HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/07/2000,ity Council Agend
Tuesday, March 7, 2000
5:00 p.m. — Study Session CC -2
6:00 p.m. — Closed Session CC -2
6:30 p.m. — Regular Meeting
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Main Auditorium
21865 East Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Mayor Debby O'Connor
Mayor Pro Tem Eileen Ansari
Council Member Wen Chang
Council Member Carol Herrera
Council Member Bob Huff
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 H 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.
DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL RULES
(ALSO APPLIES TO COMMISSION AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS)
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 interest which are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Diamond Bar City Council. A request to address the
Council should be submitted in person 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 presedation 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 ofthe Council.
Individuals are requested to refrain from personal attacks towards Council Members or other citizens. Corranents which are not conducive to a
positive busittess meeting environment are viewed as attacks against the entire City Council and will not be tolerated 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 staffthereot; 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 of the Chair, which shall include an order to be seated or to refrain from addressing the
Board, and
D. Any other unlawful interference with the due and orderly conduct of said meeting.
INFORMATION RELATING TO AGENDAS AND ACTIONS OF THE COUNCIL
Agendas for the regular Diamond Bar City Council meetings are prepared by the City Clerk and are available 72 hours prior to the meeting.
Agendas are available electronically and may be accessed by a personal computer through a phone modem
Every meeting of the City Council is recorded on cassette tapes and duplicate tapes are available for a nominal charge.
ADA REQUIREMENTS
A cordless microphone is available for those persons with mobility impairments who cannot access the public speaking area. Sign language interpreter
services are also available by giving notice at least three business days in advance of the meeting. Please telephone (909) 860-2489 between 8 am
and 5 p.m Monday through Friday.
HELPFUL PHONE NUMBERS
Copies of Agenda, Rules of the Council, Cassette Tapes of Meetings (909) 860-2489
Computer Access to Agendas (909) 860 -LINE
General Information (909) 860-2489
NOTE: ACTION MAY BE TAKEN ON ANY ITEM IDENTIFIED ON THE AGENDA.
Next Resolution No. 2000-15
Next Ordinance No. 02(2000)
STUDY SESSION: 5:00 p.m., AQMD Room CC -2
Cost Benefit Analysis & LAFCO Process regarding Annexation
1. CLOSED SESSION: 6:00 p.m. - Existing Litigation
(Subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9. Patel vs. City of
Diamond Bar.
2. CALL TO ORDER:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Girl Scout Troop 482
INVOCATION:
Christian Church
6:30 p.m., March 7, 2000
Presentation of Colors by Jr.
Pastor Ab Kastl, Diamond Canyon
ROLL CALL: Council Members Chang, Herrera,
Huff, Mayor Pro Tem Ansari, Mayor O'Connor
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Mayor
3A. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS:
3.A.1 Presentation of City Tiles to outgoing Traffic &
Transportation, Planning and Parks & Recreation
Commissioners
3.A.2 Presentation of Certificates of Recognition to the
Diamond Bar High School 1999 Mock Trial Team
3.A.3 Introduction of Lt. Pete Fosselman, L.A. County
Sheriff
3.A.4 Introduction of new Recreation Staff
3.A.5 Proclaiming March 20-25, 2000 as "Safe Communities
Week"
3.A.6 Proclaiming March, 2000 as "Women's History Month"
3B. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS: "Public Comments" is the time
reserved on each regular meeting agenda to provide an
MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 2
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.
5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1 JOINT COUNCIL/WVUSD BOARD MEETING - March 8, 2000 - 6:30
p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.2 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - March 9, 2000 -
7:00 p.m., AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.3 PLANNING COMMISSION - March 14, 2000 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD
Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.4 COMMUNITY COORDINATING COMMITTEE - March 20, 2000 - 7:00
p.m., AQMD, Room CC -3, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.5 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - March 21, 2000 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD
Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.6 DIAMOND BAR COMMUNITY FOUNDATION - March 30, 2000 - 7:00
p.m., AQMD, Room CC -3 and 5, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.7 CENSUS DAY - April 1, 2000 - CENSUS TOWN HALL MEETING
CABLE BROADCAST DATES (to be announced)
5.8 CITY BIRTHDAY PARTY - April 9, 2000 - Noon - 6:00 p.m.,
Peterson Park, 24142 E. Sylvan Glen Dr.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR:
6.1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
6.1.1 Regular Meeting of February 15, 2000 - Approve
as submitted.
6.1.2 Special Meeting of February 18, 2000 - Approve
as submitted.
Requested by: City Clerk
6.2 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES:
6.2.1 Regular Meeting of November 18, 1999 -
Receive and File.
MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 3
6.2.2 Regular Meeting of January 27, 2000 - Receive
and File.
Requested by: Community Services Division
6.3 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
6.3.1 Regular Meeting of January 11, 2000 - Receive
and File.
6.3.2 Regular Meeting of January 25, 2000 - Receive
and File.
Requested by: Planning Division
6.4 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular
Meeting of January, 2000.
Requested by: Engineering Division
6.5 VOUCHER REGISTER - Approve Voucher Register dated March
7, 2000 in the amount of $894,318.74.
Requested by: Finance Division
6.6 TREASURER'S STATEMENT - Submitted for City Council's
review and approval is the Treasurer's Statement for
January, 2000.
Requested by: Finance Division
6.7 OFFICE SUPPLY PURCHASE ORDER INCREASE FOR FY 1999-00 - On
June 15, 1999, Council authorized establishment of an
open purchase order for supplies with Staples in the
amount of $15,000. This vendor was chosen after a lengthy
RFP process and they were deemed to be the low bidder on
most commonly used office supplies. Due to an increase
in staff activities and the change in provision of
recreation services, it is necessary to increase the open
purchase order by $4000, for a total of $19,000. In
addition, since Staples has been the low bidder on other
items, such as paper, small tools, and equipment, it is
requested that Council authorize a total expenditure in
an amount not to exceed $23,000 for FY 99-00 for this
vendor. It is understood that staff will continue to
solicit bids as necessary on items not considered normal
office supplies.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council approve an increase to the open purchase order
for Staples from $15,000 to $19,000 and authorize a total
expenditure amount to Staples in an amount not to exceed
MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 4
$23,000 for FY 99-00.
Requested by: Finance Division
6.8 REDUCTION AND EXONERATION OF SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT
BONDS (FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE AND LABOR & MATERIAL)FOR
TRACT NO. 32400 (STANDARD PACIFIC)- Standard Pacific has
requested exoneration/reduction in security amounts
(surety bonds) commensurate with progress of work for
various improvements required in accordance with the
subdivision agreement for Tract No. 32400. Diamond Bar
West Partners has satisfactorily completed substantial
amounts of the work and has requested exoneration
/reduction of the amounts of certain bonds be authorized.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council approve reduction of: a) Bond No. 111 3331 7666
- Grading Bond from $2,685,256 to $671,314(750); b) Bond
No. 111 1940 5352 - Storm Drain from $736,639 to
$184,159.75 (750); c) Bond No. 111 4160 9146 -
Sewer/Street from $543,674 To $135,918.50 (75o); and
exoneration of a) Bond No. 111 3331 7591 - Domestic
Water; b) Bond No. 111 331 7609 - Reclaimed Water; c)
Bond No. 111 4160 9153 - Monumentation; and direct the
City Clerk to notify the Principal and Surety of these
actions.
Requested by: Engineering Division
6.9 APPROVAL OF CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH HULS ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT - On February 1, 2000, Council directed staff
to issue an RFP and proceed with an open bidding process
for solid waste and recycling collection services in the
City. The experience and knowledge of J. Michael Huls
would assure a timely and comprehensive approach to the
City's desire to retain a single service provider for the
community. Mr. Huls has been providing technical support
on various studies/reports pertaining to solid waste and
recycling collection services in the City. As the City's
Integrated Environmental Services Coordinator, Mr. Huls
prepared the RFP, which has been made available to all
qualified refuse and recycling services companies.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council approve a contract amendment with Huls
Environmental Management in an amount not -to -exceed
$9,900 and authorize the Mayor to execute the amendment.
Requested by: Engineering Division
MARCH 7, 2000
PAGE 5
6.10 CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH HIRSCH AND ASSOCIATES FOR THE
DESIGN OF LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS IN DIAMOND BAR - On
January 4, 2000, Council awarded a contract to Hirsch and
Associates to design landscaping improvements in the
amount of $22,000. Staff has determined that two
additional locations should be added to the scope of work
for this contract. The additional work will cost $14,050
plus $3,000 for reimbursables, for a total amount of
$17,050. The two new locations are: Golden Prados
median at Golden Springs; and Sunset Crossing dirt
median/parkway at Chaparral.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council approve the contract amendment with Hirsch and
Associates in the amount of $14,050 plus reimbursables of
$3,000, for a total amendment not to exceed $17,050.
This will result in a total contract of $39,050, which
includes $6,600 of reimbursables. It is further
recommended that the City Council allocate $17,050 from
L.L.M.D. #38 reserves for this project.
Requested by: Engineering Division
6.11 EXTENSION OF VENDOR SERVICES FOR PUBLICITY BANNERS - The
City has utilized Dekra-Lite to provide vertical
publicity banners for City events. The City's Purchasing
Ordinance limits the City Manager's purchasing authority
to $15,000. Council previously authorized expenditures
of $29,000 for the Holiday Banner Program. This work was
completed by Dekra-Lite. The City is now purchasing
banners and banner support poles from Dekra-Lite to
advertise the City Birthday Party, at a cost of $9,000.
Dekra-Lite has consistently been the low bidder with the
best turn -around time for these services.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council authorize the additional expenditure of $9,000
from General Fund Reserves for the City Birthday Party
publicity banners and banner support poles. It is
further recommended that the City Council authorize the
purchase be made from Dekra-Lite, bringing the total
expenditure from this vendor for the current fiscal year
to $38,000.
Requested by: Community Services Division
6.12 RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUESTING THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
DISTRICT TO ACCEPT ON BEHALF OF SAID DISTRICT A TRANSFER
AND CONVEYANCE OF STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS KNOWN AS
AMBUSHERS STREET DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, IN THE
MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 6
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FOR FUTURE OPERATION, MAINTENANCE,
REPAIR, AND IMPROVEMENT, AND AUTHORIZE THE TRANSFER AND
CONVEYANCE THEREOF - Construction of the Ambushers Street
Drainage Improvements Project was completed on September
7, 1999 and a Notice of Completion was approved for
filing by Council on December 7, 1999. L.A. County Flood
Control District inspected the project on November 22,
1999 and has deemed that the work has been accomplished
to the satisfaction of the District. With the project
completed, the new 24" Storm Drain should be transferred
to the County Flood Control District for operation and
maintenance. Upon approval by Council, staff will
transmit "As -Built" drawings and the signed resolution to
the District.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council adopt Resolution No. 2000 -XX requesting the L.A.
County Flood Control District to accept transfer and
conveyance of storm drain improvements known as Ambushers
Street Drainage Improvements Project.
Requested by: Engineering Division
6.13 RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACCEPTING A GRANTING OF
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED FOR ROAD PURPOSES
- Pursuant to Condition "dd" of Planning Resolution No.
99-13, the McDonald's Corp. has made an irrevocable offer
of dedication for a 5' wide portion of its property
adjacent to Golden Spgs. Dr. and Brea Canyon Rd., to the
City for roadway improvements.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council adopt Resolution No. 2000 -XX accepting a grant of
a 5' wide portion of McDonald's property adjacent to
Golden Springs Dr. and Brea Canyon Rd. for road purposes
and direct the City Clerk to record the irrevocable Offer
of Dedication with the L.A. County Recorder's Office.
Requested by: Engineering Division
6.14 AWARD OF DESIGN SERVICES FOR AREA 2 SLURRY SEAL PROJECT
- On January 21, 2000, the Public Works Division
solicited proposals for design services for the 99-00
Area 2 Slurry Seal Project. On February 4, 2000, two
proposals were received, from GFB-Friedrich & Assoc. and
Charles Abbott Assoc. Staff proposes to award the design
services contract to the most qualified consultant.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council award the 99-00 Area 2 Slurry Seal Project design
services contract to GFB-Friedrich & Assoc., in an amount
MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 7
not to exceed $36,100. Further, it is recommended that
the City Council authorize an amount of $3,600 for
contract amendment(s) to be approved by the City Manager,
for a total authorization of $39,700.
Requested by: Engineering Division
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as
matters may be heard.
7.1 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO. 99-1 AND SUBDIVISION
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 99-1 - The Development Code and
Subdivision Ordinance have been in existence for over one
year. The implementation of both codes during this time
period indicates that several amendments are needed in
order to continue to implement the purpose of both codes,
better serve residents and the development community. The
Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments on
January 25, 2000 and adopted Resolution No. 2000-02
recommending the City Council adopt the amendments.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council open the public hearing, receive public
testimony, discuss the Planning Commission recommended
amendments and direct staff to prepare an ordinance
approving said amendments to the Development Code and
Subdivision Ordinance.
Requested by: Planning Division
8. OLD BUSINESS:
8.1 APPOINTMENT TO PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
Requested by: Council Member Huff
9. NEW BUSINESS:
9.1 CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA,
DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE A PORTION OF HIGHCREST
DRIVE IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - The City has received
a request from the Highcrest Homeowners Alliance to
vacate the portion of Highcrest Dr. located southerly of
Gold Rush Dr. This matter asks Council to consider the
vacation request, to initiate the vacation proceedings in
accordance with the Streets and Highways Code, and to set
a public hearing for April 18, 2000.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council adopt Resolution No. 2000 -XX declaring its
MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 8
intention to vacate a portion of Highcrest Dr.
Requested by: Engineering Division
9.2 RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO
THE TRES HERMANOS CONSERVATION AUTHORITY JOINT EXERCISE
OF POWERS AGREEMENT TO ADD THE CITY OF INDUSTRY AS A
PARTY TO THE AGREEMENT AND MEMBER OF THE BOARD - The City
of Industry Urban Development Agency is the majority
property owner of the undeveloped area commonly known as
the Tres Hermanos Ranch located within the incorporated
boundaries of D.B. and Chino Hills. In December 1999, the
Tres Hermanos Conservation Authority (THCA) adopted a
Resolution approving the participation of the City of
Industry (Industry) as an Ex -officio Member of the
Authority. In January 2000, the City Council approved an
Amendment to the THCA Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement
to add the City of Industry as an Ex -officio Member of
the Authority. On February 28, 2000 the THCA Board
considered and approved full membership of the City of
Industry contingent upon approval by the Cities of D.B.
and Chino Hills.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopt Resolution No.
2000 -XX: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of
Diamond Bar Approving Amendment No. 2 to the Tres
Hermanos Conservation Authority Joint Exercise of Powers
Agreement. It is further recommended that the Mayor be
authorized to execute the Supplemental Agreement.
Requested by: City Manager
9.3 (a) RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR IN SUPPORT OF AB 1939
- The Bill places emphasis on implementation of waste
diversion programs to efficiently utilize limited local
resources and not require local governments to go through
extraordinary lengths to ensure mathematical compliance
with the State's 50% waste reduction mandate as insisted
by the California Integrated Waste Management Board
(Waste Board). The Bill also promotes alternative
technologies to reduce dependence on landfill and
incineration as well as requiring the Waste Board to
maintain a local office in L.A. County.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council adopt Resolution No. 2000 -XX supporting AB 1939.
(b) RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SUPPORTING AB 2067 -
MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 9
This bill would allow the 50% diversion amount
requirement for solid waste for L.A. County and the
cities and regional agencies located within that County,
to include diversion through nonburn transformation, as
defined, if specified conditions are met with regard to
the project and the residues generated from the project.
The bill would revise the definition of transformation,
for purposes of this exemption, to exclude nonburn
tansformation, for purposes of measuring compliance with
the act's diversion requirements.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council adopt Resolution No. 2000 -XX supporting AB 2067.
Requested by: Mayor Pro Tem Ansari
RECESS TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Next Resolution No. RA 2000-01
1. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman
ROLL CALL: Agency Members Ansari, Herrera,
O'Connor, VC/Chang, C/Huff
2. 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
Agency on Consent Calendar items or matters of interest to the
public that are not already scheduled for consideration on
this agenda. Although the Redevelopment Agency values your
comments, pursuant to the Brown Act, the Agency generally
cannot take any action on items not listed on the posted
agenda. Please complete a Speaker's Card and give it to the
Agency Secretary (completion of this form is voluntary).
There is a five minute maximum time limit when addressing the
Redevelopment Agency.
3. CONSENT CALENDAR:
3.1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of February 15,
2000 - Approve as submitted.
Requested by: Agency Secretary
3.2 VOUCHER REGISTER - Approve Voucher Register dated March
7, 2000 in the amount of $27,713.05.
Requested by: Finance Division
MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 10
3.3 TREASURER'S STATEMENT - Submitted for the Redevelopment
Agency Board's review and approval is the Treasurer's
Statement for January, 2000.
Requested by: Finance Division
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None
5. OLD BUSINESS: None
6. NEW BUSINESS: None
7. AGENCY MEMBER COMMENTS: Items raised by individual Agency
Members are for Agency discussion. Direction may be given at
this meeting or the item may be scheduled for action at a
future meeting.
RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING:
10. COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS:
11. COUNCIL MEMBER 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.
12. ADJOURNMENT:
TC
FR )M:
AD )RESS:
OF ANIZATION:
AG :NDA #/SUBJECT
r -. 1 ok, 'i:.r'r =a V A-)r'.'4=Q' 'S 444 CrrV VVi.AC.IL
CITY CLERK
PHON
I ex::)ect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my
narre and address as written above.
Signature
TO
FROM:
ADDRESS:
ORGANIZATION
�r'rr JA . V J -u J: 'iJ";°'�
i:;IIY (;LE: =iK
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.
Signaturp5 ,'
I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my
name and address as written above.
Signaturp5 ,'
!J
TC
;:R, W
ADI RE=SS:
- — ", = fts . =-' 'w' A.1->'-4SS THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY CLERK
r_ ------ DATE:
PHONE:
OR iANIZATION:
AGI NDA #/SUBJECT: - f /:--
I exp ect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my
name and address as written above.
Signature
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
"QUICK CAP" MINUTES
MARCH 7, 2000
STUDY SESSION: 5:08 p.m., AQMD Room CC -2
Cost Benefit Analysis & LAFCO Process regarding Annexation
Present: Council Members Chang and Huff, MPT/Ansari,
M/O'Connor. C/Herrera was excused.
Also present were: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; Mike
Jenkins, City Attorney; James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager;
David Liu, Deputy Public Works Director; Bob Rose, Community
Services Director; Mike Nelson, Communications & Marketing
Director; Lynda Burgess, City Clerk Gina Tharani, Accountant
II, Ann Lungu, Associate Planner; Sonya Joe, Development
Services Ass't.; Linda Smith, Development Services Ass't.,
Sgt. Bill Flannery and Capt. Richard Martinez.
ADJOURNED: 6:12 p.m.
1. CLOSED SESSION: 6:15 p.m. - Existing Litigation
(Subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9. Patel vs. City of
Diamond Bar.
ADJOURNED: 6:30 p.m.
2. CALL TO ORDER: 6:40 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Colors presented by Jr. Girl
Scout Troop 482
INVOCATION: Given by Pastor Ab Kastl,
Diamond Canyon Christian Church
ROLL CALL: Council Members Chang, Huff,
Mayor Pro Tem Ansari, Mayor O'Connor. Council Member Herrera
was excused.
Also present were: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; Mike
Jenkins, City Attorney; James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager;
David Liu, Deputy Public Works Director; Bob Rose, Community
Services Director; Mike Nelson, Communications and Marketing
Director and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk.
CA/Jenkins announced that no reportable action had taken place
during the Closed Session.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Mayor
3A. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS:
3.A.1 Presented City Tiles to outgoing Traffic &
Transportation, Planning and Parks & Recreation
MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 2
Commissioners
3.A.2 Presented Certificates of Recognition to the Diamond
Bar High School 1999 Mock Trial Team
3.A.3 Proclaimed March 20-25, 2000 as "Safe Communities
Week"
3.A.4 Proclaimed March, 2000 as "Women's History Month"
3.A.5 Introduced new Team Leader Lt. Pete Fosselman, L.A.
County Sheriff
3.A.6 Introduced new Recreation Staff
3.A.7 Ron Heim, Trammel Crow Co., presented plaques to
CM/Belanger and DCM/DeStefano in appreciation of
their assistance in securing the sites in the
Gateway Corporate Center now occupied by Travelers
Insurance, Citicorp and Allstate Insurance.
3B. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECO14ENDATIONS: CM/Belanger
reported that the SunCal map had closed escrow and the
property now belongs to Pulte Homes. As a result, the City
has received $1.2 million representing consideration for the
approval of the map, which has been deposited in the Parks
Facilities Development Fund. The City also received 350 acres
of permanent open space land and an additional 10 acres of
land around Summit Ridge Park. Regarding the Lanterman issue,
he stated that the State Public Works Board in Sacramento
continued their hearing on the matter until March 20 which has
provided an opportunity for all concerned parties to set up a
meeting. Said meeting will be held March 15 and 16 in
Sacramento.
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Debbie Jackley, Cal Poly Pomona
- announced Cal Poly's events in April.
5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1 JOINT COUNCIL/WVUSD BOARD MEETING - March 8, 2000 - 6:30
p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.2 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - March 9, 2000 -
7:00 p.m., AQMD Board Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.3 PLANNING COMMISSION - March 14, 2000 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD
Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.4 COMMUNITY COORDINATING COMMITTEE - March 20, 2000 - 7:00
p.m., AQMD, Room CC -3, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 3
5.5 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - March 21, 2000 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD
Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.6 DIAMOND BAR COMMUNITY FOUNDATION - March 30, 2000 - 7:00
p.m., AQMD, Room CC -3 and 5, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.7 CENSUS DAY - April 1, 2000 - CENSUS TOWN HALL MEETING
CABLE BROADCAST DATES (to be announced)
5.8 CITY BIRTHDAY PARTY - April 9, 2000 - Noon - 6:00 p.m.,
Peterson Park, 24142 E. Sylvan Glen Dr.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR: Moved by C/Chang, seconded by MPT/Ansari
to approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Items
No. 6.9 and 6.11. Motion carried 4-0-1 (C/Herrera absent) by
the following Roll Call vote:
6.1 APPROVED MINUTES:
6.1.1 Regular Meeting of February 15, 2000 - As
submitted.
6.1.2 Special Meeting of February 18, 2000 - As
submitted.
6.2 RECEIVED AND FILED PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
MINUTES:
6.2.1 Regular Meeting of November 18, 1999 - as
amended.
6.2.2 Regular Meeting of January 27, 2000.
6.3 RECEIVED AND FILED PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
6.3.1 Regular Meeting of January 11, 2000.
6.4 RECEIVED AND FILED TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
MINUTES.
6.5 APPROVED VOUCHER REGISTER - dated March 7, 2000 in the
amount of $894,318.74. M/O'Connor recused herself from
approval of P.O. 9260; P.O. 9721, a check to the Post
Office in the amount of $2,200; Invoice No. 105817;
Invoice No. 105227 and P.O. 8883 due to a potential
conflict of interest regarding the Lanterman Forensic
Expansion Project.
6.6 REVIEWED AND APPROVED TREASURER'S STATEMENT - for
January, 2000.
6.7 APPROVED OFFICE SUPPLY PURCHASE ORDER INCREASE FOR FY
1999-00 - from $15,000 to $19,000 and authorize a total
expenditure amount to Staples in an amount not to exceed
MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 4
$23,000 for FY 99-00.
6.8 APPROVED REDUCTION AND EXONERATION OF SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENT BONDS (FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE AND LABOR &
MATERIAL) FOR TRACT NO. 32400 (STANDARD PACIFIC) -
reduced: a) Bond No. 111 3331 7666 - Grading Bond from
$2,685,256 to $671,314(75$); b) Bond No. 111 1940 5352 -
Storm Drain from $736,639 to $184,159.75 (750); c) Bond
No. 111 4160 9146 - Sewer/Street from $543,674 To
$135,918.50 (750); and exonerated: a) Bond No. 111 3331
7591 - Domestic Water; b) Bond No. ill 331 7609 -
Reclaimed Water; c) Bond No. 111 4160 9153 -
Monumentation; and directed the City Clerk to notify the
Principal and Surety of these actions.
Requested by: Engineering Division
6.10 APPROVED CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH HIRSCH AND ASSOCIATES
FOR THE DESIGN OF LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS IN DIAMOND BAR
- in the amount of $14,050 plus reimbursables of $3,000,
for a total amendment not to exceed $17,050. This will
result in a total contract of $39,050, which includes
$6,600 of reimbursables and allocated $17,050 from
L.L.M.D. #38 reserves for this project.
Requested by: Community Services Division
6.12 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2000-15: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUESTING THE BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
DISTRICT TO ACCEPT ON BEHALF OF SAID DISTRICT A TRANSFER
AND CONVEYANCE OF STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS KNOWN AS
AMBUSHERS STREET DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, IN THE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FOR FUTURE OPERATION, MAINTENANCE,
REPAIR, AND IMPROVEMENT, AND AUTHORIZE THE TRANSFER AND
CONVEYANCE THEREOF.
6.13 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2000-16: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACCEPTING A GRANTING
OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED FOR ROAD
PURPOSES - a 5' wide portion of McDonald's property
adjacent to Golden Springs Dr. and Brea Canyon Rd. for
road purposes and directed the City Clerk to record the
irrevocable Offer of Dedication with the L.A. County
Recorder's Office.
6.14 AWARDED DESIGN SERVICES FOR THW 1999-2000 AREA 2 SLURRY
SEAL PROJECT - to GFB-Friedrich & Assoc., in an amount
not to exceed $36,100 and authorized an amount of $3,600
for contract amendment(s) to be approved by the City
Manager, for a total authorization of $39,700.
MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 5
MATTERS WITHDRAWN FROM CONSENT CALENDAR:
6.9 APPROVAL OF CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH HULS ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT - On February 1, 2000, Council directed staff
to issue an RFP and proceed with an open bidding process
for solid waste and recycling collection services in the
City. The experience and knowledge of J. Michael Huls
would assure a timely and comprehensive approach to the
City's desire to retain a single service provider for the
community. Mr. Huls has been providing technical support
on various studies/reports pertaining to solid waste and
recycling collection services in the City. As the City's
Integrated Environmental Services Coordinator, Mr. Huls
prepared the RFP, which has been made available to all
qualified refuse and recycling services companies.
Moved by M/O'Connor, seconded by MPT/Ansari to approve a
contract amendment with liuls Environmental Management in
an amount not -to -exceed $9,900 and authorize the Mayor to
execute the amendment. Motion carried 4-0-1 (C/Herrera
absent) by the following Roll Call vote:
6.11 EXTENSION OF VENDOR SERVICES FOR PUBLICITY BANNERS - The
City has utilized Dekra-Lite to provide vertical
publicity banners for City events. The City's Purchasing
Ordinance limits the City Manager's purchasing authority
to $15,000. Council previously authorized expenditures
of $29,000 for the Holiday Banner Program. This work was
completed by Dekra-Lite. The City is now purchasing
banners and banner support poles from Dekra-Lite to
advertise the City Birthday Party, at a cost of $9,000.
Dekra-Lite has consistently been the low bidder with the
best turn -around time for these services.
Moved by MPT/Ansari, seconded by C/Huff to authorize an
additional expenditure of $9,000 from General Fund
Reserves for the City Birthday Party publicity banners
and banner support poles and authorized that the purchase
be made from Dekra-Lite, bringing the total expenditure
from this vendor for the current fiscal year to $38,000.
Motion carried 4-0-1 (C/Herrera absent) by the following
Roll Call vote:
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
7.1 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO. 99-1 AND SUBDIVISION
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 99-1 - The Development Code and
Subdivision Ordinance have been in existence for over one
year. The implementation of both codes during this time
period indicates that several amendments are needed in
order to continue to implement the purpose of both codes,
better serve residents and the development community. The
MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 6
Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments on
January 25, 2000 and adopted Resolution No. 2000-02
recommending the City Council adopt the amendments.
M/O'Connor opened the Public Hearing.
There being no testimony offered, M/O'Connor closed the
Public Hearing.
Moved by C/Chang, seconded by C/Huff to direct staff to
prepare an ordinance approving said amendments to the
Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance. Motion
carried 4-0-1 (C/Herrera absent) by the following Roll
Call vote:
8. OLD BUSINESS:
8.1 APPOINTMENT TO PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
C/Huff appointed Jeff Hull.
Moved by MPT/O'Connor, seconded by C/Chang to approve the
appointment to the Parks & Recreation Commission. Motion
carried 4-0-1 (C/Herrera absent) by the following Roll
Call vote:
9. NEW BUSINESS:
9.1 RESOLUTION NO. 2000-17: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS
INTENTION TO VACATE A PORTION OF HIGHCREST DRIVE IN THE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - The City has received a request
from the Highcrest Homeowners Alliance to vacate the
portion of Highcrest Dr. located southerly of Gold Rush
Dr. This matter asks Council to consider the vacation
request, to initiate the vacation proceedings in
accordance with the Streets and Highways Code, and to set
a public hearing for April 18, 2000.
Sandy Erickson - Have had ongoing discussions with Pulte.
Homeowners on Highcrest seeking to retain the cul-de-sac
that currently exists on Highcrest.
Moved by C/Huff, seconded by C/Chang to adopt Resolution
No. 2000-17 declaring its intention to vacate a portion
of Highcrest Dr. Motion carried 3-1-1 (C/Herrera absent,
M/O'Connor - no) by the following Roll Call vote:
9.2 RESOLUTION NO. 2000-18: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO
THE TRES HERMANOS CONSERVATION AUTHORITY JOINT EXERCISE
OF POWERS AGREEMENT TO ADD THE CITY OF INDUSTRY AS A
MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 7
PARTY TO THE AGREEMENT AND MEMBER OF THE BOARD - The City
of Industry Urban Development Agency is the majority
property owner of the undeveloped area commonly known as
the Tres Hermanos Ranch located within the incorporated
boundaries of D.B. and Chino Hills. In December 1999, the
Tres Hermanos Conservation Authority (THCA) adopted a
Resolution approving the participation of the City of
Industry (Industry) as an Ex -officio Member of the
Authority. In January 2000, the City Council approved an
Amendment to the THCA Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement
to add the City of Industry as an Ex -officio Member of
the Authority. On February 28, 2000 the THCA Board
considered and approved full membership of the City of
Industry contingent upon approval by the Cities of D.B.
and Chino Hills.
