HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/9/19941 Alk
MAY 99 1994
7.00 P.M.
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Auditorium
21865 East Copley Drive.
Diamond Ear, California
" 0
r rrr
r
•r/ •
r •
D, Wd Meyer
Lydia. Plunk
Bruce // / /r
Don.. / i
FrankHn Fong
Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on file in the Community
Development Office, located at 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190, and are available for public inspection.
If you have questions regarding an agenda item, please call (909) 396-5676 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
accomodation(s) in order to communicate at a City public meeting. must inform the Community
Development Department at (909) 396-5676 a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting.
Pfease refrain from smoking, eating or drinl
in the Auditorium
'fie City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper
and encourages you to do the same.
CITY OF DIAMOND R
PLANNING COMMISSION AD.
Iay i 1994
CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Chairman David Meyer
Next Resolution No. 94-7
ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONERS: Chairman David Meyer, Vice Chairwoman Lydia
Plunk, Bruce Flamenbaum, Don Schad and Franklin Fong
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS:
This is the time and place for the general public to address the members of the Planning Commission on
any item that is within their jurisdiction, allowing the public an opportunity to speak on non-public hearing
and non -agenda items. Please complete a Sneaker's Card for the recording Secretary (Completion of this
form is voluntM)There is a five minute maximum time limit when addressing the Planning Commis-
sion.
CONSENT CALENDAR: The following items listed on the consent calendar are considered routine
and are approved by a single motion. Consent calendar items may be removed from the agenda by
request of the Commission only:
No items
OLD BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS: None
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING/City Council and' Planning Commission - Joint Meeting:.
1. Development Agreement Nos. 92-1 and 2; Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407, Conditional
Use Permit No. 92-8 and Oak Tree Permit No. 92-8; Vesting Tentative Tract No. 32400, Condi-
tional Use Permit No. 91-5, and Oak Tree Permit No. 91-2; Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 and
Conditional Use Permit No. 92-12; Oak Tree Permit No. 92-9; the South Pointe Master Plan;
and Environmental Impact Report No: 92-1
This is a joint public hearing of the City Council and Planning Commission to consider a re-
quest for approval of a mixed use project, known as the South Pointe Master Plan, consisting of
land uses which include residential, commercial, park, open space and school facilities. The
project site is approximately 171 acres in size and is located north of Pathfinder Road, west of
Brea Canyon Road, east of Morning Sun Drive, and south of Rapid View Drive. The project
proposes to develop 30 acres of commercial retail/office space of 290,000 square feet; approxi-
mately 200 single-family detached residential dwelling units, a 28 acre neighborhood park; and
the construction of a middle school.
APPLICANTS:
(1) R -N -P Development, Inc., 4439 Rhodelia Court, Claremont, CA 91711
(2) Arciero and Son's, Inc., 950 North Tustin, Anaheim, CA 92807
(3) Sasak Corporation, 858 W. 9th St., Upland, CA 91785
(4) City of Diamond Bar, 21660 E. Copley Dr.'Ste 100, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council and Planning Commission
receive a presentation from City Staff and project developers; open the public hearing; receive
testimony; and take appropriate action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS:
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
ADJOURNMENT: May 23, 1994,
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Chairman and Planning commissioners
FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development D ------
SUBJECT: South Pointe Master Plan
DATE: May 5, 1994
The purpose of the May 9, 1994 Planning Commission meeting is to
continue the discussion of the May 2, 1994 joint City
CQunci 1 /Planning Commission meeting regarding the South Pointe
Master Plan project, This meeting will begin at 7 p.m.
The May 3, 1994 City Council meeting was continued i to May 9, 1994
at 6 p.m., in order to complete City Council business.
Commissioners are welcomed to attend the continued City Council
business meeting. otherwise, your attendance is requested for the
7 p.m. joint City Council /Planning Commission meeting for the
South Point Master Plan project.
Attached to this memo is a revised staff report for the South
Pointe Master Plan project. Please bring previously distributed
materials concerning this project to your meeting.
Attachment:
1. South Pointe Master Plan staff report dated May 5, 1994
2. . City Council Agenda for May 9, 1994
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1
PLEASE BRING DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED
FOR THE MAY 2, 1994 JOINT MEETING
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO.
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: May 9, 1994 REPORT DATE: April 26, 1994
FROM: James DeStefano, Community Development Director Revised May 5, 1994
TITLE: Development Agreement Nos. 92-1 and 2; Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407, Conditional Use
Permit No. 92-8 and Oak Tree Permit No. 92-8; Vesting Tentative Tract No. 32400, Conditional Use Permit No.
