.
The project requires a Conditional Use Permit because it is
within a Hillside Management area and technically within a
significant ecological area. An Oak Tree Permit is required
because there is one existing oak tree on site which is set
aside and designated for preservation. The property has
smaller pads than some of the adjacent properties, the purpose
of which is to serve as starter pads for future development
for homes ranging in size from 4,000 to 8,000 square feet and
to attempt to comply with the Hillside Management Ordinance
guidelines. The units would be consistent with that which has
been and is being developed in "The Country Estates". The
property is technically incorporated within the Significant
Ecological Area (SEA) No. 15. However, there is only one oak
tree in the area. The property has been disked over the last
20 years. It is essentially a remanent piece from the Las
Brisas Condominium project which was built several years ago.
The old SEA boundary generally ran along the ridgeline. This
property, according to the graphic that was provided to the
City upon incorporation, indicates the property is included
within the SEA. The City hired a biologist and environmental
consultant to look at the property and, through this process,
confirmed staff's suspicion that the property should no longer
be considered a part of the SEA as it has none of the
qualities for which the SEA was originally created.
Approximately 185 property owners surrounding the site have
been notified through the public hearing notification process.
Staff requests that the Planning Commission recommend approval
and forward the application to the City Council for approval
of Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382, Conditional Use Permit No.
92-1, Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2, and the Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 95-2.
Responding to Chair/ F 1 amenbaum, CDD/DeStefano stated "The
Country Estates" has no interest in a third gate (Hawkwood
Road and Steeplechase Lane). Hawkwood Road homeowners are not
interested in the additional traffic that a third gate at that
location might create. The third gate does provide an
appropriate location for an "emergency only" access point.
May 8, 1995 Page 23 Planning Commission
Responding to C/Schad, CE/Myers indicated that there is
existing sewer at the Las Brisas Condominium for connection to
these four parcels. Therefore, no pumping station is needed.
In response to VC/Huff, CE/Myers stated he does not note any
significant drainage swales or down drains proposed for this
project.
CDD/DeStefano responded to VC/Huff that the condition for
annexation is consistent with that imposed upon recent
developments in "The Country Estates" i.e., that essentially
a good faith effort must be demonstrated toward annexation
into "The Country Estates" and that the fees should not exceed
those which Tract 47722 paid.
Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing open.
Lex Williman, Planning Director for Hunnsaker & Associates,
10179 Huennekens Street, San Diego, CA 92121, stated he is
representing the applicant for this project. It is the intent
of the project to annex to "The Country Estates" homeowners
association. The intent of the project is to take driveway
access from Steeplechase Lane and offer the ability within a
20 foot maximum step to drop the house down the hill in order
to minimize grading and disturbance of the area.
Mr. Williman indicated the applicant does not have any problem
with the conditions except with one issue which is
specifically related to the Hawkwood Road/ Steeplechase Lane
interface. Hawkwood Road currently deadends. In addition,
there is an emergency access from the Las Brisas Condominium
complex which connects into Hawkwood Road and onto
Steeplechase Lane. The applicant proposes, as an alternative
to the cul-de-sac turn around, a gate with fence in a motif
and material that mimics the entrance to "The Country Estates"
which would be used for emergency access only. A small turn-
around would be retained. He requested that the wording
regarding the cul-de-sac be eliminated and attach their
rendering as the basis for fulfilling that condition.
C/Meyer requested the applicant provide hillside development
standards that would put a building envelope on the four
proposed lots. He stated he is opposed to the development as
it is proposed.
Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing closed.
A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by VC/Huff to
continue the hearing for Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 to May
22, 1995. The motion was approved unanimously.
May 8, 1995 Page 24 Planning Commission
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS - None
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS - None
ANNOUNCEMENTS - None
ADJOURNMENT:
Chair/Flamenbaum declared the meeting adjourned at 11.40 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
/s/ James DeStefano
James DeStefano
Community Development Director
Attest:
/s/ Bruce Flamenbaum
Bruce Flamenbaum
Chairman
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 22, 1995
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Flamenbaum called the meeting to order at 7:18 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 Vice Chairman
Huff.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners: Chairman Flamenbaum, Vice
Chairman Huff, Commissioners Meyer, Schad and
Huff.
Also Present: Associate Planner Robert Searcy; Assistant
Planner Ann Lungu; Consultant Attorney Robert
Owen; Consultant Engineer Mike Meyer; and
Recording Secretary Carol Dennis.
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Mark Hopper, 1125 Grubstake Drive, stated he represents the
Evangelical Free Church. With respect to the minutes of May,
8, 1995, he asked that they be amended to reflect the spirit
of the meeting. He requested that on Page 20, Paragraph 10,
line 4, the word "prohibits" be amended to read "which does
not include" development at this time. He further requested
that the statement in the Draft Resolution be amended
accordingly.
C/Fong stated he believes Mr. Hopper is correct with his
wording, because his understanding of the matter is that the
Planning Commission does not intend to prohibit any
development on the knoll. He said as a Commissioner he can
make that change.
C/Schad stated he concurs with C/Fong.
Wilbur Smith, Diamond Bar citizen wanted to know what the
Planning Commission had recommended to the City Council
regarding the General Plan. Chair/Flamenbaum responded that
the Planning Commission version of the Draft General Plan was
distributed to the public at the time of its approval. This
version was sent to the City Council for their deliberation.
The Planning Commission is required by Government Code to
review areas of the General Plan that were not discussed.
These areas were referred to the Planning Commission by the
City Council; the Planning Commission held a public hearing
May 22, 1995 Page 2 Planning Commission
and discussion; the results were submitted back to City
Council with recommendations from the Planning Commission.
The specifics are included in the Planning Commission minutes
for public consumption.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Minutes of May 8, 1995.
C/Fong stated the wording on Page 14 is incorrect. He
asked that "eliminated" be stricken and the sentence be
revised to read as follows: "C/Fong recommended that the
shear key be reviewed and modified as appropriate on Lots
3, 4 and 5 to save the oak grove in view of favorable
geological conditions indicated on the current geological
map." He indicated this is what he intended to say and
what it says on Page 14 is wrong; technically, it is
incorrect. with respect to the third paragraph, Page 14,
he asked that the following words be added to the end of
the sentence to clarify what he meant: for unobstructed
view of the canyon areas from planned streets so that the
sentence reads: "C/Fong recommended that the lots be
staggered and that spaces be left between the lots for
unobstructed view of the canyon areas from planned
streets."
C/Meyer stated he has a problem with adding verbiage of
what should have been said and the way it is thought to
be at this time. The minutes are suppose to be an
abbreviated action type of minutes that reflect what
occurred at the meeting. He indicated he has no problem
changing C/Fongs statement to "modified" rather than
"eliminated" because he believes that is what C/Fong
said. He stated he does not concur with adding
clarification to paragraph 3.
C/Fong stated he did mention for unobstructed views in
canyon areas but it is not reflected in the sentence.
C/Meyer responded that this was not in accordance with
his recollection.
Chair/Flamenbaum stated he agrees with C/Meyer that the
minutes should reflect what was said and what occurred.
He suggested that the minutes be tabled and that the
recording secretary review the tape to determine if the
minutes accurately reflect what was said.
C/Fong stated that with respect to Mr. Hopper's comments,
he believes the minutes are incorrect. He doesn't
believe the Commission meant to prohibit development on
the grassy knoll. He indicated he remembers that
development on the grassy knoll was to be deferred at
this time.
May 22, 1995 Page 3 Planning Commission
Chair/Flamenbaum stated that he believes the minutes
accurately portray what the motion was and what the
Commission voted on. He indicated the recording
secretary could also review this area of the tape. The
minutes have to speak for themselves.
C/Meyer stated the minutes reflect the true content of
the motion. He reiterated that his intent was to
prohibit development on the grassy knoll.
A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by C/Schad to
table the approval of the Planning Commission minutes for
May 8, 1995 to the June 12, 1995 meeting. The motion was
approved 4-1 with the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Meyer, Schad, Fong,
Chair/Flamenbaum
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Huff
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
2. Resolution No. 95-06: A resolution of the Planning
Commission of the City of Diamond Bar approving
Conditional Use Permit No. 95-1, Development Review No.
95-1, and Negative Declaration No. 95-1 which is a
request to construct a two story sanctuary structure with
a cellar and install two temporary modular classroom
units and repealing Conditional Use Permit No. 1634(1)
for a church facility located at 3255 South Diamond Bar
Boulevard (Tract 33417, Lot 19).
VC/Huff recused himself from this agenda item and left
the dais.
A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by
Chair/Flamenbaum to adopt Resolution No. 95-06.
Chair/Flamenbaum stated his understanding of the
government code is that the word "prohibit" or words to
that effect do not preclude an applicant from applying
for a new and/or revised Conditional Use Permit at a
later date. AP/Searcy concurred that under Title 22, the
Conditional Use Permit addresses bringing back projects
that are substantially different from a project for which
the Commission has taken action. Chair/Flamenbaum
continued that it was the intent of the Planning
Commission to absolutely deny building on the grassy
knoll at this time. Pursuant to funding available to the
applicant, there was no idea as to when such building
might occur. The Commission did not believe it was in
the City's best interest to approve a structure that
would appreciably impact the surrounding community
without knowing more about it. The Commission was
May 22, 1995 Page 4 Planning Commission
concerned with the issue of parking, as well as the
improvements scheduled for Brea Canyon Road and Diamond
Bar Boulevard. If and when the applicant wishes to make
new or revised application the Planning Commission will
then make the appropriate determinations.
Responding to Mr. Hopper, C/Meyer stated it was his
intent to prohibit development on the grassy knoll as an
entitlement of the Conditional Use Permit, to eliminate
the prohibition against spires on buildings on the site,
and to eliminate the time constraints relative to evening
meetings. At issue with building on the grassy knoll is
that the designs are not in keeping with good land use
standards. There was testimony indicating the grassy
knoll is a habitat of endangered species which the
environmental review did not reflect. In addition, there
was testimony indicating that the knoll is an historical
site. He further stated that there should be no mistake
that his recommendation for the preparation of this
resolution was to prohibit development on the grassy
knoll. As the Planning Commission has reviewed and
modified conditions placed on the property by Los Angeles
County he indicated he would expect future Planning
Commissions to consider the information provided by the
applicant for future development on the grassy knoll. He
stated that it was his intent that if the applicant
wished to develop the grassy knoll area, an amendment
would be made to the Conditional Use Permit for
consideration by the Planning Commission and the City
Council at a future date. The plans that were submitted
by the applicant have significant impacts on the
surrounding development.
Mr. Hopper responded to Chair/Flamenbaum that he would
need to go to his board of directors for direction on
whether to continue with the matter or withdraw the
application. He requested a continuance.
AP/Searcy admonished the applicant to be aware that this
application was brought before the Planning Commission in
order to lift a condition of approval that terminated the
Conditional Use Permit in November, 1995. If action is
not taken by that time, the CUP will terminate and no
additional development under that Conditional Use Permit
would be permitted. In addition, no action taken by the
Planning Commission relieves the due process procedure
that is provided under the code. Due process for
requesting any change at an additional time is always
present. It is not precluded by any element of this
Resolution.
Responding to Chair/Flamenbaum, Mr. Hopper stated that
the Resolution should be adopted if it is understood by
May 22, 1995 Page 5 Planning Commission
the City that the applicant has the right to return to
the Planning Commission with an amended plan for the
unused portion of land. AP/Searcy stated that this is
guaranteed under Title 22. In addition, comments put
forth this evening are recorded in the meeting minutes
and become a matter of public record.
The motion to approve Resolution No. 95-06 was approved
4-1 with the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
VC/Huff returned to the dais.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
M e y e r ,
Chair/Flamenbaum,
Schad, Fong
None
VC/Huff
None
1. Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382, Conditional Use Permit
No. 92-1 and Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2. TPM No. 23382
(pursuant to Code Section 21.24) is a request to
subdivide a 2.55 gross acre parcel into four residential
lots ranging from .55 acres to .90 acres. The tentative
map also includes the following: Conditional Use Permit
No. 92-1 (pursuant to Code Section 22.56.215 and the
Hillside Management Ordinance No. 7 (1992)) which is
required to protect resources contained in a significant
ecological area and for hillside management in areas
where grades are in excess of ten percent; and Oak Tree
Permit No. 95-2 (pursuant to Code Section 22.56, Part 16)
which is required to preserve and protect an existing oak
tree.
Applicant: Hunsaker and Associate Inc., 10179 Hunnekens
Street, San Diego, CA 92121
Property Owner: Warren Dolezal, 4251 South Higuera
Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Property Address: 3000 block (North side) of
Steeplechase Lane between Hawkwood Road and Wagon Train
Lane, Diamond Bar
Lex Williman, Planning Director, Hunsaker and Associates,
Inc., stated the purpose of the starter pads is to meet
the intent of the Hillside Management Ordinance. He
pointed out a clarification of proposed development
standards, Exhibit "B", for Parcel Map No. 23382. A 40
foot rear building setback is proposed for each lot. The
May 22, 1995 Page 6 Planning Commission
intent is to have the units step down the pad to overcome
the massing issue. The maximum massing is 35 feet.
Condition 117, relating to the cul-de-sac extension off
of Hawkwood Road is an issue for the applicant. There is
no opposition to putting in the knuckle and the
appropriate improvements. However, the applicant does
oppose having the cul-de-sac with the knuckle. We would
ask that the Planning Commission approve, as an option:
the knuckle; eliminate the standard cul-de-sac; include
a turn -around with a gated private driveway access; and
retain the required emergency access to the Las Brisas
Condominium project.
Responding to Chair/Flamenbaum, Mr. Williman stated
Hawkwood Road specifically services four units. The
concern is that a public facility is being built in a
private area since Steeplechase Lane at Hawkwood Road
becomes "The Country Estates". Since "The Country
Estates" is a gated community, this junction was intended
to be gated for emergency access purposes only and not to
provide public access. There are some technical concerns
with this approach. As a result of a profile for
Steeplechase Lane, a water line was installed on Hawkwood
Road with a turn into Steeplechase Lane to Wagon Train
Lane. The Hawkwood Road grade up from Steeplechase Lane
is approximately 12 percent. A typical maximum grade for
a cul-de-sac is 5 percent and he indicated his firm likes
to design to a maximum of 2 or 3 percent. In order to
accommodate a cul-de-sac, a severe cut would have to be
made at the end of Hawkwood Road to lower the grade. The
applicants approach would be to use materials for the
gate similar to the existing main gate for "The Country
Estates" and used for emergency access only and not for
through traffic. In accordance with the wishes of the
residents, there will be no public access to "The Country
Estates". The applicant feels a public access at this
location would be very inappropriate.
Responding to C/Meyer, CE/Myers stated he reviewed the
proposed modifications to the street improvements. A
specific condition of approval by the Planning Commission
of Vesting Tentative Map No. 47850, which is located
across Hawkwood Road from the subject property, stated
that Steeplechase Lane shall be knuckled and Hawkwood
Road shall be cul-de-saced to City standards. Staff and
the applicant have made this an issue in order to have
the issue clarified by the City Council. The condition
in VTM No. 47850 does not say "to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer". In his opinion, it is a stark and
clearly worded condition. Therefore, he indicated he is
interested in clarification at this point in time. In
this instance, no property frontage will be taken.
Typical backing distance for firefighting vehicles is 150
May 22, 1995 Page 7 Planning Commission
feet. Since there is an emergency connection provided
between the knuckle and the cul-de-sac, the emergency
turn around factor is addressed. The second drawing
provided by the applicant shows a bull nose on the end of
the existing 40 foot roadway. This does not provide an
easy turn around for even a compact car. The current
Hawkwood Road public right-of-way is 64 feet. Perhaps a
larger bull nose could be constructed. The City's
Engineering staff would accept either alternative and has
no objection other than it is contrary to the condition
on VTM No. 47850 and the City's standards for cul-de-
sacs. He stated his understanding that the applicants
for this project and for VTM No. 47850 are in agreement
with respect to this issue.
AP/Searcy, responding to C/Meyer, indicated the residents
within a 500 foot radius were notified of this project
and public hearing.
In response to C/Meyer, CE/Myers stated, there have been
no traffic problems in this area. In his opinion, the
second alternative presented by the applicant is
functional. The road ending could be marked "no -outlet"
to avoid inconvenience for drivers unfamiliar with the
area. The conditions of approval for this project
provide construction "to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer".
Responding to C/Meyer, AP/Searcy stated the cul-de-sac
issue was addressed by the public and City staff during
public hearings for VTM No. 47850. The condition was
written because no viable alternative had been presented.
The residents were opposed to an oversized area which
might attract non-residents using the location for
parking and other purposes.
Chair/ F 1 amenbaum proposed the cul-de-sac be placed at the
end of Hawkwood Road and that the radius be increased by
10 feet. CE/Myers responded the applicant is proposing
a 20 foot radius and, because he has 60 feet of right-of-
way, the radius could be increased by 29 feet. He
indicated he would like to see the condition "to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer" with the clarification
that it does not have to be to the City's standards.
Responding to Chair/Flamenbaum, CE/Myers stated the cul-
de-sac and knuckle roadways are separated by 10 feet of
parkway.
In response to C/Huff, CE/Myers stated the 20 foot
setback begins at the 60 foot limit. In addition, there
will be a 12 foot setback from the paving.
May 22, 1995 Page 8 Planning Commission
Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing re -opened.
Wilbur Smith asked where the gate will be placed on
Hawkwood Road. He asked if the City intends to keep the
gate locked to through traffic and accommodate only
emergency vehicles, to which AP/Searcy responded that was
the intent. He wanted to know if a geotechnical
evaluation had been completed for this project with
respect to its impact on the Las Brisas Condominium
complex. He stated he does not feel it is appropriate to
approve this project when the City is one week from
approving a General Plan. He cited a portion of the
General Plan which states that lots should be one acre.
He wanted to know why Project 47850 has one acre lots and
this project has one-half acre lots, both of which are
inconsistent with the General Plan. He requested to know
what grading problems will be encountered for this
project.
Responding to Mr. Smith, CE/Myers stated he has no
knowledge of earth movement in the Las Brisas Condominium
complex area. This project has preliminary geotechnical
analysis and reports which have been reviewed and
approved by the City's Consultant Geologist. The
preliminary report will be expanded based upon the final
proposed grading and construction plans.
In response to Mr. Smith, AP/Searcy stated this project
is consistent with the Draft General Plan and conforms to
the density allowed by the zoning.
Max Maxwell, a Diamond Bar resident, stated he is
concerned about the lighting of the cul-de-sac area and
its impact on the residences at lower elevations. He
suggested a deep bore hole for testing. He requested to
know what the tree preservation program will be for this
site. He further stated this project should go before
the City Council. He asked if the project is in the SEA
15.
Chair/Flamenbaum declared the public hearing closed.
Lex Williman, responding to Mr. Smith and Mr. Maxwell,
stated the applicant is concerned about additional work
in the Hawkwood Road area that might interfere with
existing property right-of-ways. He indicated the
geologist for this project was the on-site geologist for
Las Brisas Condominium complex. The applicant states that
he is unaware of any land slippage issues with the Las
Brisas condo complex. The report prepared for this
project is more detailed than the usual preliminary
report because of the geotechnical issues associated with
this City. A buttress fill at the base of this project
May 22, 1995 Page 9 Planning Commission
was created when Las Brisas was built. He indicated at
least two deep borings were completed on site and the
City's geotechnical consultant reviewed and approved the
preliminary report. One on-site oak tree will be
preserved. Because the City felt this project was in
close proximity to the SEA 15, this project went before
SEATAC for their approval. This project is on the
opposite side of the hill from the SEA 15. The drainage
basin is away from Tonner Canyon and the storm drain goes
toward the Las Brisas complex. This project will go to
City Council for approval. The project proposes to annex
to the "The Country Estates". Access will be provided
through "The Country Estates". No public access is
proposed through Hawkwood Road. The applicant believes
he is in conformance with the General Plan and the
current zoning. The lots for this site are much bigger
and the density is much less than what would be allowed
by the current zoning and the current General Plan. This
project attempts to conform to what is consistent with
products adjacent to Hawkwood Road and located within
"The Country Estates".
Responding to Chair/Flamenbaum, AP/Searcy stated that
both resolutions require the approval of City Council in
order for the project to proceed.
In response to Chair/Flamenbaum, Mr. Williman stated the
client read the resolutions. His only concern is with
the condition relating to the road.
Mr. Williman, responding to VC/Huff, stated the City
controls the street lights. There are no street lights
proposed for this project. Regarding tennis courts,
standard conditions for site development plans states any
lighting must be directed away from adjoining neighbors.
The applicant will comply with this condition. AP/Searcy
stated the standard condition reads that a minimum of one
candle foot five feet from the surface of the tennis
court is required. Mr. Williman stated he does not feel
the lots are of sufficient size to accommodate tennis
courts. CE/Myers indicated the street lighting condition
is Engineering Condition 133. It provides only for a
street light at the end of Hawkwood Road. There are no
conditions for street lighting on Steeplechase Lane.
Responding to C/Fong, CE/Myers stated the current
geological report is preliminary and further studies will
be conducted. The report is complete at this point of
the project to establish, to a reasonable certainty, that
the development, as proposed, can proceed as proposed.
In the approval of detailed construction and grading
plans, the soils geotechnical engineers will conduct
additional studies, if necessary, to make additional
May 22, 1995 Page 10 Planning Commission
recommendations to match the detailed construction plans.
C/Fong stated the reports seem to be incomplete with
respect to geotechnical studies for this project and he
agrees with Mr. Maxwell that deep borings were not done
for this project. In his opinion, the boring included in
the addendum by Crandall is very inadequate. It does not
show all of the geologic structure or details required
for this type of project. He strongly recommends that
detailed deep boring should be required for the City's
final plan review for this tract. In addition, there
should be more details and analysis to demonstrate the
adequacy of the shear key located on the northwest
boundary adjacent to the Las Brisas development. Any
remedial grading stipulated by the City should be self -
supported for the development and be supported by any
additional investigation.
C/Meyer suggested that the "Buyer Awareness Package"
should contain the revised building standards presented
to the Planning Commission this evening. AP/Searcy
agreed the standards should be included and staff could
refer to the document during development review. C/Meyer
further suggested the applicant's proposal to include
gate design standards similar to the existing entry gate
to "The Country Estates" should be included as a
condition of approval for the subdivision. He indicated
his support of the project if the City Engineer is
satisfied that the conditions contained in the
recommendations will accommodate the additional soils and
geological reports needed to be sensitive to potential
ground movement. With respect to the cul-de-sac, he
favors the alternative design submitted by the applicant.
CE/Myers stated Engineering Condition #35 and the
Tentative Parcel Map provide for the alternative design
and, as written, states that it will be constructed "to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer".
Responding to C/Fong, Mr. Williman stated asphalt is
proposed for surface improvement on Hawkwood Road. He
indicated he would be concerned about C/Fongs proposal to
use Grass -Crete on a 12 percent grade for safety reasons.
Only 20 feet will be asphalt and the remainder is
intended to be green area. The applicant intends to
continue the look of "The Country Estates".
VC/Huff stated he likes the appliant's cul-de-sac design.
Responding to VC/Huff, AstP/Lunge stated the minimum
setback is 20 feet. The resolution proposes five-foot
variations of the setbacks so that no two lots have the
same setback.
May 22, 1995
Page 11 Planning Commission
Chair/Flamenbaum stated he feels the density is too dense
even though the proposed General Plan indicates that this
is an acceptable density. However, he also recognizes
this is a transition area. In principle, the applicant's
proposed cul-de-sac design is acceptable. However, he
feels the radius should be increased to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer to permit access by emergency
vehicles. He indicated he supports the City Engineer's
proposal that the gate structure should be similar to the
current entrance gates to "The Country Estates". The
building envelope should be added to the CC&R's. He
indicated he is troubled by the duplications in the
resolutions. He proposed that staff be directed to
prepare resolutions of approval, that the resolutions
relate to each other, and duplicate Conditions be
eliminated. In addition, both resolutions must be
approved simultaneously. He indicated he would like to
see one master resolution and one underlying resolution.
In his opinion, the geotechnical issues are adequately
addressed in the resolutions' requirement for the City to
receive final geotechnical reports to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer. He stated he has a philosophical
problem with conditional requirements that the applicant
join "The Country Estates". He further stated he has no
disagreement with requiring CC&R's to be similar to those
of "The Country Estates".
C/Meyer stated he has no problem with duplicating
resolutions since one speaks to a Conditional Use Permit
and the other speaks to approval of a Tentative Tract
Map. He suggested the Conditions be sequentially
numbered. These are recommendations to the City Council.
As an option, the Council could choose to deny the
subdivision and approve the Conditional Use Permit.
Therefore, it may be more prudent to have the Conditions
spelled out individually. He indicated he agrees with
Chair/Flamenbaum that the applicant should not be
required to join "The Country Estates". However, the
applicant has stated their intention to freely join "The
Country Estates" which he feels will be in their best
interest.
A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by C/Schad to
adopt the resolution recommending approval of Tentative
Parcel Map No. 23382 as amended. The motion was approved
5-0 with the following roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Meyer, Schad, Fong,
V C/ H u f f,
Chair/Flamenbaum
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
May 22, 1995
Page 12 Planning Commission
A motion was made by C/Meyer and seconded by C/Schad to
adopt the Resolution recommending approval of the
Hillside Management and Significant Ecological Area
Conditional Use Permit No. 92-1, Oak Tree Permit No. 95-
2, and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 9-2, as
amended. The motion was approved 5-0 with the following
roll call:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Meyer, Schad, Fong,
V C/ H u f f,
Chair/Flamenbaum
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
NEW BUSINESS - None
OLD BUSINESS - None
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS - None
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS:
C/Schad stated, for the record, that with respect to the May
8, 1995 Planning Commission meeting reference to the Tonner
Canyon wilderness Conservancy, his response to VC/Huff should
have been that the Conservancy has a set of bylaws, two
directors and three officers.
VC/Huff recommended that the Commission take local and
regional field trips to review sites under development and
sites being considered for future development in an effort to
recommend improved development. In particular, he indicated
he would like to visit the proposed high school site.
Chair/Flamenbaum suggested the visit could be coordinated with
staff's recommendations for access to the site.
Chair/Flamenbaum cautioned the Commission members that they
should not speculate with respect to the cause of the
landslide affecting the Morning Sun Avenue residents. He
further stated that if the Commissioners are approached by the
press they should respond as private citizens and not speak
for the City and the Planning Commission. He reminded the
Commissioners that any speculation or comment could bring the
City into litigation.
Responding to Chair/Flamenbaum, CE/Myers presented the
Commission with a schedule of events and occurrences from the
onset of the landslide May 19, 1995. He indicated the
property owners have had geotechnical engineers on site since
early Friday afternoon. As a preventative measure to further
damage, earth movement began on Sunday, May 21. Although the
property is privately owned, the City continues to monitor the
May 22, 1995 Page 13 Planning Commission
progress on an ongoing basis. The City of Diamond Bar and Los
Angeles County have declared a local state of emergency
enabling funding to flow to private property owners to assist
in the defraying of costs for remedying the situation. He
stated further updates will be forwarded to Commissioners as
requested.
ANNOUNCEMENTS - None
ADJOURNMENT:
Chairman Flamenbaum declared the meeting adjourned at 10:05
p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
/s/ Robert Searcy
Robert Searcy
Associate Planner
Attest:
/s/ Bruce Flamebaum
Bruce Flamenbaum
Chairman
City of Diamond Bar
I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Mayor Papon and Mayor Pro Tom Warner
FROM: Linda G. Magnuson Accounting Manager
SUBJECT: Voucher Register, Juno 20, 1995
DATE: June 15, 1995
Attached is the Voucher Register dated June 20, 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 June 20, 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 038 Fund
139
LLAD 139 Fund
141
LLAD #41 Fund
250
CIP Fund
510
Self Insurance Fund
TOTAL ALL FUNDS
APPROVED BY:
Linda G. Magnti�on
Accounting Manager
f=-Terrenc L. Bel nger
City Manager
AMOUNT
$131,950.20
3,370.80
566.16
1,319.57
869.88
2,370.00
26.61
270.00
64,385.71
206.387.00
$411,515.93
Phyl is E. Pape
Mayor
�Ga H,
erner
Mayor Pro Tem
_
-JN "!E: :3.'.':"
;L,c THF'_':
............
0, (j;,=`
VENDOR NAME
VENDOR 11,
PFE=SID '< x
ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BATCH PO.LINE/NO.
ENTF'Y/DUE
INVOICE
DESCRIFTION
AMOUNT DATE CHE_,
WEALTH Medical Group
AMHEALTH
*001-4041)-Z?45
2 _0620+; C'1
06/'.4 v6. 2G
Pre-ErtplyPyysical-Chave:
13+.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
134.00
AT & T
AT&T
*001-4090-2125
14 50620E
06/15 06/20
Long Distance Phne Svcs
16.64 06/20;95 0000C2`?')1
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----t
16.64
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
0.00
All City Management
all City
*001-4411-5531
6 50620A 01/2080A
06/14 06/20
000314
CrssngGrdSrvcs-5/14-5/27
2,350.85
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
2,850.85
AmeriComp
AmeriComp
*001-4090-1200
10 50620A 01/299;
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------5 33.30
r
C y o
f D a xi
-, d a r
RUN TIME
04,,x15/9`,
C U v
E F E
'JI_ E F
FA.--
CiJE THRU
...
a5
VENDOR NAME
VENDOR ID.
# Fn'E"SIL
ACCOUNT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/NO.
ENTRY/DUE
INVOICE
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT DATE CHECK
Berry, David
BerryD
*0",1- 101:7
42 50620E
06;14 06/210
SEATAC Mtg 4/3
100.:0
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
100.00
Burgess, Lynda
BurgessLyn
*001-4040--2325
2 50620B
06/14 06/10
Reimb-CC1kAsscMtg-3/30
25.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------7
25.00
CEWAER
CEWAER
*'601-4010-2315
1 50620B
06/14 06/20
Member Dues-Papen/Ansar,
70.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
70.00
California Contract
CCCA
*001-4090-2315
1 50620B
06/14 06/20
FY 95-96 Menber Dues
2,000.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------1
2,000.00
Carol Dennis
CarolDenni
*001-42174000
6 506208 02/2540
06/14 06/24
CC/G9559
MntSecrtry-CowDvlpt5/9
160.00
*001-4210-4220
19 50620E 01/285.6
06/14 06/20
CC/G9559
MntSec-Gen Plan 519
120.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------!
280.00
Charles Abbott
& Asc Inc CharlesAbb
§001-4551-5223
22 50620E 01/2686
06/14 06/20
033
Feb-P1nChkSvcs-TR31977
112.56
<-001-4551-5223
24 50620B 01/2660
06/14 06/20
033
Feb-P1nChk5vcs-1805Tintah
259.50
40-I,1-4551-5227
6 50620E 02/2660
06/14 06/20
033
Feb-InspectSvcs-1805Tinth
184.84
*001-2300-1010
43 506208
06/14 06/20
33
Feb Svcs -FPL 92-001
450.00
*)1-2X0-10110
44 50620E
06/14 06/20
33
Feb Svcs -FPL 94-025
620.00
;001-2300-1010
45 50620B
06/14 06/20
33
Feb Svcs -FPL 94-034
90.00
>001-4210-422:0
21 506208 01/2909
06/14 06/20
33
GerPlan-CircElement-Feb
4,012.50
:001-4510-5500
8 506200 01/2486
06/14 06/20
33
Feb -Contract Engr Svcs
13,265.00
*0071-4551-5223
26 506211E 02/2508
06/14 06/20
fiv
Feb-P1nChkSvcs-Tintah
18.60
+001-4551-5227
8 506201 JUIM
06/14 06/20
33
Feb-InspectSvcs-Tintah
27.90
*071-4551-5227
10 506201 01/2402
06114 06/20
33
Feb-InspSvcs-Claywood
168.75
*250-4310-6415
06595 15 506206 01/2846
06/14 06/20
33
AttendBMtg-PanteraPrk-Feb
212.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
19,421.63
Cintas
Cintas
*301-4310-2130
12 50620B 01/2774A
06/14 06/20
640355751
Uniform Rent -Week of 5/29
16.6.5
*001-4310-2130
10 5062% 01/2774A
06/14 06/20
640357576
Uniform Rent -Meek of 6/5
16.65
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------5 33.30
„J`j TIME: 1' -- i5
'`
cru r
E R r
..
•__
:UE
.............
.•,'211};';`
VENDOR NAME
VENDOR In
ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BATCH PO,LINEINO.
ENTRE,-JUE
71,A)r =E
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
DATE CHELK
Classe Party Rentals
C;asseP3rt
#001-40-7--2130
2' 5062:,~ 02,'2',
06,,'14 Ot•; 2
22`.:
Bore Marrow Booth - Anniv
459.04
06/20/'95 00000258-'
{vii -4_:50-21130
2 50620A 01/2887
06/14 fib/20
22,510
Tbles/Chairs/Canapy-Annv
408.87
06/20/95 OUOlKr15887
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----)
:367.?l
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
0.00
Community Disposal ,o.
CwDisposl
#001-4510-5501
2 50620B 01/2061
06/14 06/20
May Street Sweep Svcs
10,859.64
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
10,859.54
Convention Recorder
Cor.Aecord
¢001-4210-2340
2 9062i:E 01;3045
00/1` 06/2::
PlnrInstAudioTapes
58.04
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
58.04
:ottan/Seland Assoc
CzitSelysso
+001-4210-4220
15 50620E 01/275
06/14 06/20
3829
Gen Plan-Prof5vcs-Apr/May
2,499.44
:til -4210-4220
17 50K.3B G1/22 7
06/14 06/20
"_8219
Prof Svcs-GenPlan-Apr/May
4,553.10
#001-4210-4220
13 506208 01/2267
06/14 06/20
.3856
May Prof Svcs -Gen Plan
515.24
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------}
7,567.18
D. B. Improvement Assoc. OBIA
#115-4515-2115
4 50620B 01/2993
06/14 06/20
Used Motor Oil Ad -5/15
210.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
210.00
J).S lissociates
DYS
001-4553-5L:21
8 50620B 01/2448
06/14 06/20
17859
April Trfc Engr Svcs
1,978.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
1,978.00
Day 1. Night Copy Center Day&Night
#001-4350-2110
2 50620A 01/2930
06/14 06/20
0875,=
AnnvCelebFlyers
119.08
06/20/95 000002`882
*250-4310-6415 07595
13 50620A 02/2930
06/14 06/20
08758
CIP Park Signage Specs
82.27
06/20/95 0000025882
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----)
201.35
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
0.00
IeY511 Corporation
DEY511
*115-4515-12,00
2 50620B 01/2932
06/14 06/20
65028
CLOR-D-TectTestKitsOilPgm
145.07
TOTAL WE VENDOR --------)
145.07
t _ � . _. T, - � ii F . 413
t
J. -
DUE THh',.............06,':('. 5
:ENLOR NAME ,
VENDOR IU.
Supplies -Finance
177.45
1�
ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/N0.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENTRY/DUE INVCICc
DESCRIFTION
AMOUNT DATE CHE_.
Diamond Bar Petty
Cash PeI-tyCaEll"
54.64
06/14 06/20
014574861
*(<)1-4010-213_5
10 50620E
06,,15 :)6,:_-c,
Meeting Exp -_Council
5.0U
*001-4030-21 5
6 50620E
06/15 06i20
Telephone Chrges-CMgr
15.14
*0f11-4030-2'32`
6 50620E
061/1',06/20
Meeting Exp-CCMgr
4.`4
*001-40';+0-1200
15 50620E
06/15 06/20
Supplies-GenGovt
27.G9
*001-4090-2.15
13 50627,E
06/15 06/20
Dues/Subscrptn-GenSovt
14.00
*001-4 M-2325
3 50620E
06/15 06/20
Meeting Exp -Non Dept
16.68
*001-4210-1201:,
5 50620E
06/15 06y20
Supplies-CommDvlpmt
1.8'>
*001-4210-2310
5 50620E
06/15 06/20
Fuel-ComUvlpmt
3.00
*001-4d40-1200
3 50620E
06/15 06/20
Supplies-EmerPrep
10.45
Siversiried Paratransit DiversPara
*112-4553-5528 7 50620B 01/1918
Eastman Inc. Eastman
*001-4050-1200 3 50620B 1112088A
*001-4090-1200 11 50620B 12/2088A
*001-4510-1200 4 506108 10/2088A
*001-4350-1200 14 50620B 09/2(738A
Engineering -Environmental - EngEnvGeol
*001-2300-1012 7 50620B
F:restcne Stores Firestone
*001-4310-200 2 506200 01/2979
GFB-Friedrich and Assoc GF8 -
+1:3: 45,1-4000 2 50620C 01/2963
+141-4541-4000 2 50620C 02/2963
GTE California GTE
*0,.,1-4331-2125 5 50620C
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 98.64
06/14 06/20 DxalACab-Prgrm-5/1-5/15 2,308.30
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 2,308.30
06/14 06,20
314574520
Supplies -Finance
177.45
06/14 06/20
014574660
Supplies -Gen Govt
76.57
06/14 06/10
014574779
Supplies -Pub Wks
54.64
06/14 06/20
014574861
Supplies -Cow Svcs
184.13
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 492.79
06/14 06/20 G5(;6061A172 Prof Svcs-EN94-63
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
06/14 06/20 6-069038 O:1Change-CtyTrucks
TOTAL 14JE VENDOR --------
06/14 06/20 450`-02
06/14 06/20 9505-02
06/14 Oo/210
Prof Svcs -Dist 38-Mar/Apr
Prof Svcs-D:st#41-Mar/Apr
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
06/14
-------
Phone Svcs-SycCynPrk
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
260.00
260. ()0
15.06
1`.06
1 310.{;0
270.00
2,`40.00
138.135
138.85
RUN TIME: 1':19
rs/15/'a5
VL!CHEh'
FEG13T=-.
"413E `-
VENDOR NAME
VENDOR ID.
# PREPAID
ACCCuNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.L.NE,`ND.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENTRY; -E
.!��r-._t
JL: .- .ON
AmOdNT b"A7 t+".
GTE California
GTE
*001-4319-2125
1 50620C
06/14 06;20
Phone Svcs-PetersonPrk
40.74
TOTAL CJE 'VENDOR --------)
40.74
GTE California
GTE
*001-4040-2125
2 50620C
06;14 06/20
Moddm Svcs-May22-June22
26.'x1
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
26.91
GTE California
GTE
*001-4(40-2125
9 50620C
06/14 06/20
Phone Svcs -Gen Govt
1,795.29
TOTAL IU -t VENDOR --------)
1,795.29
GTE California
GTE
*001-4316-2125
1 50620C
06/14 06/20
Phone Svcs -Maple Hill
40.74
TOTAL DOE VENDOR --------)
40.74
GTE California
GTE
*001-4322-2125
1 50620C
06/14 06/20
Phone Svcs-RonReagan
37.13
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
37.13
Geiger Bros Specialty
Ad. GeigerBros
*115-4515-2352
2 50620C 01/2824
06/14 06/20
a130c.6
Oil Recycling Magnets
211.09
TOTAL DLE VENDOR --------)
211.09
,Geiger, Donna
GeigerD
*001-4040-4000
12 5062OC-01/2264
06/14 06/20
09a-95024
MntSec-CCIk 5/16
169.00
*001-4040-4000
14 50620E 01/2264
Ob/25 06120
09a95027
Mnts-CCIk-5%30-BudgtWkshp
188.00
*001-4350-4300
4 506200 02/2264
06/14 06/20
09695026
MntSec-Comm Svcs -5/25
30.00
*031-4040-40W
10 50620C 01/2264
06/14 06,20
Ors -95025
MntSec-CCIk 5%17
200.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
637.00
Graffiti Control
Systems GrafitiCon
*001-4558-5520
6 50620C 01/2095
06/14 06/20
D805',5
Graffiti Removal -May
2,460.00
TOTAL Dl1E VENDOR --------)
2,460.00
Hertz/Penske Truck Rental HertzPensk
*125-4215-2355
8 506200 0112941
06/14 761120
CO3';'-.'13V',4
TruckRent-SrFoodDrive
74.3a
TOTAL DUE 'VENDOR --------)
74.38
R"ANTIME: 119()6'S;9
0UHER
R
1E
JENDOR NAME
VEKOR ID.
ACCOUNT PROt.Tk-NO BATCH PO.LINEiNO.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ev7 (;DLE
:N'vu:CE
I_SLrti;7:uN
AMOUNT
DH - ON -
Dewitt, Charles
HewittC
*001-112306-1010
46 506200
0,,,/14 06/20
SEATAC Mtg 41134PL92-001
100.00
'3TAL DUE VENDOR--------)
100. CIO
HighPoint Graphics
H:ghPoint
*001-4095-2110
4 506200 02/2-231E
06114 0612.1
47491
PreFressSvcs-SprNwsltr
1,150'.70
*Ool-4095-2110
5 50620C O'3/2231B
06/14 06/20
47543
PrePressSvcs-Cablelnsert
27.06
TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------)
1,177.76
Home Depot
HomeDepot
*111j9-453`-2`10
7 5062Cr
06,'14 06/20
:11.213"
Ma:nt Suppl-Dist #34
24.15
*139-4531'-"",10
8 50620C
06/14 06/20
9222299
Walk Gate-Dist #39
21.62
*13'-4539-2210
9 50620C
06/14 06/20
CrMem3112138
Credit Memo
19.16-
TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------)
26.61
.
Inland Valley Dly Bulletn DailyBulle
*001-2-00-1010
48 50620C
06/14 06/20
149704
Pub Hrg-FPL 92-001
91.67
*001-x-40-1010
47 50620C
06/14 06/20
150649
Pub Hrg-FPL 95-27
82.50
*001-4210-2115
2 50620C 01/2008
06/14 06/20
150665
Pub Hrg-AppealADR95-7
84.34
TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------i
258.51
Inland Valley Dly Bulletn IVDB
*001-404tJ-2115
4 506:OC 01/2i31
061114 06/20
14861
PubHrg-FY 95-96 Budget
26.58
TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------)
26,58
H Signs
JHSigns
*001-4350-1200
13 50620A 01/2913
06/14 06/20
20160
Banners-AnnvCelebration
420.00
06/20/95 00(.W2588'1
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----)
420.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------)
0.00
rens Hardware
Kens
*001-4090-1200
13 50620C 01/2965
06/14 06/20
Painting Suppi-Ping
147.88
TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------)
147..E
Kleinfelder
Kleinfeldr
*001-2300-1012
8 50620C
06/14 06/20
58415'=
OeoTechRvw-EN95-70
757,44
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
757.50
RUN T1"E' .=°1`'' V 0 U C H G I 7 R -"Wt
DuE TSP'- ..............)c,:2" _
ENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. F'REFAID * 4
ACCOUNT PRDU.TX-Nn BATCH PO.LINE;'NO. EN -R; "DUE INV---= CE= Ri='iGti AKUNT DATE CHECr
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
L.A. Cty-Fire Dept LACFire
4K)OI -4421-5402 1 50620C 06/14 06/:0 FY95-96FireProtectionSvcs 7,359.00
70TAL DUE VENDOR --------)
L.A.County Public Works LACPubWk
*001-4510-5`02
14 50620D
01/1985
06/14 06/20
95000007815
RoadMaint-March
4,647.73
*001-4510-5505
2 50620D
01/1990
06/14 06/20
95000007816
Curb/Gutterkepair-March
5,772.36
*001-4510-5506
8 506200
01/2490
06/14 06/20
95000007812
Sign/StripSvcs-Dec94
398.56
*001-4510-5`�
2 50620D
01/2308
06/14 06/20
95000007821
Ind Waste Svcs -March
1,076.85
*+X71-4510-5506
6 506200
01/'2236
06/14 06120
9500007811
Signing/Mrking-Grand-Mar
127.21
L.A.County Public Works LACPubWk.
*001-4510-5502 16 50620E 01/1985
*001-4510-5506 10 50620E 01/22"36
*001-4510-5506 12 50620E 01/1991
*001-4510-5505 4 50620E 01/1990
*001-4510-5512 2 50620E 01/1992
*001-4510-5512 4 50620E 01/2444
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 12,022.71
06/15 06/20
95000005986
RoadMaint-Dec 94
4,645.55
06/15 06x'20
95000006896
Signing/Mrking-Grand-Feb
185.40
06/15 06/20
95000006895
Signing/Striping-Feb95
37.08
06/15 06/20
9500k706900
CurbRepair-Feb 95
2,910.89
06/15 06/20
95000006902
Feb-StormDrainInsp
1,498.40
061115 06/20
95000006903
Feb-RoadMaint
68.68
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 9,346.00
LA Cellular Telephone
LACellular
*001-4440-2125
5 50620C -
06/14 06/20
20083945
Cell Svcs 4/16-5/16-EmPrp
17.49
*001-4440-2125
4 50620C
06/14 06/20
20083986
Cell Svcs 4/16-5/16-EmPrp
23.10
*001-4440-2125
.2 50620C
06/14 06/20
20084075
Cell -Svcs 4716-5/16-EmPrp
32.84
*001-4440-2125
3 506200
06/14 06/20
20084620
Cell Svcs 4/16-5/16-EmPrp
45.17
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
118.60
LA Cellular Telephone
LACellular
*001-4030-2125
4 506200
06/14 06/20
CellSvcs5/24-6/23CMgr
42.99
1-40.30-.2125
5 506200
06/14 06/20
CellSvcs5/24-6/23CMgr
80.70
+001-4090-2125
12 506200
06/14 06/20
CellSvcs5/24-6/23GenGvt
53.80
*:
CLUE "y^,L:_.........,.:f,/C
F'i R NAME t'ENZOR H.
ACCOUNT ROJJX-NO BATCH PO.LINE,'NO. ENTRY;DUE :NYCICE DESCRIFTION AMOUNT DATE C4c'Ck.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Landscape West LanoscapeW
League of Ca. Cities League
*001-4095-2355 3 50620A 01/3044
League of Ca. Cities League
*001-4090-2315 2 506200
League of Ca. Cities League
*001-4210-2320 2 50620E 01/3046
Legacy Travel 'x Tours LegacyTrav
*001-4250-5310 6 50620C 01/2740
*1112-43360-5510 4 5i 6:.00 Ci2/274A
Leignton and Associates Leightcr,
*001-2300-1012 9 50620C
4C -O1-2300-1012 10 506200
-.cal Government LocGOVCom
*0011-4030-2315 1 50620D
Long Beach Community LngBchBand
*001-4.35G-5305 2 50620E /51/2981
-os Angeles CountyLACIntlo<
*001-40`y0-2130 8 50620C 01/2751
06,14 Ok '
15;'47
May-Prkwy/WeedAbateSvcs
4,56 .r.4
TOTAL JOE VENDOR --------)
4,561.84
061114 06/CO
ILSG Corp Tickets
666.00 06/20/'5 00000258;1
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----)
666.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
0.00
06/14 06/20
FY 95-96Dues-LAGDivsion
925.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
925.00
06/15 06/20
Planning Publications
127.00
TOTAL U VENDOR --------}
127.00
06/14 06/20
A004
MorroBay/HrstCstle5/27-28
3,225.00
06,114 06/20
A004
Trans-MorroBay/HrstCstl
625.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
3,850.00
06/14 06/20
85595
SOilsRvw-EN93-009
2,795.00
06/14 06/20
85595
SoilsRvw-E63-009
80.00
TOTAL. DUE VENDOR --------)
2,875.00
06/14 06/20
May 95 -June 95 MemberDues
50.00
TOTAL DUE 'VENDOR --------}
50.00
06/15 06/15
Band-6/28ConcInPrk
400.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
400.00
06,114 06/20
947
Pager Svcs -April
139.05
ICTAL Ld1E VENDOR --------}
139.05
# Y ,.t y o P jai= r r #4fi
DUE THF'- ................*
• ENDOR NAME VENDOR ID. '� * PRE=:H,1D 4
ACCOUNIT PROJ.TY-NO BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ENTR"/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHEJ.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Macadee Electrical Macadee
#250-4510-6412 07205 2 506.20D 01/2737
*250-4510-012 07195 4 50620D 02/2737
*250-4510-6412 0.7.395 6 50620D 03/2737
Magnuson, Linda Magnuson
•*001-4050-2330 2 50620A
Karn Street Tours MainStreet
*001-4350-5310 2 50620A 01/3027
Main Street Tours MainStreet
*001-4350-5310 4 50620A 01/3028
Mobil
*001-4310-2200
*(0174090-2'310
*001-4090-2310
*001-4310-2310
*001-4090-2310
*0;)1-4090-2310
*001-4310-2310
4001-4310-2310
*07:1-4090-2310
Mobil
4 50620D 0112976
18 50620D 01/3029
14 50620D 01/3029
10 50624D 02/3029
12 50620D 01/3029
20 50620D 01/3029
12 506200 02/3029
14 50620D 02/3029
16 50620D 0/3029
Nextel Communications Neztel
1001-4090-2130 10 50620D 01/21688
Pomona Judicial District PomJudDist
*001-322:3 1 50620D
3.8
06 14 061-20 1';'C Trr`c'3ig-GSjG1dPrd-Install -1.1,645.
06114 06/20 1390 TrfSig-GSp/Prosp-Install 20,645.38
06/14 06j20 1390 TrfSig-GldSp,'Carpio-Instl 20,645.=„3
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------> 61,936.14
06/14 06/20
06/14 06/20
06/14 06/20
06/14 06/20 6902
06/14 06/20 K6038561
06/14 06/20 K6740182
06/14 06120 K6740193
06/14 06/20 K6740215
06/14 06120 K7438686
06/14 06/20 K74.39283
06/14 06/20 K7439456
06/14 06/20 K7439563
76/14 06/20
06/14 06/20
LAIF Conf Reimb-6/2/95
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----i
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
Tckts-StatelineExcr-6/24
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
Tckts-PagentofMstrs-7/20
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----i
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------i
Battery-Prk&RecTruck
Fuel-GenGovt
Fuel-GenGoyt
Fuel-F'rk&Maint
Fuel-GenGovt
=uel-GenGovt
Fuel-Prk&Maint
Fuel-Prk&Maint
Fuel-GenGovt
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
2 Way Radio Svcs -May
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
April Prkng Fines
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
33.00 06/20/Q5 000002557'
33.00
0.00
180.00 06/20/95 00000258134
130.00
0.00
1,000.00 06/20/'75 0000025885
1,000.00
0.00
88.80
9'
26
11.03
2).00
9.03
16.40
19.09
,,.,
1.88
21.9•`-•
228.44
169.57
169.57
395.00
395.00
RUIN Tim_._vU - h _ - : :
OUT, THP .............. 06,;2
VENDOR NAME VENDOR ID.
ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINE/NO. ENTiiY/DUE :NVG-ICE DESCRIFTION AMOUNT DATE CHE-_
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pomona Valley Humane Soc. PVHS
1001-4431-5403 2 5062'31) 011194'
Pomona Vly Transportation FomonaVly
*112-4360-5310 2 50620A 01, 29,29
Postage By Phone PostByPhon
*001-4090-2120 4 50620A
Power Circuits PowerCirc
*001-4510-6230 2 50620D 01/2967
*118-4098-6230 2 50620D 02/2967
Premiere Leasing Co. PremiereLe
*001-4350-2140 4 50620D 01/1982
Professional Disp-lays ProDisplay
*001-4095-4260 4 50620A 01/3034
Pub lit Empl Retirement
PERS
W)1-12'30
1 50620A
*001-2110-1008
7 50620A
*001-2110-1008
8 50622
*001-2110-1008
9 506294.
*001-2110-1008
10 50620A
*001-2110-1008
11 50620A
*001-2110-1008
12 50620A
06,r14 06;rD:
06/14 06/20 548`
06/15 06/':0
06/14 06-11,20 39'-:27
06/14 06/20 3933
06'14 06/20 3317
06/14 06/20
06/14 06/20
06/14 06120
06/14 06/20
06/14 06/20
06/14 06/20
06/14 06/20
06/14 06/20
Anima11CtriSvc-June95
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
ShuttlSvcs-AnnvCeleb4/30
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
Postage Meter Replenishmt
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
4E6 DX Computer-Engr
486 DX Computer-AirOlty
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
Rent-SycCynBldg-6/16-7/16
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
Econ Dvlp4 Promo Display
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------
Surplus Asset Account
PP11 Emplye Retire Contrb
PP11 Emplyr Retire Contrb
4prl Contrib-Montgmry
Apr RetireRedepost-Mtgsry
May Retire Contrb-Mntgmry
MayRetireRedepstMntgmry
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
R & D Blueprint
R&DBlue
*250-4510-6412 07195
8
50620D
01/2604
06/14 06/20
19381
Blprts-01Sp/Prado
*250-4510-6412 07295
10
50620D
"02/2604
06/14 06/24
1931,
Blprts-Prspctrs
*250-4510-6412 07395
12
50620D
03/2604
06/14 06/20
19381
BluprtTrfcSig-Carpio
*001-4510-2110
4
50620"u
06/14 06/110
19386
PubWorkPrtgSvcs
*001-4510-2110
3
50620D
01/2987
06/14 06/20
4821,5
Prtg-MorngSunProj
4,314.09
4,514.09
437.50 06/20/95 00000253.=_-
437.50
0.00
1,500.00
1,500.00
1,319.57
1,319.57
2,639.14
389.70
389.70
4,199.93 06/20/95 0000025886
4,199,93
0,00
386.68- 06/20/95 0000025898
3,334.44 06/20/95 0000025898
3,003.40 06/20/95 0000025898
110.01 06/20/95 0000025898
97.57 06/20/95 0000025898
205.37 06/20/95 000}025898
97.57 06/20/95 4(X)0025598
6,461.6-1
0.00
14.43
14.43
14.44
17.18
245.47
_
J
pt.N7I"tE i_' :jo,:5,"�`_
DLCHEfi
F;EG
DUE-1z-iJ
................
VENDOR NAME
VENDOR ID.
4 4 PR�F'AID
ACIMINT 'R3J.TY-NC BATCH PO.LINE/NO.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENTRT,',UE
-.NVU:_E
-'E--�RiF7-13#d
AMG:_NT :ATE _
R & D Blueprint
F*0Blue
33NTINUED)
TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------}
305.95
RJM Design
RIADesign
+001-4331-6250
2 50620D 04/28:31
06/14 06/'=0
11304
SycCynPkFencing
2$s.Ctt!
*250-4310-64:5 081,:-1917
`0620D �I U31
06/14 06/20
11344
HeritagePHBBCourt
1,440.
*:50-4310-6415 08295
19 506200 02/2831
06/14 06/20
11304
SycCynPilings/Fencing
480.00
*250-4317-6415 00,495
21 50'K OD 03/2831
06/14 06/20
11304
StarshinePic7bl/BBQ
192.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------}
2,400.00
Rayr-raft, Barbara
15'm
*001-3478
52 50620D
06/14 06/20
14304
Recreation Refund
39.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------Y
3'x.00
Richards Watson k Gershon Richardsita
*001-4020-4020
4 50620E 01/2735
06/15 06/15
April Legal Svcs
10,144.338
TOTAL DUE 'VENDOR--------}
10,140.38
Ritz Camera
Ritz Lamer -
*001-4090-1200
14 506200 09/2225C
06/14 06/20
1102201
PhatoCpy-Mrg5unLandslde
66.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR-------}
66.00
Roberts, Brian
R6bertsE
*001-4090-4000
4 50620D 01;3035
06/14 06/20
Audio/VisSvcs5/17,22
330.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------)
330.00
S.C.M.A.F.