Moved by C/Huff, seconded by C/Ansari to adopt Resolution
No. 2000 XX: A Resolution of the City Council of the
City of Diamond Bar Approving Amendment No. 2 to the Tres
Hermanos Conservation Authority Joint Exercise of Powers
Agreement and authorized the Mayor to execute the
Supplemental Agreement. Motion carried 4-0-1 (C/Herrera
absent) by the following Roll Call vote:
9.3 (a) RESOLUTION NO. 2000-19: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR IN SUPPORT OF AB 1939
- The Bill places emphasis on implementation of waste
diversion programs to efficiently utilize limited local
resources and not require local governments to go through
extraordinary lengths to ensure mathematical compliance
with the State's 50% waste reduction mandate as insisted
by the California Integrated Waste Management Board
(Waste Board). The Bill also promotes alternative
technologies to reduce dependence on landfill and
incineration as well as requiring the Waste Board to
maintain a local office in L.A. County.
Moved by MPT/Ansari, seconded by C/Chang to adopt
Resolution No. 2000-19 supporting AB 1939. Motion
carried 4-0-1 (C/Herrera absent) by the following Roll
Call vote:
(b) RESOLUTION NO. 2000-20: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SUPPORTING AB 2067 -
This bill would allow the 50% diversion amount
requirement for solid waste for L.A. County and the
cities and regional agencies located within that County,
to include diversion through nonburn transformation, as
defined, if specified conditions are met with regard to
the project and the residues generated from the project.
The bill would revise the definition of transformation,
for purposes of this exemption, to exclude nonburn
MARCH 7, 2000
PAGE 8
transformation for purposes of measuring compliance with
the act's diversion requirements.
Moved by MPT/Ansari, seconded by C/Chang to adopt
Resolution No. 2000-20 supporting AB 2067. Motion
carried 4-0-1 (C/Herrera absent) by the following Roll
Call vote:
RECESS TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1. CALL TO ORDER:
order at 9:30 p.m.
9:30 p.m.
Next Resolution No. RA 2000-01
Chairman Huff called the meeting to
ROLL CALL: Agency Members Ansari, Herrera,
O'Connor, VC/Chang, C/Huff
Also present were: Terrence L. Belanger, Executive Director;
Mike Jenkins, Agency Attorney; James DeStefano, Deputy City
Manager; David Liu, Deputy Public Works Director; Bob Rose,
Community Services Director; Mike Nelson, Communications and
Marketing Director and Lynda Burgess, Agency Secretary.
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None offered.
3. CONSENT CALENDAR: Moved by AM/O'Connor, seconded by
AM/Ansari to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 4-
0-1 by (AM/Herrera absent) the following Roll Call vote:
3.1 APPROVED MINUTES - Regular Meeting of February 15, 2000
- As submitted.
3.2 APPROVED VOUCHER REGISTER - dated March 7, 2000 in the
amount of $27,713.05.
3.3 REVIEWED AND APPROVED TREASURER'S STATEMENT - for
January, 2000.
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None
5. OLD BUSINESS: None
6. NEW BUSINESS: None
7. AGENCY MEMBER COMMENTS: AM/O'Connor congratulated staff on
the recognition bestowed by Trammel Crow Co.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to
conduct, C/Huff adjourned the meeting at 9:33 p.m.
MARCH 7, 2000
PAGE 9
RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING: 9:33 p.m.
10. COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS AND COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS:
11. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to conduct,
M/O'Connor adjourned the meeting at 10:06 p.m. in memory of
Gwendolyn Perkins.
CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION
DISCUSSION OF ANNEXATION PROCESS
AND PRELIMINARY COST -BENEFIT ANALYSIS
Tuesday, February 1, 2000
5:00 P.M.
A.Q.M.D. Room CC -2
MEETING DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
ISSUE STATEMENT:
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO
February 1, 2000
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
Update on 1998 Preliminary Analysis for Annexation and
Informational Report on the Annexation Process
This is an informational item for the City Council Study
Session.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council discuss the results of the
updated cost -benefit analysis for annexation and the overall
annexation process and direct staff as appropriate.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
BACKGROUND:
In August 1998, a preliminary cost -benefit analysis report was completed for annexation
of four housing tracts including Sunset Ridge, Monte Verde, Diamond Ridge, and
Diamond Canyon. More specifically, this report focused on property tax benefits and
services costs. On December 7, 1999, the City Council directed staff to prepare an
updated report on the annexation of four existing housing tracts and expanded report to
include additional residential developments and vacant land.
As per the City Council's request, staff prepared an update to the preliminary cost -
benefit analysis report for annexation of the four above listed housing tracts. In
addition, the updated report includes the existing residential tracts and golf course
located south of the SR 60 freeway, east of Fairway Drive/Brea Canyon Cutoff and
vacant land owned by Shell Oil located west of the SR 57 freeway and south of
Pathfinder Road to the Los Angeles County border.
Staff has also prepared the attached informational report on the annexation process for
discussion at the City Council Study Session.
PREPARED BY:
Sonya Joe
Development Services Assistant
attachments: Informational Report on the Annexation Process
Updated Preliminary Cost -Benefit Analysis
Table Summary of Updated Cost -Benefit Analysis
Preliminary Analysis for Annexation dated August 26, 1998
Application forms to initiate annexation process
Los Angeles County LAFCO information
Study Area Map
Aerials
INFORMATIONAL REPORT ON THE ANNEXATION PROCESS
What does annexation mean?
Annexation is the process of adding territory to an existing city and extending the
city's corporate boundaries.
Why is consistency with the General Plan important?
Annexations should be part of the community's comprehensive plan for its future.
Annexation should occur in an orderly and logical manner; consistent with both
the city General Plan and with state mandates regarding service delivery and the
conservation of agricultural and open -space lands.
If the annexation area has not been included or addressed in the city General
Plan, then an amendment to the plan should be considered. When evaluating
the proposal for consistency with the plan, special consideration should be given
to the annexation's impacts on existing and planned public services, agricultural,
and open -space lands, city housing supplies for all economic levels, and the
adopted sphere of influence.
What is prezoning?
General planning practice requires the zoning to be consistent with the General
Plan. This is important for the annexation process because as mentioned above,
if the city is initiating the annexation, the site should be prezoned to be consistent
with the city's General Plan. Nevertheless, a city should prezone unincorporated
territory that it expects to annex in the future. Prezoning hearings can alert the
city to opposition or to issues of particular concern prior to its filing an application.
What is the Sphere of Influence?
The sphere of influence is the boundary for lands outside the city, but that could
eventually become a part of the city. A sphere of influence is generally
considered the ultimate city boundary. The sphere of influence is an important
benchmark because it defines the primary area within which urban development
is to be encouraged.
Local decision -makers recognize the assumption that the lands lying within the
sphere are those that the city may someday propose to incorporate. If the area
proposed for annexation by the city lies outside its sphere of influence, then the
city must request an amendment to its sphere prior to filing the annexation
request or concurrently with the annexation application. As mentioned above,
the proposed annexed area should be consistent with the General Plan. The
sphere proposal should also be addressed in the required environmental
document.
The Local Agency Formation Commission is the review authority for establishing
a city's sphere of influence. This commission is described in further detail in this
report, under the section below, titled "Who is the review authority for
annexations?"
The Local Agency Formation Commission will determine the requested
amendment to the sphere of influence with respect to each of the following items:
a. The present and planned uses in the area, including agricultural and open -
space lands.
b. The present and probable need for public facilities and services in the
area.
c. The present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services
which the agency provides or is authorized to provide.
d. The existence of any social or economic communities of interest in the
area if the commission determines that they are relevant to the agency.
e. Upon determination of a sphere of influence, the commission shall adopt
that sphere, and shall periodically review and update the adopted sphere.
f. The commission may recommend governmental reorganizations to
particular agencies in the county, using the spheres of influence as the
basis for those recommendations. Those recommendations shall be
made available, upon request, to other agencies or to the public.
Who is the review authority for annexations?
Pursuant to the Cortese -Knox Act, the State requires each county to establish a
Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). Each LAFCO is made up of
elected officials from the county, local cities, special districts, and a member of
the general public. The LAFCO is empowered to review, approve, or deny
proposals for boundary changes and incorporations for cities, counties, and
special districts. Each LAFCO operates independently of the state. However,
the State mandates specific factors, which the LAFCO must address when
considering annexation proposals. Specific factors include state wide policies
and priorities for the preservation of open -space lands and the discouragement
of urban sprawl. In turn, the LAFCO establishes the ground rules by which the
affected city will process the annexation.
4
What is the annexation Process?
In its most basic form, annexation can be considered a four part process. Key
items and terms have been noted in bold for quick reference. The four part
process includes:
1. Prefiling
Prior to filing, the proponent should meet with the LAFCO's executive officer
to establish the minimum requirements for processing, then meet with any
affected special districts and agencies to agree upon a taxation scheme and
needed property tax transfers. An application may be filed with the LAFCO
by petition of affected landowners or registered voters, or by resolution from
the involved city.
Commission action is subject to environmental analysis. More specifically,
action should follow the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
requirements. Nonetheless, an initial study will be required. This makes the
city lead agency for CEQA documents and the LAFCO a responsible agency.
The documents should address, among other concerns, the policy issues
raised in Sections 56301, 56375, and 56841. If an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) is prepared and the annexation is approved, the LAFCO and the
city will be responsible for making findings pursuant to Sections15091 and
15093 of the CEQA Guidelines justifying their actions. In any case, a
document should be prepared to address the annexation as well as all related
General Plan amendment, prezoning, sphere of influence or other proposals.
2. Filing and LAFCO consideration
LAFCO has 30 days in which to review an annexation application and
determine that it is complete for processing. Once the application has been
accepted and deemed complete, the LAFCO will analyze the proposed
annexation in light of the commission's state mandated evaluation criteria and
responsibilities and its own adopted policies.
State mandated evaluation criteria and responsibilities include, but are
not limited to the following:
a. Population, population density, land area and use, per capita assessed
valuation, topography, natural boundaries, drainage basins, proximity
to populated areas, and the likelihood of significant growth during the
next ten years.
b. Need for organized community services, present cost and adequacy of
government services and controls, probable future needs, probable
effect of the annexation and of alternative courses of action on the cost
and adequacy of services and controls in the area and vicinity.
c. The effect of the proposed annexation and of alternative actions on
adjacent areas, on mutual social and economic interests and on the
local government structure of the county.
d. Conformity of the proposal and its effects with LAFCO policies on
providing planned, orderly, efficient patterns of urban development and
with state policies and priorities in conversion of open -spaced lands to
other uses.
e. Effect of the proposal on maintaining the physical and economic
integrity of lands in an agricultural preserve in open -space use.
Clarity of the boundaries of the territory, the non-conformance of
proposed boundaries with lines of assessment or ownership, the
creation of islands or corridors of unincorporated territory and other
similar matters affecting the proposed boundaries.
g. Consistency with appropriate city or county general and specific plans.
h. The sphere of influence of any agency which may be applicable to the
proposal being reviewed.
L The comments of any affected agency.
Pursuant to Government Section 56375(a), the LAFCO may be required to
approve a city's request to annex land adjacent to its borders when the
commission finds that either of the following circumstances exist:
a. The land is substantially surrounded by the city or the Pacific Ocean, is
substantially developed or developing, is not prime agricultural land, is
designated for urban growth on the city's General Plan, and is not
within the sphere of influence of another city.
b. The land is located within an urban service area designated by the
IAFCO, is not prime agricultural land, and is designated for urban
growth on the city's General Plan.
Both of these conditions require review of the annexing city's General Plan by
the LAFCO. Although State law does not mandate that annexations conform
to local General Plans beyond requiring that the LAFCO consider consistency
with the city or county General Plans, a General Plan which reflects the
proposed annexation improves the chances that the annexation will be
approved.
Before the executive officer issues a certificate of filing, the involved city,
county, and special districts are required to negotiate the allocation of
property tax revenues during a 30 day mandatory negotiation period, but are
not required to reach agreement. However, the executive officer cannot issue
a certificate of filing until an agreement is reached.
LAFCO may approve, conditionally approve, or deny the proposed
annexation. The conditions set by the commission's resolution will be the
ground rules for the conducting authority's subsequent action. Within 30 days
of the LAFCO's resolution, any person or affected agency may file a written
request with the executive officer for reconsideration
3. Proceedings of the Conducting Authority
The involved city, acting as the "conducting authority" in accordance with the
requirements of the Cortese -Knox Act and LAFCO, will hold a public protest
hearing to determine whether the proposed annexation must be approved
without an election, terminated, or whether an election must be called to
determine the proposal's outcome. The number of protests received before
and during the hearing will determine which of these options the city must
follow.
The city should encourage public review and comment at every stage of the
process. Pursuant to State law, the LAFCO is required to provide notification
of a pending proposal to County departments, interested individuals, and local
government agencies that may be potentially be affected by a LAFCO project.
The LAFCO must also wait until information is returned from the County
Assessor, Auditor, and various state agencies before a proposal may be
scheduled for a public hearing. While the Cortese -Knox Act provides
opportunities for review at the LAFCO and city hearing levels, the General
Plan and prezoning procedures offer additional possibilities for input.
Nonetheless, early public response is helpful in assessing public sentiment
and identifying areas of concern. Therefore, hearings should be coordinated
if feasible.
If the annexation is approved, the city will forward a resolution containing the
results of its activities to the LAFCO for final review and ratification. If the
proposal is terminated, a resolution to this effect will be forwarded to the
LAFCO and no new annexation may be proposed on the site for at least one
year, unless the LAFCO waives the limitation upon finding that the limitation is
detrimental to the public interest. When an election is held, only residents of
the proposed city or territory have a right to vote on the issue of annexation.
4. Final Certification
When the LAFCO executive officer is satisfied that all elements of the Act
have been properly addressed, that the annexation approved by the city
conforms to the annexation proposal approved by the Commission, and that
all conditions have been met, he or she will certify that the annexation is
complete. The annexation is not complete until it has been certified by the
executive officer. The commission may establish an "effective date" for the
annexation. Alternatively, the effective date will be the date the certificate of
completion is recorded by the County Recorder. If the executive officer finds
the city's submittal to be incomplete, then it will be returned to the city for
completion.
How long does it take to process a proposal?
The normal, routine proposal will take about three to four months to complete
from the time a completed application is accepted in the staff office. More
complex proposals can take from six months to a year.
Does LAFCO charge a fee to process jurisdictional boundary chance
proposals?
State law authorizes LAFCO to charge the estimated reasonable cost to process
jurisdictional boundary change proposals. Processing fees vary depending on
the type of proposal (i.e. district formation, merger, reorganization, etc.)
Annexation and detachment fees are also based on acreage. A fee schedule for
the Los Angeles County LAFCO is attached with this report.
8
UPDATED PRELIMINARY COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS
This report is an update to the preliminary cost -benefit analysis prepared in 1998, for
the proposed annexation of the four residential tracts identified as Sunset Ridge, Monte
Verde, Diamond Ridge, and Diamond Canyon. In addition, the updated report includes
the existing residential tracts and golf course located south of the SR 60 freeway, east
of Fairway Drive/Brea Canyon Cutoff and vacant land owned by Shell Oil located west
of the SR 57 freeway and south of Pathfinder Road to the Los Angeles County border.
The purpose of this preliminary cost -benefit analysis is to evaluate the anticipated
amount of property tax revenue and compare this to the service expenditure burden.
PROPERTY TAX REVENUE
Background
Under Proposition 13, property taxes are limited to one percent of a property's assessed
value. Generally speaking, the rate cannot be increased except when approved by a
two-thirds vote of the local residents. Although the amount of property taxes received is
limited, property taxes are still considered a key source of tax revenue for local
government.
Analysis
The anticipated property tax revenue was calculated for the above listed annexation
areas. The method of calculation is the same method used in the preliminary cost -
benefit analysis completed in 1998. The calculation is based on the property tax dollar
breakdown in which $0.053 is collected for the City of Diamond Bar Tax District 1. The
calculation is also based on the total number of households in which the Census
indicates there are approximately 3.40 persons per household. A random sample of
households from each tract was used to calculate the mean and standard deviation.
The total amount of property taxes paid per each household was retrieved from the
TRW REDI Win2 Data computer database.
The anticipated property tax revenue is as follows:
1. Sunset Ridge
# of households = 101
Mean (x -bar) = $4,824.788
Std. Deviation = 1013.948
Property tax revenue = $25,827.089
2. Monte Verde
# of households = 161
Mean (x -bar) = $3,205.290
Std. Deviation = 492.764
Property tax revenue = $27,350.739
3. Diamond Ridge
# of households = 76
Mean (x -bar) = $4,914.965
Std. Deviation = 508.401
Property tax revenue = $19,797.479.
4. Diamond Canyon
# of households = 81
Mean (x -bar) = $2,667.887
Std. Deviation = 1494.06
Property tax revenue = $11,453.238
5. Tract No. 9058
# of households = 22
Mean (x -bar) = $4,541.014
Std. Deviation = 2664.629
Property tax revenue = $5,294.822
6. Tract No. 27141
# of households = 228
Mean (x -bar) = $2,370.500
Std. Deviation = 673.801
Property tax revenue = $28,645.122
7. Tract No. 25170
# of households = 57
Mean (x -bar) = $2,045.935
Std. Deviation = 385.792
Property tax revenue = $6,180.769
8. Tract No. 28140
# of households = 71
Mean (x -bar) = $2,102.838
Std. Deviation = 686.037
Property tax revenue = $7,912.978
9. Tract No. 28554
# of households = 19
Mean (x -bar) = $1,870.155
Std. Deviation = 602.75
Property tax revenue = $1,883.246
10. Tract No. 31219
# of households = 126
Mean (x -bar) = $1376.586
Std. Deviation = 303.678
Property tax revenue = $9,192.840
11. Tract No. 31550
# of households = 87
Mean (x -bar) = $2,005.827
Std. Deviation = 431.655
Property tax revenue = $9,248.871
12. Tract No. 31845
# of households = 54
Mean (x -bar) = $1836.118
Std. Deviation = 361.190
Property tax revenue = $5,254.969
13. Tract No. 44301
# of households= 15
Mean (x -bar) = $3,555.748
Std. Deviation = 323.066
Property tax revenue = $2,826.819
GRAND TOTAL NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS —1,090
According to the Census, there are approximately 3.4 persons per each
household. Therefore, the anticipated population of the annexed areas is 3,706
persons.
GRAND TOTAL PROPERTY TAX REVENUE — $160,855.84
10
The following unincorporated is presently vacant and owned by Shell Oil. This area is
located west of the 57 freeway south of Pathfinder to the Los Angeles County border.
The following is the amount of property tax revenue paid by Shell Oil.
14. Property tax revenue = $6,483.62 for 333.55 acres
$11,957.01 for 577.61 acres
$7,744.84 for 337.75 acres
$6,303.54 for 108.39 acres
State Subvention Funds
State subvention funds are revenues from other governmental agencies. These
revenues are generated from state taxes in -lieu of local taxes. As has been reported to
the City Council, over the past several fiscal years, the City will lose its incorporation
population (74, 115), which is currently used by the State of California to subvent (on a
per capita basis) vehichle license fees, gas tax and other revenues, on December 31,
1999. The loss in General Fund revenue could be as much as $600,000 and the loss in
Gas Tax revenues could be as much as $275,000.
Highway Users' Gas Tax
Section 2105
Mean (x -bar) = 0.638664/capita/month
Revenue = $2,366.888
Section 2107
Mean (x -bar) = 0.894096/capita/month
Revenue = $3,313.519
Total Revenue = $5,680.407
Motor Vehicle Licensing Fee
This fund amount fluctuates depending on the per capita factor. The amount of funds
received is based on the population size.
For Fiscal Year 99-2000, the estimated per capita for six months is $18.98. The
estimated per capita for one year is $37.96.
The estimated revenue for 3,706 persons within the annexed areas is $140,679.76
AB 2766 (South Coast Air Quality Management District)
Mean (x -bar) = 2.3 cars/household
# of households = 3,706
$2.00/car
Revenue = $5,014.000
ii
Franchise Fees
Companies are granted special privileges for the continued use of public property, such
as city streets. The franchise fees are the amounts required for the continued granting
of these privileges. Private companies operating under a government endorsed
monopoly pay the city a certain percentage of net business done in the city.
SC Edison (1 %) $10,345.86
SC Gas Company (1 %) $3,113.92
Adelphia Cable (5%) $8,611.43
Total = $22,071.21
Prop A — Transit Tax
The City receives twenty-five percent of the'/2 % Prop A Sales tax (approved by voters
in 1980). These funds are distributed by the L.A. County Metropolitan Transportation
Authority (MTA), and are distributed to Los Angeles County cities on a proportional
population basis. The funds are to be used for the development of transit programs
within the guidelines established by MTA.
$11.459 per capita
Total Revenue = $42,467.054
Prop C — Transit Tax
The City receives twenty-five percent of the 1/2 % Prop A Sales tax (approved by voters
in 1990). These funds are distributed by the L.A. County Metropolitan Transportation
Authority (MTA), and are distributed to Los Angeles County cities on a proportional
population basis. The funds are to be used for improving, expanding, and maintaining
public transit services. These expenditures must be consistent with the County's
Congestion Management Program.
$9.0325 per capita
Total Revenue = $33,474.445
12
SERVICE EXPENDITURE BURDENS
Background
The additional area considered for annexation may require extensive police and fire
services, utility services, school services, and recreation services. These services may
already be available in the City of Diamond Bar, but some services may utilize different
service resources. In any case, the City should anticipate this service expenditure
burden when considering an area for annexation.
Analysis
The anticipated service costs were calculated based on the dollar amount per capita.
The dollar amount per capita was taken from the City of Diamond Bar's Annual Budget
Report Fiscal Year 1999-2000. The method used to calculate the service expenditure
burdens is also the same method used in the preliminary analysis completed in 1998.
The anticipated service costs are as follows:
Street Maintenance and Public Works
The Los Angeles County will slurry seal the public streets every seven years. Whereas,
the City of Diamond Bar will slurry seal the public streets every five years. A more
detailed analysis will be required to determine actual costs.
The following results are per capita estimates based on the current City budget. The
services expenditure items have been carried over from the previous report. However,
a more detail analysis will also be required to determine actual service expenditure
burdens for these two items.
Sheriff
$70.545 per capita
Total Cost = $261,439.770
Recreation
$15.457 per capita
Total Cost = $57,283.642
CONCLUSION
This updated cost -benefit analysis report was prepared to serve as an informational
packet only. In conclusion, this information should be further discussed and considered
prior to the annexation process.
13
N
N
J
Q
Z
Q
LL
W
Z
W
m
F
N
O
U
O
w
a
0
a
m`0
y
N
co
C
cC
V
N
c�
N
70
2 L
0
E
To: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
From: David Chen
Re: Annexation Project: Preliminary Analysis
Date: Wednesday, August 26, 1998
Preliminary Analysis for Annexation of
Sunset Ridge • Monte Verde . Diamond Ridge . Diamond Canyon
The following report presents a cost -benefit analysis -of the proposed annexation
of four residential areas bordering the western boundary of the City of Diamond Bar,
located in unincorporated Los Angeles County territory Rowland Heights.
The four areas are predominantly comprised of single family dwellings. All are
recently constructed, some homes in Diamond Canyon are still incomplete. Sunset Ridge
is gated, and Diamond Canyon will be as well.
The acquisition of these four territories would provide a net increase in City
funds, allow residents to vote for local public servants and enjoy City services.
Property Tax
The largest financial contribution from the annexed areas will be property tax
revenue. The following is a rough sample survey of Sunset Ridge, Monte Verde, and
Diamond Ridge. Diamond Canyon residents' property tax revenues have not yet been
included in county computer records, as many of the houses are still uninhabited.
Sunset Ridge
Sunset Ridge is a gated community comprised of a total 91 homes on tract
numbers TR 35765, TR 35764, TR 35766, TR 35767, and TR 44343. I used House
Numbering Maps HNM 99-309 and HNM 102-309. The ZIP code for the area is 91789.
Deriving random numbers using a TI -83 Graphing Calculator, I produced a
random sample of lot numbers. Sample size was 21. I then found the corresponding
addresses on the HNMs. Entering these addresses into a computer program, called TRW
REDI Win2Data ver. 2.4, I derived property taxes paid by each individual household last
year. The percentage of property tax revenue appropriated to City Diamond Bar Tax
District 1 is 5.3% or $0.053 for every $1 (Annual Tax Increment Tables). I then
multiplied the mean property tax payment by the total number of households within
Sunset Ridge multiplied by the appropriation percentage to arrive at a dollar figure
representing the amount of financial contribution expected from property tax revenue
from this residential community.
I also calculated the standard deviation of the sample and found the uncertainty of
the mean, using a t -value of approximately 2.0, following the formula
Um=ts/�n
The following are the figures derived:
mean (x -bar) = 4654.922 std. dev. (s) = 1137.636 Unc. (U) = 2394.644
Property tax revenue = $22,450.689 ± 2,394.644
2
Monte Verde
Monte Verde is a community comprised of 160 homes on TR 33256 and HNM
99-309. The ZIP code for the area is 91789.
Using a sample size of 30 and following the same procedure as described above, I
derived the following numbers:
mean (x -bar) = 3241.797 std. dev. (s) = 640.916 Unc. (U) =,2170.637
Property tax revenue = $30,043.054. ± 2170.637
Diamond Ridge
Diamond Ridge is a community comprised of 76 homes. Since the tracts are new,
their existence was not reflected on county maps. The ZIP code for the area is 91765.
Using a sample of 22 and following the same procedure as described above, I
derived the following numbers:
mean (x -bar) = 4483.832 std. dev. (s) = 604.845 Unc. (U) =1064.820
Property tax revenue = $18,060.875 ±'1064.820
Diamond Canyon
Diamond Canyon is a community comprised of 75 homes, one church and one
corporate building, a gate is being constructed that will enclose the homes only.
Residential property tax records are not yet available on TRW REDI Win2Data ver. 2.4,
but using the values of two homes and an estimated tax rate of 1.25%, I was able to
estimate property tax revenue. However, the reliability of a two sample study is poor at
best. Commercial propertytax also is apportioned to the city. The corporate building for
Cordis Webster, a Johnson & Johnson Company pays $53,761.31 in property tax. City
Diamond Bar Tax District 1 receives $2,849.349 from that collection.
mean (x -bar) = 5437.5 std. dev. (s) = 265.165 Unc. (U) =1054.031
Residential Property tax revenue = $21,614.063 ± 1054.031
Total Property tax revenue = $24,463.412 ± 1054.031
State Subventions
State subventions are revenues from other governmental agencies. These revenues
are generated from state taxes in -lieu of local taxes.
Highway Users' (Gas) Tax
Using previous records and receipts from 8/97 to 6/98, I calculated the mean per
capita payment over the noted period. Since there were two parts to the Gas Tax, Section
2105 and 2107, I calculated these means separately. I then found the amount of revenue
expected from the annexation areas by multiplying the mean per capita per month Gas
Tax payment for each section by 3.40 persons per household (census) multiplied by 423
households multiplied by 12 months. I then added the two totals for each section to arrive
at a total expected revenue. Here are the relevant figures:
Section 2105 Section 2107
mean (x -bar) = 0.495210/capita/month mean (x -bar) = 0.607150/capita/month
Revenue = 8,456.53 ± 668.594 Revenue =11,483.739 ± 800.121
Total Revenue = 20,009.389 ± 146$.715
Motor Vehicle Licensing Fee
I followed similar procedure as that for the Highway Users' Tax. The "Car Tax"
will be significantly decreased—by as much as 25% possibly—in the coming year.
Therefore, this figure will not be reliable in the future due to policy changes. Following
are the figures derived:
mean (x -bar) = 57297.888 std. dev. (s) = 7265.786 Unc. (U) = 4819.577
Total Revenue = 57,297.888 ± 4,819.577
AB 2766 (SCAQMD)
The South Coast Air Quality Management Division (SCAQMD) pays cities $2
per car registered for a city. This money can only be used to fund programs that reduce
vehicle emissions. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)
4
provided the figure of 2_3 for average number of motor vehicles per household.
Therefore, the reyenue calculated will be an overestimate, since the term "motor
vehicles" includes vehicles other than cars.
mean (x -bar) = 2.3 cars/hhold 423 hhold $2/car
Total Revenue = $1,945.80
Other subventions apply, such as the Off -Highway Motor Vehicle Licensing Fee,
however, they contribute a negligible amount as compared to the ones detailed. (The Off -
Highway Motor Vehicle Licensing Fee yielded $22.363)
Franchise Fees
Private companies, such as utilities, operating under a government endorsed
monopoly pay the city a certain percentage of net business done in the city. Such
companies include Southern California Edison, Southern California Gas Company, and
Century Communications (cable TV).
SC Edison (1%) $5,747.70
SC Gas Company (1%) $1,683.20
Century Communications (5%) $4,784.13
Total $12,215.03
5
Propositions
State propositions to enact certain programs deliver funding to cities based on
population.
Receipt records for the propositions did not include per capita information, nor
were they complete enough to render a suitably reliable estimate. I used county totals to
figure per capita allotment of funds. I then multiplied the total number of households
within the annexation areas by the average number of persons per household. I am
assuming funds are distributed evenly county -wide. If any discrepancy exists among
cities' appropriation of these funds, they will not be reflected in this estimate.
$11.094 per capita 1438.2 persons
Total Revenue = $15,954.888
$9.251 per capita 1438.2 persons
Total Revenue = $13,304.614
6
Street Maintenance and Public Works
Since Sunset Ridge and Diamond Canyon are gated communities, their streets are
privately maintained. County contractors recently completed a slurry -seal for the streets
of Monte Verde. The slurry -seal is done every seven years. The maintenance of the
streets of Diamond Ridge has yet to be transferred to county control and is still the
developer's responsibility, as to the best information available at the date of this report.
Using previous year budget information, I calculated the amount spent per capita
for police enforcement, then applied that per capita figure to the estimated population of
the annexation areas. This figure is probably an overestimate, since additional cost may
be limited to only additional contract services. Consider this erring on the side of caution.
$65.382 per capita 1438.2 persons
Total Cost = $94,032.932
Following a similar procedure as described above, I found the per capita cost for
current Diamond Bar residents and applied that figure to the annexation population.