91-5, and Oak Tree Permit No. 91-2; Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 and Conditional Use Permit No. 92-12;
Oak Tree Permit No. 92-9; the South Pointe Master Plan; and Environmental Impact Report No. 92-1.
SUMMARY: This is a joint public hearing of the City Council and Planning Commission to consider a request
for approval of a mixed use project, known as the South Pointe Master Plan, consisting of land uses which include
residential, commercial, park, open space and school facilities. The project site is approximately 171 acres in size
and is located north of Pathfinder Road, west of Brea Canyon Road, east of Morning Sun Drive, and south of
Rapid View Drive. The project proposes to develop 30 acres of commercial retail/office space of 290,000 square
feet; approximately 200 single-family detached residential dwelling units, a 28 acre neighborhood park; and the
construction of a middle school.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council' and Planning Commission receive a
presentation from City Staff and project developers; open the public hearing; receive public testimony; and take
appropriate action. .
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report
_ Resolution(s)
.X Other
i r •
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
X Public Hearing Notification
— Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office)
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed 'N/A _ Yes _ No
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority or 4/5 vote? MAJORITY
3. Has environmental impact been assessed? X Yes — No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? —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
WED B
Terrence L. Belanger Frank M. slier es DeStefano
City Manager Assistant City Manager Community Devi
Director
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: May 9, 1994 Report Revised May 5,-1994
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, city Manager
SUBJECT: Development Agreement Nos. 92-1 and 2; Vesting 'Tentative
Tract Map No. 51407, Conditional Use Permit No. 92-r8 and
Oak Tree Permit No. 92-8; Vesting Tentative Tract No.
32400, Conditional Use Permit No. 91-5, and Oak Tree
Permit No. 91-2; Tentative Tract Map No. 51253 and
Conditional Use Permit No. 92-12; Oak Tree Permit No. 92-
9; the South Pointe Master Plan; and Environmental Impact
Report No. 92-1.
ISSUE STATEMENT: The applications submitted request approval of a mixed
use project, known as the South Pointe Master Plan,
consisting of land uses which include residential,
commercial, park, open space and school facilities. The
project site is approximately
ely 171 acres in size and is
located north of Pathfinder Road, west of Brea Canyon
Road, east of Morning sun Drive, and south of Rapid View
Drive. The project proposes to develop 30 acres of
commercial retail/office space of 290,000 square feet;
approximately 200 single-family detached residential
dwelling units, a 28 acre neighborhood. park; and the
construction of a middle school.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the -City Council receive a
presentation from the staff and project developers; open
the Public Hearing, receive public testimony, and take
appropriate action.
1
PROJECT SUMMARY: The South Pointe Master Plan has been proposed to guide
the development of 171 acres in the South Pointe Middle
School/ Sandstone Canyon area. The Master Plan incorpor-
ates property owned by five entities; the city of Diamond
Bar, Walnut Valley Unified School District, Arciero and
Sons, Inc., RNP Development, Inc. and Sasak Corporation.
The proposed project of record, if approved,will
consist of approximately -82 residential acres for
construction of 200 single family homes, 30 acres
proposed for a future commercial/office use, 28 acres
proposed for open space as a public park site, and 31
acres proposed for the construction of the South Pointe
Middle School (see Exhibit "A"). As presently
contemplated, the project will- be developed over a
projected ten year period. Under the proposed
development plan, all of the residential dwelling units,
one-half of the commercial/ office use, and the park site
will be completed within a projected five year period.
The remaining commercial/office use is projected to be
completed within the remaining ten year period.
To accommodate the proposed land uses, a number of
circulation system improvements are required. These
include the creation of new local streets within the
project site, a new access road to the school from Brea
Canyon Road, improvements to Brea Canyon Road, and area
off -site street and intersection modifications including
new signalization.
The proposed project will require the approval and
implementation* of. Development Agreements between the City
and the project applicants, adoption of a Master Plan,
Conditional Use Permits, Oak Tree Permits, Subdivision
approvals and an Environmental Impact Report. The
Planning commission has reviewed the proposed project and
has recommended city Council approval.