SCMAF
*001-4350-1200
16 50620D 01/3016
06/14 06/20
Mbmrship-MensBsktbl
77.00
TOTAL D1,'E VENDOR--------}
77.00
San Gabriel Vly Tribune SWribune
*O,I-2300-1010
49 50620D
06/14 06/20
2787'
Pub Hrg PPL 92-001
119.68
TOTAL DUE VENDOR--------)
119.68
3heri*F s Relief Assoc SheriffEmp
*(x)1-4045-1200
5 50620D
06/14 06/20
NameBadges,Buzzne/Quezada
21,01
TOTAL WE VENDOR--------}
21.01
JN 3E
DUE THFL:............0
VENDOR NAMEVENDaJR ID. PRE .i5
ACCOUNT F`RGJ.TX-NO BATCH PO.LINEiNO. ENTRY/DUE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT PATE CHECK
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sincerely Inspired SinInspire
*125-4215-4000 4 50621,E 01/2765
Smart & Final Smart&Finl
#001-4313-2210 8 50620E 01/2430
*001-4-13-2210 6 50620E 01J2430
So. Ca. Joint Powers Ins. SCJPIA
*510-4810-7200 1 50624D
*510-4810-7210 1 506200D
So. Ca. Joint Powers Ins. SCJPIA
*510-4810-7210 2 506200
Soroptimist Intl DB/Wain Soroptimis
*001-4010-2325 ? 50620A
Sport Time SportTime
*001-4328-2210 4 50620D 01/2834
TRW-Redi Property Data REDI
*001-4210-2130 4 50620E 01/2954
United States Postal Sery Postmaster
+001-4090-2120 3 50620A
06;15 061120 `_
CDBGZcmpliance Review -May
795.50
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
795.50
06/15 06/20 2141844
HrtgePrkSupplies
10.77
06/15 06/20 2143998
HrtgePrkSupplies
28.56
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
39.33
06/14 06/20
GenAutaLiabins-95\96
159,470.00
06114 06/20
ExcessPooiDeposit
10,379.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR -------->
169,849.00
06/14 06/20
RetroDepositAdjustment
36,538.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------}
36,538.00
06/14 06/20
InstalltnBrnch-Papn 6/11
20.00
06/20/95 0006025883
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----)
20.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
0.00
06/14 06/20 790317.01
SwingSeat-SummtRdge,
100.46
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
100.46
06/15 06/20
MicroficheEquipRent
487.22
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
487.22
06/14 06/20
Postage-CATVNeedsAssesmnt
1,000.00
06/20/95 0000025878
TOTAL PREPAID AMOUNT ----)
1,000.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
0.00
West Coast Arborist Inc. WCArbor
*001-4553-,5509 6 50620E 01/1929B 06,115 06/20 ?516 Tree Trim Svcs -5/4 100.00
*001-4.558-5509 s 506201E 01/19'29B 06/15 06/20 9581 Tree Trim Svcs -5/22 100.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------) 200.00
# # t t D f '.. a 1 0^ L a, 4 4 h
;'-N IME• 1- !_'.`." 0_-7L RLu( E• f'Nu= iJ
I 1JJETNRU.............:iE., 2_.c
VENL•JR NAME VENDOR iD. PREPA(i
ACCOUNT PROJ.TX-NO HATCH PO.LINE,NO. ENTRYiDIE INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
West Publishing Co. WestPub
y� ,„
X001-4041:-2o�fj 50o.'0E 0. _754
Wright, Paul
*001-4090-4000
Yosemite Waters
+001-4310-2130
*001-4310-1200
WrigntP
6 50620E 01/3037
06/15 06/2'G
06/15 06/20
YosemWater
14 50620E 01/2021A 06/15 06120 433114
5 50620E 02/2021A 06/15 06/20 445837
CA Code 33A -C Publication
64.95
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
69.95
Audio/Vis Svcs5/19-6/6
270.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
270.00
EguipRent-Water-June
12.00
Water-Syc Cyn Prk
6.95
TOTAL DUE VENDOR --------)
18.95
TOTAL PREPAID -----------)
15,504.01
TOTAL DUE ---------------)
396,011.92
TOTAL REPORT ------------)
411,515.93
r'UN TAME. :1-119 c•; i`_, _ C H E R F. = 5 I S , E F, =AGE
DUE THRU............... )6/26/'-`
G"- OS; FUTURE T,RANIA T��`•=
DISBURSE G/L G,"e �!I�L j_' GUE HAS POSTED
FUND TOTAL DIRECT PAi REVERIE EXPENSE REVENUE EXPENSE REVENUE EXPENSE
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C10I General Fundy 131,'950.2-0 2
1,2trcd.02
11318LLAT' #38 Fund "'Ll/0.00
257 C.I.P. Fund 64,385.71
115 Int Waste Mgmt F 566.16
112 Prop A -Transit F 3,_i0.84
141 LLAD #41 Fund 2; 01.00
125 CDBG Fund 869.88
139 LLAD #39 Fund 26.61
118 Air Quality Imp 1,319.57
510 Self Insurance F 206,387.00
TOTAL------------ ------------ ------------ ----
ALL FUNDS 411,515.93 12,208.0=
434.00 X19,308.17
64,385.71
5566. 16
,370.80
270.00
r
8F.,9 . dd
L6. f, 1
1,319.57
206
-- ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------
434.00 398,873.1)
CARL WARREN & CO.
Insurance Ad)usters
Claims ;Management and Administration
750 The (:nv Drive
Swtc 400
(hangc, CA 92668
Mail PO Bux 25180
Santa Ana, CA 92799-5 180
1 714) 740-7999
80U)572-6900
FAX (714)740-7992
6
I'lLi1�:: • ,
CITY ' i
95 JUN - I Pry 1:57
May 30, 1995
TO: City of Diamond Bar
ATTENTION: Lynda Bwgm CMC/AAE, City Clerk
RE: Claim Shaw v. Diamond Bar
C Iaiew& C. Shaw
D/Eva t 3!3/'95
Redd YKlffice : SM95
Our File S 82481 ABK
We have reviewed the above captiamed daim and raquest that you take the act widwated
below:
CLAIM RI' TACTWN: Seed a rtasdard rues letter to the rl- apt.
Please provide us with a any of the notice Sart, as regwsW above. If you have any quos
please contact the undersigned.
Very
cc: SCJPIA vAW-
4
2
TO PERSON OR PROPERTY
IVSTRUCTIO`'S
1. Claims for death, Injury to person or tc personal lrcpeity ;must be filed not
later than 6 nos. after the occurrence. 'Gov Code Sec. 311.:,)
2. Claims for damages to real property must be filed not lata than 1 yeah after the
occurrence. (Gov. Code Sec. 911.2)
3. Read entire claim before filing.
4. See page 2 for diagram upon which to locate place if a::ident.
5. This claim form must be signed on page 2 at bot,.orr. .
6. Attach separate sheets, if necessary, to dive full details. SIGv EACH SHEET.
7. Claim must be filed with City Clerk. (Gov. Code Sec. 915a)
To: The City of Diamond Bar
Name of Claimant
Home Address of Claimant C.ty and :itate
-77Z /0AlA;iS �L_!4/2f- J���V� 1.�h4LA��e T— , Cti-
Business Address of Claimant t- and Stats
(-
Give address to which you desire notices or communications to be sent regarding this claim:
CLAIM No.._y.. _
;5 MAY -2 P;' 00
Age of Claimant (if natural person)
49
Rome Telephone Number
9/8-q(.4-OS/3 -
Business Telephone Number
-714- 9,vz - 3'9/ 4.
77Z I&A—A:1£- 172rv,-., [ }L eu; (�4 • 9/79'9
How did DAMAGE or INJURY occur? Give full parL•culars.
lotllL-L Dk r tNnl66 rx-.� Es C /Y?µS-
S tz5 i f� ir✓ a,4in r4 o ! cv o ,.f n 7}/ c ,e • 4 -5-� � �S
Ate► l f}G It f}S /Y)//J oQ P47 C� ce T'4 <-- E%- "IAD
A -Jct I44z jo A� ���«c>?v--/�771AZ �4r/.¢i�.�%�c� roe ✓��v�rv� �c
When did DAMAGE or INJURY occur? Give full particulars, date, time of day: 7>1 Str24v
M #-gc�4 3, l qc,,s g'+'o
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:
ON L° t Is�lffi r�oA� %/�/t ✓ 'E�4-4 r c; ic, E si % 0 e-,+- n A•e-e s 67J
',Vhat particular ACT or OMISSION do you claim caused the injury or damage? Give names of City employees causing the injury or
'_amage, if known:
I�e 1}-� Lo�l STiZw�Tr dtil
What D_: LEGE or !.; LURIES do you claim resulted? Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed:
LCItK�t6 Tir24 , � cc,l2ihlC Pl+f '114
W`iat AMOUNT do you claim account of each item of injury or damage as of date of presentation of this claim, giving basis of
Computation:11
Gne ESTIMATED AMOUNT as far as known you claim on account of each item of prospective injury or damage, giving basis of
computation:
SEE PAGE 2 (OVER) THIS CLAIM MUST BE SIGNED ON REVERSE SIDE
Insu:ance payments received, :1 any, and names of l:uurance Company:
Expenditures ace on account of accident or :n;ury: (Date—Item) ;,�•.,-
Vane and aadress of Witnesses, Doctors and Hospitals:
READ CAREFULLY
For all accident claims place on following dicgram names of streets, including North, East, South, and West; indicate place of
accident by "X" and by showing house numbers or distances to street corners.
If City Vehicle was involved, designate by letter "A" location of City vehicle when you first saw it, and by "B" location of yourself
or your vehicle %ti hen you first saw City vehicle; location of City vehicle at time of accident by "A-1" and location of yourself or your
vehicle at the time of the accident by "B-1" and the point of impart by "X_ "
NOTE: If diagrams below do not fit the situation, attach hereto a proper diagram signed by claimant.
FOR AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENTS
FOR OTHER ACCIDENTS
CURE–*
Signature of Claimant or person filing on his behalf giving
relationship to Claimant:
vT1'T i CIT: =K (GOV.
SIDEWALK
PAR K WAY
SIDEWALK_
TypedName:
14'LD f 6A00
SEC. 915a).
CURB–}
I� �I
Date
� t�
'7e1fD1 210 olden Springs Drive —Phone 909-595-k aJ6 ono Service Order _
Chevron DIAM.iND BAR, CA 91789—B.A.R. SRC 152508
C ate Automotive R Ir'! 'aloe Autnonzatlon Vo 1 Date
vial spa
Name - =hr1t mi cue nr Ss rear Make e Vlooei T,Te vVanteo �ewer
Address
rT r;teq s ,3r "s: a ;errcrnet *o protect Jacamy Jo `,emsmeter Rearing tcense rt,uo Taken By
ALL PARTS ARE NEW UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED �-+,.i,•
QTY PART NO. OR DESCRIPTION PARTS ] _ ABOR ----- - '
s 1111dassis men ------
—��ir Dts Del LABOR — OTHER PARTS AMOUNT
PARTS i !ABOR
*' Oil Filter Replace
Air Cleaner Clean iReplare, i
Gaso. Filter I i
Y Front Wheel Beanngsl Inspect I Reoack
Yt TRANSMISSION Dram
Differential Drain i
►� U Joints & Spline
I
I
n Drive Belt
Power Steer
Coolant Ilnspectl
Y Brake Cylinder
I
-ire Conuition — P.S.I.
LFR /32� RF /321 Type
as
/321 /34S¢_
❑ Repair ❑ Switch
Shock Absorbers
Add
Add
7i
Add ! ��
Battery Condition
❑ Good ❑ Needed Water
i
❑ Maintenance Free
= Needs Recharge ❑ Recharged
Sub -total Parts I
Po No Sublet Repairs By
IF
Total Sublet Repairs (c) (c)
Safety Points Double Checked Et Initialed for Your Protection
Crankcase Dram Plug Radiator Level
Transmission Plugs & Level Brake Cylinder
Differential Plugs & Level Wheel Lugs
Crankcase Filled By Warranty & Door Record
Filter Test
ADDITIONAL AND/OR SUBLET REPAIR AUTHORIZATION
Estimated Cost of additional repairs $
1 MXNM ALEDGE 100111E AND URAL APPROVAL OF AN INCREASE M THE WAWML ESTIMATED PRICE
ICUSTOMER SIGYMTU E)
TELHOW aan10aZAtna - -
DATE I TELEPM* NO CALLED I TIME
RS -6 n t-931
NAME OF PERSON AOTWJRIZRIG
Sub -total 17& r � lel f ,• 0
C SUPREME ❑ REGULAR F-1UNLEADEDDDA"myI PRICE
Estimated Cost if Above Repairs S Icr; 1' irk rocs
Do you want the old parts? ❑ Yes -❑ No i arts �p�
I, the RegraWad owner, autlgrn you to perform the above repairs and tom - h 'B) Lahr 7�Q-)
necessary materuda. I uriderstord any cost quoted heretofore is an asumaee
only Your employees may operate vehrele for inspection, testing, dNivery at Excise Tax
my risk. You will not be responsible for less or damage to whicle or articles Stnaet
left in it I agree to pay se run" stengs an whada left mon Total than 48 hours Q `111=
after notdieaton that repairs me -III a' An express madam's In is Reterddls
acknowledged an above vehicle to secure the amount of repass therm, Vlfaste
mcWing those from any prior work or mperr contract an du vehicle In the
event se attorney rs MU" to baseless to leu or to brag ad for eoMaetimn Sales Tax
of
y sums des I agru to pay cow of tzeactk acid resaonahN sonToy
hestlOn
Receipt a co of this order is he acknowledged Insipecoon
Signed AIJA- aeA
is amara Nunn - Total Amount
EMISSION CONTROL REPAIR AUTHORIZATION
CERTIFICATION ❑ YES ❑ NO CERT. NO.
CERTIFICATE COST $ INSPECTION COST S
POSSIBLE WARRANTY COVERAGE ❑ YES ❑ NO If "Yes" is indicated, I have been advised
of possible manufacturer's emission warranty coverage as required by state of California and/or
federal governmelpt and I agree to have dealer listed above complete the repairs.
Siw.,e Oeste
ammo t6MAlalE1
By law, you may choose another facility to perform any needed repairs or adjustments which
the Smog Check test Indicates are necessary.
L.s'Z
��� CARL WAtRREN 8>,. CO.
Claims Management and Administration
750 The Cnv Drive
Suite 400
(range, CA 92668
Mail PO Box25180
Santa Ana, CA 92799-5180
17141740-7999
18001572-6900
FAX 17141740-7992
TO: City of Diamond Bar
ATTENTION: Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
RE: Claim
C,la�ae�t
IAIEve t
hoed Y/Onice:
our Fife
95 JUN 12 PM 2: 10
June 9, 1993
Wigs vs. Walnut
Alan= Sane, Lie. (Wills)
12107/92
M 1/9S
S-72034 AQ
We have reviewed the above captioned claim and request tit" yam- !aloe tine action
indicated below.
• G1 -AIM Rlr-UX TM: Seed a standarvi rejection k6ar to llhe daimisaL
Please provide us eitb a aepyr of tis satice aat, as -1 Im 1 abwx. IC lam isve any
Westiow plkW evatact drs wtlersigsed.
7'*VZ
Richard D. Marqueh
RDM/rkia -`-
cc: SCJPIA vdew.
1
i
j14.
LOCATION OF INCIDENT Brea Canyon Cut -Off Road
1,305 south of Pathfinder
2
Road, City of Diamond Bar,
County of Los Angeles
3
S.
DETAILS OF OCCURRENCE WHICH GAVE RISE TO THIS CLAIM:
4
Vehicular accident wherein runoff water is an issue.
5
6.
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF INDEBTEDNESS, OBLIGATION, INJURY,
6
DAMAGE OR LOSS INCURRED, SO FAR AS IT MAY BE KNOWN AT THE
TIME OF PRESENTATION OF THIS CLAIM:
7
1. Plaintiff Diaz claims personal injuries;
8
2. The survivors of Stephen Andrew Wills claim damages as a
9
result of the death of Stephen Andrew Wills.
10
7.
NAME OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEE(S) CAUSING THE INJURY, DAMAGE AND/OR
LOSS, IF KNOWN:
11
Claimant is uncertain of the names of actual public
12
employees responsible for the injury.
-13
S.
AMOUNT CLAIMED AS OF THE DATE OF PRESENTATION OF THIS CLAIM:
14
Within the jurisdictional limits of the Los Angeles County
Superior Court.
15
DATED: May 26, 1995 WELLCOME FEINMAN & APPLEGATE
16
17
BY: _
18
B ARA A. FEINMAN, zSQ.
Attorneys for Defendant/Cross-
19
Complainant, ALARCON SONS,
INC.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2 8 MO I WILLS. DIA I CLAIM
-3-
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGFiI`iDA REPORT
AGENDA NO.
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995 REPORT DATE: June 15, 1993
FROM: Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
TITLE: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS PERTAINING TO GENERAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 2, 1995.
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the California Elections Code, the City Council must adopt resolutions
calling and giving notice of the holding of an election and requesting the Board of Supervisors to consolidate
the City's election with School Elections on November 7, 1995 In addition, the City Council must adopt
regulations pertaining to the filing of candidates' statements.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the following Resolutions:
1. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA,
CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION
TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1995, FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS
AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES.
2. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA,
REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO
CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 7, 1995,
WITH THE SCHOOL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 10403
OF THE ELECTIONS CODE.
(Continued)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed _ Yes XX No
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority
3. Has environmental impact been assessed? _ Yes _ No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes _ No
Which Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes _ No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
RFW
Te rence L. Bel er rank sher— L Burgess
City Manager Assistant City Manager City Clerk
Terrenee L. Belanger
June 1J, lyya
Page Two
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA,
ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO
CANDIDATES STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1995.
RESOLUTION NO. 95-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING
REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE
PERTAINING TO CANDIDATES STATEMENTS SUBMITTED
TO THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION TO BE HELD
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1995
WHEREAS, Section 13307 of the Elections Code of the
State of California provides that the governing body of any local
agency adopt regulations pertaining to materials prepared by an
candidate for a municipal election, including costs of the
candidates statement;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND
BAR, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND
ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS. That pursuant to
Section 13307 of the Elections Code of the State of California,
each candidate for elective office to be voted for at an Election
to be held in the City of Diamond Bar on November 7, 1995 may
prepare a candidate's statement on an appropriate form provided
by the City Clerk. The statement may include the name, age and
occupation of the candidate and a brief description of no more
than 200 words of the candidate's education and qualifications
expressed by the candidate himself or herself. The statement
shall not include party affiliation of the candidate, nor
membership or activity in partisan political organizations. The
statement shall be filed in typewritten form in the office of the
City Clerk at the time the candidate's nomination papers are
filed. The statement may be withdrawn, but not changed, during
the period for filing nomination papers and until 5:00 p.m. of
the next working day after the close of the nomination period.
SECTION 2. FOREIGN LANGUAGE POLICY.
a. Pursuant to state law, the candidates statement
must be translated and printed in Spanish at the candidates
request.
b. Pursuant to the Voting Rights Act, the city is
required to translate candidates statements into the following
languages in addition to English: Spanish, Vietnamese, Chinese,
Japanese, Tagalog.
C. The City Clerk shall print any foreign language
translations of candidates who request printing in the voters
pamphlet.
SECTION 3. PAYMENT.
1. The candidate shall be required to pay for the cost
of printing the candidates statement in English.
2. The candidate shall be required to pay for the cost
of translating the candidates statement into any foreign language
as specified in (a) and/or (b) above pursuant to State and/or
Federal law.
3. The candidate shall be required to pay for the cost
of printing the candidates statement in a foreign language. The
City Clerk shall estimate the total cost of printing, handling,
translating, and mailing the candidate's statements filed
pursuant to this section, including costs incurred as a result of
complying with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (as amended), and
require each candidate filing a statement to pay in advance to
the local agency his or her estimated pro rata share as a
condition of having his or her statement included in the voter's
pamphlet. In the event the estimated payment is required, the
estimate is just an approximation of the actual number cost that
varies from one election to another election and may be
significantly more or less than the estimate, depending on the
actual number of candidates filing statements. Accordingly, the
clerk is not bound by the estimate and may, on a pro rata basis,
bill the candidate for additional expense or refund any excess
paid depending on the final actual cost. In the event of
underpayment, the clerk may require the candidate to pay the
balance of the cost incurred. In the event of underpayment, the
clerk may require the candidate to pay the balance of the cost
incurred. In the vent of overpayment, the clerk shall prorate
the excess amount among the candidates and refund the excess
amount paid within 30 days of the election.
SECTION 4. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS. No candidate will be
permitted to include additional materials in the sample ballot
package.
SECTION 5. That the City Clerk shall provide each
candidate or the candidate's representative a copy of this
Resolution at the time nominating petitions are issued.
SECTION 6. That all previous resolutions
establishing council policy on payment for candidates statement
are repealed.
SECTION 7. That this resolution shall only apply to
the election to be held on November 7, 1995 and shall then be
repealed.
SECTION S. That the City Clerk shall certify to the
passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the
book of original resolutions.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON 1995.
I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond
Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed,
approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of ,
1995, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
RESOLUTION NO. 95 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING
NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION
TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1995, FOR
THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS AS REQUIRED BY THE
PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES
WHEREAS, under the provisions of the laws -relating to
general law cities in the State of California, a General
Municipal Election shall be held on November 7, 1995, for the
election of Municipal Officers; and
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND
BAR, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That pursuant to the requirements of the
laws of the State of California relating to General Law Cities,
there is called and ordered to be held in the City of Diamond
Bar, California, on Tuesday, November 7, 1995, a General
Municipal Election for the purpose of electing two Members of the
City Council for the full term of four years;
SECTION 2. That the ballots to be used at the election
shall be in form and content as required by law.
SECTION 3. That the City Clerk is authorized,
instructed and directed to procure and furnish any and all
official ballots, notices, printed matter and all supplies,
equipment and paraphernalia that may be necessary in order to
properly and lawfully conduct the election.
SECTION 4. That the polls for the election shall be
open at seven o'clock a.m. of the day of the election and shall
remain open continuously from that time until eight o'clock p.m.
of the same day when the polls shall be closed, except as
provided in Section 14401 of the Election Code of the State of
California.
SECTION 5. That in all particulars not recited in this
resolution, the election shall be held and conducted as provided
by law for holding municipal elections.
SECTION 6. That notice of the time and place of
holding the election is given and the City Clerk is authorized,
instructed and directed to give further or additional notice of
the election, in time, form and manner as required by law.
SECTION 7. That the City Clerk shall certify to the
passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the
book of original Resolutions.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of
1995.
Mayor
I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond
Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed,
approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of
, 1995 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
RESOLUTION NO. 95-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
TO CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION
TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 7, 1995, WITH THE
SCHOOL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THE DATE PURSUANT TO
SECTION 10403 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar
called a General Municipal Election to be held on November 7,
1995, for the purpose of the election of two Members of the City
Council; and
WHEREAS, it is desirable that the General Municipal
Election be consolidated with the School election to be held on
the same date and that within the city the precincts, polling
places and election officers of the two elections be the same,
and that the county election department of the County of Los
Angeles canvass the returns of the General Municipal Election and
that the election be held in all respects as if there were only
one election;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND
BAR DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That pursuant to the requirements of
Section 10403 of the Elections Code, the Board of Supervisors of
the County of Los Angeles is hereby requested to consent and
agree to the consolidation of a General Municipal Election with
the School election on Tuesday, November 7, 1995, for the purpose
of the election of two Members of the City Council.
SECTION 2. That the county election department is
authorized to canvass the returns of the General Municipal
Election. The election shall be held in all respects as if there
were only one election, and only one form of ballot shall be
used.
SECTION 3. That the Board of Supervisors is requested
to issue instructions to the county election department to take
any and all steps necessary for the holding of the consolidated
election.
SECTION 4. That the City of Diamond Bar recognizes
that additional costs will be incurred by the County by reason of
this consolidation and agrees to reimburse the County for any
costs.
SECTION 5. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to
file a certified copy of this resolution with the Board of
Supervisors and the county election department of the County of
Los Angeles.
SECTION 6. That the City Clerk shall certify to the
passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the
book of original resolutions.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON 1995.
MAYOR
I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond
Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed,
approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of ,
1995, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
GZTY OF DILMOND D.LZi
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995 REPORT DATE: June 15, 1995
FROM: Bob Rose, Community Services Director
TITLE: Extension of Bus Shelters contract.
SUMMARY: The City of Diamond Bar has contracted with Metro Display Advertising, Inc. to provide
23 bus shelters in the City since July of 1990. The five year term of the original contract expires on
July 1, 1995. Section 15 of the contract provides the City Council with the option of extending the
contract for an additional five year term. Staff has negotiated the conditions of the extension with
officials from Metro Display Advertising, Inc. and the contract is prepared for City Council action. The
City of Diamond Bar will receive an annual $24,000 franchise fee and will incur no costs for the repair
or maintenance of the bus shelters, per the proposed extension.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the extension of the
Bus Shelters contract with Metro Display Advertising, Inc. for a period of five (5) years, effective July
1, 1995.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report — Public Hearing Notification
X Agreement(s) _ Bid Specifications (on file in City Clerk's Office)
_ Ordinance(s) X Other: Letter of Agreement
Agreement(s)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1.
Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
X Yes
_ No
by the City Attorney?
2.
Does the report require a majority 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:
Terrence L. Bel er rank M. Usher r Bob Rose
City Manager Assistant City Manager Community Services Director
CITY COUNCIL RTrORz-
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrance L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Extension of Bus Shelters Contract
ISSUE STATEMENT:
Shall the City Council approve the extension of the Bus Shelters contract with Metro Display Advertising,
Inc. for a period of five (5) years, effective July 1, 1995?
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
It is recommended that the City Council approve the extension of the Bus Shelters contract with Metro
Display Advertising, Inc., for a period of five (5) years, effective July 1, 1995.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
The terms of the proposed extension require Metro Display Advertising, Inc. to pay a minimum of
$24,000 in franchise fees to the City of Diamond Bar per year. All maintenance and repair costs will
be borne by Metro Display Advertising, Inc. There are no costs proposed to be borne by the City of
Diamond Bar.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Diamond Bar has contracted with Metro Display Advertising, Inc. to provide bus shelters
in the City since July of 1990. The five year term of the original contract expires on July 1, 1995.
Section 15 of the contract provides the City Council with the option of extending the contract for up to
two additional five year terms.
Over the past five years, Metro Display Advertising, Inc. has paid all of the guaranteed franchise fees
due to the City, has maintained the bus shelters in a satisfactory manner at their expense and has
operated an advertising policy that generally has been non-offensive to the community. Twice during the
five years, staff has had to invoke its right to have advertising removed due to complaints from the
community, per section 12 of the contract. Both times, Metro Display Advertising, Inc. promptly
removed the advertising. Also, twice during the five years, staff has had to call Metro Display
Advertising, Inc. to remove trash from overflowing bus shelter trash cans. Both of these occurred on
Monday mornings. Both times Metro Display Advertising, Inc. promptly came out and removed the
trash. The proposed contract extension calls for servicing of trash cans twice per week, one of those
being on Monday mornings.
Metro Display Advertising, Inc., as a business, has had some difficult times over the past five years,
and even went through a bankruptcy to reorganize. Despite the bankruptcy, all franchise fees due to the
City have been paid, although some fee payments were delayed by the bankruptcy action. All required
maintenance activities required under the contract have been completed, even while in bankruptcy, and
City Council Report
Meeting Date: June 20, 1995
Metro Display Advertising, Inc.
Page Two
BACKGROUND: (continued)
the service of the community has not been interrupted.
There have been some significant acts of vandalism on many of the bus shelters that has resulted in
decisive action by officials at Metro Display Advertising, Inc. Many of the bronze colored glass panels,
located behind the bench in the shelters, have been destroyed by rock throwing vandals. In order to
resolve this ongoing problem, the glass panels have been replaced with frosted acrylic panels that do not
break. In another act of vandalism, a bus shelter was recently doused with a flammable liquid and
burned up. Maintenance crews from Metro Display Advertising, Inc. removed the bus shelter within
hours of notification. The destroyed shelter has since been replaced with a new one.
It is staff's experience that Metro Display Advertising, Inc. is responsive to the needs of the community.
They provide quality shelters at 23 bus stops in Diamond Bar and maintain them in a manner satisfactory
to the community.
DISCUSSION:
Per Section 15 of the contract, conditions and revenue are negotiated during the extension process. A
Proposal For Extension has been submitted by Metro Display Advertising, Inc. Features of the proposal
include:
1. Extension of contract for five (5) years.
2. Modest increase in guaranteed franchise fee from approximately $23,000 per year to $24,000
per year.
3. 60 day notice of termination clause in favor of City should the franchise default with
reasonable cause.
4. 60 day notice of removal clause in favor of Bus Stop Shelters should policies be established
that make it impossible for the bus shelter to generate advertising profit.
5. Maintenance schedule that includes trash disposal twice per week and steam cleaning once
per month.
6. Repair response time of three (3) hour maximum.
7. Availability of pay phones for each bus shelter site, should the City Council so request.
(The current contract prohibits installation of pay phones without City authorization).
8. Advertising policy that allows the City to require removal of any advertisement, with 24
hours notice.
9. Allows City use of bus shelter panels for public service announcements.
Staff met with officials from Metro Display Advertising, Inc. to review the proposal. In addition to the
items listed above, Metro Display Advertising, Inc. is offering additional bus shelters in Diamond Bar,
should the City Council so request, with the quantity and locations to be determined. It is staff's
intention to bring back a recommendation to the City Council that includes proposed sites for installation
of new bus shelters at a future City Council meeting for approval.
PREPARED BY:
Bob Rose, Community Services Director
June 15, 1995
City of Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100 - Diamond Bar, CA 917654177
(909) 860-2489 • Fax (909) 861-3117
Metro Display Advertising, Inc.
Scott Kraft, President & CEO
15265 Alton Parkway, Ste 100
Irvine, CA 92718
RE: Bus Shelters Contract
Dear Mr. Kraft:
The City of Diamond Bar is interested in extending the Bus Shelter Contract
with Metro Display Advertising, Inc. The term of the extension is for five (5)
years per Section 15 of the existing contract. Conditions of the extension have
been negotiated to include the following:
Phyllis E. Papen a. Term of extended Contract will begin on July 1, 1995 and shall continue
Mayor -for five (5) years, unless previously terminated.
Gary H. Werner - b. Fee payable to City `stated in Section 2.a. shall be the higher of 19.1%
Mayor Pro Tem of gross advertising revenues or $24,000 per year. No CPI increases
Eileen R. Ansari will be available for the five year term and no additional guaranteed fees
Council Member will be available if additional bus shelters are installed.
Clair W. Harmony C. Section 16, Termination, shall be revised to add the following paragraph:
Council Member Contractor shall retain the right to remove any shelter upon sixty (60)
Gary G. Miller days notice to the City of Diamond Bar in the event the Federal, State,
Council Member Municipal or other proper authorities should hereafter establish any rules,
regulations or taxation which shall so restrict location, construction,
maintenance or operation of the shelters as to substantially diminish the
value of said shelters for advertising purpose which effectively inhibits
the ability of the bus shelter to generate advertising profit.
d. Section 11, Shelter and Bench Maintenance and Repair, shall be revised
to require cleaning and trash removal by the contractor twice per week,
one of those being on the first work day following a weekend, and to
Recvded paper
JUN -16-1995 03:o5 METRO DISPLAY ADVERTISING 714 727 4444 P.02
Leftr tD Mano 13ispWy Adm, 11m.
9c Ex egdw of Cpnm"
Jum is, 1955
PW INM
te"Im a tbm (3) your & Vcn-- dme mulmm, by oontra=
mmhMV M cc+evvs hoc any problan railft W dna W ahm.
It is t --&e Dod *@L dwW tete city Couaoil nxluest, bbft 040qr
Advcrdsing, buL doll b mll additlmd Buz 9hal m is ' D&vmgcd Bu, the
t)olatlE 4 sad bcaiora w be demryiricd by tbo City CosaeiL
Upon agora! of the contract en m m by dw Dbmond Bar city Carnot!, a
fully eUm%d cWy of dds kora will be tocwaAd to yoa.
Siacerdy*
Bob Rose, ERWw
pwn"v"ay & vloea Dapaeu�at
$y siring !below.. me pum ww to tb
Mayor .
aiy of Diamcad Bar
A"aft
Eity iti tic Dm
JLV-15-19M 12:23 CITY OF DIAMOND WR
iu, bm
City AtlorWy
z
P.03
AGREEMENT FOR BUS SHELTERS
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 1st day of
July , 1990, by and between the CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, a
municipal corporation of the State of California, (the "City"),
and
r,
W I T N E 8 8 E T H
RECITALS:
A. City needs bus shelters and bus benches, hereinafter re-
ferred to as "shelters" and "benches", at various designated bus
stop locations throughout the City.
B. City desires to provide such shelters and benches with-
out incurring costs and expenses therefor.
C. City has requested proposals for construction and main-
tenance of such shelters and benches.
D. Franchisee represents that it is willing and qualified
to provide such shelters under the terms and conditions hereinaf-
ter set forth.
E. City is willing to provide Franchisee with a right to
construct, erect, install, repair, maintain and insure such shel-
ters on City -owned property under the terms and conditions herein-
after set forth.
WHEREFORE, in consideration of the respective and mutual cov-
enants and promises hereinafter contained and made and subject to
all of the terms and conditions hereof, the parties hereto do
hereby agree as follows:
1. Grant of Riqht by City
City hereby grants to Franchisee, subject to provi-
sions herein, the right to construct, erect, install, repair, and
1
maintain and insure shelters as described in Exhibit "A", attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference, at twenty (20) desig-
nated bus stop locations, said locations described in Exhibit "A"
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
2. Fee Payable to City
a. In consideration of the right granted hereby,
Franchisee agrees to pay to City 19.1% of the gross advertis-
ing revenues received by Franchisee, after agency commission, for
the rental of advertising space in and on each shelter, and in no
instance shall said payment be less than a minimum of $76.10
per month per shelter which is maintained and/or owned by Franchi-
see within the City's Corporate limits. The greater of these
amounts per calendar month will be the payment for that month.
Monthly guaranteed revenue per shelter will increase after -year
• one and through year five, by the same percentage of -increase as
reflected in the Los Angeles Consumer Price Index.
b. Franchisee shall make payment to City on a
quarterly basis for all shelter revenues due City for the preced-
ing quarter. Payments are due January 15, April 15, July 15, and
October 15 of each year.
C. All payments from Franchisee to City shall be
supported by a certified Statement of Account showing all shelter
locations and revenues received.
d. Franchisee shall allow inspection of its books
and records by City officials as authorized by City's Manager, at
Franchisee's office during reasonable business hours, to determine
revenues due the City.
e. Certified quarterly reports (unaudited) con-
cerning gross advertising receipts derived from shelters within
E
the City shall be provided to the City Manager of City within thi-
rty (30) days after the conclusion of each calendar quarter.
3. Franchisee's Services
Franchisee agrees, at its own cost and expense, to
perform as follows:
a. Scope of Service.
Franchisee shall install and/or maintain a
total of twenty (20) shelters in the City upon City sidewalks at
twenty (20) locations specified in Exhibit "A". In addition, up
to fifty (50) bus benches of custom design, embossed with the leg-
end "Diamond Bar" shall be furnished, installed and maintained.
Benches shall be installed at locations designated by City.
b. Timeline for Installation.
Work on the construction or installation of
the first bus shelter shall begin July 15, 1990 after the franch-
ise has been awarded by the City Council. Building permit appli-
cations must be submitted to the proper agencies within thirty
(30) calendar days after the contract has been afarded.
Installation of an individual shelter, includ-
ing all shelter amenities, except electrical connections, shall be
completed within seven (7) calendar days, after work has commenced
on such individual shelter. Failure to perform as required will
result in liquidated damages being assessed by the City.
Construction or installation of all twenty
(20) shelters including electrical connections shall be completed
within ninety (90) calendar days after the date that work has com-
menced on the first shelter.
Installation of all required bus benches shall
be completed within one hundred twenty (120) days after the date
3
of City design approval of the benches prior to fabrication.
Franchisee's proposed design to be submitted within thirty (30)
day of award contract.
Failure to perform, as required above, on any
item, will result in liquidated damages being assessed by the City
in the sum of fifty dollars ($50.00) for each delinquent day.
C. Additional Shelters.
The City reserves the right to require addi-
tional shelters subject to the provisions herein, and upon written
amendment to this agreement. Franchisee shall make every effort
to meet the need for additional City requested shelters, or docu-
ment in writing within seven (7) days why it cannot meet stated
needs. Failure to respond to City's written request within seven
(7) days shall release City to fill the need at its discretion.
No shelters other than those specified in Exhibit "A" shall be
installed by the Franchisee without written authorization from the
City.
d. Design of Shelters and Benches.
1. SpaCIFICATIONS:
All work performed on the shelter or the
shelter site must conform to the requirements of the Standard Spe-
cifications For Public Works Construction, 1988 edition, and all
applicable codes and regulations, including, but not limited to,
the City Building and Electrical Codes. In addition, all work
must comply with the conditions of the Public Works Permit issued
for each location and any and all other conditions of the fran-
chise. Franchisee shall obtain any and all necessary building and
electrical permits prior to its performance of the .franchise.
4
2. SHELTER DESIGN DRAWINGS:
All designs, plans and change orders
shall be signed by a California Registered Civil or Structural En-
gineer before they will be accepted for design or location appro-
val.
Before any shelter may be installed in
the City of Diamond Bar, it shall be reviewed for adequate design
by the Diamond Bar Park and Building Departments for electrical
wiring and appurtenances, structural integrity and general sound-
ness of design and compliance with provisions of the franchise and
these specifications.
3. SHELTER LOCATION DESIGN DRAWINGS:
A location drawing shall be provided by
Franchisee and shall contain a minimum forty (40) feet to one -inch
scale representation of the proposed shelter site, covering the
area from the adjacent property line to the street centerline at
the intersection. Mid -block sites may be shown with broken line
ties: The drawing shall tie the shelter -location to the closest
curb return and give the distance from the existing curb and adja-
cent property line to the shelter. It shall also show the loca-
tion of manholes, catch basins, fire hydrants, poles, trees and
other above -ground facilities within twenty-five (25) feet of the
proposed shelter.
4. PERMITS:
The City will issue "no fee" }permits, as
required, which may include building, electrical, and construction
and excavation permits required for the construction and installa-
tion of the bus shelters.
5
5. SHELTER SITE SELECTION:
Any shelter sites, in addition to those
specified initially by the City, shall be chosen by the City in
consultation with the Franchisee. The City shall supply the Fran-
chisee with a list of preferred shelter sites. Any proposed shel-
ter site shall be subject to the following screening process:
a) In the event the proposed site is
adjacent to a commercial user, the specific consent of the commer-
cial user may be required.
b). All sites proposed which are adja-
cent to residential uses shall be subject to review by the Diamond
Bar Engineering Department.
C) No shelter site shall be chosen
which will result in a shelter being closer than -ten (10) feet to
a driveway.
d) No shelter site shall be chosen
which will result in a shelter being located over a storm drain,
unless approved by the City Engineer.
e) No shelter site shall be chosen
which will result in a shelter being placed -in such a position
that less than four (4) feet of contiguous sidewalk remains us-
able.
f) All sites are subject to approval by
the City Council based on safety of bus riders, traffic and pedes-
trians.
g) Every shelter Shall be wheelchair
accessible.
In the event the city and Franchisee can-
not agree on the location of a site, beyond the initial twenty
(20) locations, the City's decision on locations shall be final.
Some of the initial twenty (20) shelter
sites may have benches existing. These existing benches shall be
removed and dismantled by the Franchisee and delivered to the
Parks and Maintenance Department. Some of the initial fifty (50)
bench sites may have existing benches, these too will be disman-
tled and delivered to the Parks and Maintenance Department.
6. SITE RELOCATION:
The City reserves the right to require
the Franchisee to relocate shelters and benches, at Franchisee's
sole expense, for the convenience of pedestrians and bus patrons
or because of a change in bus stop locations or street widening.
The Franchisee shall. not relocate or remove a bus shelter or bench
without the City's permission. The City may require or permit a
shelter or bench to be removed or relocated if it has been demon-
strated to be incapable of proper maintenance due to excessive
vandalism or any other reasonable cause. ''Excessive vandalism" is
defined as damage inflicted to an individual shelter during any
consecutive six (6) month period, which requires cumulative expen-
ditures for replacement and repair that exceed the original cost
of construction and installation of the shelter.
7. SHELTER DESIGN BBECIPICATIONS:
Basic Shelter Design -
a) All shelters shall be of the same
design, wherever used throughout the City, unless alternate de-
signs are approved by the City.
b) Shelter shall be enclosed on two
sides and covered. Transparent panels shall be of tempered safety
glass.
C) The roof shall be supported by four
curved corner steel columns, aluminum clad, steel columns or other
similar construction materials. Roof shall be Red Tile.
d) A standard roof overhang shall be
designed into the shelter to increase protection from the rain and
sun.
e) The space between all glass, ad pan-
els, and the sidewalk shall be a maximum of six (6) inches to ac-
commodate a blind person's touching cane. This may be accomplish-
ed with either a larger glass panel, a deeper bottom glass support
or a flange attached to the bottom of the glass support.
f) Final shelter design (sizes, roof
types, etc.) shall require City approval.
1. Advertising Panels -
a) only one, two-sided, back -lighted ad panel per shelter
will be allowed. Each'ad panel side shall display no more than
twenty-five (25) square feet of advertising (fifty (50) square
feet total per shelter).
b) All ad panels shall be constructed of metal and tempered
safety glass.
2. Allowable Size of Shelter:
a) Height: 716" to 816"
b) Length: 14' to 17'
C) Width: 416" to 516"
In the event a shelter is desired at a location which will
not permit construction of the standard shelter meeting these al-
lowable sizes, unique designs will be considered by the City.
8
All ad panels shall be locked or secured in a manner that
will eliminate or discourage vandalism.
3. wheelchair Access -
All shelters shall be designed to accommodate wheelchairs.
4. Shelter Seating -
Minimum bench length - 616"
Minimum bench width - 115"
Bench shall be located such that a wheelchair can be placed
alongside the bench within the shelter.
S. Shelter Electrification -
Every shelter shall be illuminated from dusk to dawn by an
overhead, energy efficient, fluorescent lighting system concealed
in the roof structure. Failure to light the shelters at night
shall be grounds for cancellation of the franchise.
a) Minimum size - eighty (80). Solar power shall be used.
Supplemental conventional power may be used.
b) Photocells or other approved devices capable of activat-
ing each shelter's lighting system shall be installed.
6. Shelter Drainage -
All shelters shall contain a roof gutter system to prevent
dripping water over the edges.
Water shall be drained through a downspout(s) located in the
columns, with the water exiting at approximately sidewalk level.
7. Glazing Anchorage -
No edge of any glass panel shall be exposed.
All glass panels shall be securely contained and held at both
top and bottom. The securing of all four edges is preferable.
All post foundations shall be designed in accordance with the
Uniform Buildinq Code, latest edition adopted by the City.
9
8. Trash Receptacles -
Each shelter shall have at least one (1) covered trash recep-
tacle, designed and placed to promote maximum usage by shelter
patrons. The receptacle and its cover shall be securely attached
to the shelter.
No telephone vending machines, kiosks, news racks, or any
other device not specifically allowed in these specifications
shall be permitted to be installed on or near the shelters, with-
out prior authorization from the City.
8. SHELTER SIGNAGE:
a) The Franchisee shall ensure that bus
route information, and City logo, are displayed in and around the
shelter.
b) The name of the nearest cross street
where appropriate, shall be placed on the roof facia on both ends
of the shelter. Minimum letter size for this sign shall be three
(3) inches high and two and one half (2-1/2) inches wide.
C) The Franchisee shall affix, in a
conspicuous area on each shelter, an owner identification plaque,
that includes its business name, address and telephone number.
9. SHELTER CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS:
a) The shelter shall be prefabricated
and assembled at the site.
b) No welding except for foundation
works shall be permitted at the site.
C) All concrete finishing shall conform
to the Standard Specifications for Public Works construction, lat-
est edition.
10
d) The Franchisee shall have quality
control supervisors working for its contractor, if any, (not the
sub -contractor), at every construction site for a minimum of one
(1) hour per working day.
10. BENCHES:
a) Bus benches shall be recycled plas-
tic as manufactured by Hammers Plastic Recycling Corp. RR3 Box
182, Iowa Falls, Iowa, 50126, (515) 648-5073, or equivalent de-
sign, as approved by the City. Concrete bus benches shall be as
manufactured by Robbins Pre Cast Inc., P. O. Box 2225, Irwindale,
California, 91706, (818) 357-4111, bench number PSP -72, or equiva-
lent design, as approved by the City.
b) Each bench shall be fabricated with
the legend "Diamond Bar" embossed on the face of the seat back.
C) The color of the benches shall be
coral, with color samples to be approved by the City.
d) Preference will be given to benches
made of recycled materials.
11. SHRT•TER AND BENCN MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR:
The Franchisee shall maintain, repair,
clean, and service all shelters and benches, keeping them, their
appurtenances and the immediate surrounding areas, in a safe,
clean, attractive, and sanitary condition. The Franchisee shall
be at liberty to enter upon and into shelters and benches at any
reasonable time with personnel and all necessary equipment and
materials to provide for the satisfactory maintenance of the
clean-up/trash removal calls on each shelter (not benches) at
least twice each week. Each shelter and bus bench shall be com
11
pletely steam cleaned as needed, but not less often than once a
month.
The Franchisee shall repair or replace
bus shelters and benches due to damage, vandalism or graffiti w-
ithin two (2) working days after having been found at the time of
the required twice per week routine maintenance, or sooner upon
notification by the City. If shelter or bench damage or vandalism
is such that the public could be exposed to a dangerous situation
while in or -near the shelter or bench, the Franchisee shall repair
or, if necessary, remove the entire shelter or bench within twen-
ty-four (24) hours of notification, leaving the site in a safe
condition, and it shall be replaced and made fully operational at
the same location within five (5) working days after removal.
The Franchisee shall furnish to the City
a written monthly summary of its shelter maintenance operations
within the City of Diamond Bar. All maintenance work and correc-
tive actions shall be performed at the expense of the Franchisee.
Franchisee's personnel, equipment and/or
vehicles shall not block automobile or bicycle travel lanes with-
out proper warning signs and traffic delineation devices properly
placed in accordance with the Work Area Traffic Control Handbook
(published by Building News, Inc.).
12. ADVERTISING:
The Franchisee shall, upon request, tran-
smit to -the City Manager or his designee, color copies of any and
all ads proposed to be placed in the shelters, for review prior to
display. Should the City, in its sole discretion, determine that
any advertising on any shelter is improper, offensive or consti-
tutes a display that is likely to interfere with, mislead or dis-
12
tract traffic, or conflict with any traffic control system, the
Franchisee shall be so advised and shall not utilize such adver-
tising. In the event Franchisee fails to provide the City Manager
or his designee with such color copies prior to display, and the
display is determined to be improper, for any reason set forth
herein, Franchisee shall remove such advertising within twenty-
four (24) hours after the City serves written notice thereof.
Franchisee contractor will provide local businesses the right of
first refusal on 50% of the available advertising space.
13. PUBLIC SERVICE MESSAGES:
The Franchisee shall, at least two (2)
times per year, for at least ten (10) consecutive calendar days,
display at least one (1) public service announcement in lieu of
paid advertising in each bus shelter. The Franchisee shall ar-
range for service and installation of the public service announce-
ments. The City shall be entitled to specify certain public ser-
vice messages to be displayed.
14. PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE:
The Franchisee shall post and maintain an
irrevocable letter of credit which will inure to the benefit of
the City, or equivalent security approved by the City, in the
amount of twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00). Said letter
of credit or security shall remain in effect over the duration of
the franchise period to insure the faithful performance of Fran-
chisee's covenants for construction, maintenance, and repair or
replacement of the shelters and benches, timely payment of all
revenues due the City, (including permit fees, business license,
advertising revenues), and restoration of shelter sites to their
condition existing prior to installation of the shelters, whenever
13
a shelter is removed or relocated.
All shelters no longer serving a speci-
fied bus route shall be removed by Franchisee within seven
(7) days after written notice is served by mail by City. Shelters
may be relocated only with City approval.
15. TERM:
The term of this Agreement shall commence
at 12:01 a.m., on the day following execution hereof by City and
shall continue for a term of five (5) years, unless previously
terminated as hereafter provided. By mutual agreement and consent
of both Bustop Shelters of California, Inc. and the City of Dia-
mond Bar, this agreement may be extended for two (2), five (5)
year increments. Conditions and revenue to be negotiated at time
of extension, as amended.
16. TERNINATIONt
If the Franchisee is found to be in de-
fault with respect to any term or provision of the franchise, and
if after ten (10) days prior written notice, Franchisee does not
cure such default and provide for the satisfactory continuance of
the agreement, the City may terminate the contract upon giving the
Franchisee written notice thereof not less than sixty (60) days
prior to the effective date of termination.
Upon termination of the franchise, either
by default or by expiration of its term, and within ten (10) days
thereof the Franchisee shall remove the shelters and restore each
site to its proper and original condition at the Franchisee's own
cost and expense. The non -advertising bus benches shall remain in
place at the termination of the franchise.
14
17. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR:
Franchisee is an independent contractor
and not an employee of City, and all personnel to be utilized by
Franchisee in the performance of this Agreement shall be employees
of Franchisee and not employees of City. Franchisee shall pay all
salaries and wages, employer's social security taxes, unemployment
insurance and similar taxes relating to employees and shall be
responsible for all applicable withholding taxes.
18. INBURANCE:
The Franchisee shall obtain, at its sole
cost, and keep in force throughout the term of the franchise, the
following insurance coverage:
a) Minimum one million dollars ($1,000-
,000.00) combined single limit public liability insurance for bod-
ily injury and property damage.
b) Said policy or policies shall be in
a form approved by the City and shall name the City, the City
Council, its officers, agents and employees as additional insureds
by an endorsement to the policy. Said endorsement shall provide
that the City shall receive not less than thirty (30) days prior
written notice of cancellation of any policies of insurance re-
quired hereunder.
C) Franchisee shall furnish evidence,
prior to commencing performance of this Agreement, of having pro-
cured Workers' Compensation Insurance on behalf of its employees
in an amount as required by law and which is acceptable to the
City Attorney of City.
Further, the Franchisee shall obtain any
additional kinds and amounts of insurance which, in its own judg-
15
ment, may be necessary for the proper protection of any of its
officers', employees', agents', or authorized subcontractors' own
actions during the performance of this franchise.
19. REPRESENTATIVES AND NOTICES:
The City Manager or his designee shall be
the representative of City for purposes of this Agreement and may
issue all consents, approvals, directives and agreements on behalf
of City, called for by this Agreement, except as otherwise expres-
sly provided in this Agreement.
Ji -an r midi- T.PRnyPr , shall be the
sole representative of Franchisee for purposes of this Agreement,
and may enter into any subordinate agreements with City pursuant
to this Agreement on behalf of the Franchisee.
Notice and written communications sent by
one party to the other shall be personally delivered or sent by
U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, to the following addresses:
If sent by Franchisee to City:
City Manager
City of Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley Drive
Suite #100
Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177
If sent by City to Franchisee:
Rustop Shelters of California, Inc.
ATTN: Jean Claude T.eRoyer
18023 Secy Park' Circle. H2
Irvine. California 92714
20. OWNERSHIP :
Prior to commencing performance under
16
this Agreement, Franchisee shall provide the City with a written
statement, executed under penalty of purjury, containing the fol-
lowing information:
a. If the Franchisee is a corporation,
the name of the corporation shall be set forth exactly as shown in
its Articles of Incorporation or Charter together with the State
and date of incorporation and the names and residence addresses of
each of its current officers and directors, and of each stockhold-
er holding more than five percent (5%) of the stock of that corpo-
ration.
b. If Franchisee is a partnership, the
statement shall set forth the name and residence addresses of each
of the partners, including limited partners. If Franchisee is a
limited partnership, it shall furnish a copy of its certificate of
limited partnership, as filed with the County Clerk. If one or
more of the partners is a corporation, the provisions of subsec-
tion a, above, pertaining to corporate Franchisee shall apply.
C. Franchisee, if a corporation, or
partnership, shall designate one of its officers or general part-
ners to act as its responsible managing employee. Such person
shall complete and sign all the statements required in this sec-
tion.
d. If the Franchisee is not a corpora-
tion or partnership, the statement shall set forth the name and
residence address of each and every owner possessing mode than
five percent (5%) ownership interest; regardless of whether such
ownership interest consists of stock or any other asset, tangible
or intangible.
17
21. SUBCONTRACTORS:
None of the services to be provided under
this Agreement shall be subcontracted without the prior approval
of City. Franchisee shall be fully responsible to City for the
performance of any and all approved subcontractors. Any perfor-
mance of Franchisee's obligations hereunder by any person or en-
tity, other than Franchisee, without prior written permission of
City, shall be deemed reasonable cause for City to terminate this
Agreement.
22. ASSIGNABILITY:
This Agreement may not be sold, transfer-
red or assigned by the Franchisee or by operation of law, to any
other person or persons, business entity, without the City's prior
(written permission. Any such sale, transfer or assignment, or at-
tempted sale, transfer or assignment without written- permission,
may be deemed by City to constitute a voluntary termination of
this Agreement by Contractor constitute a voluntary termination of
this Agreement by Franchisee and this Agreement shall thereafter
be deemed terminated and void; provided and excepting, however,
that if the Franchisee is a partnership and one or more of the
partners should die, one or more of the surviving partners may
acquire, by, purchase or otherwise, the interest of the deceased
partner or partners without effecting a surrender or termination
of this Agreement.
23. INDEKNIFICATION:
Franchisee shall defend, indemnify, hold
free and harmless the City, its elected officials, its officers
and employees, from and against any and all damages to property or
injuries to or death of any person or persons, and shall defend,
18
indemnify, save and hold harmless City, elected officials, its of-
ficers and employees from any and all claims, demands, suits, ac-
tions or proceedings of any kind of nature, including, but not by
way of limitation, all civil claims, workers' Compensation claims,
and all other claims resulting from or arising out of the acts,
a errors or omissions of Franchisee, its employees and/or authorized
subcontractors, whether intentional or non -intentional, in the
performance of this Agreement.
26. VALIDITY:
The invalidity in whole or in part of any
provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity
of any of the other provisions of this Agreement.
2 S. GOVMMINQ i•%R:
This Agreement shall be governed by and
construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
26. INTIRe AQREVImET:
This Agreement, plus City's "Request For
Franchise Proposals", which is hereby incorporated by reference as
part of this Agreement, supersedes any and all other agreements
whether oral or written, between the parties hereto with respect
to the subject matter hereof and contains all of the Covenants and
Agreements between the parties with respect to said matter, and
each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations,
inducements, promises or agreements, orally or otherwise, have
been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party,
which are not embodied herein, and that any other agreement or
modification of this Agreement shall be effective only if executed
in writing and signed by both City and Franchisee.
19
27. TAX INTEREST:
Franchisee recognizes and understands
that this Agreement may create a possessory interest in Franchisee
subject to property taxation and Franchisee agrees to assume all
liability and responsibility for payment of property taxes levied
on -_.-ch interest.
28. ATTORNEY' S Ye'e8 :
In the event any legal proceeding is in-
stituted to enforce any term or provision of the Agreement, the -
prevailing party in said legal proceeding shall be entitled to re-
cover attorneys' fees and costs from the opposing party in an
amount determined by the Court to be reasonable.
29. YeDIATION
Any dispute or controversy arising under
this Agreement, or in connection with any of the terms and under
this Agreement, or in connection with any of the terms and condi-
tions hereof, shall be referred by the parties hereto for media-
tion. A third party, neutral mediation service shall be selected,
as agreed upon by the parties and the costs and expenses thereof
shall be borne equally by the parties and the costs and expenses
thereof shall be borne equally by the parties hereto. In the
event the parties are unable to mutually agree upon the mediator
to be selected hereunder, the City Council shall select such a
neutral, third party mediation service and the City Council's de-
cision shall be final. The parties agree to utilize their. good
faith efforts to resolve any such dispute or controversy so sub-
mitted to mediation. It is specifically understood and agreed by
the parties hereto that referral of any such dispute or controver-
sy, and mutual good faith efforts to resolve the same therby,
20
shall be conditions precedent to the institution of any action or
proceeding, whether at law or in equity with respect to any such
dispute or controversy.
21
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this
Agreement, the date and year first above written.
ATTEST:
ChERK OF THE COUNCIL
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
22
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
A Municipal Corporation of
the State of California
O DIAMOND BAR
Q" v
MJVAGING GE ERAL PARTNER
FRANCHISEE
EXHIBIT A
Shelter Locations
These locations are in commercial areas and require shelter for a
minimum of 10 patrons a day. Listed below are those sites:
Location
1. WB Diamond Bar
2. WB Diamond Bar
3. WB Diamond Bar
4. WB Diamond Bar
5. WB Diamond Bar
6. WB Diamond Bar
7. WB Diamond Bar
S. WB Diamond Bar•
9. WB Diamond Bar
10. WB Golden Springs
11. 'WB Golden Springs
12. EB Golden Springs
13. EB Golden Springs
14. EB Diamond Bar
15. EB Diamond Bar
16. EB Diamond Bar
17. EB Diamond Bar
18. EB Diamond Bar
19. EB Diamond Bar
20. EB Diamond Bar
# of Patrons
Brea Canyon
18
Fountain Springs
21
Grand
38
Golden Springs
105
Save -on Entrance
88
Pomona Freeway
26
Sunset
45
Highland
37
Temple
21
Grand
38
Brea Canyon
70
Brea Canyon,
71
Grand
37
Golden Springs
85
K -Mart Entrance
99
Sunset
41
Highland
25
Grand
35
Quail Summit
15
Brea Canyon
19
23
til"1'Y VF Dr1ia
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO. �� .,
TO: Mayor and City Council
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995 REPORT DATE: June 14, 1995
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
ISSUE: Consideration of General Services Agreement.