$12.925 per capita 1438.2 persons
Total Cost =18,588.060
Closing Remarks
While the figures here look very promising, it is the recommendation of this
report that a second, more thorough analysis be undertaken, if for no other purpose than
as a double-check for these results. The next annexation analysis might also endeavor to
project figures for future years.
r_
.j
N
v_
a
N
CPI
C4
0
O
cl
_
o
M
�O
o
a
M
N
N
00
O_
00
M
00
�
O
lP1
+I
+I
+I
+I
+I
000
lC
CD
L
tn
n
00
O
N
_
�
000
M
O
O
00
\D
oro
M
d
O
N
00
0w0
ON
N
�D
N
oN0
^
N
O
00
L
N
N
Ow
N
v
00
N
"fl
�
G
a
W
�
0
C
=
�
;s
•a
co
a
ca
U
O
V1
�
e.
cYr
F
r_
.j
N
v_
a
N
CPI
q
O
cl
_
o
a
M
N
N
_O
O_
00
+I
+I
+I
+I
+I
000
lC
CD
0000
O0
O
tn
n
00
O
N
_
�
000
M
O
O
00
\D
oro
M
O
00
h
I
O
N
00
0w0
ON
eh
G
O
M
�D
N
oN0
^
N
O
00
of
N
Ow
N
v
M
N
U
x
�
e�
y
x
E�
d
o
o
U
o
>
:�
c
Gi
w
cu
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
PROPERTY TAX DOLLAR BREAKDOWN
S 0.249 Los Angeles County General
S 0.191 Walnut Valley Unified School District
$ 0.161 Consolidated Fire Protection District of LA Co.
$ 0.134 Educational Augmentation Fund Impound
S 0.085 Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund
011S3 G"rtp..Diamond * t. t1
$ 0.029 Mt. San Antonio Community College
S 0.022 L A County Library
$ 0.020 County Lighting Maintenance District No. 10006
—
$0.0122
Canty Sanitation District No 21.Operating
— $0.0093
LA County Flood Control Maintenance
— $0.0076
County school service Fund Walnut Valley
— $0.0066
Walnut Valley Warr District hmprovemmt Dist. 3
— S0.0062
LA Canty Fire. FFW
— $0.0041
Throe Valley Municipal Water Dist. Original Area
— S0.0027
Childtea's institutional Tuition Fund
— S0.0016
LA County Flood control Improvement Dist,
— $0.0016
Walnut Valley Water District lmptovemeot Disc 4
— S 0.0014
County School Services
— $0.0008
Development Ctr Handicapped Minor Walnut Valley
— $0.0007
Walnut Valley Water District
— $ 0.0004
Southeast Mosquito Abatement District
— $0.0003
Mt San Antonio Childrm's Center Fund
— $0.0001
LA County Accumulative Capital Outlay
$1.000
ATI (Annual Tax Increment) Ratios For Tax Rate Area 10068, Excluding Redevelopment Factors & Additional Debt Service
Source: HdL Conn do Cone, Los Anodes County Assessor 1996/97 Animal Tar Increment Tables NE70MI452
This report is not to be used in support of debt issuance without the wriaten consent of HdL, Cotsn & Cone.
Change of Organlzatlorti. -,eorganlza.ioni wec -a -
APPLICATION TO INITIATE PROCEEDING FOR CHANGE OF
ORCANIZATION/REORGANIZATION/ SPECIAL REORGANIZATION
(Pursuant to the Cortese -Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985,
Division 3, Title 5 Commencing with Section 56000, of the Government Code
TO: LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION
County of Los Angeles
Room 383, Hill of Administration
500 West Temple Street
Los Angeles, California 90012
DESIGNATION OF PROPOSAL:
AFFECTED CITY/DISTRICT:
RELATED JURISDICTIONAL CHANGES:
GENERAL LOCATION OF
PROPOSAL:
THOMAS GUIDE PAGE(S) _
PROPOSAL INITIATED BY:
APPLICANT:
SIGNED:
TITLE, if any
TELEPHONE:
DATE:
I. THE SUBJECT AREA
A. GENERAL DESCRIPTION
http://Ialafco.co.1a.ca.us/fonnOl.htm
COORDINATES
Resolution Landowner/Voter Petition
(CITY, DISTRICT OR CHIEF PETITIONER)
(ADDRESS)
(CITY, STATE, ZIP)
1. Acres or Square Miles:
2. What major highways and sheets serve the
3. Topography:_
4. Physical boundaries, if any (rivers, freeways, etc.):
B. POPULATION AND HOUSING
1. Estimated Population:
2. Number of Registered Voters:
Give source and date of information:.
3. Number and type of dwelling unit:_
C. LAND USE AND ZONING [if applicable]
1. What is the present land use in the subject area?
2. What is the land use in the surrounding area?
3. If annexation to a city is involved as a part of this proposal, what is the city --s general plan
designation for the area?
4. Describe any proposed change in land use and zoning as a result of this proposal (including, if
applicable, prezoning by an affected city):
5. If this proposal will result in development of property, describe the type of development
proposed (type of business or industry, single- or multi -family residential, etc.; number of units
or facilities):
http://lalafco.co.1a.ca.us/formo l.htm
Change of Organtzattoty.teorganiza,aotv,�opec:_a..tieur.g�� . ... -
What effect would denial of this proposal have on the proposed development, if any:
Is the subject area proposed to be included within a redevelopment project area upon
completion of this proposal?
II. THE PROPOSAL
A. What are the reasons for initiation of this proposal?
B. What are the alternate courses of action, if any? (Include the names of other local agencies having the
authority to provide the same or similar services as those proposed)
C. Plan for Providing Services
Describe the services to be extended to the subject area, the range and level of those services, when
the services can be extended to the area, and how the services will be financed, including any
improvement or upgrading of structures, roads, sewer or water facilities or other conditions which
would be imposed or required by the local agency within the subject area if this proposal is
completed:
D. List the division, acquisition, improvement, disposition, sale or transfer of any property, real or
personal, belonging to a city or district that is involved in this proposal:
E. List the disposition, transfer or division of any money or funds and any other obligations of a city or
district involved as part of this proposal:
F. To what extent will residents or landowners within the subject area be liable or remain liable for any
existing indebtedness of the city or district to or from which annexation, detachment, or detachment
and incorporation is proposed:
http://Ialafco.co.1a.ca.us/formo l .htm
Change of Organization/Reorgamzattoni3pecta..teorgaT..��:._ -
G. What services and/or costs to residents or landowners in the area would be increased, reduced, or
eliminated as a result of this proposal?
H. List any terms or conditions requested as part of this proposal:
III. GENERAL
A. List names and addresses of any persons, organization or agencies known to you who may be opposed
to this proposal:
B. ANY OTHER COMMENTS YOU MAY WISH TO MAKE [Attach additional pages if necessary] :
C. Names and addresses of persons who are to receive notice of hearing, staff report and minutes:
IV. INCORPORATION OF INSTRUCTIONS
By submitting this Application to Initiate Proceedings, the applicant acknowledges receipt of the
Instruction for Filing Application for Change of Organization/ Reorganization/Special Reorganization@
and agrees to be bound by same, including, but not limited to the provisions contained therein regarding
filing and processing fees, and defense and indemnification of the Commission.
Contact Person:
(Name)
(Address)
(Telephone)
Back to To
Back to Forms Page
http://Ialafco.co.1a. ca. us/form0 l .htm
LAFCO PARTY DISCLOSURE FORM
LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION
PARTY DISCLOSURE FORM
Information Sheet
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 84308, this form must be completed by applicants
or, persons who are the subject of any applicant proceeding pending before the Local Agency
Formation Commission.
IMPORTANCE NOTICE
If you are an applicant for, or the subject of any application or proceeding pending
before the Local Agency Formation Commission, you are prohibited from making a
campaign contribution of greater than $250 to any commissioner, his or her alternate,
or any candidate for such position. This prohibition ends three (3) months after a final
decision is rendered by the Local Agency Formation commission. In addition, no
commissioner, alternate, or candidate may solicit or accept a campaign contri
dbution of
more than $250 from you during this period.
These prohibitions also apply to your agents and/or lobbyists. If you are a closely held
corporation this prohibition applies to your majority shareholder as well.
2. You must file the attached disclosure form and disclose whether you or your agent(s)
have in the aggregate contributed more than $250 to any commissioner, his or her
alternate, or any candidate for the position during the twelve (12) month period
preceding the filing of the application or the initiation of the proceeding.
3. If you or your agent have made a contribution to any commissioner, alternate, or
candidate during the twelve (12) months preceding the decision on the application or
proceeding, that commissioner must disqualify himself or herself from the decision.
However, disqualification is not required if the commissioner, alternate, or candidate
returns the campaign contribution within thirty (30) days of learning about both the
contribution and the proceedings.
This form must be completed and filed with your application.
go to page 2
Back to Forms Pape
Back to Topics Pape
http://Ialafco.co.1a.ca.us/formO6.htm
Instruction for filing App'.tcatzon :or 1— aange o:: --
INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILING APPLICATION FOR
CHANGE OF ORGANIZATION / REORGANIZATION/ SPECIAL REORGANIZATION
Submit the following to: Local Agency Formation Commission
Reom 3F 3, Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration
500 West Temple Street
Los Angeles, California 90012
1. RESOLUTION (PETITION) MAKING APPLICATION
If the application is initiated toy registered voter or landowner petition, submit the original petition. If
initiated by resolution of an affected agency, submit one certified copy.
20 copies.
ions and
s must conform
2 APPLICATo State Board NE ORM tion Standards (_See Atta-- Submit the original ched) For additional t requirements see Items 3 and
4 below.
3. LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Submit on disk.
The description should be double spaced and must bear the designation of the proposal.
(e.g., Annexation No 1" to the City of
4. MAP
Submit an original or erasable duplicate Mylar(must be to scale and legible) and 5 printed copies.
Extraneous information must be left off. (e.g., contour lines, house set backs, etc.). Maps will not be
returned.
Map shall not be smaller than 82" x 11 " or larger than I V x 17". Any other size must be authorized
by this office.
The map(s) must show the designation of the proposal and the name(s) of the affected agency.
(e.g., "Annexation No. 1 to the City of
The boundaries of the subject territory must be distinctively shown on the map without obliterating
any essential geographic or political features.
All maps must be professionally drawn or copied. Rough sketches of maps or plats will not be
accepted.
5. FILING FEES (EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 1998)
(Make check payable to the County of Los Anr eles).
Annexations and Detachments
Under 1 acre
$1,500
1 to 9.99 acres
2'000
10 to 19.99 acres
2,500
20 to 49.99 acres
3'000
50 to 99.99 acres
3,500
100 to 149.99 acres
4,000
http://lalafco.co.1a.ca.us/fonn02.htm
Instruction for filing Application tor (_ ange o':-rgan1za'aonj.,,Qw... )3pec..a...';u
150+ acres 4,500
Other Actions
Special Reorganization
$8,000
Incorporation/Disincorporation
6,000
District Formation
5,000
District Dissolution
3,500
District Consolidation
3,500
District Merger
3,500
Establishment of Subsidiary District
3,500
Reorganizations
3,500
Activation of Latent Power
3,000
Detachments Due to Lack of Service
500
Sphere of Influence
3,000
Sphere of Influence Amend./Review
1,500
Sphere of Influence Amend w/annexation
500
Reconsideration of LAFCO determinations
700
Out of agency service agreements
2,000
Map and legal description review
300
Petition Verification
Actual Cost, as required by Registrar -Recorder
Environmental Review
CEQA Exemption No charge
Extended Initial Study (if required) Actual cost, due at time of contract execution
Preparation of EIR (if required) Actual cost, due at time of contract execution
Review initial study or determine EIR, is $ 500
required
Appeal of environmental determination 500
Other Fees
http://Ialafco.co.1a.ca.us/formO2.htm
Instruction for filing Application for (_ iange o', 'Jrgamzalaonj.-,cuz... i 6Uet- _a 1—...
State Controller's Review of Incorporation Fiscal Analysis
For any request made pursuant to Government Code Section 56833.3, the requester shall include a
deposit, in an amount to be determined by the Executive Officer, to cover the costs of the Controller's
Office review. Upon completion of the Controller's Office review and final billing to LAFCO, the
requester will be: (a) refunded the amount that the deposit exceeds the actual costs to LAFCO; or (b)
charged the amount that the actual cost to LAFCO exceeds the deposit.
Outside Legal Counsel
Outside Legal Counsel Fees Actual Cost
An additional fee may be charged based on actual costs to hire outside counsel in instances where a
conflict of interest may exist for County Counsel. Application of the charge will be at the discretion
of the Executive Officer, except that such charge may be appealed directly to the Commission
Indemnification/LeEal Defense
Legal Defense Actual cost
As a condition of approval of any change of organization or sphere of influence review by the Local
Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), the applicant shall be required to defend, indemnify, and
hold harmless LAFCO or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding
against LAFCO or its agents, officers, and employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval
of LAFCO concerning the processing of the proposal or any action relating to, or arising out of, such
approval when such action is brought within the applicable statute of limitations. The Commission
has adopted a policy and procedure setting out the process by which this charge will be applied. At
the discretion of the Executive Officer, a deposit of funds by the proponent may be required in an
amount sufficient to cover the anticipated litigation costs, except that such charge may be appealed
directly to the commission.
Copying of Tape of Commission Hearing $9.00 per tape
Preparation of Transcript of Hearing $17.00 per page
Assessor's Processing $20 per parcel for the first 50 parcels
$10 per parcel for each additional parcel with a limit
of $1,500 per proposal
Fee Provisions
Payment of the Filing Fee listed in paragraph 5 on page 2, of these instructions, should not be
construed to either obligate the applicant to pay any additional processing fees nor constitute a waiver
by the Commission of its authority to require payment of additional processing fees pursuant to
Government Code Section 56383,
a. Filing fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Filing.
b. Fees are non-refundable.
c. Fees may be waived or reduced by the Executive Officer if financial hardship is
demonstrated, or if the application is in response to a LAFCO condition or recommendation.
d. Fees may be appealed to the Commission prior to submittal of an application. A request for
waiver or reduction of the fees shall be submitted in writing and shall specify the reasons for
the request. The request will be considered by the Commission at the next meeting in which
the item can be legally placed on the agenda.
NOTE:
http://lalafco.co.1a.ca.us/form02.htm
instruction '.or?a.ing i-ipp..zcaaon of .,zange o.; �rgarz�a. u u.�uu.r'...�3pccia-.�eorvanr.,-n..0
There is a processing fee required by the State Board of Equalization upon completion of
proceedings, based on acreage category. Applicant will be notified by LAFCO staff of the
amount and when the fee must be submitted to this office.
6. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS
If the application is initiated by a public agency, submit 13 copies of the EIR, Negative Declaration
or Declaration of Exemption.
If the application is initiated by petition, the applicant may be required to submit additional
information for an environmental assessment.
7. PREZONING ORDINANCE
If the proposal involves annexation to a city, submit one copy of the prezone ordinance.
8. LANDOWNER LIST
Submit 4 copies of a list of names and addresses of all owners of land within the subject proposal.
(This requirement is not applicable to city incorporation or special reorganization proposals).
9. HOUSE NUMBERS
For city boundary change proposals only, submit two copies of either a map or list of all streets and
addresses within the proposal. If addresses will be changed upon completion of the boundary change,
submit both current and new numbers.
If you have any questions, contact LAFCO staff at (213) 974-1448.
Back to Top
Back to Forms Page
http://lalafco.co.1a.ca.us/form02.htm
Change of Jurisdictional Bounc.ary
STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
CHANGE OF JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARY
REQUIREMENTS FOR STATEMENTS, BOUNDARY DESCRIPTIONS, MAPS
and SCHEDULE OF PROCESSING FEES
Sections 54902, 54902.5, Government Code
December 2, 1998
1. GENERAL APPLICATION: Fees and requirements set forth in this schedule shall apply to all statements filed
pursuant to Sections 54900 to 54903 of the Government Code. Provisions and definitions given in Sections 3 and
4 below are to help you compute the fees and serve as guidelines to ensure acceptance of maps and boundary
descriptions.
A. Final date to file with the State Board of Equalization for a change of jurisdictional boundary for special
revenue district is on or before December 1 of the year immediately preceding the year in which the
assessments or taxes are to be levied.
B. All fees shall accompany the statements.
C. Mail statements, maps and fees to Tax Area Services Section, State Board or Equalization, 450 N
Street, MIC: 59, P.O. Box 942879, Sacramento, CA 94279-0059. Inquiries concerning these
requirements should be sent to Mr. David J. Martin or call (916) 322-7185 Fax (916) 327-4251.
2. STATEMENTS REQUIRED TO FILE FOR A CHANGE OF JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES:
The items listed below shall be submitted together as a single package. Incomplete packages will be rejected.
A. Statement of boundary change (Form PT -400 -TA; no substitutions accepted)
B. Certificate of completion (if applicable)
C. Copy of the resolution from the governing board
D. Written geographic description of the subject territory as defined in Section 3
E. Maps and supporting documents
F. List of assessor parcel numbers for parcels within the subject territory
G. Letter of tax rate area assignment from the County Auditor (consolidated counties only)
H. Fees
3. DESCRIPTIONS AND MAPS: Upon completion of the initial processing, all filed documents are microfilmed
and then destroyed. Any document that will not produce a readable photographic image shall be rejected and
returned to the applicant for replacement.
It is strongly recommended that maps be submitted in electronic/digital format. Refer to Item 3.0 below.
ALL DOCUMENTS SHALL CONFORM TO ITEMS 3.A.1 THROUGH 3.11.14 BELOW WITHOUT
EXCEPTION.
A. WRITTEN GEOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARY CHANGES:
items I through 7 shall apply to all documents pursuant to Section 54902, Government Code.
Tax Area Services is not involved in issues related to property ownership. Descriptions of
territory that are required in the filing process with the State Board of Equalization are used
to establish geodetic position and are not intended to establish property ownership in a
http://Ialafco.co.1a.ca.us/formO4.htm
Change of Jurisdictional. Bounc.ary
Court of law. SubdiN ision maps, assessor's maps and deeds are not on file with the State
Board of Equalizaticn, nor are such documents readily available to its staff in Sacramento
where all processing at the state level is performed. Boundary descriptions that merely cite
recorded documents or refer to assessor's parcels are of very limited value to the Board's
cartographic staff and shall be rejected. (See Items 3.A.1, 3.A.2 and 3.A.5 below).
1. Ever)', written geographic description must be self-sufficient within itself without
tile necessit)' of reference to any extraneous document. A boundary description that
relies solely on the use of secondary' references shall be cause for rejection. The
cartographic staff must be able to plot the boundaries from the written description.
Example:
Unacceptable: "...thence northerly to the southwest comer of that
certain property recorded in Book 12, Page 15 of Recorded Deeds..."
Acceptable: "Thence North 1'18'56" West a distance of 150' to the
southwest corner of that certain property recorded in Book 12, Page
15 of Recorded Deeds..."
2. The written geographic description shall be expressed as either a bearings and distances
description, or as a specific parcel description in sectionalized land (e.g., The SW 1/4 of Section
22, TIN, RIW). When the description is by metes and bounds, all courses shall be numbered and
described with bearings and distances written in a consistent clockwise direction. All courses
required to close the traverse of the subject territory shall be stated. All curves 'shall be described
by direction of concavity'. Delta arc length, chord and radius shall be listed, including radial
bearing for all points of non -tangency.
3. The written geographic description shall be a document separate from any maps.
4. The written description shall be of the subject territory only. If a complete description of the special
district is filed, that portion of the subject territory shall be clearly identified in a separate
document.
5. The geographic description shall have a point of beginning referenced to a known major geographic
position (Example: section corners, intersection of street or road centerlines, intersection of street
centerline and city, county or district boundary at time of filing, etc.). A point of beginning that is
tied to a fence post, tree or pipe in the ground is not considered a major geographic position. A
point of beginning that refers only to a tract map, a subdivision map or a recorded survey map will
be rejected. It is preferred that the point of beginning be the point of departure from an existing
district boundary (when applicable).
6. Effective January 1, 2000, the point of beginning shall be described by the California State Plane
Coordinate System, 1983 datum (see Item 33.5 below).
7. The written description shall state the acreage for each separate single area (see Section 4 for a
definition of single area) and the combined total acreage of subject territory.
Example: "Area A containing x.xx acres, Area B containing x.xx acres: Total
computed acreage containing xx.xx acres more or less. "
B. MAPS: Item I through 14 shall apply to all map documents pursuant to Section 54902, Government
Code.
1. All maps shall be professionally drawn or copied. Rough sketches or pictorial drawings will be
rejected. Assessor parcel maps will not be accepted as a substitute for the project map.
http://Ialafco.co.1a.ca.us/formO4.htm
C.-iange o::. urisc.tc'aona—::,ounc.ary
2. Every map shall bear a scale and north arrow. Every map shall be of a sufficient size to allow Tax
Are< Services to plot the boundary without difficult. Reduced maps are not acceptable and will
be rejected. Every map shall be of a scale common to the industry. All lettering and numbering on
the inap must be legible.
3. A vic ruty map shall be included.
4. The point of beginning shall be clearly shown on the map and referenced to a known geographic
point (see Item 3.13.5 above).
5. Effective January 1, 2000, every boundary description and map shall contain a minimum of four
geodetic control points that are referenced to the California State Plane Coordinate System, 1983
datum (see Item 3.13.6 above).
Acceptable control points: Section corners, section 1/4 corner,
section centerpoints; the intersection of street, road, or
highway centerlines.
Unacceptable control points: Reference to a recorded deed,
recorded survey or tract map. A tie to an insignificant
monument that can change, move or erode over time
(Example: fence posts, marks on trees, etc.).
6. All prior annexations contiguous with the subject territory shall be shown listing the annexation
number, the resolution number, resolving agency name, ordinance or official record number and
recording date.
7. All dimensions needed to plot the boundaries must be given on the map of the subject territory.
Each map shall have numbered courses matching the written geographic description. All courses
shall be numbered and described with bearings and distances written in a consistent clockwise
direction. All courses required to close the traverse of the subject territory shall be drawn. All
curves shall be described by direction on concavity. Delta, are length, chord and radius, including
radial bearing for all points.of non -tangency shall be listed. Index tables may be utilized.
8. Every map must clearly indicate all existing streets, roads, and highways, together with the current
names of these thoroughfares, within and adjacent to the subject territory. The relationship of the
subject territory to street rights -of -ways and street centerlines must be clearly indicated. Other
pertinent physical features should be included. Do no include topographic contour or elevation lines
unless they are specifically called out in the geographic description.
9. The boundaries of the subject territory shall be distinctively delineated on the map without
obliterating any essential geographic or political features. The boundaries of the subject territory
shall be the most predominant line on the map. Boundary lines that are delineated by a line that
exceeds w.5 millimeter in width shall be rejected. The use of graphic tape or broad tip marking
pens to delineate the boundary is not acceptable.
10. All parcels within the subject territory that touch the new boundary shall be clearly labeled with the
assessors parcel number. Interior parcels that do not touch the exterior boundary need not be
identified.
11. If the subject territory has interior islands of exclusion, or the boundary has a peninsula of
exclusion (or inclusion), that area(s) shall be shown enlarged in a marginal sketch. This sketch shall
be of sufficient size and scale to allow Tax Area Services to plot the boundary without difficulty.
The parcels in the sketch that touch the boundary shall be clearly labeled with the assessor parcel
numbers.
12. When it is necessary to use more than one map sheet to show the boundaries of the subject territory,
http://lalafco.co.1a.ca.us/form04.htm
Change of Jurisdictional Boundary
the sheet size shall be uniform. A small key map giving the relationship of the several sheets shall
be furnished. Match lines between adjoining sheets shall be used. While the geography on adjoining
sheets may overlap, the project boundaries must stop at the match lines. Tax Area Services has
standardized on the D size (24" X 36") map sheet, but will accept larger or smaller map sizes
depending on the size and complexity of the individual single area.
13. Maps of the subject territory shall be drawn to these standard minimum scales:
(For a multiple -area filing, the size and complexity of each single area should govern
the map scale.)
Acreage within Minimum
Project Area Mgp Scales
1— 40 acres 1" = 100'
41 — 2000 acres I" = 200'
201— 1000 acres I" = 400' or 1" = 800'
Over 1001 acres 1" = 800' or 1" = 1200'
14. If any segment of the boundary is shorter than 1/40 of the map scale (i.e., 10 feet on a 1" _
400' scale map) that segment should be shown enlarged in a marginal sketch.
C. ELECTRONIC/DIGITAL MAPS: It is strongly recommended that all maps submitted to the State
Board of Equalization be filed in electronic/digital form .
1. Media: 3.5' diskette, double -sided high-density (1.44) mg). Please use separate disks for each
filing. The diskette shall have an adhesive label applied that states:
a. the agency and/or special district submitting the map
b. name of the project/short title
c. number of diskettes for the filing
d. county name(s)
2. File Format: Tax Area Services will only accept files in Auto CAD .dwg format. Drawing
shall be in vector format only. Raster files, raster -vector hybrid, tiff, .pcx, .eps or any other
drawing formats will be rejected. Tax Area Services will not accept a print file.
3. Compressed Files: Tax Area Services will only accept files that have used PKZiP as the
compression tool or is compressed as a self -extracting file. A copy of PKUNZIP must be
included on the diskette. It is preferred that uncompressed files be sent.
4. Required files: The diskette shall contain only the following files:
a. map/drawing files(s)
b. ASCII text file labeled "read—me.txt: listing the name, address and phone number of
the agency/special district; county name, city name (if applicable), project/short title
of the action; name, address and phone number of office that prepared the map file;
list of files on individual diskettes (if more than one diskette is sent for the action),
California State Plane Coordinate System zone and datum (NAD '83 OR '27), any
http://lalafco.co.1a.ca.us/form04.htm
Change of !unscscttona .-_,ounc.ary
other pertinent data that relates to the map files only. Please be brief.
c. PKUNZIP if the drawing is a compressed file
5. Contents of rnap files: Maps that are filed electronically shall conform to the same
regt.ii ements for a manually drawn amp as described in this document (Item 3.B.1 through
3.B.14).
6. Plotting: Themap must be plot ready without requiring any additional work by the Tax Area
Services staff. The maps will be plotted out and shared with other departments and agencies
in paper format. Digital information will not be shared without the permission of the
applicant. The map drawing file shall have the same appropriate borders, legends, title
blocks, signature block and any necessary information that is required for a manually drawn
map. Sheet size and plotting scale shall be listed in the "read_me.txt" file.
7. Scale: The drawing shall be at real-world scale.
8. Line types: All line types shall be continuous with the exception of street centerlines.
9. La31rs: The drawing file(s) shall contain, but not limited to, the following three layers.
a. Boundary: The complete perimeter boundary of the subject territory. Any portion of
the boundary coterminous to an existing boundary shall be drawn. The boundary
shall be drawn as a closed figure. A segment of the existing district boundary
sufficient to establish the relationship of the subject territory to the district shall be
drawn. This shall apply to both contiguous and non-contiguous relationships to the
existing district boundary.
b. Background: All line work to delineate existing lot lines and other pertinent physical
features (rivers, streams, canals, etc.) within and adjacent to the subject territory;
centerlines for all streets, roads, highways including dimensions and labels, directly
relating to the perimeter boundary of the subject territory; right-of-way for all
streets, roads, highways, including dimensions and labels, directly relating to the
perimeter boundary of the subject territory; Township and Range and section lines
with appropriate labels, use when applicable. This may be multiple layers if named
appropriately. The vicinity map shall be on this layer.
C. Border: Borderlines, north arrow, scale, title blocks, signature block and all
associated text.
4. DEFINITIONS AND SPECIAL FEE PROVISIONS:
A. "Single area," means any separate geographical area regardless of ownership. A lot, subdivision or a
township should each be a "Single area". For the purpose of this schedule a geographical area, which is
divided into two or more parcels by a roadway, railroad right-of-way, river or stream, shall be considered a
"Single area". Separated geographic areas that are not contiguous to each other shall not be considered a
"Single area". A "Single area" does not include two areas that are contiguous to an existing boundary of a
city or district but not to each other.
B. "Contiguous" shall be defined as two polygons that share a common line segment.
C. "Zones" include temporary zones in highway lighting districts, other zones, zone of improvement, zone of
benefit, improvement districts, or any other sub -units of a county, city or parent district.
D. "Concurrent transaction" includes any combination of formations, annexations and withdrawals of a single
area under one resolution or ordinance. The fee shall be according to the fee schedule, Section 5; there is
no additional costs for the number of transactions involved. If there is more than one resolution or
http://Ialafco.co.1a.ca.us/form04.htm
Change of Junsoctiona _�-ounc.ary
ordinance, e a:h single area must be separately computed under the fee schedule, Section 5.
E. The fees in &-,ction ` of this schedule are based on the concept that any given action is confined to a single
county. If mere than one county is involved, add $300.00 for the second and each additional county
involved.
F. Coterminous transaction: If an annexed or detached territory comprises an entire city, district, or zone
without affecting the existence of that city, district or zone, the total processing fee shall be $300.00. If the
coterminous transaction contains areas of exclusion, each area of exclusion shall be considered a single
area transaction and all requirements shall apply and the fees calculated as such. Example: A district is
formed coter vinous with a city boundary and contains two areas of exclusion of four acres each; the total
fee is $1,060 (see Section 5, Schedule of Processing Fees).
G. Payment of the fee for formation of a city or district may be deferred until that city or district receives its
first revenue (Section 54902.5 Government Code). Each deferment shall be subject to a $35 billing charge.
IMPORTANT: IF YOU HAVE AN UNUSUAL SITUATION OR ARE UNSURE, DO NOT GUESS AT THE
FEE, CALL (916) 322- 7185 OR WRITE TO: TAX AREA SERVICE SECTION, STATE BOARD OF
EQUALIZATION, 450 N STREET, MIC: 59, PO BOX 942879, SACRAMENTO, CA 94279-0059 FOR
HELP TO DETERMINE THE CORRECT FEE.
5. SCHEDULE OF PROCESSING FEES: See Section 4 for definitions and modifications of the fees under certain
circumstances. Multiple area filings for special revenue districts shall be calculated as a singe area transaction for
each area separate!. A separate fee must be computed for each ordinance or resolution. All fees are required at the
time of filing. Please make checks payable to the State Board of Equalization.
Single Area Transactions:
Acreage within
Single Area
The following transactions may supersede
sub 'ect territory
Mapping fee
or combine with the single area transaction
fee schedule
Less than 1 acre
$300
Deferral of Fees
$35
1 — 5
$350
Additional County per transaction
$300
6-10
$500
Consolidation per district or zone
$300
11-20
$800
Entire district transaction
$300
21-50
$1,200
Coterminous transaction
$300
51-100
$1,500
Dissolution or Name change
$0
101-500
$2,000
501-1,000
$3,000
1,001-2,000
$3,000
2,001 and above
$3,500
Back to Top
Backto Forms Page
http://Ialafco.co.1a.ca.us/formO4.htm
Resolution No.