PROJECT APPLICANTS: The applicants for the proposed project are:
(1) RNP Development, Inc. 4439 Rhodelia Dr.,'Claremont
CA 91711
(2) Arciero and Sons, Inc. 950 North Tustin, Anaheim,
CA 92807
(3) Sasak Corporation, 858 W. 9th Street, Upland CA
91785
(4) City of Diamond Bar, 21660 E. Copley Dr., Ste. 100,
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
2
The property owners within the boundary of the master plan area include the
applicants and the Walnut Valley Unified School District. Ownership
boundaries are identified within Exhibit "B", attached.
BACKGROUND: On July 27, 1993, the City Council adopted the General Plan.
Prior to the General Plan's adoption, Ordinance No. 4 prohibited the hearing
and consideration of the South Pointe Master Plan. On.September 14, 1993,
the City Council began the public hearing process to consider development
applications for the South Pointe Master Plan project. The Council received
a presentation on the proposal from the City Staff and a summary of the
environmental review process from the City's environmental consultant. The
public hearing on the project was continued to September 28, 1993, October 5,
1993, November 16, 1993, and January 4, 1994. As a result of the City
Council action of December 14, 1993, to repeal Resolution 93-58, which
adopted the General Plan, the project was tabled. Subsequently,actions were
taken to develop a new General Plan and a State of California Office of
Planning and Research General Plan Extension ' letter was obtained which
enables the City to process certain previously applied for development
projects. The Walnut Valley Unified School District ha's recently asked the
City for assistance in order that the district may begin construction of the
middle school facilities. At issue is the removal of approximately 400,000
cubic yards of earthfrom the school site in order to facilitate construction
of the permanent South Pointe school. The South Pointe Master Plan
contemplates the relocation of the earth from the school site to Arciero's
proposed subdivision site.
Considerable community input has been received for and against the project.
As a result, the private developers have discussed the submittal of an
alternative proposal for consideration along with the project now before the
City Council. The Planning Commission has been asked to participate in the
public presentation such that they may deliberate and comment, as
appropriate,. upon any proposed modification to the project not previously
considered by the commission during its earlier public hearings. Time is of
the essence in regards to the WVUSD school project, specifically as regards
State Capitol funds ($8 million) and construction contract considerations.
If any contemporaneous assistance to the WVUSD is to be accomplished, it is'
necessary to move the decision making process forward, therefore, providing
a response to the requests from the school district and developers.
It should be noted that the WVUSD cannot remove the 400,000 cubic yards -of
dirt without the permission of the authoritative governmental body, which is
the City Council of Diamond Bar.
3
PROJECT REVIEW:
Developer Proposal
The South Pointe Master Plan weaves five public and private ownership
interests into a comprehensive land use plan designed to provide . a mixed use
neighborhood compatible with the built environmental.
III IK CI IY III DI1M0,101101
TI POINTF
It PLANINCO COMMUNITY
-i "'III VN fflfl) SCIIUOI DI s101[
or 01I.0110 BIR
I'MIN, r,II INC
14 1 sn.s I.C.
. M-0111110,
W ewNAAAr
The Master Plan project proposes the subdivision of a primarily undeveloped
171 acre site to accommodate the phased development and subsequent use of the
site for residential, commercial, park, open space, and school purposes.
As depicted in Exhibit "C",'the project site has been divided into five (5)
planning areas or enclaves. Project specific development standards have been
proposed for each enclave. Each tentative tract map has been designed
consistent with the proposed development standards.
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 32400
Vesting Tentative Tract No 32400 is,proposed by Arciero and Sons and consists
of 93 lots on 47.44 acres. Ninety-one (91) single family homes are proposed
with two lots totaling approximately 6 acres (2.58 and 3.34 acres) set aside
for commercial purposes. (See Exhibit I'D") The project indicates a
residential density of'approximately 2.2 units per acres. Preliminary Title
Reports indicate no unusual characteristics. The site is zoned R-1-15,000.
4
Im
The proposed map is located within Enclave 3. The minimum lot size proposed
for Enclave 3 is 7200 square feet with a minimum pad size, of 6000 square
feet. The proposed project contains lot sizes that range from 7200 (lot #ji)
to 15,095 (lot #14) square feet. Pad sizes ranges from 6,070 (lot #69) to
13,365 (lot #45) square feet. Primary ac ' cess is from Brea Canyon Road with
a secondary access point through the �future commercial development.