DISCUSSION: Since incorporation, the City of Diamond Bar has maintained a General Services Agreement with the
County of Los Angeles, for the provision of miscellaneous services which may be requested from time to time from the
County to the City. The current agreement will expire on June 30, 1995.
The Los Angeles County Chief Administrative Office has submitted a General Services Agreement which will continue such
services through June 30, 2000. The provisions of the proposed agreement are essentially the same as those in the
agreement in effect since June 11, 1990.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve and adopt the General Services Agreement between the County
of Los Angeles and the City of Diamond Bar, for the period from July 1, 1995 through June 30, 2000.
----------------------------------
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1 Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote?
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:
Terrence L. B�nger
City Manager
Frank M. Usher
Assistant City Manager
_ Yes X No
MAJORITY
N/A _ Yes —No
_ Yes X No
_ Yes —No
GENERAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, dated for purposes of reference only, , 1995, is
made by and between the County of Los Angeles, hereinafter referred to as the "County",
and the City of Diamond Bar, hereinafter referred to as the "City".
RECITALS:
(a) The City is desirous of contracting with the County for the performance by its
appropriate officers and employees of City functions.
(b) The County is agreeable to performing such services on the terms and
conditions hereinafter set forth.
(c) Such contracts are authorized and provided for by the provisions of
Section 5616 of the Charter of the County of Los Angeles and Section 51300, et seq., of
the Government Code.
THEREFORE, THE PARTIES MUTUALLY AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. The County agrees, through its officers and employees, to perform those
City functions which are hereinafter provided for.
2. The City shall pay for such services as are provided under this agreement
at rates to be determined by the County Auditor -Controller in accordance with the policies
and procedures established by the Board of Supervisors.
These rates shall be readjusted by the County Auditor -Controller annually effective
the first day of July of each year to reflect the cost of such service in accordance with the
policies and procedures for the determination of such rate as adopted by the Board of
Supervisors of County.
3. No County officer or department shall perform for said City any function not
coming within the scope of the duties of such officer or department in performing services
for the County.
4. No service shall be performed hereunder unless the City shall have available
funds previously appropriated to cover the cost thereof.
5. No function or service shall be performed hereunder by any County officer
or department unless such function or service shall have been requested in writing by the
City on order of the City Council thereof or such officer as it may designate and approved
by the Board of Supervisors of the County, or such officer as it may designate, and each
such service or function shall be performed at the times and under circumstances which
do not interfere with the performance of regular County operations.
6. Whenever the County and City mutually agree as to the necessity for any
such County officer or department to maintain administrative headquarters in the City, the
City shall furnish at its own cost and expense all necessary office space, furniture, and
furnishings, office supplies, janitorial service, telephone, light, water, and other utilities.
In all instances where special supplies, stationery, notices, forms and the like must be
issued in the name of the City, the same shall be supplied by the City at its expense.
It is expressly understood that in the event a local administrative office is
maintained in the City for any such County officer or department, such quarters may be
used by the County officer or department in connection with the performance of its duties
in territory outside the City and adjacent thereto provided, however, that the performance
of such outside duties shall not be at any additional cost to the City.
7. All persons employed in the performance of such services and functions for
the City shall be County employees, and no City employee as such shall be taken over
by the County, and no person employed hereunder shall have any City pension, civil
service, or other status or right.
-2-
For the purpose of performing such services and functions, and for the
purpose of giving official status to the performance hereof, every County officer and
employee engaged in performing any such service or function shall be deemed to be an
officer or employee of said City while performing service for the City within the scope of
this agreement.
8. The City shall not be called upon to assume any liability for the direct
payment of any salary, wages or other compensation to any County personnel performing
services hereunder for the City, or any liability other than that provided for in this
agreement.
Except as herein otherwise specified, the City shall not be liable for
compensation or indemnity to any County employee for injury or sickness arising out of
his employment.
9. The parties hereto have executed an Assumption of Uability Agreement
approved by the Board of Supervisors on December 27, 1977 and/or a Joint Indemnity
Agreement approved by the Board of Supervisors on October 8, 1991. Whichever of
these documents the City has signed later in time is currently in effect and hereby made
a part of and incorporated into this agreement as of set out in full herein. In the event
that the Board of Supervisors later approves a revised Joint Indemnity Agreement and the
City executes the revised agreement, the subsequent agreement as of its effective date
shall supersede the agreement previously in effect between the parties hereto.
10. Each County officer or department performing any service for the City
provided for herein shall keep reasonably itemized and in detail work or job records
covering the cost of all services performed, including salary, wages and other
compensation for labor; supervision and planning, plus overhead, the reasonable rental
value of all County -owned machinery and equipment, rental paid for all rented machinery
-3-
or equipment, together with the cost of an operator thereof when furnished with said
machinery or equipment, the cost of all machinery and supplies furnished by the County,
reasonable handling charges, and all additional items of expense incidental to the
performance of such function or service.
11. All work done hereunder is subject to the limitations of ,the provisions of
Section 23008 of the Government Code, and in accordance therewith, before any work
is done or services rendered pursuant hereto, an amount equal to the cost or an amount
10% in excess of the estimated cost must be reserved by the City from its funds to insure
payment for work, services or materials provided hereunder.
12. The County shall render to the City at the close of each calendar month an
itemized invoice which covers all services performed during said month, and the City shall
pay County therefore within thirty (30) days after date of said invoice.
If such payment is not delivered to the County office which is described on said
invoice within thirty (30) days after the date of the invoice, the County is entitled to recover
interest thereon. Said interest shall be at the rate of seven (7) percent per annum or any
portion thereof calculated from the last day of the month in which the services were
performed.
13. Notwithstanding the provisions of Government Code Section 907, if such
payment is not delivered to the County office which is described on said invoice within
thirty (30) days after the date of the invoice, the County may satisfy such indebtedness,
including interest thereon, from any funds of any such City on deposit with the County
without giving further notice to said City of County's intention to do so.
14. This contract shall become effective on the date herein -above first
mentioned and shall run for a period ending June 30, 2000, and at the option of the City
-4-
Council of the City, with the consent of the Board of Supervisors of County, shall be
renewable thereafter for an additional period of not to exceed five (5) years.
15. In event the City desires to renew this agreement for said five-year period,
the City Council shall not later than the last day of May, 2000, notify the Board of
Supervisors of County that it wishes to renew the same, whereupon the Board of
Supervisors, not later than the last day of June, 2000, shall notify the City Council in
writing of its willingness to accept such renewal. Otherwise such agreement shall finally
terminate at the end of the aforedescribed period.
Notwithstanding the provisions of this paragraph hereinabove set forth, the County
may terminate this agreement at any time by giving thirty (30) days' prior written notice
to the City. The City may terminate this agreement as of the first day of July of any year
upon thirty (30) days' prior written notice to the County.
16. This agreement is designed to cover miscellaneous and sundry services
which may be supplied by the County of Los Angeles and the various departments
thereof. In event there now exists or there is hereafter adopted a specific contract
between the City and the County with respect to specific services, such contract with
respect to specific services shall be controlling as to the duties and obligations of the
partes anything herein to the contrary notwithstanding, unless such special contract
adopts the provisions hereof by reference.
N
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed by their duly authorized officers.
Executed this day of THE CITY OF
1995. By
Mayor
ATTEST: THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
City Clerk
Z
Deputy
ATTEST:
JOANNE STURGES
Executive Officer/Clerk
of the Board of Supervisors
By
Deputy
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DEWI�T./T W. CLINTON, Co
u Counsel
By �[ �P J -
eputy
a •ar 95p&t-
By
Chairman, Board of Supervisors
0
SALLY R. REED
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
May 5, 1995
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE y
713 KENNETH RAHN HALL OF ADMINISTRATION/LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012
(213) 974-1101
Mr. Terrence L. Belanger
City Manager
City of Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley Dr., Suite 100
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Dear Mr a er:
The General Services Agreement (GSA) between your City and the County of Los Angeles
will expire on June 30, 1995. To ensure continuation of services you may be receiving
and the ability to add or augment services in the future, we would like to work with you
in renewing this agreement for a five-year period.
Three copies of the GSA are enclosed. Please note that Provision 9 on page 3 has been
revised to provide for the incorporation of either the Assumption of Liability Agreement or
a Joint Indemnity Agreement. It references the most currently executed agreement and
provides that if a revised indemnity agreement is approved by the Board and executed
by the City in the future, it would be incorporated and supersede any previously executed
agreement.
Please return the three signed originals with a certified copy of your Council's
resolution approving renewal of the GSA by May 31, 1995 to the address indicated
below:
City -County Liaison
Chief Administrative Office
723 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration
500 West Temple Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
The May 31, 1995 submission date will allow the timely processing of your Agreement
with approval by the Board of Supervisors. One original will be returned to you as soon
as it is approved and executed by the Board of Supervisors.
95gsacty.1tr
Mr. Terrence L. Belanger
May 5, 1995
Page 2
If you have any questions about the renewal r
Please call Selma Anderson at Process or desire additional information,
association, and we thank you in f advance i his matter,
forward to
our continued
Sincerely,
GE I KARIYA
Assistant Administrative Officer
Intergovernmental Relations Branch
GK:SA:raf
Enclosures
95gsacty.ltr
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO. Ll
TO: Mayor and City Council
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995 REPORT DATE: June 14, 1995
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
ISSUE: Consideration of City -County Law Enforcement Services Agreement.
DISCUSSION: Since incorporation, the City of Diamond Bar has provided law enforcement services with the Los Angeles
County Sheriffs Department through a Law Enforcement Services Agreement with the County of Los Angeles. The
current agreement will expire on June 30, 1995.
The Sheriffs Department has submitted an agreement which will continue law enforcement services through June 30, 1999.
With minor modification regarding notice of renewal, the provisions of the proposed agreement are essentially the same
as those in the agreement in effect since April 24, 1990.
The services to be provided during Fiscal Year 1995-1996 will be at the same level as those provided during Fiscal Year
1994-1995.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the accompanying resolution approving the City -County Law
Enforcement Services Agreement, for the period from July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1999.
------------------------------------
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
I Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
—Y
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?
_ Yes
X No
Which Commission?
5 Are other departments affected by the report?
_ Yes
—No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
REVIEWED BY:
Terrence L. Belanger rank M. Usher j
City Manager Assistant City Manager
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
April 25, 1995
OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE
FROM: ROBERT W. MIRABELLA, CAPTAIN TO: CONCERNED STATION COMMANDERS
CONTRACT LAW ENFORCEMENT BUREAU FIELD OPERATIONS REGIONS
SUBJECT: CITY -COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT RENEWAL
The City -County Law Enforcement Services Agreement between the County of Los Angeles
and the cities of Diamond Bar, La Habra Heights, Palmdale and West Hollywood expire on
June 30, 1995. Enclosed are five original copies of the City -County Law Enforcement
Services Agreement approved as to form by County Counsel, and a resolution requesting the
provision of specified supplemental law enforcement services for each city.
Please forward all of these documents to your respective contract city for review and action.
Upon approval by the city, all copies of the City -County Law Enforcement Services
Agreement and resolution should be returned to Contract Law Enforcement Bureau for
processing. Upon final Board of Supervisors approval, a fully executed original set of
documents will be returned to each City via your station.
Should you have any questions regarding these documents or the renewal procedure, please
do not hesitate to contact Earl Shields, Ed Rogner or Ed Anderson at (213) X30-5472.
RWM:EMS:es
Enclosures
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND
BAR REQUESTING ADDITIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES
WITHIN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FROM THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT UNDER THE CITY -COUNTY LAW
ENFORCEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DOES RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to the
terms and provisions of the City -County Law Enforcement Services Agreement,
dated , 199_, and entered into by and between the
City of Diamond Bar and the County of Los Angeles for general law enforcement
services through the County Sheriff's Department, desires for the City specialized
law enforcement services, said services being in addition to those heretofore
requested by the Law Enforcement Services Agreement.
Section 2. Therefore, in addition to the general law enforcement services
now being provided to the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to the Law Enforcement
Services Agreement, the City Council does hereby request the following additional
services:
Motorcycle Traffic Enforcement
Traffic Law Enforcement
Community Service Personnel
Parking Control
Narcotics Education Program (SANE)
License Investigation and Enforcement
School Crossing Guards
Special Assignment Personnel
Section 3. The County of Los Angeles, through its Sheriff's Department,
has expressed its willingness to provide Aerial Helicopter Patrol and Support
Service on a fee basis pursuant to a policy which defines Countywide, and less
than Countywide, helicopter enforcement services. In addition to the general law
enforcement services now being provided to the City of Diamond Bar pursuant
-2 -
to the Law Enforcement Services Agreement, the City Council
DOES
DOES NOT
request Aerial Helicopter Patrol and Support Service.
Section 4. It is hereby requested that the Board of Supervisors or its
designated agent or agency approve and authorize the performance of services
requested in this resolution, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the
existing Law Enforcement Services Agreement.
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 199
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Mayor
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a
resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar at a regular
meeting thereof held on the day of , 199_ .
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND
BAR REQUESTING ADDITIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES
WITHIN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FROM THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT UNDER THE CITY -COUNTY LAW
ENFORCEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DOES RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to the
terms and provisions of the City -County Law Enforcement Services Agreement,
dated , 199_, and entered into by and between the
City of Diamond Bar and the County of Los Angeles for general law enforcement
services through the County Sheriff's Department, desires for the City specialized
law enforcement services, said services being in addition to those heretofore
requested by the Law Enforcement Services Agreement.
Section 2. Therefore, in addition to the general law enforcement services
now being provided to the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to the Law Enforcement
Services Agreement, the City Council does hereby request the following additional
services:
Motorcycle Traffic Enforcement
Traffic Law Enforcement
Community Service Personnel
Parking Control
Narcotics Education Program (SANE)
License Investigation and Enforcement
School Crossing Guards
Special Assignment Personnel
Section 3. The County of Los Angeles, through its Sheriff's Department,
has expressed its willingness to provide Aerial Helicopter Patrol and Support
Service on a fee basis pursuant to a policy which defines Countywide, and less
than Countywide, helicopter enforcement services. In addition to the general law
enforcement services now being provided to the City of Diamond Bar pursuant
to the Law Enforcement Services Agreement, the City Council
DOES
DOES NOT
request Aerial Helicopter Patrol and Support Service.
Section 4. It is hereby requested that the Board of Supervisors or its
designated agent or agency approve and authorize the performance of services
requested in this resolution, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the
existing Law Enforcement Services Agreement.
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 199
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Mayor
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a
resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar at a regular
meeting thereof held on the day of , 199_ .
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND
BAR REQUESTING ADDITIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES
WITHIN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FROM THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT UNDER THE CITY -COUNTY LAW
ENFORCEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DOES RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to the
terms and provisions of the City -County Law Enforcement Services Agreement,
dated , 199_, and entered into by and between the
City of Diamond Bar and the County of Los Angeles for general law enforcement
services through the County Sheriff's Department, desires for the City specialized
law enforcement services, said services being in addition to those heretofore
requested by the Law Enforcement Services Agreement.
Section 2. Therefore, in addition to the general law enforcement services
now being provided to the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to the Law Enforcement
Services Agreement, the City Council does hereby request the following additional
services:
Motorcycle Traffic Enforcement
Traffic Law Enforcement
Community Service Personnel
Parking Control
Narcotics Education Program (SANE)
License Investigation and Enforcement
School Crossing Guards
Special Assignment Personnel
Section 3. The County of Los Angeles, through its Sheriff's Department,
has expressed its willingness to provide Aerial Helicopter Patrol and Support
Service on a fee basis pursuant to a policy which defines Countywide, and less
than Countywide, helicopter enforcement services. In addition to the general law
enforcement services now being provided to the City of Diamond Bar pursuant
-2 -
to the Law Enforcement Services Agreement, the City Council
DOES
DOES NOT
request Aerial Helicopter Patrol and Support Service.
Section 4. It is hereby requested that the Board of Supervisors or its
designated agent or agency approve and authorize the performance of services
requested in this resolution, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the
existing Law Enforcement Services Agreement.
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 199
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Mayor
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a
resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar at a regular
meeting thereof held on the day of , 199_ .
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND
BAR REQUESTING ADDITIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES
WITHIN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FROM THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT UNDER THE CITY -COUNTY LAW
ENFORCEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DOES RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to the
terms and provisions of the City -County Law Enforcement Services Agreement,
dated , 199_, and entered into by and between the
City of Diamond Bar and the County of Los Angeles for general law enforcement
services through the County Sheriff's Department, desires for the City specialized
law enforcement services, said services being in addition to those heretofore
requested by the Law Enforcement Services Agreement.
Section 2. Therefore, in addition to the general law enforcement services
now being provided to the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to the Law Enforcement
Services Agreement, the City Council does hereby request the following additional
services:
Motorcycle Traffic Enforcement
Traffic Law Enforcement
Community Service Personnel
Parking Control
Narcotics Education Program (SANE)
License Investigation and Enforcement
School Crossing Guards
Special Assignment Personnel
Section 3. The County of Los Angeles, through its Sheriff's Department,
has expressed its willingness to provide Aerial Helicopter Patrol and Support
Service on a fee basis pursuant to a policy which defines Countywide, and less
than Countywide, helicopter enforcement services. In addition to the general law
enforcement services now being provided to the City of Diamond Bar pursuant
-2 -
to the Law Enforcement Services Agreement, the City Council
DOES
DOES NOT
request Aerial Helicopter Patrol and Support Service.
Section 4. It is hereby requested that the Board of Supervisors or its
designated agent or agency approve and authorize the performance of services
requested in this resolution, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the
existing Law Enforcement Services Agreement.
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 199_
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Mayor
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a
resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar at a regular
meeting thereof held on the day of , 199_ .
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND
BAR REQUESTING ADDITIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES
WITHIN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FROM THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT UNDER THE CITY -COUNTY LAW
ENFORCEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DOES RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to the
terms and provisions of the City -County Law Enforcement Services Agreement,
dated , 199_, and entered into by and between the
City of Diamond Bar and the County of Los Angeles for general law enforcement
services through the County Sheriff's Department, desires for the City specialized
law enforcement services, said services being in addition to those heretofore
requested by the Law Enforcement Services Agreement.
Section 2. Therefore, in addition to the general law enforcement services
now being provided to the City of Diamond Bar pursuant to the Law Enforcement
Services Agreement, the City Council does hereby request the following additional
services:
Motorcycle Traffic Enforcement
Traffic Law Enforcement
Community Service Personnel
Parking Control
Narcotics Education Program (SANE)
License Investigation and Enforcement
School Crossing Guards
Special Assignment Personnel
Section 3. The County of Los Angeles, through its Sheriff's Department,
has expressed its willingness to provide Aerial Helicopter Patrol and Support
Service on a fee basis pursuant to a policy which defines Countywide, and less
than Countywide, helicopter enforcement services. In addition to the general law
enforcement services now being provided to the City of Diamond Bar pursuant
-2 -
to the Law Enforcement Services Agreement, the City Council
DOES
DOES NOT
request Aerial Helicopter Patrol and Support Service.
Section 4. It is hereby requested that the Board of Supervisors or its
designated agent or agency approve and authorize the performance of services
requested in this resolution, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the
existing Law Enforcement Services Agreement.
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 199_
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Mayor
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a
resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar at a regular
meeting thereof held on the day of , 199_ .
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
APPROVING THE LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AND THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, AND
REQUESTING SAID SERVICES PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT
The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does resolve as follows:
Section 1. The City -County Law Enforcement Services Agreement, from July 1, 1995 through
June 30, 1990 is hereby approved.
Section 2. The units to be requested and services to be performed during Fiscal Year 1995-1996
are those listed on Exhibit "A", included herein.
Section 3. The Board of Supervisors or its designated agent or agency is requested to approve
and authorize the performance of services requested in this resolution, subject to the terms and
conditions set forth in the City -County Law Enforcement Services Agreement.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1995.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
I, Lynda Burgess, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was passed, approved, and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Diamond Bar held on the day of . 1995 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
FISCAL YEAR 1995-1996
TYPE OF SERVICE NUMBER
General Law Units:
One-man 40 -hour (Team Leader) 1
One-man 56 -hour 6
Two-man 40 -hour 1
Traffic Law Units:
One-man 56 -hour 4
Motorcycle 40 -hour 3
Community Service Officers with
vehicles 2
Crime Prevention Deputy 1
Narcotic Prevention Deputy 1
Asian Task Force Deputy 0.5
Helicopter Patrol
Special Event Overtime
C -CAP Computer Maintenance
Crime Prevention Supplement
Meetings, Liaison
4 -hours per month
RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSH�
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
GLENN R WATSON
AMANDA F SUBSKIND^r
FRCHARD RICHARDS
ROBERTO BEVERLY
HARRY LL GERSHON
ROBERT C CE
SAYR WEAVECCON'i
+ :t4,.r
(19161888)
111
DOUGLAS W. ARGUE
STEVEN H KAUFMANN
MARK L LAMKEN
ARNOLD DIMON
GARY E. GLANS
JOHN J. HARRIS
THIRTY-EIGHTH FLOOR
ERWIN E ADLER
KEVIN G. ENNIS
333 SOUTH HOPE STREET
DAROLD D. PIEPER
ALLEN E. RENNETT
ROBIN D. HARRIS
MICHAEL ESTRADA
May 10 1995 LOS A
/ ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90071-1669
STEVEN L DORSEY
WILLIAM L DTRAUSZSTEVEN
LAURENCE B. WIENER
R. ORR
(213) 626-8684
ROBERT M. GLOLDFRI MO
ANTHONY B.DREWRY
DEBORAH R. HAKMAN
SCOTT K SHINTANI
FACSIMILE (213) 6264078
MITCHELL E. ABBOTT
TIMOTHY L NEUFELD
MICHAEL G COLANTUONO
TERRY P KAUFMANN MACIA9
OF COUNSEL
ROBERT F. DE METER
GREGORY W. STEPANICICH
S. TILDEN KIM
AURIN D. WEINER
WILLIAM K 16iAMER
ROCHEL LE BROWNS
SASKIA T ASAMURA
DONALD STERN
DAVID M FLEISHMAN
MICHAEL JENKINS
WILLIAM S. RUDELL
KAYSER O. SOME
CRAIG A. STEELE
0564935
DAVID L COHEN
GUINN M. BARROW
T PETER PIERCE
AUSON E MAKER
OUR FILE NUMBER
CAROLW LYNCH
COLEMAN J. WALSH. JR
BENJAMIN SARNOUW
TERENCE R SOGA
10572-00001
JEFFREY A. RABIN
DOUGLAS A CARLEN
GREGORY M KUNERT
DANIEL L PINES
THOMAS M. JIMBO
MICHELLE DEAL BAGNERIS
USA M BOND
WINNIE TWEN
LsA '
Lynda Burgess
Office of the City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
21660 East Copley Drive r
Suite 100
Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177
Re: Law Enforcement Services Agreement ug
t
Dear Lynda:
You have recently forwarded to me a copy of the
proposed Law Enforcement Services Agreement between the County of
Los Angeles and the City of Diamond Bar. The agreement appears
to be the County's standard agreement, and appears unchanged.
Accordingly, the agreement is acceptable as a matter of form.
Ly
ruly rs,
el Jenkins
MJ:clm
0564935
CITY 817 EIAMb"S SA&
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995N
FROM: Linda G. Magnuson`Accounting Manager
TITLE:
Agreement for Auditing of Documentary Transfer Tax Payments
SUMMARY:
AGENDA NO. % fir)
REPORT DATE: June 12, 1995
It is estimated that up to 12 percent of a city's transfer tax revenue may be misallocated to other jurisdictions.
Hdl, Coren & Cone is proposing a service to audit the Documentary Transfer Tax allocated to the City. Hdl,
Coren & Cone will analyze, through verification of real estate transfer documents, if the City of Diamond Bar
is receiving its appropriate share of transfer tax. If errors have occurred, Hdl, Coren & Cone will initiate the
proper paperwork to recover the City's misallocated portion of the tax.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council approve and direct the City Manager to execute an agreement between
Hdl, Coren & Cone to perform a review of Documentary Transfer Taxes paid to the City.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: _ Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification
Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office)
Ordinances(s) XX Other
Agreement(s)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed _ Yes XX No
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority
3. Has environmental impact been assessed? _ Yes XX No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? _ Yes XX No
Which Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes XX No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
RE D Y:
Te ence L. Belang I`rank BVI. slier Linda Magnuson
g
City Manager Assistant City Manager Accounting Manager
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Agreement for Auditing of Documentary Transfer Tax payments
ISSUE STATEMENT:
Shall the City engage the service of a consultant to monitor, identify and correct Documentary Transfer Tax
payment errors?
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council approve and direct the City Manager to execute an agreement
between Hdl, Coren & Cone to perform a review of Documentary Transfer Taxes paid to the City.
DISCUSSION:
Documentary Transfer Tax is imposed on the transfer of real property. Counties are authorized to levy the
tax at a rate of $.55 per $500 of the sale value, exclusive of any lien or encumbrance remaining at the time
of sale. Once a county has enacted the tax, a city is authorized to levy a tax at one-half the county rate. The
city tax is then credited against the county tax and the county remits payment to the City. It is estimated that
up to 12 percent of a city's revenue may be misallocated to another jurisdiction. For fiscal year 1994-95,
the City will receive approximately $95,000 in Property Transfer Tax. Based on the City's current collection
of Transfer Tax, it is anticipated that the increase in revenue would be approximately $11,400 offset by an
approximate cost of $1,700.
HdL Coren & Cone is proposing to audit the City's Documentary Transfer Tax payments. This service will
track the property transfers for comparison with the monthly statement provided to the City of Diamond Bar
by the County Recorder's Office. Those transfers which are coded to the City and which have not resulted
in taxes being remitted to the City will be submitted to the City for transmittal to the appropriate County
agency. Further, to the extent that remittance detail is available, misallocations may be recovered for each
of the past three years.
This service is being offered to the City for a fee of 15 percent of the amount of revenue recovered. There
are no other monthly retainers or fees required.
Dvuunivuiaiy Tieuib&r TuA
Page Two
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
Revenue- approximately $11,000 per year (based on 1994-95 collection of Transfer Tax)
Expenditure - Hdl, Coren & Cone's fee is based upon 15% of recovered transfer tax
190 aVR:7�1�7:�`il
G-4 kJ �
Linda G. Magnuso , Accounting Manager
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO. ('�1
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995 REPORT DATE: June 13, 1995
FROM: David G. Liu, Senior Engineer
Kellee A. Fritzal, Administrative Assistant
TITLE: CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATIONANSPECTION SERVICES FOR GRAND
AVENUE REHABILITATION - DEWAN, LUNDIN & ASSOCIATES
SUMMARY: In preparation for the Grand Avenue Rehabilitation Project, the City distributed Requests for Proposal for
Construction Administration and Inspection services. After review of the proposals, interviews, and
references checks, the committee ranked the proposing firms. Staff recommended Harris and Associates
as the most qualified firm. On June 13, 1995 Harris and Associates withdrew their proposal. Staffs
subsequent recommendation is Dewan, Lundin & Associates (DL & A). The firm has worked with the
City on the Diamond Bar Boulevard Rehabilitation Project and the quality of their work has been very
good. For this project, the cost proposal of DL & A is the second lowest cost proposal received. DL &
A is currently completing a project with the selected contractor, Gentry Brothers, in the City of South Gate.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the Mayor to enter into a Professional
Services Agreement with Dewan, Lundin and Associates for Construction Administration
and Inspection Services for the Grand Avenue Reconstruction in a amount not to exceed
$28,600 and provide a contingency amount of $2,500 for contract amendment (s) to be
approved by the City Manager, for a total authorization amount of $31,100.
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed X Yes No
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? MAJORITY
3. Has environmental impact been assessed? N/A Yes _ No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? N/A Yes No
Which Commission?
5. Arc other departments affected by the report? _ Yes X No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
REVIEWED BY:
Terrence L. Belanger Flank . Us er avid G. Liu
City Manager Assistant City Manager Senior Engineer
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATIONANSPECTION SERVICES FOR GRAND
AVENUE REHABILITATION - DEWAN, LUNDIN & ASSOCIATES
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the Mayor to enter into a Professional Services Agreement
with Dewan, Lundin and Associates for Construction Administration and Inspection Services for Grand Avenue
Rehabilitation in a amount not to exceed $28,600, and provide a contingency amount of $2,500 for contract
amendment (s) to be approved by the City Manager, for a total authorization amount of $31,100.
SUMMARY:
The City Council awarded a contract for the construction of the Grand Avenue Rehabilitation on June 12, 1995.
The City requested the services of a professional firm who specializes in Construction Administration and
Inspection, RFP was prepared and distributed to fifty (50) firms. The City received twenty proposals. After
review of the proposals, ten firms were interviewed by a committee composed of the Assistant City Manager,
Senior Engineer and Administrative Assistant. Based upon review of the proposals, interviews, and references
checks the committee ranked the ten finalist. The Committee recommended Harris and Associates as the most
qualified firm. On June 13, 1995, Harris and Associates withdrew their proposal. The subsequent
recommendation is Dewan, Lundin & Associates.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
The firm of Dewan, Lundin & Associates proposes a fee of $28,600 for the Construction Administration and
Inspection Services.
DISCUSSION:
The Grand Avenue Rehabilitation Project consists of traffic signal synchronization, reconstruction of a portion of
the roadway, intersection improvements, and storm drain relocation. The project is scheduled to begin during the
school summer vacation (end of June). The Construction Administration/Inspection services include: video
documentation, monitoring and adherence to construction schedule, traffic control, public education/information,
inspection services, utility company coordination, and quality control. Staff desires to retain the services of a
company which will control the project. Due to the withdrawal of Harris and Associates, staff met with the next
best qualified firm, DL & A, regarding the Construction Administration. Staff requested DL & A to provide service
at an enhanced level. The City will implement a "Grand Avenue Hotline" and DL & A will provide the message,
monitor the calls and respond to any complaints, 7 days a week, with responses to be made within 24 hours. Due
to the higher level of service, the proposed fee has increased $5,200. DL & A, with David Hart and Walt Lundin
as the project team, will closely monitor the ninety (90) day construction schedule for strict adherence, provide full-
time inspection and quality control services, traffic control, video documentation, utility company coordination, and
plan and specifications review. The fees proposed by the ten firms ranged from $23,400 to $66,810.
The following list is the ranking of the ten interviewed firms by the Committee (based upon proposal and interview):
FIRM
PROPOSED COST*
Harris and Associates
$41,310**
Dewan, Lundin & Associates
$28,600
PBS & J
$66,810
DGA
$23,400
RKA Civil Engineers
$44,500
Norris-Repke, Inc
$34,212
Hall and Foreman
$29,000
Dwight French & Associates
$54,495
Consulting Services Group
$37,586
Bryan Stirrat & Associates
$50,578
Based on a construction period of 90 calendar days.
* * Harris and Associates withdrew their proposal on 6/13/95.
CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made as of June 20. 1995 by and between the City of Diamond Bar, a
municipal corporation ("City") and Dewan. Lundin & Associates, ("Consultant").
RECITALS
A. City desires to utilize the services of Consultant as an independent contractor to provide
consulting services to City as set forth in Exhibit "A."
B. Consultant represents that it is fully qualified to perform such consulting services by virtue of
its experience and the training, education and expertise of its principals and employees.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of performance by the parties of the covenants and conditions
herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. Consultant's Services.
A. Scope of Services. The nature and scope of the specific services to be performed
by Consultant are as described in Exhibit "A."
B. Level of Services/Time of Performance. The level of and time of the specific
services to be performed by Consultant are as set forth in Exhibit "A."
2. Term of Agreement. This Contract shall take effect June 20. 1995, and shall continue
until September 30. 1995, unless earlier terminated pursuant to the provisions herein.
3. Compensation. City agrees to compensate Consultant for each service which
Consultant performs to the satisfaction of City in compliance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit "B."
Payment will be made only after submission of proper monthly invoices in the form specified by City.
Total payment to Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall not exceed twen -eight thousand six
hundrsd dollars
4. General Terms and Conditions. In the event of any inconsistency between the
provisions of this Agreement and Consultant's proposal, the provisions of this Agreement shall control.
5. Addresses.
City: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
City of Diamond Bar
21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 100
Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177
Consultant: Surender Dewan, P.E.
Dewan, Lundin & Associates
12377 Lewis Street, Suite 101
Garden Grove, CA 92640-4643
950325 10572.00001 Isj/sd1 1092677 4
6. Status as Independent Consultant.
A. Consultant is, and shall at all times remain as to City, a wholly independent
contractor. Consultant shall have no power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of City or
otherwise act on behalf of City as an agent. Neither City nor any of its agents shall have control over the
conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's employees, except as set forth in this Agreement.
Consultant shall not, at any time, or in any manner, represent that it or any of its agents or employees are
in any manner agents or employees of City.
B. Consultant agrees to pay all required taxes on amounts paid to Consultant under
this Agreement, and to indemnify and hold City harmless from any and all taxes, assessments, penalties,
and interest asserted against City by reason of the independent contractor relationship created by this
Agreement. In the event that City is audited by any Federal or State agency regarding the independent
contractor status of Consultant and the audit in any way fails to sustain the validity of a wholly
independent contractor relationship between City and Consultant, then Consultant agrees to reimburse
City for all costs, including accounting and attorney's fees, arising out of such audit and any appeals
relating thereto.
C. Consultant shall fully comply with the workers' compensation law regarding
Consultant and Consultant's employees. Consultant further agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless
from any failure of Consultant to comply with applicable worker's compensation laws. City shall have
the right to offset against the amount of any fees due to Consultant under this Agreement any amount due
to City from Consultant as a result of Consultant's failure to promptly pay to City any reimbursement or
indemnification arising under this Section 6.
7. Standard of Performance. Consultant shall perform all work to the highest
professional standards and in a manner reasonably satisfactory to the City Manager or the City Manager's
designee.
8. Indemnification. Consultant is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform
the services and duties agreed to be performed under this Agreement,, and City is relying upon the skill
and knowledge of Consultant to perform those services and duties. To the fullest extent permitted by law,
Consultant hereby agrees, at its sole cost and expense, to defend, protect, indemnify, and hold harmless
the City of Diamond Bar and its elected officials, officers, attorneys, agents, employees, volunteers,
successors, and assigns (collectively "Indemnitees") from and against any and all damages, costs,
expenses, liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, proceedings, expenses, judgments, penalties,
liens, and losses of any nature whatsoever, including fees of accountants, attorneys, or other
professionals and all costs associated therewith, arising or claimed to arise, directly or indirectly, out of,
in connection with, resulting from, or related to any act, failure to act, error, or omission of Consultant or
any of its officers, agents, servants, employees, subcontractors, materialmen, suppliers or their officers,
agents, servants or employees, arising or claimed to arise, directly or indirectly, out of, in connection
with, resulting from, or related to this Agreement or the performance or failure to perform any term,
provision, covenant, or condition of the Agreement, including this indemnity provision. This indemnity
provision is effective regardless of any prior, concurrent, or subsequent active or passive negligence by
Indemnitees and shall operate to fully indemnify Indemnitees against any such negligence. This
indemnity provision shall survive the termination of the Agreement and is in addition to any other rights
or remedies which Indemnitees may have under the law. Payment is not required as a condition
precedent to an Indemnitee's right to recover under this indemnity provision, and an entry of judgment
against an Indemnitee shall be conclusive in favor of the Indemnitee's right to recover under this
950525 10572-00001 lsj/sW 1092677 4 Page 2
indemnity provision. Consultant shall pay Indemnitees for any attorneys fees and costs incurred in
enforcing this indemnification provision. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in this instrument shall
be construed to encompass (a) Indemnitees' sole negligence or willful misconduct to the limited extent
that the underlying Agreement is subject to Civil Code § 2782(a) or (b) the contracting public agency's
active negligence to the limited extent that the underlying Agreement is subject to Civil Code § 2782(b).
This indemnity is effective without reference to the existence or applicability of any insurance coverages
which may have been required under the Agreement or any additional insured endorsements which may
extend to Indemnitees.
Consultant, on behalf of itself and all parties claiming under or through it, hereby waives all rights of
subrogation and contribution against the Indemnitees, while acting within the scope of their duties, from
all claims, losses and liabilities arising out of or incident to activities or operations performed by or on
behalf of the Consultant regardless of any prior, concurrent, or subsequent active or passive negligence
by the Indemnitees.
In the event there is more than one person or entity named in the Agreement as a Consultant, then all
obligations, liabilities, covenants and conditions under this Section 8 shall be joint and several.
9. Insurance. Consultant shall at all tunes during the term of this Agreement carry,
maintain, and keep in full force and effect, with an insurance company admitted to do business in
California and approved by the City (1) a policy or policies of broad -form comprehensive general
liability insurance with minimum limits of $1,000,000.00 combined single limit coverage against any
injury, death, loss or damage as a result of wrongful or negligent acts by Consultant, its officers,
employees, agents, and independent contractors in performance of services under this Agreement; (2)
property damage insurance with a minimum limit of $500,000.00; (3) automotive liability insurance,
with minimum combined single limits coverage of $500,000.00; and (4) worker's compensation
insurance with a minimum limit of $500,000.00 or the amount required by law, whichever is greater.
City, its officers, employees, attorneys, and volunteers shall be named as additional insureds on the
policy(ies) as to comprehensive general liability, property damage, and worker's compensation
coverages. -
A. All insurance policies shall provide that the insurance coverage shall not be non -
renewed, canceled, reduced, or otherwise modified (except through the addition of additional insureds to
the policy) by the insurance carrier without the insurance carrier giving City thirty (30) day's prior
written notice thereof. Consultant agrees that it will not cancel, reduce or otherwise modify the
insurance coverage.
B. Consultant agrees that if it does not keep the insurance in full force and effect,
and such insurance is available at a reasonable cost, City may take out the necessary insurance and pay
the premium thereon, and the repayment thereof shall be deemed an obligation of Consultant and the cost
of such insurance may be deducted, at the option of City, from payments due Consultant.
C. Consultant shall submit to City (1) insurance certificates indicating compliance
with the minimum worker's compensation insurance requirements above, and (2) insurance policy
endorsements indicating compliance with all other minimum insurance requirements above, not less that
one (1) day prior to beginning of performance under this Agreement. Endorsements shall be executed on
City's appropriate standard forms entitled "Additional Insured Endorsement".
10. Confidentiality. Consultant in the course of its duties may have access to confidential
data of City, private individuals, or employees of the City. Consultant covenants that all data,
950525 1057240001 IsysdI IOM77 4 Page 3
documents, discussion, or other information developed or received by Consultant or provided for
performance of this Agreement are deemed confidential and shall not be disclosed by Consultant without
written authorization by City. City shall grant such authorization if disclosure is required by law. All
City data shall be returned to City upon the termination of this Agreement. Consultant's covenant under
this section shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
11. Ownership of Materials. All materials provided by Consultant in the performance of
this Agreement shall be and remain the property of City without restriction or limitation upon its use or
dissemination by City.
12. Conflict of Interest.
A. Consultant covenants that it presently has no interest and shall not acquire any
interest, director or indirect, which may be affected by the services to be performed by Consultant under
this Agreement, or which would conflict in any manner with the performance of its services hereunder.
Consultant further covenants that, in performance of this Agreement, no person having any such interest
shall be employed by it. Furthermore, Consultant shall avoid the appearance of having any interest
which would conflict in any manner with the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement.
B. Consultant covenants not to give or receive any compensation, monetary or
otherwise, to or from the ultimate vendor(s) of hardware or software to City as a result of the
performance of this Agreement. Consultant's covenant under this section shall survive the termination of
this Agreement.
13. Termination. City may terminate this Agreement with or without cause upon fifteen
(15) days' written notice to Consultant. The effective date of termination shall be upon the date specified
in the notice of termination, or, in the event no date is specified, upon the fifteenth (15th) day following
delivery of the notice. In the event of such termination, City agrees to pay Consultant for services
satisfactorily rendered prior to the effective date of termination. Immediately upon receiving written
notice of termination, Consultant shall discontinue performing services.
14. Personnel. Consultant represents that it has, or will secure at its own expense, all
personnel required to perform the services under this Agreement. All of the services required under this
Agreement will be performed by Consultant or under it supervision, and all personnel engaged in the
work shall be qualified to perform such services. Consultant reserves the right to determine the
assignment of its own employees to the performance of Consultant's services under this Agreement, but
City reserves the right, for good cause, to require Consultant to exclude any employee from performing
services on City's premises.
15. Financial Condition. Prior to entering into this Agreement, Consultant has submitted
documentation acceptable to the City Manager, establishing that it is financially solvent, such that it can
reasonably be expected to perform the services required by this Agreement. Within thirty (30) days of
the first anniversary of the effective date of this Agreement, and each year thereafter throughout the term
of this Agreement, Consultant shall submit such financial information as may be appropriate to establish
to the satisfaction of the City Manager that Consultant is in at least as sound a financial position as was
the case prior to entering into this Agreement. Financial information submitted to the City Manager shall
be returned to Consultant after review and shall not be retained by City.
950525 10572.00001 Isj/sdl I092b77 4 Page 4
16. Non -Discrimination and Equal Employment Opportunity.
A. Consultant shall not discriminate as to race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital
status, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental handicap, medical condition, or sexual
orientation, in the performance of its services and duties pursuant to this Agreement, and will comply
with all rules and regulations of City relating thereto. Such nondiscrimination shall include but not be
limited to the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, transfers, recruitment or recruitment
advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training,
including apprenticeship.
B. Consultant will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or
on behalf of Consultant state either that it is an equal opportunity employer or that all qualified
applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, sex,
marital status, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental handicap, medical condition, or sexual
orientation.
C. Consultant will cause the foregoing provisions to be inserted in all subcontracts
for any work covered by this Agreement except contracts or subcontracts for standard commercial
supplies or raw materials.
17. Assignment. Consultant shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor
the performance of any of Consultant's obligations hereunder, without the prior written consent of City;
and any attempt by Consultant to so assign this Agreement or any rights, duties, or obligations arising
hereunder shall be void and of no effect.
18. Performance Evaluation. For any contract in effect for twelve months or longer, a
written annual administrative performance evaluation shall be required within ninety (90) days of the
first anniversary of the effective date of this Agreement, and each year thereafter throughout the term of
this Agreement. The work product required by this Agreement shall be utilized as the basis for review,
and any comments or complaints received by City during the review period, either orally or in writing,
shall be considered. City shall meet with Consultant prior to preparing the written report. If any
noncompliance with the Agreement is found, City may direct Consultant to correct the inadequacies, or,
in the alternative, may terminate this Agreement as provided herein.
19. Compliance with Laws. Consultant shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances,
codes and regulations of the federal, state, and local governments.
20. Non -Waiver of Terms, Rights and Remedies. Waiver by either party of any one or
more of the conditions of performance under this Agreement shall not be a waiver of any other condition
of performance under this Agreement. In no event shall the making by City of any payment to
Consultant constitute or be construed as a waiver by City of any breach of covenant, or any default which
may then exist on the part of Consultant, and the making of any such payment by City shall in no way
impair or prejudice any right or remedy available to City with regard to such breach or default.
21. Attorney's Fees. In the event that either party to this Agreement shall commence any
legal or equitable action or proceeding to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Agreement, the
prevailing party in such action or proceeding shall be entitled to recover its costs of suit, including
reasonable attorney's fees and costs, including costs of expert witnesses and consultants.
950525 10572.00001 lsysdl 1092677 4 Page 5
22. Notices. Any notices, bills, invoices, or reports required by this Agreement shall be
deemed received on (a) the day of delivery if delivered by hand during regular business hours or by
facsimile before or during regular business hours; or (b) on the third business day following deposit in
the United States mail, postage prepaid, to the addresses heretofore set forth in the Agreement, or to such
other addresses as the parties may, from time to time, designate in writing pursuant to the provisions of
this section.
23. Governing Law. This Contract shall be interpreted, construed and enforced in
accordance with the laws of the State of California.
24. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of
which shall be deemed to be the original, and all of which together shall constitute one and the same
instrument.
25. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, and any other documents incorporated herein by
specific reference, represent the entire and integrated agreement between Consultant and City. This
Agreement supersedes all prior oral or written negotiations, representations or agreements. This
Agreement may not be amended, nor any provision or breach hereof waived, except in a writing signed
by the parties which expressly refers to this Agreement. Amendments on behalf of the City will only be
valid if signed by the City Manager or the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk.
26. Exhibits. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement are incorporated herein by this
reference.
IN WITNESS V,�HREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first
written above.
"City"
ATTEST:' CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
am
City Clerk
By:
Mayor
Approved as to form: "CONSULTANT"
By. �- I_A�
City Attorney SWj
By:
Its: ;TVA eA
950325 10572-00001 13ysdl 1092677 4 Page 6
ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT
COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL LIABILITY
Name and address of named insured ("Named Insured'):
Name and address of Insurance Company ("Company'):
General description of agreement(s), permit(s), license(s), and/or activity(ies) insured:
Notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the policy to which this endorsement is attached
(the "Policy") or in any endorsement now or hereafter attached thereto, it is agreed as follows:
1. The("Public
Agency"), its elected officials, officers, attorneys, agents, employees, and volunteers are additional
insureds (the above named additional insureds are hereafter referred to as the "Additional Insureds")
under the Policy in relation to those activities described generally above with regard to operations
performed by or on behalf of the Named Insured. The Additional Insureds have no liability for the
payment of any premiums or assessments under the Policy.
2. The insurance coverages afforded the Additional Insureds under the Policy shall be
primary insurance, and no other insurance maintained by the Additional Insureds shall be called upon to
contribute with the insurance coverages provided by the Policy.
3. Each insurance coverage under the Policy shall apply separately to each Additional
Insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought except with respect to the limits of the Company's
liability.
4. Nothing in this contract of insurance shall be construed to preclude coverage of a claim
by one insured under the policy against another insured under the policy. All such claims shall covered
as third -party claims, i.e., in the same manner as if separate policies had been issued to each insured.
Nothing contained in this provision shall operate to increase or replicate the Company's limits of liability
as provided under the policy.
5. The insurance afforded by the Policy for contractual liability insurance (subject to the
terms, conditions and exclusions applicable to such insurance) includes liability assumed by the Named
Insured under the indemnification and/or hold harmless provision(s) contained in or executed in
J_1 ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT
950525 10572-00001 lsysdl 1092677 4 COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL LIABILITY
conjunction with the written agreement(s) or permit(s) designated above, between the Named Insured
and the Additional Insureds.
6. The policy to which this endorsement is attached shall not be subject to cancellation,
change in coverage, reduction of limits (except as the result of the payment of claims), or non -renewal
except after written notice to Public Agency, by certified mail, return receipt requested, not less than
thirty (30) days prior to the effective date thereof. In the event of Company's failure to comply with this
notice provision, the policy as initially drafted will continue in full force and effect until compliance with
this notice requirement.
7. Company hereby waives all rights of subrogation and contribution against the Additional
Insureds, while acting within the scope of their duties, from all claims, losses and liabilities arising out of
or incident to the perils insured against in relation to those activities described generally above with
regard to operations performed by or on behalf of the Named Insured regardless of any prior, concurrent,
or subsequent active or passive negligence by the Additional Insureds. .
8. It is hereby agreed that the laws of the State of California shall apply to and govern the
validity, construction, interpretation, and enforcement of this contract of insurance.
This endorsement and all notices given hereunder shall be sent to Public Agency at:
10. Except as stated above and not in conflict with this endorsement, nothing contained
herein shall be held to waive, alter or extend any of the limits, agreements, or exclusions of the policy to
which this endorsement is attached.
POLICY PERIOD LMTS OF
FROM/TO LIABILITY
11. Scheduled items or locations are to be identified on an attached sheet. The following
inclusions relate to the above coverages. Includes:
J_Z ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT
950325 10372-00001 Isi/S& 10926774 COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL LIABILITY
❑ Contractual Liability
❑ Owners/Landlords/Tenants
❑ Manufacturers/Contractors
❑ Products/Completed Operations
❑ Broad Form Property Damage
❑ Extended Bodily Injury
❑ Broad Form Comprehensive
General Liability Endorsement
❑ Explosion Hazard
❑ Collapse Hazard
❑ Underground Property Damage
❑ Pollution Liability
❑ Liquor Liability
5
12. A ❑ deductible or ❑ self-insured retention (check one) of $ applies
to all coverage(s) except:
(if none, so state). The deductible is applicable ❑ per claim or ❑ per
occurrence (check one).
13. This is an ❑ occurrence or ❑ claims made policy (check one).
14. This endorsement is effective on at 12:01 A.M. and forms a part
of Policy Number
1, (print name), hereby
declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that I have the authority to bind
the Company to this endorsement and that by my execution hereof, I do so bind the Company.
Executed .19 -
Phone
19
Signature of Authorized Representative
(Original signature only; no facsimile signature
or initialed signature accepted)
Phone No.: ( )
J_3 ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT
950525 10572-00001 hj/sdl 1092677 4 COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL LIABILITY
ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT
AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY
Name and address of named insured ("Named Insured'):
Name and address of Insurance Company ("Company'):
General description of agreement(s), permit(s), license(s), and/or activity(ies) insured:
Notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the policy to which this endorsement is attached
(the "Policy") or in any endorsement now or hereafter attached thereto, it is agreed as follows:
1. The
("Public Agency"), its elected officials, officers, attorneys, agents, employees, and volunteers are
additional insureds (the above named additional insureds are hereafter referred to as the "Additional
Insureds") under the Policy in relation to those activities described generally above with regard to
operations performed by or on behalf of the Named Insured. The Additional Insureds have no liability
for the payment of any premiums or assessments under the Policy.
2. The insurance coverages afforded the Additional, Insureds under -the Policy shall be
primary insurance, and no other insurance maintained by the Additional Insureds shall be called upon to
contribute with the insurance coverages provided by the Policy.
3. Each insurance coverage under the Policy shall apply separately to each Additional
Insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought except with respect to the limits of the Company's
liability.
4. Nothing in this contract of insurance shall be construed to preclude coverage of a claim
by one insured under the policy against another insured under the policy. All such claims shall covered
as third -party claims, i.e., in the same manner as if separate policies had been issued to each insured..
Nothing contained in this provision shall operate to increase or replicate the Company's limits of liability
as provided under the policy.
5. The insurance afforded by the Policy for contractual liability insurance (subject to the
terms, conditions and exclusions applicable to such insurance) includes liability assumed by the Named
Insured under the indemnification and/or hold harmless provision(s) contained or executed in
conjunction with the written agreement(s) or permit(s) designated above, between the Named Insured
and the Additional Insureds.
J-4 ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT
AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY
950525 10572.00001 WWI 1092677 4
6. The policy to which this endorsement is attached shall not be subject to cancellation,
change in coverage, reduction of limits (except as the result of the payment of claims), or non -renewal
except after written notice to Public Agency, by certified mail, return receipt requested, not less than
thirty (30) days prior to the effective date thereto. In the event of Company's failure to comply with this
notice provision, the policy as initially drafted will continue in full force and effect until compliance with
this notice requirement.
7. Company hereby waives all rights of subrogation and contribution against the Additional
Insureds, while acting within the scope of their duties, from all claims, losses and liabilities arising out of
or incident to the perils insured against in relation to those activities described generally above with
regard to operations performed by or on behalf of the Named Insured regardless of any prior, concurrent,
or subsequent active or passive negligence by the Additional Insureds.
8. It is hereby agreed that the laws of the State of California shall apply to and govern the
validity, construction, interpretation, and enforcement of this contract of insurance.
9. This endorsement and all notices given hereunder shall be sent to Public Agency at:
10. Except as stated above and not in conflict with this endorsement, nothing contained
herein shall be held to waive, alter or extend any of the limits, agreements, or exclusions of the policy to
which this endorsement is attached.
TYPE OF COVERAGES TO WHICH POLICY PERIOD
THIS ENDORS hOM ATTACHES_ FROMM
LB41TS OF
I JABILILY
11. Scheduled items or locations are to be identified on an attached sheet. The following
inclusions relate to the above coverages. Includes:
❑ Any Automobiles ❑ Truckers Coverage
❑ All Owned Automobiles ❑ Motor Carrier Act
❑ Non -owned Automobiles ❑ Bus Regulatory Reform Act
❑ Hired Automobiles ❑ Public Livery Coverage
J_5 ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT
AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY
950525 10572-00001 Isysdl 1092677 4
❑ Scheduled Automobiles ❑
❑ Garage Coverage ❑
12. A ❑ deductible or ❑ self-insured retention (check one) of $
applies to all coverage(s) except:
(if none, so state). The deductible is applicable ❑ per
claim or ❑ per occurrence (check one).
13. This is an ❑ occurrence or ❑ claims made policy (check one).
14. This endorsement is effective on at 12:01 A.M. and forms a part of Policy
Number
I (print name), hereby
declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that I have the authority to bind
the Company to this endorsement and that by my execution hereof, I do so bind the Company.
Executed , 19
Signature of Authorized Representative
(original signature only; no facsimile signature
or initialed signature accepted)
Phone No.: (._)
J-6 ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT
AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY
950525 10572.00001 Isi/A 1092677 4
ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT
EXCESS LIABILITY
Name and address of named insured ("Named Insured'):
Name and address of Insurance Company ("Company'):
General description of agreement(s), permit(s), license(s), and/or activity(ies) insured.
Notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the policy to which this endorsement is attached
(the "Policy") or in any endorsement now or hereafter attached thereto, it is agreed as follows:
I. The
("Public Agency"), its elected officials, officers, attorneys, agents, employees, and volunteers are
additional insureds (the above named additional insureds are hereafter referred to as the "Additional
Insureds") under the Policy in relation to those activities described generally above with regard to
operations performed by or on behalf of the Named Insured. The Additional Insureds have no liability
for the payment of any premiums or assessments under the Policy.
2. The insurance coverages afforded the Additional Insureds under the Policy shall be
primary insurance, and no other insurance maintained by the Additional Insureds shall be called upon to
contribute with the insurance coverages provided by the Policy.
3. Each insurance coverage under the Policy shall apply separately to each Additional
Insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought except with respect to the limits of the Company's
liability.
4. Nothing in this contract of insurance shall be construed to preclude coverage of a claim
by one insured under the policy against another insured under the policy. All such claims shall covered
as third -party claims, i.e., in the same manner as if separate policies had been issued to each insured.
Nothing contained in this provision shall operate to increase or replicate the Company's limits of liability
as provided under the policy.
5. The insurance afforded by the Policy for contractual liability insurance (subject to the
terms, conditions and exclusions applicable to such insurance) includes liability assumed by the Named
Insured under the indemnification and/or hold harmless provision(s) contained in or executed in
J-7 ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT
EXCESS LIABILITY
950525 10572-00001 lsj/s& 1092677 4
conjunction with the written agreement(s) or permit(s) designated above, between the Named Insured
and the Additional Insureds.
6. The policy to which this endorsement is attached shall not be subject to cancellation,
change in coverage, reduction of limits (except as the result of the payment of claims), or non -renewal
except after written notice to Public Agency, by certified mail, return receipt requested, not less than
thirty (30) days prior to the effective date thereto. In the event of Company's failure to comply with this
notice provision, the policy as initially drafted will continue in full force and effect until compliance with
this notice requirement.
7. Company hereby waives all rights of subrogation and contribution against the Additional
Insureds, while acting within the scope of their duties, from all claims, losses and liabilities arising out of
or incident to the perils insured against in relation to those activities described generally above with
regard to operations performed by or on behalf of the Named Insured regardless of any prior, concurrent,
or subsequent active or passive negligence by the Additional Insureds.
8. It is hereby agreed that the laws of the State of California shall apply to and govern the
validity, construction, interpretation, and enforcement of this contract of insurance.
9. This endorsement and all notices given hereunder shall be sent to Public Agency at:
10. Except as stated above and not in conflict with this endorsement, nothing contained
herein shall be held to waive, alter or extend any of the limits, agreements, or exclusions of the policy to
which this endorsement is attached.
TYPE OF COVERAGES TO WHICH POLICY PERIOD i LIMITS OF
TIRS ENDORSEMENT ATTACHES FROM11O LIABILITY
❑ Following Form
❑ Umbrella Liability
11. Applicable underlying coverages:
INSURANCE COMPANY POLICY NO.