A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION BY THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE (insert name of city)
REQUESTING THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION TO
INITIATE PROCEEDING FOR THE REORGANIZATION OF TERRITORY
RESOLVED by the City Council of the (Insert name of city)
WHEREAS, the (Insert name ofcity)
, that,
desires to initiate
proceedings pursuant to the Cortese -Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985,
commencing with Section 56000 of the California Government Code, for a reorganization
which
would concurrently annex territory to the (Insert name ofcity)
and detach territory from (Insert name of agency)
; and,
WHEREAS, notice of intent to adopt this resolution of application has been given, and this
Council has conducted a public hearing based upon this notification; and,
WHEREAS, the principal reasons for the proposed reorganization are as follows:
(State principal reasons)
; and,
WHEREAS, the following agency or agencies would be affected by the proposed
jurisdictional changes:
Agency (Insert agency name) Nature of Change (i.e., annexation, detachment)
http://lalafco.co.1a.ca.us/form05.htm
Initiate Proceedings for ne _�eorgamzation o: .. ern .ur. y
and,
WHEREAS, the territory proposed to be reorganized is Inhabited/ Uninhabited (use one),
and a map and description of the boundaries of the territory are attached hereto as Exhibits A
& B and by this reference incorporated herein; and,
WHEREAS, it is desired to provide that the proposed reorganization be subject to the
following
terms and conditions: (List of terms and conditions or insert "None")
and,
WHEREAS, this proposal is consistent with the adopted spheres of influence for all of the
agencies which would be affected by reorganization; and,
WHEREAS, this Council certifies that: (Insert findings pursuant to cEQA)
(Insert if applicable) WHEREAS, this Council has determined that this proposal meets the
http://Ialafco.co.1a.ca.us/formO5.htm
..emtory
criteria for waiver of Conducting Authority proceedings as set forth in Government Code
Section 56837(c);
NOW, THEREFORE, this Resolution of Application is hereby adopted and approved by the
City
Council of the (Insert name of city)
Formation
Commission of (Insert name)
take
and the Local Agency
County is hereby requested to
proceedings for the annexation of territory as authorized and in the manner provided by the
Cortese -Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of
Council
of the
State
of California, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
(Insert Name), City Clerk
Back to Forms Page
http://Ialafco.co.la-ca.us/formO5.htm
County of
(Insert Name), Mayor
City Council
19_, by the City
—os Angeles 1—oumy —onunzssioner5
L 0 S A N G E L E S C Q U N T X
Los Angeles LAFCO Structure
Two members from the Board of Member: Yvonne Burke -
Supervisors appointed by the Board Supervisor, Second District
Of Supervisors.
Member: 7.ev Yaroslaysky -
Supervisor, Third District
One alternate from the Board of
Supervisors appointed by the Board
of Supervisors.
One public member from the San
Fernando Valley statistical area. not
a member of the Board of
Supervisors, appointed by the
Board of Supervisors.
One alternate public member
appointed by the Board of
Supervisors.
Two members representing the 87
cities in the county. Must be a city
officer and appointed by the City
Selection Committee.
One alternate appointed by the City
Selection Committee.
One member from a city
representing 30% of the total
population of the county who is a
member of the legislative body
from that city. Must be appointed
by the presidine officer of that
legislative body.
Alternate appointed by the same.
One member from the «eneral
public appointed by the other eight
Commissioners.
Alternate appointed by the same
Two members appointed by the
Independent Special District
Selection Committee.
Alternate: Don Knabe -
Supervisor. Fourth District
Member: James DiGuiseppe
Alternate: Richard Close
Member: Thomas Jackson -
City of Huntington Park
Member: Beatrice Proo -
City of Pico Rivera
Alternate: Cristina Cruz -Madrid -
City of Azusa
Member: Hal Bemson -
C.ouncilman. City of Los Angeles
Alternate: John Ferraro -
Councilman. City of Los Angeles
Member: Henri Pellissier
Alternate: Kenneth Chappell
Members: Larry Connelly -
Little Rock Creek. Irrigation District
William Wentworth -
Walnut Valley Water District
Alternate appointed by the same. Alternate: Gordon Knopp - Las Vir.-ines
Municipal Water District
Los Angeles County LA -(-U v eettng 3c iec.u_e
L U S A N G E L E S C Q U int T Y
Bac;1
http://Ialafco.co.1a.ca.us/lafco—sched.htm
n
I
to
CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION
ANNEXATION REPORT
Tuesday, March 7, 2000
5:00 P.M.
A.Q.M.D. Room CC -2
MEETING DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
ISSUE STATEMENT:
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO
March 7, 2000
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
Amended Annexation Report
This is an informational item for the City Council
Study Session.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council discuss the
results of the amended annexation report and direct
staff as appropriate.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
BACKGROUND:
On February 1, 2000, the staff prepared an updated report on the annexation of
four existing housing tracts and an expanded report to include additional
residential developments and vacant land. Staff also prepared an update to the
preliminary cost -benefit analysis report for annexation of the four above listed
housing tracts and an informational report on the overall annexation process for
discussion at the City Council Study Session. After review of the annexation
report, the City Council requested the following items be added to an amended
annexation report:
1. Details on the Shell Oil property located on the east side of the SR 57
freeway.
2. Details on the land within the City of Diamond Bar's sphere of
influence.
In an effort to relate the new information with the previous report, staff has
provided key points and a summary of the previous annexation report as a part of
the amended report. Also, per the City Council's request, staff prepared
additional report information on school jurisdiction and law enforcement for the
above listed properties.
KEY POINTS/SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ANNEXATION REPORT
Annexation results in added territory. For the City of Diamond Bar, added
territory results in a larger city. Nevertheless, if annexation occurs, Diamond Bar
must take the added responsibility of maintaining a larger city. The purpose of
the previous annexation report was to help determine if the City of Diamond Bar
would like to pursue annexation. It is an informational report that outlined the
annexation process and also looked at specific areas considered for annexation..
The areas included the existing residential tracts and golf course located south of
the SR 60 freeway, east of Fairway Drive/Brea Canyon Cutoff and vacant land
owned by Shell Oil located west of the SR 57 freeway and south of Pathfinder
Road to the Los Angeles County border.
Areas considered for annexation are unincorporated and belong to the County of
Los Angeles. If annexation occurs, it is anticipated the added territory will
generate additional revenues. The City relies on property tax and sales tax
revenues. Nonetheless, staff evaluated the anticipated property and sales tax
revenues generated by the areas considered for annexation. Under Proposition
13, property taxes are limited to one percent of a property's assessed value.
Moreover, the permanent state sales tax is six cents for every dollar of retail
sales. Of that six cents, one cent is given to local government. The one -cent is
returned to the local government based on the location where the retail sale
occurred. Additionally, a city receives state subvention funds such as the
Highway Users' Gas Tax, Motor Vehicle Licensing Fees, AB2766 funds,
Franchise Fees, Proposition A and Proposition C funds. Anticipated additional
state subvention funds were also included in the previous annexation report.
If annexation occurs, it is also anticipated the added territory will create costs for
the City to bear. The previous annexation report evaluated costs associated with
police, fire, school, and recreation services, along with street and public works.
AMENDED ANNEXATION REPORT
Shell Oil Property
The Shell Oil properties are located on both the west and east sides of the SR 57
freeway. (See attached Supplemental Map for Shell Oil Properties) The Shell
Oil properties encompass approximately 1,357 acres of land, which is presently
vacant. In an effort to be consistent with the previous annexation report, staff
attempted to provide a preliminary cost -benefit analysis. With respect to
anticipated benefits, staff again evaluated property and sales tax revenues.
According to the Experian property database, the County of Los Angeles collects
approximately $32,489.01 in property taxes. However, the amount of current
property tax revenue collected may not accurately reflect the anticipated
revenues. The anticipated property tax revenue will be based on the type of land
2
use and development in that area and population size. The City has not yet
determined if a specific type of land use and development should occur on the
Shell Oil properties. With respect to costs, the actual costs will also be
dependent on the type of land use and development. Once development occurs,
it is anticipated that a good portion of the costs will be paid for by developers.
Sphere of Influence
The sphere of influence is a boundary which delineates lands outside the City,
but are lands that could eventually become a part of the City. The sphere of
influence is often referred to as the ultimate city boundary. The City of Diamond
Bar's sphere of influence is located east of the SR 57 freeway and Shell Oil
properties, south of the City's limits to the Los Angeles/ Orange County border.
(See attached General Plan Map) The City of Diamond Bar's sphere of influence
was first approved by the Los Angeles County Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCO) on August 8, 1990. It encompasses approximately 2,900
acres or 4.5 square miles of land, which contains the middle portion of Tonner
Canyon and the Tonner Canyon watershed. The lower portion of the canyon is
within San Bernardino County. Much of the middle portion of Tonner Canyon is
considered a "significant ecological area" by the County, and contains extensive
oak woodland, riparian (stream -side), chaparral, and coastal sage vegetation,
along with a diversity of native wildlife.
The General Plan land use designation for land within the sphere of influence is
Agricultural (AG). This land use designation requires a maximum of 1 dwelling
unit per five acres. Moreover, the zoning district is Agricultural (AG). The AG
zoning district is intended for application to areas upon annexation to the City,
where low density residential uses, agricultural and compatible open space uses,
and public facility and recreation uses are desired. The maximum allowed
density for new single-family residential development is one dwelling unit per five
acres.
According to the Experian property database, the County of Los Angeles collects
approximately $38,451.76 in property taxes. Again however, the amount of,
current property tax revenue collected may not accurately reflect the anticipated
revenues. The anticipated property tax revenue will be based on the type of land
use and development in that area and population size. In this case, the City may
consider changing the General Plan land use designation objective of AG and
consistently changing the zoning district. With respect to costs, the actual costs
will also be dependent on the type of land use and development. Once
development occurs, it is anticipated that a good portion of the costs will be paid
for by developers.
School Districts
The Shell Oil properties belong to the Rowland Heights School District. The
greater portion of land within Diamond Bar's sphere of influence belongs to the
Walnut Valley School District. The portion of land with Diamond Bar's sphere of
influence, closest to east side of the SR 57 freeway belongs to the Rowland
Heights School District. (See attached School District Map)
The costs associated with impacting school district services will also depend on
the type of land use and development and the population size. If the land use
and development allows for a significant increase in the number of single family
residential households with families, then there may be a higher demand for
additional school district services. At the present time, the impacts are negligible
since the land is vacant.
Law Enforcement
■ Shell Oil Properties and Areas within Diamond Bar's Sphere of Influence
The County of Los Angeles Sheriff's Department oversees the law enforcement
for the Shell Oil properties and areas within the City of Diamond Bar's sphere of
influence. According to records by the Walnut -Diamond Bar Sheriff's
Department, the Shell Oil properties are identified as being part of Reporting
District No. 2936 and 2937. (See attached Sheriff's Department Reporting
District Map) Reporting District No. 2936 also contains the Diamond Ridge and
Diamond Canyon residential neighborhoods located west of Brea Canyon Road
and a portion of the Rowland Heights residential neighborhood. Therefore, the
quantified data does not accurately reflect the crime rate for only the Shell Oil
properties. There were a total of 261 calls for service and 104 reported crimes
for Reporting District No. 2936 and 2937. Moreover, the areas within the City of
Diamond Bar's sphere of influence is identified as being a part of Reporting
District No. 2937, in which there were a total of 52 calls for service and 35
reported crimes. According to the California Highway Patrol, there were a total of
74 calls for service for Reporting District No. 2937. The calls for service include
arrests, citations, and traffic collisions.
The costs associated with impacting law enforcement services will depend on the
type of land use and development and population size. In turn, there may or may
not be a demand for law enforcement services. To quantify the demand, the law
enforcement agencies will typically look at the total number of calls for service,
along with the actual numbers of reported crimes. According to the Walnut -
Diamond Bar Sheriff's Department, a minimum of one and a half deputies will be
needed for additional law enforcement staff. The costs for one deputy is
approximately $340,000. (See attached Sheriff's Department Memo)
■ Existing Residential Tracts in Areas Considered for Annexation
Law enforcement was evaluated for the areas considered for annexation in the
previous report. This includes the existing residential tracts and golf course
located south of the SR 60 freeway, east of Fairway Drive/Brea Canyon Cutoff.
Law enforcement services for these areas are currently provided by the Sheriff's
Department. These areas are identified as being a part of Reporting District No.
2938. There were a total of 1806 calls for service and 230 reported crimes for
Reporting District No. 2938. If annexation occurs, Diamond Bar will bear the
responsibility of providing law enforcement services for the added territory.
However, it is not anticipated the annexed areas will create a significant increase
in crime rates. (See attached Sheriff's Department Memo) The costs for law
enforcement services may increase, but it is anticipated the crime rate impacts
will be negligible since the areas are already serviced by the Sheriff's
Department and will continue to be serviced by them.
CONCLUSION
This amended annexation report was prepared to serve as an informational
packet only. In conclusion, this additional information along with the previous
report should be further discussed and considered prior to the annexation
process. The City Council may wish to direct staff initiate an application for a
new sphere of influence and/or make an application for annexation. The City
Council may also want to notify staff of the boundaries for areas the City would
like to pursue annexing. Also, as an attachment to this report, staff has provided
a copy of a memorandum by the City Attorney, which outlines the provisions of
the Cortese -Knox Act and the annexation election procedures.
PREPARED BY:
Sonya Joe
Development Services Assistant
attachments: Informational Report on the Annexation Process dated
February 1, 2000
Updated Preliminary Cost -Benefit Analysis dated
February 1, 2000
Preliminary Analysis for Annexation dated August 26, 1998
Application forms to initiate annexation process
Los Angeles County LAFCO information
Study Area Map
Aerials
Amended Annexation Report
Supplemental Map for Shell Oil Properties
General Plan Map
Sheriff's Department Memo dated February 29, 2000
Sheriff's Department Reporting District Map
School District Map
Memo on Annexation Election Procedures
Feb -29 -UV t -sera =ner9y -
c. Industry
La Puente % �County ojLos AA#cles — 7p Walnut
VALLEYBLVD I I wal
Corinrt O O /
2
< Industry
N Industry . Lam.
a
n
Bar
' COLIMA RD I c
Cl
Ln Aof
ngeles vt
? r�
N
SUPPLEMENTAL MAP
FOR THE
SHELL OIL PROPERTIES
r
Location and Vicinity
Lltlilith lit i� lti� _�.litLi'll`i� �_�
-� �hrriff's �rtt;zritnrtt; i!is�:tilitLt:lrlrrj* _ r ..;
D 1�LtD �i:t[nutt:� jililt tviiar
'111 Ltf00.M�P
utttrrru JJark. L7ltfurni.t 91 -11
LEROY D. BACA. SHERI`F C
(909) 595-2264 -
February 29, 2000
Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
City of Diamond Bar City Hall
21660 Copley Drive
DiamondBw, Ca ifornia 91765
,j t
Dear Terry:
In response to your request for some information regarding law enforcement
activity in the proposed annexation area surrounding the city of Diamond Bar, my
staff has come up with the following information.
All of the proposed areas (reporting districts 2936, 2937, and 2938) at the
current time are jointly patrolled by Sheriff's personnel and California Highway
Patrol (CHP) personnel. The Sheriff's personnel are assigned to the
Walnut/Diamond Bar Station and the CHP officers work out of the Santa Fe
Springs Office. Sheriffs' personnel handle the crime issues and preventive patrol
as part of the unincorporated patrol area for Rowland Heights, and the CHP
handles the traffic issues as mandated for unincorporated areas of the County.
A breakdown of the Sheriff's responses during year 1999 is as follows:
• Reporting district 2936 is primarily residential property and has a few
local businesses. There were 209 calls for service and 69 reported
crimes.
Reporting district 2937 is primarily residential property and undeveloped
land. There were 52 calls for service and 35 reported crimes.
• Reporting district 2938 is very heavily populated. It has residential
property and many local businesses. There were 1,806 calls for service
and 230 reported crimes.
The CHP indicated that their role in these three reporting districts is primarily
handling calls for service. There is very little preventive patrol. Their major
obligation in this immediate area is providing traffic enforcement on the adjacent
57 freeway. According to their data, they handled 74 service incidents in this
area during 1999. This number included calls for service regarding traffic
collisions, traffic related arrests from observations, and the issuance of citations
to traffic violators.
_irr: �%it�on
Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager - 2 -
February 29, 2000
In totality, handling all of these calls for service and providing traffic enforcement in these areas
would be a rather significant burden on the existing patrol items currently assigned to the city of
Diamond Bar. A logical deduction for staffing the proposed annex areas would be to have at
least one deputy available around the clock. However, this single item contract, in our purview,
does not take into consideration the existing city of Diamond Bar contract, and a stand alone
contract item would be a significant cost increase (approximately $670,000) to the existing
contract.
Our proposal, one we believe would suffice and enhance the existing contract and provide
sufficient coverage for the proposed annex areas, would be as follows:
Add one 56 -hour car to cover an overlap shift of the day shift and the PM shift.
Increase the existing 40 -hour overlap car that covers the PM and EM shift to a full 56 -
hour car, providing overlap coverage seven days a week.
The approximate costs to add this additional coverage to the existing contract would be
approximately $340,000 per year. This figure is about half of what a single around the clock
deputy would cost.
It should be noted that since the city of Diamond Bar implemented the overlap car on the PM
and EM shift, the response times to calls for service during shift change has dropped
dramatically. I believe this benefit would also be witnessed if an overlap car were added to
cover the Day and PM shift.
Submitted with this letter is a map showing the annex areas as they relate to the Sheriff's
Department's respective reporting districts and a statistical report of crimes reported for each of
the respective reporting districts.
If you have any questions or additional concerns, feel free to give me a telephone call.
Sincerely,
Y D. BACA, SHERIFF
Richard J. Martinez, Ca tain
Commander
Walnut/Diamond Bar St
TAS
dkVi
i
it 's +.dd,� t y0"•alq� i =f .� .X!!IfA Si a} !"t _
R U
SEE AERIAL #2..
� S ,� • �iR r�f
_ �to �'� � � � V* : a' •-� , 9 . � "`'� � .✓
Y y p
2 n2` A
' { SEE AERIA E ;
Sunset Ridge
SHELL PROPERTY
Monte Verde
:
Diamond Ridge j
Diamond Canyon '"�
Tract No. 9058
29
3
f Tract No_ 27141 LOS ANG ES COUNTY
Tract No.25710
Tract No. 28140 ' t
Tract No. 28554
Tract No, 31213
Tract No. 31550Tract -No.
31845 UA
Tract No. 44301
Shen Property
j NOU-ST
`SEE
AERlA1 #1
rrad�.
TAS
dkVi
i
it 's +.dd,� t y0"•alq� i =f .� .X!!IfA Si a} !"t _
R U
SEE AERIAL #2..
� S ,� • �iR r�f
_ �to �'� � � � V* : a' •-� , 9 . � "`'� � .✓
Y y p
2 n2` A
' { SEE AERIA E ;
Sunset Ridge
SHELL PROPERTY
Monte Verde
:
Diamond Ridge j
Diamond Canyon '"�
Tract No. 9058
29
3
f Tract No_ 27141 LOS ANG ES COUNTY
Tract No.25710
Tract No. 28140 ' t
Tract No. 28554
Tract No, 31213
Tract No. 31550Tract -No.
31845 UA
Tract No. 44301
Shen Property
System: LARCIS
Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department
Rpt. ID: G -004-B
CRIME INFORMATION
REPORT
ALL CRIMES
R D 2938
REPORT DATE: 01/01/1999 to 12/31/1999
Crime
Stat Count
STATION -WALNUT
ROBBERY, WEAPON
(03)
2
ASSAULT, FELONY
(05)
5
_
BURGLARY, RESIDENCE
(06)
15
BURGLARY, OTHER STRUCTURE
(07)
10
GRAND THEFT
(08)
15
GRAND THEFT VEHICLE (GTA)
(09)
7
WORTHLESS DOCUMENTS/FORGERY
(10)
6
FRAUD
(11 )
2
ASSAULT, MISDEMEANOR
(14)
5
WEAPON LAWS
(15)
1
DEFRAUDING
(16)
2
OFFENSES AGAINST FAMILY
(17)
1
NARCOTICS
(18)
9
DISORDERLY CONDUCT
(21 )
6
VEHICLE AND BOATING LAWS
(25)
10
VANDALISM
(26)
18
ARSON
(27)
1
RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY
(29)
1
FEDERAL OFFENSES WITH MONEY
(31 )
1
FELONIES, MISCELLANEOUS
(32)
1
FELONIES, MISCELLANEOUS
(33)
1
VEHICLE BURGLARY
(34)
14
THEFT, PETTY ($400 OR LESS)
(38)
5
MISDEMEANORS, MISCELLANEOUS
(39)
8
PERSONS MISSING OR FOUND
(40 )
13
NON -CRIMINAL
(44 )
28
SUICIDE AND ATTEMPT
(45)
4
MENTALLY ILL
(46)
1
PERSONS DEAD
(49)
3
MISCELLANEOUS
(50)
13
REASONABLE CAUSE ARRESTS
(60)
1
VEHICLE/BOAT, OTHER NOW
(73)
21
CRIMINAL
Report Total
230
02/0912000
Page: 1
— -- — Version: 1.01.05.0
System: LARCIS
Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department
Rpt. iD: G-004-8
CRIME INFORMATION
0210912000
REPORT
ALL CRIMES
R C 2936
REPORT DATE: 01/01/1999 to
12/31/1999 Page: 1
Crime Stat
Count
STATION -WALNUT
ROBBERY, STRONG-ARM (04)
3
ASSAULT, FELONY (05)
3
-
BURGLARY, RESIDENCE (06)
6
BURGLARY, OTHER STRUCTURE (07)
1
GRAND THEFT (08)
4
GRAND THEFT VEHICLE (GTA) (09)
1
WORTHLESS DOCUMENTS/FORGERY (10)
4
FRAUD (11 )
2
SEX FELONIES (12 )
1
ASSAULT, MISDEMEANOR (14 )
3
NARCOTICS (18)
2
DISORDERLY CONDUCT (21 )
1
VEHICLE AND BOATING LAWS (25)
1
VANDALISM (26)
5
THEFT, PETTY ($400 OR LESS) (38)
5
MISDEMEANORS, MISCELLANEOUS (39)
1
PERSONS MISSING OR FOUND (40)
4
NON -CRIMINAL (44 )
10
MISCELLANEOUS (50)
4
JUVENILE CITATION (72)
1
VEHICLEIBOAT, OTHER NOW (73)
7
CRIMINAL
Report Total 69
Version: 1.01.05.0
System: LARCIS Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department
Rpt. ID: G -004-B CRIME INFORMATION REPORT
ALL CRIMES
R c 2937 REPORT DATE: 01/01/1999 to 12/31/1999
STATION -WALNUT
Crime
Stat
Count
ROBBERY, STRONG-ARM
(04)
1
ASSAULT, FELONY
(05)
1
BURGLARY, RESIDENCE
(06)
2
BURGLARY, OTHER STRUCTURE
(07)
1
GRAND THEFT
(08)
5
GRAND THEFT VEHICLE (GTA)
(09)
1
SEX FELONIES
(12)
1
ASSAULT, MISDEMEANOR
(14)
3
NARCOTICS
(1$)
6
DISORDERLY CONDUCT
(21 )
1
DRUNK DRIVING - VEHICLE/BOAT
(24)
1
VEHICLE BURGLARY
(34)
2
PERSONS MISSING OR FOUND
(40)
1
NON -CRIMINAL
(44)
3
MISCELLANEOUS
(50)
1
JUVENILE CITATION
(72)
1
VEHICLE/BOAT, OTHER NOW
(73)
4
CRIMINAL
Report Total 35
02/09!2000
Page: 1
Version: 1.01.05.0
USER NO: 5674 MEMO:
RICHARDS, WATSON & c3ERSHON ANNEXATION ELECTION PROCEDURES
Attorneys at Law
333 South Hope Street - 38th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071
Telephone: (213) 626-8484
Fax: (213) 626-0078
DATE: February 9, 2000
TO: Terrence Belanger
City Manager
RECEIVING TELECOPYING NO.: (909) 861-3117
FROM: Michael Jenkins
OUR FILE NO.: 113 90.0001
TOTAL PAGES: (induding this coven sheet): T
DOCUMENT: Memo re Anexation eleytion procedures
REMARKS: Thought this might be useful.
(If you have difficulty receiving any pages, please telephrne our
service center at (213) 253-0420)
Attention Fax Operator and Other Recipients
This fax contains privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the
intended recipient named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any copying of this fax or dissemination of it or its contents to anyone other than the
intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you have received this fax in error, please immediately
notify us by telephone to arrange its retuua to us at our expense.
Sent: date time by
RICHARDS. WATSON & GERSHON
MEMORANDUM
To: Terry Belanger v
FROM: Michael Jenkins
DATE: February 9, 2000
SUMUECT: Annexation - Cortese -Knox
At last Tuesday's study session, Mayor O'Connor asked a
question regarding the circumstances under which an annexation
election is required. This issue is governed by.the Cortese -Knox
Local Government Reorganization Act (Gov. Code 5 56000 et
seq.11) (the "Act") . This memorandum, which you may wish to
share with the Council, discusses the relevant provisions of the
Act in response to that question.
As you know, under the Act, LAFCo proceedings for
annexation of territory may be brought by resolution of the
affected local agency or by a petition containing the required
signatures of landowners or registered owners. [Sections
56800(a), 56753, respectively]. The Act further requires the
resolution or petition to specify whether the city will succeed
to any existing Williamson Act contracts -21 [Sections 56800.3,
56700.31
The Act sets forth when the conducting authority2i
must terminate an annexation proceeding, approve an annexation
without an election, or hold an election proceeding. Following
please find a brief summary of these requirements.
All statutory references are to the Government Code unless
otherwise specified.
2/ The Williamson Act, also known as the California Land Use
Conservation Act of 1965, which is codified at Government Code 5
51200 et seq., pertains to agricultural preserves.
I/ with respect to annexations involving a city, the conducting
authority is the legislative body of the affected city. [Section
560291
M3:pgb
x9177.99999 0366399.A
RICHAWS, WATSON as GEF0H0N
MEMORANDUM
Terry Belanger
February 9, 2000
Page 2
I R
trict
se
al
i. Lovide+athat tar ownerssof1ct—this is land withinathe9districtoarePentitled
act provides that
to vote on the election of district officers, bonded
indebtedness, or other district matters. [Sections 56050
Rule: The conducting authority must terminate the
annexation proceedings if So% or more of the voters entitled
to vote as a result of owning land within the district have
filed and not withdrawn written protests. [Sections
57076 (a) S7078 (c) ]
2. Registered -voter districts or cities—these are districts or
cities whose principal act provides that registered voters that
reside in the district are entitled to vote for the election of
district officers, incurring of bonded indebtedness, or any other
district matter. [Section 560721
a. Inhabited territory—this is territory that has
twelve or more registered voters residing in the territory.
Rule: The conducting authority must terminate the
annexation proceeding if 5o% or more of voters residing in
the territory have filed and not withdrawn written protests.
[Sections 57075(b)(1), 57078(b)1
b. uninhabited territory—this is territory that does
not have at least twelve registered voters residing in the
territory. [Section 560461
Rule: The conducting authority must terminate the
annexation proceedings if the landowners owning 50% or more
of the assessed value of the land within the territory have
filed and not withdrawn written protests. [Section
57078(a)]
1. LAFCO may approve an annexation without an election if all
of the landowners within the affected territory consent in
writing to the annexation.
Rule: The Act authorizes LAFCO to approve an annexation to
a city without notice or hearing and to authorize the
conducting authority to proceed without notice, hearing,
MJ:pgb
99999-99999 056639I.A
RICHARDS, WATSON & QE LHON
MEMORANDUM
Terry Belanger
February 9, 2000
Page 3
and/or election if the petition or the resolution offer
satisfactory proof that all of the landowners within the
affected territory have given written consent to the
annexation. [Section 568731.
2. XWCO may approve an annexation without an election if the
territory meets all of the criteria in Section 56375(d).
Rule: The Act authorizes LAFCO to either approve an
annexation to a city atter notice and hearing and to permit
the conducting authority to proceed without an election, or
to waive the conducting authority proceedings, if LAFCO
finds that the territory meets -@,U of the following
criteria:
(a) The area to be annexed does not exceed 75 acres in
area.
(b) The' area is an island and the island does not
constitute part of an incorporated area which is more
than 100 acres.
(c) The area is surrounded in -either of the following
ways:
(i) it is surrounded, or substantially surrounded, by
the city to which annexation is proposed or by the city
and a county boundary or the Pacific Ocean; (ii) it is
surrounded by the city to which annexation is proposed
and adjacent cities. This subdivision, however, does
not apply to a territory that is a gated community that
has services provided by a community services district.
(d) The area is substantially developed or developing.
LAFCO may base this finding on several factors,
including, the availability of public utility services,
the presence of public improvements, or the presence of
physical improvements upon the parcel or parcels within
the area.
(e) The area is not prime agricultural land, as defined by
Section 56064.
(f) And the area will benefit from the annexation or is
receiving benefits from the annexing city.
[Section 56375(d))
If LAFCO approves and authorizes an annexation without
an election under Section 56375(d), the Act requires the
conducting authority, to adopt a resolution within 35 days
after the LAFCO hearing that either orders the annexation
without an election or terminates the proceedings. [Section
570801
MJ:pgb
99990-99939 OSG6199.A
RICHARDS, WATSON & GEASHON
MEMORANDUM
Terry Belanger
February 9, 2000
Page 4
3. _Special rule applies to a proposed annexation that
involves inhabited territory with more t�oa00,000 Of reside t000.
that is located in a co=ty with a popul
Rule. The Act provides that a city may order annexation
without lection if less than 15% of the registered
voters in the territory or 1088 than 15% of the owners of
land who own less than 15% of the total assessed value of
land within the territory have filed and not withdrawn
written protests. [Section 57075.5(c)]
4. Land -owner -voter districts.
Rule: The conducting authority may order the annexation
without an election if less than 25% of the number of owners
of land who own less than 25% of the assessed value of land
within the affected territory have filed and not withdrawn
written protests. [section 57076(c)]
5. Registered -voter districts or cities.
a. Inhabited territory.
Rule: In inhabited territory, the conducting authority can
order the annexation without an election if less than 25% of
the registered voters or leas than 25% of the number of
owners of land who own less than 25% of the assessed value
of land within the affected territory have filed and not
withdrawn written protests. [Section 57075(x)(3)]
b. Uninhabited territory.
Rule: The conducting authority may order the annexation if
owners of land who own less than 50* of the total of land
within the affected territory have filed and not withdrawn
written protests. [Section 57075(b)(2))
The Act further authorizes LAFCO to order that an
annexation be confirmed by the voters in an election conducted
within the territory of a city to which the annexation is
proposed if certain written protest criteria are satisfied.
[Sections 56375(g), 568501 Different rules apply to inhabited
territory with more than 100,000 residents, registered -voter
districts, and landowner districts.