Earthwork quantities indicate 1.795 million cubic yards of cut and-1.8-10-
million
nd 1.810million cubic yards of fill. The proposed map is consistent with the design
and development standards contained within the Master Plan.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51407 is proposed by RNP Development, Inc.
and consists of 84.20 acres containing 90 single family residential parcels
with 28.13 acres proposed for recreational open space and 21.9 acres proposed
as a commercial center. This map is located within Enclave 1, as described
within the Master Plan development standards. Minimum lot sizes for this
Enclave are 8,000 square feet with minimum pad sizes of 6,900 square feet.
The proposed residential neighborhoods within this Enclave are designed to be
compatible with the existing style and type of development pattern adjacent
to the project. The property is zoned RPD -10,000-6U. VTM 51407 provides for
an overall density of 2.59 units per acre on the 34.62 acre residential site.
Lot sizes range from 8,977 sq. ft. (lot *#24) to 18,679 sq. ft. (lot #34).
Pad sizes range from 7,079 sq. ft. (lot #26) to 13,322 sq. ft. (lot #30).
28.13 acres have been set aside for open space/ recreational purposes (lot
#91). Three commercial lots are proposed ranging in size from 3.40 acres to
13.05 acres for a total of 21.45 commercial acres. Earthwork quantities
indicate 2,567,000 yards of cut and 2,571,000 yards of fill for the proposed
map. The circulation pattern consists of a residential collector, street
"A", from Brea Canyon Road to the middle school site, and a residential
street "B" proposed extending through to Morning Sun Drive. The project
proposes six residential dwelling units facing Larkstone Drive on property
presently owned by the Walnut Valley Unified School District.
The proposed map would supersede previously filed Tract Map No.'s 32576 and
35742. Those maps dedicated the right to prohibit the construction of
residential units within certain lots. That right was accepted by the County
i
and s valid and enforceable against any development request. In 1979 an
offer to dedicate the property as a "future park" was rejected by the County.
The developer is currently limited to a total of two dwelling units. other
restrictions on the property relate to flood hazard and restricted use areas.
This proposed map, if approved, would supersede and erase the existing
development restrictions placed upon the property. (See Exhibit "Ell)
There are other parcels in the community which are also subject to similar
development restrictions. Properties with such development restrictions have
been re -subdivided by Los Angeles County. The applicant has specifically
requested approval of this application *package which permits the City to
evaluate the change in entitlement on the merits of the proposed project.
E
Several tract maps, approved prior to incorporation, contain development
prohibitions or restrictions upon a portion of the property. Although these
properties have been retained as open space, they were not dedicated to the
County as open space. Therefore, depending upon the specific circumstances,
a property.owner could request the removal of the development restrictions
and development approval.
The decision as to whether or not development should be permitted -is of major
significance to the community. The Subdivision map Act provided the vehicle
for a property owner to.seek abandonment of these property restrictions. The
Map Act also appears to give the City considerable latitude to decide if
abandonment is consistent with present or prospective city policy.
Consideration of development upon the restricted properties is a matter of
public policy. The City has no obligation to remove the restrictions. The
developer has, it would appear, no inherent "right" to the abandonment or
project approval. The benefit(s) of abandonment of the restrictive map
language should be carefully examined (i.e. provision of significant
community amenities).
The Interim City Attorney has determined that the restrictions constitute an
"open space easement". In order to abandon an open space easement, pursuant
to Government Code Section 51093, the'City Council must refer the matter to
the Planning commission for a noticed public hearing and report; cause the
county assessor to determine the full cash value of the land as though it
were free of the open space easement; determine an abandonment fee, payable
to the county; and find that:
1. there is no public purpose in continuation of the land as open
space; and
2. the abandonment is not inconsistent with the purposes of open space
law; and
3. the abandonment conforms with the General Plan; and
4. the -refusal to abandon will cause a substantial hardship upon the
landowner.*
Tentative .Tract ...No. 51253
This 6.7 acre site is currently proposed as a 21 lot, 3.13 units per acre,
single family residential development by Sasak Corporation. - The proposed
project as presently designed is consistent with the Master Plan development
standards for Enclave No. 1. Lot sizes range from 8,241 square feet (lot #1)
to 20,962 square feet (lot #4)'. Earthwork quantities indicate 145,800 cubic
yards of excavation, 98,300 cubic yards of embankment, and 47,500 cubic yards
of export. The proposed subdivision provides for an extension of street "B"
as shown within Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51407 designed to connect with
Morning Sun Drive. Title reports indicate this Tentative Map contains the
same basic development restrictions as the previously discussed map and
currently would permit a total of 3 dwelling units. The Subdivision Map Act
N.
pro ' vides a means to remove such restrictions. If a resubdivision or
reversion to acreage of the tract is subsequently filed for approval, the
offer of dedication previously rejected is terminated upon the approval and
recordation of the new map. (See Exhibit 'IF")
Master Plan
The use of a "Master Plan" is proposed to guide the overall development. The
components of the plan include permitted uses and development standards. The,
proposed zoning regulations and development standards will be implemented via
the use of development agreements for the RNP and Arciero proposals.