AMOLTNT
J-8 ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT
EXCESS LIABILITY
950525 10572-000OI IsiISM 1092677 4
12. The following inclusions, exclusions, extensions or specific provisions relate to the
above coverages:
13. A ❑ deductible or ❑ self-insured retention (check one) of $ applies
to all coverage(s) except:
(if none, so state). The deductible is applicable ❑ per claim or ❑ per occurrence (check one).
13. This is an ❑ occurrence or ❑ claims made policy (check one).
14. This endorsement is effective on
of Policy Number
at 12:01 A.M. and forms a part
I (print name), hereby
declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that I have the authority to bind
the Company to this endorsement and that by my execution hereof, I do so bind the Company.
Executed , 19
Signature of Authorized Representative
(Original signature only; no facsimile signature
or initialed signature accepted)
Phone No.:(
,1_9 ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT
EXCESS LIABILITY
950525 10572-00001 lsilsdl 1092677 4
ATTACHMENT A
SCOPE OF WORK
(REVISED) y
The City of Diamond Bar has approved plans and specifications for Grand Avenue street
rehabilitation, traffic signal synchronization and intersection modifications between Golden
Springs Drive and the San Bernardino County Line.
The proposed project consists of:
a) Reconstruction of existing pavement
b) Cold planing of existing pavement
c) Installation of pavement fabric
d) Construction of A.C. overlay
e) Construction of curb and gutter
f) Reconstruction of median islands
g) Construction of P.C.C. sidewalks, wheelchair ramps, driveways, cross gutters, etc.
h) Construction of R.C.P. storm drain, catch basin, local depression and
appurtenances
i) Construction of retaining wall
j) Reinstallation of traffic detector loops
k) Traffic striping and signage
Construction contract documents allow the contractor to complete the work within 90 calendar
days. Request for proposal (RFP) indicates a start date of May 15, 1995 and a completion date of
August 15, 1995 which allows a total of 65 working days excluding Saturdays, Sundays and
Holidays.
The scope of work, as set forth in the Request for Proposal, includes construction observation
and administration in accordance with the plans and specifications, and as follows:
1. Attend pre -construction meeting.
2. Coordinate with utility companies.
3. Provide construction inspection to ensure that the contractor is in full compliance
wish the construction contract.
4. Provide plant inspection, if necessary
5. Prepare daily inspection reports and submit to the City on a bi-weekly basis.
6. Provide videography (visual documentation) of street condition befare, during,, and
after the construction.
7. Answer contractoes questions regarding design issues and review/monitor
contractor's progress and schedule.
8. Evakuft progress paymcnis and change order requests.
9. Conduct final job walk(s) and prepare a "punch list',
10. Recommend for fieal acceptance of project.
11. Maintain project construction records and prepare record drawings to be given to
the City at the end of the project.
12. Conduct mooting with business owners.
13. Maintain_"Grand Avenue Telephone Hotline".
14. Provide contlnuai public relati0ns-
15. Track claims %ling contractor.
PROJECT APPROACH
(REVISED)
1. Pre -Construction Meeting
DLA's contract administrator in consultation with the City staff and the contractor will
send out notifications to various agencies and utility companies to schedule the pre -
construction meeting. It will also be the responsibility of our administrator to prepare
minutes of the meeting.
2. Utility Coordination
A's observer will coordinate as necessary with
Throughout the duration of contract, DL
utility companies so as to ensure smooth completion of the project.
3. Construction Observation
DLA's observer will perform observer/administrator's duties are set forth in the scope of
work for the project. Guidance for the manner in which those duties are carried out best
described in:
a) Project Plans and Specifications
b) Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, 1994 Edition
c) Public Works Inspectors Manual (Published by Building News Inc.)
4. Plant Inspection, if necessary
DLA will provide, 'if required a plant inspector to ensure that the asphalt material to be
used conforms to project specifications. DLA will utilize the services of LaBelle &
Marvin for these services.
5. Daily Inspection Reports
DLA's inspector will prepare daily inspection reports to document the work performed by
the contractor. Copies of daily reports will be delivered to the City at the completion of
the project.
6. Provide Videography
Our staff will prepare VHS tapes to document phases of construction. This tape will be
delivered to the City at the completion of the project. Photographs will also be taken
during construction. City will be provided with weekly reports highlighting and
summarizing the work performed during the week.
7. Monitor Contractor's Progress
DLA's observer will answer contractor's questions regarding design issues and review or
monitor contractor's progress and schedule. Impact to local businesses and residences will
be minimized through careful coordination with the contractor. Strict adherence to the
approved schedule will be required of the contractor. If necessary, the contractor will be
immediately notified when his progress falls behind schedule. DLA's observer with
contractor and designer in order to minimize any potential delays.
a. Evaluate Progress Payments
Evaluate progress payments and change order requests. DLA's construction observer
upon receipt of contractors proVess payments review them for accuracy. Any revisions
resulting in change orders will be brought to the City's attention prior to authorization.
9. Conduct Fiscal Job Walk mod "Punch List"
At the completion of the project, DLA's observer will prepare a "Punch List" identifying
items to be addressed by the contractor prior to final acceptance of the job. DLA's
observer will ensure that items addressed in the "Punch list" are attended to by the
contractor.
10. Final Acceptance
Recommend for final acceptance of project.
11. "As Constructed" Plans
At the completion of construction, DLA's observer will prepare "As Constructed" plans
and deliver to the City for revisions to the original mylars.
12. Conduct Meeting with Business Owners
DLA will set up, with assistance Brom the City staff, a meeting with all affected business
owners prior to the start of construction to inform them of the proposed work and
schedule. This meeting wail supplement the flyers and signage provided by the contractor.
Comments and input obtained from attendees will be incorporated into contractors
construction schedule so as to minimize any inconvenience.
13. Maintain "Grand Avenue Telephone Hotline"
DLA will maintain a telephone hotline by provided by the City. This hotline will provide
a daily message identityirtg anticipated road closures and work scheduled. Callers will be
able to leave messages to request additional information and to submit complaints. DLA
will prepare the daily message and review messages submitted by callers at 9:00 a.m., 1:00
p.m., and 4:00 p.m. on weekdays and at 1:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays. All calls be
responded to within 24 hours, if not immediately.
14. Provide Continual Public Relations .
In addition to the normal notification procedures, DLA will meet periodically with
business owners and other affected agencies, e.g. schools, library, fire dcpw*m t, post
office, etc. These owners and agencies will be contacted the weds prior to proposed
closures in their area.
15. Track Claims Against the Contractor
Some claims against the contractor are inevitable and will be received either through the
hotline or by City staff. These claims will be reviewed by DLA. Specific h6cmation on
the damage, date and time of event, location where damage occurred, and other relevant
information will be requested from the claimant. This information wd) be provided to the
contractor for resolution. Each claim will be tracked to identify when the initial claim was
made, when information was submitted, when claim was submitted to the contractor, and
when the Claim was seftlod,
ATTACHMENT B
FEE SCHEDULE
(REVISED)
1. It is estimated that our observer will spend
on an average eight (8) hours a day at the job
site.
Therefore assume
s(hours) x 65(working days) x 40(hourly rate) S 201800.00 =
2. It is estimated that on an average one (1)
hour a day will be spent on administration
work.
Therefore assume:
1(hour) x 65(working days) x 40(hourly rate) $ 2,600-00
3. It is estimated that on an average two (2) hours
a day will be spent on motrito 4 the "hotline"
and coordinating with businesses.
Therefore aamm:
2(hour) x 60(working days) x 40(houdy rate) S 4,800.00
4. Reimbursable expenses, e.g. film, film processing
photostats, etc, which will be reimbursed at cost
plus 15% S 400.00
Total N.TX Fee: S 2i, MOO
N TE: In the event the duration of the contract was to exceed 65 working days,
additional services will be provided at $40.00 an hour.
" The estimated fee does not provide for plant inspection. If required, a plant inapator will
be provided on an "as needed" basis at an hourly rale of $60.00 an hour.
%.;117Y VI'- DIA-MUND BAR
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995 REPORT DATE: June 15, 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 submittals, review payments 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 services for this specific project. R11" is currently under contract with the
City for on-call landscape architect services and co --',L '.ruction drawings for the Maple Hill
Park project.
RECOMMENDED ACTIO
services for the Maple Hil
$9,500.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
�QQ ncil award the project management
r lT roup in an amount not to exceed
V'
Hearing Notification
;cifications (on file in City
Office)
ontract Addendum
-)nsultant Proposal
1.
Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
X Yes
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:
Terr6ce L. Bel r rank Ushe o ose
City Manager Assistant City Manager Community Services Director
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrance L. Belanger, City Manger
SUBJECT: AWARD OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO RJM
DESIGN GROUP FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES
FOR THE MAPLE HILL RETROFIT PROJECT
ISSUE STATEMENT:
Shall the City Council award the project management services for Maple Hill Park retrofit
project to RJM Design Group.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
It is recommended that the city Council award the project management services for Maple
Hill Park retrofit project to RJM Design Group in an amount not to exceed $9,500.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
There are adequate funds available in the current Community Services Department budget.
BACKGROUND:
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, conduct construction inspections, prepare the final "punch list" and produce "as -
built" drawings for the City. The City believes the RIM 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.
DISCUSSION:
The ADA Maple Hill Park Retrofit Project is ready to start immediately. 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 for the plans and specifications and ADA compliance standards staff requested
RIM Design Group to provide a proposal for Project Management services.
City Council Report
Maple Hill ADA Retrofit
Meeting Date: June 20, 1995
Page 2
DISCUSSION: (continued)
Attached is the proposal from RJM Design Group for these services and an addendum to
the existing on-call Landscape Architect Contract. The not to exceed amount of the project
will be $9,500 which includes both field observation and office administration. The project
management services are added as an addendum to the existing on-call Landscape Architect
services contract with R.J.M. Design Group by this proposed City Council action.
PREPARED BY:
Bob Rose
Community Services Director
CONTRACT ADDENDUM NO. 2 - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES
MAPLE HILL PARK RETROFIT
This Addendum No. 2 is made and entered into this 20th day of June, 1995 by and
between the City of Diamond Bar (hereinafter referred to as "CITY"), and R.J.M. Design
Group, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT").
A. RECITALS:
(i) CITY has heretofore entered into a contract, (the "Contract") with
CONSULTANT to provide "on-call" Landscape Architectural Services, dated
November 3, 1993.
(ii) CITY has authorized contract Addendum No. I. with CONSULTANT to
provide construction documents for the Maple Hill Park retrofit project,
(hereinafter referred to as the "PROJECT"), dated November 15, 1994.
(iii) CITY recognizes that construction administration and observation (Project
Management) is a professional service necessary to complete the "PROJECT".
(iv) CONSULTANT has now submitted its proposal for the performance of such
services, a full, true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit
"A" of Addendum and by this reference made a part hereof.
(v) CONSULTANT represents that it is qualified to perform such professional
services as described in Exhibit "A" of Addendum.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between CITY and CONSULTANT:
B. ADDENDUM TO CONTRACT:
1. CONSULTANT shall provide project management services for the
"PROJECT", the specific services as set forth in Exhibit "A" of Addendum.
2. CITY shall compensate CONSULTANT a maximum sum of $9,500 for
services provided on a time and materials basis, per the following:
a. For services performed under this Addendum, the CITY shall
compensate the consultant at a rate of $82.00/hour for the Principal
Landscape Architect/Landscape Architect, $70.00/hour for Designer,
$55.00/hour for the Senior Draftsperson, $48.00/hour for the Junior
Draftsperson, $82.00/hour for Field Observation, and $31.00/hour for
Word Processor. These rates shall remain in effect through the
I
-��_., _ ,
( RECEIVED 0PAGE 3 (PRiN� �:' 6/16 09:10 1995 AT 613117 P. 3
Jun . 16 '95 8:42 5FtvFPOC20 s e r f e 5 — ---
TUTA-15—'95 THU 17:06 ID:CITY OF DIAMOND BRR TEL 1,10:714—$61-3117 #140 p03
oompleft of the "PROJECT
b. Itt =necft with swims pedormed uIlder this Addendum,
CONSULTANT shall ty reimbursed r basi�ofdln dee dutrmt �laet expeeees
As approved by
3. This Addendum shell remain in offset until Notice tocf t Complotlon far the
"PROJECT" is filed by CITY. unless terminated
be terminated by eldw party by providing written
.4, This Addendum may s prior to the effecdve terminadaat date.
r0doc of at leash fifteen (15) day p
g. &sept as expr*1stly amended hereby tho Contract $hail mmaip in full forgo
and sffect.
IN WnHESg WHEREOF, the pardes hereto have executed this Addendum u of the day
and year first set forth above:
Approved u to Form:
City Attorney
ArrmT:
2
CONSULTANT
� t
A,
I
r�
Mayor
City eek
RJM
r.,
DESIGN GROUP, INC.
PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
April 10, 1995 EXHIBIT "A"
Mr. Bob Rose
Director of Community Services
City of Diamond Bar
21660 Fast Copley Drive, Ste 100
Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177
RE: Construction Observation for Maple Hill Park ADA/Tot Lot Improvements
117
Pursuant to our recent discussions we are pleased to submit this letter of interest regarding construction
administration and observation for Maple Hill Park.
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 of, 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 Improvemenu/995-30
27285 LAS RAMBLAS, SUITE 250 • MISSION VIEJO, CA 92691 . (714) 582-7516 • FAX (714) 582-0429
Pap
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 And 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
R.L..
Vgice
LPR/le
Maple Hill ADA/Tot Lot ImptovemenW995-30 Pap 2
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Agreement is made and entered into this 3rd day of
November,1993, between the City of Diamond Bar, a Municipal
Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") and RJM Des'
Group. Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT").
A. Recitals.
(i) CITY has heretofore issued its verbal Request for
Proposal pertaining to the performance of professional services
with respect to "on call" landscape architectural services.
("Project" hereafter) and by this reference made a part hereof.
(ii). CONSULTANT has now submitted its proposal for the
performance of such services, a full, true and correct copy of
which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and by this reference made
a part hereof.
(iii) CITY desires to retain. CONSULTANT to perform
professional services necessary, to render advice and assistance to
CITY, CITY's City Council and staff on an as -needed basis.
(iv) CONSULTANT represents that it is qualified to
perform such services and is willing to perform such professional
services as hereinafter defined.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between CITY and
CONSULTANT as follows:
1
B. Acreeaent.
I. Definitions: The following definitions shall apply
to the following terms, except where the context of this Agreement
otherwise requires:
(a) Project: The preparation of described in
Exhibit "A" hereto including, but not limited to, the preparation
of maps, surveys, reports, and documents, the presentation, both
oral and in writing, of such plans, maps, surveys, reports and
documents to CITY as required and attendance at any and all work
sessions, public hearings and other meetings conducted by CITY with
respect to the assigned project.
(b) Services: Such professional services as are
necessary to be performed by CONSULTANT in order to complete the
assigned project.
(c) Com2letion of Project: The date of completion
of all phases of the Project, including any and all procedures,
development plans, maps, surveys, plan documents, technical
reports, meetings, oral presentations and attendance by CONSULTANT
at public hearings regarding the adoption of
as set forth in Schedule 1 of Exhibit "A" hereto.
2. CONSULTANT agrees -4_s follows:
(a) CONSULTANT shall forthwith undertake and
complete the project in accordance with Exhibit "A" hereto and all
in accordance with Federal, State and CITY statues, regulations,
ordinances and guidelines, and professional standards, all to the
reasonable satisfaction of CITY.
2
(b) CONSULTANT shall supply copies of all maps,
surveys, reports, plans and documents (hereinafter collectively
referred to as "documents") including all supplemental technical
documents, as described in Exhibits "A" and "B" to CITY within the
time specified in Schedule of work in Exhibit "A". Copies of the
documents shall be in such numbers as are required by Exhibit "A".
CITY may thereafter review and forward to CONSULTANT comments
regarding said documents and CONSULTANT shall thereafter make such
revisions to said documents as are deemed necessary. CITY shall
receive revised documents in such form and in the quantities
determined necessary by CITY. The time limits set forth pursuant
to this Section B2.(b) may be extended upon written approval of
CITY.
(c) CONSULTANT shall, at CONSULTANT's sole cost and
expense, secure and hire such other persons as may, in the opinion
of CONSULTANT, be necessary to comply with the terms of this
Agreement. In -the event any such other persons are retained by
CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT hereby'warrants that such persons shall be
fully qualified to perform services required hereunder. CONSULTANT
further agrees that no subcontractor shall be retained by
CONSULTANT except upon the prior written approval of CITY.
3. CITY agrees as follows:
(a) To pay CONSULTANT a maximum sum of 525.000.00
for the performance of the services required hereunder. This sum
shall cover the cost of all staff time and all other direct and
indirect costs or fees, including the work of employees,
3
consultants and subcontractors to CONSULTANT. Payment to
CONSULTANT, by CITY, shall be made in accordance with the schedule
set forth below.
(b) Estimated cost and timing for each
project/service will be provided by consultant in writing. Written
proposals will be followed by a notice to proceed from the City
which will include agreed upon deadlines and costs for the services
indicated.
(c) Payments to CONSULTANT shall be made by CITY in
accordance with the invoices submitted by CONSULTANT, on a monthly
basis, and such invoices shall be paid within a reasonable time
after said invoices are received by CITY. All charges shall be in
accordance with CONSULTANT's proposal either with respect to hourly
rates averaging $70.00 per hour, and not exceeding $82.00 per hour,
or lump sum amounts for individual tasks. In no event, however,
will said invoices exceed 95% of individual task totals described
in Exhibits "A" and "B".
(d) CONSULTANT agrees that, in no event, shall CITY
be required to pay to CONSULTANT any sum in excess of 95% of the
maximum payable hereunder prior to receipt by CITY of all final
documents, together with all supplemental technical documents, as
described herein acceptable in form and content to CITY. Final
payment shall be made not later than 60 days after presentation of
final documents and acceptance thereof by CITY.
(e) Additional services: Payments for additional
services requested, in writing, by CITY, and not included in
4
CONSULTANT's proposal as set forth in Exhibit "B" hereof, shall be
paid on a time -and -materials reimbursement basis in accordance with
the fee schedule set forth in said Exhibit "B". Charges for
additional services shall be invoiced on a monthly basis and shall
be paid by CITY within a reasonable time after said invoices are
received by CITY.
4. CITY agrees to provide to CONSULTANT:
(a) Information and assistance as set forth in
Exhibit "A" hereto.
(b) Photographically reproducible copies of maps
and other information, if available, which CONSULTANT considers
necessary in order to complete the Project.
(c) Such information as is generally available from
CITY files applicable to the Project.
(d) Assistance, if necessary, in obtaining
information from other governmental agencies and/or private
parties. However, it shall be CONSULTANT's responsibility'to make
all initial contact with respect to the gathering of such
information.
5. Ownership of Documents: All documents, data,
studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs and reports
prepared by CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement shall be
considered the property of CITY and, upon payment for services
performed by CONSULTANT, such documents and other identified
materials shall be delivered to CITY by CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT
may, however, make and retain such copies of said documents and
5
materials as CONSULTANT may desire.
6. Termination: This Agreement may be terminated by
CITY upon the giving of a written "Notice of Termination" to
CONSULTANT at least fifteen (15) days prior to the date of
termination specified in said Notice. In the event this Agreement
is so terminated, CONSULTANT shall be compensated at CONSULTANT's
applicable hourly rates as set forth in Exhibit "A", on a pro -rata
basis with respect to the percentage of the Project completed as of
the date of termination. In no event, however, shall CONSULTANT
receive more than the maximum specified in paragraph 3(a), above.
CONSULTANT shall provide to CITY any and all documents, data,
studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs and reports,
whether in draft or final form, prepared by CONSULTANT as of the
date of termination. CONSULTANT may not terminate this Agreement
except for cause.
7. Notices and Designated Representatives: Any and all
notices, demands, invoices and written communications between the
parties hereto shall be addressed as set forth in this paragraph 7.
The below named individuals, furthermore, shall be those persons
primarily responsible for the performance by the parties under this
Agreement:
City of Diamond Bar
Terrence L..Belanger
City Manager
21660 E. Copley Dr., Ste. #100
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
RJM Design Group, Inc.
Larry P. Ryan
Project Director
27285 Las Ramblas, 1250
Mission Viejo, CA 92691
6
Any such notices, demands, invoices and written communications, by
mail, shall be deemed to have been received by the addressee
forty-eight (48) hours after deposit thereof in the United States
mail, postage prepaid and properly addressed as set forth above.
8. Insurance: CONSULTANT shall neither commence work
under this Agreement until it has obtained all insurance required
hereunder in a company or companies acceptable to CITY nor shall
CONSULTANT allow any subcontractor to commence work on a
subcontract until all insurance required of the subcontractor has
been obtained. CONSULTANT shall take out and maintain at all time
during the term of this Agreement the following policies of
insurance:
(a) Workers' Compensation Insurance: Before
beginning work, CONSULTANT shall furnish to CITY a certificate of
insurance as proof that it has taken out full workers' compensation
insurance for all persons whom it may employ directly or through
subcontractors in carrying out the work specified herein, in
accordance with the laws of the State of California.
In accordance with the provisions of California
Labor Code Section 3700, every employer shall secure the payment of
compensation to his employees. CONSULTANT prior to commencing
work, shall sign and file with CITY a certification as follows:
"I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of
Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against
liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self insurance
in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply
7
with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work
of this Agreement"
(b) Public Liability and Property Damage: Throughout
the term of this Agreement, at CONSULTANT's sole cost and expense,
CONSULTANT shall keep, or cause to be kept, in full force and
effect, for the mutual benefit of CITY and CONSULTANT,
comprehensive, broad form, general public liability and automobile
insurance against claims and liabilities for personal injury,
death, or property damage arising from CONSULTANT's activities,
providing protection of at least One Million Dollars
($1,000,000.00) for property damage, bodily injury or death to any
one person or for any one accident or occurrence and at least One
Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) aggregate.
(d) General Insurance Requirements: All insurance
required by express provision of this Agreement shall be carried
only in responsible insurance companies licensed to do business in
the State of California and policies required under paragraphs
8.(a) and (b) shall name as additional insureds CITY, its elected
officials, officers, employees, agents and representatives. All
policies shall contain language, to the effect that: (1) the
insurer waives the right of subrogation against CITY and CITY's
elected officials, officers, employees, agents and representatives;
(2) the policies are primary and noncontributing with any insurance
that may be carried by CITY; and ( 3 ) they cannot be canceled or
materially changed except after thirty (30) days' notice by the
insurer to CITY by U. S. mail. CONSULTANT shall furnish CITY with
8
copies of all such policies promptly upon receipt of them, or
certificate evidencing the insurance. CONSULTANT may effect for
its own account insurance not required under this Agreement.
9. Indemnification: CONSULTANT shall defend, indemnify
and save harmless CITY, its elected and appointed officials,
officers, agents and employees, from all liability from loss,
damage or injury to persons or property, including the payment by
CONSULTANT of any and all legal costs and attorneys' fees, in any
manner arising out of the acts and/or omissions of CONSULTANT
pursuant to this Agreement, including, but not limited to, all
consequential damages, to the maximum extent permitted by law.
10. Assignment: No assignment of this Agreement or of
any part or obligation of performance hereunder shall be made,
either in whole or in part, by CONSULTANT without the prior written
consent of CITY.
11. Damages: In the event that CONSULTANT fails to
submit to CITY the,completed project, together with all documents
and supplemental material required hereunder, in public hearing
form to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY, within the time set
forth herein, or as may be extended by written consent of the
parties hereto, CONSULTANT shall pay to CITY, as liquidated damages
and not as a penalty, the sum as specified in the notice to proceed
for each project submitted by the City represents a reasonable
endeavor by the parties hereto to estimate a fair compensation for
the foreseeable losses that might result from such a default in
performance by CONSULTANT, and due to the difficulty which would
9
otherwise occur in establishing actual damages resulting from such
default, unless said default is caused by CITY or by acts of God,
acts of the public enemy, fire, floods, epidemics, or quarantine
restrictions.
12. Independent Contractor: The parties hereto agree
that CONSULTANT and its employers, officers and agents are
independent contractors under this Agreement and shall not be
construed for any purpose to be employees of CITY.
13. Governing Law: This Agreement shall be governed by
and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of
California.
14. Attorney's Fees: In the event any legal proceeding
is instituted to enforce any term or provision of the Agreement,
the prevailing party in said legal proceeding shall be entitled to
recover attorneys' fees and costs from the opposing party in an
amount determined by the court to be reasonable.
15. Mediation: Any dispute or controversy arising under
this Agreement, or in connection with any of the terms and
conditions hereof, shall be referred by the parties hereto for
mediation. A third party, neutral mediation service shall be
selected, as agreed upon by the parties and the costs and expenses
thereof shall be borne equally by the parties hereto. In the event
the parties are unable to mutually agree upon the mediator to be
selected hereunder, the City Council shall select such a neutral,
third party mediation service and the City Council's decision shall
be final. The parties agree to utilize their good faith efforts to
10
resolve any such dispute or controversy so submitted to mediation.
It is specifically understood and agreed by the parties hereto that
referral of any such dispute or controversy, and mutual good faith
efforts to resolve the same thereby, shall be conditions precedent
to the institution of any action or proceeding, whether at law or
in equity with respect to any such dispute or controversy.
16. Entire Agreement: This Agreement supersedes any and
all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the
parties with respect to the subject matter herein. Each party to
this Agreement acknowledges that no representation by any party
which is not embodied herein nor any other agreement, statement, or
promise not contained in this Agreement shall be valid and binding.
Any modification of this Agreement shall be effective only if it is
in writing signed by all parties.
In the event the City Exercises its option to extend the
term -of this Agreement, Contractor's monthly compensation shall be
subject to adjustment at the Commencement of the extended term and
annual thereafter ("the adjustment date") as follows:
The compensation provided herein shall be adjusted to
reflect the increase, if any, in the cost of living during the
previous year. This will be accomplished by multiplying the
current level of the contractor's compensation by the percentage of
increase in the Consumer Price Index ("CPI") for the month
immediately preceding the Adjustment Date (the "Index Month") over
the CPI for the month one year prior to the Index Month. The "CPI"
11
index that will be used for this calculation is identified as the
Los Angeles -Anaheim -Riverside Metropolitan area Index as reported
by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States Department
of Labor. If the Index is discontinued, the Director's office
shall, at its discretion, substitute for the Index such other
similar index as it may deep appropriate.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this
Agreement as of the day and year first set forth above:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CONSULTANT
City Attorney CI Y OF DIAMO D B
R,,
City Manager
4_�
ATTEST: , AZI1
City Cl k
12
01TV 0p 01MOUD PAA
AGENDA REFVRT M3.U11LM VA %J 42
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995 REPORT DATE: June 16, 1995
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
TITLE:
A resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar approving and
adopting a budget for the City of Diamond Bar for the Fiscal Year commencing
July 1, 1995 and ending June 30, 1996 including maintenance and operations,
special funds and capital improvements and appropriating funds for accounts,
departments, divisions, objects and purposes therein set forth.
Annually, the City Council is required to adopt by resolution a budget which
sets forth the estimated revenues, appropriations, personnel, and programs
which are anticipated for the forthcoming Fiscal Year. The City Council has
held public meetings to discuss the proposed FY95-96 budget.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution 95- which
formally adopts the budget for the Fiscal Year commencing on July 1, 1995 and
ending June 30, 1996.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:
X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification
X Resolution(s) Bid Spec. (on file in City Clerk's Office)
Ordinances(s) X Other - FY 95-96 Budget
_ Agreement(s)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1.
Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
X Yes_
No
by the City Attorney?
2.
Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote?
YesX
No
3.
Has environmental impact been assessed?
_
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:
ALL
REVIEWED BY:
Fy,A-Terrence L. Belanger Frank M. Us r Linda G. Ma son
City Manager Assistant City Manager Accounting Manager
AGEND ITEM NO. 7.1
BUDGET FOR FY 1995-96
PLEASE BE SURE TO BRING YOUR DRAFT BUDGET
RESOLUTION NO. 95-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AND ADOPTING A BUDGET
FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR COMMENCING JULY 1,
30, 1995 INCLIIDING MAINTEN1995 AND ENDING JUNE
ANCE AND OPERATIONS,
SPECIAL FUNDS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND
APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR ACCOUNTS, DEPARTMENTS,
DIVISIONS, OBJECTS AND PURPOSES
FORTH. THEREIN SET
A. Reels
(1) The City Manager has heretofore prepared and
Presented to this City Council a proposed budget for the City,s
fiscal year 1995-96, including staffing and position allocations,
maintenance and operations, special funds and capital improvements,
including appropriations therefor
(the "Budget" sometimes
hereinafter).
(ii) The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond
Bar has heretofore publicly reviewed the
proposed capital
improvements specified in the Budget and has rendered to the City
Council its report thereon concerning conformity of the capital
improvement program with the City,s contemplated general plan, all
as required by California Government Code Section 65401. Copies of
the Budget are on file in the office of the City Clerk labeled
"City of Diamond Bar 1995-96 Budget" and said Budget hereby is made
a part of this Resolution.
(iii) The City Council has conducted a public hearing
on the entirety of the fiscal year 1995-96 Budget and concluded
said hearing prior to the adoption of this Resolution.
:�-V __Z,._..�
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DEPARTMENT:, General Gaut.
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES
Printing
DIVISION
Economic Dev.
1995-96
ACCOUNT #:
4096
Photography
1994-95 City Manager
City Council
5,000
Adjusted Budget Recommended
Approved
PERSONNEL SERVICES
2121
Mailing Services
0010 Salaries
11,850
Telephone
0070 City Paid Benefits
200
Rental/Lease Real Property
0080 Retirement
1,700
Membership/Dues
0083 Worker's Comp Exp.
150
Travel-Conf &,Meetings
0085 Medicare
200
Promotional Items
0090 Cafeteria Benefits
1,800
Business Incentives
5,000
$0 $15,900
$0
SUPPLIES
TOTAL OPERATING EXP.
1200 Operating Supplies
2,500
TOTAL SUPPLIES
$2,500
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
2110
Printing
7,500
2111
Pre -Press Printing
2112
Photography
2115
Advertising
5,000
2120
Postage
3,000
2121
Mailing Services
2126
Telephone
500
2140
Rental/Lease Real Property
4,000
2315
Membership/Dues
500
2330
Travel-Conf &,Meetings
2,000
2352
Promotional Items
1,000
2358
Business Incentives
5,000
2395
Misc. Expenditures
TOTAL OPERATING EXP.
$0 $28,500 $0
PROFESSIONAL SVCS
4000 Professional Services 30,000
4265 Business Retention
TOTAL PROF SVCS $0 $30,000 $0
DEPARTMENT TOTAL $0 $76,900 $0
27
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FUND TYPE_ Special Revenue
SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET FUNCTION: Str Maint/Const
1995-96 FIEND #: 111
GAS TAX FUND
CAPITAL PROJECTS INCLUDE:
Various Street & Signal Improvements
60,000
Cant' over from FY94-95
13,000
06396 Grand Ave. Overlay
300,000
08896 Golden Springs Seepage
100,000
08996 Rule 20A Undergrounding
80,000
Pkwy Maint
480,000
FY95-96 Projects
46,000
01496 Slurry Seal - #6
215,000
NB/SB DB Bid @ Mt Laurel -L Turn
30,000
Brea Cyn Resurfacing -No City Limit-Gldn Spgs
164,000
Sunset Crossing - Western Terminus
125,000
Pthfinder Rehad-Shaded Wood to DBB
273,000
SB/NB Brea Cyn @ Gldn Spgs-Left Turn
50,000
SB Gldn Spgs @ DB Blvd - Left Turn
8,000
NB DB Blvd @ Pathfinder - Left Turn
30,000
TRANSFER TO GENERAL FUND:
895,000
Utilities
60,000
PW -Engineering
13,000
Street Sweeping
105,000
Road Maint
241,000
Right of Way Maint
27,000
Pkwy Maint
6,500
Strping/Signing
46,000
Bridge Maint
4,000
Traffic Signals
65,000
T & T - Operating Ex
650
T & T - Traffic
38,000
606,150
67
1,375,000
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET
1995-96
PROPOSITION C FUND
FUND DESCRIPTION:
FUND TYPE: Special Revenue
FUNCTION: Str Maint/Const
FUND #: 113
The City periodically receives additional allocations of State Gas Tax funds from Los Angeles
County. These funds must be used for street -related purposes such as construction, rehabilitation,
or maintenance. In order to receive these funds the City must submit a project to the County for
approval.
1994-95 City Manager City Council
Adjusted Budget Recommended Adopted
ESTIMATED RESOURCES:
2550
Fund Balance Reserve
$1,378,985
$1,267,135
3112
Transportation Tax
438,150
452,520
3350
Intergovt - County
100,000
3610
Interest Revenue
30,000
45,000
TOTAL
$1,847,135
$1,864,655 $0
APPROPRIATIONS:
4090-6100
4915-9001
Trans out - Gen Fund
30,000
15,000
4915-9250
Trans out- CIP Fund
970,000
1,140,000
2550
Fund Balance Reserve
847,135
709,655
_ _
TOTAL
$1,847,135
$1,864,655, $0
CAPITAL PROJECTS INCLUDE:
07495 Grand Ave Signal Synch.
DB Blvd Rehab - Grand to SR60
TS : #A from Warrant Study
TS: #B from Warrant Study
TS: #C from Warrant Study
Sunset Crossing -G Spg to SR57
69
$420,000
60,000
125,000
125,000
125,000
285,000
1,140,000
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT WISHLIST
FY 95-96
Traffic Control Improvements
07496' Grand Ave Signal Synchronization
NB/SB DB Bid @ Mt. Laurel - L Turn
SB/NB Brea Cyn @ Gldn Spgs-L Turn
SB Gldn Spgs @ DB BI - Left Turn
NB DB BI @ Pathfinder -Left Turn
TS: #A - from Warrant Study
TS : #B - from Warrant Study
TS : #C - from Warrant Study
TOTAL
420,000
420,000
30,000
Street Improvements
50,000
06396'
Grand Ave Overlay
724,300.
300,000 20,000 404,300
01496
Slurry Seal - Area 6
215,000
215,000
08896"
Gldn Spgs - Seepage
100,000
100,000
08996'
Rule 20A Undergrounding
80,000
80,000
125,000
Br Cyn Resurf-NoCity Limit-GdnSpg
164,000
164,000
Sunset Crossing-Gldn Spgs to SR57
285,000
285,000
Sunset Crossing -Western Terminus
125,000
125,000
Pthfndr Rehab -Shaded Wood to DBB
273,000
273,000
DB Blvd Rehab - Grand to SR60
460,000
400,000 60,000
TOTAL
2,426,300
400,000 1,257,000 345,000 20,000 404,300 0
Traffic Control Improvements
07496' Grand Ave Signal Synchronization
NB/SB DB Bid @ Mt. Laurel - L Turn
SB/NB Brea Cyn @ Gldn Spgs-L Turn
SB Gldn Spgs @ DB BI - Left Turn
NB DB BI @ Pathfinder -Left Turn
TS: #A - from Warrant Study
TS : #B - from Warrant Study
TS : #C - from Warrant Study
TOTAL
420,000
420,000
30,000
30,000
50,000
50,000
30,000
8,000.
30,000
30,000
125,000
125,000
125,000
125,000
125,000
125,000
935,000
0 118,000
795,000
22,000
0
co
0 0 22,000
Grand Total Road/Traffic Imp 3,361;300 400,000 1,375,000 1,140,000 20,000 404,300 22,000
" - Denotes Carry over Projects fromFY94-95
Projects in which funding has yet to be determined include: Brea Cyn Rd Widening (Fountain Springs to Cool Springs)
Brea Cyn Rd Widening (Golden Springs to Pathfinder)
Installation of Lighting under SR -60 overpass @ Lemon Ave
(Cost $20,000, maint cost of $200/yr, & energy cost $100/mo)
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FUND TYPE Capital Project
SPECIAL FUNDS BUDGET FUNCTION: Capital Project
1995-96 FUND #: 250
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FUND
FY95-96 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS INCLUDE:
STREET IMPROVEMENTS:
01496 Slurry Seal (VI Phase) $215,000
Gas Tax
08895 Golden Springs - Seepage 100,000
Gas Tax
08995 Rule 20A Undergrounding 80,000
Gas Tax
B Cyn Resurf-N City Limit -G Spgs
164,000
Gas Tax
Sunset Crossing -G Spgs to SR57
285,000
Prop C
30,000
Sunset Crossing-Wstrn Terminus
125,000
Gas Tax
125,000
Pthfndr Rehab -Shaded Wd-DB B
273,000
Gas Tax
125,000
DB Blvd Rehab -Grand to SR60
460,000
ISTEA (400,000)
Prop C (60,000) .
TOTAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS
$1,702,000
TRAFFIC CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS:
07496 Grand Ave Signal Synchr 420,000
Prop C (MTA)
NB/SB DB Bid @ Mt Laurel -L Tur 30,000
Gas Tax
SB/NB Brea Cyn @ G Spgs-LTur 50,000
Gas Tax
SB Gldn Spgs @ DB Blvd -L Turn
30,000
Gas Tax (8,000)
Developer (22,000)
NB DB Blvd @ Pathfndr-L Turn
30,000
Gas Tax
TS: #A - from Warrant Study
125,000
TS: #B - from Warrant Study
125,000 '
TS: #C - from Warrant Study
125,000
Prop C
TOTAL TRAFFIC CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS $935,000
84
(iv) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this
Resolution have occurred.
B. RESOLUTION.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Diamond
Bar does hereby find, determine and resolve as follows:
1. In all respects, as set forth in the Recitals, Part
A, of this Resolution.
2. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the
capital improvement program set forth in the Budget, and each
project identified therein, is categorically exempt from the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970,
as amended, and the guidelines promulgated thereunder pursuant to
Section 15301 of Division 6 of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations.
3. The Budget, including the changes enumerated and
directed to be made by the City Council during the course of the
public hearing conducted by the City Council, hereby is adopted as
the Budget of the City of Diamond Bar for the fiscal year
commencing July 1, 1995 and ending June 30, 1996 and consisting of
the estimated and anticipated expenditures and revenues for that
fiscal year.
4. There are hereby appropriated for obligations and
expenditures by the City Manager the amounts shown for the various
departments, divisions and objects set forth in the Budget. All
obligations and expenditures shall be incurred and made in the
manner provided by the provisions of State law and City ordinances
and resolutions applicable to purchasing and contracting.
5. Subject to further provision of this Resolution, the
appropriations made above constitute the maximum amount authorized
for obligation and expenditure by the City Manager for respective
departments, divisions and objects as set forth in the Budget.
Each department head shall be responsible, as well as the City
Manager, for seeing that said maximum amounts are not exceeded.
6. No warrant shall issue nor shall any indebtedness be
incurred which exceeds the unexpended balance of the fund and
department appropriations hereinabove authorized unless such
appropriations shall have been amended by a supplemental
appropriation duly enacted by the City Council, or by individual
appropriations within any aforesaid fund or department therein,
except insofar as the City Manager may authorized transfers
pursuant to this Resolution.
7. Within the various funds and departments contained in
the Budget, the City Manager is authorized to employ, during the
fiscal year covered by said Budget, the number and classification
of such full time employees as are shown in the Budget all subject
to the provisions of the City's classification and compensation
plans as amended and adopted by the City Council. Part time and
seasonal employees are authorized as necessary by the City Manager
provided that the total to be obligated and expended within any
fund and department set forth in the Budget, with respect to
salaries and wages therefor, shall not exceed the budgeted and
appropriated amount, as the same may be amended by the City
Council, from time to time.
8. The City Manager hereby is authorized to transfer
funds appropriated hereby or by supplemental appropriation as
follows: With respect to those classifications designated by code
1000 series, 2000 series, 4000 series, 5000 series and code 6000
series, the City Manager may transfer amounts between and within
those classifications, but only within a department or fund.
9. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this
Resolution.
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this day of
, 1995.
Mayor
I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar,
do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, adopted
and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Diamond bar held on the day of 1995, by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ATTEST:
City Clerk of the
City of Diamond Bar
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995 REPORT DATE: June 15, 1995
FROM: Troy L. Butzlaff, Assistant to the City Manager
TITLE: Renewal of Animal Care and Control Services Agreement
SUMMARY: The City's agreement with the Pomona Valley Humane Society for animal care and control
services expires on June 30, 1995. In addition to renewing their agreement for animal care and control
services, the Humane Society is requesting that the City Council consider an increase to certain animal
control, shelter and licensing fees. This fee increase is being proposed in order to off -set the increased cost
of animal control services.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve Supplement Number 4 with the
Pomona Valley Humane Society extending their agreement for animal control services for an additional 12
month period. It is further recommended that the City Council consider one of the following options relating
to the proposed increase in costs: (1) increase the annual supplemental payment to the Humane Society from
$54,169.00 to $59,150.00 and amend the City's proposed Fiscal Year 1995-96 budget accordingly; or (2)
direct staff to prepare a public hearing notice for the purpose of holding a hearing to consider an increase to
certain animal control, shelter and licensing fees.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: 2LStaff Report
—Resolution(s)
—Ordinances(s)
2LAgreement(s)
2LOther:
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: None
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
_ Public Hearing Notification
_ Bid Specification
Supplement No. 4
Fee Comparison Matrix
1.
Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
_ Yes
A 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:
�.-d`'Terrence L. Belanger Frank M. LIsVr
City Manager Assistant City Manager
Tr . Butzlahk
Assistanthe City M ager
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Renewal of Animal Care and Control Services Agreement
ISSUE STATEMENT:
The City's agreement with the Pomona Valley Humane Society for animal care and control services
expires on June 30, 1995. In addition to renewing their agreement for animal care and control
services, the Humane Society is requesting that the City Council consider an increase to certain animal
control, shelter and licensing fees. This fee increase is being proposed in order to off -set the increased
cost of animal control services.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council approve Supplement Number 4 with the Pomona Valley
Humane Society extending their agreement for animal control services for an additional 12 month
period. It is further recommended that the City Council consider one of the following options relating
to the proposed increase in costs: (1) increase the annual supplemental payment to the Humane Society
from $54,169.00 to $59,150.00 and amend the City's proposed Fiscal Year 1995-96 budget
accordingly; or (2) direct staff to prepare a public hearing notice for the purpose of holding a
hearing to consider an increase to certain animal control, shelter and licensing fees.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
The City Council approved the expenditure of $54,169 in Fiscal Year 1994-95 for animal care and
control services. The Humane Society is requesting an overall increase of $5,341.00. This increase is
necessary in order to off -set an increase in costs relating to unaltered dogs, as well as an increase in
food and care costs for certain animals.
BACKGROUND:
The Pomona Valley Humane Society has been providing animal care and control services to the City
since 1991. In consideration for these services, the City has agreed that the Humane Society should
retain all fees and charges for licensing, impounding, food and care fees and other related fees for
animal control services. In addition to these fees, the City pays the Humane Society an annual
supplement payment. This payment is calculated annually based upon a $1.00 per capita assessment and
the City's pro rata share of service related costs.
L13l.U13MUI ;
The City's proposed Fiscal Year 1995-96 budget for animal control services is $55,000.00. The
Pomona Valley Humane Society is requesting a budget increase of $5,341.00. This increase in largely
the result of an increase in the care and feeding of animals, as well as an increase in service calls
related to unaltered dogs. The Humane Society is proposing an increase to certain fees as a means of
off -setting the increased cost of service. The fees and their proposed increase are as follows:
License Fee
License Fees for Unaltered Dogs: $5.00/year (from $20.00 to $25.00)
Late Application for New Dog License: $10.00/year (from $10.00 to $20.00)
Late Renewal of Dog License: $10.00/year (from $10.00 to $20.00)
Food & Care
Medium Sized Animal:
Large Sized Animal:
$1.00/day (from $3.00 to $4.00)
$1.00/day (from $4.00 to $5.00)
According to City records, there has not been an increase in animal control, shelter and licensing fees
since 1989. For your information and use, staff has attached a matrix comparing the proposed fee
increase to those fees charged by other animal control agencies. As indicated by the matrix, the
Pomona Valley Humane Society proposed increase in dog license fees and late penalties would be
slightly higher than San Bernardino County, but lower than the fees charged by Los Angeles County.
The proposed fees for food and care are comparable to the fees charged by San Bernardino County, but
still lower than the fees assessed by Los Angeles County. In general, the proposed increase in fees
appears to be consistent to the fees charged by other animal control agencies.
There are essentially two options for dealing with the increase cost of services. The City Council could
provide notice and conduct a public hearing for the purpose of increasing the fees for animal control
and care services. If the City Council decides to increase the animal control, shelter and licensing fees
then the supplement payment amount to the Humane Society would remain at $54,169.00. However,
should the City Council elect not to increase the fees, then the City will need to amend the budget
authorization for Fiscal Year 1995-96 to reflect the increased cost of service. This will result in a new
annual supplement payment of $59,150.00.
[98j", A41 9102
J 3 1
Troy L. ff
Assistant to the City Manager
i -
Pomona Valley Humane Society & S.P.C,A.
500 Humane way
Pomona, California 91766
Food & Care
Food & Care
Pomona Valley Humans Society
Dogs
3.00
Cats
2,00
Small Animals
2.00
Medium Animals
4.00*
Large Animals
5.00*
San Bernardino County
5.00
5.00
1.00
4.00
5,00
Los Angeles County
7.50
7.50
2.00
7,50
7.50
Southeast Area Animal Control
5,00
5.00
5.00
8.00
15.00
Dog License Fees
License Fees
Unaltered
Altered
Semlior Citizen
Penalty
Pomona Valley Humane Society
25,00*
10.00
5.00
20,00
San Bernardino County
18.00
9.00
5.00
15.00
[Los:A:n�oes County
33,00
18.00
10.50
20.00
i0'd ZOO'ON ZO:Oi S6.9Z Nnf :GI
I (I 39ud 031NIHd) 1 Mud LIIEI9 113 5661 IS:11 91/90 03AIR33H 1
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AMU DCOODT AGENDA NO
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995 REPORT DATE: June 12,1995
FROM: Linda G. Magnuson, Accounting Manager
TITLE:
Appropriations Limit - Fiscal Year 1995-1996
SUMMARY:
Submitted for the Council's review and approval is the Appropriations Limit recommendation for
Fiscal Year 1995-1996. In addition, the Council is being asked to approve the adjustment factors
used in the calculation of the Appropriations Limit.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the use of the City of Diamond Bar population percentage change for use in calculating
the Fiscal Year 1995-1996 Appropriations Limit.
Approve the use of the California Per Capita Income percentage change in calculating Fiscal Year
1995-1996 Appropriations Limit.
Approve Resolution 95 -XX, which establishes the Fiscal Year 1995-1996 Appropriations Limit at
$14,005,207.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification
X Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification
Ordinances(s) _ Other
Agreement(s)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
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 415 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 _ No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
REVIEWED BY:
Q11 4I
Terren a L. Bela r Frank M. Usher Linda G. Magnuieon
City Manager Assistant City Manager Accounting Manager
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: Proposed FY95-96 Appropriations Limit, and approval of limit adjustment factors.
ISSUE STATEMENT:
Government Code Section 7910 requires the City Council to formally adopt by resolution the
Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 1995-96. In addition, Proposition 111 requires a recorded vote,
of the City Council regarding the annual adjustment factors being used in the calculation of the
Appropriations Limit.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the use of the City of Diamond Bar population percentage change for the use in calculating
the FY95-96 Appropriations Limit.
Approve the use of the California per Capita income change in calculating the FY95-96
Appropriations Limit.
Approve Resolution 95- , which establishes the FY95-96 Appropriations Limit at $14,005,207.
DISCUSSION:
As required by Government Code Section 7910, the City Council is being asked to formally adopt
by resolution the Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 1995-96.
In addition, Proposition 111 requires a recorded vote of the City Council regarding the annual
adjustment factors which are being applied for Fiscal Year 1995-96. The factors recommended are
the California per Capita income percentage change, and the City of Diamond Bar percentage
change in population growth.
The price factor which may be used by the City could either be the percentage change in the
California per capita personal income, or the percentage change in the local assessment roll due
to the addition of local non-residential new construction. This fiscal year the California per capita
personal income showed an increase of 4.72%. The non-residential new construction assessment
valuation showed an increase of 2.60%. Since the California per capita personal income
rage z - ApprUpnaavns Lirrut r1 "-UD Kepvrt
percentage is higher, this factor is being recommended.
Section 7901 of the Government Code allows entities to use either the population increase within
the City or the increase with in the County. This year, the City's population increase was 1.55% as
opposed to the Countywide increase of .33% in population. Therefore, it is recommended that the
population increase with in the City of Diamond Bar be used.
PREPARED BY:
Linda G. Magnuson
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT WORK SHEET
1995-1996
California Per Capita Income
% Change Over Prior Year
Population Change
% Change Over Prior Year (City)
CpCPI Change Converted to a Ratio
Population Change Converted to a Ratio
Calculation of Growth Factor
1994-95 Appropriations Limit
1995-96 Appropriation Limit
4.72%
1.55%
1.0472
1.0155
1.063432
$13,169,824
$14,005,207
Note: The Appropriations limit is based upon a base year amount of $8,000,000
RESOLUTION NO. 95 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, SETTING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR
FISCAL YEAR 1995-1996 FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 9 OF
TITLE 1 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE
WHEREAS, Article XIII B of the Constitution of the State of California as proposed by the
Initiative Measure approved by the people at the special statewide election held on November 6,
1979, provides that the total annual appropriations limit of such entity for the prior year be adjusted
for changes in the non-residential assessed valuation and population except as otherwise specifically
provided for in said Article; and
WHEREAS, Section 7910 of the Government Code provides that each year the governing
body of each local jurisdiction shall, by resolution, establish its appropriations limit for the following
fiscal year pursuant to Article XIII B at a regularly scheduled meeting or a noticed special meeting.
Prior to such meeting, documentation used in the determination of the appropriation limit shall be
available to the public; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 111 as approved by the voters of the State of California, requires
a recorded voice vote of the City Council regarding which of the annual adjustment factors have been
selected each year; and
WHEREAS, Section 7902 (a) and 7902.6 of the Government Code sets forth the method for
determining the appropriations limit for each local jurisdiction for the 1995-96 fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar wishes to establish the
appropriation limit for fiscal year 1995-96 for the City of Diamond Bar.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar,
California, as follows:
Section 1. That it is hereby found and determined that the documentation used in the
determination of the appropriations limit for the City of Diamond Bar for fiscal year 1995-96 was
available to the public in City offices of said City at least fifteen days prior to this date.
Section 2. That the County of Los Angeles LAFCO, established the appropriations limit for the
newly incorporated City.
Section 3. That the City of Diamond Bar percentage increase in California Per Capita Income
and the percentage change in the population of the City of Diamond Bar were selected as factors.
Section 4. That the Appropriations Limit for the City of Diamond Bar as established in
accordance with Section 7902(a) and Section 7902.6 of the California Government Code is
$14,005,207.
Section 5. That the Mayor of the City of Diamond Bar shall sign and the City Clerk shall certify
to the passage and adoption of this Resolution No. 95 -
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1995.
Mayor
I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar do hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution was passed, and approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of , 1995, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ATTEST:
City Clerk of the
City of Diamond Bar
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR �7
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995 REPORT DATE: June 12, 1995
FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director
TITLE: Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382, Conditional Use Permit No. 92-1, Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2, and
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 95-2.
SUMMARY: The proposed project is a request by the Dolezal Family Limited Partnership to approve the
subdivision of a 2.55 acre parcel into four residential lots ranging from .55 to .90 acres in size. The project
site is located in the 3,000 block (north side) of Steeplechase Lane, at the terminus of Hawkwood Road adjacent
to "The Country Estates".
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382,
Conditional Use Permit No. 92-1, Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2, Negative Declaration No. 95-2, Findings of
Fact, and conditions as listed within the attached resolution.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification
X Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office)
Ordinances(s)
Agreement(s)
Other
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1.
Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
X Yes
_ No
by the City Attorney?
2.
Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? Majority
_ Yes
_ No
3.
Has environmental impact been assessed?
X Yes
_ No
4.
Has the report been reviewed by a Commission?
X Yes
_ No
Which Commission? Planning Commission.
5.
Are other departments affected by the report?
X Yes
_ No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
Public Works Department and Building and Safety Division.
RE7D 7BY: GWOZ
Terre ce L. Bel r Frank Us er es DeStefano
City Manager Assistant City Manager CommunityDevelop ent Director
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 (TPM 23382)
ISSUE STATEMENT:
The proposed project is a request by the Dolezal Family Limited
Partnership to approve the subdivision of a 2.55 acre parcel into four
residential lots ranging from .55 to .90 acres in size.
BACKGROUND:
The property owner and applicant, Warren Dolezal is requesting approval
(pursuant to Code Section 21.24) to subdivide one parcel into four
residential lots located in the 3000 block (north side) of Steeplechase
Lane, at the terminus of Hawkwood Road adjacent to "The Country Estates".
Project Overview:
Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 is a request to subdivide a 2.55 gross
acre parcel into four residential lot as follows:
LOT NUMBER
GROSS ACRES/
SQUARE FOOTAGE
NET ACRES/
SQUARE FOOTAGE
PAD ACRES/
SQUARE FOOTAGE
1
.90/39,204
.62/27,001
.14/6,098
2
.55/23,958
.55/23,958
.13/5,663
3
.55/23,958
.55/23,958
.15/6,534
4
.55/23,958
.55/23,958
.14/6,098
TOTAL
2.55/111,078
2.27/98,875
.56/24,393
The request also includes the following: Conditional Use Permit No. 92-1
which is required to protect resources contained within a Significant
Ecological Area (SEA) and for hillside management where grades are in
1
LU946�. o4 ten percent; and 6A Tree permi� NO. 9 -� w�ic� is r&cfuIrpd %^
protect ana preserve an existing oak tree.
The draft General Plan's land use designation for this project is Low
Density Residential -Maximum 3 Dwelling Units Per Acre (RL -3 du/acre).
The actual calculated land use designation is one (1) unit for every .64
acres.
The project site is within the Single Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size
8,000 Square Feet (R-1-8,000) Zone. The proposed parcel Map will create
lots that are a minimum 23,958 square feet which is consistent with the
site's current zoning. Generally, the following zones surround the
subject site: to the north is the Single Family Residential -Minimum Lot
Size 20,000 Square Feet (R-1-20,000) and Commercial -Recreation (C-R)
Zones; to the east is the R-1-20,000 Zone; to the south is the R-3-8,000
Zone; and to the west is the Single Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size
9,000 Square Feet (R-1-9,000) Zone.
Grading and Pad Development:
Approximately, 75 percent of the project site has been previously graded.
Prior grading activities include remedial grading to correct an unstable
slope condition over the western/central portion of the site and to
construct a shear key along the northern property line for the Las Brisas
Condominium project, grading for Steeplechase Lane along the site's
southern boundary, and construction of an emergency access road along the
western boundary. The subdivision, as proposed, requires approximately
2,300 cubic yards each of cut and fill. Therefore, total proposed earth
movement is 4,600 cubic yards
While final precise grading for individual lots is acceptable, remedial
grading does not respect property lines. Therefore, it is important and
required that remedial and mass grading, for all lots, be performed at
the same time. However, precise grading, for individual lots, may be
executed separately.
A significant portion of the site is an ancient landslide. A buttress
fill was constructed at the northerly property line with the development
of Tract No. 36382 (adjacent northerly subdivision - Las Brisas
Condominiums) to protect that development to the north and not
necessarily to prepare this project site for development. A preliminary
geotechnical report for the proposed project was reviewed by Klienfelder
(City's consultant). The applicant has adequately addressed the concerns
stated by Klienfelder.