MJ:pgb
99999-!7999 0966398.71
(-UOHAMM. WATSON & GERSHON
MEMORANDUM
Terry Belanger
February 9, 2000
Page 5
1. Inhabited territory with more than 1000000 residents,
located in a county 'with a population of over 4,000,000.
Rule: A city may order that the territory be annexed
s f v if either 15% of the registered
voters or 15� oz.more of the number of owners of land who own not
less than Is% of the total assessed value of land in the
territory havefiled and not withdrawn written protests.
[Section 57075.5(b)]
2. Registered -voter districts or cities involving inhabited
territory.
Rule: The conducting authority must hold an election if
either (1) at least 25k, but less than 50% of the registered
voters residing in the inhabited territory or (2) at least 25% of
the number of owners of land who also own at least 254 of the
assessed value of land within the affected territory have filed
and not withdrawn written protests. [Section 57075 (a)(2)]
3. Land-o'wner districts.
Rule: The conducting authority must hold an annexation
election if either (1) 25t or more of the number of owners Of
land who also own 25% or more of the assessed value of land
within the territory or (2) 254 or more of the voting power of
landowner voters entitled to vote as a result of owning property
within the territory have filed and not withdrawn written
protests. [Section 57076(b)]
Section 57150 sets forth the requirements for payment
of election costs. It states, in pertinent part:
"All proper expenses incurred in conducting
elections for a change of organization or
reorganization pursuant to this chapter shall be paid,
unless otherwise provided by agreement between the
conducting authority and the proponents, as follows:
"(a) In the case of annexation or detachment
proceedings, by the local agency to or from which
territory is annexed, or from which territory is
detached, or was proposed to be annexed or detached."
[Section 571503
mi: pgb
22999-s9990 054630o.A
j;kICHARDS, WATSON 3 GEFISHON
MEMORANDUM
Terry Belanger
February 9, 2000
page 6
Thus, unless the proponents of an annexation and a city
have an agreement with respect to the election costs, the city is
responsible for such costs.
MJ:pgb
99099-99999 0599300.)
TOTAL P.07
r
City of Pomona
, ti , �tOssm�
�a
City of Industry
M
Rl
® RL a
RL
77K
RL
1L
41
RL
i
as
s
City of Chino Hills
JRR Rural Residential (max. 1 du/acre)
JRL Low Density Residential (max. 3 du/ocre)
IRLY Low -Medium Residential (max. 5 du/acre)
RM Medium Density Residential (+nay. 12 du/ocre)
RMH Medium High Density Residential (max. 16 du/acre)
IRH High Density Residential (max. 20 du/acre)
IC General Commercial (max. 1.0 FAR)
CO Commercial/ Office (max. 1.0 FAR)
IOP Professional Office (max. 1.0 FAR)
I Light Industrial (max. 1.0 FAR)
PF Public Facility
W Water
F Fire
10, NO 01-rWINUR A01\I
S School
PK Pork
GC Golf Course
OS Open Space
PR Private Recreation
AG Agriculture (max. i du/S acres)
SP Specific Plan Overlay
I pq,4: PA Planning Area
Gr
^` City Boundary
,`' Sphere of Influence
Significant Ecological Area
r,o Hi I Is
GENERAL PLA
LAND USE M,
ADOPTED - July 25,199!
scale
I
0 1800' 3600' n<
Figur
INWO
I
-
-
c"
RA
.2.
NARD11YO F
RIf E
5
4t, VALLEY
MWD
$
-r—
N
M—=
EMPLE 6
6
Pomona School District
Owl
rI it
01=
ir
id Heights School District
Ape
L
Walnut Valley Unified School District
41'
Hin
%g�.k4rw-
pow rr
nd Heights School District
1w OF
%
Walnut Valley Unified School District
"Y � \MFAMM
w~
wumm
4"8600,
AMMM or xwr
StAwAmm
dvlrxgw
Awn"
aw
or
-qwwpw--- D E
SCHOOL DISTRICT BOUNDARY MAP
= t
A
S' ME .3
IM
D.
WN.U.
ap I
ST --- A1R !L �+ s sen / '' - r _
LLEARo srC09
AWALESE. CWT
NS
ST
S rt r INE
r 9 L W
VALLEY
-LEY V6
N aA? VALLEY -0
AV
AV SAN �JME�
4 UP
yll ST II
-16
Al Sl U.
VBIN cl SEE AERIAL #1
Q%fSEr, ST III
m FS N
COLIM4
$1 T
is T
0, .—LEN ST
,am
ST -1 R.U.S.D.
'IT 4
lmodL
.10
SEE AERIAL #2
N
vt
X A
yt"*
J,
ST sl
.. m4 , " es, ARK
pt
SEE AERIAL
SIP-%
-F.
Ridge
SHELL PROPERTY
Verde
rid Ridge . . . . . . . *
rid Canyon
lo. 9058
1 nQ AMMMI CC
Ab
L S- Al SEE -6
J, ME
Ridge
/erde
d Ridge
d Canyon
�. 9058
).27141
).25710
).28140
).28554
).31219
).31550
1-31845
1.44301
)perty
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
STUDY AREA MAP
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
am" CITY BOUNDARY
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
ANNEXATION AREA
• • �•• ROWLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT (R.U.S.D.)
XXXI It WALNUT VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT (W.V.U.S.D.)
it u
NxV Y''M•�,,,/./ ✓ ' /, « ,IM'{•?« „�4.11
r
�h191ul' Ilk
1
wl III r •• I I
u � F R II II
'r�`• ?x II Illi ��II II �� � I( ..�, �; i i � i `I,,, SII /
I.
✓ I�ul9�l� ��' , , � ���!�. * s�.° 9 P ' � � �„PIY*'� II �mrl� �` r-�— � . -
. ` l a III ' �Rh �I '� �, N SPI mpr O�
u LI �I•I'MIN(�Ihl I�II� j��IV lil'
AO
IIII:P'NN �, � 4��''� � 'u�►,W��oI��i I I�I���IN�I .�P � �I���I�" �� ,,�I '7a JAL. �I�����li�f����l ��
��'� I�I� i :" I� I I � I� r ^' @ ` � I 'llj,l i� I�h �! I �l�nl � � �I �I��p� / � „�r«� • I - _.� �;: p � ��' a ",� q� r'm�l'� "1 1 ' f u
�" ���LL o,,. I � � � I � � III I�� � • ���I ���� .• r 'r .. .. n _ .. _......-..- .. �� • .._�.
IIII IIII �pu
w 1149: � x J� , + I +�„,"�~"(►' i ISI I , , ��� i III �,pl � , r,s�; ,}�t . L
Ih l Il . ,,''►•�! F; ,. �Il l'., III / ,r, _I� lh l�'-�” .:_,�' . "" ..,`' ,6.
�c.;� a� �►
loll�� fir'
alp' wal r f
�N Y '_'
� f � � I I ' I ��d l l � I _ ,��'' -•• PiI N ��«; I Il � � a « , f . - � ; , IL' � �
w,r, II �I' ���I '� 4 r � ♦ _- ' � ��I� � '. �. dl I ��II � � � � �'Iwl s �.r— � �,� �;,I u� �
� �' ;� �I;N I i I � �I III ,III � I II � , �� rc tN:., III • ���'llml' II • I' . � x . � �` v NII °I I I�i ,,� Ilauiip � ry M wx4'� ��� ",,�`
J IIc ygryn I�
NI ,
I � III ,..,I �y� �,. , 9ih�� • - �!I � ,- � `:. ,�;1 � u
t — _ IlM •III � • --r
IV
l I 1sw
I I I Y - '�,�- + ref `V � .ai � '� e ♦ \ / �/ +� , � %pit 16
r� -
141
•�u n III 1p � + � , 'R� � � � � -�''
41Ila ;
„
4j, � � �" M`�t � - 11'�'�" � 'I/t`�^,�,r•^T V 1� � •,,y-1 �,Y ..y � ,�� ,�' u. ,1i�1, �,,. � � � � � ,� « � � � * �
" �L. °► d��I,� u,,^" ' ,','`v 7' ;•111. ! .J7". Y , ''�... -. f + Ily
I -$ I aT'.' �'�yl, 9 ��„�. � /'-'!�► ,� 'l',�, �.�
��rml , �° . Ir �,n„�� �� .• �' �u y'� o� �r'�M++ �h►, +a.' � ` �., ���rs.4 �'�� ^�
� '_� •y ' � ^i�. �x 4s r v J✓/ � .>. +P.. a yf.� + ...
` , �
�• } IXW :oro t d! ,.y' .a,P r' a I /Y /',Ilul,.:
,I ✓','. •may, I {tel.`{'
16
. • 1q. �. % y�I 1r v 1 �1 Orli-
S j��. ,.. M`I �n � � �� ± ;+1•�W ,.may ,ut^ '�✓ �N6� «'IMu,:� _ •�.'.. i'
,VAC.-
nl E �., � ��e�nl .A} �� JII 'tae-�' s fir- � "te.• ,..,
O9 ♦ .x'11 . ull. t k
N n i ?. 4A s
y q iJJ
11% VWt
"Nil ��� I f I I; UI� ' �► � ` ;+ .' '�
� „ r
LA1
d I � VIII '.. »r'? - r li;.- .�I'� , �., h� � lul► .• I' � r �' Na t
'� °I� ,r •ar"I�� „ - �, Ilr �)'��°, II II�II•1/ m', f u ,x. �� ��«
.. „ � I I � IIP, Ili•. r 'n� � ,,' �
� lila•, t u T �q�Jwu � II �',;; w ..� I
0 lu I
+a �� .W. '�', \ �wllll�l;h III�I,•I u ,.�",,; ..I —"S T'r,�. '
�N
I,
AERIAL # 3
W{{N41TE0 OF T4tE ceTv CQuw+GIL
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
FEBRUARY 15, 2000
CLOSED SESSION: None
2. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor O'Connor called the City Council meeting
to order at 6:32 p.m. in the Auditorium of the South Coast Air Quality Management
District, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
ROLL CALL: Council Members Chang, Herrera, Huff, Mayor
Pro Tem Ansari and Mayor O'Connor.
Also present were: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; Mike
Jenkins, City Attorney; James D®Stefano, Deputy City Manager; David Liu, Deputy
Public Works Director; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Linda Magnuson,
Finance Director; Mike Nelson, Communications & Marketing Director and Lynda
Burgess, City Clerk.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council
Member Huff.
INVOCATION: The Invocation was given by Dr. Robert Cassel,
Northminster Presbyterian Church.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: CM/Belanger recommended that Consent
Calendar Items 6.2 and 6.9 be continued to a later date.
3.A SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS:
3.A.1. Presented Certificates of Recognition to Jerry Arnet, Glen Plovanich, Ben
Potter, John Rowe and Jackie Warren, Volunteer Patrol Members that have
logged 500 hours.
3.A.2 Proclaimed February 2000 as "Black History Month."
3.13 CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
3.6.1. CM/Belanger reported that the Council established a Complete Count
Committee for the 2000 Census. Since that time, staff has applied for and
received approval for funding by both the State and the Federal
Governments to assist in the cost of getting the message out to the
community encouraging them to participate in Census Day on April 1, 2000.
It is important that every resident of D.B. be counted. To that end, the City
Council will sponsor a Town Hall Meeting on Saturday, February 26 from
9:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon in the SCAQMD Auditorium. The event will be
broadcast live on Channel 12.
FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 2
CM/Belanger further stated that Council has established the D.B. Community
Foundation and has appointed five additional members to the Board of
Directors. A meeting is tentatively scheduled for Thursday, February 17 at
7:00 p.m. to appoint the final four members of the Board.
With respect to the Lanterman Developmental Center's security project,
CM/Belanger reported that staff prepared an information letter for distribution
to the community to inform the residents of this newly proposed project. It
is anticipated that the letter will be in the mail by the end of this week to
every postal customer in D.B. The project proposal will be considered by the
State's Public Works Board on Friday, February 18. Representatives of the
Lanterman Developmental Center Advisory Committee will attend the
meeting along with the City's special counsel and the homeowner's special
counsel. This past weekend, the City of Walnut distributed an informational
letter to every resident in Walnut.
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Alison Meyers, Associate Branch Director, Diamond Bar -Walnut YMCA, thanked
Council for their continuing support of the YMCA. She announced the YMCA's
annual support fund-raising campaign.
M/O'Connor presented checks from Council Members to Ms. Meyers.
Randy Nayadu, 24095 Highcrest Dr., said he noticed fences being erected around
the Sun Cal property. He was surprised to learn that Pulte is involved. The City
and SunCal have done an extraordinary job in providing the citizens with a lot of
information on this project. If there is a new developer, it could change the equation
for the residents living adjacent to the project and he asked Council to provide the
affected residents with as much information as possible.
Sandy Erickson, 24008 Highcrest Dr., stated that SunCal promised that they would
work with the residents on Highcrest to negotiate the location of the gate. The
residents have met with a representative of Pulte and were told that negotiations
are not proceeding as expected. She asked Council for their assistance in
providing information regarding the changeover.
Rafik Tadros, 24069 Highcrest Dr., said he is the newest member of the
neighborhood. He said that he was never told through his escrow process that
there would be such a project at the end of Highcrest. He was notified by his
neighbors about the pending project. He acquired his home because of its location
in the cul-de-sac in order to provide protection for his children. He was present to
support his neighbors and get as much information as possible regarding Pulte
Homes.
Sue Sisk spoke about recent editorials regarding the Lanterman issue. Contrary
FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 3
to comments made by employees of Lanterman, the residents of D.B. do not want
this facility to close. However, the citizens continue to be opposed to housing
behavioral and severe -behavioral clients in a facility that will have security features
normally associated with forensic clients. She recommended that information
regarding Lanterman contained in the Community Newsletter be placed on the
City's website.
Mohan Lalvani spoke in opposition to Consent Calendar Item No. 6.5. He said that
there is a serious speeding problem in the morning and afternoon hours on
Chestnut Creek Dr. that will not be mitigated by passage of this item. He presented
a copy of a letter signed by 25 families on Chestnut Creek indicating that this is not
the solution to the problem. This letter was presented to the Traffic &
Transportation Commission one month ago.
Darla Farrell said that Assembly Member Pacheco is scheduled to host a Town Hall
Meeting to address the Lanterman issue. She asked that notice of the meeting as
well as notice of Lanterman Developmental Center Advisory Committee meetings
be posted on Channel 12 and City On -Line.
CM/Belanger stated that the City will advise the community regarding the course
of work Pulte will undertake during succeeding months. The fence was installed in
response to an agreement with adjacent neighbors to provide boundary fences to
assure that animals cannot leave the property when grading and clearing activities
begin. The location of the gate was left to the property owners and developers. To
date, there has been no conclusion to that matter. Information regarding property
matters is the responsibility of the respective buyers and sellers. Realtors have a
responsibility to provide information on behalf of property owners. Under today's
law, there are disclosure requirements. He did not know whether the disclosure of
a prospective subdivision is something that a Realtor would have to disclose.
5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1 15e YEAR CELEBRATION - DIAMOND BAR LIBRARY - February 18, 2000
- 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
5.2 PRESIDENT'S HOLIDAY - February 21, 2000 - City Offices will be closed.
Will re -open Tuesday, February 22, 2000.
5.3 PLANNING COMMISSION - February 22, 2000 - 7:00 p.m., SCAQMD
Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.4 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION - February 24, 2000 - 7:00 p.m.,
SCAQMD Hearing Board Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.5 CENSUS 2000 TOWN HALL MEETING - February 26, 2000 - 9:00 a.m. -12
noon, SCAQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 4
5.6 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - March 7, 2000 - 6:30 p.m., SCAQMD
Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.7 JOINT COUNCILNWUSD BOARD MEETING - March 8, 2000 6:30 p.m.,
SCAQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.8 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - March 9, 2000 - 7:00 p.m.,
SCAQMD Hearing Board Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.9 TOWN HALL MEETING - ASSEMBLY MEMBER PACHECO - April 1, 2000
- 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., SCAQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.,
5.10 11th CITY BIRTHDAY PARTY - April 9, 2000 - Peterson Park, 24142 E.
Sylvan Glenn Dr.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR: MPT/Ansari moved, C/Huff seconded, to approve the
Consent Calendar with the exception of Item No.'s 6.2, 6.5, 6.9 and 6.10. Motion
carried by the following Roll vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Chang, Herrera, Huff, MPT/Ansari, M/
O'Connor
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
6.1 APPROVED MINUTES:
6.1.1 Study Session of February 1, 2000 -As submitted.
6.1.2 Regular Meeting of February 1, 2000 - As amended.
6.2 CONTINUED PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular
Meeting of November 18, 1999 - to March 7, 2000.
6.3 APPROVED VOUCHER REGISTER - dated February 15, 2000 in the
amount of $560,716.57.
6.4 APPROVED NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR MINNEQUA LANDSLIDE
REMEDIATION PROJECT - accepted the work performed by Summit
Contracting and authorized the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion
and release any retention amounts thirty-five days after the recordation date.
6.5 (a) ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2000-9: A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ORDERING THE
CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE AND TO FILE A REPORT RELATED
TO MAINTENANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38 AND ANY
FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 5
ASSESSMENT THEREON FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001.
(2) ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2000-10: A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ORDERING THE
CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE AND TO FILE A REPORT RELATED
TO MAINTENANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 39 AND ANY
ASSESSMENT THEREON FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001.
(3) ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2000-11: A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ORDERING THE
CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE AND TO FILE A REPORT RELATED
TO MAINTENANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 AND ANY
ASSESSMENT THEREON FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001.
(4) AWARDED CONTRACT FOR ASSESSMENT ENGINEERING
SERVICES - to GFB-Friedrich & Associates, Inc. in an amount not to
exceed $9,900 each for FY 2000-2001, 2001-2002 and 2002-2003
respectively; a contract total of $29,700 plus a contingency amount
of $3,000.
6.7 APPROVED CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH L.A. SIGNAL INC. FOR
INSTALLATION/MODIFICATION OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS ON BREA
CANYON ROAD (AT DIAMOND CREST LANE, GLENBROOKE DRIVE AND
GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE) - in an amount not to exceed $13,500 for a total
contract amount of $256,105.
6.8 REJECTED ALL BIDS RECEIVED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
SKATEBOARD PARK AT PETERSON PARK - approved the revised plans
and specifications and directed the City Clerk to advertise to receive bids.
6.9 CONTINUED RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
OF DIAMOND BAR FOR APPROVAL OF FINAL TRACT MAP NO. 52267,
FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF A 65 ACRE SITE INTO 127 SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCES, LOCATED IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA.
6.10 CONTINUED AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH BONTERRA CONSULTING REGARDING
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FOR PROPOSED VTM 52267 (SunCal) - in
the amount of $99,446.
6.11 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2000-12: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AUTHORIZING THE FILING
OF A PETITION TO THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
CONTESTING ACTION TAKEN WITH RESPECT TO THE REGIONAL
FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 6
WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD ORDER NO. 96-054.
6.12 APPROVED A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING
SERVICES FOR A TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR ROUTE LOCATION
STUDY - directed the Mayor to execute a contract for professional
engineering services for a transportation corridor route location study with
Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade and Douglas, Inc. in the amount of $74,797.
MATTERS WITHDRAWN FROM CONSENT CALENDAR:
6.5 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2000-13: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE
INSTALLATION OF MULTI -WAY STOP SIGNS AT THE T -
INTERSECTIONS OF LEYLAND DRIVE/BENFIELD PLACE, CHESTNUT
CREEK ROAD/EVERGREEN SPRINGS DRIVE, CHESTNUT CREEK
ROAD/PRESADO DRIVE, AND THE INSTALLATION OF 50 FEET OF RED
CURB AT THE NORTHWEST AND NORTHEAST CORNERS OF
PRESADO DRIVE/CHESTNUT CREEK ROAD - The City received requests
from residents to study the need for multi -way stop signs at the intersections
of Leyland Dr./Benfield PI., Chestnut Creek Rd./Evergreen Springs Dr.,
Chestnut Creek Rd./Presado Dr. The Traffic & Transportation Commission
reviewed the requests and recommended that Council approve the signs.
Mohan Lalvani said that the letter signed by 26 families asked for speed
humps or stop signs on Chestnut Creek Rd. and not at the intersection of
Tierra Loma Dr. or Presado Dr. to slow the traffic down.
Ed Bennett, 2147 Chestnut Creek Rd., stated that a stop sign exists at
Chestnut Creek and Presado. The issue is that motorists leave the upper
portion of Chestnut Creek at Evergreen Springs and accelerate fairly quickly
down the steep hill. A stop sign at Tierra Loma would slow the traffic at the
beginning of the downhill slope. The residents are attempting to get the
traffic slowed down above the area of his driveway. He had seen smaller
type speed bumps in the City of Corona that are about 4 inches high that he
feels might be effective on Chestnut Creek. He pointed out the area in which
he would like to have a stop sign placed.
Patricia Marinovich, 2003 Chestnut Creek stated that originally, residents
did not request a stop sign at Tierra Loma. It will not make any sense to put
a T -stop on Evergreen Springs and Chestnut Creek. It will not solve the
problem of vehicles speeding downhill on Chestnut Creek.
Ed Bennett said the residents do not see a need for a stop sign at Presado.
Tierra Loma at Chestnut Creek is already past the long downhill stretch and
blind corner. By the time cars reach the blind comer, they have already
slowed down. He believed the issue that the residents were attempting to
FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 7
convey is that from Evergreen Springs, cars pick up speed until they reach
the blind corner. There is nothing to slow their speed on the downhill. If a
stop sign could be placed here (he pointed to the map) or speed bumps
along the upper section of Chestnut Creek below the upper intersection of
Tierra Loma, it would likely alleviate the speeding vehicles.
In response to C/Herrera, CM/Belanger explained that traffic engineers
recommend that speed humps and similar type devices not be installed on
city streets that have downward grades because they can act as launching
pads and can present liability concerns. Installation of stop signs has been
one attempt to control speed. However, stop signs were not designed to
control speeds. Effective control of speed is to ask people who drive in the
neighborhoods to observe safe speed limits.
In response to M/O'Connor, CM/Belanger stated that botts dots are noisy
and residents frequently request that they be removed. In addition, moisture
adheres to the dots and renders them slick.
DDPW/Liu indicated that consideration of installation of bolts dots was
discussed by the Traffic & Transportation Commission. Botts dots serve only
to warn motorists. This option was presented to the residents but they felt
that installation of stop signs or speed humps along Chestnut Creek would
be a better solution. Staff is not aware of any location within this or other
jurisdictions that have stop signs installed mid -block.
At the request of C/Huff, seven residents in the audience indicated that they
were present to consider this matter. No one indicated that they favored the
Traffic & Transportation Commission's recommendation. Seven residents
indicated that they prefer moving the stop signs from Evergreen Springs and
Chestnut Creek down to Tierra Loma and Chestnut Creek. One resident
would approve of stop signs at Tierra Loma and Presado.
C/Huff moved, M/O'Connor seconded, to adopt amended Resolution 2000-
13 by removing consideration of stop signs on Chestnut Creek Drive and
return the matter to the Traffic & Transportation Commission for
consideration of stop signs on Chestnut Creek Dr. at the locations suggested
by the public speakers. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Chang, Herrera, Huff, MPT/Ansari, M/
O'Connor
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None
8. OLD BUSINESS:
FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 8
8.1 REPORT ON THE STATUS OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND PROGRESS IN
ITS IMPLEMENTATION - California Government Code Section 65400(b)
requires the preparation of an annual report for presentation to the City
Council regarding the status of the City's General Plan and progress in its
implementation. The report was reviewed by the Planning Commission at
its meeting of February 8, 2000.
M/O'Connor directed staff to forward copies to the State Office of Planning
and Research and the State Department of Housing and Community
Development.
8.2 CONSIDERATION OF SITE SELECTION FOR THE PROPOSED
COMMUNITY/CIVIC CENTER - Four sites are currently being considered for
the proposed Community/Civic Center complex: 1) flat pad (vacant) south of
and behind Calvary Chapel at Grand Avenue and Golden Springs Drive
(hospital site); 2) vacant pad southwest of current City Hall on Bridge Gate
Drive in the Gateway Corporate Center (Kaiser site); 3) northwest portion of
Summitridge Park at Grand Avenue and Summitridge Drive; 4) portion of the
D.B. Gold Course where the clubhouse and banquet facilities are currently
located (Grand Avenue and Golden Springs Drive). To assist with this
decision, staff worked with L.P.A. and developed a series of digital photos
of each of the sites and placed the proposed facilities of the complex into
each of the photos using computer technology. These photos show how the
facilities will look from various points of reference in the vicinity of each site.
Report by given by Jim Wirick, L.P.A.
Martha Bruske said that unless the residents keep a close watch on the
Council, the golf course site may very well be turned into a shopping center.
She opposed use of any portion of the golf course as well as placement of
any buildings on city park sites.
CM/Belanger stated that in approximately 60 to 90 days, staff will be
prepared to recommend selection of an architectural firm if tonight, Council
directs staff to release an RFP.
Following discussion, C/Chang moved, C/Huff seconded, to direct staff to
release an RFP to begin the formal selection process for an architect to
design the Community/Civic Center complex with decision on a site to take
place at a later date. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Chang, Herrera, Huff, MPT/Ansari, M/
O'Connor
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 9
9. NEW BUSINESS:
9.1 APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONERS FOR PLANNING, PARKS AND
RECREATION, AND TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONS.
PLANNING COMMISSION:
C/Chang re -appointed George Kuo.
C/Huff appointed Bob Zirbes.
C/Herrera re -appointed Joe Ruzicka.
MPT/Ansari re -appointed Steve Nelson.
M/0'Connor re -appointed Steve Tye.
MPT/Ansari moved, C/Chang seconded, to approve the appointments/re-
appointments to the Planning Commission. Motion carried by the following
Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS -Chang, Herrera, Huff, MPT/Ansari, M/
O'Connor
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
C/Herrera re -appointed Joyce Leonard -Colby
C/Chang appointed Joseph Kong
C/Huff re -appointed Roland Morris.
MPT/Ansari re -appointed Jack Istik.
M/O'Connor re -appointed Arun Virginkar.
MPT/Ansari moved, C/Herrera seconded, to approve the appointments/re-
appointments to the Traffic and Transportation Commission. Motion carried
by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Chang, Herrera, Huff, MPT/Ansari, M/
O'Connor
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
C/Huff - no nominee at this time - continued to March 7, 2000.
C/Herrera appointed Marty Torres
C/Chang re -appointed Patty Anis
MPT/Ansari re -appointed Annette Finnerty
M/O'Connor appointed Eric Stone
FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 10
C/Chang moved, MPT/Ansari seconded, to approve the appointments/re-
appointments to the Parks and Recreation Commission. Motion carried by
the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Chang, Herrera, Huff, MPT/Ansari, M/
O'Connor
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
M/O'Connor requested that Council honor retiring Commission Members on
March 7, 2000.
9.2 CONSIDERATION OF CITY COUNCIL SUPPORT FOR PROPOSITION 12,
THE SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS, CLEAN WATER, CLEAN AIR, AND
COASTAL PROTECTION BOND ACT OF 2000 - The Safe Neighborhood
Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000 is
the first state bond to go before the voters since 1988. This financing would
provide for state, county and city park improvements, development and
acquisition. The three categories of per -capita grant programs included in
this proposition would result in allocation of $714,175 directly to the City.
There are other funds that will be available for which the City can compete
as well. The proposition requires a simple majority for passage (i.e.: 50%+1)
and there is no known organized opposition to this bond act. In fact, there
are over 180 parks, recreation and conservation agencies and organizations
that have expressed their support of this proposition. The League of
California Cities, the California State Chamber of Commerce and the
Cal ifomia Taxpayers' Association (CTA) are also supportive. Ina letter from
CTA, it states "Cal -Tax endorses Proposition 12 because it is fiscally
responsible, it does not raise taxes, and it pays for projects that are
important for all Californians."
At the suggestion of M/O'Connor, Council concurred to consider this item
only as a public information item.
9.3 CONSIDERATION OF SUPPORT OF PROPOSITION 14: CALIFORNIA
READING AND LITERACY IMPROVEMENT AND PUBLIC LIBRARY
CONSTRUCTION AND RENOVATION BOND ACT OF 2000 - Proposition
14 proposes a $350 million bond measure to fund grants for public library
construction and renovation. Grant funds would be available to any city,
county, city and county or district that is authorized to own and maintain a
public library. Funds may be used for acquisition or construction of new
facilities, acquisition of land or remodeling, rehabilitation of existing public
library facilities and purchase and installation of furnishings. First priority for
funding is to be given to joint use projects in which the agency that operates
the library and one or more school districts have a cooperative agreement.
Second priority is to be given to all other public library projects. Grant
FEBRUARY 15, 2000
PAGE 11
recipients must provide a 35% local match, with the remaining 65% (up to a
maximum of $20 million) shall be allocated form bond funds.
At the suggestion of M/O'Connor, Council concurred to consider this item
only as a public information item.
RECESS TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: M/O'Connor recessed the City
Council Meeting to the Redevelopment Agency at 9:39 p.m.
RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING: M/O'Connor reconvened the City Council
Meeting at 9:41 p.m.
10. COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS AND MEMBER COMMENTS:
C/Herrera reported that Council continues to oppose the newly proposed
Lanterman Developmental Center's expansion project. Several individuals will
attend the Public Works Board hearing on Friday to state their opposition. She
expressed her sorrow at the passing of Raul Medina, former Parks and Recreation
Commissioner and offered her condolences to his family.
C/Chang expressed his condolences on the loss of Raul Medina. On February 2,
he attended Diamond Bar High School's press conference. He congratulated the
scholarship recipients and their parents. During the past week, he attended several
events in conjunction with Chinese New Year. On February 13, he was a keynote
speaker for Vision 21 symposium.
C/Huff stated that on February 3, he attended a COG meeting in EI Monte. On
February 4 and 5, he attended the Foothill Transit's team building and goal setting
event as a board member and on February 10, he attended Foothill Transit's
special board meeting. On February 11, he and several Lanterman Advisory
Committee Members met with the City's Attorney, Jack Rubin, to discuss upcoming
meetings. Also on February 11, he was interviewed by a reporter from the L.A.
Business Journal regarding the Alameda Corridor East project. On February 12,
he and M/O'Connor attended the Chinese Association celebration at Diamond Bar
High School. He, C/Herrera and M/O'Connor attended funeral services for Raul
Medina. He stated that the community of D.B. is richly blessed with many people
who take pride in their city and volunteer to assist in community events. Raul
Medina was one of those special people who was very friendly and outgoing, and
took the time to participate in his city, which he loved. He will be missed. C/Huff
encouraged others to look to Raul Medina's leadership as a volunteer to help make
D.B. a better community. C/Huff announced that on February 6, he married Mee
Mee Ho.