The
standards are attached to the Sasak proposal as a component of the Tentative
Map conditions. The complete document is contained within the previously
prepared report. The use of a master plan is a tool for implementing the
General Plan and often bridges the gap between General Plan policy and zoning
standards for the property under consideration for development.
Development Agreements
The use of Development Agreements are proposed for the Arciero and RNP
development project. The Development Agreement is utilized as a contract
document to incorporate the Master Plan, the Hillside Management regulations,
the Oak Tree Permit, the Development Standards with reference to the
Tentative Tract Maps. Cities are provided with the ability to enter into
Development Agreements with any property owner. Development Agreements are
essentially a negotiated contract between a public agency and a private
developer. The Development Agreement establishes the terms and conditions
from which the development can proceed and provides the applicants with
assurances based upon their commitment to timing and compliance with the
agreements.- The proposed agreements incorporate land transfers, contract
zoning, and c project..
by all parties toward the successful completion of
the proposed project.. Attached to this report are maps which illustrate the
existing and future , ownership of property as a result of project
implementation.
Hillside Management ordinance, Conditional Use Permit and Oak Tree Permit
The Hillside Management Ordinance requires a conditional use permit approval
for each tentative tract map proposal. The hillside management standards and
guidelines have been incorporated within each development. The impact of the
project grading�is analyzed in the Draft Environmental�Impact Report within
the earth resources and aesthetics sections. The Development Code requires
an Oak Tree permit for the removal of any oak genus which is eight inches in
diameter as measured four and one-half.feet above the natural grade. Each
proposed subdivision site contains oak trees which would require removal.
7
In accordance with requirements of the Code, an oak tree inventory as
conducted for each subdivision site. Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51407
contains 449 oak trees. Tentative Tract Map 51253 contains 53 trees
scheduled for replacement. Vesting Tentative Tract Map 32400 will require
the removal of 276 oak trees. The Draft Environmental Impact Report indicates
that 92 percent or 768 of the 835 inventoried oak trees will be removed as a
result of the proposed grading activities on-site. All oak trees removed as
a result of the proposed project are proposed for replacement at a 2:1 ratio.
The Developers' proposal provides potential benefits to the community in the
form of facilitating the construction of the permanent middle school,
development of a publicly held park and open space, creation of 'a freeway
oriented commercial site and numerous area -wide traffic improvements.
Action R99RiK9!ik
1. Certification' of the Environmental Impact report along with
Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
2. Abandonment of the dedicated right to restrict construction of
residential buildings upon RNP and Sasak properties pursuant to
Government Code (551903). Agreements,
3. Approval of each tentative tract map, Development
Conditional Use Permits, oak Tree Permits, and the Master Plan.
(The Council must make written findings pursuant to Government Code
565360, and 565361, and the conditions of the extension letter,
that there is little or no probability that the project will be
detrimental to or interfere with the future adopted General P . lan if
the project is ultimately inconsistent with that plan).
4. Recordation of EIR Certification
5. completion of approved conditions, as required, for issuance of
grading permits (including the applicant obtaining an Army Corp of
Engineers, Section 404, permit and a I California Department of Fish
and Game, Section 1601-1607, permit for alteration of the stream).
6. Recordation of final documents, maps, etc.
0
Alternative 1 - North/South Canyon preservation
An alternative to the proposed project has been proposed for consideration
and is designed to encourage the preservation of the Sandstone Canyon area
for open space purposes. The concept. involves Arciero and Sons .(Tract Map
No. 32400) trading their property, adjacent to the middle school, for the
westerly 35+ acres of, the RNP Development, Inc. (Tract 'Map. No. 51407)
property. - Ar ' ciero, would.develop 103 homes on the former RNP site and include
a new road access from Brea Canyon Road to the middle school. The proposal
would incorporate the -excess earth scheduled for export from the school site.
(See Exhibit 11G11) I
RNP would not build upon Arciero's former site, nor their remaining acreage.