"Starter" pads are indicated on the tentative parcel map ranging from
5,663 square feet to 6,534 square feet. Exhibit "B", pursuant to the
Planning Commissions request, delineates the building envelope for each
lot. The building envelope indicates the following minimum standards:
side yard setbacks of 10 and 15 feet; rear yard setbacks of 40 feet; and
front yard setbacks beginning at 20 feet. Additionally, a condition of
approval requires that adjacent front yard setbacks shall vary no less
than five feet, beginning with a minimum setback of 20 feet from the
front property line and no adjacent lots can utilize the same front yard
setback. When determining future development standards for the proposed
lots, the Hillside Management Ordinance's guidelines, which address
retaining the integrity of each site's natural topography, minimal
grading, utilization of terraces and multiple orientations, reduction of
2
MY, AAAI of excessive canes 1 worm 111 Aet,,,l„ 11 .1—L! ..-d
rcquirea to Ae incorporated into this project. Additionally, the
objectives and strategies of the City's draft General Plan require
consideration. These objectives and strategies dictate that development
maintain a feeling of open space, minimize grading, encourage superior
land use, ensure new development yields a pleasant living environment,
compatibility with surrounding development, and building setbacks along
roadways be varied to avoid a monotonous street scene and relate to the
structure's scale. To meet the guidelines of the Hillside Management
Ordinance and the objectives and strategies of the draft General Plan,
structures for each residential lot should be designed to retain the
integrity of each site's natural topography; grading should be minimal
with variable slope ratio from 2:1 to 4:1 within the proposed graded
area; terracing and low levels deck should be utilized; excessive
cantilevers on downhill elevations should be avoided; structure bulk
should be reduced; architectural treatment should be used on all sides of
the residential structure; building materials and color schemes should
blend in with the natural landscape of earth tones; and view
opportunities and multiply orientations should be considered along with
residential privacy.
Annexation to "The Country Estates":
The proposed project is located adjacent to a private, gated community
identified as "The Country Estates". The project's applicant proposes
annexation to "The Country Estates". A condition of approval for this
project is that an application for annexation shall occur and Conditions,
Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) comply with and be consistent with
the CC&R's implemented by "The Country Estates".
Road Improvements and Access:
The tentative parcel map, as proposed, requires the extension of
Steeplechase Lane and Hawkwood Drive. The alignment shown requires
construction of the street and public utilities off-site on property
outside the ownership of the applicant. Easements must be obtained by
the applicant from the adjacent property owner. The applicant is
required to provide an offer of dedication for the construction of a
bullnose at the terminus of Hawkwood Road, the knuckle at the western
terminus of Steeplechase Lane, and the maintenance of the fire access
road from Steeplechase Lane to the Las Brisas Condominium project. These
proposed improvements will coincide with Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
47850. For those portions of the private street improvements within the
parcel map's boundaries, the applicant is required to dedicate right-of-
way for public use. For public street improvements, the applicant is
required to grant access easements for private and public purposes and
for street drainage. Access to the project site will only be provided
through "The Country Estates".
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
The environmental evaluation shows that the proposed project will not
have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative
Declaration has been prepared pursuant to the guidelines of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Mitigated Negative Declaration/ Mitigation Monitoring Program
Aff idW f ied ih the %4! a 1 S�udv. _ nron^mna n"^4^4 will r^t
pvzenz1a11Zr signtrivant errect on the environment because mitigation
measures are incorporated into this project. These mitigation measures
will reduce any potentially significant effects on the environment to a
level of less than significant.
Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Mitigation
Monitoring Program was prepared by City staff. The Mitigation Monitoring
Program is a schedule utilized to supervise the project's mitigation
measures. Its purpose is to ensure that mitigation measures are
satisfied.
The incorporated mitigation includes appropriate measures to prevent soil
erosion by wind or water. These measures, pursuant to the Hillside
Management Ordinance and the Uniform Building Code, require planting
materials (native, naturalized, or other) which blend with the area and
are fire retardant. These planting materials are required to have a
support irrigation system which utilizes water and energy conservation
techniques. Other mitigation measures include hours of construction,
compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance and SCAQMD Rule 403, National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) permits, and protection
of existing oak tree.
Significant Ecological Area (SEA):
Tonner Canyon is established as Significant Ecological Area (SEA) No. 15
by Los Angeles County in 1976 to preserve one of three hilly areas in
eastern Los Angeles County that still supports a relatively undisturbed
stand of the southern oak woodland/ chaparral coastal sage scrub/riparian
woodland complex that was once common in this part of the country. Based
on a study by England and Nelson Environmental Consultants, prepared for
Los Angeles County's Regional Planning Department, an area is designated
"ecologically significant" when it contains undisturbed biotic
communities and possesses resources that are uncommon, rare, unique, or
absolutely critical to the maintenance of wildlife.
The Tentative Parcel Map No.22382 is located at the extreme northwestern
edge of the Tonner Canyon/Chino Hills Significant Ecological Area No. 15.
This project site is denude of any vegetation due to annual surface
scraping/disking by the Los Angeles County Fire Department conducted over
many years, except for Lot 3. Lot 3 contains the one oak tree previously
mentioned. The project site no longer meets any of the SEA criteria.
The City has a Significant Ecological Area Technical Advisory Committee
(SEATAC) which, pursuant to the City's Code, reviews and comments and
provides recommendations on projects within the SEA. SEATAC met on April
3, 1995 to discuss the proposed parcel map. SEATAC finds that the
proposed parcel map will not have a significant effect on SEA No. 15 and
no additional changes or recommendations are necessary.
Planning-Commission Review:
The first Planning Commission public hearing for this proposed map was
held on April 24, 1995. At that time, the Commission granted a
continuance to May 8, 1995 at the applicant's request. At the May 8,
1995 continued public hearing, the Commission received testimony and
directed the applicant to provide hillside development standards which
will delineate the building envelope for each lot. The public hearing
4
was continued to May 22, 1995 in order to give the applicant time to
respond to the Commission's request. At the final public hearing held on
May 22, 1995, the Planning Commission adopted resolutions recommending
the City Council approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 as conditioned.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC SEARING:
Notice for this project was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin and
the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on May 30, 1995. Public hearing notices
were Mailed to approximately 185 property owners within a 500 foot radius
of the project site on May 26, 1995.
CONCLUSION:
Other tract maps under consideration by the City Council, recently
approved in the area, or under construction have various size lots
beginning at .46 acres (20,000 square feet, VTM 47850). The proposed
parcel map has lot sizes beginning at .55 acres (23,958 square feet).
Therefore, it is compatible with tract maps under consideration by the
City Council, recently approved in the area, or under development when
considering lot acreage. The envisioned product will be compatible with
the existing development in the area. Further more, this project serves
as a transition between Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 47850 (located
on the south side of Steeplechase Lane) and the existing development to
the north and west.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council approve
23382, Conditional Use Permit No. 92-1, Oa
Negative Declaration 95-2, Findings of Fact,
within the attached resolution.
PREPARED BY:
An u , Assistant Planner
Attachments:
Tentative Parcel Map No.
Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2,
and conditions as listed
1. Draft City Council Resolutions
2. Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B" dated June 20, 1995
3. Planning Commission Resolutions No. 95-7 and No. 95-8
4. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 95-2
5. Mitigation Monitoring Program
6. Planning Commission Minutes dated April 24, May 8, and May 22, 1995
5
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
NO. 23382 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
NO. 95-2 FOR A REQUEST TO DIVIDE ONE PARCEL
INTO FOUR RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED AT THE
EXTREME NORTHWESTERN EDGE OF TONNER
CANYON/CHINO HILLS SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL
AREA (SEA) NO. 15, AT 3000 BLOCK (NORTH SIDE)
OF STEEPLECHASE LANE.
A. Recitals
1. The property owner/applicant, Warren Dolezal of Dolezal
Family Limited Partnership has filed the "Application"
for Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 for a request to
divide on parcel into four residential lots located at
the extreme northwestern edge of Tonner Canyon/Chino
Hill Significant Ecological Area No. 15. The project
site is located at 3,000 block (north side) of
Steeplechase Lane, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County,
California, as described in the title of this Resolu-
tion. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Tentative Parcel Map application is referred to as the
"Application".
2. On April 181, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal organization
of the State of California. On that date, pursuant to
the requirements of the California Government Code
Section 57376, 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, including the subject Application, within
the City of Diamond Bar.
3. The City of Diamond Bar lacks an operative General Plan.
Accordingly, action was taken on the subject
application, as to consistency to the Draft General
Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Office
of Planning and Research extension granted pursuant to
California Government Code Section 65361.
4. Notification of the Planning Commission public hearing
for this project has been made in the San Gabriel Valley
1
Tribune and the Inland Vallev Bulletin newspaper
March 31, 1995. One hundred and eighty-five (18
property owners within a 500 foot radius of the project`
site were notified by mail on March 28, 1995.
5. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, on
April 24, 1995 conducted a duly noticed public hearing
on the Application. At that time, the public hearing
was continued to May 8, 1995. On May 8, 1995, the
public hearing was continued to May 22, 1995. The
Planning Commission recommended approval to the City
Council on May 22, 1995.
6. Notification of the City Council public hearing for this
project has been made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune
and the Inland Valley Bulletin newspapers on May 30,
1995. One hundred and eighty-five (185) property owners
within a 500 foot radius of the project site were
notified by mail on May 26, 1995.
7. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, on June 20,
1995 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the
Application.
8. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolu-
tion 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. The 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 and determines that having
considered the record as a whole, there is no evidence
before this City Council that the project as proposed by
the Application, and conditioned for approval herein,
will have the potential of an adverse effect on wildlife
resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife
depends. Based upon substantial evidence presented in
the record before this City Council, the Council hereby.
rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in
Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations.
3. The City Council hereby finds that the initial study
review and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 95-2 has
been prepared by the City of Diamond Bar in compliance
with the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended, and guidelines
promulgated thereunder. Further, the Mitigate Negative
2
6
Declaration reflects the independent judgement o
City of Diamond Bar. g
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth
herein, this City Council, hereby finds as follows:
(a) The project request relates to a vacant parcel of
2.55 gross acres located at the extreme
northwestern edge of SEA No. 15 at the 3000 block
(north side) of Steeplechase Lane at the terminus
of Hawkwood Road and adjacent to a gated community
identified as "The Country Estates".
(b) The project site is located within the Single
Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square
Feet (R-1-8,000) Zone. It has a draft General
Plan land use designation of Low Density
Residential -Maximum 3 Dwelling Units Per Acre (RL -
3 Du/Acre).
(c) Generally, the following zones surround the
project site: to the north are the Single Family
Residential -Minimum Lot Size 20,000 Square Feet
(R-1-20,000) and Commercial -Recreational (C-R)
Zones; to the west is the Single Family
Residential -Minimum Lot Size 9,000 Square Feet (R-
1-9,000) Zone; to the east is the R-1-20,000 Zone;
and to the south is the R-3-8,000 Zone.
(d) The proposed parcel map is consistent with the
Cityfs draft General Plan and zoning standards.
(e) The design and improvements of the proposed
subdivision complies with the City's draft General
Plan, local ordinances, and State requirements.
(f) The project site is physically suitable for this
type of subdivision.
(g) The design of the proposed subdivision or the
proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially
and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their
habitat.
(h) The design of the subdivision or the type of
improvements is not likely to cause serious public
health problems.
(i) The design of the subdivision or the type of
improvements will not conflict with easements,
acquired by the public at large, for access
through or use of, property with in the proposed
subdivision.
3
6
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth ab
the City Council hereby approves this Application
subject to the following conditions:
A. PLANNING DIVISION
(1) Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 shall be developed
in substantial conformance to plans dated June 20,
19951 labeled Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B" as
submitted and approved by the City Council.
(2) The approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 is
granted subject to the approval of the Hillside
Management and Significant Ecological Area
Conditional Use Permit No. 92-1, Oak Tree Permit
No. 95-2, and Mitigated Negative Declaration No.
95-2.
(3) The approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382
shall not be effective for any purpose until the
permittee and owner of the property involved (if
other than the permittee) have filed within
fifteen (15) days of approval of this map, at the
City of Diamond Bar's Community Development
Department, their Affidavit of Acceptance stating
that they are aware of and agree to accept all the
conditions of this map. Further, this approval
shall not be effective until the permittee pays
remaining Planning Division processing fees.
(4) In accordance with Government Code Section 66474.9
(b) (1), the applicant shall defend, indemnify,
and hold harmless from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City or its agents,
officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void
or annul, approval of the Tentative Parcel Map No.
23382, which action is brought within the time
period provided for Government Code Section
66499.37.
(5) The site shall be maintained in a condition which
is free of debris both during and after the
construction, addition, or implementation of the
entitlement granted herein. The removal of all
trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or
subsequent to construction shall be done only by
the property owner, applicant or by a duly
permitted waste contractor, who has been
authorized by the City to provide collection,
transportation, and disposal of solid waste from
residential, commercial, construction, and
industrial areas within the City. It shall be the
applicant's obligation to insure that the waste
contractor utilized has obtained permits, from the
City of Diamond Bar to provide such services.
f' f
(6) All requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and
the underlying zoning of the subject propert,:
shall be complied with, unless otherwise set forth
in the permit or shown on the approved plans. 4
(7) The applicant shall satisfy the City's park
obligation by contributing an in -lieu fee to the
City prior to recordation of the final map per
Code Section 2124.340.
(8) The applicant shall pay development fees
(including, but not limited to, Planning and
Building and Safety Divisions 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.
(9) Prior to approval of the final map, the owner
shall make a bonafide application to "The Country
Estates" Association to annex this subdivision to
that association. The owner shall be required to
agree to annex upon recordation of the final map
if all fees assessed by "The Country Estates"
Association do not exceed the fees assessed per
lot for annexation, to "The Country Estates"
Association for Tract No. 47722.
(10) Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's)
and Articles of Incorporation of a homeowner's
association are required and shall be provided to
the Community Development Director and the City
Attorney for review and approval prior to the
recordation of the final map. A homeowners'
association shall be created and responsibilities
there of shall be delineated within the CC&R's or
the homeowners' association shall be incorporated
into "The Country Estates". The CC&R's and
Articles of Incorporation shall be recorded
concurrently with the final map or prior to the
issuance of any City permits, whichever occurs
first. A recorded copy shall be provide to the
City Engineer.
(11) The CC&R's shall incorporate Exhibit "B" which
delineates each lot's building envelope.
(12) The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation
Monitoring Program for Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 95-2.
(13) The Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) fees shall
be deposited with the City prior to issuance of a
grading permit. All costs related to the ongoing
monitoring shall be secured from the subdivider
5
(i A`
and received by the City prior to the final a a V II
approval.
(14) The parcel map shall be designed so as to
substantially comply with the CC&R's implemented
by the adjacent development known as "The Country
Estates". The CC&R's shall incorporate at a
minimum, provisions which would establish a
maintenance program for urban pollutant basins and
all mitigation measures within the Mitigation
Monitoring Program. The CC&R's shall, to the
fullest extent possible, be consistent with "The
Country Estates"" CC&R's.
(15) A clause shall be incorporated into the CC&R's
which requires disputes involving interpretation
or application of the CC&R's (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.
(16) Grading and/or construction activities shall be
restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday
through Saturday. All equipment utilized for
grading and/or construction shall be properly
muffled to reduce noise levels. Transportation of
equipment and materials and the operation of heavy
grading shall be restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. All equipment staging areas shall be located
on the subject property. Dust generated by
grading and construction activities shall be
reduced by watering the soil prior to and during
the activities. Reclaimed water shall be used
whenever possible.
(17) Construction equipment and/or related construction
traffic shall not be permitted to enter the
project site from Hawkwood Road.
(18) Parcel Map No. 23382 shall maintain a minimum 20
foot wide (open clear to the sky) paved access
road along and within that public utility and
public services easement on the westerly portion
of Lot 1 and between the cul-de-sac of Hawkwood
Road and the knuckle of Steeplechase Lane, to the
satisfaction of the Los Angeles County Fire
Department and the City Engineer. The access
shall be indicated on the map as a "Fire Lane".
Vehicular or pedestrian gates obstructing the
access shall be of an approved width and shall be
provided only with locking devices and/or override
C.1
mechanisms which has been approved by
Chief.
(19) The applicant shall prepa
Community Development Direc
to the sale of the first to
"Buyers' Awareness Package'
but, not limited to, inf<
geologic issues regarding
corridors, oak and waln
issues, the existence and
to SEA No. 15 and Tonner Ca
delineates each lot's buil
atory information pertaini
use of properties as necess
matter. The applicant sha
to include delivery of a
the i
T.F
-e and submit to the
for for approval prior
of the subdivision, a
which shall include,
rmation pertaining to
:he property, wildlife
.it tree preservation
constraints pertaining
iyon, Exhibit "B" which
ling envelope, explan-
ag to restrictions on
try and similar related
L1 institute a program
coDv of the "Buyers'
Awareness Package" to each prospective purchaser
and shall keep on file in the applicant's office a
receipt signed by each such prospective purchaser
indicating that the prospective purchaser has
received and read the information in the package.
The applicant shall incorporated within the CC&R's
a reference to the availability of the package and
the fact that a copy thereof is on file in the
City of Diamond Bar's City Clerk's office.
(20) The project applicant, 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 District's waste
diversion policies.
(21) All down drains and drainage channels shall be
constructed in muted earth tones so as not to
impart adverse visual impacts.
(22) Slopes in excess of five fe
shall be landscaped and i
control. Slope landscaping
be continuously maintained
thriving condition by the
individual lot or unit is so
buyer. Prior to releasin
units, an inspection shall
Planning Division to dete
this condition.
et in vertical height
rrigated for erosion
and irrigation shall
in a healthy and
developer until each
ld and occupied by the
g occupancy for the
be conducted by the
'mine compliance with
(23) Variable slope ratios of 2:1 to 4:1 shall be
utilized within the indicated grading areas of
each lot to the satisfaction the City Engineer.
(24) The emergency access gate at the terminus of
Hawkwood Road shall be consistent, in design and
7
materials, with existing gates located at other
access areas within "The Country Estates".
(25) Notwithstanding any previous subsection of this
resolution, if the Department of Fish and Game
requires payment of a fee pursuant to Section
711.4 of the Fish and Game Code, payment therefore
shall be made by the Applicant prior to the
issuance of any building permit or any other
entitlement.
(26) The subject property shall be maintained and
operated in full compliance with the conditions of
this grant and any law, statute, ordinance or
other regulations applicable to any development or
activity of the subject properties.
(27) This grant is valid for two (2) years and must be
exercised (i.e. construction) within that period
or this grant shall expire. A one (1) year
extension may be requested in writing, submitted
to the City, 30 days prior to this grant's
expiration date.
B. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
General
(1) Prior to approval and recordation of the parcel
map, written certification shall be submitted to
the City from the Walnut Valley Water District
(WVWD) that adequate water supply and facilities;
from Los Angeles County Sanitation District
(LACSD) that adequate sewage conveyance and
treatment capacity; and from each public utility
and cable television purveyor that adequate
supplies and facilities; are or will be available
to serve the proposed project. Such letters must
have been issued by the districts, utility
companies and cable television company within
ninety (90) days prior to parcel map approval.
(2) A title report/guarantee and subdivision guarantee
showing all fee owners and, interest holders, and
nature of interest shall be submitted when a
parcel map is submitted for map check. The
account with the title company shall remain open.
until the parcel map is filed with the County
Recorder. An updated title report/ guarantee and
subdivision guarantee shall be submitted ten (10)
working days prior to parcel map approval.
(3) All easements existing prior to parcel map
approval shall be identified and shown on parcel
map. If an easement is blanket or indeterminate
8
in nature, a statement to that effect shall
shown on the parcel map in lieu of showing i
location. *>1
(4) Based on a field survey boundary monuments shall
be set in accordance with the State Subdivision
Map Act and local subdivision ordinance and shall
be subject to approval by the City Engineer.
(5) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all required public improvements. if
any required public improvements have not been
completed by Applicant/ Subdivider and accepted by
the City prior to the approval of the parcel map,
Applicant/Subdivider shall enter into a
subdivision agreement with the City and shall post
the appropriate security, guaranteeing completion
of the improvements, prior to parcel map approval.
(6) Plans for all site grading, landscaping,
irrigation, street, sewer, water and storm drain
improvements shall be approved by the City
Engineer prior to parcel map approval.
(7) House numbering plans shall be submitted to and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
building permits.
(8) The detail drawings and construction notes shown
on the submitted tentative map are conceptual only
and the approval of this tentative map shall not
constitute approval of said notes.
Grading
(9) The final subdivision grading plans (1" = 40' or
larger scale, 24" x 36" sheet format) shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Engineer
prior to issuance of any building or grading
permits and prior to parcel map approval.
(10) The Applicant/Subdivider, at the Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall perform
all grading in accordance with plans approved by
the City Engineer. For grading not performed
prior to Parcel Map approval an agreement shall be
executed and security shall be posted,
guaranteeing completion of the improvements prior
to Parcel Map approval.
(11) Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the City
Engineer the detail grading and drainage
9
i
construction cost estimate for bonding purpos6o
all grading, prior to approval of the parcel ma
(12) Precise final grading plans for each parcel shall
be submitted to the City Engineer for approval
prior to issuance of building or grading permits.
(This may be on an incremental or composite
basis.)
(13) Grading of the subject property shall be in
accordance with the current Uniform Building Code
and City's Hillside Management ordinance, and
acceptable grading practices. The final
subdivision and precise final grading plans shall
be in substantial conformance with the grading
shown as a material part of the approved Tentative
Map. No driveway serving building area(s) shall
exceed 15% grade.
(14) All landslide debris shall be completely removed
prior to fill placement or other approved remedial
measures implemented as required by the final
geotechnical report and approved by the City
Engineer.
(15) At the time of submittal of the final subdivision
grading plan for plan check, a detailed soils and
geology report shall be submitted in compliance
with City guidelines to the City Engineer for
approval. The report shall be prepared by a
qualified registered geotechnical engineer and
engineering geologist licensed by the State of
California. All geotechnical and soils related
findings and recommendations shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
any grading permits and recordation of the parcel
map. The report shall address, but not be limited
to, the following:
(a) Soil remediation measures shall be designed
for a "worst case" geologic interpretation
subject to verification in the field during
grading.
(b) The extent of any remedial grading into
natural areas shall be clearly defined on the
grading plans.
(c) Areas of potential for debris flow shall be
defined and proper remedial measures
implemented as approved by the City Engineer.
(d) Gross stability of all fill slopes shall be
analyzed as part of the geotechnical report,
including remedial fill that replaces natural
slope.
(e) Stability of all proposed slopes shall be
confirmed by analysis as approved by the City
10
Ar I
Engineer. Unstable slopes shall
redesigned or stabilized utilizing slopeh,;=
reinforcement.
(f) All geologic data including landslides and
exploratory excavations shall be shown on a
consolidated geotechnical map using the final
subdivision grading plan as a base.
(g) Stability analyses of daylight shear keys
with a 1:1 projection from daylight to slide
plane; projection plan shall have a minimum
safety factor of 1.5.
(h) 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.
(i) All landslides must be shown on a
consolidated geotechnical map. Specific
remedial measures shall be implemented
pursuant to the requirements of City Code and
Ordinances.
(j) Stability of back cuts (i.e. excavation of
natural slopes) must be analyzed.
(16) Final subdivision grading plans shall be designed
in compliance with the recommendations of the
final detailed soils and engineering geology
reports. All remedial earthworm specified in the
final report shall be incorporated into the plans.
(17) Grading plans shall be signed and stamped by a
California registered Civil Engineer, registered
Geotechnical Engineer and registered Geologist.
(18) All identified geologic hazards within the
Tentative Subdivision boundaries which cannot be
eliminated as approved by the City Engineer shall
be indicated on the parcel map as "Restricted Use
Area" subject to geologic hazard. The subdivider
shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit
the erection of buildings or other structures
within such restricted use areas shown on the
parcel map.
Drainage
(19) A drainage study and drainage improvement plans
(24" x 36" sheet format) prepared by a California
registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to
and approved by the City Engineer prior to parcel
map approval. All drainage facilities shall be
designed and constructed as required by the City
11
Engineer and in accordance with County of -labs.
Angeles standards.
(20) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all drainage improvements in accordance
with plans approved by the City Engineer. For
drainage improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
and security shall be posted, guaranteeing
completion of the improvements, prior to parcel
map approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit
to the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all drainage improvements
prior to parcel map approval.
(21) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's ` sole cost and expense, shall
construct all facilities necessary for dewatering
all parcels to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. For dewatering facilities not
constructed prior to parcel map approval an
agreement shall be executed and security shall be
posted, guaranteeing completion of the
improvements, prior to parcel map approval.
Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the City
Engineer the detail cost estimate for bonding
purposes for all dewatering improvements prior to
parcel map approval.
(22) Easements for disposal of drainage water onto or
over adjacent parcels shall be delineated and
shown on the parcel map as approved by the City
Engineer.
(23) All drainage improvements necessary for dewatering
and protecting the subdivided properties shall be
installed prior to issuance of building permits
for construction upon any parcel that may be
subject to drainage flows enter, leaving, or
within that parcel for which a building permit is
requested.
(24) An erosion control plan shall be submitted to and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
grading permits.
(25) An offer of easements for drainage and drainage
improvements, as required by the City Engineer,
shall be made on the parcel map prior to parcel
map approval.
Streets
12
<T�1;05
(26) Street improvement plans (24" x 36" sheetfo
prepared by a California registered Civil Engin ..'
shall be submitted to and approved by the Cit'
Engineer prior to parcel map approval.
(27) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all street improvements in accordance
with plans approved by the City Engineer. For
street improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
and security shall be posted, guaranteeing
completion of the improvements, prior to parcel
map approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit
to the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all street improvements prior
to approval of the parcel map.
(28) New street centerline monuments shall be set at
the intersections of streets, intersection of
streets with the westerly boundary of Parcel 1 and
the easterly boundary of Parcel 3 of Parcel Map
1528, and to mark the beginning and ending of
curves or the points of intersection of tangents
thereof. Survey notes showing the ties between
all monuments set and four (4) durable reference
points for each shall be submitted to the City
Engineer for approval in accordance with City
Standards, prior to issuance of Certificate of
occupancy.
(29) 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 for work in the City of Diamond Bar in
addition to any other permits required.
(30) No street shall exceed a maximum slope of 12%
unless approved by the City Engineer.
(31) Base and pavement on all streets shall be
constructed in accordance with a soils report and
pavement thickness calculations shall be prepared
by a qualified and registered engineer and shall
be approved by the City Engineer or as otherwise
directed by the City Engineer.
(32) The street light at end of Hawkwood cul-de-sac
shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
(33) All utility lines shall be placed underground in
and adjoining the proposed tentative subdivision
map.
13
(34) Curbs and gutters for cul-de-sac at ends
Hawkwood shall be constructed to the satisfacti
of the City Engineer.
Sewer and Water
(35) Prior to parcel map approval the subdivider shall
submit an area study to the City Engineer and Los
Angeles County Department of Public Works to
determine whether capacity is available in the
sewerage system to be used as the outlet for the
sewers in this land division. If the system is
found to be of insufficient capacity, the problem
shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and Los Angeles County Department of
Public Works.
(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
subdivision shall be connected to the City sewer
system.
(37) Sewer system improvement plans (24" x 36" sheet
format, 2 pages per sheet) prepared by a
California registered Civil Engineer shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Engineer,
Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, and
Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts prior to
parcel map approval.
(38) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all sewer system improvements. For
sewer system improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
and security shall be posted guaranteeing
completion of the improvements prior to parcel map
approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit to
the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all sewer system improvements
prior to approval of the parcel map.
(39) The Applicant/ Subdivider shall obtain connection
permit(s) from the City, Los Angeles County Public
Works Department and County Sanitation District
prior to issuance of building permits. The
subdivision area within the tentative map
boundaries shall be annexed into the County
Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District and Los
Angeles County Sanitation District No. 21.
(40) An offer of easements for sewer system
improvements, as required by the City Engineer,
14
shall be made on the parcel map prior to parcel t
map approval.
(41) Domestic water system improvement plans, designed
with appurtenant facilities to serve all parcels
in the land division and designed to Walnut Valley
Water District (WVWD) specifications, shall be
provided and approved by, the City Engineer and
WVWD. The system shall include fire hydrants of
the type and location as determined by the Los
Angeles County Fire Department. The main lines
shall be sized to accommodate the total domestic
and fire flows to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer, WVWD and Fire Department.
(42) Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/Subdivider's
sole cost and expense, shall construct all
domestic water system improvements. For water
system improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
and security shall be posted, guaranteeing
completion of the improvements, prior to parcel
map approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit
to the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all domestic water system
improvements prior to approval of the parcel map.
(43) Separate underground utility services shall be
provide to each parcel, including water, gas,
electric power, telephone and cable TV service, in
accordance with the respective utility company
standards. Easements that may be required by the
utility companies shall be approved by the City
Engineer prior to granting.
(44) An offer of easements for public utility and
public services purposes, as required by the City
Engineer, shall be made on the parcel map prior to
parcel map approval.
(45) Applicant/Subdivider shall relocate and
underground any existing on-site utilities as
necessary and to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and the respective utility owner.
(46) Reclaimed water system improvement plans, designed
with appurtenant facilities capable of delivering
reclaimed water to all portions of the subdivision
and serving each parcel in the subdivision and
designed to Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD)
specifications, shall be provided and approved by
the City Engineer and WVWD.
(47) Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/Subdivider's
sole cost and expense, shall construct reclaimed
15
-„
water system improvements, including main aha
service lines capable of delivering reclaimed
water to all portions of the subdivision.
Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the City
Engineer the detail cost estimate for bonding
purposes for all reclaimed water system
improvements prior to approval of the parcel map.
(48) As reclaimed water supply is not currently
available, Subdivider shall enter into agreement
to design and construct system, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Walnut
Valley Water District. The system shall be
designed to permit "switch over" of non-domestic
services on each lot at such time a reclaimed
water supply is available to the subdivision.
Irrevocable security shall be posted to guarantee
the performance of this agreement.
(49) The Applicant/Subdivider shall install portions of
the reclaimed water system (main and irrigation
service lines) capable of delivering reclaimed
water to those designated areas, if any, of the
subdivision for which the homeowners association
is responsible for irrigation and/or landscape.
maintenance. This installation shall provide for
a present connection to the domestic water system
and shall include provisions for the switch -over
to the future reclaimed water system.
The City Clerk shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution;
(b) This City Council hereby provides notice to Warren
Dolezal of the Dolezal Family Limited Partnership that
the time within which judicial review of the decision
represented by this resolution must be sought is
governed by the provisions of the California Code of
Civil Procedures, Section 1094.6; and
(c) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution,
by certified mail to: Warren Dolezal of the Dolezal
Family Limited Partnership, 4251 S. Higuera Street, San
Luis Obispo, CA 93401;
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 1995, BY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
16
BY:
Phyllis E. Papen, 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, at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the
20th day of June, 1995, by the following vote:
AYES: [COUNCIL MEMBERS:]
NOES: [COUNCIL MEMBERS:]
ABSENT: [COUNCIL MEMBERS:]
ABSTAIN: [COUNCIL MEMBERS:]
ATTEST:
Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
17
A.
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 95-XX
41
AN,
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT
AND SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREA CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 92-1, OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 95-
2, AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 95-
2 FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 23382 WHICH IS
A REQUEST TO DIVIDE ONE PARCEL INTO FOUR
RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED AT THE EXTREME
NORTHWESTERN EDGE OF TONNER CANYON/CHINO
HILLS SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREA (SEA) NO.
15, AT 3000 BLOCK (NORTH SIDE) OF
STEEPLECHASE LANE.
Recitals
1. The property owner/applicant, Warren Dolezal of Dolezal
Family Limited Partnership has filed the "Application"
for Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 for a request to
divide on parcel into four residential lots located at
the extreme northwestern edge of Tonner Canyon/Chino
Hill Significant Ecological Area No. 15. The project
site is located at 3,000 block (north side) of
Steeplechase Lane, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County,
California, as described in the title of this Resolu-
tion. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Tentative Parcel Map application is referred to as the
"Application".
2. on April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal organization
of the State of California. On that date, pursuant to
the requirements of the California Government Code
Section 57376, 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, including the subject Application, within
the City of Diamond Bar.
3. The City of Diamond Bar lacks an operative General Plan.
Accordingly, action was taken on the subject
application, as to consistency to the Draft General
Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Office
1
B.
0
of Planning and Research extension granted pursMt�to
California Government Code Section 65361.
4. Notification of the Planning Commission public hearing
for this project has been made in the San Gabriel Valley
Tribune and the Inland Valley Bulletin newspapers on
March 31, 1995. One hundred and eighty-five (185)
property owners within a 500 foot radius of the project
site were notified by mail on March 28, 1995.
5. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, on
April 24, 1995 conducted a duly noticed public hearing
on the Application. At that time, the public hearing
was continued to May 8, 1995. On May 8, 1995, the
public hearing was continued to May 22, 1995. The
Planning Commission recommended approval to the City
Council on May 22, 1995.
6. Notification of the City Council public hearing for this
project has been made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune
and the Inland Valley Bulletin newspapers on May 30,
1995. One hundred and eighty-five (185) property owners
within a 500 foot radius of the project site were
notified by mail on May 26, 1995.
7. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, on June 20,
1995 conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the
Application.
S. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolu-
tion have occurred.
Resolution
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the
City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
1. The 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 and determines that having
considered the record as a whole, there is no evidence
before this City Council that the project as proposed by
the Application, and conditioned for approval herein,
will have the potential of an adverse effect on wildlife
resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife
depends. Based upon substantial evidence presented in
the record before this City Council, the Council hereby
rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in
2
16
Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Co P
Regulations.
3. The City Council hereby finds that the initial study
review and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 95-2 has
been prepared by the City of Diamond Bar in compliance
with the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended, and guidelines
promulgated thereunder. Further, said Mitigate Negative
Declaration reflects the independent judgement of the
City of Diamond Bar.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth
herein, this City Council, hereby finds as follows:
(a) The project request relates to a vacant parcel of
2.55 gross acres located at the extreme
northwestern edge of SEA No. 15 at the 3000 block
(north side) of Steeplechase Lane at the terminus
of Hawkwood Road and adjacent to a gated community
identified as "The Country Estates".
(b) The project site is located within the Single
Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size 81000 Square
Feet (R-1-8,000) Zone. It has a draft General
Plan land use designation of Low Density
Residential -Maximum 3 Dwelling Units Per Acre (RL -
3 Du/Acre).
(c) Generally, the following zones surround the
project site: to the north are the Single Family
Residential -Minimum Lot Size 20,000 Square Feet
(R-1-20,000) and Commercial -Recreational (C-R)
Zones; to the west is the Single Family
Residential -Minimum Lot Size 9,000 Square Feet (R-
1-9,000) Zone; to the east is the R-1-20,000 Zone;
and to the south is the R-3-8,000 Zone.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
(d) The proposed project will not be in substantial
conflict with the draft General Plan, local
ordinances, and State requirements.
(e) The proposed project will not adversely affect the
health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons
residing or working in the surrounding area.
(f) 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.
3
"1
(g) The proposed project will not jeopardize, endan�►
or otherwise constitute a menace to public health ,'
safety or general welfare.
(h) The project site is adequate in size and shape to
accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking 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.
(i) 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.
SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREA (SEA)
(j) The proposed project is designed to be highly
compatible with the biotic resources present,
including the setting aside of appropriate and
sufficient undisturbed areas.
(k) The proposed project is designed so that wildlife
movement corridors (migratory paths) are left in
an undisturbed and natural state.
(1) The proposed project retains sufficient natural
vegetative cover and/open spaces to buffer
critical resource areas from the requested
project.
(m) Where necessary, fences or walls are provided to
buffer important habitat areas from development.
(n) The proposed project is designed to maintain water
bodies, watercourses, and their tributaries in a
natural state.
(o) The roads and utilities serving the proposed
project are located and designed so as not to
conflict with critical resources, habitat areas or
migratory paths.
HILLSIDE MANAGBMENT AREA
(p) 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/or property due to
F1
the presence of geologic, seismic, s A
instability, fire, flood, mud flow, or erosio;
hazard.
(q) The proposed project is compatible with the
natural, biotic, cultural, scenic, and open space
resources of the area.
(r) 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.
(s) The proposed project demonstrates creative and
imaginative design, resulting in a visual quality
that will complement community character and
benefit current and future community residents.
OAR TREE PERMIT
(t) The proposed project will be accomplished without
endangering the health of the remaining oak tree.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth above,
the City Council hereby approves this Application
subject to the following conditions:
A. PLANNING DIVISION
(1) Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 shall be developed
in substantial conformance to plans dated June 20,
1995, labeled Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B" as
submitted and approved by the City Council.
(2) The approval of the Hillside Management Ordinance
and Significant Ecological Area Conditional Use
Permit No. 92-1, Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2, and
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 95-2 is granted
subject to the approval of Tentative Parcel Map
No. 23382.
(3) The approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382
shall not be effective for any purpose until the
permittee and owner of the property involved (if
other than the permittee) have filed within
fifteen (15) days of approval of this map, at the
City of Diamond Bar's Community Development
Department, their Affidavit of Acceptance stating
that they are aware of and agree to accept all the
5
4
conditions of this map. Further, this app
shall not be effective until the permittee p
remaining Planning Division
processing fees.
(4) In accordance with Government Code Section 66474.9
(b) (1.), the applicant shall defend, indemnify,
and hold any claim, action, or proceeding against
the City or its agents, officers, or employees to
attack, set aside, void or annul, and approval of
the Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 which action is
brought within the time period provided for
Government Code Section 66499.37.
(5) The site shall be maintained in a condition which
is free of debris both during and after the
construction, addition, or implementation of the
entitlement granted herein. The removal of all
trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or
subsequent to construction shall be done only by
the property owner, applicant or by a duly
permitted waste contractor, who has been
authorized by the City to provide collection,
transportation, and disposal of solid waste from
residential, commercial, construction, and
industrial areas within the City. It shall be the
applicant's obligation to insure that the waste
contractor utilized has obtained permits from the
City of Diamond Bar to provide such services.
(6) All requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and of
the underlying zoning of the subject property
shall be complied with, unless otherwise set forth
in the permit or shown on the approve plans.
(7) The applicant shall satisfy the City's park
obligation by contributing an in -lieu fee to the
City prior to recordation of the final map per
Code Section 2124.340.
(8) The applicant shall pay development fees
(including, but not limited to, Planning and
Building and Safety Divisions 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.
(9) Prior to approval of the final map, the owner
shall make a bona fide application to "The Country
Estates" Association to annex this subdivision to
that association. The owner shall be required to
agree to annex upon recordation of the final map
if all fees assessed by "The Country Estates"
2
Association do not exceed the fees assess r
lot for annexation to "The Country Esta*
Association for Tract No. 47722.
R'
(10) Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's)
and Articles of Incorporation of a homeowner's
association are required and shall be provided to
the Community Development Director and the City
Attorney for review and approval prior to the
recordation of the final map. A homeowners'
association shall be created and responsibilities
there of shall be delineated within the CC&R's or
the homeowners' association shall be incorporated
into "The Country Estates". The CC&R's and
Articles of Incorporation shall be recorded
concurrently with the final map or prior to the
issuance of any City permits, whichever occurs
first. A recorded copy shall be provide to the
City Engineer.
(11) The CC&R's shall incorporate Exhibit "B" which
delineates each lot's building envelope.
(12) The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation
Monitoring Program for Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 95-2.
(13) The Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) fees shall
be deposited with the City prior to issuance of a
grading permit. Additionally, all costs related
to the ongoing monitoring shall be secured from
the subdivider and received by the City prior to
the final map approval.
(14) The parcel map shall be designed so as to
substantially comply with the CC&R's implemented
by the adjacent development heretofore know as
"The Country Estates". The CC&R's shall
incorporate at a minimum, provisions which would
establish a maintenance program for urban
pollutant basins and all mitigation measures
within the Mitigation Monitoring Program. The
CC&R's shall, to the fullest extent possible, be
consistent with "The Country Estates"' CC&R's.
(15) A clause shall be incorporated into the CC&R's
which requires dispute 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
7
4
court of competent jurisdiction.
mediation shall be borne equally byhpa
the cost of
parties.
(16) Grading and/or construction activities shall be
restricted to 7:00 a.m, to 5:00 p.m.,
through Saturday. Monday
All equipment utilized for
grading and/or construction shall be properly
muffled to reduce noise levels. Transportation of
equipment and materials and the operation of heavy
grading shall be restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00
P.M. All equipment staging areas shall be located
on the subject property. Dust generated by
grading and construction activities shall be
reduced by watering the soil prior to and during
the activities. Reclaimed water shall be used
whenever possible.
(17) Construction equipment and/or related construction
traffic shall not be permitted to enter the
project site from Hawkwood Road.
(18) Parcel Map No. 23382 shall maintain a minimum 20
foot wide (open clear to the sky) paved access
road along and within that public utility and
public services easement on the westerly portion
of Lot i and between the cul-de-sac of Hawkwood
Road and the knuckle of Steeplechase Lane, to the
satisfaction of the Los Angeles County Fire
Department and the City Engineer. The access
shall be indicated on the map as a "Fire Lane".
Vehicular or pedestrian gates obstructing the
access shall be of an approved width and shall be
provided only with locking devices and/or override
mechanisms which has been approved by the Fire
Chief.
(19) 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
"Buyers' Awareness Package" which shall include,
but, not 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, Exhibit "B" which
delineates each lot's building envelope, explan-
atory information pertaining to restrictions on
use of properties as necessary and similar related
matter. The applicant shall institute a program
to include delivery of a copy of the "Buyers'
Awareness Package" to each prospective purchaser
and shall keep on file in the applicant's office a
8
ev
receipt signed by each such prospective purcha
indicating that the prospective purchaser has
received and read the information in the package.
The applicant shall incorporated within the CC&R's
a reference to the availability of said package
and the fact that a copy thereof is on file in the
City of Diamond Bar's City Clerk's office.
(20) The project applicant, 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 District's waste
diversion policies.
(21) All down drains and drainage channels shall be
constructed in muted earth tones so as not to
impart adverse visual impacts.
(22) Slopes in excess of five feet in vertical height
shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion
control. Slope landscaping and irrigation shall
be continuously maintained in a healthy and
thriving condition by, the developer until each
individual lot or unit is sold and occupied by the
buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for the
units, an inspection shall be conducted by the
Planning Division to determine compliance with
this condition.
(23) Variable slope ratios of 2:1 to 4:1 shall be
utilized within the indicated grading areas of
each lot to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
(24) The emergency access gate at the terminus of
Hawkwood Road shall be consistent, in design and
materials, with existing gates located at other
access areas within "The Country Estates".
(25) Adjacent front yard setbacks shall vary no less
than five (5) feet, beginning with a minimum
setback of 20 feet from the front property line
and no adjacent lots shall utilize the same front
yard setback. Minimum required rear yard setbacks
are 15 feet from the buildable pad's edge.
Minimum side yard setbacks shall be 10 and 15 feet
from the buildable pad's edge.
(26) All proposed single family residential structures
are required to comply with the City's Development
Review Ordinance.
9
(27) Notwithstanding any previous subsection of the
resolution, if the Department of Fish and Gam
requires payment of a fee pursuant to Section
711.4 of the Fish and Game Code, payment therefore
shall be made by the Applicant prior to the
issuance of any building permit or any other
entitlement.
(28) The subject property shall be maintained and
operated in full compliance with the conditions of
this grant and any law, statute, ordinance or
other regulations applicable to any development or
activity of the subject properties.
(29) This grant is valid for two (2) years and must be
exercised (i.e. construction) within that period
or this grant will expire. A one (1) year
extension may be requested in writing, submitted
to the City, 30 days prior to this grant's
expiration date.
B. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
General
(1) Prior to approval and recordation of the parcel
map, written certification shall be submitted to
the City from the Walnut Valley Water District
(WVWD) that adequate water supply and facilities;
from Los Angeles County Sanitation District
(LACSD) that adequate sewage conveyance and
treatment capacity; and from each public utility
and cable television purveyor that adequate
supplies and facilities; are or will be available
to serve the proposed project. Such letters must
have been issued by the districts, utility
companies and cable television company within
ninety (90) days prior to parcel map approval.
(2) A title report/guarantee and subdivision guarantee
showing all fee owners and, interest holders, and
nature of interest shall be submitted when a
parcel map is submitted for map check. The
account with the title company shall remain open
until the parcel map is filed with the County
Recorder. An updated title report/ guarantee and
subdivision guarantee shall be submitted ten (10)
working days prior to parcel map approval.
(3) All easements existing prior to parcel map
approval shall be identified and shown on parcel
map. If an easement is blanket or indeterminate
10
in nature, a statement to that
shown on the parcel map in lieu
location.
4
effect shall
of showing
(4) Based on a field survey boundary monuments shall
be set in accordance with the State Subdivision
Map Act and local subdivision ordinance and shall
be subject to approval by the City Engineer.
(5) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all required public improvements. If
any required public improvements have not been
completed by Applicant/ Subdivider and accepted by
the City prior to the approval of the parcel map,
Applicant/Subdivider shall enter into a
subdivision agreement with the City and shall post
the appropriate security, guaranteeing completion
of the improvements, prior to parcel map approval.
(6) Plans for all site grading, landscaping,
irrigation, street, sewer, water and storm drain
improvements shall be approved by the City
Engineer prior to parcel map approval.
(7) House numbering plans shall be submitted to and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
building permits.
(8) The detail drawings and construction notes shown
on the submitted tentative map are conceptual only
and the approval of this tentative map shall not
constitute approval of said notes.
Grading
(9) The final subdivision grading plans (1" = 40' or
larger scale, 24" x 36" sheet format) shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Engineer
prior to issuance of any building or grading
permits and prior to parcel map approval.
(10) The Applicant/Subdivider, at the Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall perform
all grading in accordance with plans approved by
the City Engineer. For grading not performed
prior to Parcel Map approval an agreement shall be
executed and security shall be posted,
guaranteeing completion of the improvements prior
to Parcel Map approval.
11
(11) Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the C
Engineer the detail grading and drain
construction cost estimate for bonding purposes of
all grading, prior to approval of the parcel map.
(12) Precise final grading plans for each parcel shall
be submitted to the City Engineer for approval
prior to issuance of building or grading permits.
(This may be on an incremental or composite
basis.)
(13) Grading of the subject property shall be in
accordance with the current Uniform Building Code
and City's Hillside Management Ordinance, and
acceptable grading practices. The final
subdivision and precise final grading plans shall
be in substantial conformance with the grading
shown as a material part of the approved Tentative
Map. No driveway serving building area(s) shall
exceed 15% grade.
(14) All landslide debris shall be completely removed
prior to fill placement or other approved remedial
measures implemented as required by the final
geotechnical report and approved by the City
Engineer.
(15) At the time of submittal of the final subdivision
grading plan for plan check, a detailed soils and
geology report shall be submitted in compliance
with City guidelines to the City Engineer for
approval. The report shall be prepared by a
qualified registered geotechnical engineer and
engineering geologist licensed by the State of
California. All geotechnical and soils related
findings and recommendations shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
any grading permits and recordation of the parcel
map. The report shall address, but not be limited
to, the following:
(a) Soil remediation measures shall be designed
for a "worst case" geologic interpretation
subject to verification in the field during
grading.
(b) The extent of any remedial grading into
natural areas shall be clearly defined on the
grading plans.
(c) Areas of potential for debris flow shall be
defined and proper remedial measures
implemented as approved by the City Engineer.
12
I
(d) Gross stability of all fill slopes shall'^,
analyzed as part of the geotechnical reportf. .
including remedial fill that replaces natural
slope.
(e) Stability of all proposed slopes shall be
confirmed by analysis as approved by the City
Engineer. Unstable slopes shall be
redesigned or stabilized utilizing slope
reinforcement.
(f) All geologic data including landslides and
exploratory excavations shall be shown on a
consolidated geotechnical map using the final
subdivision grading plan as a base.
(g) Stability analyses of daylight shear keys
with a 1:1 projection from daylight to slide
plane; projection plan shall have a minimum
safety factor of 1.5.
(h) 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.
(i) All landslides must be shown on a
consolidated geotechnical map. Specific
remedial measures shall be implemented
pursuant to the requirements of City Code and
Ordinances.
(j) Stability of back cuts (i.e. excavation of
natural slopes) must be analyzed.
(16) Final subdivision grading plans shall be designed
in compliance with the recommendations of the
final detailed soils and engineering geology
reports. All remedial earthworm specified in the
final report shall be incorporated into the plans.
(17) Grading plans shall be signed and stamped by a
California registered Civil Engineer, registered
Geotechnical Engineer and registered Geologist.
(18) All identified geologic hazards within the
Tentative Subdivision boundaries which cannot be
eliminated as approved by the City Engineer shall
be indicated on the parcel map as "Restricted Use
Area" subject to geologic hazard. The subdivider
shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit
the erection of buildings or other structures
within such restricted use areas shown on the
parcel map.
13
Drainage o
(19) A drainage study and drainage improvement plans®
(24" x 36" sheet format) prepared by a California
registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to
and approved by the City Engineer prior to parcel
map approval. All drainage facilities shall be
designed and constructed as required by the City
Engineer and in accordance with County of Los
Angeles standards.
(20) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all drainage improvements in accordance
with plans approved by the City Engineer. For
drainage improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
and security shall be posted, guaranteeing
completion of the improvements, prior to parcel
map approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit
to the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all drainage improvements
prior to parcel map approval.
(21) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all facilities necessary for dewatering
all parcels to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. For dewatering facilities not
constructed prior to parcel map approval an
agreement shall be executed and security shall be
posted, guaranteeing completion of the
improvements, prior to parcel map approval.
Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the City
Engineer the detail cost estimate for bonding
purposes for all dewatering improvements prior to
parcel map approval.
(22) Easements for disposal of drainage water onto or
over adjacent parcels shall be delineated and
shown on the parcel map as approved by the City
Engineer.
(23) All drainage improvements necessary for dewatering
and protecting the subdivided properties shall be
installed prior to issuance of building permits
for construction upon any parcel that may be
subject to drainage flows enter, leaving, or
within that parcel for which a building permit is
requested.
14
(24) An erosion control plan shall be submitted to
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance
grading permits.
(25) An offer of easements for drainage and drainage
improvements, as required by the City Engineer,
shall be made on the parcel map prior to parcel
map approval.
Streets
(26) Street improvement plans (24" x 36" sheet format)
prepared by a California registered Civil Engineer
shall be submitted to and approved by the City
Engineer prior to parcel map approval.
(27) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all street improvements in accordance
with plans approved by the City Engineer. For
street improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
and security shall be posted, guaranteeing
completion of the improvements, prior to parcel
map approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit
to the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all street improvements prior
to approval of the parcel map.
(28) New street centerline monuments shall be set at
the intersections of streets, intersection of
streets with the westerly boundary of Parcel 1 and
the easterly boundary of Parcel 3 of Parcel Map
1528, and to mark the beginning and ending of
curves or the points of intersection of tangents
thereof. Survey notes showing the ties between
all monuments set and four (4) durable reference
points for each shall be submitted to the City
Engineer for approval in accordance with City
Standards, prior to issuance of Certificate of
Occupancy.
(29) 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 for work in the City of Diamond Bar in
addition to any other permits required.
(30) No street shall exceed a maximum slope of 12%
unless approved by the City Engineer.
15
(31) Base and pavement on all streets shall
constructed in accordance with a soils report
pavement thickness calculations shall be prepare►
by a qualified and registered engineer and shall
be approved by the City Engineer or as otherwise
directed by the City Engineer.
(32) The street light at end of Hawkwood cul-de-sac
shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
(33) All utility lines shall be placed underground in
and adjoining the proposed tentative subdivision
map.
(34) Curbs and gutters for cul-de-sac at end of
Hawkwood shall be constructed to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
Sewer and Water
(35) Prior to parcel map approval the subdivider shall
submit an area study to the City Engineer and Los
Angeles County Department of Public Works to
determine whether capacity is available in the
sewerage system to be used as the outlet for the
sewers in this land division. If the system is
found to be of insufficient capacity, the problem
shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and Los Angeles County Department of
Public Works.
(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
subdivision shall be connected to the City sewer
system.
(37) Sewer system improvement plans (24" x 36" sheet
format, 2 pages per . sheet) prepared by a
California registered Civil Engineer shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Engineer,
Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, and
Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts prior to
parcel map approval.
(38) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all sewer system improvements: For
sewer system improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
16
44()
and security shall beosted
completion of the improvements prior togu
paarcelrcelei
map%,�
approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit to �"
the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all sewer system improvements
prior to approval of the parcel map.
(39) The Applicant/ Subdivider shall obtain connection
permit(s) from the City, Los Angeles County Public
Works Department and County Sanitation District
prior to issuance of building permits. The
subdivision area within the tentative map
boundaries shall be annexed into the County
Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District and Los
Angeles County Sanitation District No. 21.
(40) An offer of easements for sewer system
improvements, as required by the City Engineer,
shall be made on the parcel map prior to parcel
map approval.
(41) Domestic water system improvement plans, designed
with appurtenant facilities to serve all parcels
in the land division and designed to Walnut Valley
Water District (WVWD) specifications, shall be
provided and approved by the City Engineer and
WVWD. The system shall include fire hydrants of
the type and location as determined by the Los
Angeles County Fire Department. The main lines
shall be sized to accommodate the total domestic
and fire flows to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer, WVWD'and Fire Department.
(42) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider"s sole cost and expense, shall
construct all domestic water system improvements.
For water system improvements not constructed
prior to parcel map approval an agreement shall be
executed and security shall be posted,
guaranteeing completion of the improvements, prior
to parcel map approval. Applicant/Subdivider
shall submit to the City Engineer the detail cost
estimate for bonding purposes for all domestic
water system improvements prior to approval of the
parcel map.
(43) Separate underground utility services shall be
provide to each parcel, including water, gas,
electric power, telephone and cable TV service, in
accordance with the respective utility company
standards. Easements that may be required by the
17
utility companies shall be approved by the Ci
Engineer prior to granting.
(44) An offer of easements for public utility and
public services purposes, as required by the City
Engineer, shall be made on the parcel map prior to
parcel map approval.
(45) Applicant/Subdivider shall relocate and
underground any existing on-site utilities as
necessary and to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and the respective utility owner.
(46) Reclaimed water system improvement plans, designed
with appurtenant facilities capable of delivering
reclaimed water to all portions of the subdivision
and serving each parcel in the subdivision and
designed to Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD)
specifications, shall be provided and approved by
the City Engineer and WVWD.
(47) Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/Subdivider's
sole cost and expense, shall construct reclaimed
water system improvements, including main and
service lines capable of delivering reclaimed
water to all portions of the subdivision.
Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the City
Engineer the detail cost estimate for bonding
purposes for all reclaimed water system
improvements prior to approval of the parcel map.
(48) As reclaimed water supply is not currently
available, Subdivider shall enter into agreement
to design and construct system, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Walnut
Valley Water District. The system shall be
designed to permit "switch over" of non-domestic
services on each lot at such time a reclaimed
water supply is available to the subdivision.
Irrevocable security shall be posted to guarantee
the performance of this agreement.
(49) The Applicant/Subdivider shall install portions of
the reclaimed water system (main and irrigation
service lines) capable of delivering reclaimed
water to those designated areas, if any, of the
subdivision for which the homeowners association
is responsible for irrigation and/or landscape
maintenance. This installation shall provide for
a present connection to the domestic water system
and shall include provisions for the switch -over
to the future reclaimed water system.
18
The City Clerk shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution;
(b) This City Council hereby provides notice to Warren
Dolezal of the Dolezal Family Limited Partnership that
the time within which judicial review of the decision
represented by this resolution must be sought is
governed by the provisions of the California Code of
Civil Procedures, Section 1094.6; and
(c) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution,
by certified mail to: Warren Dolezal of the Dolezal
Family Limited Partnership, 4251 S. Higuera Street, San
Luis Obispo, CA 93401;
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 1995, BY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
BY:
Phyllis E. Papen, 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, at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the
20th day of June, 1995, by the following vote:
AYES:
[COUNCIL
MEMBERS:]
NOES:
[COUNCIL
MEMBERS:]
ABSENT:
[COUNCIL
MEMBERS:]
ABSTAIN:
[COUNCIL
MEMBERS:]
ATTEST:
Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
19
Z
z 3
; o
i
R
Z
lP oi`
o A
TW
m
N
0
s-
U,
R
n
TW
y
A000 �e
�
S7o a
� ��
R• o
�g'Rf�'�gS�
a
m
1
M
iZF N
?a
G
Wig■
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
FOR PARCEL MAP 23382
A Standards
The building envelope for all structures shall be as follows:
a. Downhill Lot - A maximum/height of thirty-five (35) feet as
measured from natural or a finished grade at the front setback,
extending towards the rear of the lot. The maximum height at the
side setbacks shall be twenty-five (25) feet extending up to the
center of the lot at a forty-five (45) degree angle to a maximum
height of thirty-five (35) feet as measured from natural grade or
approved finish grade.
Pow flu- s�zyfcw
f9' I
35`
25`
b. Adjacent front yard setbacks shall vary no less than five (5) feet,
beginning with a minimum setback of 20 feet from the front
property line and no adjacent lots shall utilize the same front yard
setback. Minimum required rear yard setbacks are 15 feet from the
buildable pad's edge. Minimum side yard setbacks shall be 10 and
15 feet from the buildable pad's edge.