MPT/Ansari congratulated C/Huff on his marriage. During the past two weeks, she
attended the Lanterman meeting chaired by C/Herrera, three SCAG meetings on
storm water runoff, met with the D.B. Evergreen Chinese Senior Club, the SCAG
board meeting, the board meeting of the California Contract Cities, a SCAG water
FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 12
quality meeting and this morning's Chamber Board meeting. The Chamber will hold
an Eggs & Issues Breakfast on Friday, February 25 at the Holiday Inn Select, with
guest speaker Assembly Member Pacheco. On April 8, the night before the City's
Birthday Celebration, the Chamber of Commerce will sponsor its Casino Night. She
attended the Inland Valley Economic Corporation, which is planning to have a
business round table and brokers caravan in April during which brokers will preview
properties in D.B. that are available for commercial businesses. She spoke about
Assembly Member Pacheco's bill AB1939 concerning solid waste issues. She also
spoke about the passing of Raul Medina and his participation in the community.
M/O'Connor stated that on February 8, the L.A. County Board of Supervisors went
on record in support of Proposition 13. On February 1, the Board of Supervisors
went on record to oppose Proposition 28. On February 2, she and MPT/Ansari
hosted a Boy Scout Den at City Hall. She and other Council Members attended the
Diamond Bar High School luncheon, during which 8 students were honored. She
reported on her attendance at the WCCA meeting and issues that were discussed.
On February 3, she and C/Herrera attended a retirement dinner for Sheriff Myron.
850 people attended the event, which was a great tribute to L.A. County's fine
Sheriff's Department. On February 8, she attended the Chamber Mixer at Citrus
Valley. She encouraged business and Council members to attend the Chamber
Mixers. On February 9, the City held its first Census Complete Count committee
meeting. Over 120 letters were sent to local organizations encouraging them to
send a representative to committee meetings. It is disappointing that only 3
representatives appeared at the meeting. On February 10, she attended the
Chamber's Legislative Breakfast. She attended the annual YMCA fund-raising
event kickoff. She serves as Chairman of the event and the goal is to reach
$25,000. On February 12, she and other Council Members attended the Chinese
Association School's New Year's event. Congressman Miller also attended the
event. She, Council Members, staff members, current and past members of the
Parks & Recreation Commission and Congressman Miller attended funeral services
for Raul Medina. Congressman Miller presented the eulogy. Among other
accomplishments, Raul Medina was a member of the bowler's 300 Club. She
reminded everyone to exercise his or her right to vote on March 7. On February 23,
Sanitation District No. 21 will hold a public hearing to discuss the increase in cost
of services. She encouraged interested parties to attend the hearing. She asked
for residents to volunteer their services to the D.B. Community Foundation. The
Foundation is scheduled to meet on Thursday, February 17. She has met with
residents and tenants concerning the empty Ralph's lease space in The Country
Hills Towne Center. She received an e-mail from the Mayor Pro Tem of Brea
indicating that their city has the same situation. He suggested that the two cities
pool their resources to attempt to influence Ralph's to re -consider their position on
this matter.
FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 13
12. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to conduct, WO'Connor
adjourned the meeting at 10:13 p.m. in memory of Raul Medina, former Parks and
Recreation Commissioner.
ATTEST:
Mayor
LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk
MINUTES OP THE CITY COUNCIL DQA-7-,
5PECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
FEBRUARY 18, 2000
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor O'Connor called the Special Meeting of the
City Council to order at 3:37 p.m. in Conference Room A, Diamond Bar City Hall,
21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100, Diamond Bar, California 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor
O'Connor.
ROLL CALL: Council Members Chang, Herrera, Mayor Pro
Tem Ansari, Mayor O'Connor. Council Member Huff arrived at 4:08 p.m.
Also present were: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; James DeStefano, Deputy
City Manager; David Liu, Deputy Public Works Director; Rose Manela, Associate
Civil Engineer and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT: Bob Schwartz, 24038 Highcrest Dr., expressed
concern that there are too many unresolved issues such as locations of gates with
respect to this project. He felt the City should be acting on behalf of the citizens
who live in D.B.
Randy Nayudu stated that he has lived on Highcrest Drive for 11 years and paid a
premium to live on one of the best streets in D.B. He asked if the gate on Highcrest
is supposed to be an emergency gate only or an ingress/egress gate for the
homeowners in the proposed project. If it is an emergency gate only, then the
residents have no problem. If the gate is going to be used for an entrance to the
tract, then Council and the Mayor need to fight for the residents to include them in
that association without having to pay the penalty of $200 or $300 a month for
association dues.
Rafik Tadros, 24069 Highcrest Drive, asked what the purpose of the ingresslegress
on Highcrest would be when there is ingress/egress on D.B. Blvd. Highcrest is not
a major passageway to any place in the city except possibly Pantera School.
Goldrush Dr. has enough traffic in the morning hours and his tract does not need
the additional traffic.
At the direction of M/O'Connor, DCM/DeStefano indicated that the condition, as
written when the Vesting Tentative Tract Map condition was approved in
September/October, 1998, reads as follows: "The connection to Highcrest Drive
from VTTM No. 52267 shall be utilized as a secondary access into VTTM No.
52267." The issue of access at that portion of this property was one that was
discussed at the Planning Commission level as well as Council level. This is where
Council concluded with its decision. The purpose of the access is one that provides
the ability to enter into the site from Highcrest Dr., which affords residents of the
new project an opportunity to utilize Goldrush Dr. as a means of access into their
project. This condition does not permit secondary egress or exiting. It specifically
says "into." The purpose for any connection at Highcrest would have been to
FEBRUARY 18, 2000 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
provide the potential for ingress or egress while the project was being considered
and to provide an opportunity for emergency ingress and egress. The developer's
primary gate as submitted is to take place off of Tin Dr. With respect to the staging,
he understood that Pulte Homes would have a construction headquarters trailer at
the corner of Goldrush and D.B. Blvd. The large equipment utilized in the grading
operation will be located on-site. Staff has advised the developer that construction
access from Highcrest is not permitted.
RECESS: M/O'Connor recessed the meeting at 3:46 p.m.
RECONVENE: WO'Connor reconvened the meeting at 3:50 p.m.
3. CONSENT CALENDAR:
MATTERS WITHDRAWN FROM CONSENT CALENDAR:
3.1 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR FOR APPROVAL OF FINAL TRACT MAP NO. 52267, FOR
THE SUBDIVISION OF A 65 ACRE SITE INTO 127 SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCES, LOCATED IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA
- This project consists of construction of 127 single family units on 65 acres
of a 339 acre site. The Final Tract Map has been submitted by SunCal
Companies to the City for approval and staff has technically approved the
map.
DCM/DeStefano reported that this matter was held over from the Regular
Council Meeting of February 15 in order to obtain the necessary resolution
between the subdivider and the Walnut Valley Water District, which
concluded with a letter forwarded to the City today dated February 18
indicating that the Water District Board has approved the exchange
agreement, joint escrow instructions, grant deeds and quitclaim deed for the
Diamond Hills Ranch Partnership, i.e. SunCal Development. In addition,
there have been technical changes to the Subdivision Agreement. The
revised Subdivision Agreement contained in tonight's packet corrected a
variety of typographical errors. The Resolution has been modified to include
1) the date of February 18, where appropriate and 2) a paragraph added by
the City's legal counsel that, in summary states, that this Final Map approval
would be contingent upon payment of $1,256,000 to the City through a
specific escrow account that has been set aside between SunCal
Development and Pulte Corporation and would also include the conveyance
of the property behind Pantera Park, known specifically as Lot 9 of Tract
31479 and Lots 50 and 51 of Tract 42576 as well as dedication of Open
Space as indicated on the face sheet of the map. The action will not be
binding until the City receives a direct wire transmission or check in the
amount indicated as well as the grant deed. Furthermore, the Mayor is
directed to sign the Final Map only upon receipt and assurance by the
FEBRUARY 18, 2000 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
escrow holder that the payment has been made and that the license for
construction improvements has been released and that the grading permit
has been released upon the close of escrow. Otherwise, as pointed out in
the Resolution, this approval of the Final Map will be null and void and of no
effect whatsoever. He recommends that Council a) approve the Final Map;
b) authorize the Mayor to execute the Subdivision Agreement; c) adopt the
Resolution authorizing the Deputy Director of Public Works to sign the Map;
d) direct the City Clerk to certify and process the map and CC&R's for
recordation; and f) direct the City Manager to sign the Escrow Instructions
and Entry Permit.
Following discussion, C/Herrera moved, C/Chang seconded, to approve
Resolution No. 2000-14: A Resolution of the City of Diamond Bar approving
Final Tract Map No. 52267, for the subdivision of a 65 acre site into 127
single family residences, located in the City of Diamond Bar, California.
Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Chang, Herrera, Huff, MPT/Ansari, M/
O'Connor
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
3.2 APPROVED AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH BONTERRA CONSULTING REGARDING
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FOR PROPOSED VTM 52267 (SunCal) - In
order to provide environmental services necessary to monitor the mitigation
measures as outlined within the previously -approved VTM 52267, approval
of an amendment to the existing agreement is necessary.
DCM/DeStefano recommended that Council approve an amendment to the
agreement with BonTerra Consulting in the amount of $99,446.
C/Herrera moved, MPT/Ansari seconded, to approve Amendment No. 5 to
a Professional Services Agreement with BonTerra Consulting regarding
environmental services for proposed VTM 52267 (SunCal). Motion carried
by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Chang, Herrera, Huff, MPT/Ansari, M/
O'Connor
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
C/Chang recommended that the developer work closely with the surrounding
neighborhoods to insure a smooth transition during construction.
FEBRUARY 18, 2000 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
4. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to conduct, WO'Connor
adjourned the meeting at 4:15 p.m.
ATTEST:
Mayor
LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. IZ-
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000 REPORT DATE: March 2, 2000
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
TITLE: Resolution No. 2000 -XX "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar
Requesting the Board of Supervisors of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District to Accept
on Behalf of said District a Transfer and Conveyance of Storm Drain Improvements Known as
Ambushers Street Drainage Improvements Project, in the City of Diamond Bar for Future
Operation, Maintenance, Repair, and Improvement, and Authorize the Transfer and Conveyance
Thereof. "
SUMMARY Construction of the Ambushers Street Drainage Improvements Project was completed
on September 7, 1999 and Notice of Completion was approved for filing by the City Council on
December 7, 1999. L.A. County Flood Control District inspected the project on November 22,
1999 and has deemed that the work has been accomplished to the satisfaction of the District.
With the project completed, the new 24" Storm Drain should be transferred to the County Flood
Control District for operation and maintenance. Upon approval by the City Council, staff will
transmit "As -Built" drawings and the signed resolution to the District.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2000 -XX "A Resolution of
the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Requesting the Board of Supervisors of the Los
Angeles County Flood Control District to Accept on Behalf of said District a Transfer and
Conveyance of Storm Drain Improvements Known as Ambushers Street Drainage Improvements
Project, in the City of Diamond Bar for Future Operation, Maintenance, Repair, and
Improvement, and Authorize the Transfer and Conveyance Thereof. "
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification
x Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification
_ Agreement(s) x Other: Plot Plan of Storm Drain Plan
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. Are other departments affected by the report?
N/A Yes No
REVIEWED BY:
Ten nce L. Belau a James DeStefano a
G. Liu
City Manager Deputy City Manager Deputy Director of Public Works
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000 AGENDA NO. _
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2000 -XX "A Resolution of the City Council of the City
of Diamond Bar Requesting the Board of Supervisors of the Los
Angeles County Flood Control District to Accept on Behalf of said
District a Transfer and Conveyance of Storm Drain Improvements
Known as Ambushers Street Drainage Improvements Project, in the
City of Diamond Bar for Future Operation, Maintenance, Repair, and
Improvement, and Authorize the Transfer and Conveyance Thereof. "
ISSUE STATEMENT
To transfer the operation and maintenance of the Ambushers Street Storm Drain to the Los
Angeles County Flood Control District.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2000 -XX "A Resolution of the City Council of the
City of Diamond Bar Requesting the Board of Supervisors of the Los Angeles County Flood
Control District to Accept on Behalf of said District a Transfer and Conveyance of Storm Drain
Improvements Known as Ambushers Street Drainage Improvements Project, in the City of
Diamond Bar for Future Operation, Maintenance, Repair, and Improvement, and Authorize the
Transfer and Conveyance Thereof. "
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
The process of transferring this storm drain has no financial impact on the City's budget.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
Construction of the Ambushers Street Drainage Improvements Project was completed on
September 7, 1999 and Notice of Completion was approved for filing by the City Council on
December 7, 1999. L.A. County Flood Control District inspected the project on November 22,
1999 and has deemed that the work has been accomplished to the satisfaction of the District.
With the project completed, the new 24" Storm Drain should be transferred to the County Flood
Control District for operation and maintenance. Upon approval by the City Council, staff will
transmit "As -Built" drawings and the signed resolution to the District.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY
FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT TO ACCEPT ON BEHALF OF SAID DISTRICT A
TRANSFER AND CONVEYANCE OF STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS KNOWN AS
AMBUSHERS STREET DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, IN THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR FOR FUTURE OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, AND
IMPROVEMENT, AND AUTHORIZE THE TRANSFER AND CONVEYANCE
THEREOF.
WHEREAS, there has been storm drain improvements and drainage system constructed
by the City known as Ambushers Street Drainage Improvements Project, described in Exhibit A
attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, the City is authorized and empowered to transfer and convey to the Los
Angeles County Flood Control District any storm drain improvements and drainage systems for
future operation, maintenance, repair, and improvement; and
WHEREAS, the best public interest will be served by the transfer and conveyance of the
storm drain improvements and drainage system described in Exhibit A attached hereto from the
City to the Los Angeles County Flood Control District for future operation, maintenance, repair
and improvement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Diamond Bar does hereby
request the Los Angeles County Flood Control District to accept the transfer and conveyance of
the storm drain improvements and drainage system described in said Exhibit A.
Reference is hereby made to District Drawing Nos. 313-F 123.1-.4, the plans and profile
of said storm drain improvements and drainage system on file in the office of the City Engineer
and on file in the office of the Chief Engineer of said District for further data as to the exact
location, extent, and description of said storm drain improvements and drainage system.
BE IT FURTHER RESOVED that the City Engineer is directed and ordered to prepare
all necessary instruments and documents, to cause the Los Angeles County Flood Control District
to initiate immediate operation and maintenance of said improvements.
The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7h day of March, 2000.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
MAYOR, City of Diamond Bar
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 7`h day of March, 2000, by the following
vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
LYNDA BURGESS, CITY CLERK
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
EXHIBIT "A"
MTD No. (Ambushers Street Drainage Improvements Project)
A reinforced concrete pipe, generally described as follows:
24" diameter reinforced concrete pipe 1500D. On Ambushers Street from Station
20+26.04 to westerly to station 30+69.51 and tying into PD No. 493, as shown on the
approved drawings for "Ambushers Street Drainage Improvements Project", on file in the
office of the City Engineer of the City of Diamond Bar.
VICINITY MAP
N N.T.S.
PROCLAMATION FOR SAFE COMMUNITIES WEEK
March 20 - 25, 2000
WHEREAS, the vitality of the County of Los Angeles Depends on how safe we
keep our home, neighborhoods, work places and communities; and
WHEREAS, crime and fear diminish our trust in others
threatening the community's health and prosperity; and ,
WHEREAS, people of all must be made
themselves, their families, neighbors and co -w
violence, and other crimes; and
WHEREAS, people of all ages must
creating a safe, healthy, crime -free environr
programs; and
WHEREAS, the major focus of this to
difference for our communities by educ
alternatives and role models for child
community including schools busi s, r
enforcement agencies and local conn
NOW, THEREI
of Supervisors, do her
WEEK in Los Angeles
privaile institutions, tg(
is to make a positive
' by providing positive
port of the local
, service clubs, law
r< ' e; Chair of the Los Angeles Board
2000, as SAFE COMMUNITIES
s, government agencies, public and
;e their participation in our community's
productive comminutes and improve
V10
W
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
HEARING BOARD ROOM OF S.C.A.Q.M.D.
21865 Copley Drive
NOVEMBER 18, 1999
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Nolan called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Commissioner Finnerty.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Chairman Dan Nolan, Vice Chairman Yvonne Pruitt, and
Commissioners Patty Anis, Annette Finnerty and Karen Holder.
Staff: Bob Rose, Director of Community Services; Wendy Bowman,
Recreation Supervisor and Marsha Roa, Community Services
Assistant.
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE:
Richard Toombs referred the Commission to a November Metro article which pointed out how
many stray dogs are located in the County. He asked the Commission to consider recommending
that the City Council designate an area of a city park for dogs.
CSD/Rose responded to C/Finnerty that the City=s Parks Master Plan includes consideration of
a pooch park under Aspecial facilities.@ No location is identified.
CALENDAR OF EVENTS:
Friday, November 19, 1999 - Skate Park Informational Meeting - 6:00 p.m. -
9:00 p.m. - SCAQMD Building.
Saturday, November 20, 1999 - Adult Excursion, AWindmills & Wineries@ - $40 pp
- Departs 8:00 a.m. - Returns 7:00 p.m. from City Hall
NOVEMBER 18, 1999
PAGE 2 PARKS & RECREATION
Tuesday, November 23, 1999 -
City Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m., SCAQMD
Auditorium (Skate Park Consideration)
Thursday, December 4, 1999 -
Senior Excursion, AChristmas Is... @/$26pp - Departs
from Heritage Park
11:45 a.m. - Returns 5:15 p.m.
Community Center
Tuesday, December 7, 1999 -
City Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m., SCAQMD
Center Fiscal Analysis
Auditorium (Community
Presentation)
Wednesday, December 8, 1999 -
-
Senpor
00 pm. from Heritage
Returns 6Palm 1ngs Fr
p arts 9 00 a m�.
Park Community Center
Thursday, December 9, 1999 -
11`h Birthday Celebration Committee Meeting - 8:30
a.m. - City Hall Conference Room A
Friday, December 10, 1999 -
Adult Excursion, ARadio City Music Hall
Rockettes@/$55pp - Departs 11:30 a.m. - Returns 6:30
p.m. from City Hall.
Thursday, December 16, 1999 -
Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting - 7:00 p.m.,
SCAQMD Hearing Board Room
Tuesday, December 21, 1999 -
City Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m., SCAQMD
Auditorium
1. CONSENT CALENDAR:
1.1 Approval of Minutes
of October 28, 1999 Regular Meeting.
C/Finnerty moved, C/Anis seconded, to approve the minutes of October 28, 1999
as corrected. Motion
carried 5-0 by Roll Call vote.
2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
2.1 Recreation Update:
RS/Bowman presented the recreation update for
NOVEMBER 18, 1999 PAGE 3 PARKS & RECREATION
a. Youth Activities
b. Tiny Tots
C. Adult Sports
d. Contract Classes
e. Marketing
Chair/Nolan said that he was approached by a gentleman who was willing to instruct a
distance running contract class.
RS/Bowman suggested that Chair/Nolan have the interested party contact Kim Crews,
Contract Class Specialist.
2.2 Halloween Festival - Oral Report.
CSD/Rose reported that the Halloween Festival was a huge success. He thanked
C/Holder for her time and effort toward its success. The event attracted about
2,000 people, with 800 participating in the haunted house event. He said he
appreciated the fact that there was an extraordinarily large number of teenagers
who assisted with the event.
C/Holder stated she was very pleased with the festival.
2.3 Millennium Celebration - Update - Oral Report.
CSD/Rose reported that the event will be held at the Country Hills Towne Center.
All of the originally planned elements will be included in the celebration.
Promotion of the event is now under way.
3. OLD BUSINESS:
3.1 Transition to In -House Recreation Program - Update.
CSD/Rose reported.
4. NEW BUSINESS: None
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
C/Holder said she is taking a group to the 70's show tomorrow and will take another group in
NOVEMBER 18, 1999 PAGE 4 PARKS & RECREATION
January.
C/Anis reported that she completed tours of Paul C. Grow and Maple Hill Parks. She wished
everyone a Happy Thanksgiving.
C/Finnerty said that the view of the new trees on Diamond Bar Boulevard and Grand Avenue is
breathtaking, and that the field lights at Lorbeer Middle School are awesome.
CSD/Rose indicated to C/Finnerty that the Lorbeer Middle School lighting project has not yet been
completed.
VC/Pruitt completed her walk through of Heritage Park a few days after the Halloween Festival.
The park looked good. She passed along a citizen=s concern regarding a tree that hangs over
the basketball court. She asked if the basketball court and walkway could be better illuminated.
CSD/Rose responded that such a feature would have to be expressly stated, approved by the City
Council and announced to the public. The light may be faulty and he will have it checked.
VC/Pruitt asked if the City plans to redo the basketball court at Heritage Park.
CSD/Rose said he will check on this matter.
VC/Pruitt said she completed her walk through of Peterson Park. She pointed out that the
handicapped parking sign in front of the restroom is being used as a teeter-totter. Pop Warner
Football has two bowl games on Thanksgiving weekend. She said she is looking forward to the
holiday and she hopes everyone has a peaceful and joyful celebration.
Chair/Nolan wished everyone a fantastic Thanksgiving and looks forward to seeing everyone on
December 16.
ADJOURNMENT:
NOVEMBER 18, 1999 PAGE 5 PARKS & RECREATION
C/Finnerty moved, VC/Pruitt seconded, to adjourn the meeting. There being no other business
to come before the Commission, Chairman Nolan adjourned the meeting at 9:20 p.m. to
December 16, 1999 at 7:00 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
/s/ Bob Rose
Bob Rose
Secretary
Attest:
/G� Dan Nol any
Dan Nolan
Chairman
("2_Z-,
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
HEARING BOARD ROOM OF S.C.A.Q.M.D.
21865 Copley Drive
JANUARY 27, 2000
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Nolan called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Commissioner Finnerty.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Chairman Dan Nolan, Vice Chairman Yvonne Pruitt, and
Commissioners Patty Anis, Annette Finnerty and Karen Holder.
Staff: Bob Rose, Director of Community Services; Marsha Roa, Community
Services Assistant and Debbie Gonzales, Administrative Secretary.
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE: None
1. CONSENT CALENDAR:
VC/Pruitt moved, C/Holder seconded, to approve the Consent Calendar as presented.
Motion carried 5-0.
1.1 Approval of Minutes:
1.1.1 Regular Meeting of November 18, 1999 - approved as submitted.
1.1.2 Regular Meeting of December 16, 1999 - approved as submitted.
2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
2.1 Recreation Update:
CSD/Rose presented the recreation update for
JANUARY 27, 2000
PAGE 2 PARKS & REC COMMISSION
a. Athletics - Adult Volleyball, Basketball & Softball - Youth Basketball and
Track and Field Meet
b. Contract Classes
C. Tiny Tots
d. Senior Program
CSD/Rose responded to Chair/Nolan that the number of participants in the
Volleyball program have dropped off because the event is held on Friday night.
Participants indicate that they would prefer to have the event any other night of the
week.
2.2 Transition to In -House Program status.
CSD/Rose stated that the in-house program is progressing extremely well. The City
is looking to fill the Superintendent position from four qualified applicants who are
currently being considered.
2.3 Capital Improvement Program (CIP Projects)
a Heritage Park/Ronald Reagan Park A.D.A. Retrofit - completed.
b. Lorbeer Ball Field Lights - completed.
C. Skate Park - out to bid; bids due February 8 - award of contract by February
15 with construction commencing March 1 and completion slated for early
June.
d. Sycamore Canyon Park A.D.A. Retrofit - contract let for Master Plan.
e. Community/Civic Center Project - under consideration by the City Council.
Final site selection slated for the February 15 agenda.
Chair/Nolan indicated that he was unable to attend the study session.
f. Pantera Park Ball Field Lights - Plans and Specifications ready for discussion
at neighborhood meeting.
g. Peterson Park Drainage Correction - to commence after installation of
ballfield lights at Pantera Park.
VC/Pruitt stated she attended the grand opening of the Ontario Mills Skate Board
Park. Several professionals attended the event and took time to evaluate Diamond
Bar's plan. One minor recommendation was to make the right corner proposed in
JANUARY 27, 2000 PAGE 3 PARKS & REC COMMISSION
Concept A a ledge rather than a square hip with curved edge. She presented the
report to CSD/Rose.
2.4 Trails Master Plan
CSD/Rose reported that the contract for the Trails Master Plan was awarded to the
Roth Group by the City Council. The first meeting with the consultant to kick off
the project is scheduled for next week. The intent is to develop a plan with priority
and funding needs and standards for the different trail opportunities in Diamond
Bar.
2.5 Millennium Celebration
VC/Pruitt stated that it was a great event and well attended. She believes that there
would have been many more people present except for the rain. She has received
a lot of feedback from people of all ages and groups and they want another
celebration. She recommends that the City hold another similar event by getting
as many people as possible to write letters to the City Council.
C/Finnerty said that people loved the location. They were thrilled to be able to
walk to and from the event. More than 400 people shuttled to the event. Parking
was still available in the area of the event.
CSD/Rose responded to Chair/Nolan than there were an estimated 5,000 to 6,000
people in attendance. The Sheriff's Department estimated that the highest number
present at one time (11:00 p.m.) was about 4,500.
C/Holder said that a lot of people attended the event and then left to be at their
homes at midnight.
VC/Pruitt said that many people with smaller children left around 10:00 p.m. The
rides and vendor's booths were a huge success. The fireworks were awesome.
The Millennium Committee members suggested that planning begin earlier in the
year in order for the City to solicit and obtain donations for the event.
The Commission concurred with VC/Pruitt to invite residents to address their letters
to the City Council for approval of a similar event for the end of 2000. The
Commissioners voiced their unanimous support of having another event at the end
of 2000.
JANUARY 27, 2000 PAGE 4
3. OLD BUSINESS: None
4. NEW BUSINESS:
PARKS & REC COMMISSION
4.1 Summer Concerts In The Park - 2000 - Staff proposes to conduct 10 Summer
Concerts on Wednesday evenings from June 21 through August 23, 2000. With
July 4`h falling on a Tuesday, staff proposes to conduct the Patriotic themed concert
on July 5 rather than June 28.
CSD/Rose presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Commission review
staff's proposed concert schedule and styles of music for the summer of 2000 and
comment accordingly.
Following is staff's proposed schedule and styles of music for this summer's
Concerts in the Park series. Concerts will be held on Wednesday evenings:
Date Style
June 21
Regae/Calypso/Steel Drum
June 28
70's Party/Disco
July 5
Patriotic
July 12
Country Western
July 19
Classic 60's
July 26
Big Band/Swing
August 2
Contemporary/Top 40
August 9
Irish Dance
August 16
Surfin' USA - 50's, 60's
August 23
Rock
The Commission supported having July 5 as the patriotic themed concert.
Chair/Nolan suggested that the series be kicked off with a "walk-in"/"bike-in" event.
C/Finnerty asked when the City will have spanner banners available.
CSD/Rose responded that the spanner banner process is being reinitiated. The two
firms that committed to providing bids read the City's contract proposals and
determined that their companies were too small to meet the indemnification
requirements.
JANUARY 27, 2000 PAGE 5 PARKS & REC COMMISSION
The Commission concurred with staff's proposed schedule of dates and music styles
for the Summer Concerts in the Park - 2000.
4.2 C.P.R.S. Conference - This educational conference will be held in Ontario,
California on March 15 through March 18. Registration materials must be
postmarked by January 31 to receive the pre -registration fee of $20 per person less
than the regular fee.
CSD/Rose presented staff's report. Staff recommends that Commissioners advise
staff of their intentions regarding the C.P.R.S. Conference.
CSD/Rose stated he will register all five Commissioners.
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Chair/Nolan stated that a check in the amount of $500 will be coming to the Diamond Bar
Community Foundation from Heritage Farms.
C/Holder stated she is having a teen dance tomorrow night at St. Denis from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00
p.m. The entire community is invited. Six local teen bands will be playing. Admission is $2.00
per person. If the event is successful, she plans to schedule a monthly dance.
C/Anis said that everyone she spoke with about the Millennium Celebration thought it was a
wonderful event. The fireworks brought tears to her eyes. Congratulations to all who worked to
make the event a success. On Sunday, April 30 the Friends of the Library will hold its Wine
Tasting Soiree at the Shilo Hilltop Suites from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Tickets are $30.
C/Finnerty suggested that it might be time to begin working on the City's Youth Master Plan. She
asked if there is a possibility that foundation members could be invited to attend certain
workshops at the C.P.R.S. Conference. In response to Chair/Nolan, C/Finnerty stated that the
following five people were appointed to serve as Council appointees to the Diamond Bar
Community Foundation: Eileen Tillery, Andrew Wong, Dexter MacBride, Allen Wilson and
Daniel Osaka. The first meeting of the Foundation is scheduled for February 17. The Foundation
is looking to appoint four members from different service organizations and the Chamber of
Commerce as dictated by the Foundation's by-laws. She reported that the German sausage booth
will contribute a net profit of approximately $400 to the Foundation.
VC/Pruitt asked if the City has figures on revenue received from the soda machines in the parks.
CSD/Rose responded that the City has received two checks: One for just over $1,000 and a
JANUARY 27, 2000 PAGE 6 PARKS & REC COMMISSION
second check for about $1,900. He stated that the Maple Hills Park machine was broken in to
and destroyed last night. Machines at Heritage Park, Sycamore Canyon Park and a third park
recorded no activity for the month. This may represent problems with the machines since prior
activity had been strong at those parks.
VC/Pruitt asked if the City sent a thank you note to M&H Properties.
CSD/Rose responded that the thank you letter is on his desk for signature.
VC/Pruitt said she reviewed the news release regarding "Family Night Under the Stars" and
questioned the run dates and participation per -person price and where the event is being held.
CSD/Rose responded that it is a one day event on Friday, February 11 at Pantera Park Community
Center from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. The price is $18 for a family of four or less.
VC/Pruitt stated that Pop Warner held elections and the Board remains in tact. The first fund raiser
golf tournament that is scheduled to take place the end of May/first of June.
Chair/Nolan said he likes the new one page City Communication. He reported that there are no
nets on any of the basketball rims at Pantera Park.
CSD/Rose stated that the hoops originally installed at Pantera Park were designed to accommodate
steel nets. He said he prefers nylon nets. The City recently changed out all of the rims at
Pantera Park, and the new rims accommodate nylon nets. The new rims and nets were placed
there about two weeks ago. This was probably done after Chair/Nolan saw the missing nets.