RNP's offer of dedication of this 75+ acre Sandstone Canyon site to the City,
would be conditioned upon the removal of existing map restrictions on
property, owned by RNP, located adjacent to Grand Avenue. Any future
development proposal for the Grand Avenue site would be subject to all City
regulations for environmental review and development. Subdivision plans
would be submitted for review at A later date. Potential benefits of this
proposal include, but are not limited to, the facilitation of the school
construction, preservation and dedication of Sandstone Canyon to the public,
and substantial reduction of environmental impacts.
Action Required
1. Referral of revised project to Planning Commission pursuant to
Section 65857 for a report and recommendation.
2. Certification of the Environmental Impact Report, preparation of an
addendum or supplemental EIR along with Findings of Fact and a
Statement of Overriding Considerations.
3. Preparation of revised project conditions and agreements outlining
Alternative 1 (i.e. application of conservation easement or
building rights restriction upon former Arci.ero, Tract 32400,
site).
4. Planning Commission and City Council consideration of the RNP Grand
Avenue site for removal of map restrictions (pursuant to Government
Code §51093).
5. Approval of revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map .51407 and its
associated CUP, Oak Tree Permit and Development Agreement.
Approval* of Tentative Tract 51253 (Sasak) and related permits.
Approval of Parcel Map 24031 for RNP Grand Avenue Site (The Council
must make written findings pursuant to Government Code.§65360, and
§65361, and the conditions of the extension letter, that there is
little or no probability that the project will be detrimental to or
interfere with the future adopted General Plan.if the project is
ultimately inconsistent with that plan).
6. Completion of conditions required for grading permits, 'recordation
of maps, etc.
Although an intermittent blue -line stream exists upon the most westerly
portion of Tract 51407, a significant amount of school site earth may be
relocated to Tract 51407 concurrent with the processing of the 404 and 1601-
1607 permits.
9*
Alternative...2 - Preservation of East/West Properties
Another design concept to consider is the maintenance of an east -west open
space amenity by only permitting the development of Arciero's Tract 32400
site. As- an example, in 1991, Arciero proposed a subdivision of 75 homes
upon their acreage utilizing a previous tentative map. The 1991 tentative
map consists o I f 35 lots on 47.6 acres. 75 single family lots are proposed on
19.5 net acres and range in size from 7200 square feet and average 11,660
square feet. The earthwork quantities indicate the need for 393,151 cubic
yards of import (presumable from the school site). 21.2 acres are set aside
as' open space with the balance of the acreage, 6.9, devoted to streets.
Arcierols-property is encumbered by a "blue line" stream. An U.S. Army Corp
of Engineers permit and California Department of Fish and Game permit would
be required prior to any modification to the existing streambed. This
alternative provides the opportunity to facilitate the school development and
preserve the building rights restricted east -west properties now owned by
Sasak Corporation (6.7 acres) and RNP Development (78 acres). (Exhibit 11H11)
Action Required
1. Referral to Planning Commission pursuant to Section 65857 for
report and recommendation.
2. -Certification of the Environmental Impact Report along with
Findings of Fact and a Statement of overriding Considerations and
Addendum.
3. Rejection of I VTM 51407 (RNP) and TM 51253 (Sasak) with appropriate
findings and conclusions. to
4. Preparation of revised map, conditions, and agreements
facilitate the revised Arciero subdivision.
5. Approval of new VTM 32400 with associated CUP, OT and Development
Agreement (The Council must make written findings pursuant to
Government Code §65360, and §65361, and the conditions of the
extension letter, that there is little or no probability that the
project will be detrimental to or interfere with the future adopted
General'Plan if the. project is ultimately inconsistent with that
plan).
6. Completion of approved conditions, as required, for issuanceof
grading permits (including the applicant obtaining an Army Corps-. of
Engineers, Section 4 * 04, permit and a California Department of Fish
and Game, Section 1601-1607, permit for alteration of the stream).
HE
Alternative 3 - No Project
A "no
,Project" alternative, if selected, would require the off -Site
exportation of the surplus soil presently found on the South Pointe Middle
School site in order to facilitate; immediately, construction of permanent
school buildings. As proposed, the existing excess soil will be used within
the project boundaries. Depositing the soil at an alternative off-site
location could require an addendum or supplement to the
District's previously certified Final Environmental Impact Report for the
South Pointe Middle School * .' The transportation of the soil, outside of the
project boundaries, would require an estimated 26,000+ truck trips upon local
streets. The additional time and cost of this alternative would be borne by
the School District.