LW: kk =word�k 1109W1.doc
Wo 110.41 5112195
EXHIBIT-- rte _____
61 -?-05
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 95-7
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 23382 AND
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 95-2 FOR A
REQUEST TO DIVIDE ONE PARCEL INTO FOUR
RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED AT THE EXTREME
NORTHWESTERN EDGE OF TONNER CANYON/CHINO
HILLS SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREA (SEA) NO.
15, AT 3000 BLOCK (NORTH SIDE) OF
STEEPLECHASE LANE.
A. Recitals
1. The property owner/applicant, Warren Dolezal of Dolezal
Family Limited Partnership has filed the "Application"
for Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 for a request to
divide on parcel into four residential lots located at
the extreme northwestern edge of Tonner Canyon/Chino
Hill Significant Ecological Area No. 15. The project
site is located at 3,000 block (north side) of
Steeplechase Lane, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County,
California, as described in the title of this Resolu-
tion. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Tentative Parcel Map application is referred to as the
"Application".
2. On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal organization
of the State of California. On that date, pursuant to
the requirements of the California Government Code
Section 57376, 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, including the subject Application, within
the City of Diamond Bar.
3. The City of Diamond Bar lacks an operative General Plan.
Accordingly, action was taken on the subject
application, as to consistency to the Draft General
Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Office
of Planning and Research extension granted pursuant to
California Government Code Section 65361.
1
4. Notification of the public hearing for this project has
been made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the
Inland Valley Bulletins newspapers on March 31, 1995.
One hundred and eighty-five (185) property owners within
a 500 foot radius of the project site were notified by
mail on March 28, 1995.
5. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, on
April 24, 1995 conducted a duly noticed public hearing
on the Application. At that time, the public hearing
was continued to May 8, 1995. On May 8, 1995, the
public hearing was continued to May 22, 1995.
6. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolu-
tion have occurred.
B. Resolution
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
1. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that
all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of
this Resolution are true and correct.
2. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that
having considered the record as a whole, there is no
evidence before this Planning Commission that the
project as proposed by the Application, and conditioned
for approval herein, will have the potential of an
adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon
which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial
evidence presented in the record before this Planning
Commission, the Commission hereby rebuts the presumption
of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5 (d) of
Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
3. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the initial
study review and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 95-2
has been prepared by the City of Diamond Bar in
compliance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended,
and guidelines promulgated thereunder. Further, the
Mitigate Negative Declaration reflects the independent
judgement of the City of Diamond Bar.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth
herein, this Planning Commission, hereby finds as
follows:
(a) The project request relates to a vacant parcel of
2.55 gross acres located at the extreme
northwestern edge of SEA No. 15 at the 3000 block
(north side) of Steeplechase Lane at the terminus
'r�
of Hawkwood Road and adjacent to a gated community
identified as "The Country Estates".
(b) The project site is located within the Single
Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square
Feet (R-1-8,000) Zone. It has a draft General
Plan land use designation of Low Density
Residential -Maximum 3 Dwelling Units Per Acre (RL -
3 Du/Acre).
(c) Generally, the following zones surround the
project site: to the north are the Single Family
Residential -Minimum Lot Size 20,000 Square Feet
(R-1-20,000) and Commercial -Recreational (C-R)
Zones; to the west is the Single Family
Residential -Minimum Lot Size 9,000 Square Feet (R-
1-9,000) Zone; to the east is the R-1-20,000 Zone;
and to the south is the R-3-8,000 Zone.
(d) The proposed parcel map is consistent with the
City's draft General Plan and zoning standards.
(e) The design and improvements of the proposed
subdivision complies with the City's draft General
Plan, local ordinances, and State requirements.
(f) The project site is physically suitable for this
type of subdivision.
(g) The design of the proposed subdivision or the
proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially
and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their
habitat.
(h) The design of the subdivision or the type of
improvements is not likely to cause serious public
health problems.
(i) The design of the subdivision or the type of
improvements will not conflict with easements,
acquired by the public at large, for access
through or use of, property with in the proposed
subdivision.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth above,
the Planning Commission hereby approves this Application
subject to the following conditions:
A. PLANNING DIVISION
(1) Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 shall be developed
in substantial conformance to plans dated May 8,
1995, labeled Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B" as
submitted and approved by the Planning Commission.
3
(2) The approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 is
granted subject to the approval of the Hillside
Management and Significant Ecological Area
Conditional Use Permit No. 92-1, Oak Tree Permit
No. 95-2, and Mitigated Negative Declaration No.
95-2.
(3) The approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382
shall not be effective for any purpose until the
permittee and owner of the property involved (if
other than the permittee) have filed within
fifteen (15) days of approval of this map, at the
City of Diamond Bar's Community Development
Department, their Affidavit of Acceptance stating
that they are aware of and agree to accept all the
conditions of this map. Further, this approval
shall not be effective until the permittee pays
remaining Planning Division processing fees.
(4) In accordance with Government Code Section 66474.9
(b) (1), the applicant shall defend, indemnify,
and hold harmless from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City or its agents,
officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void
or annul, approval of the Tentative Parcel Map No.
23382, which action is brought within the time
period provided for Government Code Section
66499.37.
(5) The site shall be maintained in a condition which
is free of debris both during and after the
construction, addition, or implementation of the
entitlement granted herein. The removal of all
trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or
subsequent to construction shall be done only by
the property owner, applicant or by a duly
permitted waste contractor, who has been
authorized by the City to provide collection,
transportation, and disposal of solid waste from
residential, commercial, construction, and
industrial areas within the City. It shall be the
applicant's obligation to insure that the waste
contractor utilized has obtained permits, from the
City of Diamond Bar to provide such services.
(6) All requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and of
the underlying zoning of the subject property
shall be complied with, unless otherwise set forth
in the permit or shown on the approved plans.
(7) The applicant shall satisfy the City's park
obligation by contributing an in -lieu fee to the
City prior to recordation of the final map per
Code Section 2124.340.
4
(8) The applicant shall pay development fees
(including, but not limited to, Planning and
Building and Safety Divisions 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.
(9) The owner shall make a bona fide application to
"The Country Estates" Association to annex this
subdivision to that association. The owner shall
be required to annex if all fees assessed by "The
Country Estates" Association do not exceed the
fees assessed per lot for annexation to "The
Country Estates" Association for Tract No. 47722.
(10) Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's)
and Articles of Incorporation of a homeowner's
association are required and shall be provided to
the Community Development Director and the City
Attorney for review and approval prior to the
recordation of the final map. A homeowners'
association shall be created and responsibilities
there of shall be delineated within the CC&R's or
the homeowners' association shall be incorporated
into "The Country Estates". The CC&R's and
Articles of Incorporation shall be recorded
concurrently with the final map or prior to the
issuance of any City permits, whichever occurs
first. A recorded copy shall be provide to the
City Engineer.
(11) The CC&R's shall incorporate Exhibit "B" which
delineates each lot's building envelope.
(12) The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation
Monitoring Program for Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 95-2.
(13) The Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) fees shall
be deposited with the City prior to issuance of a
grading permit. All costs related to the ongoing
monitoring shall be secured from the subdivider
and received by the City prior to the final map
approval.
(14) The parcel map shall be designed so as to
substantially comply with the CC&R's implemented
by the adjacent development known as "The Country
Estates". The CC&R's shall incorporate at a
minimum, provisions which would establish a
maintenance program for urban pollutant basins and
all mitigation measures within the Mitigation
Monitoring Program. The CC&R's shall, to the
fullest extent possible, be consistent with "The
Country Estates"' CC&R's.
5
(15) A clause shall be incorporated into the CC&R's
which requires disputes involving interpretation
or application of the CC&R's (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.
(16) Grading and/or construction activities shall be
restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday
through Saturday. All equipment utilized for
grading and/or construction shall be properly
muffled to reduce noise levels. Transportation of
equipment and materials and the operation of heavy
grading shall be restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. All equipment staging areas shall be located
on the subject property. Dust generated by
grading and construction activities shall be
reduced by watering the soil prior to and during
the activities. Reclaimed water shall be used
whenever possible.
(17) Construction equipment and/or related construction
traffic shall not be permitted to enter the
project site from Hawkwood Road.
(18) Parcel Map No. 23382 shall maintain a minimum 20
foot wide (open clear to the sky) paved access
road along and within that public utility and
public services easement on the westerly portion
of Lot 1 and between the cul-de-sac of Hawkwood
Road and the knuckle of Steeplechase Lane, to the
satisfaction of the Los Angeles County Fire
Department and the City Engineer. The access
shall be indicated on the map as a "Fire Lane".
Vehicular or pedestrian gates obstructing the
access shall be of an approved width and shall be
provided only with locking devices and/or override
mechanisms which has been approved by the Fire
Chief.
(19) 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
"Buyers' Awareness Package" which shall include,
but, not 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, Exhibit "B" which
delineates each lot's building envelope, explan-
atory information pertaining to restrictions on
use of properties as necessary and similar related
D
matter. The applicant shall institute a program
to include delivery of a copy of the "Buyers'
Awareness Package" to each prospective purchaser
and shall keep on file in the applicant's office a
receipt signed by each such prospective purchaser
indicating that the prospective purchaser has
received and read the information in the package.
The applicant shall incorporated within the CC&R's
a reference to the availability of the package and
the fact that a copy thereof is on file in the
City of Diamond Bar's City Clerk's office.
(20) The project applicant, 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 District's waste
diversion policies.
(21) All down drains and drainage channels shall be
constructed in muted earth tones so as not to
impart adverse visual impacts.
(22) Slopes in excess of five feet in vertical height
shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion
control. Slope landscaping and irrigation shall
be continuously maintained in a healthy and
thriving condition by the developer until each
individual lot or unit is sold and occupied by the
buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for the
units, an inspection shall be conducted by the
Planning Division to determine compliance with
this condition.
(23) Variable slope ratios of 2:1 to 4:1 shall be
utilized within the indicated grading areas of
each lot to the satisfaction the City Engineer.
(24) The emergency access gate at the terminus of
Hawkwood Road shall be consistent, in design and
materials, with existing gates located at other
access areas within "The Country Estates".
(25) Notwithstanding any previous subsection of this
resolution, if the Department of Fish and Game
requires payment of a fee pursuant to Section
711.4 of the Fish and Game Code, payment therefore
shall be made by the Applicant prior to the
issuance of any building permit or any other
entitlement.
(26) The subject property shall be maintained and
operated in full compliance with the conditions of
this grant and any law, statute, ordinance or
7
4
other regulations applicable to any development or
activity of the subject properties.
(27) This grant is valid for two (2) years and must be
exercised (i.e. construction) within that period
or this grant shall expire. A one (1) year
extension may be requested in writing, submitted
to the City, 30 days prior to this grant's
expiration date.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
General
(1) Prior to approval and recordation of the parcel
map, written certification shall be submitted to
the City from the Walnut Valley Water District
(WVWD) that adequate water supply and facilities;
from Los Angeles County Sanitation District
(LACSD) that adequate sewage conveyance and
treatment capacity; and from each public utility
and cable television purveyor that adequate
supplies and facilities; are or will be available
to serve the proposed project. Such letters must
have been issued by the districts, utility
companies and cable television company within
ninety (90) days prior to parcel map approval.
(2) A title report/guarantee and subdivision guarantee
showing all fee owners and, interest holders, and
nature of interest shall be submitted when a
parcel map is submitted for map check. The
account with the title company shall remain open
until the parcel map is filed with the County
Recorder. An updated title report/ guarantee and
subdivision guarantee shall be submitted ten (10)
working days prior to parcel map approval.
(3) All easements existing prior to parcel map
approval shall be identified and shown on parcel
map. If an easement is blanket or indeterminate
in nature, a statement to that effect shall be
shown on the parcel map in lieu of showing its
location.
(4) Based on a field survey boundary monuments shall
be set in accordance with the State Subdivision
Map Act and local subdivision ordinance and shall
be subject to approval by the City Engineer.
(5) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all required public improvements. If
any required public improvements have not been
completed by Applicant/ Subdivider and accepted by
8
the City prior to the approval of the parcel map,
Applicant/Subdivider shall enter into a
subdivision agreement with the City and shall post
the appropriate security, guaranteeing completion
of the improvements, prior -to parcel map approval.
(6) Plans for all site grading, landscaping,
irrigation, street, sewer, water and storm drain
improvements shall be approved by the City
Engineer prior to parcel map approval.
(7) House numbering plans shall be submitted to and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
building permits.
(8) The detail drawings and construction notes shown
on the submitted tentative map are conceptual only
and the approval of this tentative map shall not
constitute approval of said notes.
Grading
(9) The final subdivision grading plans (1" = 40' or
larger scale, 24" x 36" sheet format) shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Engineer
prior to issuance of any building or grading
permits and prior to parcel map approval.
(10) The Applicant/Subdivider, at the Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall perform
all grading in accordance with plans approved by
the City Engineer. For grading not performed
prior to Parcel Map approval an agreement shall be
executed and security shall be posted,
guaranteeing completion of the improvements prior
to Parcel Map approval.
(11) Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the City
Engineer the detail grading and drainage
construction cost estimate for bonding purposes of
all grading, prior to approval of the parcel map.
(12) Precise final grading plans for each parcel shall
be submitted to the City Engineer for approval
prior to issuance of building or grading permits.
(This may be on an incremental or composite
basis.)
(13) Grading of the subject property shall be in
accordance with the current Uniform Building Code
and City's Hillside Management Ordinance, and
acceptable grading practices. The final
subdivision and precise final grading plans shall
be in substantial conformance with the grading
9
shown as a material part of the approved Tentative
Map. No driveway serving building area(s) shall
exceed 15% grade.
(14) All landslide debris shall be completely removed
prior to fill placement or other approved remedial
measures implemented as required by the final
geotechnical report and approved by the City
Engineer.
(15) At the time of submittal of the final subdivision
grading plan for plan check, a detailed soils and
geology report shall be submitted in compliance
with City guidelines to the City Engineer for
approval. The report shall be prepared by a
qualified registered geotechnical engineer and
engineering geologist licensed by the State of
California. All geotechnical and soils related
findings and recommendations shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
any grading permits and recordation of the parcel
map. The report shall address, but not be limited
to, the following:
(a) Soil remediation measures shall be designed
for a "worst case" geologic interpretation
subject to verification in the field during
grading.
(b) The extent of any remedial grading into
natural areas shall be clearly defined on the
grading plans.
(c) Areas of potential for debris flow shall be
defined and proper remedial measures
implemented as approved by the City Engineer.
(d) Gross stability of all fill slopes shall be
analyzed as part of the geotechnical report,
including remedial fill that replaces natural
slope.
(e) Stability of all proposed slopes shall be
confirmed by analysis as approved by the City
Engineer.
(f) All geologic data including landslides and
exploratory excavations shall be shown on a
consolidated geotechnical map using the final
subdivision grading plan as a base.
(16) Final subdivision grading plans shall be designed
in compliance with the recommendations of the
final detailed soils and engineering geology
reports. All remedial earthworm specified in the
final report shall be incorporated into the plans.
(17) Grading plans shall be signed and stamped by a
California registered Civil Engineer, registered
Geotechnical Engineer and registered Geologist.
10
(18) All identified geologic hazards within the
Tentative Subdivision boundaries which cannot be
eliminated as approved by the City Engineer shall
be indicated on the parcel map as "Restricted Use
Area" subject to geologic hazard. The subdivider
shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit
the erection of buildings or other structures
within such restricted use areas shown on the
parcel map.
Drainage
(19) A drainage study and drainage improvement plans
(24" x 36" sheet format) prepared by a California
registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to
and approved by the City Engineer prior to parcel
map approval. All drainage facilities shall be
designed and constructed as required by the City
Engineer and in accordance with County of Los
Angeles standards.
(20) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all drainage improvements in accordance
with plans approved by the City Engineer. For
drainage improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
and security shall be posted, guaranteeing
completion of the improvements, prior to parcel
map approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit
to the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all drainage improvements
prior to parcel map approval.
(21) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all facilities necessary for dewatering
all parcels to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. For dewatering facilities not
constructed prior to parcel map approval an
agreement shall be executed and security shall be
posted, guaranteeing completion of the
improvements, prior to parcel map approval.
Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the City
Engineer the detail cost estimate for bonding
purposes for all dewatering improvements prior to
parcel map approval.
(22) Easements for disposal of drainage water onto or
over adjacent parcels shall be delineated and
shown on the parcel map as approved by the City
Engineer.
(23) All drainage improvements necessary for dewatering
and protecting the subdivided properties shall be
11
installed prior to issuance of building permits
for construction upon any parcel that may be
subject to drainage flows enter, leaving, or
within that parcel for which a building permit is
requested.
(24) An erosion control plan shall be submitted to and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
grading permits.
(25) An offer of easements for drainage and drainage
improvements, as required by the City Engineer,
shall be made on the parcel map prior to parcel
map approval.
Streets
(26) Street improvement plans (24" x 36" sheet format)
prepared by a California registered Civil Engineer
shall be submitted to and approved by the City
Engineer prior to parcel map approval.
(27) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all street improvements in accordance
with plans approved by the City Engineer. For
street improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
and security shall be posted, guaranteeing
completion of the improvements, prior to parcel
map approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit
to the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all street improvements prior
to approval of the parcel map.
(28) New street centerline monuments shall be set at
the intersections of streets, intersection of
streets with the westerly boundary of Parcel 1 and
the easterly boundary of Parcel 3 of Parcel Map
1528, and to mark the beginning and ending of
curves or the points of intersection of tangents
thereof. Survey notes showing the ties between
all monuments set and four (4) durable reference
points for each shall be submitted to the City
Engineer for approval in accordance with City
Standards, prior to issuance of Certificate of
Occupancy.
(29) 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 for work in the City of Diamond Bar in
addition to any other permits required.
12
(30) No street shall exceed a maximum slope of 12%
unless approved by the City Engineer.
(31) Base and pavement on all streets shall be
constructed in accordance with a soils report and
pavement thickness calculations shall be prepared
by a qualified and registered engineer and shall
be approved by the City Engineer or as otherwise
directed by the City Engineer.
(32) The street light at end of Hawkwood cul-de-sac
shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
(33) All utility lines shall be placed underground in
and adjoining the proposed tentative subdivision
map.
(34) Curbs and gutters for cul-de-sac at end of
Hawkwood shall be constructed to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
Sewer and Water
(35) Prior to parcel map approval the subdivider shall
submit an area study to the City Engineer and Los
Angeles County Department of Public Works to
determine whether capacity is available in the
sewerage system to be used as the outlet for the
sewers in this land division. If the system is
found to be of insufficient capacity, the problem
shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and Los Angeles County Department of
Public Works.
(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
subdivision shall be connected to the City sewer
system.
(37) Sewer system improvement plans (24" x 36" sheet
format, 2 pages per sheet) prepared by a
California registered Civil Engineer shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Engineer,
Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, and
Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts prior to
parcel map approval.
(38) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all sewer system improvements. For
sewer system improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
13
and security shall be posted guaranteeing
completion of the improvements prior to parcel map
approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit to
the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all sewer system improvements
prior to approval of the parcel map.
(39) The Applicant/ Subdivider shall obtain connection
permit(s) from the City, Los Angeles County Public
Works Department and County Sanitation District
prior to issuance of building permits. The
subdivision area within the tentative map
boundaries shall be annexed into the County
Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District and Los
Angeles County Sanitation District No. 21.
(40) An offer of easements for sewer system
improvements, as required by the City Engineer,
shall be made on the parcel map prior to parcel
map approval.
(41) Domestic water system improvement plans, designed
with appurtenant facilities to serve all parcels
in the land division and designed to Walnut Valley
Water District (WVWD) specifications, shall be
provided and approved by the City Engineer and
WVWD. The system shall include fire hydrants of
the type and location as determined by the Los
Angeles County Fire Department. The main lines
shall be sized to accommodate the total domestic
and fire flows to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer, WVWD and Fire Department.
(42) Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/Subdivider's
sole cost and expense, shall construct all
domestic water system improvements. For water
system improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
and security shall be posted, guaranteeing
completion of the improvements, prior to parcel
map approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit
to the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all domestic water system
improvements prior to approval of the parcel map.
(43) Separate underground utility services shall be
provide to each parcel, including water, gas,
electric power, telephone and cable TV service, in
accordance with the respective utility company
standards. Easements that may be required by the
utility companies shall be approved by the City
Engineer prior to granting.
(44) An offer of easements for public utility and
public services purposes, as required by the City
14
Engineer, shall be made on the parcel map prior to
parcel map approval.
(45) Applicant/Subdivider shall relocate and
underground any existing on-site utilities as
necessary and to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and the respective utility owner.
(46) Reclaimed water system improvement plans, designed
with appurtenant facilities capable of delivering
reclaimed water to all portions of the subdivision
and serving each parcel in the subdivision and
designed to Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD)
specifications, shall be provided and approved by
the City Engineer and WVWD.
(47) Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/Subdivider's
sole cost and expense, shall construct reclaimed
water system improvements, including main and
service lines capable of delivering reclaimed
water to all portions of the subdivision.
Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the City
Engineer the detail cost estimate for bonding
purposes for all reclaimed water system
improvements prior to approval of the parcel map.
(48) As reclaimed water supply is not currently
available, Subdivider shall enter into agreement
to design and construct system, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Walnut
Valley Water District. The system shall be
designed to permit "switch over" of non-domestic
services on each lot at such time a reclaimed
water supply is available to the subdivision.
Irrevocable security shall be posted to guarantee
the performance of this agreement.
(49) The Applicant/Subdivider shall install portions of
the reclaimed water system (main and irrigation
service lines) capable of delivering reclaimed
water to those designated areas, if any, of the
subdivision for which the homeowners association
is responsible for irrigation and/or landscape
maintenance. This installation shall provide for
a present connection to the domestic water system
and shall include provisions for the switch -over
to the future reclaimed water system.
The Planning Commission Secretary shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
15
(b) Forthwith transmit a
by certified mail to:
Limited Partnership,
Obispo, CA 93401;
certified copy of this Resolution,
Warren Dolezal of Dolezal Family
4251 S. Higuera Street, San Luis
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MAY, 1995, BY
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
BY:
Bruce Flamenbaum, Chairman
I, James DeStefano, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the
City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of May,
1995, by the following vote:
AYES: Flamenbaum, Huff, Schad, Fong, Meyer
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
ATTEST: /
s DeStefano, Secretary
A.
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 95-8
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT AND SIGNIFICANT
ECOLOGICAL AREA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
92-1, OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 95-2, AND MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 95-2 FOR TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP NO. 23382 WHICH IS A REQUEST TO
DIVIDE ONE PARCEL INTO FOUR RESIDENTIAL LOTS
LOCATED AT THE EXTREME NORTHWESTERN EDGE OF
TONNER CANYON/CHINO HILLS SIGNIFICANT
ECOLOGICAL AREA (SEA) NO. 15, AT 3000 BLOCK
(NORTH SIDE) OF STEEPLECHASE LANE.
Recitals
1. The property owner/applicant, Warren Dolezal of Dolezal
Family Limited Partnership has filed the "Application"
for Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 for a request to
divide on parcel into four residential lots located at
the extreme northwestern edge of Tonner Canyon/Chino
Hill Significant Ecological Area No. 15. The project
site is located at 3,000 block (north side) of
Steeplechase Lane, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County,
California, as described in the title of this Resolu-
tion. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Tentative Parcel Map application is referred to as the
"Application".
2. On April 18, 1989, the City of Diamond Bar was
established as a duly organized municipal organization
of the State of California. On that date, pursuant to
the requirements of the California Government Code
Section 57376, 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, including the subject Application, within
the City of Diamond Bar.
3. The City of Diamond Bar lacks an operative General Plan.
Accordingly, action was taken on the subject
application, as to consistency to the Draft General
Plan, pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Office
1
of Planning and Research extension granted pursuant to
California Government Code Section 65361.
4. Notification of the public hearing for this project has
been made in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the
Inland Valley Bulletin newspapers on March 31, 1995.
One hundred and eighty-five (185) property owners within
a 500 foot radius of the project site were notified by
mail on March 28, 1995.
5. The Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, on
April 24, 1995 conducted a duly noticed public hearing
on the Application. At that time, the public hearing
was continued to May 8, 1995. On May 8, 1995, the
public hearing was continued to May 22, 1995.
6. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolu-
tion have occurred.
B. Resolution
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
1. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that
all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of
this Resolution are true and correct.
2. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that
having considered the record as a whole, there is no
evidence before this Planning Commission that the
project as proposed by the Application, and conditioned
for approval herein, will have the potential of an
adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon
which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial
evidence presented in the record before this Planning
Commission, the Commission hereby rebuts the presumption
of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5 (d) of
Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
3. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the initial
study review and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 95-2
has been prepared by the City of Diamond Bar in
compliance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended,
and guidelines promulgated thereunder. Further, said
Mitigate Negative Declaration reflects the independent
judgement of the City of Diamond Bar.
4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth
herein, this Planning Commission, hereby finds as
follows:
(a) The project request relates to a vacant parcel of
2.55 gross acres located at the extreme
northwestern edge of SEA No. 15 at the 3000 block
(north side) of Steeplechase Lane at the terminus
of Hawkwood Road and adjacent to a gated community
identified as "The Country Estates".
(b) The project site is located within the Single
Family Residential -Minimum Lot Size 8,000 Square
Feet (R-1-8,000) Zone. It has a draft General
Plan land use designation of Low Density
Residential -Maximum 3 Dwelling Units Per Acre (RL -
3 Du/Acre).
(c) Generally, the following zones surround the
project site: to the north are the Single Family
Residential -Minimum Lot Size 20,000 Square Feet
(R-1-20,000) and Commercial -Recreational (C-R)
Zones; to the west is the Single Family
Residential -Minimum Lot Size 9,000 Square Feet (R-
1-9,000) Zone; to the east is the R-1-20,000 Zone;
and to the south is the R-3-8,000 Zone.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
(d) The proposed project will not be in substantial
conflict with the draft General Plan, local
ordinances, and State requirements.
(e) The proposed project will not adversely affect the
health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons
residing or working in the surrounding area.
(f) 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.
(g) The proposed project will not jeopardize, endanger
or otherwise constitute a menace to public health,
safety or general welfare.
(h) The project site is adequate in size and shape to
accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and
loading facilities, landscaping and other
development features prescribed within City
ordinances, or as otherwise required in order to
3
integrate the use with uses in the surrounding
area.
(i) 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.
SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREA (SEA)
(j) The proposed project is designed to be highly
compatible with the biotic resources present,
including the setting aside of appropriate and
sufficient undisturbed areas.
(k) The proposed project is designed so that wildlife
movement corridors (migratory paths) are left in
an undisturbed and natural state.
(1) The proposed project retains sufficient natural
vegetative cover and/open spaces to buffer
critical resource areas from the requested
project.
(m) Where necessary, fences or walls are provided to
buffer important habitat areas from development.
(n) The proposed project is designed to maintain water
bodies, watercourses, and their tributaries in a
natural state.
(o) The roads and utilities serving the proposed
project are located and designed so as not to
conflict with critical resources, habitat areas or
migratory paths.
HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT AREA
(p) 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/or property due to
the presence of geologic, seismic, slope
instability, fire, flood, mud flow, or erosion
hazard.
(q) The proposed project is compatible with the
natural, biotic, cultural, scenic, and open space
resources of the area.
4
(r) 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.
(s) The proposed project demonstrates creative and
imaginative design, resulting in a visual quality
that will complement community character and
benefit current and future community residents.
OAR TREE PERMIT
(t) The proposed project will be accomplished without
endangering the health of the remaining oak tree.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth above,
the Planning Commission hereby approves this Application
subject to the following conditions:
A. PLANNING DIVISION
(1) Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 shall be developed
in substantial conformance to plans dated May 8,
1995, labeled Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B" as
submitted and approved by the Planning Commission.
(2) The approval of the Hillside Management Ordinance
and Significant Ecological Area Conditional Use
Permit No. 92-1, Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2, and
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 95-2 is granted
subject to the approval of Tentative Parcel Map
No. 23382.
(3) The approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382
shall not be effective for any purpose until the
permittee and owner of the property involved (if
other than the permittee) have filed within
fifteen (15) days of approval of this map, at the
City of Diamond Bar's Community Development
Department, their Affidavit of Acceptance stating
that they are aware of and agree to accept all the
conditions of this map. Further, this approval
shall not be effective until the permittee pays
remaining Planning Division processing fees.
(4) In accordance with Government Code Section 66474.9
(b) (1), the applicant shall defend, indemnify,
and hold any claim, action, or proceeding against
the City or its agents, officers, or employees to
5
attack, set aside, void or annul, and approval of
the Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382 which action is
brought within the time period provided for
Government Code Section 66499.37.
(5) The site shall be maintained in a condition which
is free of debris both during and after the
construction, addition, or implementation of the
entitlement granted herein. The removal of all
trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or
subsequent to construction shall be done only by
the property owner, applicant or by a duly
permitted waste contractor, who has been
authorized by the City to provide collection,
transportation, and disposal of solid waste from
residential, commercial, construction, and
industrial areas within the City. It shall be the
applicant's obligation to insure that the waste
contractor utilized has obtained permits from the
City of Diamond Bar to provide such services.
(6) All requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and of
the underlying zoning of the subject property
shall be complied with, unless otherwise set forth
in the permit or shown on the approve plans.
(7) The applicant shall satisfy the City's park
obligation by contributing an in -lieu fee to the
City prior to recordation of the final map per
Code Section 2124.340.
(8) The applicant shall pay development fees
(including, but not limited to, Planning and
Building and Safety Divisions 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.
(9) The owner shall make a bona fide application to
"The Country Estates" Association to annex this
subdivision to that association. The owner shall
be required to annex if all fees assessed by "The
Country Estates" Association do not exceed the
fees assessed per lot for annexation to "The
Country Estates" Association for Tract No. 47722.
(10) Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's)
and Articles of Incorporation of a homeowner's
association are required and shall be provided to
the Community Development Director and the City
Attorney for review and approval prior to the
recordation of the final map. A homeowners'
6
association shall be created and responsibilities
there of shall be delineated within the CC&R's or
the homeowners' association shall be incorporated
into "The Country Estates". The CC&R's and
Articles of Incorporation shall be recorded
concurrently with the final map or prior to the
issuance of any City permits, whichever occurs
first. A recorded copy shall be provide to the
City Engineer.
(11) The CC&LR's shall incorporate Exibit "B" which
elineates each lot's building envelope.
(12) The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation
Monitoring Program for Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. 95-2.
(13) The Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) fees shall
be deposited with the City prior to issuance of a
grading permit. Additionally, all costs related
to the ongoing monitoring shall be secured from
the subdivider and received by the City prior to
the final map approval.
(14) The parcel map shall be designed so as to
substantially comply with the CC&R's implemented
by the adjacent development heretofore know as
"The Country Estates". The CC&R's shall
incorporate at a minimum, provisions which would
establish a maintenance program for urban
pollutant basins and all mitigation measures
within the Mitigation Monitoring Program. The
CC&R's shall, to the fullest extent possible, be
consistent with "The Country Estates"' CC&R's.
(15) A clause shall be incorporated into the CC&R's
which requires dispute 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.
(16) Grading and/or construction activities shall be
restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday
through Saturday. All equipment utilized for
grading and/or construction shall be properly
muffled to reduce noise levels. Transportation of
equipment and materials and the operation of heavy
grading shall be restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. All equipment staging areas shall be located
7
on the subject property. Dust generated by
grading and construction activities shall be
reduced by watering the soil prior to and during
the activities. Reclaimed water shall be used
whenever possible.
(17) Construction equipment and/or related construction
traffic shall not be permitted to enter the
project site from Hawkwood Road.
(18) Parcel Map No. 23382 shall maintain a minimum 20
foot wide (open clear to the sky) paved access
road along and within that public utility and
public services easement on the westerly portion
of Lot 1 and between the cul-de-sac of Hawkwood
Road and the knuckle of Steeplechase Lane, to the
satisfaction of the Los Angeles County Fire
Department and the City Engineer. The access
shall be indicated on the map as a "Fire Lane".
Vehicular or pedestrian gates obstructing the
access shall be of an approved width and shall be
provided only with locking devices and/or override
mechanisms which has been approved by the Fire
Chief.
(19) 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
"Buyers' Awareness Package" which shall include,
but, not 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, Exhibit "B" which
delineates each lot's building envelope, explan-
atory information pertaining to restrictions on
use of properties as necessary and similar related
matter. The applicant shall institute a program
to include delivery of a copy of the "Buyers'
Awareness Package" to each prospective purchaser
and shall keep on file in the applicant's office a
receipt signed by each such prospective purchaser
indicating that the prospective purchaser has
received and read the information in the package.
The applicant shall incorporated within the CC&R's
a reference to the availability of said package
and the fact that a copy thereof is on file in the
City of Diamond Bar's City Clerk's office.
(20) The project applicant, through the "Buyer
Awareness Program", shall encourage the
segregation of green wastes for reuse as specified
8
under the City's Source Reduction Recycling
Element and County Sanitation District's waste
diversion policies.
(21) All down drains and drainage channels shall be
constructed in muted earth tones so as not to
impart adverse visual impacts.
(22) Slopes in excess of five feet in vertical height
shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion
control. Slope landscaping and irrigation shall
be continuously maintained in a healthy and
thriving condition by the developer until each
individual lot or unit is sold and occupied by the
buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for the
units, an inspection shall be conducted by the
Planning Division to determine compliance with
this condition.
(23) variable slope ratios of 2:1 to 4:1 shall be
utilized within the indicated grading areas of
each lot to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
(24) The emergency access gate at the terminus of
Hawkwood Road shall be consistent, in design and
materials, with existing gates located at other
access areas within "The Country Estates".
(24) Adjacent front yard setbacks shall vary no less
than five (5) feet, beginning with a minimum
setback of 20 feet from the front property line
and no adjacent lots shall utilize the same front
yard setback. Minimum required rear yard setbacks
are 15 feet from the buildable pad's edge.
Minimum side yard setbacks shall be 10 and 15 feet
from the buildable pad's edge.
(25) All proposed single family residential structures
are required to comply with the City's Development
Review Ordinance.
(26) Notwithstanding any previous subsection of this
resolution, if the Department of Fish and Game
requires payment of a fee pursuant to Section
711.4 of the Fish and Game Code, payment therefore
shall be made by the Applicant prior to the
issuance of any building permit or any other
entitlement.
(27) The subject property shall be maintained and
operated in full compliance with the conditions of
this grant and any law, statute, ordinance or
9
other regulations applicable to any development or
activity of the subject properties.
(28) This grant is valid for two (2) years and must be
exercised (i.e. construction) within that period
or this grant will expire. A one (1) year
extension may be requested in writing, submitted
to the City, 30 days prior to this grant's
expiration date.
B. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
General
(1) Prior to approval and recordation of the parcel
map, written certification shall be submitted to
the City from the Walnut Valley water District
(WVWD) that adequate water supply and facilities;
from Los Angeles County Sanitation District
(LACSD) that adequate sewage conveyance and
treatment capacity; and from each public utility
and cable television purveyor that adequate
supplies and facilities; are or will be available
to serve the proposed project. Such letters must
have been issued by the districts, utility
companies and cable television company within
ninety (90) days prior to parcel map approval.
(2) A title report/guarantee and subdivision guarantee
showing all fee owners and, interest holders, and
nature of interest shall be submitted when a
parcel map is submitted for map check. The
account with the title company shall remain open
until the parcel map is filed with the County
Recorder. An updated title report/ guarantee and
subdivision guarantee shall be submitted ten (10)
working days prior to parcel map approval.
(3) All easements existing prior to parcel map
approval shall be identified and shown on parcel
map. If an easement is blanket or indeterminate
in nature, a statement to that effect shall be
shown on the parcel map in lieu of showing its
location.
(4) Based on a field survey boundary monuments shall
be set in accordance with the State Subdivision
Map Act and local subdivision ordinance and shall
be subject to approval by the City Engineer.
(5) The' Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
10
construct all required public improvements. If
any required public improvements have not been
completed by Applicant/ Subdivider and accepted by
the City prior to the approval of the parcel map,
Applicant/Subdivider shall enter into a
subdivision agreement with the City and shall post
the appropriate security, guaranteeing completion
of the improvements, prior to parcel map approval.
(6) Plans for all site grading, landscaping,
irrigation, street, sewer, water and storm drain
improvements shall be approved by the City
Engineer prior to parcel map approval.
(7) House numbering plans shall be submitted to and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
building permits.
(8) The detail drawings and construction notes shown
on the submitted tentative map are conceptual only
and the approval of this tentative map shall not
constitute approval of said notes.
Grading
(9) The final subdivision grading plans (1" = 40' or
larger scale, 24" x 36" sheet format) shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Engineer
prior to issuance of any building or grading
permits and prior to parcel map approval.
(10) The Applicant/Subdivider, at the Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall perform
all grading in accordance with plans approved by
the City Engineer. For grading not performed
prior to Parcel Map approval an agreement shall be
executed and security shall be posted,
guaranteeing completion of the improvements prior
to Parcel Map approval.
(11) Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the City
Engineer the detail grading and drainage
construction cost estimate for bonding purposes of
all grading, prior to approval of the parcel map.
(12) Precise final grading plans for each parcel shall
be submitted to the City Engineer for approval
prior to issuance of building or grading permits.
(This may be on an incremental or composite
basis.)
11
(13) Grading of the subject property shall be in
accordance with the current Uniform Building .Code
and City's Hillside Management Ordinance, and
acceptable grading practices. The final
subdivision and precise final grading plans shall
be in substantial conformance with the grading
shown as a material part of the approved Tentative
Map. No driveway serving building area(s) shall
exceed 15% grade.
(14) All landslide debris shall be completely removed
prior to fill placement or other approved remedial
measures implemented as required by the final
geotechnical report and approved by the City
Engineer.
(15) At the time of submittal of the final subdivision
grading plan for plan check, a detailed soils and
geology report shall be submitted in compliance
with City guidelines to the City Engineer for
approval. The report shall be prepared by a
qualified registered geotechnical engineer and
engineering geologist licensed by the State of
California. All geotechnical and soils related
findings and recommendations shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
any grading permits and recordation of the parcel
map. The report shall address, but not be limited
to, the following:
(a) Soil remediation measures shall be designed
for a "worst case" geologic interpretation
subject to verification in the field during
grading.
(b) The extent of any remedial grading into
natural areas shall be clearly defined on the
(c)
(d)
(e)
grading plans.
Areas of potential for
defined and proper
implemented as approved
Gross stability of all
analyzed as part of the
including remedial fill
slope.
debris flow shall be
remedial measures
by the City Engineer.
fill slopes shall -be
geotechnical report,
that replaces natural
Stability of all proposed slopes shall be
confirmed by analysis as approved by the City
Engineer.
(f) All geologic data including landslides and
exploratory excavations shall be shown on a
consolidated geotechnical map using the final
subdivision grading plan.as a base.
12
(16) Final subdivision grading plans shall be designed
in compliance with the recommendations of the
final detailed soils and engineering geology
reports. All remedial earthworm specified in the
final report shall be incorporated into the plans.
(17) Grading plans shall be signed and stamped by a
California registered Civil Engineer, registered
Geotechnical Engineer and registered Geologist.
(18) All identified geologic hazards within the
Tentative Subdivision boundaries which cannot be
eliminated as approved by the City Engineer shall
be indicated on the parcel map as "Restricted Use
Area" subject to geologic hazard. The subdivider
shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit
the erection of buildings or other structures
within such restricted use areas shown on the
parcel map.
Drainaae
(19) A drainage study and drainage improvement plans
(24" x 36" sheet format) prepared by a California
registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to
and approved by the City Engineer prior to parcel
map approval. All drainage facilities shall be
designed and constructed as required by the City
Engineer and in accordance with County of Los
Angeles standards.
(20) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all drainage improvements in accordance
with plans approved by the City Engineer. For
drainage improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
and security shall be posted, guaranteeing
completion of the improvements, prior to parcel
map approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit
to the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all drainage improvements
prior to parcel map approval.
(21) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all facilities necessary for dewatering
all parcels to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. For dewatering facilities not
constructed prior to parcel map approval an
agreement shall be executed and security shall be
posted, guaranteeing completion of the
13
improvements, prior to parcel map approval.
Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the City
Engineer the detail cost estimate for bonding
purposes for all dewatering improvements prior to
parcel map approval.
(22) Easements for disposal of drainage water onto or
over adjacent parcels shall be delineated and
shown on the parcel map as approved by the City
Engineer.
(23) All drainage improvements necessary for dewatering
and protecting the subdivided properties shall be
installed prior to issuance of building permits
for construction upon any parcel that may be
subject to drainage flows enter, leaving, or
within that parcel for which a building permit is
requested.
(24) An erosion control plan shall be submitted to and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of
grading permits.
(25) An offer of easements for drainage and drainage
improvements, as required by the City Engineer,
shall be made on the parcel map prior to parcel
map approval.
Streets
(26) Street improvement plans (24" x 36" sheet format)
prepared by a California registered Civil Engineer
shall be submitted to and approved by the City
Engineer prior to parcel map approval.
(27) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applican/Subdivider's
sole cost and expense, shall construct all street
improvements in accordance with plans approved by
the City Engineer. For street improvements not
constructed prior to parcel map approval an
agreement shall be executed and security shall be
posted, guaranteeing completion of the
improvements, prior to parcel map approval.
Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the City
Engineer the detail cost estimate for bonding
purposes for all street improvements prior to
approval of the parcel map.
(28) New street centerline monuments shall be set at
the intersections of streets, intersection of
streets with the westerly boundary of Parcel 1 and
the easterly boundary of Parcel 3 of Parcel Map
14
1528, and to mark the beginning and ending of
curves or the points of intersection of tangents
thereof. Survey notes showing the ties between
all monuments set and four (4) durable reference
points for each shall be submitted to the City
Engineer for approval in accordance with City
Standards, prior to issuance of Certificate of
Occupancy.
(29) 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 for work in the City of Diamond Bar in
addition to any other permits required.
(30) No street shall exceed a maximum slope of 12%
unless approved by the City Engineer.
(31) Base and pavement on all streets shall be
constructed in accordance with a soils report and
pavement thickness calculations shall be prepared
by a qualified and registered engineer and shall
be approved by the City Engineer or as otherwise
directed by the City Engineer.
(32) The street light at end of Hawkwood cul-de-sac
shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
(33) All utility lines shall be placed underground in
and adjoining the proposed tentative subdivision
map.
(34) Curbs and gutters for cul-de-sac at end of
Hawkwood shall be constructed to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
Sewer and Wa
(35) Prior to parcel map approval the subdivider shall
submit an area study to the City Engineer and Los
Angeles County Department of Public Works to
determine whether capacity is available in the
sewerage system to be used as the outlet for the
sewers in this land division. If the system is
found to be of insufficient capacity, the problem
shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and Los Angeles County Department of
Public Works.
15
(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
subdivision shall be connected to the City sewer
system.
(37) Sewer system improvement plans (24" x 36" sheet
format, 2 pages per sheet) prepared by a
California registered Civil Engineer shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Engineer,
Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, and
Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts prior to
parcel map approval.
(38) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all sewer system improvements. For
sewer system improvements not constructed prior to
parcel map approval an agreement shall be executed
and security shall be posted guaranteeing
completion of the improvements prior to parcel map
approval. Applicant/ Subdivider shall submit to
the City Engineer the detail cost estimate for
bonding purposes for all sewer system improvements
prior to approval of the parcel map.
(39) The Applicant/ Subdivider shall obtain connection
permit(s) from the City, Los Angeles County Public
Works Department and County Sanitation District
prior to issuance of building permits. The
subdivision area within the tentative map
boundaries shall be annexed into the County
Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District and Los
Angeles County Sanitation District No. 21.
(40) An offer of easements for sewer system
improvements, as required by the City Engineer,
shall be made on the parcel map prior to parcel
map approval.
(41) Domestic water system improvement plans, designed
with appurtenant facilities to serve all parcels
in the land division and designed to Walnut Valley
Water District (WVWD) specifications, shall be
provided and approved by the City Engineer and
WVWD. The system shall include fire hydrants of
the type and location as determined by the Los
Angeles County Fire Department. The main lines
shall be sized to accommodate the total domestic
and fire flows to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer, WVWD and Fire Department.
LU
(42) The Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/
Subdivider's sole cost and expense, shall
construct all domestic water system improvements.
For water system improvements not constructed
prior to parcel map approval an agreement shall be
executed and security shall be posted,
guaranteeing completion of the improvements, prior
to parcel map approval. Applicant/Subdivider
shall submit to the City Engineer the detail cost
estimate for bonding purposes for all domestic
water system improvements prior to approval of the
parcel map.
(43) Separate underground utility services shall be
provide to each parcel, including water, gas,
electric power, telephone and cable TV service, in
accordance with the respective utility company
standards. Easements that may be required by the
utility companies shall be approved by the City
Engineer prior to granting.
(44) An offer of easements for public utility. and
public services purposes, as required by the City
Engineer, shall be made on the parcel map prior to
parcel map approval.
(45) Applicant/Subdivider shall relocate and
underground any existing on-site utilities as
necessary and to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and the respective utility owner.
(46) Reclaimed water system improvement plans, designed
with appurtenant facilities capable of delivering
reclaimed water to all portions of the subdivision
and serving each parcel in the subdivision and
designed to Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD)
specifications, shall be provided and approved by
the City Engineer and WVWD.
(47) Applicant/Subdivider, at Applicant/Subdivider's
sole cost and expense, shall construct reclaimed
water system improvements, including main and
service lines capable of delivering reclaimed
water to all portions of the subdivision.
Applicant/Subdivider shall submit to the City
Engineer the detail cost estimate for bonding
purposes for all reclaimed water system
improvements prior to approval of the parcel map.
(48) As reclaimed water supply is not currently
available, Subdivider shall enter into agreement
to design and construct system, to the
17
satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Walnut
Valley Water District. The system shall be
designed to permit "switch over" of non-domestic
services on each lot at such time a reclaimed
water supply is available to the subdivision.
Irrevocable security shall be posted to guarantee
the performance of this agreement.
(49) The Applicant/Subdivider shall install portions of
the reclaimed water system (main and irrigation
service lines) capable of delivering reclaimed
water to those designated areas, if any, of the
subdivision for which the homeowners association
is responsible for irrigation and/or landscape
maintenance. This installation shall provide for
a present connection to the domestic water system
and shall include provisions for the switch -over
to the future reclaimed water system.
The Planning Commission Secretary shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
(b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution,
by certified mail to: Warren Dolezal of Dolezal Family
Limited Partnership, 4251 S. Higuera Street, San Luis
Obispo, CA 93401;
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MAY, 1995, BY
THE PLANN/ING MM SSIN OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
BY:
Bruce Flamenbaum, Chairman
I, James DeStefano, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the
City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 22nd day of May,
1995, by the following vote:
AYES: Flamenbaum, Huff, Schad, Fong, Meyer
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
i
I
ATTEST:
JjaDeStefanc, Secretary
" is
MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 95-2
for
Dolezal Family Limited Partnership
Parcel Map No. 23382
Conditional Use Permit No. 92-1
Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2
Prepared by:
David Tanner & Associates
and
The City of Diamond Bar
Community Development Department
Prepared: April 1993
Revised: March 1995
MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 95-2
for
Dolezal Family Limited Partnership
Parcel Map No. 23382
Conditional Use Permit No. 92-1
Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2
Prepared by:
David Tanner & Associates
and
The City of Diamond Bar
Community Development Department
Prepared: April 1993
Revised: March 1995
Dolezal Family Limited Partnership Project
rarcei Map No. 233 '2, Cbnddana? Use ftrrruf yi i, and t3ak Tree hermit No. Y -L
City of Diamond Bar
PROJECT DESCRIPTION - INITIAL STUDY
Introduction
This Initial Environmental Study has been prepared in accordance with Section 15063 of the
Guidelines for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The initial
study provides the factual and analytical basis for a Negative Declaration or to focus an EIR on
the significant effects of a project. This initial study addresses the potential impacts associated
with the Parcel Map, Conditional Use Permit, and Oak Tree Permit applications and ultimately,
development of the property.
Project Description
The Dolezal Family Limited Partnership filed an application with the City of Diamond Bar
requesting approval of Parcel Map No. 23382, Conditional Use Permit 92-1, and Oak Tree Permit
No. 95-2. The Parcel Map proposes to divide a 2.55 gross acre parcel into four residential lots.
The Conditional Use Permit is required by the City of Diamond Bar Hillside Management
Ordinance for grades in excess of 10% and for lots which are in or partly in an area designated
as a significant ecological area. The project applicant proposes a private development containing
four custom homes. Homes would range in size from approximately 4,000 to 8,000 square feet
and would be marketed to upper income families. Access to the site will be provided through the
"The Country Estates" development. "The Country Estates" development is a private community
having restricted access. The project site is proposed to be annexed to "The Country Estates"
Homeowners Association. A secondary emergency access route will be provided through a gated
connection between Steeplechase Lane and Hawkwood Road (Baldwin, Tract 32974). Street
lighting is not proposed. Parcel Map No. 23382 has been provided for review in Figure 1.
Location and Access
Location: T2S R9W '/a OF NW '/4 SEC. 28
(YORBA LINDA 7.5' QUADRANGLE, SBBM)
APN: 8713-017-08
Access: Regional access to the project vicinity is provided by the 57 Freeway. Arterial access
to the project vicinity from the 57 Freeway is provided by Diamond Bar Blvd. Local access to
the project site from Diamond Bar Boulevard is obtained from Shadow Canyon Drive, south to
Steeplechase Lane, then southwest to its terminus at the southeastern boundary of the project. A
Location map is provided on Figure 2 for review.
prepared: April 1993
revised: March 1995
�h.
4� dig N
Y�3 > O
18 953 0
y $i644
a I * + 1
vi I I D 3
NPoll- tl�u!
Hit
�I o
a
1 u^
ad
LL a�
AwKWOOD
RD.
Figure
2
JECT
CATION
4ArAN
Not to Scale
Location Map David J. Tanner
& Associates, Inc.
3 Tentative Parcel Map 23382
Diamond Bar General Plan
The contemplated Diamond Bar General Plan Land Use Element designates the project site as
Low Density Residential (RL) maximum 3 du/ac.
Site Zonine
The project site is zoned R-1 (8,000). R-1 (8,000) zoning permits development of single family
residential dwellings with a minimum lot site of 8,000 square feet.
Sienificant Ecological Area
The project site is located at the extreme northwestern edge of the Tonner Canyon/Chino Hills
Significant Ecological Area (SEA) No. 15, pursuant to the Los Angeles County Significant
Ecological Area Study completed in 1976. This study was prepared for Los Angeles County
Department of Regional Planning by England and Nelson Environmental Consultants. According
to this study, in order for an area to be designated "ecologically significant", it must contain
undisturbed biotic communities and possess resources that are uncommon, rare, unique, or
absolutely critical to the maintenance of wildlife.
Based on this study, the SEA within Los Angeles County contains eight classification, each with
its own criteria. These classifications and their criteria are as follows:
Classification
Criteria
Class 1
Habitat of rare, endangered, and threatened plant and animal species;
Biotic communities, vegetative associations, and habitat of plant and
Class 2
animal species that are either one of a kind, or are restricted in distibution
on a regional basis;
Biotic communities, vegetative associations, and habitat of plant and
Class 3
animal species that are either, one of a kind, or are restricted in distiution
in L. A. County;
Class 4
Habitat that at some point in the species' life cycle or group of species
serves as a concentrated breeding, feeding, resting, or migrating grounds
and is limited in availability;
Biotic resources that are of scientific interest because they are either an
Class 5
extreme in physical/geographical limitations, or they represent an unsual
variation in a population or community;
Class 6
Areas important as game species habitat or as fisheries;
Class 7
Areas that would provide for the preservation of relatively undisturbed
examples of the natural biotic communities in L. A. County;
Class 8
Certain area that are worthy of inclusion, but do not fit any of the above
criteria.
4
The project site (located within Tonner Canyon/Chino Hills SEA No. 15) is in Class 7. This
particular SEA Class contains undisturbed stands of southern oak woodland, chaparral, coastal
sage scrub, riparian woodland complex, California Walnut, and intermitent stream in the canyon
bottom. However, the project site contains only one oak tree and is denude of any vegetation due
to annual surface scraping/disking by the Los Angeles County Fire Department conducted over
many year. As such, the project site does not meet the prerequisites or citeria for being in an
SEA. Additionally, boundaries chosen for SEAs are based on ridgelines, toe of slope,
interpretation of aerial photographics, and cultural features such as freeways, dams, and
development. Steeplechase Lane (abutting the project site) is a ridgeline and could be a natural
delineatation for the SEA. The project site falls north of this ridgeline. Based on this natural
delineation and the fact that the site is reqularly disturbed and denude of vegetatation, it may be
reasonable to suggest that the project site should not be designated as an SEA as it no longer
meets any of the SEA criteria.
Site Description
Landform: The project site is irregular in shape, encompassing 2.55 gross acres. Elevations on-
site range from 1077± at the southern property line to 1022± along the northern property line.
The site slopes downward to the north averaging 15-20%. Approximately 75% of the site has
been previously graded. Prior grading activities included: remedial grading to correct an unstable
slope condition over the western/central portion of the site, grading for Steeplechase Lane along
the southern boundary of the site, construction of an emergency access road along the western site
boundary and remedial grading to construct a shear key along the northern property line for the
Las Brisas Condominium project. Site Photos have been included in Figures 3 & 4 for review.
Existing Land Use: The project site is privately owned vacant land. The entire project site is
disked regularly by the County for fire prevention purposes. The project applicant is not utilizing
the property in anticipation of development.
Man-made Improvements: Six foot perimeter chain-link fencing has been erected on the north,
east and west to restrict access. A 40 foot general utility and access easement containing a 20
foot paved emergency access drive for the Las Brisas Condominium project is located along the
western site boundary. A concrete "V" ditch to control surface runoff has been constructed atop
a manufactured slope (shear key) paralleling the northern property line. The entire site has been
previously disturbed by grading and or disking. Numerous pieces of 12 inch ACP water pipe left
over from the construction of Steeplechase Lane are present on the property, along with isolated
areas of domestic litter.
The project site lies adjacent to Steeplechase Lane, an unpaved private dirt road connecting
Hawkwood Road (Baldwin, Tract 32974) on the west to Wagon Train Lane (serving PM -1528 to
the south) and "The Country Estates" development (Tract 30289) on the east. Steeplechase Lane
has a 60 foot right-of-way. Once improved, Steeplechase Lane will have two 14 foot travel lanes.
An underground water main and fire hydrant have been constructed within the right-of-way of
Steeplechase Lane adjacent.
5
View from 57 Freeway looking south. Project site is located just below ridgeline
and above the Las Brisas Condominium project in center of nhn+n
Tele vi w from the 57 Freeway looking south.
Site Photos
Photo Taken: March 1993
Figure
3
David J. Tanner
& Associates, Inc.
Tentative Parcel Map 23382
:. Figure
• = W"I U.aU lugIl point on the site looking north. Las Brisas Condominium
project in foreground, 57 Freeway in backeround.
View from the high point on the site looking northeast. Las Brisas Condominium
project in foreground. The Country development to far right.
Site Photos
Photo Taken: March 1993
David J. Tanner
& Associates, Inc.
Tentative Parcel Map 23382
View looking east along the site's northern boundary. Photo taken from north-
western corner of site.
Figure
5
View looking south along eastern site boundary. Photo taken rrom nortneasLern comm -
of site. Steeplechase Lane (a private dirt road) shown along left side of photo.
Site Photos
Photo Taken: March 1993
David J. Tanner
& Associates, Inc.
Tentative Parcel Map 23382
View looking southeast across center of site. Photo taken near the northwestern
corner of the site.
Figure
6
View looking north along western site boundary. Photo taken from southwestern
corner of site. Photo of the emergency access road for the Las Brisas Condo. project.
Site Photos
Photo Taken: March 1993
David J. Tanner
& Associates, Inc.
Tentative Parcel Map 23382
Public Utilities and Services
Fire Supuression: The City of Diamond Bar contracts with the County of Los Angeles Fire
er
Department for fire protection services. Station 119, located at 20480 East Pathf f re
Avenue, Walnut, CA. 91789 is the closest station. Station 119 will provide primary
suppression and emergency paramedic response to the project site. Estimated response
times range from 3-5 minutes.
Law Enforcement: The City of Diamond Bar contracts with the County of Los Angeles
Sheriffs Department for law enforcement services. The nearest Sheriffs substation is
located in Walnut.