Chair/Nolan pointed out that there were no doggie pot bags in the holder when he visited Pantera
Park. In addition, the electrical box in front of the community room had graffiti painted on it.
Chair/Nolan stated that he attended the City Birthday Celebration meeting today. The theme is
historical. The level of enthusiasm is high. Genevieve Peterson, the first person to purchase a
house in Diamond Bar will be present. The celebration date is April 9. Walnut Sheriff's are
seeking youth ages 16 to 18 to sign up for their explorer group. The night before the celebration
the Chamber of Commerce will hold its Casino Night from 6:00 to 10:00 p.m. The admission is
$25 which includes a barbecue dinner and playing chips for the games.
ADJOURNMENT:
C/Finnerty moved, C/Anis seconded, to adjourn the meeting. There being no other business to
JANUARY 27, 2000 PAGE 7 PARKS & REC COMMISSION
come before the Commission, Chairman Nolan adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
/s/ Bob Rose
Bob Rose
Secretary
Attest:
/s/ Dan Nolan
Dan Nolan
Chairman
�'
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 11, 2000
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Tye called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management Auditorium,
21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Ruzicka.
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Chairman Steve Tye, Vice Chairman Steve Nelson, and Commissioners
George Kuo, Joe McManus and Joe Ruzicka.
Also Present: James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager; Ann Lungu, Associate Planner;
Sonya Joe, Development Services Assistant, Linda Smith, Development Services
Assistant, and Stella Marquez, Administrative Secretary.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None offered.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR:
4.1 Minutes of the December 14, 1999, meeting.
C/Ruzicka moved, C/Kuo seconded, to approve the minutes of the meeting of December 14,
1999 as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS
5. OLD BUSINESS: None
6. NEW BUSINESS: None
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: None
Kuo, McManus, Ruzicka, VC/Nelson, Chair/Tye
None
None
JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
7.1 Development Code Amendment No. 99-1 and Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1
(Continued from December 14, 1999).
Development Code Amendment No. 99-1 (pursuant to Code Section 22.44) is a request to amend
the following Articles of the Development Code:
Presentation by AssocP/Lungu. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the
public hearing, receive public comments, discuss the recommended amendments as indicated in
staff's report and direct staff to prepare a resolution recommending approval of the amendments
to the City Council to be forwarded to the Commission on January 25, 2000. Additionally, staff
recommends that the discussion on the Significant Ecological Area be continued to January 25,
2000.
Article II
Zoning Consistency Matrix, Section 22.6.040, Table 2-2, amend to read as follows: RPD -
20,000, R-1-20,000 and R-1-15,000 - Low Density Residential RL); and PA-21SP - RL.
Residential Zoning District General Development Standards, Section 22.08.240, Table 2-4,
modify the rear yard setback from 20 to 25 feet in the RR Zone; modify the rear yard setback
from 15 to 20 feet in the RL and RLM Zones; and add Lot Coverage, maximum 30 percent
within the RR, RL and RLM Zones.
Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for Office Zoning Districts, Section 22.10.030, Table
2-5, amend to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages (off site consumption) in conjunction with
the sale of motor fuel with a Conditional Use Permit in the OP and CO Zones.
Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts, Section
22.10.030, Table 2-6, amend to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages (off site consumption) in
conjunction with the sale of motor fuel with a Conditional Use Permit in the C-1, C-2 and C-3
Zones.
Article III
Required Setbacks -Accessory Uses and Structures, Section 22.42.110, Table 3-15, amend the
three-foot rear and side yard setback to five feet for swimming pools and similar accessory
structures.
Guest Houses, Section 22.42.060, amend to allow guest houses up to 25 percent of the main
residence, not to exceed 1,200 square feet with a Minor Conditional Use Permit; and to amend
overall parcel coverage to 30 percent.
JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
Significant Ecological Area, add Section 22.22.160, to discuss development within a
Significant Ecological Area.
AssocP/Lungu suggested that this matter be discussed at the January 25, 2000 meeting.
Article IV
Review Authority, Section 22.44.020, Table 4-1, amend Planned Sign Program to
Comprehensive Sign Program.
Article V
Restrictions on Nonconforming Structures, Section 22.68.030, amend to allow additions not to
exceed 500 square feet if the exterior limits of the new construction do not exceed the
applicable height or encroach further into the setbacks than the comparable portions of the
existing structure.
Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1 (pursuant to Code Sections 21.02) is a request to amend
the following Articles of the Subdivision Ordinance:
Article I
Applicability, Section 21.01.040, amend to add that all subdivisions within the City shall
follow the same process as a Development Code Amendment.
Article II
Changes to Approved Tentative Map or Conditions, Section 21.20.110, amend the process to
allow proposed changes to a Tentative Map or conditions of approval to be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer, except as otherwise provided by this Section.
PROPERTY ADDRESS: Citywide
APPLICANT: City of Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
VC/Nelson suggested that he should recuse himself from the January 25, 2000, discussion of the
Significant Ecological Area issue because the firm he works with is conducting an update for
Los Angeles County.
JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
DCM/DeStefano responded that it is likely that VC/Nelson should recuse himself. He will investigate
the matter further and keep VC/Nelson advised.
Chair/Tye re -opened the public hearing.
There was no one present who wished to speak on this matter.
Chair/Tye referred to a letter addressed to the City from Samuel C. Tricoli which cited Article V,
Section 22.68.030 and asked that staff explain how these changes will effect Mr. Tricoli's concerns.
AssocP/Lungu responded that Mr. Tricoli wants to add 200 square feet to his home. Apparently,
Mr. Tricoli has a legal non -conforming issue because his house is not built to the current setback
requirements. In order for Mr. Tricoli to proceed with his 200 square foot addition, he needs to go
through the public hearing process, notify property owners within a 500 foot radius of his project site,
post his site with a 4 x 6 foot board advertising what he intends to do on his site for a minimum of
10 days prior to the hearing and through the 10 calendar day appeal period and provide a $1,000 deposit
to the City. Mr. Tricoli is disturbed because he believes that a 200 square foot addition is minimal and
he does not understand why the City would require him to go through this process.
Chair/Tye said he is not sure that he would disagree with Mr. Tricoli.
C/Ruzicka asked if the proposed amendment will solve Mr. Tricoli's concern.
AssocP/Lungu indicated that if the Commission recommends approval of this amendment and the City
Council adopts this amendment, Mr. Tricoli's problem is solved because it will not be necessary for him
to go through the Minor Conditional Use Permit public hearing process time and related costs.
C/Ruzicka asked staff to identify the sections in the Development Code that substantiates a negative
impact on surrounding uses will be minimized.
AssocP/Lungu identified specific sections of the Development Code that would support that concern.
C/Ruzicka moved, VC/Nelson seconded, to prepare a resolution recommending approval of the
amendments as outlined in staff's report for Development Code Amendment No. 99-1 and Subdivision
Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1 to the City Council to be forwarded to the Commission on January 25,
2000 for final approval, and to continue the public hearing on the Significant Ecological Area discussion
to January 25, 2000. Motion carried 5-0 by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kuo, McManus, Ruzicka, VC/Nelson, Chair/Tye
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
Chair/Tye continued the public hearing to January 25, 2000.
8. PUBLIC HEARING:
8.1 Development Review No. 99-12 (pursuant to Code Section 22.48) is a request to demolish an
existing 3,944 square foot two-story single-family residence with garage and pool/spa, and
construct an 11,389 square foot two-story with basement single-family residence including a six -
car garage, motor court, pool/spa and gazebo.
PROJECT ADDRESS:
PROPERTY OWNER:
APPLICANT:
2501 Crowfoot Lane
(Tract No. 30577, Lot 61)
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Charles Chin
2501 Crowfoot Lane
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Simon Shum
20545 Walnut Drive #D
Walnut, CA 91789
DSA/Smith presented staff s report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve
Development Review No. 99-12, Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval, as listed within
the resolution.
DSA/Smith responded to VC/Nelson that the trees contemplated to be most impacted by this
project are the seven California Pepper trees. The project is conditioned that the trees must be
fenced within 5 feet of the drip line. No trees will be removed.
Simon Shum, architect, explained that the project was designed to conform to the natural
landscape and believes it will enhance the neighborhood.
Chair/Tye opened the public hearing.
There being no one present who wished to speak on this matter, Chair/Tye closed the public
hearing.
Following discussion, C/Ruzic4 moved, C/McManus seconded, to approve Development
Review No. 99-12, Findings *of Fact, and conditions of approval, as listed within the revised
resolution. Motion carried 5-0 by the following Roll Call vote:
JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Kuo, McManus, Ruzicka, VC/Nelson, Chair/Tye
None
None
C/Ruzicka complimented staff for the excellent Millennium Celebration. He said he was approached by 10 to
15 people asking that the City planned to scheduled this type of event on an annual basis.
C/McManus said that he missed the celebration due to illness. However, he has heard from many people that
the event was successful and that people had a good time.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
10.1 Planners Institute -March 1-3,2000, Monterey Conference Center.
DCM/DeStefano stated that it is imperative that hotel reservations be made as soon as possible and he
asked that Commissioners indicate their intentions to staff.
10.2 Compensation Increase for Planning Commission.
Report by DCM/DeStefano indicating that Commissioner's compensation will be increased from $60 to
$65 per meeting with a maximum per month increase from $180 to $195 effective as of tonight's
meeting.
DCM/DeStefano indicated to C/Ruzicka that most cities compensate Commissioners with an amount of
money. Amounts vary based upon the complexity of projects, the size of cities, etc.
Chair/Tye said he would prefer that additional monies be used to compensate City staff.
10.3 Public Hearing Dates for Future Projects.
As provided by the matrix within Commissioner packets.
DCM/DeStefano reported that the City of Industry Majestic Industrial 6,500,000 square foot project proposed
for the Brea Canyon Road and Grand Avenue area just outside the Diamond Bar city limits is moving forward.
Since the Commissions last meeting Travelers Insurance and Allstate Insurance. have moved into the Gateway
Corporate Center. In addition, two or three Fortunate 100 companies are looking at Diamond Bar as a candidate
site for their businesses. The City Council approved an ordinance that prohibits skateboards and other wheeled
toys on private property with a slope greater than a two or three percent. The City Council approved
JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION
development of a skate park at Peterson Park. The City Council is scheduled to award bid on February 1 with
construction commencing immediately. The skate park opening is slated for April. DCM/DeStefano stated that
the SunCal project is scheduled to go before the City Council for Final Map approval on January 18. It appears
that the project will be sold to Pulte Homes and that Pulte Homes will commence grubbing and clearing of the
site in about 30 days with grading to follow immediately thereafter. With the construction of homes will come
the transfer of about 360 acres of privately held property into public open space.
SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As listed in the agenda.
ADJOURNMENT:
C/Ruzicka moved, VC/Nelson seconded, to adjourn the meeting. There being no further business to come
before the Planning Commission, Chair/Tye adjourned the meeting at 8:15 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
James DeStefano
Deputy City Manager
Attest:
l
Steve Tye
Chairman
C0 , Z� C. -
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 25, 2000
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Tye called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management
Headquarters Building Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Vice Chairman Nelson.
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Chairman Steve Tye, Vice Chairman Steve Nelson, and Commissioners
George Kuo, and Joe Ruzicka.
Joe McManus was excused.
Also Present: James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager; Ann Lungu, Associate Planner;
Sonya Joe, Development Services Assistant, Linda Smith, Development Services
Assistant, and Stella Marquez, Administrative Secretary.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None offered.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR:
4.1 Minutes of the January 11, 2000, meeting.
C/Ruzicka moved, C/Kuo seconded, to approve the minutes of the meeting of January 11, 2000,
as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
5. OLD BUSINESS: None
6. NEW BUSINESS: None
Kuo, Ruzicka, VC/Nelson, Chair/Tye
None
McManus
JANUARY 25, 2000 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
7. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
7.1 Development Code Amendment No. 99-1 and Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1
(Continued from January 11, 2000).
Development Code Amendment No. 99.1 (pursuant to Code Section 22.44) is a request to
amend the following Articles of the Development Code:
Zoning Consistency Matrix, Section 22.6.040, Table 2-2, amend to read as follows: RPD -
20,000, R-1-20,000 and R-1-15,000 - Low Density Residential RL); and PA-21SP - RL.
Residential Zoning District General Development Standards, Section 22.08.240, Table 2-4,
modify the rear yard setback from 20 to 25 feet in the RR Zone, modify the rear yard setback
from 15 to 20 feet in the RL and RLM Zones; and add Lot Coverage, maximum 30 percent
within the RR, RL and RLM Zones.
Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for Office Zoning Districts, Section 22.10.030, Table
2-5, amend to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages (off site consumption) in conjunction with
the sale of motor fuel with a Conditional Use Permit in the OP and CO Zones.
Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts, Section
22.10.030, Table 2-6, amend to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages (off site consumption) in
conjunction with the sale of motor fuel with a Conditional Use Permit in the C-1, C-2 and C-3
Zones.
Article III
Required Setbacks -Accessory Uses and Structures, Section 22.42.110, Table 3-15, amend the
three-foot rear and side yard setback to five feet for swimming pools and similar accessory
structures.
Guest Houses, Section 22.42.060, amend to allow guest houses up to 25 percent of the main
residence, not to exceed 1,200 square feet with a Minor Conditional Use Permit, and to amend
overall parcel coverage to 30 percent.
Significant Ecological Area, add Section 22.22.160, to discuss development within a
Significant Ecological Area.
AssocP/Lungu suggested that this matter be discussed at the January 25, 2000 meeting.
JANUARY 25, 2000 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
Article IV
Review Authority, Section 22.44.020, Table 4-1, amend Planned Sign Program to
Comprehensive Sign Program.
Article V
Restrictions on Nonconforming Structures, Section 22.68.030, amend to allow additions not to
exceed 500 square feet if the exterior limits of the new construction do not exceed the
applicable height or encroach further into the setbacks than the comparable portions of the
existing structure.
Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1 (pursuant to Code Sections 21.02) is a request to amend
the following Articles of the Subdivision Ordinance:
Article I
Applicability, Section 21.01.040, amend to add that all subdivisions within the City shall
follow the same process as a Development Code Amendment.
Article II
Changes to Approved Tentative Map or Conditions, Section 21.20.110, amend the process to
allow proposed changes to a Tentative Map or conditions of approval to be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer, except as otherwise provided by this Section.
PROPERTY ADDRESS: Citywide
APPLICANT: City of Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Presentation by AssocP/Lungu. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Resolution
No. 2000-2, recommending that the City Council adopt Development Code Amendment No. 99-1,
Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1, and Negative Declaration No. 99-9, Findings of Fact and
conditions of approval as listed within the resolution.
Chair/Tye re -opened the public hearing.
There being no one present who wished to speak on this matter, Chair/Tye closed the public hearing.
JANUARY 25, 2000 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
C/Ruzicka moved, VC/Nelson seconded, to approve Resolution No. 2000-2 recommending that the City
Council adopt Development Code Amendment No. 99-1, Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1,
and Negative Declaration No. 99-9, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the
Resolution. Motion carried 4-0 by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
8. PUBLIC HEARING: None
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS:
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
Kuo, McManus, Ruzicka, VC/Nelson, Chair/Tye
None
McManus
None
10.1 Planners Institute -March 1-3,2000, Monterey Conference Center.
DCM/DeStefano encouraged Commissioners to attend the Conference. Any Commissioner wishing to
attend should advise staff as soon as possible.
10.2 Planning Commission Re -appointment - Verbal Report.
DCM/DeStefano stated that the City Council will consider this matter at its February 15, 2000, meeting.
Staff recommends that those Commissioners who wish to continue serving in their current capacity
contact their Council Member to voice their desires. The annual reorganization of the Planning
Commission will take place at the March 14, 2000, meeting.
10.3 Public Hearing Dates for Future Projects.
As provided by the matrix within Commissioner packets.
DCM/DeStefano stated that staff anticipates a City Council Public Hearing on March 7, 2000 for the
Development Code amendments approved this evening.
SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As listed in the agenda.
JANUARY 25, 2000 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
ADJOURNMENT:
C/Ruzicka moved, C/Kuo seconded, to adjourn the meeting. There being no further business to come before the
Planning Commission, Chair/Tye adjourned the meeting at 7:24 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
4A 1�
J es DeStefano
Deputy City Manager
Attest:
�-- Fun
Steve Tye
Chairman
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
JANUARY 13, 2000
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Morris called the meeting to order at 7:11 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management District
Hearing Board Room, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Chair/Morris.
ROLL CALL:
Commissioners: Chairman Roland Morris, Vice Chairman Arun Virginkar, and
Commissioners Jack Istik and Scott Lin.
Commissioner Joyce Leonard -Colby was excused.
Also Present were: David Liu, Deputy Director of Public Works, Rose Manela, Associate
Engineer; Sonya Joe, Development Services Assistant; Linda Smith,
Development Services Assistant; Frank Hess, Public Works Supervisor;
John Ilasin, Engineering Technician; Sharon Gomez, Administrative
Secretary and Deputy Tim Perkins.
I APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
A. Minutes of October 14, 1999.
VC/Virginkar moved, C/Lin seconded, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of October
14, 1999 as submitted. Motion approved with the following Roll Call vote:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS
It COMMISSION COMMENTS: None
III PUBLIC COMMENTS: None
Lin, VC/Virginkar, Chair/Morris
None
Istik
Leonard -Colby
JANUARY 13, 2000 PAGE 2 T&T COMMISSION
IV CONSENT CALENDAR: None
V NEW BUSINESS:
A. Consideration of multi -way stop signs at the T -intersection of Chestnut Creek Drive/Evergreen
Springs Drive (both south and north), Chestnut Creek Drive/Tierra Loma Drive, and Presado
Drive/Chestnut Creek Drive.
DSA/Smith presented staff s report. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation
Commission receive public input and discuss the installation of multi -way stop signs at the
intersections of Chestnut Creek Drive/Evergreen Springs Drive, both T -intersections of Chestnut
Creek Drive/Tierra Loma Drive and Presado Drive/Chestnut Creek Drive and concur with staff's
recommendations and forward the following recommendations to the City Council for approval:
Staff' does not recommend the installation of stop signs at Chestnut Creek Drive/Evergreen
Springs Drive and the T -intersections) of Chestnut Creek Drive/Tierra Loma Drive. Staff
recommends the installation of multi -way stop signs for all legs of Chestnut Creek Drive and
Presado Drive and further recommends that red curbing be installed on Presado Drive at Chestnut
Creek Drive 50 feet each side of Presado Drive for additional visibility.
Diane Dahl, 1938 Chestnut Creek Road, said she can see where there has been a problem in the
past. Normally people slow down to turn and are usually cautious. A stop sign at Chestnut
Creek Drive would most likely solve the problems on Tierra Loma Drive. Her main concern is
with Presado Drive and the ability of motorists to get out of the street onto Chestnut Creek.
Wale Alofe, 1966 Chestnut Creek Road, said he is a registered Civil Engineer with the State
Department of Transportation. He stated that although he has lived at his current address for only
three years, he has seen the potential for accidents on the street. He constantly witnesses people
speeding down the road in an attempt to avoid Diamond Bar Boulevard and Pathfinder Road. He
favors speed humps on his street and stop signs at the intersection of Presado Drive and Chestnut
Creek Drive on both sides as well as, a stop sign at the intersection of Evergreen Springs Drive
and Chestnut Creek Drive.
Mohan Lawani favors installation of speed humps and stop signs. He welcomes a scientific study
and he does not believe that the report presented by staff is valid.
Robert and Jolene Zirbes, 2141 Tierra Loma Drive, said they favor stop signs at the intersection
of Chestnut Creek Drive and Presado Drive. They have lived on their street for 15 years and have
witnessed several serious accidents at that blind intersection. Robert Zirbes stated that cars "fly"
down Chestnut Creek Drive toward Presado Drive constantly and he is very concerned about the
safety of his children and other children in the neighborhood. He asked the Commission to
JANUARY 13, 2000 PAGE 3 T&T COMMISSION
consider speed humps and stop signs. Mr. and Mrs. Zirbes support staffs recommendation for
stop signs at Presado Drive/Chestnut Creek Drive and consideration of some type of mitigation at
Tierra Loma Drive and Chestnut Creek Drive.
Carlos Torres, 2005 Tierra Loma Drive (corner of Tierra Loma Drive and Chestnut Creek Drive),
said he has lived at his current address for six months. He has two young children. When he
moved to the area he was hopeful that his children could play in the front yard. However, he
believes it is not safe because he has seen wreckless motorists. Stop signs are probably a good
idea. Most of the citizens are law-abiding but there are motorists who speed on the street, even
uphill.
Patricia Marinovich, 2003 Chestnut Creek Drive (intersection of Tierra Loma Drive and Chestnut
Creek Drive) said that there are a lot of speeding vehicles in her area. She asked the Commission
to consider speed humps and stop signs and not to wait until someone is killed before the City
takes action.
Sidney Jacobs, 2009 Chestnut Creek Road, said that speed is an issue on Chestnut Creek Road
and it is Chestnut Creek Road and has never been Chestnut Creek Drive. He is concerned about
speeding traffic on Friday and Saturday nights that were not part of the survey time. He agrees
with staff s recommendation for installation of stop signs for Presado Drive and Chestnut Creek
Road.
C/Lin thanked staff for their thorough investigation of the matter. Based upon residents'
comments, he is inclined to recommend more stop signs,
C/Istik said he has always been in favor of speed humps. Currently, there are no speed humps
allowed in the City. One approach that has been used by other cities is that two-thirds of the
people who are impacted by the speed humps can sign off on the project if they wish speed humps
installed and if it meets the safety criteria set forth by the city. This Commission previously
initiated a neighborhood traffic study that covered an entire area. DKS proposed solutions for
slowing the traffic on the residential streets and he believes most of the residents were happy with
the results of the study and felt that the mitigation measures worked.
VC/Virginkar stated that the Traffic and Transportation Commission has discussed the issue of
speed humps on several occasions. As a result of those discussion, it was determined that speed
humps would not benefit the City's residential neighborhoods. He concurs with staffs
recommendation for installation of a stop sign at Presado Drive and Chestnut Creek Road. He
said he would also like for the Commission to consider installation of multi -way stop signs at
Evergreen Drive and Chestnut Creek Road based upon safety concerns.
JANUARY 13, 2000 PAGE 4 T&T COMMISSION
Chair/Morris spoke about the topography of Diamond Bar and it is attractive for residential living
and at the same time presents traffic problems. He asked Deputy Perkins to have his department
take a close look at this area in the peak p.m. hours because he believes increased enforcement
might alleviate some of the problems and concerns addressed by the residents. He further asked
Deputy Perkins to communicate with Diamond Bar High School to make the students aware of
the safety concerns and learn to respect the residential neighborhoods.
Deputy Perkins indicated to Chair/Morris that the Sheriffs Department has been focusing on the
area of Evergreen Springs Drive and Pathfinder Road in accordance with the City Council's
instructions. Response from law enforcement has been good in that area and contact has been
made with many students in that area during school hours. He has not had any recent
communication with the high school nor has he asked them to communicate with the students
about their driving.
Chair/Morris said that safety has always been a primary concern of residents. He would like for
staff to investigate existing signage on Chestnut Creek Road, Evergreen Springs Drive and
Presado Drive to determine whether it is adequate. He concurs with VC/Virginkar that the City
needs to take a much closer look at the intersection of Chestnut Creek Road and Evergreen
Springs Drive. If the addition of a stop sign does anything to discourage cut -through traffic, it
serves a purpose and enhances safety. He believes that speed humps would turn into launch pads
on Diamond Bar's hilly streets.
DDPW/Liu responded to an audience member that the City's current policy is no installation of
speed humps. He suggested consideration of botts dots as an alternative mitigation measure
pointing out their advantages and disadvantages.
Chair/Morris suggested the residents discuss the potential use and placement of botts dots.
C/Istik said he would prefer to consider stop signs as part of an overall neighborhood study.
Chair/Morris said he agrees with staff's recommendation for the three way stop at Presado
Drive/Chestnut Creek Drive. He is leaning toward VC/Virginkar's recommendation for the
Evergreen Springs Drive/Chestnut Creek Drive location. However, he would prefer to have more
information before recommending the stop sign at the second location. In the meantime, he
believes that signage, communication with the high school and additional enforcement would help
to mitigate the situation.
VC/Virginkar moved, C/Lin seconded, to recommend installation of two multi -way stop signs on
JANUARY 13, 2000 PAGE 5 T&T COMMISSION
Chestnut Creek Drive/Evergreen Springs Drive and Chestnut Creek Drive/Presado Drive, with
appropriate striping and red curbing as recommended by the staff. Motion carried by the
following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
C. Washington Street Parking.
Istik, Lin, VC/Virginkar, Chair/Morris
None
Leonard -Colby
AE/Manela presented staff s report. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation
Commission receive public input and discuss the installation of additional red curbs and/or parking
restrictions at the intersections of Washington Street/Windwood Drive.
AE/Manela responded to Chair/Morris that staff has discussed this matter with Metro -Link and
the City of Industry.
DDPW/Liu stated he believes that the City of Industry is working with Metro -Link to expand the
park and ride lot.
Chair/Morris said he believes an informational letter from the City to the City of Industry would
serve to communicate the problem.
Lyle Kennedy, 21015 Washington Street, said he has noticed a significant increase in parking on
his street and he believes the problem will be worse as time passes.
Jeff Reinert, 726 Windwood Drive, said the intersection of Windwood Drive and Washington
Street has become a serious safety issue during the morning hours. Metro -Link parking has
already spilled over into the condominium complex and the residential tract in the area. The
increased traffic makes it difficult for young children to safely board the school bus on
Washington Street in the morning.
C/Istik moved, C/Lin seconded, to adopt staffs recommendation to install 150 feet of additional
red curbs and/or parking restrictions at the intersections of Washington Street/Windwood Drive.
Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: Istik, Lin, VC/Virginkar, Chair/Morris
None
Leonard -Colby
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
JANUARY 13, 2000 PAGE 6 T&T COMMISSION
The Commission concurred to direct staff to send a letter to the City of Industry communicating
the concerns regarding the lack of sufficient parking at the Metro -Link park and ride lot.
B. Consideration of multi -way stop signs at the intersection of Leyland Drive/Benfield Drive and
Leyland Drive/Newbury Way.
DSA/Joe presented staff s report. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation
Commission receive public input and discuss the installation of multi -way stop signs at the
intersection of Leyland Drive/Benfield Drive and Leyland Drive/Newbury Way.
Jian Tsai, 791 S. Leyland Place, asked the Commission to install multi -way stop signs at the
intersection of Leyland Drive and Benfield Drive.
Arjan Idnani, 24197 Benfield Place, is at the corner of Leyland Drive and Benfield Drive and he
knows that there is a speeding problem. About six months ago there were patrol officers present
in the area giving tickets on a daily basis. For the past four or five months there has been no
patrolling of the area. He does not believe a stop sign will solve the problem. He would prefer to
see more enforcement in the area, especially in the evening hours.
Angela Holloway, 780 Leyland Drive, acknowledged that there is speeding on her street. She is
concerned about the safety of small children in her neighborhood and believes that installation of
stop signs at both ends of Leyland Drive would be beneficial to the residents. Mr. Holloway
concurred.
Chair/Morris said he has noticed that people who play basketball at Pantera Park tend to park
along the driveway rather than using the marked parking spaces. He suggested that the
participants be asked to monitor their driving habits when leaving the basketball court.
VC/Virginkar moved, C/Istik seconded, to recommend installation of multi -way stop signs at
Leyland Drive and Benfield Drive. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
Istik, Lin, VCNirginkar, Chair/Morris
None
Leonard -Colby
DDPW/Liu indicated to Chair/Morris that staff will conduct a site evaluation of the need for
warning signs. Signs will be installed, if warranted.
JANUARY 13, 2000 PAGE 8 T&T COMMISSION
VIII ITEMS FROM STAFF:
DDPW/Liu stated that on November 23, 1999, the Redevelopment Agency awarded the design services
to Warren Siecke for the left turn traffic signals for Golden Springs Drive/Lemon Avenue, Diamond Bar
Boulevard/Sunset Crossing Road, Pathfinder Road at Fernhollow Drive, Brea Canyon Road/Lycoming
Avenue, Golden Springs DriveBallena Drive, and Pathfinder Road/Evergreen Springs Drive. In addition,
the Agency awarded design services to Linscott, Law and Greenspan for traffic signal modification on
Golden Springs Drive and Grand Avenue.
DDPW/Liu reported that at its January 4, 2000 meeting, the City Council approved the design services
contract for the three parkway medians on Golden Springs Drive. In addition, the Council approved the
Trails and Bicycle Routes Master Plan. The Council also awarded design of the ADA improvements at
Sycamore Canyon Park.
A. Verbal Presentation: Monthly Traffic Enforcement Update for October/November/December,
1999. - Oral report by Deputy Tim Perkins.
IX INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
3. Future Agenda Item
4. Public Testimony dated November 18, 1999
Resolution No. 90-75A - "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar
Amending Resolution No. 90-75 Establishing Compensation for City Commissioners/Committee
Members."
X SCHEDULE OF FUTURE CITY MEETINGS AND EVENTS:
As agendized.
ADJOURNMENT:
C/Istik moved, C/Lin seconded, to adjourn the meeting. There being no further business to come before the
Traffic and Transportation Commission Chair/Morris adjourned the meeting at 9:58 p.m.
JANUARY 13, 2000 PAGE 9 T&T COMMISSION
Respectfully,
/G/ navid GL Liu
David G. Liu
Secretary
Attest:
/s/ Roland Morris
Chairman Roland Morris
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor O'Connor and Councilmember Herrera
FROM: Linda G. Magnuson, Finance Director 04YVA
SUBJECT: Voucher Register, March 7, 2000
DATE: March 1, 2000
Attached is the Voucher Register dated March 7, 2000. 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 Calendar.
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 REGI�TER APPROVAL
The attached listing of vouchers dated March 07, 2000 have been
rev1ewe�, approve�, and recommended for payment. Paymen�s are
hereby allowed from the follow1ng fun�s in these amounts
FUND
DESCFTPTION
PREPAID
V�UCHERS
TOTAL
001
GENERAL FUND
139,333.68
510,299.32
649
633.00
010
011
LIBR�RY SERVICES.00
145.02
`145 02
COM QRGANIZATION SUPPORT
300.00
.00
300^00
112
PROP A - TRANSIT FUND
.00
23,202.68
23
202`68
115
INTEGRATED WASTE MGT FUND
'O0
4,926,39
4`9�6-39
118
AIR QLTY IMPR FD (AB27�6)
.00
908.08
`vo8^08
126
CITIZENS OPT -PUBLIC SFTY
118.38
500.00
618^38
138
LLAD #3S FUND
.00
4,381.17
4
381`17
139
L L A D FUND
.00
3,997.50
3`997^50
141
LLAD #41 FUND
.00
2,860.00
2`860^0O
250
CAPITAL IMPROV/PROJ FUNO
'00
200,770.52
200`770^52
510
SELF INSURANCE U
FND2`576~00
REPORT FOR ALL FUNDS
139,752.0�
754,566.68
894,318.74
APPROVED BY:
F -in. ince Director
...... ........