Alternative 4
Certify the EIR, Deny projects, or specific components.
Alternative 5
Continue discussion of the South Pointe Master Plan for further environmental
analysis or investigation of additional alternatives.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the City has
determined that an Environmental Impact Report should be prepared to assess
and analyze the environmental effects of the 'proposed project. The City
engaged Ultrasystems Engineers and Constructors, Inc. as an independent
consultant to prepare the environmental documents. An Executive Summary of
the environmental -review record is attached.
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE:
The South Pointe Master Plan project was publicly noticed in accordance with
State and local requirements. Advertisements were published within the San
Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on April 11 and
April 22, 1994 ' . Notices were mailed to property owners within a 500 foot
radius of the project boundaries on April 8, 1994 and April 21, 1994.
Several hundred additional notices were mailed to interested citizens
providing public awareness of the proposal.
11
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The Planning commission conducted numerous public study sessions and public
hearings on the proposals. A walking tour of the site was conducted on
December 13, 1992. Study Sessions were held in October and December 1992.
Noticed public hearings were held in January,' February, March, April and May,
1993. The Planning Commission recommended City Council approval of all
project components on May 24, 1993.
PREPARED BY:
James De Stefano
Community Development Director
Attachments: (Previously transmitted within May 2, 1994 report)
MAPS I. South Pointe Master Plan (Exhibit "All) -
2. Project Boundaries (Exhibit IIBII)
3. Planning Enclaves (Exhibit IICII)
4. VTM 32400 (Exhibit I'D")
5.VTM 51407 (Exhibit "Ell.)
6. TM 51253 (Exhibit 'IF")
7. Revised VTM 51407 (Exhibit IIGII)
a. Previous (1991) VTM.32400 (Exhibit IIHII)
9. Environmental Review Record
lo. City Council Staff Reports and Meeting Minutes
11. Planning Commission Staff Reports and Meeting Minutes
12. Notices of Public Hearing
13. OPR Extension Letter dated 1/31/94
14. Letter from J. C. Dabney dated 3/25/94
15. Walnut Valley School District Letter dated 4/4/94
16. Timeline of Construction for South Pointe Middle School
1994-1995
17-. Sierra Club Letter received 4/21/94
18. Letter from Frederick & Frances Strunck dated 4/17/94
19. 6 1 page Petition signed by 102 persons re: Sandstone Canyon
20. List of correspondence received from January 19, 1993 through
June 8, 1993 - both for.and against
21. Draft Environmental Impact Report I previously transmitted
22.. Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report
dated February 1993 ( previously transmitted
23. Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report -
Volume II dated November 1993 ( previously transmitted
24. Technical appendix -Response to Comments on the Draft
Environmental Impact Report dated May 1993 previously
transmitted
12
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.1
PLEASE BRING DOCUMENTATION .
PROVIDED FOR THE MAY 2, 1994 MEETING
Monday, May 9, 1994
6:00 P.M.
Adjourned Regular Meeting
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Auditorium
21865 East Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, California
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
Council Member
Council Member
Council Member
Gary H. Werner
Clair W. Harmony
Eileen R. Ansari
Phyllis E. Papen
Gary G. Miller
City Manager Terrence L. Belanger
Interim City Attorney . Michael Montgomery
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.
Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking
in the Council Chambers.
The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper
and encourages you to do the same.
MISSION STATEMENT
The City Council meeting is the forum established to
conduct the business of the City of Diamond Bar, its
citizens, property owners, and businesses. The City
.-...-...-Council has chosen. -to conduct its business meetings in a.
televised, open forum. This has been done to assure that
.all community members are kept informed as to the status of
City business. It is the Council's objective to conclude
the business stated on the evening's agenda by a reasonable
hour, which is 11:00 p.m. To accomplish tonight's
objectives, the City Council requests that:
1. Public comments may be directed to Consent
Calendar items or matters of interest to the
public, which are not on this.evening's agenda.
2. Public comments on scheduled matters will be
heard in conjunction with the respective
agendized subject.
3. There are.to be no personal attacks toward
individual members of the City Council. Such
comments are viewed as personal attacks against
the entire City Council and will not be
tolerated.
4. There are to be no personal attacks from an
individual Council member. Such are viewed as.
.personal attacks from the entire City Council,
which are not conducive to a positive business
meeting environment; and, will not be tolerated.
The Diamond Bar City Counpil apprpgiates your cooperation.