Tele_ The project site lies within the service area of the General Telephone Company
of California.
Electricity: The project site lies within the service area of the Southern California Edison
Company.
Natu�as: The project site lies within the service area of the Southern California Gas
Company
Water: The project site is within the service area of the Walnut Valley Water District. An
existing 12 inches ACP line has been installed beneath Steeplechase Lane adjacent to the
site. The District has indicated that they can provide water to the project.
Sewer: The City of Diamond Bar contracts with the County of Los Angeles Saanl�wer
Department for sewage treatment. The District has indicated that they can provide
service to the project site.
Schools: The project site lies with in the boundary
o f the
Walnost ut
Valleyly ifiedle Rock
School
District. Students generated from the project
Middle School and Diamond Bar High School. The District is
Elementary, South Pointe
experiencing overcrowding and has enacted a school impact fee mitigation program in
accordance with Senate Bill 201. With the payment of impact fees, the District will be
able to provide adequate school service to facilitate the project needs.
Libr : The City of Diamond Bar contracts with the County of Los Angeles for library
services.
Solid Waste Di=sal: The City of Diamond Bar contracts with the County of Los Angeles
ond Ba is
Sanitation District for solid waste disposal. Solid waste
With a private haulerforsold waste
deposited in the Spadra Landfill. The City c
disposal in this area.
Surrounding Land Uses
t growth over the
The project site is located in an area which has existing and or planned re.
developmentst
decade. The project site is surrounded by g
Single family residential custom and tract developments lie adjacent to the project site on the east
10
("The Country Estate" development, Tract 30289) and west (Baldwin, Tract 32974). Multi -fa P i
housing lies adjacent to the project site on the north (The Las Brisas Condominium project,
15434). Single family residential land uses have been approved or are proposed on the south
(Parcel Map 1528 & proposed Vesting Tentative Tract 47850) but not constructed. The California
Division of Forestry utilizes a portion of Parcel Map 1528 located south of the project site as a
temporary emergency helicopter landing pad.
The boundary of the Tonner Canyon/Chino Hills Signifilencompa se Area
appr(SEA) No3 15 is
believed to lie immediately east of the project site. S
gross acres. In total, the County of Los Angeles has SEAL established
SEA's to
established s ed by the
integrity of the County's varied ecoaintain the
logical resources. Coastal
County to protect relatively undisturbed stands of Southern Oak Woodland, Chaparral,
Sage Scrub and Riparian Woodland complex.
Existin Environmental Setting
ws to the north where it is intercepted by a concrete lined "V"
Drainage: Surface runoff sheet flois point runoff flows easterly
ditch paralleling the northern property line. From o an underground storm drainlsysteme. Las
Brisas Condominium project where it is channeled
Flora and Fauna: Two biological site investigations have ca t conducted
f Aug ed ustof 1992 projectn the . The second
first was conducted under contract with the project app
survey was conducted under contract with the City of Diamond
t evaluation of the applicaar in March 1993 2. nt provided
of the second survey was to have an independ
biological survey.
Both biological site surveys concluded that the site haregularly
ebeen �severelye disturbed
County for fire
by past
surface scraping/disking. The project site is disked gu Y
by prevention purposes. Pre -disturbance ve etation, based on a desi na ed tant nsinterest
coastal sage shrub and California Walnut Wooisted of
dlan arthespec al
fu
community. The site is bordr fragmenting the
ered on all sides by development,
ectively
remnants of the walnut woodland. The wildlife potentio on-site as bwilleen efeliminate
removed due to past disturbance.
remnant walnut woodland. project
approximately 0.5 acre o
Biological Site Assessment, Parcel Map 23382
O'Farrell Biological Consultants, August 4, 1992
Biological Site Assessment, Parcel Map 23382
Biological Assessment Services, March 10, 1993
11
Because of the existing disturbed site and lack of wildlife developed habitat and the
non-
adjacent development surrounding the site, the movedmpacttmo tSltive components wildfe10 f the ewalrut
significant. Past disturbance on-site has re
sociation. The remnants of this community
woodland. There is no longer a viable plant as
on-site comprise isolated individual plants with no interactive understory.
Culturalitesources: Apreliminary archaeological assessment s consisted off the :oject site 1) background
conducted in February 1993 3. Evaluation of the project sitecon
research to determine if the property had been previously surveyed and if cultural resources
had been recorded within a one -mile radius of the project site: and 2) an intensive
pedestrian survey of the project site.
The records survey indicated that no cultural resources been eyedid not find any
fied on-site or
within a one -mile radius of the project site. Th pedestrian
evidence of cultural resources on-site. The archaeologist concluded that development of
the project site poses no threat to known cultural resources.
Visual Resources: The project site is situated on ther northeedirection. , ear Cheatop of the
of a
prominent ridgeline. This ridgeline trends in an east- we
st northern flank has been developed for residential land nosrth . lie the B7 Freeway Boulevard has
been constructed along the base of this slope. Farther of
he
majority of the project site is visible from the 57 FreewaycoAvenue 1
/2 mihan e le north
both
the
Diamond Bar Boulevard interchange to the Pathfinder
directions). In general, views of the site increase as
scaping subsctantially
This results because the Las Brisas Condominium project and is land
block views from the lower elevations closest to the bottom Boulevard. the slope. Only limited
vistas of the site can be obtained from Diamond Bar
3
Archaeological Assessment, Parcel Map 23382, Diamond Bar, CA, Scientific Resource
Surveys, February 22, 1993
12
II. Environmental Impacts:
(Explanations and additional information to supplement all "yes" and "possibly"
answers are required to be submitted on attached sheets)
YES NO P0.SSIBLY
1. Earth.
Will the proposal result in:
•
a.
Unstable earth conditions or changes in
geologic substructures?
•
b.
Disruptions. displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil?
•
C.
Change in topography or ground surface relief
features?
•
d.
The destruction, covering or modification
of any unique geologic or physical feature?
e.
Any increase in wind or water erosion of
soils, either on or off the site?
•
f.
Changes in deposition, erosion of stream
banks or land adjacent to standing water.
changes in siltation, deposition or other
processes which may modify the channel of
constant or intermittently flowing water as
well as the areas surrounding permanent or
intermittent standing water?
•
g.
Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides,
mudslides, ground failure, or similar
hazards?
2. Air.
Will the proposal result in:
a.
Substantial air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air quality?
•
b.
The creation of objectionable odors?
C.
Alteration of air movement, moisture, or
temperature, or any changes in climate,
either locally or regionally?
3. Water.
Will the proposal result in:
•
a.
Changes in currents or the course or
direction of water movements?
14
YES NO POSSIBLY
•
•
i
4.
•
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of surface
run-off?
C. Alterations of the course or flow of flood
waters?
d. Changes in the amount of surface water in
any body of water?
C. Discharge into surface waters, or in any
alteration of surface water quality including
but not limited to dissolved oxygen and
turbidity?
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow
of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters,
either through direct additions or
withdrawals, or through interception of an
aquifer by cuts or excavations?
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water
otherwise available for public water
supplies?
i. Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding?
Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or number
of any species of plants (including trees,
shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction in the numbers of any unique rare
of endangered species of plants?
C. Reduction in the size of sensitive habitat
areas or plant communities which are
recognized as sensitive?
d. Introduction of new species of plants into
an area, or in a barrier to the normal
replenishment of existing species?
C. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural
crop?
15
YES NO POSSIBLY
4. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
•
a. Change in the diversity of species, or number
of any species of animals (birds, land
animals including reptiles, fish, and
shellfish, benthic organisms and insects)?
•
b. Reduction in the numbers of nay unique rare
or endangered species of animals?
C. Introduction of new species of animals into
an area, or in a barrier to the normal
migration or movement of resident species?
•
d. FL -duction in size or deterioration in quality
of existing fish or wildlife habitat?
6. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Significant increases in existing noise
levels?
•
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
7. Light and Glare_ Will the proposal result in:
a. Significant new light and glare or contribute
significantly to existing levels of light
and glare?
8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in:
a. A substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use in an area?
9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
•
a. An increase in the rate of use of any natural
resources?
10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal result in:
a. A risk of an explosion or the release of
hazardous substances (including but not
limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation) in the event of an accident or
upset condition?
16
YES NO POSSIBLY
• b. Probable interference with an emergency
response plan or an emergency evacuation
plan?
17
11.
Population. Will the proposal:
•
a. Alter the location, distribution, density,
or growth rate of the human population of
an area?
12.
Housing. Will the proposal affect:
•
a. Existing housing. or create a demand for
additional housing?
13.
Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal
result in:
•
a. Generation of Substantial additional
vehicular movement?
•
b. Effects on existing parking facilities or
demand for new parking?
•C.
Substantial impact on existing transportation
systems?
•
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people and goods.
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air
traffic?
•
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
14.
Public Services. Will the proposal:
a. Have an effect upon, or result in the need
for new or altered governmental services in
any of the following areas:
•
1. Fire Protection?
•
2. Police Protection?
•
3. Schools?
17
YES NO POSSIBLY
• 4. Parks or other recreational facilities?
• S. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
6. Other governmental services?
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
• a. Useof substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
• b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing
energy sources or require the development
of new sources of energy?
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in:
• a. A need for new systems, or Substantial
alterations to public utilities?
18
17.
Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
•
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health)?
•
b. Exposure of people to potential health
hazards?
18.
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in:
•
or view
a. The obstruction of any scenic vista
open to the public, or will the proposal
result in the creation of an aesthetically
offensive site open to the public view?
19.
Recreation. Will the proposal result in:
�•
a. An impact upon the quality or quantity of
existing recreational opportunities?
20.
Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
•
a. The alteration of or the destruction of a
prehistoric or historic archaeological site?
18
YES NO POSSIBLY
b. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building, structure
or object?
C. A physical change which would affect unique
ethnic cultural values?
• d. Restrictions on existing religious or sacred
uses within the potential impact area.
19
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance?
•
a. Does the proposed project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate or
significantly reduce a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
•
b. Does the proposed project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage
of long-term, environmental goals?
C. Does the proposed project pose impacts which
are individually limited but cumulatively
considerable?
d. Does the project pose environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human .beings, either directly or
indirectly?
19
III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION:
(Attach Narrative)
IV. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a
significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
• I find that although the
g proposed project could have a
significant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because the
mitigation measures described on the attached sheet
have been incorporated into the proposed project.
A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant
effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
Date: �f—�—G%,3 Signature: Xat". J. 9''0
T i t 1 e 0 Awa aN
For the City of Diamond Bar, California
2U
Dolezal Family Limited Partnership Project
Parcel Map No. 23382, Conditional Use Permit 92-1, and Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2
City of Diamond Bar
INITIAL STUDY
EXPLANATION OF "YES", "NO" AND "MAYBE" ANSWERS
Initial Stuff - Findings of Fact
1. Earth: (a -g)
Potential Impact: The proposed project will result in grading over the majority of the site to
create residential building pads and yard areas. Approximately 2,300 cubic yards of earth
redistribution is anticipated. Grading of the 2.55± acre site will alter the existing contour of the
land. Grading will have the potential to result in short term soil erosion, and may induce
accelerated sedimentation/siltation of downstream flood control facilities. Grading will also result
in disruption, displacement and compaction of these erodible soils. Site development will subject
future residents to earthquake hazardous typically experienced throughout Southern California.
Discussion: Approximately 75% of the site has been previously graded. Prior grading activities
included; remedial grading to correct an unstable slope condition over the western/central portion
of the site, grading for Steeplechase Lane along the southern boundary of the site, construction
of an emergency access road along the western site boundary and remedial grading to construct
a shear key along the northern property line for the Las Brisas Condominium project. The site
is disked regularly by the County for fire prevention purposes. The impact to the natural
landform from site grading is considered insignificant.
Erosion and sedimentation can be readily controlled by various management practices and
techniques through an erosion control plan. An erosion control plan and National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit are required prior to site grading. These
programs incorporate the following erosion control measures to insure that the potential for
increased erosion and sedimentation during grading are maintained at a level of insignificance.
Erosion Control Measures
Erosion control measures will be implemented during all phases of construction to revent
the loss of on-site soils as required by the City of Diamond Bar.
All appropriate cleared areas will be re -planted immediately after grading to prevent the
erosion of soils by wind or water. These plantings may be permanent or temporary in
nature.
All cleared areas will be regularly watered to prevent erosion by wind or water.
Watering will be increased on excessively hot or windy days; grading activities will
cease when wind speeds exceed 15 mph and during Santa Ana conditions and during
Stage I smog episodes.
21
During the rainy season, erosion control dikes and sandbags shall be placed at
appropriate intervals in roadway cuts.
Install construction equipment wheel washes at the entrance/exits of the construction
sites.
Public roadways providing access to the construction sites shall be cleared of soil
on a regular basis.
The project site is located in a region known for its seismic activity. While no known
active faults occur on the property, the site could be impacted by earthquakes generated
from the Whittier, Chino and San Anderas fault zones. Seismic activity on these faults has
the potential to generate strong ground shaking. Because of the proximity of the site to
these active earthquake faults and the intensity of ground shaking anticipated during a
major event, project development will expose people and property to geologic hazards;
damage to residential structures may be experienced in a major earthquake.
However, buildings designed to the standards of the Uniform Building Code will reduce
this exposure to an acceptable level of risk and the effect is therefore considered
insignificant.
Finding: Site development may have a significant impact on the environment. However,
existing regulations mitigate potential impacts to a level of insignificance.
2. Air: (a -c)
Potential Impact: The proposed project will generate both short and long-term, primary
and secondary air emissions. Short-term pollutants will be generated locally by
construction equipment emissions and by dust from grading activities. Long-term
pollutants will be generated locally from the use of natural gas for cooling and space
heating and through use of the automobile by future residents. Long-term pollutants will
be generated off-site at electrical generation facilities.
Discussion: The project is not anticipated to result in the creation of objectionable odors,
or in alteration of air movements, moisture, temperature, or climate.
The project site lies within the South Coast Air Basin. The South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) regulates airborne emissions within the basin. The
SCAQMD has released "Guidelines For Implementing the 1989 Air Quality Management
Plan (AQMP). The proposed project will contribute incremental quantities of air pollutants
locally, at levels well below the threshold criteria suggested by the SCAQMD for
determining significance.
The project developer(s) is required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 403 to protect against
windblown soil erosion during grading. Emissions from construction equipment are also
regulated by the AQMP. The Uniform Building Code, Title 22 requires utilization of
22
energy efficient appliances and building practices. Combined, these measures minimizing
the potential for significant impacts to air resources.
Finding: Site development may have a significant impact on the envirorunent. However,
existing regulations mitigate potential impacts to a level of insignificance.
3. Water: (a -i)
Potential Impact: Site development will increase the amount of impervious surfaces on-site
and result in an incremental increase in off-site runoff. Landscape irrigation will
incrementally increase the amount of water absorbed into the soil. Site grading has the
potential to increase erosion on-site and increase off-site siltation of down stream storm
drain facilities.
Discussion: Site development will not result in the need for new or upgraded off-site
drainage facilities. The incremental increase in off-site runoff and on-site absorption
anticipated from site development is considered insignificant.
Erosion and sedimentation can be readily controlled by various management practices and
techniques through an erosion control plan and NPDES permit. The grading permit and
NPDES process is designed insure that potential erosion and siltation effects to water
resources are maintained at a level of insignificance.
Finding: Site development may have a significant impact on the environment. However,
existing regulations mitigate potential impacts to a level of insignificance.
4. Plant Life: (a -d)
Potential Impact: Site development will result in removal of all on-site vegetation with the
exception of one oak tree within lot #3. Site grading and development in close proximity
to this oak tree could destroy it. New urban landscapes will be planted by the individual
home owners following development.
Discussion: The project site has been severely disturbed by past grading, surface scraping
and disking. The project site is disked regularly by the County for fire prevention
purposes. The site is bordered on all sides by existing and or planned development.
The project site is located at the extreme northwestern edge of the Tonner Canyon/Chino
Hills Significant Ecological Area (SEA) No. 15.
The City has identified oak trees as a valuable resource. Oak woodlands have been rapidly
decreasing in size throughout Southern California as a result of wide -spread urban
development. The City has adopted an Oak Tree Permit process to protect these oak
resources. While the proposed project does not propose to remove the singular oak tree
on-site. The following measures shall be considered during the site plan review stage to
minimize accidental damage to the oak tree.
23
a. Prior Construction Damage: The large concentration of concrete pipes
stacked against the trunk and accumulated soil shall be removed. The area
within the dripline should be hand aerated to rectify soil compaction which
has occurred.
b. Protection/Preservation Measures: . Pursuant to the City's Oak Tree Permit
process, chain link fencing, with a minimum height of four (4) feet, shall be
installed five (5) feet outside the tree's dripline or 15 feet from its trunk,
shich ever is greater.
C. Maintenance Guidelines: In addition, improper care and maintenance by the
homeowner can result in damage and or death to the oak tree. The site
developer and future homeowner shall be provided a copy of the Oak Tree
Management Guidelines contained in the Biota report review attached hereto.
Finding: Because of the small scale of the project, its disturbed nature and location
adjacent to urban developments, site development is not anticipated to result in a significant
impact to plant life.
5. Animal Life: (a -d)
Potential Impact: Site development will result in the displacement of all wildlife onsite.
Site development may result in the introduction of domestic cats and dogs onto the site and
the SEA. Upon completion of landscaping, wildlife compatible with urban areas is
anticipated to utilize the project site for nesting and foraging.
Discussion: The wildlife potential on-site has been effectively removed due to past
disturbance. Because of the existing lack of wildlife developed habitat and the adjacent
development surrounding the site, the impact to sensitive wildlife is deemed non-
significant.
The project site is located at the extreme northwestern edge of the Tonner Canyon/Chino
Hills Significant Ecological Area (SEA) No. 15.
The potential impact to the SEA from site development is not considered significant.
However, the following measure is recommended to help maintain the biologic integrity
of the Tonner Canyon/Chino Hills SEA.
a. During the site plan review stage, consideration shall be given to minimize
excessive amounts of light and glare directed toward the SEA (southeast).
Consideration may include architectural design, lighting location, type of
lighting, use of shields and landscaping.
Finding: Because of the small scale of the project, its disturbed nature and location
adjacent to urban developments, site development is not anticipated to result in a significant
impact to animal life.
24
6. Noise: (a -b)
Potential Impact: Site development will result in the generation of both short and long-
term noise. Short-term construction noise will be generated locally during the construction
of each residential unit. The use of the automobile by future residents will result in an
incremental increase in long-term noise levels within the community.
Discussion: Ambient noise levels within the project site are considered low. Existing
ambient noise is generated by low density residential land uses. Approval of the project
is not anticipated to subject people to noise levels in excess of state or local standards for
interior and/or exterior residential uses.
The project developer(s) is required to comply with existing regulations that govern
construction noise, minimizing potential impacts to nearby noise receptors.
Finding: Site development may have a significant impact on the environment. However,
existing regulations mitigate potential impacts to a level of insignificance.
7. Light and Glare:
Potential Impact: Site development may result in the generation of long-term light and
glare.
Discussion: Ambient levels of light and glare on the project site are considered low.
Existing ambient light and glare is generated by low and medium density residential land
uses to the north east and west as well as the 57 Freeway to the north. - Site development
will add incremental quantities of light and glare to the project vicinity. No street lighting
is proposed.
The potential impact to the SEA from project -related light and glare is not considered
significant. However, the following measure is recommended to help maintain the biologic
integrity of the Tonner Canyon/Chino Hills SEA.
a. During the site plan review stage, consideration shall be given to minimize
excessive amounts of light and . glare directed toward the SEA (south).
Consideration may include architectural design, lighting location, type of lighting,
use of shields and landscaping.
Finding: Because of the small scale of the project, site development is not anticipated to
result in a significant generation of light and glare.
8. Land Use:
Potential Impact: Approval of the proposed project will permit development of four
custom homes on the project site.
25
Discussion: The proposed project is consistent with the City's contemplated General Plan
and Zoning Ordinance. The project site is surrounded by existing residential and or
planned residential land uses.
Finding: For the reasons discussed above, site development is not anticipated to result in
a significant impact to land use.
9. Natural Resources:
Potential Impact: Site development will consume both renewable and non-renewable
natural resources over the life of the project. Non-renewable natural resources include the
use of fossil fuels (for the generation of electricity and fuel for automobiles) and natural
gas (for space heating). Renewable lumber products will be used as a construction
material.
Discussion: Site development is not anticipated to use abnormally large quantities of
natural resources. The project developers) and future homeowners are required to comply
with existing regulations to reduce the generation of solid wastes to off-site landfills
(AB939) and are encouraged to recycle which further minimize the consumption of natural
resources.
Finding: For the reasons discussed above, site development is not anticipated to result in
a significant impact to natural resources.
10. Risk of Upset: (a -b)
Potential Impact: Site development may involve the temporary storage of fuels and oils
used by grading equipment. While the risk of spillage and or leakage of small quantities
of diesel fuel or engine oil is considered remote, this potential exists at any construction
site.
Discussion: The project will not involve the risk of explosion or the release of hazardous
substances. The project will not interfere with emergency response plans or emergency
evacuation plans.
The project developers is required to comply with existing regulations to protect against
the risk of spillage and or leakage of toxic materials including diesel fuel and engine oil.
In addition. the project developers is required to mitigate off-site waterborne construction
pollutants through the existing NPDES permit process. Combined, these measures
minimizing potential the risk of upset from site development.
Finding: Because of the projects small scale and existing regulations in effect, the
proposed project is not anticipated to result in a significant risk of upset.
26
11. Population:
Potential Impact: Site development will result in a population increase of approximately
14 residents.
Discussion: The proposed project is consistent with the City's contemplated General Plan
and Zoning Ordinance. The project site is surrounded by existing residential and or
planned residential land uses. Site development is consistent with growth projections for
the project site.
Finding: For the reasons discussed above, site development is not anticipated to result in
a significant impact to population.
12. Housing:
Potential Impact: Site development will increase the City's housing stock by four single
family detached homes.
Discussion: The proposed project is consistent with the City's contemplated General Plan
and Zoning Ordinance. The project site is surrounded by existing residential and or
planned residential land uses. Site development is consistent with growth projections for
the project site.
Finding: For the reasons discussed above, site development is not anticipated to result in
a significant impact to housing.
13. Transportation/Circulation: (a -f)
Potential Impact: Site development will generate approximately 48 average daily trips to
the local circulation system. Access to the site will be provided by Steeplechase Lane, a
private street having restricted access.
Discussion: Because of the small scale of the proposed project, the site development will
have minimal impact on existing traffic levels or circulation patterns. The project will not
result in alterations to waterbome, rail or air traffic.
Finding: For the reasons discussed above, site development is not anticipated to result in
a significant impact to Transportation/Circulation.
14. Public Services: (a, 1-6)
Potential Impact: Project development will incrementally increase the demand for public
services; e.g., law enforcement, fire protection, school and park facilities.
Discussion: The project will contribute development fees as required by the City for law
enforcement, fire protection and public park facilities. These funds will ensure that
27
sufficient services and facilities are provided to accommodate the demand generated by this
development.
The project site lies with in the boundary of the Walnut Valley Unified School District.
The District is experiencing overcrowding and has enacted a school impact fee mitigation
program in accordance with Senate Bill 201. With the payment of impact fees, the District
will provide adequate school services to facilitate the project's needs.
Finding: Existing regulations mitigate potential impacts to a level of insignificance.
15. Energy: (a -b)
Potential Impact: Site development will consume both renewable and non-renewable
energy resources. Non-renewable energy resources include fossil fuels (generation of
electricity and fuel for automobiles) and natural gas (space heating and cooldng).
Discussion: Site development is not anticipated to result in the use of substantial amounts
of fuel, or a substantial increase in demand for energy or the development of new sources
of energy. The project developers) and future homeowners are required to comply with
existing regulations to reduce the use of non-renewable energy resources. These
regulations include; compliance with energy efficient design standards, use of emergency
efficient household appliances and recycling programs (AB939). Renewable solar energy
will be used for passive space heating and cooling of residential dwellings and swimming
pools.
Finding: Insignificant effect.
16. Utilities:
Potential Impact: Project development will incrementally increase the demand for public
utilities; e.g., water and sewer service, electricity and natural gas.
Discussion: Utilities are available adjacent to the project site and will be extended from
Steeplechase Lane onto the project site. The project will pay connection fees as required
by the City.
Finding: Insignificant effect.
17. Human Health: (a -b)
Potential Impact: The proposed project is not anticipated to result in the creation of any
health hazards or the exposure of people to potential health hazards. Existing regulations
are in-place which regulate construction materials used in residential construction.
Finding: Insignificant effect.
M
18. Aesthetics:
Potential Impact Approval of the proposed project will permit site development of four
custom homes near the top of a ridge within the viewshed of the 57 Freeway and
residential/commercial areas north of Diamond Bar Boulevard. Site development will
require recontouring of the land to create residential building pads and yards.
Approximately 2,300 cubic yards of earth redistribution is anticipated.
Discussion: The natural appearance of the project site has been disturbed by past grading
activities and contains litter from the construction of a water main along Steeplechase Lane.
The project site is disked regularly by the County for fire prevention purposes.
The site contains one large oak tree which is proposed to be incorporated in the design of
the project.
The project site is located in an area which has experienced rapid urban development. The
entire site is surrounded by existing and or planned residential land uses. The project site
is situated on the northern flank, near the top of a prominent ridgeline. Nearly all of the
northern flank has been developed for residential land uses.
The majority of the project site is visible from the 57 Freeway (from the Diamond Bar
Boulevard interchange to the Pathfinder Avenue interchange in both directions). In
general, views of the site increase as the distance from the site increases. This results
because the Las Brisas Condominium project and its landscaping substantially block views
from the lower elevations closest to the bottom of the slope. Only limited vistas of the site
can be obtained from Diamond Bar Boulevard. Upon site development, the upper portions
of the four homes will be visible from the north. Site development will be seen from
adjacent areas with the Baldwin development to the west, the Country development to the
east and Las Brisas Condominium project to the north.
Residential land use on this site is consistent with the City's contemplated General Plan.
The design of the proposed parcel map is consistent the City's zoning ordinance. This type
of development will be similar in character to adjacent development on the east ("The
Country Estates") and west (Baldwin Tract) and at a lower density than adjacent
development on the north (Las Brisas Condominiums). The proposed project will be
similar in character to planned residential development on the south (Parcel Map 1528).
The project developer(s) is required to comply with the City's Hillside Management
Ordinance which is designed to preserve and protect the views to and from hillside areas
in order to maintain the identity, image and environmental quality of the City of Diamond
Bar". Each homesite will be required to undergo individual site plan review for
conformance with the Development Review Ordinance. Combined, these measures insure
that the potential adverse aesthetic impacts from site development is maintained at a level
less than significant.
Finding: Under these conditions, project development is not considered to be of aesthetic
29
significance.
19. Recreation:
Potential Impact: Implementation of the proposed project will incrementally increase the
demand on the City's existing recreational facilities.
ay
ment of in -lieu
Discussion: In accordance with 1 Mmregulation
eg of thisssi ee CThe City utilizesity requires the pthis fee to acquire
park improvement fees for de p
and/or improve new park and recreation facilities.
Finding: Insignificant effect.
20. Cultural Resources: (a -d)
Potential Impact: Approximately 2,300 cubic yards of earth redistribution will be required
to construct residential building pads.
Discussion: A records search and site investigation for cultural resources was preformed
in February 1993. The records survey indicated that no cultural resources have been
identified on-site or within a one -mile radius of the proje�esite.
uc� o archaeologist ianconsurvey
that
did
not find any evidence of cultural resources on-site
development of the project site poses no threat to known cultural resources.
Finding: Insignificant effect.
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance:
a. Discussion: The project site has been previously disturbed by grading activities.
The site is disked on a regular basis by the County for fire prevention purposes.
The site is fenced on the north, east and west.
t. No
Theeproject nd n endangered
species
have been observed on or are anticipated t
ent
state. No cultural resources have been reported within a one mile radius of the
project site and none were observed during a site investigation.
j
P
Finding: The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife species to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate or
significantly reduce a plant or animal commm� or eliminateuce eimportant examples of
number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or am
the major periods of California history or prehistory.
b. Discussion: The proposed project implements the long-term goals of the City's
contemplated General Plan for development of this site and completes the
improvement of Steeplechase Lane.
30
Finding: The project will not have the potential to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals.
C. Discussion: Site development will continue the planned implementation of the City's
contemplated General Plan for this area. Increased urbanization adjacent and within
significant ecological areas will increase pressure on those species sensitive to urban
encroachment. Continued urban development within Diamond Bar will increase
long-term service demands on pubiic service and utility companies. Continued
number of automobiles utilizing local roadway
urban development will increase the
and may necessitate the need for new and/or improved roadways. Long range
infrastructure planning is based on the level of development anticipated by buildout
of the contemplated General Plan. The proposed project and others approved in the
project vicinity are consistent with the contemplated General Plan.
Finding: The cumulative impact of the proposed project combined with other
planned developments in the project vicinity is not considered significant.
d. Discussion: The project does not involve the use of hazardous materials, pose the
risk of explosion nor is it located in close proximity to such uses.
Finding: The approval of the proposed Parcel Map, Conditional Use Permit, Oak
Tree Permit, and ultimate construction of four custom homes is not anticipated to
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
DETERMINATION:
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described
herein have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
WILL BE PREPARED.
31
n �
o
o
d
O
C7
C'
a.o d°
�r�
rr
oo
tz� �d
��py
(A
< � a
d
y C
\Op dwLit
E3
N O Gn
0
>y
H+ y
t
a
GQ
E4
O
z
0
PC
0
O
�•
O O
b
G
v0, O
b
Qmn• Q
00 Cr y
�wm
PP+
�'�
O `O
tr' o•
� �^
'O
p
p
ri •
rn R �n D+
� �p
Q0
o
oJQOQ
p
O w
w O
O
mcm
�ao�
'o00ff
" �
o d
g 6
DQ
g
a
aha +
a �•�
2
^ 71
C
o
00
5i
6
O
a
107'
CFO
OO
cs i�• do
O y
,yo
p
A
y
;/i rn
y
CD
0
Q.
2
y
m b
_
c
Ny
OQ tA
.+
0°OQ
G
o
' ...
°0
00
00
00�r..
0
°' o
Q
~ti
CrQ
o OQ
O
b
'O
7'O
'O
b
'U
PO
O.
O.
t
a
GQ
E4
O
z
0
PC
0
�
O
f 1 f1
o
n
0°
n
m°
'�
o O p. c •, .,
►+
is
g
y y�
^
�•m 5 ti
co
2<
<° ��
^ o g v� °
5.�p E. o
a
a$
m•i
c�
R
y
ct
�• e �Ri i.
cu
oa
O
O.
Q
ON
Q r
g p. CD a b
�•
oo
y
F
<
rs�'� o R
•.
n°p
o p.
z
o
a' O.'
N n t� " y" C uo
To
(o
p .�<.
c
C 'V
n
OQ "n m,
`
O O Cr CT a M w.. 0 O
a
O
•�
�D
CO
CCD
�. b' 4' :E o
p
o
ts C6
O 0 m
�, o
aro
04 o
8 ti o R
rs
y
ao.$moo
�'g+y
c<o
o
M R' Sc p
cl, rr
p K
CtM
n n 0 ? 8�
��
m
O 0'b
m
p'y°a
-'0,a
moi
d
c
d
d
c
O cV
, ,
o co
o a .,,
O
co
O
p'
�•
K �
� a �
ti
ro
,• K�� �,
(moo
<
as R
^
:r
�s
CD
m
c�
�
0
ro
P tz
O
O
O
0
0
a
oo
d
d
y
� d
d
d
C7m
�•
�•d
o
�•d
0
rL
o.
S z
5•z
b
�'-0
W
co
a
y b
R
a. CO)
.r°r
pCD
y
ct
a
p
a
a
a
c�
�
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR �y I
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO !
-0: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995 REPORT DATE: June 12, 1995
FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director
TITLE: RESOLUTION NO.95-XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR ADOPTING THE 1995 GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
SUMMARY: On May 9, 1995, the City Council held a public hearing on the draft 1995 General Plan. The
public hearing was opened, testimony received, and corrections and changes were made by the Council.
Resolution No. 95-21 incorporating Resolution 92-43 by reference and certifying the adequacy of the
Addendum to the General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report was adopted.
The Council, on May 9, 1995, discussed the possibility of placing the General Plan on the ballot. The meeting
was continued to May 23, 1995 in order to provide options to the City Council regarding adoption of the 1995
General Plan. The May 23, 1995 discusson was continued to June 20, 1995.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council receive a presentation from City staff, review
the General Plan materials, and adopt Resolution No. 95 -XX.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification
Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office)
Ordinances(s)
_ Agreement(s)
Other
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: Library
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1.
Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
X Yes _ No
by the City Attorney?
N/A
2.
Does the report require a majority or 415 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?
5.
Are other departments affected by the report?
X Yes _ No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
REVIEWED BY:
Terlence L. Belanger 4:�o Frank Usher / mimes DeStefano
City Manager Assistant City Manager Community Develo ment Director
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO.95-XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ADOPTING THE 1995 GENERAL
PLAN FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
ISSUE STATEMENT: State law requires the preparation and adoption of a comprehensive, long
term General Plan for the physical development of all property within the
City and any land outside its boundaries which bears relation to its
planning. The 1995 General Plan is presented for adoption.
BACKGROUND:
On May 9, 1995, the City Council held a public hearing on the draft 1995 General Plan. The public
hearing was opened, testimony received, and corrections and changes were made by the Council.
Resolution No. 95-21 incorporating Resolution 92-43 by reference and certifying the adequacy of the
Addendum to the General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report was adopted.
The Council, on May 9, 1995, discussed the possibility of placing the General Plan on the ballot. The
meeting was continued to May 23, 1995 in order to provide options to the City Council regarding
adoption of the 1995 General Plan. The Associate City Attorney has provided the attached memorandum
regarding options available to the City Council.
In response to City Council direction the General Plan has been modified to incorporating revisions as
discussed on May 9, 1995. The latest draft of the General Plan, dated May 9, 1995 is presented for
adoption.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council, receive a presentation from City staff and adopt Resolution No.
95 -XX.
PREPARED BY:
James DeStefano
Community Development Director
attachments: • Draft Resolution No. 95 -XX
• Draft General Plan dated May 9, 1995
• Memorandum from Michael Montgomery dated May 15, 1995
• City Council staff report dated May 9, 1995 (without attachments)
• May 9, 1995 City Council Minutes
2
RESOLUTION NO. 95 -XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND
BAR ADOPTING THE 1995 GENERAL PLAN FOR THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR
A. Recitals.
(i) The City of Diamond Bar previously initiated
proceedings to adopt a general plan (111992 General Plan") pursuant
to Title 7, Division 1 of the California Government Code Sections
65360 and 65361.
(ii) In 1990 a General Plan Advisory Committee was
formed to provide the community with an opportunity to participate
in the creation of the City of Diamond Bar's 1992 General Plan and
to make recommendations with respect to the specific components of
the 1992 General Plan. Numerous study sessions and duly noticed
public hearings were held by the Planning Commission and the City
Council of the City of Diamond Bar from July 1991 through July
1992.
Pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated
thereunder ("CEQA"), a Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report
was prepared and considered to address the environmental effects
of the 1992 General Plan, the mitigation measures related to each
significant environmental effect of the 1992 General Plan, the
project alternatives and a Mitigation Monitoring Plan.
(iv) On July 30, 1991, copies of the draft 1992 General
Plan were mailed to affected agencies pursuant to Government Code
Section 65352.
(v) On July 14, 1992 the City Council adopted
Resolution No. 92-44 adopting the 1992 General Plan and adopted
Resolution 92-43 certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report
for the 1992 General Plan.
(vi) On or about August 10, 1992, a referendum petition
,seeking the repeal of Resolution No. 92-44 was submitted to the
City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar. The city Clerk certified
the sufficiency of the signatures on the referendum petition
pursuant to a court order and presented such certification to the
City Council.
(vii) On March 16, 1993 the City Council adopted
Resolution No. 93-15 repealing Resolution No. 92-44, the
resolution which adopted the 1992 General Plan.
(viii) In March of 1993 the City Council directed the
retention of a consultant team to develop a new general plan
(111993 General Plan"). Opportunities for public participation
were provided throughout the program of creating the 1993 General
Plan. Five community workshops were held with City residents to
identify key planning issues and to discuss potential general plan
policy options. the results of those workshops were summarized and
forwarded to the City Council for its consideration.
(ix) On May 19, 1993, the City Council began the public
hearing process to adopt a general plan. The City Council held
duly noticed public hearings on May 19, 1993, May 26, 1993, June
2, 1993, June 9, 1993, and June 16, 1993, whereby public testimony
was received with respect to all elements of the draft 1993
General Plan.
(x) Because substantial modifications to the draft 1993
General Plan were being considered, the City Council, pursuant to
Government Code Section 65356, referred the review of the draft
1993 General Plan to the Diamond Bar Planning Commission for its
recommendations. On June 23, 1993 the Planning Commission held a
study session to consider the draft 1993 General Plan. On June
28, 1993 the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
'hearing to consider and receive public testimony on the draft 1993
General Plan. The Planning Commission considered all the evidence
presented and submitted a written recommendation to the -City
Council to adopt the draft 1993 General Plan, with various
modifications.
(xi) On June 29, July 6, July 13, July 20 and July
27, 1993.the city -Council conducted additional duly noticed public
hearings. In the course of these public hearings, the City
council -received and deliberated upon written and oral testimony.
(xii) On July 27, 1993 the City Council adopted
Resolution No. 93-57 and 93-58 certifying the adequacy of the
Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report and
adopting the 1993 General Plan.
(xiii) On August 24, 1993 a referendum petition seeking
the repeal of Resolution No. 93-58 was submitted to the City Clerk
of the City of Diamond Bar. The City Clerk certified the
sufficiency of the signatures on the referendum petition pursuant
to a court order and presented such certification to the City
Council.
(xiv) on December 14, 1993 the City Council adopted
Resolution No. 93-80 repealing Resolution No. 93-58, the
resolution which adopted the 1993 General Plan.
(xv) In January of 1994 a new General Plan Advisory Committee
(GPAC) was formed to develop a new General Plan (111995 General
Plan"). The GPAC headf if Juneteen
1994Cen orderpublic
tomeetings
developbthee1995
January 11, 1994 an
General Plan. The results of the GPAC efforts and its
recommendations were forwarded to the Planning Commission for its
review and recommendation to the City Council.
(xvi) The Planning Commission conducted thirteen public
hearings between July 11, 1994 and October 17, 1994 to review the
GPAC recommended General Plan. The Planning Commission considered
the GPAC recommendations, received public testimony and initiated
additional changes through the course of their review. On October
17, 1994 the Planning Commission forwarded its recommendations to
the City Council.
(xvii) On November 22, 1994 the City Council began the
public hearing process to adopt the 1995 General Plan. The City
Council held duly noticed public hearings on November 22, 1994,
November 29, 1994, January 9, 1995, January 16, 1995, January 24,
1995, January 31, 1995, February 6, 1995, February 13, 1995,
February 16, 1995, February 23, 1995, February 28, 1995, and March
6, 1995 whereby public testimony was received with respect to all
elements of the draft 1995 General Plan. The City Council
considered the GPAC and planning Commission recommendations,
received public testimony and initiated changes through the course
of its review.
(xviii) On April 4, 1995 the City Council, pursuant to
Government Code Section 65356, referred the 1995 General Plan to
the Planning Commission for its recommendations. On April 10, 1995
the Planning Commission conducted a noticed public meeting,
received public testimony, considered and commented upon City
Council modifications to the 1995 General Plan. The Planning
Commission submitted a written report and recommendation to the
City Council to adopt the 1995 General Plan, with modifications.
(xix) On May 9, 1995 the City Council conducted an
additional duly noticed public hearing. In the course of this
public hearing the City Council received and deliberated upon
written and oral testimony.
(xx) The Final Environmental Impact Report previously
prepared for the 1992 General Plan adequately addresses all of the
significant environmental impacts associated with the 1995 General
Plan. Therefore, an Addendum was prepared and considered in
accordance with CEQA. The City Council considered the information
contained in the Final Environment -1 impact Report and the
Addendum thereto ("Final EIR") prior to approval of*the 1995
General Plan.
(xxi) The City Council considered, individually and
collectively, the six elements comprising the 1995 General Plan,
the related appendices and the Final EIR. The 1995 General Plan
incorporates the seven mandatory elements established in
Government Code section 65302 into six components, specifically:
a. The Land Use Element;
b. The Housing Element;
C. The Resource Management Element (Open Space
and Conservation Elements);
d. The Public Health and Safety Element (Noise
and Safety Elements);
e. The Circulation Element;. and
f. The Public Services and Facilities Element
(xxii) In its review of the 1995 General Plan and the
Final EIR, the City Council fully considered the impacts upon
landforms and topography, earth resources and seismicity, drainage
and flood control, biological resources, crime and prevention
services, fire hazards and protective services, health and
emergency services, hazardous materials, recreation and open
space, land use, air quality, noise, cultural resources,
socioeconomics (housing), energy systems, circulation/
transportation, educational services, water, wastewater, and solid
waste associated with the further development of the City in
accordance with the goals, policies and programs as more fully
detailed in the 1995 General Plan.
(xxiii) The 1995 General Plan and all of its
constituent parts are properly integrated, internally consistent
apd-compatible.
(xxiv) The City Council has considered all the
information presented to it, and found and determined that the
public convenience, welfare and good planning practice require the
adoption and implementation.of the goals, policies and programs
contained in the 1995 General Plan.
(xxv) All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption
of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and
resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, as
follows:
1. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar hereby
specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the
Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct and are
hereby incorporated into the body of this Resolution by reference.
2. Documentation has ')een prepared in compliance with
CEQA and this City Council has reviewed and considered the
information contained in the environmental documentation,
including the Final Environmental Impact Report, the Addendum and
the Mitigation Monitoring Plan with respect to the 1993 General
Plan, and has determined that such documentation is complete and
adequate.
3. The City Council hereby determines that:
(a) The six components of the 1995 Diamond Bar
General Plan, including all appendices, completely address the
mandatory elements, and the mandatory legal contents required
therein, pursuant to California Government Code Section 65302 and
all other applicable statutes. The 1995 General Plan, attached
hereto as Exhibit A, is incorporated herein by this reference as
though set forth in full.
(b) The 1995 General Plan is informational,
readable, and available to the public pursuant to California
Government Code Section 65357.
(c) The six components of the 1993 General Plan,
including appendices, are internally consistent as required by
California Government Code Section 65300.5.
(d) The 1995 General Plan is consistent with State of
California policies, rules, regulations and guidelines.
(e) The 1995 General Plan covers all territory within
the corporate boundaries of the City of Diamond Bar and further,
incorporates all lands outside the corporate boundaries of the
City of Diamond Bar which the City Council has judged to bear a
reasonable relationship to Diamond Bar's planning activities
pursuant to California Government Code Section 65300.
(f) ' The 1995 General.Plan'is long term in perspective
pursuant to California Government Code Section 65300.
(g) The 1995 General Plan reasonably addresses all
relevant local issues and concerns currently -identified.
4. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar hereby finds
that adoption of the 1995 General Plan will generate social,
economic and other benefits which clearly outweigh the unavoidable
adverse environmental impacts, as specified in the Statement of
overriding Considerations set forth in Exhibit A of Resolution No.
95 -XX -
5. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar hereby
finds that the 1995 General Plan for the City of Diamond Bar was
prepared in accordance with California State Planning and Zoning
Law, particularly Title 7, Chapter 3 of the California Government
Code and the General Plan Guidelines promulgated by the Governor'
s Office of Planning and Research.
6 . The City Council hereby approves and adopts the
1995 General Plan, attached hereto and incorporated herein by
this reference as Exhibit A, as the General Plan of the City of
Diamond Bar.
7. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of
this Resolution.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED this of
, 1995.
I, LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar,
do hereby certify y that the foregoing Resolution was passed,
adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of , 1995, by the
following vote:
AYES:
COUNCIL
MEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCIL
MEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL
MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED:
COUNCIL
MEMBERS:
ATTEST
Lynda Burgess, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
6
,.AN CFc'CES
MICHAEL B. MONTGOMERY
A LAW CORPORATION
io5o1 VALLEY BOULEVARD. SUITE 121
EL MONTE, CALIFORNIA 01731
TELEPHONE (818) 452-1272
FACSIMILE (818) 452-8323
ALSO ADMITTED TO FLORIDA
AND HAWAII STATE BARS
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL r11 Al
FROM: Associate City Attorneylrr t',1'�
DATE: May 16, 1995
RE: Options re Adoption of General Plan
CF COUNSEL
_ ALAN R. BURNS'
JOHN ROBERT HARPER'
ORANGE COUNTY OFFICE
453 S. GLASSELL STREET
ORANGE. CA 02E00
(714) 771.7728
*Professional Corporations
WENDY D. OAWER
The case causing procedural concern, DaVida v. Napa'- had been
decided by the Court of Appeal and was pending before the Supreme
Court, when the Legislature enacted the revised Elections Code. The
DaVida decision, which allowed the voters to amend an existing
General Plan at the ballot box, was of statewide concern, hotly
debated, and it is inconceivable to think that the Legislature was not
aware of its import. New Elections Code 99200 says that, "Ordinances
may be enacted by Rnd for any incorporated city pursuant 'to this
article." The single -subject rule does not apply to initiatives.
If the provisions of two or more ordinances adopted at the same
election conflict, the ordinance receiving the highest number of
affirmative votes shall control ( Elections Code §9221).
A city may hold at its discretion, an advisory election on any subject
for which it otherwise has jurisdiction, to indicate to the council,
approval or disapproval of the proposal. The measure shall be
headed with the title, "Advisory Vote Only". The results of the
advisory vote are not controlling (Election Code 99603).
A city council may submit to the voters, without a petition therefore,
any proposition for the repeal, amendment or enactment of any
ordinance to be voted upon in any succeeding regular or special
election, and if the proposition submitted receives a majority of the
votes, it shall be enacted accordingly.
On this point, it has already been held that CEQA compliance is not
' 9 Cal.4th 763
People v. Norton (1930) 108 Ca. App. 767, 775
Elections Code S9221, 9222
LAW OFFICES
MICHAEL B. MONTGOMERY
Mayor and City Council
City of Diamond Bar
May 16, 1995
Page 2
required in order for the council to put the matter on the ballot,
because the electorate is not a, "public agency" within the meaning of
that act.'
If the council adopts the general plan, then the question of whether
or not it shall be repealed is put to the voters as a, "proposition" ,
rather than submitted as a repealing ordinance.'
Da Vida v. County of Napa,' holds that the planning process need
not be followed before a vote by the electorate. It would seem that
the same concept as in Lee would apply, i.e., the electorate is not a
public agency, and only public agencies are subject to the Planning
and Zoning Law (see Government Code 165300). The adopted Plan
could still be challenged as to mandatory element." Therefore, the
Council has the following options:
1. Adopt the General Plan by resolution, by majority vote of
the council. Government Code 465356.7
2. Refuse to adopt the General Plan.
3. Declare the original, now expired General Plan., to be the
current and existing General Plan.
4. Adopt the pending General Plan, but only for a limited time
period.
5. Place the General Plan in the ballot at the next election,
and submit the question of whether or not it should be adopted to the
electorate.
6. Adopt the pending General Plan, but to remain in effect,
only until the next election, and submit to the voters the proposition
of whether or not this General Plan should be continued as such.
7. Adopt this General Plan and put an advisory question on
the next ballot, which is not binding on the Council, on whether or
not this General Plan should be continued.
Lee v. City of Lompoc (1993) 14 Cal. App.4th 1515, 18 Cal.
Rptr.2d. 359
Schildwachter v. City of Compton (1939) 14 Cal.2d 342
AG Opn No. 83-310, 66 AG opne 258
' Subject to a procedural limitation (see concurrent memorandum)
LAW OFFICES
MICHAEL B. MONTGOMERY
Mayor and City Council
City of Diamond Bar
May 16, 1995
Page 3
The following scenarios result, depending upon your decision. If you
refuse to adopt the General Plan at this time, without placing the
issue on the ballot for the next election, no further discretionary
land use permits may be granted. If you fail to adopt, but agree to
place the matter on the ballot, it can be argued that land use
decisions can be granted, if they are in conformity with the
"proposed General Plan", which, of course, is the one that would be
on the ballot. Any land use decision granted after adoption of the
General Plan at your next meeting, but before a referendum petition
is filed, would vest, regardless of whether the General Plan was
thrown out by the voters at the next election, or whether it suffers a
defeat under an advisory vote. Adoption of the old, expired General
Plan would probably not need an Environmental Impact Report, since
it adopts the existing situation for the most part, and could be done
with a negative declaration.
If the Council's proposed General Plan were placed on the same ballot
with the initiative proponents' GPAC General Plan, then they would
be listed as separate measures with a "Yes/No" vote as to each. If
one passes and the other is defeated, the issue is resolved. If both
are defeated, the process starts, anew. If both are adopted, the
General' Plan receiving the most votes would prevail (while there is a
rule that two or more initiatives may go into effect at the same
election, with the one getting the highest votes 'prevailing only as to
conflicting provisions, under the rule requiring internal consistency
of a General Plan, presumably internal consistency_.. would not be
present if the two plans were thrown together, leaving the prevailing
Plan to have effect) .
If the Council adopts the General Plan, without limitation, and if the
initiative proponents place theirs on the ballot, and it passes, it will
repeal the Council's General plan; if it loses, the Council's General
Plan continues. If the initiative proponents General Plan goes on the
ballot and is passed, it can be amended only by a subsequent vote of
the people, subject, of course, to any provisions in the initiative
proponents' General Plan that would allow the Council to act, or
certain areas that may be pre-empted, such as the Housing Element.
Staff has raised the issue that having the Council place on the ballot,
a measure that has not yet gone through the entire planning process,
such as the initiative proponents' measure (although they apparently
dispute this assertion) might subject the matter to challenge. You
can pretty well figure that there is going to be a challenge from any
LAIN OFFICES
MICHAEL B. MONTGOMERY
Mayor and City Council
City of Diamond Bar
May 16, 1995
Page 4
direction.
I have resolved the issue in favor of validity if adopted by ballot, on
three grounds:
1. Case law solidly gives the benefit of the doubt to initiative
proponents.
2. The new Elections Code states that any ordinance may be
submitted to the voters.
3. CEQA once considered sacrosanct in the normal development
process, and the procedure through which millions of dollars may be
lost on an unsuccessful effort", is not required in an initiative
measure ( Lee, supra) , or in any initiative amendment to a GeneraI-
Plan (DaVida, supra).
If any of the Council have questions on the foregoing prior to the
meeting, do not hesitate to contact me.
" AVCO Community Developers v lout Coast Regional Com (1976) 17
Cal.3d 785
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: May 9, 1995
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Adoption of the 1995 General Plan
ISSUE STATEMENT: State law requires the preparation and adoption of a comprehensive, thin e
term General Plan for the physical development of all property
City and any land outside its boundaries which bears relation to its
planning. Upon adoption, the General Plan, through its numerous goals,
objectives and strategies, will define development strategy for the next
twenty years. The Draft 1995 General Plan has been developed since
January 1994 and is presented for adoption.
BACKGROUND:
In January 1994 the City Council established a General Plan Advisory Committee to develop the General
Plan. GPAC recommendations crafted over a six month period were .forwarded to the Planning
Commission for review and consideration in July 1994. n pctobrPlanning, 1994 theoPl�anningted Commission
us
public hearings between July and October 199
recommended that the City Council approve and adopt the Draft General Plan. The City Council began
its detailed review of the documents on January 9, 1995.
The Council has examined the Introduction, Vision Statement, Resource Management Element (RI E),
c
PubliHealth and Safety Element (PHSE), Circulation
U
Public Services and Facilities Element (PSFE), T F The purpose of the bia}� 9,
Element (CE), Housing Element (HE), and the Land Use Element (LUE). P
1995 public hearing is to consider adoption of the 1995 General Plan.
On March 6, 1995 the City Council concluded its initial review of the General Plan and directed the
preparation of final documents. The Council subsegtMay
dated March 31,public
99 hearing
`L o
consider adoption of the documents. The latest draft
ofthe General Plan,
distributed on April 7, 1995 providing a 30 day publicly noticed review period as previously establis''
1
by the Council.
The March 31, 1995 draft General Plan was referred to the Planning Commission for review and
recommendation in accordance with California Government Code Section 65356. The Commission
conducted a noticed public meeting on April 10, 1995, reviewed the General Plan as directed by the
Council and has provided its report and recommendations in the form of the attached meeting minutes.
The General Plan document before the City Council has been developed over the last 16 months and 40
public meetings incorporating extensive community interest and involvement. The 20 year plan sets forth
numerous strategies responding to local and regional issues facing the City. This General Plan responds
to ongoing development pressures by limiting new residential growth to a maximum of approximately
1200 additional housing units to the 18,000 existing homes. The General Plan requires the creation of
a slope density ordinance and tree preservation ordinance both designed to preserve and protect existing
resources. New.developmcnt proposals Plan doessites
not�rrtitbe �e development dedicate to of aeroadway through
e areas for
permanent preservation. The General Pe
environmentally sensitive Tonner Canyon.
The Plan does incorporate a strong Vision Statement which seeks; retention of the rural/ country living
community character, preservation of open space resources, reducing regional traffic impacts on local
streets, promotion of viable commercial activity, well maintained housing, and a nurturing community
environment for all citizens.
The environmental impacts of the 1995 General Plan have been examined and compared with the
originally adopted'General Plan. The Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) previously prepared and
certified (Resolution No. 92-43) adequately addresses the environmental impacts associated with the 1995
General Plan. The 1995 General Plan will not result'in any new or more adverse environmental impacts
not already considered within the scope of the analysis contained the previously certified FEIR. In
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) an "Addendum" to the FEIR has been
prepared and is attached.
The 1995 General Plan contains all mandatory elements and legal contents required for adoption pursuant
to the California Govemment Code. The General Plan has been presented in the form of numerous
"draft" documents reflecting the input of the citizen based General Plan Advisory Committee, Planning
Commission, and City Council. The Plan has been a work in progress reflecting the layers of public
review. Attached to this report is a "clean" version of the last draft plan with the layers of revisions
removed. A clean copy of the General Plan will be used as an attachment to the adopting resolution.
2
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council, receive a presentation from City staff, open the public hearing,
receive testimony, close the public hearing, review the General Plan materials, approve the documents
and adopt Resolution Nos. 95-xx and 95-xx.
PREPARED BY:
James DeStefano
Community Development Director
attachments: - Planning Commission minutes from the April 10, 1995 meeting.
- Letter from Mr. Konrad Bartlam, City of Brea, dated November 28, 1994
- Letter from Mr. Dorian Johnson, Bramalea California, dated November 16,
regarding traffic issues.
- Final Environmental Impact Report Addendum
- Mitigation Monitoring Program
Draft Resolutions
Draft General Plan dated May 5, 1995
3
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
MAY 9, 1995
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Papen called the meeting to order
at 6:45 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 C/Ansari.
ROLL CALL: Mayor Papen, Mayor Pro Tem Werner,
Council Members Harmony and Ansari.
C/Miller was excused.
Also Present: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; Michael Montgomery,
Special Legal Counsel; George Wentz, City Engineer; James DeStefano,
Community Development Director and Tommye Nice, Deputy City Clerk.
Mayor Papen announced that Council Member Miller was attending another
meeting and would be arriving in approximately one hour.
2. PUBLIC HEARING:
(A) Resolution No. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR INCORPORATING RESOLUTION NO.
92-43 BY REFERENCE AND CERTIFYING THE ADEQUACY OF
THE ADDENDUM TO THE GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT AND MAKING FINDINGS THEREON PURSUANT
TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
(B) Resolution No. 95 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ADOPTING THE 1995 GENERAL
PLAN FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
CDD/DeStefano reported that development of the 1995 General Plan had
taken place over the past 1 1/2 years beginning with review by the Council -
appointed General Plan Advisory Committee. The Planning Commission
then held approximately 12 public hearings and the Council began detailed
deliberation of the document in January, 1995. The latest draft of the
General Plan, dated March 31, 1995, was distributed on April 7, 1995 for a
30 -day review by the public at the direction of the Council. The 30 -day
publicly -noticed review period incorporated documents available for
inspection, purchase or loan at City Hall and inspection at the Library.