G
Clair W. Harmony
Mayor Pro Tem
Eileen R. Ansari
Councilwoman
er, Mayor
Phyllis E. Papen
Council o
f C/ary G. Mille(i
k�_ Councilman
THIS MEETING IS BEING BROADCAST LIVE BY JONES INTERCABLE
FOR AIRING ON CHANNEL 12, AND BY REMAINING IN THE ROOM,
YOU ARE GIVING YOUR PERMISSION TO BE TELEVISED.
1.- CALL TO ORDER:
00
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
ROLL CALL:
Next Resolution No. 94-21
Next Ordinance No. 03(1994)
6:00 p.m.
Mayor Werner
Council Members Ansari, Papen,
Miller, Mayor. Pro Tem Harmony
and Mayor'Werner
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, ETC.:
CLOSED
PUBLIC COMMENTS: CLOSED
COUNCIL COMMENTS: CLOSED
SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: CLOSED
CONSENT CALENDAR: CLOSED
PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE
OLD BUSINESS:
8.1 SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 02(1994): AN ORDINANCE
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING
TITLE 22 OF THE LOS ANGELES CODE BY ADDING NEW CHAPTER
22.54 AND ESTABLISHING PROPERTY. MAINTENANCE STANDARDS -
On April 19, 1994, the City Council held a public
hearing, received testimony, waived full reading, and
approved as amended, Ordinance No. 02(1994). Continued
from May 3, 1994.
Recommended Action:. It is recommended that the City
Council approve for second reading.'and adopt Ordinance
No. 02(1994).
Requested by: Community Development Director
8.2 ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND
IMPLEMENTATION OF A PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM - In .
accordance with the requirements of Prop. 111 for State
Gas Tax Fund and the criteria stipulated by the Prop. C
Local Return Guidelines, local jurisdictions must certify
that it has in place a pavement management system (PMS).
This is to foster the cost-effective use of public funds
prior to expending Prop. C funds. The system needs to
provide an overview of the condition of the total street
MAY 91 1994 PAGE 2
system, a means of documenting street maintenance/
rehabilitation needs, and a means of rationally
prioritizing street improvement projects in terms of
needs and cost-effectiveness. To accomplish this work'
it is necessary to retain the services of a qualified
engineering firm. In response to the City's Request
for Proposal, the Selection Committee received and
evaluated four (4) proposals.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council award a professional engineering services
contract to Dwight French and Associates in an amount not
to exceed $37,020.00, plus a contingency amount of
$3,000.
Requested by: City Engineer
8.3 DISCUSSION RE: COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE FOR LIBRARY
SERVICES - Continued from May 3, 1994.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the Mayor
appoint a Library Services sub -'committee of the City
Council, comprised of two members of the Council.
Requested by: Councilwoman Ansari
8.4 MATTER OF REQUEST FOR INFORMATION FROM FORMER CITY
ATTORNEY - Continued from May 3, 199.4.
Requested by: Mayor Pro Tem Harmony
1 9. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING/CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION
JOINT MEETING - 7:00 P.M.
9.1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NOS. 92-1 AND 2; VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 51407, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-8;
AND OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 92-8; VESTING TENTATIVE' TRACT MAP
32400), CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-5, AND OAK TREE
PERMIT NO. 91-.2; TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 5125*3 AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-12; OAK TREE PERMIT NO.
92-9; THE SOUTH POINTE MASTER PLAN; AND ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT NO. 92-1 - This is a joint public hearing
of the City Council and Planning Commission to consider
a request for approval of a mixed use project, known as
South Pointe Master Plan, consisting of land.uses which
include residential, commercial, park, open space and
school facilities. The project site is approximately 171
acres in size and is located north of Pathfinder Rd.,
west of Brea Canyon Rd., east of Morning Sun Dr., and
south of Rapid View Dr. The project proposes to develop
30 acres of commercial retail/office space of 290, 000 sq.
ft.; approximately 200 single-family detached residential
dwelling units, a 28 acre neighborhood park; and the
construction of a middle school. Continued from May 2,
1994.
MAY 9, 1994 PAGE 3
1994.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council and Planning commission receive a presentation
from City Staff and project developers; open the'public
hearing; receive testimony; and take appropriate action.
Requested by: M/Werner
'A
10. ANNOUNCEMENTS:
11- ADJOURNMENT:
lc;i
yfiD �d
File
b �_
gand is r� _
ffbr
File rev' wed by
on -410
and is ready for
destruccbon by City Clam