Approximately 80 "clean copies" of the General Plan were provided to the
Council and the public using the City's mailing list. The "clean copy"
eliminated all overlays and included all current changes and corrections
directed by Council. The Planning Commission then reviewed four specific
items on April 10, 1995, as directed by Council and concurred with Council's
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 2
draft recommendations on all but one item. Regarding the South Pointe
Master Plan property, the Commission agreed with Council's verbiage for the
Planned Development proposed for the area with two exceptions. The first
was that the most sensitive property discussed within the Planned
Development area should be the eastern -most portion of the canyon. The
second difference was the Commission's suggestion that development of
Larkstone Park be in addition to the 30% set aside in Planned Development
as Open Space, meaning that of the 78 acre site, instead of about 23 acres
set aside for open space, incorporation of Larkstone Park (approximately 2
1/2 acres) would increase open space to approximately 26 acres. Regarding
PD 5, the 27 -acre Site D area located at Brea Canyon Rd. and D.B. Blvd.,
the General Plan allows for residential uses and, through a correction, staff
will indicate Council's desire for a designation of Public Facilities, Open
Space and Park for the property. The Planning Commission reviewed the
change and, by a split vote, recommended that Council incorporate a Public
Facilities designation for the entire property which is consistent with the
previous Commission recommendation for use of the property. In addition
to an .errata, staffs presentation included Council's decision-making-
involvement
ecision-makinginvolvement with respect to adoption of an addendum to the Environmental
Impact Report, as well as an Implementation & Mitigation Monitoring
Program for the Environmental Impact Report and General Plan. Regarding
the addendum, the Environmental Impacts of the 1995 General Plan were
examined -and compared with the originally -adopted 1992 General Plan. An
Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the 1992 General Plan which
addressed environmental impacts associated with the range of alternatives
considered within that document. An analysis was performed by the City's
consultant, Cotton\ Beland Assoc., Inc. regarding the environmental impacts
of the 1995 General Plan. The conclusion was that the 1995 General Plan
would not result in any new or more adverse environmental impacts that
were not already considered within the scope of analysis contained in the
previously certified EIR. In accordance with the State Environmental Quality
Act, an addendum to the previously certified EIR was prepared and attached.
The addendum does not require public review. The Implementation &
Mitigation Monitoring Program is a combined document. Upon adoption of
the General Plan, implementation begins. In addition, as a result of
discussions contained in the General Plan, the next step for the City would
be to create improved Hillside Management Ordinances, Tree Preservation
Ordinances, Subdivisions, etc. The Mitigation Monitoring Program sets forth
all strategies contained within the General Plan and timing and responsibility
for oversight to insure implementation of all strategies. Staff received four
letters since publication of the packet on Friday, May 5, 1995: 1)
WN.U.S.D., dated April 26, 1995 and received on May 1, 1995, provided
suggestions for Planned Development Areas 4 and 5; 2) Calif. Dept. of
Transportation dated May 1, 1995 suggesting that, in future development
projects, the City look into development impact fees for public facilities such
as the freeway system; 3) Dept. of Conservation dated May 8, 1995,
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 3
indicating that there is an oil exploratory area either within or adjacent to the
City, known as the Tonner Canyon Shell Oil area, and that if any
development were to take place at any future date in that area, there is a set
of guidelines and procedures that must be followed with regard to capping
wells, etc; 4) Boy Scouts of America dated May 5, 1995 indicating that
Edward Jacobs and Tom Kolin of that organization may speak on behalf of
the Chairman of the Boy Scouts of America, L.A. Area Council.
With respect to revisions and errata, CDD/DeStefano presented the
following: On Page 1-17 of the Land Use Element, there is a discussion of
Planned Development Areas 2, 3 and 4. In a letter included in the packet,
Bramalea suggested minor changes to the description for Planned
Development Area 2. Bramalea correctly pointed out that within Planned
Development Area 2, the description of the site requires amendment; that
the 75 acres of Sub Area B is located of Pantera Park; that the 2 acre
area discussed in this Planned Development located at D.B. Blvd. and Gold
Rush Dr. should be noted as being at the southeast corner of those two
streets; the last sentence should conclude by stating that lot sizes would
range from 6,000 to 10,000 square feet. Regarding Planned Development
Area 5, he pointed out that while the text indicates that the land uses
appropriate for the site include five units per acre residential land use,
Council asked that land uses incorporating Public Facilities, Open Space
and Park be incorporated into that Planned- Development Area.
On Page 1-18, Specific Plan Area 1, under Strategy 1.6.3, second paragraph,
subsection (a) beginning with the words "Facilities appropriate for this site..."
should be deleted. r I
Regarding Table 1-3, Page 1-25, the top third of the table refers to Land Use
Designations, Residential Designations and follows with a Subtotal.
Reading from left to right, the Subtotal Gross Acres in the City is 5,884 and
the Total Gross Acres should read 5,884. The bottom quarter of Table 1-3
indicates "Other Designation" under Water, the Total Gross Acres total 21
instead of 19. On Table 1-3, Other Designations "Open Space" Gross Acres
in the City should be 55$ and therefore, Total Gross Acres should also read
51L Private Recreation is listed as 58 acres and should be changed to
read: 15 with the Total Gross Acres also indicating J5. Total Gross Acres
under Other Designations, "Agriculture" should read 3,589 and not zero (0).
The final totals on the page are correct.
Regarding Table 1-4, Page 1-26, a revised table was provided. The dwelling
unit discussion in the Residential Land Use classification was split.
Therefore, the table under the "Land Use" heading currently reads:
"Residential." Lines were added to read "City" and "Sphere." Reading from
left to right, corrections are as follows: Existing Units/Sq. Ft. for Residential
is 17,813 Dwelling Units; Potential Additional is 1,205; Expected Total
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 4
Development is 19,018; and Population at General Plan Buildout is 58,000.
The next line for the Sphere of Influence would read: Existing Units 0;
Potential Additional Units 1,800; Expected Total Development 1,800;
Population at General Plan Buildout 5,500. Totals remain unchanged.
With respect to Page 1-27, Land Use Map, at the western most boundary of
the City west of Brea Canyon Rd., west of the 57 Fwy. at the terminus of
Pathfinder Rd., there is a public park below Pathfinder. Above Pathfinder,
in a small notation, is Private Recreational. This designation is incorrect.
It is a graphic error and should be restated as Open Space. This
designation is consistent with Council's previous direction for the two open
space areas that exist on either side of the Pathfinder Homeowners Assn.
property.
Referring to Page II -9 and II -10 of the Housing Element, changes to Table
II -3 were provided to Council. Council's requested update of these tables
includes statistics through March, 1995. The Church of Christ in Pomona,
the Pomona Women's Fellowship Home Site, Pomona and the Elsie
Manning Friend in Need Service Center, Pomona no longer provide area
homeless facilities and services. The Catholic Charities Brother Miguel
Center of Pomona was added to the list (includes Target Groups Low
income families and Facility/ Service Provide shelter, vouchers. food and
referrals). On Table 11-3, Page II -9, Pomona Valley Shelter, the number of
beds was changed from 22 per night to i. Families can be serviced. Under
Pomona Neighborhood Center, # Beds should read: 170+. Under Dept. of
Social Services, Pomona, Facility/Service should read: "Homeless
assistance is provided at S30/night. 16 days maximum." The Beta Center
should be corrected to state under Facility/Service: "7 day emergency food
supply for each family member is added. On Page II -10, Table II -3, the
Women's & Family Crisis Center Social Services, Pomona # Beds should be
changed to: 32 each in two shelters and Facility/Service is corrected by
adding the following: "SHELTERS ARE IN LOS ANGELES." Bienvenidos
Children Center, Inc., West Covina, # Beds should indicate 4f and the
EMERGENCY SHELTER is actually located in Altadena.
At the end of Table II -3, "Source:" should be shown as Cotton/
Beland/Assoc., March 1995.
The text of the first paragraph on Page II -10 was changed to reflect the table
just discussed.
Regarding Table II -4, Page II -14, the following changes were noted: under
Low Density Residential classification the Acres under Vacant Land should
be changed to Z2 and the DU's to M for a Unit Total of 2_fk instead of 140.
The TOTALS for the table are changed to read as follows: Acres 1.827.7;
DU's 1.331; and Unit Total 1,471.
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 5
In response to M/Papen, CDD/DeStefano responded that the document
currently states 1,205 DUs under Vacant Land and the total should be
corrected to 1,331 as provided by Cotton/Beland based upon the latest
mathematical calculations of development opportunity and application of
density and; therefore, the number of dwelling units that may be created on
those vacant areas. The number may change as the discussion of Land Use
and Housing Element concludes.
Referring to Page III -5, Resource Management Element, the second
paragraph regarding the number of recreational areas should be corrected
as a result of proper clarification contained within Table III -1 on Page III -4.
The new first sentence follows: "Currently, within the City there is a total of
478.3 acres of recreational facilities, including 414 acres of developed
parkland and 997 acres of undeveloped parkland for a total of 142.4 acres of
City owned park land."
With respect to Page V-22, Circulation Element, he recommended that the
fourth line of the first paragraph be changed to read: 'The City of Industry
is considering the development of the area beyond the terminus of Sunset
Crossing Road, Beaverhead Drive, Washington Street and Lycoming Street
with industrial uses and at waste -to -rail materials recovery facility" and the
rest of the sentence should be eliminated. In addition, the next sentence
should be eliminated. It now reads: 'The area through which these streets
would be extended is presently undeveloped."
M/Papen stated that, in addition to the changes recommended by staff, the
following words should be eliminated from the, next sentence: 'The
extension of these streets and..." so that the sentence now reads: "The
proposed development of industrial uses would significantly increase the
volume of traffic along these residential streets and introduce a significant
number of trucks into these residential neighborhoods."
On Page V-23, sub -strategy (g) (4) Local funding; should be corrected to
read: "(g) (4) Local funding such as, Prop C or Redevelopment funds;"
Council concurred to adopt staffs recommended changes/corrections.
CDD/DeStefano stated that staff believed, through the course of
development of this General Plan, that the Council has a document
containing all of the mandatory elements and all of the legal contents
required for adoption pursuant to the California Government Code.
M/Papen suggested the following changes/additions/corrections:
Introduction, Page 1, third paragraph, second sentence, capitalize ]2iamond;
Housing Element Page II -2, Paragraph 1 and Paragraph 4, change 1994 to
1995; Housing Element, Page II -4; Resource Management Element, Page
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 6
III -4, Table III -1, insert the number of parking spaces for the D.B. Golf
Course, the Little League Park and The Country Estates Park; Table III -1,
Page III -4, itemize local school recreational facilities i.e., tennis courts, etc.;
Circulation Element, Page V-12, b. Paratransit Services, correct the
paragraph to reflect the current "Diamond Bar Dial a Cab" service in place
of Dial -a -Ride and change the last sentence to read: 'Transportation is
provided within 10 miles of the City limits at a reduced rate; Paragraph V-24,
Strategy 1.1.7 was previously deleted by the Council because it was
redundant with the previous Strategy 1.1.5. In error, Strategy 1.1.6 was
deleted. Therefore, Strategy 1.1.7 should read as follows: "Encourage
Orange and San Bernardino Counties to fund and construct an
environmentally sensitive transportation corridor through Soquel Canyon
and/or Carbon Canyon;" Public Services and Facilities, Page VI -2,
Paragraph 1, change the third sentence to read 'The City has established
a system for collection of solid waste;" Page VI -2, Paragraph 8, delete the
last phrase "although the statewide drought makes the long-term supply of
water to this area questionable;" Page VI -2, Paragraph 11, change to -read:
"Other services within Diamond Bar include branch office postal services
administered in Pomona, MTA, Foothill Transit and OCTA bus system§,
Walnut -Diamond Bar YMCA, and Seniors organization;" Page VI -3,
Paragraph 7, first sentence, delete "continuation of the" so the sentence
reads: "Although local water purveyors can adequately serve the area in
terms of facilities, a Statewide drought could put severe restrictions on the
availability of water;" Page VI -3, Paragraph 8, second sentence change to
read: "The City should take a more active role in energy conservation and
the implementation of new energy technologies;" Page VI -4, GOAL 1,
change to read: "Consistent with the Vision Statement, provide adequate
infrastructure facilities and public services to support development and
planned growth."
Responding to MPT/Werner regarding Existing Noise Contours Map, Figure
IV -3 on Page IVA 6, Public Health & Safety Element, CDD/DeStefano stated
that the graphics are based upon an analysis performed over the course of
development of this Plan and reflect the conditions at the time of the
analysis. With traffic increases and other noise sources that may impact
D. B., those numbers may change. Objective 1.10 and subsequent
Strategies refer to reviewing and revising standards with respect to noise
generators that would have impacts upon the City, as well as improving
development standards so that the receptors of noise would be protected.
The material contained within the graphic is accurate as of the time the
information was obtained.
M/Papen opened the Public Hearing.
Wilbur Smith, 21630 Fairwind Ln., stated thet regarding Page II -3, numbers
should reflect the current situation. In the Circulation Element, Page V-22,
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 7
he indicated that Strategy 1. 1.4 should reflect that the easterly portion of the
Sphere of Influence is outside SEA 15.
Responding to Mr. Smith, M/Papen referred him to Sub -strategy (c). Mr.
Smith requested that the map reflect this statement.
C/Miller arrived at 7:40 p.m.
Responding to C/Harmony, Mr. Smith stated the basic problem was not to
have a road through Tonner Canyon and SEA 15 in particular. He indicated
the language in the General Plan could be more specific if the easterly
portion referred to in Strategy 1.1.4 is defined as being outside SEA 15.
In response to M/Papen, Don Cotton stated that under b. Housing Stock
Characteristics, Page II -3, the average resale value of $312,324 for 1991
being up 2.7 percent from 1990 was for a four bedroom home. M/Papen
requested that sentence 5 be changed to include "four bedroom home" so
that the sentence reads: "A review of resale house price date from the
California Market -Data Cooperative (CMDC) in Diamond Bar indicates an
average resale value of a four bedroom home of $312,324 for 1991 which
was up 2.7 percent from a value of $304,000 for 1990."
Max Maxwell, 3211 Bent Twig Ln., agreed with Mr. Smith regarding Page V-
22 of the Circulation Element. He indicated the Resolution number is blank
on the EIR form and asked what the number would be.
M/Papen responded that the Resolution Number will be assigned by the
Clerk at the time it is adopted.
Mr. Maxwell further stated that the Council will be costing the City another
$50,000 to $100,000 if the Council does not put this General Plan, along
with GPAC's initiative on the ballot. The initiative has been filed and,
therefore, according to law 65360 regarding general plans, referring to a
statement that says "any plan that is under consideration that any land
development or any approval by the Council of an issue that is not in
accordance with any plan...", the Council will be breaking the law because
the GPAC intended to put their initiative on the ballot and it is under
consideration even though the Council might pass the General Plan tonight.
There being no further testimony offered, M/Papen closed the Public
Hearing.
M/Papen stated she is not a traffic engineer or a geologist and that she
hesitated to put a line on a map with respect to the question of Strategy 1.1.4
and SEA 15 as raised by Mr. Smith. Technical studies regarding the area
have not been completed. She believed it is the intent of both the Planning
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 8
Commission and the Council unanimously to, as much as possible, avoid
disturbance of Tonner Canyon and SEA15 to preserve the wildlife corridor
and also allow for the possibility of a regional bypass that would relieve the
City's streets from outside traffic.
CDD/DeStefano displayed Figure 1-1 describing existing land uses in the
City's planning area. He pointed out the demarcation for SEA 15 and where
it is located within the City's area. Also contained within the Land Use
Element is the proposed land use plan indicating a demarcation for SEA 15.
According to the text of the Circulation Element, Strategy 1.1.5, Page V-23,
which is very specific, there are a series of requirements for any future road
consideration, one of which is avoiding the disruption of SEA 15. If there is
going to be a roadway, it is going to be within the eastern most portion of the
Sphere of Influence avoiding disruption of SEA 15.
MPT/Werner stated that this is the same drawing that was brought before
the Council months ago and in his opinion, what Mr. Smith is suggesting is
not that difficult. He suggested that Strategy 1. 1.4 (c) be changed to read:
"Avoiding SEA 15."
CM/Belanger responded that the City could avoid SEA 15 and still disrupt
SEA 15.
M/Papen asked if any Council Member objected to deleting "disruption of
from Strategy 1.1.4 (c) so that it reads: "Avoiding SEA 15". Seeing no
objection, staff was directed to make the change.
M/Papen suggested the following changes/additions/corrections: Page 1-12,
Strategy 1.1.6, correct the second sentence to read: "This designation also
includes lands which may have been restricted to open space by map
restriction, deed (dedication condition covenant and/or restriction), or by an
Open Space Easement pursuant to California Government Code (CGC),
Section 51070 et seq. and Section 64499 et seq;" Page 1-15, Strategy 1.5.3,
correct the first sentence to read: "Land designated as Open Space by deed
(dedication. condition. covenant. and/or restriction) by open space easement
(CGC Section 51070 et seq) or by map restriction (explicit or previous
subdivision) must comply with an established review and decision making
process prior to the recision, term;nation, abandonment and/or removal of
an open space dedication easement and/or restriction;" Page 1-23, F. LAND
USE PLAN, 1. Land Use Designations, second paragraph, correct the
number of land use designations from 16 to 18;" Page 1-23, F. LAND USE
PLAN, 2. Land Use Intensity/Density, correct the third sentence to read:
"Density is described in terms of dwelling units per gloss acre of land
(du/ac).
M/Papen opened the Public Hearing with respect to the Land Use Element.
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 9
Edward C. Jacobs, President, L.A. Area Council, Boy Scouts of America,
stated the Boy Scouts seek the same density designation as always under
L.A. County and an unbiased perspective so that the property's use is not
predetermined prior to formulation of a specific plan. The Scouts are
concerned with language in the current version of the General Plan requiring
that any future development in the Specific Plan area will have to "create
fiscal benefits for the City". Further, the Scouts were concerned that the
language encouraged a predetermined use for the property, a use which
must create fiscal benefits. Eliminating this phrase will maintain consistency
with other portions of the Land Use Element and will reinforce unbiased
perspective toward the Specific Plan designation. He presented Council
with the Scout's specific wording for the General Plan.
M/Papen acknowledged the following WVUSD Board members: Christine
McPeak, President; Carol Herrera, Larry Redinger and Marsha Sykes.
Ronald Hockwalt, Superintendent, WVUSD, asked to expand upon the letter
dated April 26, 1995 to the Council which addressed concerns regarding the
Land Use Element; Page 1-17, (d) Planned Development Area 4, formerly the
RNP property. The current language is too restrictive. The Board requested
that the Council drop reference to dwelling units since the school district has
no interest in residential development in this area. Second, the Board would
like the Council to expand the language to include commercial to public
facilities and open space. Third, the language from the Planning
Commission seems very restrictive to the Board. The school district is on
record supporting a minimum of 30 percent of the 78 acres as open space
and preserving the canyon. The district stands by these positions but finds
the Planning Commission recommendation still too restrictive. With respect
to Page 1-17 (e) Planned Development Area 5, also known as Site D, the
Board felt that current language did not provide enough flexibility. The
Board requested that the Council expand the language to include public
facilities, recreational and commercial land uses. As in the past and
throughout discussion over the last several years, the district is requesting
greater flexibility including a mixed land use pallet under the umbrella of
Planned Development. The district requested that the Council incorporate
these changes into the General Plan prior to adoption.
Don Schad stated that, in his opinion, had the first General Plan been put
into effect, this would be a much more peaceful City and a lot nicer to live in.
If the present General Plan goes through, instead of the citizens' plan, then
the City's natural resources will be gone with no chance to replace what
most of the citizens moved here for in the first place. Sandstone Canyon
and Tanner Canyon will be gone forever. Map and deed restrictions were
placed on some tracts for a variety of reasons. The GPAC recommended
that any land designations be modified or changed only by a vote of the
people, especially those citizens who would be impacted the most by lifting
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 10
those restrictions. Many real estate transactions were done with the promise
that adjoining open space areas will never be developed. The housing
density factor will impact open areas. GPAC approved between 600 and
700 new homes to be allowed before the City is built out. This will also
reflect a certain amount of traffic increase as a result cf over building. The
City's traffic problems are severe now. Why compound the problem with
greater density. As all of the easy areas are now developed, the trend
seems to go after the wooded stream fed canyons and hills. Once again, the
GPAC committee and citizens have been ignored. The rezoning of key
environmentally sensitive areas for more commercial was also a "no" by
GPAC and citizens but the power of three changed all of that again and with
35 to 40% vacancy in D.B., it doesn't dictate destroying hills, canyons and
existing neighborhoods just to create more vacancies. The "no vote"
regarding Tonner Canyon was an adamant effort and if a roadway was ever
built in Tonner Canyon, the net result would impact D.B. very severely
through increased traffic, smog and noise - noise factors exceeding the
standards in the General Plan and opening the way. for massive
development plus the total destruction of the last major wilderness area in
L.A. County. The Council of three promised the General Plan would be
placed on the ballot; Based on past performance, this is the last chance for
the Council to keep at least one promise to all citizens.
Carolyn Elfelt, 21119 Silver Cloud Dr., indicated that she was present to
support the school district's request for use of its D.B. properties. In April,
she attended an EdSource Conference during which the goals for national
education by the year 2000 were discussed. WVUSD has achieved the
goals or has the processes in place to attain them. According to the State
Superintendent of Public Instruction, Calif. funding will be spent to improve
areas in which the district is already strong. During the conference,
business leaders emphatically stressed that in order to be ready for the next
century, students will have to know as much technology as possible.
Technology costs money. Therefore, the value of the school district's
property, as determined by the General Plan, will affect the district's ability
to provide technology in its schools. She asked the Council to please allow
the district the flexibility it needs to have as many options as possible in the
use of its property in order to better meet the needs of the students.
Wilbur Smith requested that Page 1-10, Strategy 1.1.1 (f) contain language
indicating all of the units within this category are to be used for the purpose
of satisfying the State requirements of 20.0 dwelling units per gross acre.
Regarding (g) under Strategy 1.1.1, Page 1-11, he asked that the Council
define the number of domestic units per acre as a function of the average
slope calculation. Regarding Page 1-12, Strategy 1.1.6, he did not
understand why residences are allowed in an open space area. In his
opinion, if its open space, there should be no residences. With respect to
Page 1-12, Strategy 1.1.10, residences are allowed under the Agricultural
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 11
(AG) designation. In his opinion, these statements are allowing development
of Tonner Canyon and this is contrary to the Vision Statement of the General
Plan. He stated that Table 1-4, Page 1-26, indicates that Tonner Canyon and
the SEA 15 are targeted for development. He further stated that, in
modifications to the EIR, there is no indication that the Council is really
preparing to allow for development of the Sphere of Influence and SEA 15;
however, the words in the document state that is exactly what will occur and
this is a contradiction. He indicated that potential development of Tonner
Canyon and the SEA 15 is the reason there will be an effort to referend the
General Plan and to have an initiative which puts forth the citizens version
of the General Plan.
Max Maxwell stated that GPAC requested that parks and open space be
separated. He indicated that the City requires that five acres per 1000
residents be set aside for parks. The school district purchased property with
a promise to the Pathfinder Homeowners Assn. that they would preserve in
its entirety. The school district bought property with restrictions on it. He
stated that GPAC does not support the taxpayers paying .$1.4 million to have
commercial development on the school district property. GPAC wants the
General Plan to go to a vote of the people. SEA protection has been
overruled. Hundreds of homes are being built now, some of which are in the
back side of "The Country Estates."
Jan Dabney, representing D&L Properties, Inc. and SASAK, Inc., asked that
both properties remain in the current zoning as set forth by the Planning
Commission and forwarded to the Council at the last meeting. The DBL,
Property is proposed to be Rural Residential (RR) and SASAK Corp. is
presently processing a map for the May 6, 1995 Council agenda. He stated
that he has heard "The citizen's General Plan" for six years. These issues
were widely discussed at GPAC and very few of the controversial land use
issues were a landslide vote in either direction. Much of the language and
much of the consideration given in the Mission Statement was widely
discussed and not everyone was in agreement. The majority ruled, as it
should be. There has been a representation that each GPAC committee was
100% in agreement with everything that came out of GPAC. Over the last
three General Plans, the public has heard, on each occasion, that that
General Plan, is the best General Plan and that it is the "citizen's General
Plan." On two of the occasions, the General Plan has come out with
theoretically the same citizens group, substantially modified. He stated that
when he, as a professional engineer, hears terms put forth such as "a road
through Tonner Canyon is going to increase the traffic impact in the City of
D. B." which has currently ground to a stop and business people cannot get
their cars into sites because of the pass-through traffic, he finds such
statements a travesty. He further stated he is not advocating a highway
through Tonner Canyon, but it needs to be reviewed. If a highway can be
kept out of the SEA area, obviously it should be. He indicated that lack of
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 12
a traffic corridor is what is killing this community. He stated that, in his
opinion, the reason the corridor has not been approved to this date is that
this City has taken six years to approve a General Plan while every
surrounding community has built out their community and dropped traffic
onto Grand Ave. Without having some instrument allowing the City to work
in concert with other communities, the City is currently suffering the
consequences.
Terry Birrell stated that the GPAC General Plan respected map restrictions
on the 400 acres off of Grand Ave. and Summitridge Dr. and map restrictions
on the school district property. She further stated that map restrictions were
placed on the property through the developer's negotiations with L.A. County
because of density transfers which occurred years ago. For the City to
incorporate and then lift those restrictions seemed immensely unfair. She
continued that Mrs. Elfelt indicated that the school district needs money to
educate children. She agreed with that statement but wondered why the
district speculated with $1.5 million of taxpayers dollars. The district bought
property with restrictions on it which had been purchased only three years
earlier for less than $100,000. The district speculated that it could force a
change. She deplored the waste of taxpayers dollars. She encouraged the
Council to respect the designations placed on the land by GPAC and L.A.
County. The Council indicated that its changes to the GPAC plan are in the
interest of economic development for the City. She pointed to an article from
the Wall Street Journal which concludes thel in Europe, helped by greenbelt
regulations, Europe's town centers prosper. She suggested that if the City
is truly looking for economic development in an appropriate manner, that the
City consider what is being created and that the City not be used merely as
a pass through. She requested the Council to be more respectful of the
GPAC version of the General Plan and put both versions on the ballot and
let the citizens voices be heard.
Ken Anderson stated he would like to see an open forum so that all sides
could be considered prior to closing the Public Hearing.
There being no further testimony offered, M/Papen closed the Public
Hearing.
RECESS: M/Papen recessed the meeting at 8:45 p.m.
RECONVENE: M/Papen reconvened the meeting at 8:55 p.m.
WPapen referred the Council to the Boy Scouts' request regarding Page I-
12, Strategy 1.1.9, last paragraph stating the Boy Scouts have requested the
language be changed to: "At such time as development might be proposed,
r�uire formulation of a specific plan pursuant to the provisions of
Government Code Section 65450 for the Sphere of Influence The formation
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 13
of a future specific plan should incorporate provisions to protect existing
resources while minimizing future adverse impacts to both the human and
natural environment of the City as well as the region (see Strategy 1.1.4 of
the Circulation Element)."
MPT/Werner stated that Mr. Smith raised the issue of SEA 15 and the
question of contradiction between what the General Plan is stating in terms
of preservation of the SEA and suggesting that the property is developable.
He further stated that his comments addressed the Boy Scout property, as
well as all of the properties in the Sphere of influence area. He asked the
City Attorney what purpose is served by designating anything for properties
outside of the City which are currently subject to L.A. County zoning and
could be subjected to a zoning initiative through the County. He continued
that, in his opinion, the residents who are asking for the City's absolute
control of the open space should be directing their concerns to the Board of
Supervisors. Specifically, where does the City's control come from in
designating these properties outside of the City and what does the City
accomplish.
SC/Montgomery stated that the original purpose of the Sphere of Influence
was to ask the communities that were incorporated to work with the
surrounding areas to plan them in a harmonious concept so that if and when
annexation occurred, those areas would readily be assimilated into the
surrounding city to which they adjoin or to which they have been assigned
by the County. Long term planning by the County envisions that they will not
be able to provide public services to isolated pockets. The duty of the
Council, .under the planning act and through the Land Use Element, has a
duty to address the unincorporated areas that abut the City and that are in
the Sphere of Influence and give the residents in the unincorporated areas
an idea of what would be acceptable to the City should they choose to pass
the annexation petition.
MPTfWerner continued that the City has no authority to zone the property
unless the property was annexed to the City.
SC/Montgomery responded that while this is true, the City's designation is
persuasive to the regional planner. L.A. County created the SEA 15
designation and it overlays the Agricultural (AG) zoning of the property. He
further stated that the Boy Scouts would have a difficult time changing the
zoning if the City endorses the Agricultural (AG) zoning on the Sphere of
Influence.
MPT/Werner suggested that if, under County zoning, the Boy Scouts were
to sell the property under AG zoning to a developer and the developer
proposes to build 2 acre ranchettes. Under current zoning, if the City were
to designate the property anything other than 2 acre ranchettes, would L.A.
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 14
County be in a position to approve 2 acre ranchettes.
SC/Montgomery responded affirmatively by stating that the regional planner
is going to look at how the Sphere of Influence has been treated by the City
for zoning in the General Plan. The County cannot arbitrarily and politically
bypass zoning. Whatever is done by the City regarding the Sphere of
Influence will have a great deal of impact at the County level.
MPT/Werner stated that the Boy Scout property was targeted for acquisition
by the Joint Powers of Authority. Would the City's designation of land use
on that property have any influence on the fair market value of the property.
SC/Montgomery responded that obviously, it would and if the Boy Scouts
can show that their property was depressed simply because the
Conservancy planned to acquire it, the Boy Scouts would be able to secure
other zoning. If the Boy Scouts cannot show that it should have been
changed and all of the reasonable planners say that is what the zoning
should have been, then that is what the fair market value would be even
though the Agricultural (AG) zoning under the County prevails.
MPT/Werner stated that a contradiction was alleged to exist and, in his
opinion, he did not see a contradiction. The property has some very
complex natural features, environmental conditions and political conditions
in terms of jurisdictions and perhaps other conditions influencing what, if
anything, will happen with the property in the future. The current General
Plan addresses a base line land use designation which identifies, as
required by State law, the appropriate land use density for the property
(1du/2ac). Other sections of the General Plan show this property to be a
significant ecological area under natural resources and rather than melding
this together with the land use designation, the General Plan overlays the
significant ecological area designation onto the land use designation and the
plan suggests that in some future development plan, the preservation
objectives stated under the SEA should be worked out compatibly with land
use objectives. He asked if this is a contradiction to which SC/Montgomery
responded that it is not because the City cannot anticipate what the
changing situation is going to be and the two designations can work together
to an end result deemed acceptable to the City and the developer in terms
of preservation of the SEA.
C/Harmony asked if there would be any adverse impact on the Boy Scout
property if it was designated Open Space Recreational rather than
Agricultural.
Responding to C/Harmony, SC/Montgomery stated that, as a matter of law,
a landowner is never entitled to more than the existing use. The trend is
toward reduction of entitlement. There is no right to gain a more
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 15
economically developable use. Therefore, the General Plan could indicate
a current use zoning.
MPT/Werner reiterated Ms. Birrell's reminder that the City's incorporation
application stated there would be no change to land use designations.
Responding to MPT/Wemer, C/Harmony stated the Council, without his vote,
created new designations for properties. He further stated that the promise
to the people is to keep the zoning on properties the same as it was through
the County. Specific Plans and Planned Developments pull protection out
of the General Plan. The school district is asking for commercial and those
aspects pre -suggest the idea of lifting map restrictions.
M/Papen restated the request by the Boy Scouts for the proposed change
of language as previously outlined.
It was moved by C/Ansari, seconded by MPT/Werner to retain the current
language for Strategy 1.1.9, Page 1-12.
MPTMlerner, responding to C/Harmony, stated that he sensed that
C/Harmony felt that a Specific Plan overlay had a negative connotation
because it leaves to the future some land use decisions. He offered that the
Specific Plan overlay as a well accepted planning tool, not only holds off
land use decisions to the future, it provides a better opportunity to bring
together all of the issues, objectives and goals of the entire. General Plan
document and the environmental impacts associated with projects and bring
them together in a complete design for the property. By eliminating the
Specific Plan overlay, a project is reduced to the Conditional Use Permit
process and the same level of control is not evident. The Specific Plan is a
legislative action which goes to Council and becomes ordinance.
C/Harmony indicated he thought that is what a development plan would
accomplish which is a better technique for future development of a project
so that the citizens have specific notice and can deal with a project. Specific
Plans allow for special agreement arrangements which gets very close to the
concept of spot zoning. He indicated he has problems with the technique of
Specific Plan and properties should be zoned as they currently are zoned
and when a land developer wants to develop a property the developer
comes forward, asks for amendments to the General Plan, if necessary, and
puts the plans on the table and everyone is notified. Until then, the
developer knows what the rules are and what obstacles need to be
overcome instead of upgrading the zoning now and not having anything to
show for it.
C/Ansari's motion carried 4-1 by the following Roll Call vote:
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 16
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Miller, MPT/Werner,
M/Papen
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Harmony
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
Regarding Planned Development Area 4, Page 1-17 (d), M/Papen stated that
there is a mixed ownership on this property with the City owning four acres
of freeway frontage property in the same PD -4 zone. Total acres should be
82 vacant acres with the City owning four acres and the school district
owning 78 acres. The Planning Commission asked that the General Plan
specify that the 30% set aside for open space not include Larkstone Park.
She suggested that the residential language be deleted and designate PD -4
to consist of public facilities, commercial offices, general commercial and
open space and add the word park.
Responding to M/Papen, CDD/DeStefano stated that with respect to the
school district property 78 acres, 23 1/2 acres would be set aside for open
space; two and one-half acres for Larkstone Park; 19 112 acres for
commercial, and 32 acres for public facilities.
Addressing Dr. Hockwalt, C/Harmony restated the school district's desire to
"protect their investment" and the property has been currently appraised at
$1.2 million. He asked Dr. Hockwalt how it would protect the district's
investment to upgrade the property to commercial.
Responding to C/Harmony, Dr. Hockwalt stated the property was appraised
at $3.5 million.
C/Harmony stated that his understanding of previous discussions was that
one-half of the property would remain as open space.
Dr. Hockwalt responded that discussions he has been involved in allowed
for 30% of the property being set aside as open space.
In response to C/Harmony, Dr. Hockwalt responded that the school district
has always wanted to preserve the entirety of Sandstone Canyon. In
addition, he indicated he did not view it as profit taking, he viewed it as
maintaining and managing the assets that the school district has.
C/Ansari, addressing Dr. Hockwalt, stated that she is appalled by the master
plan and the five Planned Development areas that are listed specifically.
She was not against the school district's general building. The General Plan
is specific as to what is allowed in the Planned Development areas. There
have been two referendums because of Planned Development and she felt
that the General Plan process should proceed. In her opinion, there is no
need to develop a master plan for each of these areas. She believed both
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 17
the GPAC version of the General Plan and the version of the General Plan
now before the Council should go on the ballot and let the community decide
what it wants. She is not in favor of another referendum. She further stated
that this designation grants entitlements.
M/Papen stated these designations do not grant entitlements.
C/Ansari continued that the perception of the community is that these
designations give entitlements. The language of the General Plan states
that a master plan shall be developed for each area of the City designated
as a Planned Development.
MPT/Werner, addressing C/Ansari, stated that there are no entitlements. An
entitlement is equal to a permit and once a permit is obtained, building can
begin. That does not happen from any aspect of the General Plan.
Entitlement is a very specific term. Perhaps some of the citizens need to
understand that this is not an entitlement, it is a General Plan. He indicated
he would like to see the General Plan less specific as was originally
intended, however, the people who are now opposed to the verbiage said
the General Plan was not specific enough. So now the City is at the point
where the General Plan is more specific; however, it is not an entitlement.
He stated he would not have a problem calling the Planned Development
areas 'Planned Preservation areas." It was his understanding that the
restrictions on the school district property are for residential dwelling units.
The school district is asking that the residential dwelling units be deleted
from -the land use designation so they are acquiescing to the restriction on
the property indicating they do not want the restriction. The City is now
asked to put in place "commercial." He was not aware of any commercial
restriction on the property. The school district is also saying they are going
to preserve 1/3 of the property in natural open space and the remaining 1/3
of the property in public facility. Those sound positive and consistent with
the planned preservation area. He believed that what the school district
requested is consistent with what has transpired over the past one and one-
half years with regard to this property.
SC/Montgomery stated that C/Werner was correct. The Land Use
designation is a threshold to the application of the permit. Application for
permit cannot be made if the Land Use designation does not permit the use
intended.
MPT/Werner continued that the General Plan is a foundation. The City is
not saying, through this General Plan, that something can or cannot be built.
It is a straightforward foundation toward the next step in the process and he
believed that it was what the State had in mind when it said that cities are
obligated to establish the land use principals that will allow a property owner
to come forward and ask for a reasonable use of their property. With that,
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 18
he indicated he would support the school district's request that is consistent
with everything being said by members of the community. He did not
suggest removing any restrictions from the property. If there is a restriction
on the property, the restriction remains.
M/Papen suggested the following wording for Page 1-17, (d) Planned
Development Area 4: "PD -4 consists of 82 vacant acres and is located west
of Brea Canyon Road, north of Peaceful Hills Road and south of South
Pointe Middle School. Land uses appropriate for this planned development
area would include commercial, park, public facilities and open space. A
minimum of 30% of the site will be set aside as open space, not including
parkland. The most sensitive portion of the site shall be retained in
permanent open space. The site plan shall incorporate the planning and site
preparation to accommodate the development of Larkstone Park of a
suitable size and location to serve the neighborhood as approved by the
City."
Motion by MPT/Werner, seconded by C/Miller to adopt M/Papen's language.
C/Harmony stated that he is in favor of the GPAC language which indicated
no development in Sandstone Canyon - 78 acres, no development - and to
allow 1/3,1/3 and 1/3 is a real corruption of that body's deliberation; that is
open space, it had reservations on it, the land was only worth $150,000
when Miller bought it. The school district bought it for $1,200,000. This is
profit taking all of the way and it should be open space and the -school
district has to stick with their investment.
M/Papen responded that one of the school board members mentioned to her
during the recess that one of the reasons they had to spend in excess of $1
million to acquire the property, which was worth $3 million, was because they
were going to lose $8 million in State funding because of the Council's
delays in 1993 in approving any kind of development on this property. In her
opinion, there is quality education in the WVUSD and the citizens want to
encourage that. It is unfortunate that school districts have to go into land
use planning in order to provide monies for education. However, if that is
what it takes to provide the quality of education long-term in this community,
she supports the school district 100%.
Following discussion, regarding Parlimentary Procedure and with consensus
of Council, the meeting continued.
C/Ansari questioned M/Papen's statement that the school district's project
was held up in 1993. At that time, it was part of the South Pointe Master
Plan. This item did not come before the Council again until the end of
March, 1994, when the school district requested a re -hearing. The district
was told at that time that they would have to begin grading in a couple of
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 19
weeks and she was surprised because during a meeting with Dr.
Hockwalt and Marsha Sykes on December 1, 1993, she was not told that
they would need grading in the second or third week of April, 1994. It was
brought before the Council the end of April, 1994, so it was rushed
through on a time line that she did not feel was explored enough. It was
held up because of the will of the people concerned about the South
Pointe Master Plan. She was not against builders building on their land.
She felt the Council should specify a master plan and if the Council wants
to call a master plan Open Space Area 1, Area 2, Area 3, Area 4 and
Area 5.
C/Ansari moved to rename Planned Development Area 4 to Qnen Space
Area 4 and replace current wording with the following language for
Strategy 1.6.1, (d) Page 1-17: "OS4 consists of 78 vacant acres and is
located west of Brea Canyon Road, north of Peaceful Hills Road and
south of South Pointe Middle School." No other language should be
incorporated and the people have so stated. The City should pass the
General Plan and then come back and amend the Plan for each
developer and each plot of land as it is presented.
C/Ansari's motion died for lack of a second.
C/Miller stated that C/Harmony's statement that he sold the property to
the school district is not true and he wants this issue cleared. He
indicated he does not have a problem calling this area "Planned
Preservation" and"leaving the text as written.
C/Miller amended MPT/Werner's motion to rename area 4 "Planned
Preservation Area" leaving all of the text as requested by the school
district. MPT/Werner agreed to the amendment.
MPTfWerner did not see any difficulty in doing what C/Ansari suggested
for Planned Development Area 4. The current language is more
restrictive whereas what C/Ansari suggested opens the door and makes it
less compatible and more contradictory to what the rest of the General
Plan states.
M/Papen stated that if the descriptive language is removed and the Plan
only identifies the number of acres and location, then the property owner
is allowed to come in with all 20 land uses from which to pick and choose
and the application could be for any land use.
Responding to M/Papen and MPT/Werner, CM/Belanger stated there
would be no restriction on what kind of application could be made. The
school district asked for a land use designation presuming the district
would be the applicant. However, some future landowner could submit an
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 20
application and ask that the land use mix be changed to something else.
Any property owner has a right to ask for anything and this particular
property owner has stated they would like it to be a certain way. But if a
future property owner comes in and says they want it to be 30 acres of
commercial and 50 acres of residential, they can ask for it no matter what
the General Plan states. The applicant can request a General Plan
amendment.
In response to C/Ansari, CM/Belanger stated that a General Plan
designation of Planned Development does not zone the property. If the
property owner came back to the City with a plan that is outlined here, at
the very least, they would have to subject themselves to a zone change
which means they would have to go through public hearing and it is all
subject to referendum - it is a legislative act. Anything that is done to any
property in a planning designation requires, at a minimum, a change in
zoning because you don't zone the property. The Plan is simply stating
these are categories. The property owner has to come back and say what
they want to do. The property is not being given an entitlement. The only
way the property can get an entitlement is to get zoning and specific
legislative approval by the Council to do something. The General Plan
does not do that. - -
MPT/Werner's motion carried 3-2 by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, MPT/Wemer, M/Papen
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
Staff was directed to change all Planned Development (PD) Area headings
to Planned Preservation Area (PP)".
M/Papen stated that regarding Strategy 1.6.1 (e), Page 1-17, the request by
the school district is to add the following language: "Land uses appropriate
for this site include public facilities, commercial offices and general
commercial." which includes deletion of the reference to single family land
use.
Motion made by MPT/Werner, seconded by M/Papen to amend the second
sentence of Strategy 1.6.1 (e) Planned Preservation Area 5 to read as
follows: "Land uses appropriate for this site include a maximum of five (5)
single family detached residential dwelling units per acre and public
facilities."
In response to C/Harmony, Dr. Hockwalt stated that the 28 acre parcel had
not been declared surplus property and if the school district wished to
declare it surplus, it would have to go through the necessary legal
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 21
procedures. In addition, if the property was declared surplus, it would have
to be offered for sale to other public agencies. Since the district is not
declaring the property surplus, it will not be offered for sale and the school
district can develop the property in order to follow through with the principles
of asset management.
Motion carried 3-2 by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, MPT/Werner, M/Papen
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
Motion made by MPT/Werner, seconded by C/Miller to adopt Resolution No.
95-20, Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar
incorporating Resolution No. 9243 by reference and certifying the adequacy
of the addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report and
making findings thereon pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
as amended. Motion carried 3-2 by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, MPT/Werner, M/Papen
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
Responding to M/Papen, SC/Montgomery stated that the General Plan can
be adopted for a limited period of time and put on the ballot as to whether it
should be continued or allowed to terminate at that time.
Motion by MPT/Werner to adopt Resolution No. 95-21 adopting the 1995
General Plan, with the Plan to remain in effect during the remainder of 1995.
Motion died for lack of a second.
Motion by M/Papen, seconded by C/Miller to adopt Resolution No. 95-21:
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopting the
1995 General Plan for the City of Diamond Bar as amended.
MPT/Werner asked what was the iptent with regard to the ballot measure
and if the ballot measure were to fail, what would be the status of the
General Plan.
M/Papen suggested adopting the General Plan and directing the City
Attorney to bring back options to the Council for discussion at the first
meeting in June.
SC/Montgomery explained that the way a ballot measure would be phrased
in the analysis is that it either terminates that day on a vote of the people or
it continues. Its called an "interim ordinance" and then it's put on the ballot
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 22
for the issue of "should it continue or not?" and you can phrase it either way.
You can say "should ordinance so and so of the General Plan be
continued?" or you can say "should ordinance so and so, General Plan, be
terminated?"
In response to MPT/Werner, M/Papen suggested that the Council wait for
a report from the City Attorney on the options available and the impacts of
doing it different ways.
MPT/Werner moved to amend M/Papen's motion with a supplemental
provision that adoption of the General Plan would extend for a period of 13
months from tonight unless it is voted upon to continue.
M/Papen indicated that she would not accept a substitute motion because
the proposal is not a friendly amendment.
MPT/Werner offered to amend his motion to extend the General Plan for 18
months if the ballot measure is approved.
SC/Montgomery reminded Council that when they indicate 18 months and
put the measure on the ballot and the voters vote against adoption, that's the
end of it.
MPTNVerner explained that he meant that between the time it's voted down
in November and the expiration of that 18 month period is the period of time
that the Council would then have to make the corrections.
SC/Montgomery suggested it would be more reasonable to indicate that
you're either adopting this for the next election or not.
M/Papen's motion failed by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, M/Papen
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS - MPT/Werner
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
It was moved by MPT/Werner, seconded by C/Miller to continue the Public
Hearing for two weeks.
Following discussion, MPT/Werner and C/Miller amended their motion to
continue to the Public Hearing until the next regular Council meeting on May
16, 1995.
MPT/Werner requested staff to provide more background on some of the
topics currently being discussed so that Council would be in a better position
next time.
MAY 9, 1995 PAGE 23
5. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to
discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m. to Tuesday, May 16, 1995
at 6:30 p.m.
Tommye Nice, Deputy City Clerk
ATTEST:
/Mayor
RE E1VED 06/13 17:45 1995 AT 613117 PACE 2 (PRINTED PAGE 2) 1
JUN -13-1995 17:10 COUNTY OF LDS ANGELES
COU'Itq of Los Angeles Public Library
7400 East 'rWarial Hwy.. P.O. Hox 7011, Ibwaeyr, CA 90241-7011
(3 i 0) 940.8461, TELEFAX (310) 803-3032
SMOPAF. AeUM
ca pm uWVAN
June 13, 1995
TO: City Managers
FROM: Sandra F, Reubet-
County Librarian
Sally FL Reed 4)4
Chief Adrdrdxn tive Officer
SUBJECT: CITY SUPPORT FOR LIB Y SERVICES
131033032 P.02i05
1 U--""
M n r=
In the County Library's May 19 report to City Managers, the status of the 1103.0 budget
outlook was outlined. The letter also identified a number of options which cities served by
the County of Los Angeles Public Library may want to consider, including the possibility of
allocating funds from City sources for library services.
The overall County financial WAcok remains essentially, unchanged. We do not ar>ticipate
the County Qeneral Fund to experience an uneopedW increase in revenue at year am, se
occurred last Year, a portion of which was used to
for 00 Cainly
Library, a special dietricL The County Library has not yP � on�� o
replace the annual $30 million lova of revenue aperienoed In 1993 when the State of
California shifted local properly tax to schools and eliminated the Special District
Augmentation Fund, both primary spurges of County Library financing. While the Hoard of
Supervisors has allocated substantial dollars each year thereafter to temporarly ameliorate
the situation, the Board will not have the resources to assist the •Library District with General
Fund monies in i 895-6 to the degree it has in the past. The County Ubrery faces the
Possibility of a $20 million reduction from the finding level provided In 1994-0B despite $10
million from the County General Fund Included In the 10sWN proposed budget. This is
$23.4 million below what is needed to ffwkt h current shoe levels In 199boa. These are
times when collaborallm among govwrenents MY pie a new model for fi wwft
services the pubic wants and needs, such as Itbraries. While the County Library's dedicated
share of prop" tax, around $90 million. remains available each year, It may now be
necessary for tiro cities served to help finance County libraries in their cities, while the Hoard
finances libraries In the unincorporated areas.
�r
r -
c'7
In considering the budget difficulties facing the Library DLswct, the Board of Supervisors
Instructed us to contact the mayor end qty manager of each city served by tits County
Public Library to determine if the city is irltereeted In — and capable of — ossuming all or part
of the operating responsibility for the library or libraries serving that city. Attached is a copy
of the minutes from the Board of Supervisors' discussion on this molter.
Serving t% W*CCrporatod area 0( 1-06 Argdos County ab Dn abn d: ftg= H% . Anae4 ■ ^dlo f , R,, Il a r�wtc 8r Bal OArdn+a 9erlkw+or
PA -=a Ekwh�Hkb M ■, G 'y �W �' • DWI" d Bw . pinto ■ g k6ft . Garden . Hen pad" . Hawth�x v •
Ftunlington Park LA C ok Fkwogo a LA Hobtzi FiIVA ■ Lakewood ■ LA Nlrada . Laneaeter • La Pwnte • . La Veme
•Lawndale • U m in ■ Ly, vxzd ■ rvtObu ■ I
San Fernando San Gdhrid 3anla Clarity . Monte So • AAontatbb • Werwak • Paran+ount - Pko tiiwra . Ftoaamoad • 3an ob; r�os •
Ga*o ■ Tarn* Cly • wWMA • Wat Covina 8 YUYat Holywood . waAWkV VRaga
C RECEIVED 06/13 17:45 1995 AT 613117 PAGE 3 (PRINTED PAGE 3) 1
JUN -13-1995 17:11 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 13108033032 P.03/05
City Moaners
June 19, 1906
Page 2
We recognize that there will be a number of unresolved Issues regarding your olty assuming
some financial responsibility for the operation of library services. However, at this point we
aro merely wWioring wha#wr or not there is any Interast by your olty in pumuing this matter
further. We apologize for the short notice on this request. However, the Board has
requa dod a report back from the County Ubrary end the Chist Adrninistrativ�e t�flios WbNn
three weeks. Thar9fore, we wotdd appradae a response from your qty on this matter by
Friday, June 23.
Should you have any questions, plea* phone your LAXWy RegkwW AdminhMVjor, Mar+garsl
Wong at (310) 94448409, or DWW mint, AsskWd Director, Famm and Planning at (310)
940-8408. We all share a common god of keeping, reliable quafity library servtos available
to the people.
SFR:SRR:jaim
Attachment
c: City Mayom
Each Supervisor
Board Lialsons
6cWAve Oflloer, Board of Supervisors
C RECEIVED 06/13 17:45 1995 AT 613117 PAGE 4 (PRINTED PAGE 4) 1
JUN -13-1995 17 11 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 131 2 P.04/05
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPeRVISORS
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Joanne Sturges, Ema" Meer
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
383 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration
Los Angeles. California 90012
RECEIVED
Chief Administrative Officer .jux 2 �gg5
vs Public Librarian
At its meeting held June 6, 1995, the Board took the following action:
73
Supervisor Antonovich made the following statement:
"Over the past several years, the Los Angeles County Public
Library has been decimated by funding cuts. at the State level which
eliminated nearly half of its $" million annual budget. in
response to these reductions, the County Librarian was forced to first
recommend closure of ten library outlets. Subsequently, the District
had to reduce hours of operation at a" of its 87 remaining branches to
just two to four days per week, seven hours per day.
"Last year, this Board allocated approximately $22 million from
the General Fund to.the Public Library, enabling the restoration of
library hours to 1992-93 levels. However, -the budget deficit facing
this County for Rscal Year 1995-96 makes a similar transfer unlikely
and leads to the very real possibility that numerous County Public
Library branches will have to be closed for lack of funds.
"More than 50 of the 87 County Public Library outlets are located
within Incorporated cities. and many of these cities have conVWted
the County about either sharing, through a joint powers authority,
or assure In total the management responsibility for those
libraries t 1fth serve their residents.
(Continued on Page 2)
M
R
I RECEIVED 96/13 17:16 1995 AT 613117 PAGE 5 (PRINTED PAGE 5) 1
JUN -13-1995 17 12 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 13108033032 P.05i05
Syn. 73 (Continued)
"in this period of severe w6rumnic constraint, it is vital that
we explore every poterrtial avenue that will snablee us to continue
to provide the same level of service, Including open librarian, to
County residents."
Sandra F. Reuben, County Librarian, addressed the Board.
After disoussbn, on motion of Supervisor Antonovich, seconded by
Supervisor YaroWw"ky, unanimously carried (Supervisor Dana being absent),
the Chief Administrative Officer and the County Librarian war@ kmoucted to
contact the Mayor and the City Manager of each City served by the County
Library District, to detemOns those Cities' interest in and desire to assume
all or part of the operating responsibility for the library(:) within their City;
and report back to the board with the various responses within three weeks.
50006.2.com
Copies distributed:
Each Supervisor
County Counsel
-2-
TOTAL P.05
CITY OF DIAMOND DAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO. `^
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995 REPORT DATE: June 9, 1995
FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director
Kellee A. Fritzal, Administrative Assistant
TITLE: EXTENSION OF CONTRACT WITH CAROL A. DENNIS FOR MINUTE
SECRETARY SERVICE
SUMMARY: In October, 1994, the City distributed Requests for Proposals (RFP) for Minute Secretary
Services. A contract was awarded to Carol A. Dennis for Minute Secretary Services for the
Planning and Traffic and Transportation Commission Meetings. The City has a one year
renewal option for the extension of that contract. Based upon the quality of service and
performance of Carol A. Dennis, Staff desires to utilize the one year renewal option.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to extend for one year
the agreement with Carol A. Dennis for the Planning and Traffic and Transportation
Commission meetings for $14,000 for the period of July 1, 1995 to June 30, 1996.
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?
_ Yes X No
Which Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report?
X Yes —No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
Public Works/Engineering
REVIEWED BY:
-Tlk-
Tkrence L. Belana Frank M. Usher James DeStefano
City Manager Assistant City Manager Community Development Director
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: June 20, 1995
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: EXTENSION OF CONTRACT TO CAROL A. DENNIS FOR MINUTE SECRETARY
SERVICE
ISSUE STATEMENT:
Should the City extend the Agreements for contract Minute Secretary Services Planning and Traffic and
Transportation Commission Meetings?
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to extend for one year the agreement with
Carol A. Dennis for the Planning and Traffic and Transportation Commission meetings for $14,000 for the period
of July 1, 1995 to June 30, 1996.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
The funding would be from the department's Professional Services accounts, which have been budgeted in the
proposed 1995/96 Budget:
Community Development - (001-4210-4000) $11,000
Public Works/Engineering- (001-4553-4000) $ 3,000
BACKGROUNDIDISCUSSION:
Since December, 1990 the City has retained the services of a contract minute secretary for various Council,
Commission and special meetings. The retention of an minute secretary allows the clerical staff the opportunity
to more efficiently and effectively perform their duties.
In August 1994, the City prepared and distributed a Request for Proposal and distributed to all parties who have
expressed an interest to the City or who have previously prepared transcribed minutes, in addition a copy of the RFP
was placed on the City's front counter. Four people responded. Two people were retained.
Carol A. Dennis was retained in October, 1994 for Planning and Traffic and Transportation Commission Meetings.
The services she has supplied have been of excellent quality and in a timely fashion. Based upon the quality of
work and performance of Carol A. Dennis it is Staffs recommendation to extend the Agreement for a period of one
year.
Prepared by:
Kellee A. Fritzal
June 20, 1995
Carol A. Dennis
23246 Antler Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Re: AGREEMENT FOR MINUTE SECRETARY SERVICE - PLANNING
COMMISSION AND TRAFFIC/TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
Dear Ms. Dennis:
It is the intent of this correspondence to extend, by this letter, the contractual
relationship between Carol A. Dennis (hereinafter Dennis) and the City of Diamond
Bar (hereinafter City) for Minute Secretary services (hereinafter Project).
Based upon the services to be completed under this agreement, Dennis will be
compensated at the Standard Hourly Rate of $20.00 per hour, with a not to exceed
maximum amount of eleven thousand dollars ($11,000) for Planning Commission
meetings and three thousand dollars ($3,000) for Traffic and Transportation
Commission meetings. This extension Agreement is for the period of July 1, 1995
through June 30, 1994. All invoices submitted or payment must include a detailed
accounting of the services rendered and total time spent on the task. In no event
should your billing exceed the maximum amount without prior written authorization
by the City.
Should the assignment of the above -referenced agreement be acceptable to you,
please sign this letter at the space provided and return the original to this office. A
copy of this correspondence and a Purchase Order will be mailed to you for your
records.
Should you have any questions or need further clarification regarding this matter,
please contact my office at (909) 396-5666.
Sincerely,
Terrence L. Belanger
City Manager
KF
Approved:
Carol A. Dennis