Councilmember
CITY OF DIAMC?,D BAR
RUN DATE: 03/01/2000 17:39:31
VOUCHER REGISTER
PAGE: 1
DUE THRU: 02/07/2000
PREPAID
FUND,SECT-ACCT-PROJECT-ACCT
PO #
INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
DATE CHECK
TEFRY AHN
001-34780--
-347&:9
RECREATION REFUND
25.00
TOTAL
PREPAIDS
.UC
TOTAL
VOUCHERS
25.00
TOTAL
DUE VENDOR
'25.00
AIRTOUCH CELLULAR
0014090-42125--
CELL CHRGS-'NCL/CMGR
294.14 03/07/2000
35738
1264411-42125--
CELL CHRGS-SHERIFF'B
118.38 03/07/2000
15738
0014440-42125--
CELL CHRGS-EMER PREP PHNS
79.96 03/07/2000
05738
TOTAL
PREPAIDS
49'2.48
TOTAL
VOUCHERS
.00
TOTAL
DUE VENDOR
492.48
AIRTOUCH PAGING
Oi14090-42130--
os": -
1 -341890.84 CITY PAGERS -STATEWIDE
25.83 03/07/2000
3575:
TOTAL
PREPAIDS
25.K
TOTAL
VOUCHERS
.00
TOTAL
DUE VENDOR
AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION
0015510-42340--
MTO - GASB34 - LIU
50.00 03/07/2000
35760
TOTAL
PREPAIDS
50.00
TOTAL
VOUCHERS
,00
TOTAL
DUE VENDOR.
50.00
AMERICAN SOCIETY LOF CI`dIL ENGINEERS
('015510412340—
W SCHL SEMdn -R MN LA�r
F v5.00 0-3/0712000, ."5759
TOTAL
PREPAIDS
6r`.00
TOTAL
'VOUCHERS
.00
TOTAL
DUE VENDOR
695.00
ASPHALT " IfTENANCE COMPANY
2`0"10-46411-01Va9-41411
9161
SLURRY SEAL -AREA 1 PFOJCT 5,
a3 .e2
TOTAL
PREPAIDS
.00
TOTAL
VOUCHERS 5,932.82
TOTAL
DIRE YENDOR
9". 82'
AT&T
0014090-42125--
LNG DIST CHARGE
25.82
OOI5:3i3-42125--
LNG DIST-HERITAGE PK
r
.',Va 8i
"15%'31-42125--
LNG DIST-SYC CYN PK
12.67
:-_,�_'--
LONG DISTANICE CHARGE
66.26:
L_.tu [ISTIANICE CHARGE
TOTAL
PREPAIDS
.00
TOT4L
VOUCHERS
1c.G_
TOTAL
DUE '.;BIRO
6,0:=:
CITY OF DIAMOND PAF;
RUN DATE: 03;01/2000 17:3931
VOUCHER REGISTEF
PAGE:
DUE THRU: O , /07; 2000
PREPAID
FUt.iDfSECT-ACCT-PROJECT-ACCT
PO #
INVOICE Di-SCRIPTION' AMOUNT
DATE CHECK
AT&T WIRELESS
0114030-4212`_--
CELL CHQC_CI?t MAPJAGEF.'
`4.45
0014415-42125--
CELL CHRG-V/PATROL
67.77
0014411-42125--
CELL CHRG-SHERIFF
2q•1w
;1014090-42105--
CELL C"HR-0-GENERAL
107.0'e.
TOTAL PREPAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
258.49
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
258.44
ATHENS SERVICES
0015510-455'01—
71
UAP, 200TREET SWEE IN SVCS -JAN
8"219.16
TOTAL PREPAID:
•'';r(;
TOTAL VOUCHERS
8,214.16
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
8,219.16
AUCTION EXPRE=S TITLE SER!ICE
0.}!41;91;-441111(1--
80728-80736 PROF.SVC-VEH REGISTRATION
67.50
TOTAL PREPAIDS
•00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
67.50
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
67.50
BEST LIGHTING
[1)15319-42216--
54:6 PROF SVC-ELECTRCL REPAIR
192.50
TOTAL PREPAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
192.50
TOTAL DUE ' ENI TDOR
192.50
PIE ER LIGHTING CCFFORATION
0+115322-42210--113u99H
PROF SVC-TENNiS CRT LITE5
-',l16.00TOTAL
PREPAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
2 116.00
7107 rl, E kyENDOR
2 116.00
rA 'r: LOC}•: ���:; SAFE
S:14-4'21 0--
15;9KEIS PETERSPK RS RM
O".00
16.1 _
TOT{L FREFAI'DIS
00
TOTAL VOUCHEP°
1,.16
IOTA_ DUE VENDOR
16.16
-
F:O ,jr-IN'TwC•TR W; - ESSN
-
510.00
7!'TAL FGEFAIDS
,Ott
TOTAL VOUCHERS
510.00
OT h _UE )EINIDO5-1.00
CIT`' OF DREA
yi
COMP TECH SPPRT-AUG-DEC:99
450. OD
TOTAL PREPAIDS
.r)G
TOTAL VOUCHERS
450.00
TOTAL DUE VEND'
S". . O
r-HIPESE DAIL, p;_ ,
roo4,nrt_42,0 r,.__ ?725 SUBSC�'IPTIDN - i YEAS 171:,00 03/011/20,00 35755
TOTAL PREF'AIDS 17L. �0
TOTAL VOUCHERS ,+ If;
TOTAL DUE VEND'OR 17E:, 00
_ut�diJ HILLS cr;P`r
nr1;4,.i}-}221+-- VEH MAINT-97 FORD TAURUS 24.78
TOTAL PREPAIDS .00
Ti C7 VOUCHERS 24.78
TrtT, 1 DUE VENDOR 24.7"
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
RUN DATE: 03/01,'2000 17:39:31
VOUCHER REGISTER
PAGE: 3-
DUE THRU: 03;'07/2.:j'jj
PREPAID
FUNDJSECT-ACCT-PROJECT-ACCT
PO It
INIVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK
CA PARI I. RECREATION SOCIETY
001400-42115--
131 AE -K.. °:: REC OPENINGS
55.01)
TOTAL PREFAMS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
55.x0
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
55,0;;
CALIBER CONSTRUCTION INC
(4)14090-42210--
9920 -CDB PROF SVC-ELECTRCL OUTLET
215.0:'
TOTAL PREPAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
215.33
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
215.E
CALIFORNIA :;PIA
5104081-4720!'--
LIABLTY CS?-l,lij-6/30(01
2,576.00
TOTAL PREPAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
2,576.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
'2),576.00
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF WEST CDVIt#A
0014010-4232`--
LEGIS PWR LUCHEON-MAYOR
3.00 [3/0',/2000 05747
TOTAL PREPAIDS
2:•00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
21. 00
CHARLES ABBOTT ASSOCIATES INC.
C'C}15350-42::54--
04`-572 MAINP SVCS—FOF. MILLEN!IIUM
1,494.96
112__7.• 455"--
PROF SvCS-8;,: Of INSP JAN
400. 00
551`t -4._..,v
:i4"—., RDMAiNT-1 '2/•:—l,a:/00
9,�?; _.�U
15511? -455 r:--
ir::;
%4'J MR€::ING °: SGNING-121'2 -1/8
71.`_:,50
�;.cc cai n
0.'� 5=_-4.,.3t,,--
- -
57. cc. R G 7 � � n
i;4''-.�,--__• PROF SVCS -WEED ABTMIT JAN
4 .•�.; _
525
-'r_:4
�:.4'=' _�_ RGHT OF W,1L/:.1,-1/8:'iiij
:3`'t•.i:l
'4'>-_ RD MALN: �_
8. 15
PROF SVCS—TREE WTRNG JACJ
z,6r�2.lt.
tn,lcr crtln--
.,
�'� --53 KT1.r F.. rh ham' > ria -•;'.lint
��o cit
: CC, �_
i 111 •__f0-4515,02--
015510-4.5,02 —
�•. L':
';r.
-- - r'Q_9`i
:4'>' _?U RD MAICJ?-1, : _ /00
-:tj� M1M1
6,�., .,.,
crn �ccip
7,58-455,"'
"'_-41•_::--
9492
649-5-3- -C�� n -. C iC U
64=�-.,;� C PROF SVCS -TREE WELL REML
62('.,.
v,•._r.1-4 _I_ --
: ❑ ^
:r:.
f. T f. .1 M_11f/.ip_t.il •�O
114';'_c._24 RrlO -'-1 4 I1f :
T2L (,c
�.
ii -4. --
RGHT OF :
7`75.'2:'
TOTAL FREFAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS'�,085.f'
;OTAI.iUE
nac ,F"
r-HIPESE DAIL, p;_ ,
roo4,nrt_42,0 r,.__ ?725 SUBSC�'IPTIDN - i YEAS 171:,00 03/011/20,00 35755
TOTAL PREF'AIDS 17L. �0
TOTAL VOUCHERS ,+ If;
TOTAL DUE VEND'OR 17E:, 00
_ut�diJ HILLS cr;P`r
nr1;4,.i}-}221+-- VEH MAINT-97 FORD TAURUS 24.78
TOTAL PREPAIDS .00
Ti C7 VOUCHERS 24.78
TrtT, 1 DUE VENDOR 24.7"
CITY OF IIIAM'ONG BAF:
RUN LATE: 03/01/2000 17:39:31
VOUCHER REGISTER
PAGE: 4
DUE THRU: 03/07/2000
PREPAID
FUND/SECT-ACCT-PR0jECT-ACCT
PO #
INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
DATE CHECK:
CINTAS CORPORATION
0015.'•10-42130--
40:56
150273831 UNFRM RNT!-'1k 2/14 CS
14.52
0015:::10-421'0--
9:`136
150275470 UNFRN RNTL - N�. 2/21 CS
17,c;4
OLl1 10 421.31;--
0015310-42:130-
40?_
150272271 UNFRM RNTL-WE. 2/7 CS
14.52
.OGi'_10-42130--
9150272271JiFRM
RI;T;L-�1_. 2' j7 PW
-•
0015510-4212',0—
,,,.
45'''x'
150273;.31 UNFRM FINTL-64K 2/14/00 F'K
18.50
TOTAL PREPAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
6S 2'`'
TOTAL LIVE VENDOR
LOUT
„I- 325
L.i�J'
MEMFR-HP MTC-ANSAR� 24
r1
TOTAL PRFPAIDS
1L'•i}''
TOTAL VOUCHERS
0
TOTAL DU .yi :;*:n
j :,0
CM SCHOOL SUPPLY
00153350-41200--
:::__=1 TINY TOTS SUPPLIES-PNTERA
I88.41
;1=, 50-412x1:;--
=5L50 SUPPLIES -TINT' 70T/REO
2`'.5_:
TOTAL PREPAIDS
0Q`
TOTAL VOUCHERS
217.99
TOTAL D'UE VENDOR
217•99
r�=_ --
1:
-:4:
= RECREATION REFUND
_. _ _.
43.00
TOTAL F't,EPAIDS
00,
TOTAL VOUCHERS
43.00
T 0T!lL DUE VENDOR
43.00
CFF'-
,n cr.c.a_�r`"--
._:
MEM8R5HF-REF STAF`
31`1•'�i�a
T"TAL PREPAID;-
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
_;it1,0i
TRIAL DUE VENDOR
310.00
:°CAS DISTfi;ICT flil
OC`•15?50-42'25--
CFPC .'IST dC'r'EO'.-_ STAFF
80.:'''
TOTAL PREPAIDS
110
TOTAL VOUCHEFS
80.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
80.00
", I �pjG,n��Eurn�G
001522(1-4':2'nl--
9014A
2t;i10DE-0 HLIT10177; Sti::-1/17-2111'0
10,510.2.`
TOTAL PF:EF`AIL`S
.00
TOTAL V0UCHCCF;S
18;510.29
T OTAL DUE t'ENDJOR
tU q1n„r
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES._ INC
25`'15=:0-46415-112'x, 46415
C7969
0=:2361 PROF SVCS-LORBEER B/FIELD
1,050.01'.'
TOTAL PREFAIDS.
00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
1,050.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
1,050.00
CITY OF DIAMON PP
RUN DATE: 03/01/2000 17:39:31 VOUCHER REGISTER;
DUE THRU:
FUND,SECT-ACCT-PkO,JECT-ACCT F'0 # INVOICE DESCRIPTION
DAY & NITE COPY CENTER
FEB
FEL -DENTAL PREMIUMS
0')15350-4211C!--
00?
PRIIT
U ING
SVCS -YOUTH LSk:.LiLL
�`_05'1i!-46415-15500-4.415
00
F'RNTIP'i�
SVC-F'LN/SPEC PTRS
2505215-46.420-1'30;9'-46.420
007PkNTING
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
SVCS -COMM C/CENTR
0015350-41200--
007
SUPPLIES -SOCCER FLYERS
2505310,-46415-155jt}-46415
i!011:;
PRNTING
SVCS -SPECS Si -.'.T PK.
Ci;
TOTAL
PREPAIDS
PROF SVC-LANTERMAN 2/7/00
1512 10-44000--
TOTAL
VOUCHER=:
PROF SVC-PLNN COMM 2/14
:G1535!:�-4431;1;--
TOTAL
DUE VENDOR
PROF SVCS-P&R MTG 1/27/110
DELTA CARE PMI
001-1104-- FEE FEL -DENTAL PREMIUMS
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
DELTA DENTAL
AMOUNT
0U1 -211x14--
FEB
FEL -DENTAL PREMIUMS
TOTAL F'kEF'AIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
CAROL DENNIS
00140411-44000--
92;_.0
DLCui2U1
PROF SVC-CC,RDA,STDY SESS
Ci;
PROF SVC-LANTERMAN 2/7/00
1512 10-44000--
9260
14 100
PROF SVC-PLNN COMM 2/14
:G1535!:�-4431;1;--
9260
PR_012'
PROF SVCS-P&R MTG 1/27/110
00140'30-44000--
9260
WCCA0202
PROF SVC-WCCA MTG 2/2/00
0015210-44000--
<6Q
PC°:.AR2/1/00
PROF SVC-FLN COMM '2/11ini
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDTfh
JAMES DESTEFANO
0015210-42330--
DEWAN LU NIDIN ?:! ASSOCIATES
250551ti-46411-1229u 46,411
2-5-05511 0-46411 1-1319-8-4L411
DFM 3T�:q
0-.14;!4l!-4 21 31 90--
::./28/00 ADVNCE TRVL WNS-:/1-3/3
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOJCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
PAGE:
PREPAID
DATE CHECK
427.05
938.75
,�
297._2 03,•'G7/240i -:,.! 4?
297.82
1,912.40 0/07/2000 35739
1,912.40
.00
1,912.40
300.00
810.00
9'0.00
140.00
140.00
0.00
.00
840.00
,140.00
195.75 03/07/2000 3576.3
195.75
.00
195.75
9449 JIB 02. 3 DSGN SVCS-DRNAGE IMPROVMT 10,12:.75
9294 Duii2: -3 D OF SVCS -INSPECTION CTION SVCS 7,240.011
TOTAL PREPAIDS •00
TONALrGUCH S 17,362.75
ER �
TOTAL DUE: VENDOR 17,362.75
944`. i!=:020X12-IN 21:11'; CA ELECTION CODE UPD 7`;.5'=
TOTAL FREF'AID •0'?
T ITAL VOUCHE
7,17r.i rt'rtiF�lr!GR 'O
L!rig. .__ I.-NDOR .d
DIAMOND BAR IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION
00140910-42115-- 9540 303° AD -CENSUS 2000, 440.00
TOTAL PF,EPATDS loo
TOTAL VOUCHERS 440.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR 440.00
DIAMOND BAR MOBIL
00140)90-42'310)-- JAN -00 FUEL -GENERAL GOVT -JAN 97.10
00153110-42310-- JAN -00 FUEL -COMM SVCS - JAN 245.37
TOTAL PREPAIDS .00
TOTAL VOUCHERS 342.47
TOTAL DUE VENDOR 342.47
DIAMOND GAF; REDEVELOPMENT AGEP;CY
1;1;1-1=1`;-- RI!A'='07 ADVANCE TO RPA - 3/7/2'i�;:.)i09 03107/200.? RDA 307
TOTAL PPEP-;IDS 27,713.0.
TOTAL VOUCHER .00
TOTAL DUE VE^'DOR 27,71'.05
DIAMOND PHOTO
j1115=5i;-412'00'- 271672 FILM DEVELPMT-RECREATION 12.02
i1'?15.50)-4121;0-- 2711761673 PIHOTO DVLPMT-REC BROCHURE 25.19
010153-K-42.:�n-- _7167%,,67" PHCTG DVLPMT-RECREATION 25.64
1::.
T07AL PPEPAIDS .00
TOTAL VOL!CHERS '°5
�.
TOTAL DOGE VEND-CF,F 6 2.8
D1AN"4D SANCH HIGH BOOSTER CLUB
01I4'`11i -4 55-- 1ST ANP!_ "AINC NITE-SF'NS j0;0,i1ti 0:/!i7/20u)0 35157
�}
TOTAL P`FF_F`'- J 300.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS 0,r'
TOTAL IDE VENDOR aJ0.00
11E I F R :'!CTT T !
Di RSIFIEI ;P„) NK` 1 iC
„-:_ Jr-::,--
. �=455_:-4.
Gr,7
_ 7
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
t PC 4T j -t 5 r 0i
.DIAMON _, ,:1L' i. 1 i1=/:
RUN DATE: 03/011/2000 17:39:31
111_cam60-4_;1c
VOUCHER ;Et:GISTER
PAGE: 6
HOLIDAY
i•,
RID 51.'�'i,
DUE THRO: 0 /07/20jC,
125553-4CC.'�G_
DIAMOND
PREPAID
FUND /SEC?- ACCT -PROJEC?-ACCT
PC # INVOICE DESCRIPTIO"!
AP!CUNT DATE CHECk::
DIAMONI! BAF; CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
HD_iIAY
RIDE -1211-31/00,
4802.90
0014-010-4'Z321--
':'114010-42"`--
,2_
MTG-CMG-'/CNCL 2/2_ 00;
60.0'0 03/07/2'0700 3574'x_:
0014095-45rC;0;--
0,
'?104 1264
PROF SVCS-D/B MAPS
4500;.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL
P'REPAIDS
60.00
TOTAL
VOUCHERS
4 50;0;.0)0)
TOTAL
DUE VENDOR
4,56vl.00
DIAMOND BAR CHINESE ASSOCIATION
001-23002--
50430
REFND SCRTY DEQ' -HERITAGE
2CsC1.C)i;
001-36610--
504:'0
STAFF CHARGES
-10.00
TOTAL
PREP'AIDS
•00
TOTAL
VOUCHERS
190.00
TOTAL
DUE VENDOR
190 .00
DIAMOND BAR IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION
00140910-42115-- 9540 303° AD -CENSUS 2000, 440.00
TOTAL PF,EPATDS loo
TOTAL VOUCHERS 440.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR 440.00
DIAMOND BAR MOBIL
00140)90-42'310)-- JAN -00 FUEL -GENERAL GOVT -JAN 97.10
00153110-42310-- JAN -00 FUEL -COMM SVCS - JAN 245.37
TOTAL PREPAIDS .00
TOTAL VOUCHERS 342.47
TOTAL DUE VENDOR 342.47
DIAMOND GAF; REDEVELOPMENT AGEP;CY
1;1;1-1=1`;-- RI!A'='07 ADVANCE TO RPA - 3/7/2'i�;:.)i09 03107/200.? RDA 307
TOTAL PPEP-;IDS 27,713.0.
TOTAL VOUCHER .00
TOTAL DUE VE^'DOR 27,71'.05
DIAMOND PHOTO
j1115=5i;-412'00'- 271672 FILM DEVELPMT-RECREATION 12.02
i1'?15.50)-4121;0-- 2711761673 PIHOTO DVLPMT-REC BROCHURE 25.19
010153-K-42.:�n-- _7167%,,67" PHCTG DVLPMT-RECREATION 25.64
1::.
T07AL PPEPAIDS .00
TOTAL VOL!CHERS '°5
�.
TOTAL DOGE VEND-CF,F 6 2.8
D1AN"4D SANCH HIGH BOOSTER CLUB
01I4'`11i -4 55-- 1ST ANP!_ "AINC NITE-SF'NS j0;0,i1ti 0:/!i7/20u)0 35157
�}
TOTAL P`FF_F`'- J 300.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS 0,r'
TOTAL IDE VENDOR aJ0.00
11E I F R :'!CTT T !
Di RSIFIEI ;P„) NK` 1 iC
„-:_ Jr-::,--
. �=455_:-4.
Gr,7
_ 7
:;/,f1: jr
t PC 4T j -t 5 r 0i
.DIAMON _, ,:1L' i. 1 i1=/:
f,'^:0:.74
1 ,_.
111_cam60-4_;1c
%2
HOLIDAY
i•,
RID 51.'�'i,
lc.x1
125553-4CC.'�G_
DIAMOND
( c71c
'a -'.i �
.:,__,
.`t'"t %" 41 5112=j:;6:'-4•.,•_._--
. �G:;O.
HD_iIAY
RIDE -1211-31/00,
4802.90
TOTAL PREPAIDS
.oC;
TOTAL VOUCHERS
« 657.b`r_'
TOTAL n,iE 4,EP,rDR
uu v iU
�:57.6c'
+ ,'-
CITY OF DIAMOND RAR
RUN DATE: 03/01/2000 17:39:31
VOUCHER REGISTER
PAGE: i
DUE THRU: 03/07/2000
PREPAID
FUND/SECT-ACCT-PRO,lCT-ACCT
PC #
INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT LATE CHECI
DUCK HOUSE
0014070-42121--
REIMB-UPS MAILING
34.50
TOTAL PREPAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
34.50
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
34.50
EDUCATION TO 00, INC
0015350-42140--
2000-54.2 INSTRCTR PYMT-COMP COURSE
290.00
TOTAL PREPAIDS
•00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
290.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
290.00
EXCEL PAVING COMPANY
2505510-46411-13298-46411
9157
674 PROF SVC-GRND/TORITO LN
53,279.44
TOTAL PREPAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
53,279.44
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
53,27'3.44
FEDERAL EXPRESS
0014090-42120--
717648538 EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL GOVT
30.90
0014090-42120--
7E'7677266 EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL GOVT
45.34
001-231112--
782197958 EXPRESS MAIL -EN 94-065
15.43
0:014090-42120--
7$721983 EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL GOVT
58.54
0014090-421^0--
71762OK" EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL GOVT
29.50
0=014096-4212!;--
7E:•21 9795 1 EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL GOVT
:55.53
0014090-42120--
7876203 EXPRESS MAIL -COUPON
-20.00
TOTAL PREPAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
:.'53.24
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
253.24
FIRST CHOICE COFFEE SERVICE
0014090-421.'0--
9-`�7'1'
303456 NTR. CLR LEASE -FEE 00
17.95
TOT;L PREPAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
17.95
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
17.95
FOOD SYSTEMS INC.
0014090-42325--
5;:75
1.G0= MTG SUPPLIES -4 CORNER_
2!`:.94
TOTAL PREPAID•'3
•00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
262.94
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
26''..94
FUTURE CONCEPTS INTERNET SOLUTIONS
1:64411-44000--
9743
10;1-9/_,•0/00 INTERNET HOME PAGE MAINT
500.00
!OTAL . F;EPAIDS
CK�
TOTAL VOUCHERS
500.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
5',,'O•00
FP: FRIELiRlCllmll ': ASSOCIATES INC
r:rr rC' i P 1
r.-__�10-46411-. 14''
bf
r,c " C4 C Rl SEAL
'�I�-':'.' 1Pi_i`v `:CS- !_R' 1 aEA� F ;
8,776.2`11'
jjD15-551-45223--
• a•. vim_ ,�r _
o ci
__. _
��'_ S If DI 1
r�r:�.. 1 PROF L4 -OR :.IIG,%INSPEGTh
;/.O
.. .49
Tn-q Pr:
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
RUN DATE: 0310112000 17:39:31
VOUCHER REGISTEP
PAGE: 8
DUE 7HRU: 03!07/2000
PREPAID
FUND/SECT-ACCT-PRO_!ECT-ACCT
F'O #
INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
DATE CHECK
GRAFFITI CONTROL SYSTEMS
r�5� r=-i,
001.5508-455.2 -
9(124
DB11i?i) GRAFFITI REMVL-UAtd 2000
4,020.00
TOTAL PREPAIDS
•00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
4,020.0_:
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
4 020.00
GRAND MOBIL
0014090-4220f--
7=6:3 MAINT - CITY VEHICLE
74.81
TOTAL PREP'AIPS
' r 0
TOTAL VOUCHERS
74.91
?^TA' DUE VENDOR
74.81
GTE CALIFORNIA
0'0140910-421'21--CH1i_5c,1
INSTALL PH.-BLDG & SFTY
201.07
00153,31-421225--
909261921,20 PH. SVCS-SYC CYN PARK
90.05
0014090-42125--
9093967182 PH, SVCS-DAY CAMP
203.24
1189-098-421225--
90'3964035 PH. SVCS-BBS MODEM
112.17
0014090-42125--1'17=12=!
PH. SVCS - GENERAL
1,990.14
PH. SVCS-SYC CYNP'ARM;
58.05
0015331-42125--
90931960194 PH. SVCS-SYC CYN PARK
36.162
01014090-421125--
2 PH. SVCS-DAY CAMP
90`396718P'
'2
^r
`'i?9r;605463 PH. SVCS-CITY ON LINE
151.95
c?li =: =_q•:,1.2=:--
qlf 4'x•10 0 PH E'VCS-LIBRARY FRO!
145.02
0015.14-42125--
9093-16568111"! PH. SVCS-HRTG COMM CTR
26,55
PH. SVCS-TELEWORK'. ACLS
6=17.96
0014095-4212`-
'.80,777'24°5' Pk:. SVCS-ECON DVLP
41.55
r , :___
001404 J-4 12�
,ner•.l2 }74+; PH. S':!CE-MODEM C/Ct.`
19.22
TOTAL PREPAID"
.00
TOTA!- VOUCHERS
:3,749.52
TOTAL. r:uE VENDOR
r
:,74. - ,..,i
F'HCNIE EQ RNlL-MAR H 00
466.78
To. AL PREPAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCH-- S
466.79
TOTAL DLA �'En;I�R
461_•.79
HALL ,. FDR.E"AN! , NC
}y1l?_4J:'__
i.
r;"
:lY1SF
, 9�
1:
: 4r::-- _
4.
00; L
='' ;P' PROF i'; Co- INSPECTION
127.51?
:15:51-48_:22''--
94 .1
7' i?R PROt SVCS-F"LN CK/INSPCTN
-, . .
792.4?
TOTAL PREPAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
3075.35
Or,
i TAL DUE VENDOR
r ac
4 ' J. GJ
J,7
HAloi1RTH, INC
0015:50-46250--
9+577
10026447 METAL SHELVES-COM SVCS
173.81
TOTAL PREPAIDS
. 00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
173.81
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
113.81
IY-TEK LTi'
1;hil ? EMFI=:E 5?AGE
INLAND VALLEY DAILY BL,LLETIN
I ''ALLEY' HUh AltaE SD=iETY
+:014431-454;x'_-
1 '�+ 1r-
NT�.`'' : I i^L PROT T
� ECI4E SVCS It%.0
V 11 -4541[i -
TOTAL PREPAIDS
.0
CITY OF DIAMOND BAP
TOTAL VOUCHERS
RUN DATE: 03"/O1i2000 17:^9:31
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
VOUCHER REGISTER.
PAGE:
413c=•4 SPORTS SOFTWARE-RECREATN
499.00
DUE THRU • 03/07,:Q_' -_!_)!.l
TOTAL VOUCHERS
499.00
PEEP":ID
FUP.DiSECT-ACCT-PzOECT-ACCT
PO #
INVOICE DESCFIRTION RI"OUNT
DATE CHECK:
HERTZ CORPORATION
0`_6(j0`���,.r.,.-r, TRANSPRTN-PROP A
45 1J
, 7f 1
OTA! F: 7r`..rnc
0015-210-42330--
70TAi ;.;0{ ICHER6
RNTL CAF' -PLN'`. COMM" %1-_
I62.0 ^=`i'200C 35752
TOTAL DUE ')T:Nr,t-,
.()Cl
TOT A:
:L
PRE I, _:
_FA __.
1r,2 11;
455054 :7 I5f1; LEGAL AD - FPL 99-054
TOTAL
VOUCHER
58 0
TOTAL
DUE VEN%CR
HIGHPOINT,INC
.0)
TOTAL VOUCHERS
' 171.^5
7111140=''`-42111--
_= -
r:7=``�
PREPRESS SVCS -RC BUS CRD
..ANIMAL_(C
j22fi01 r�tTRL Slr5-MAR
r,437.i042
TOTAL FREPAIUE
'REPRESS SVCS -COMM NIEWSLT
TOTAL VOUCHERS
5,437.00
TOTAL
PREF'AIDS
.00
TOTAL
01LICHERS
414.60
.ran
TOTAL
DUE VENDOR
414.60
HULS ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, LLC
6 rq1 ,,
_. ..V,
1155515-45500--
915'
SLD WASTE 5VC-1..•'1-ii 1/:}i)
4,535100
001551.1-44::43--
915b
NPOES SVCS -I/1-1/31/0
-=5.00
IY-TEK LTi'
1;hil ? EMFI=:E 5?AGE
INLAND VALLEY DAILY BL,LLETIN
I ''ALLEY' HUh AltaE SD=iETY
+:014431-454;x'_-
1 '�+ 1r-
NT�.`'' : I i^L PROT T
� ECI4E SVCS It%.0
V 11 -4541[i -
TOTAL PREPAIDS
.0
TOTAL VOUCHERS
5,420.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
5,420.00
9646
413c=•4 SPORTS SOFTWARE-RECREATN
499.00
TOTAL P D IDIS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
499.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR4'x9.00
AOLT EXCR.Shi-STATELINE
A5. 00
0`_6(j0`���,.r.,.-r, TRANSPRTN-PROP A
45 1J
, 7f 1
OTA! F: 7r`..rnc
.00
70TAi ;.;0{ ICHER6
3671.00
TOTAL DUE ')T:Nr,t-,
.()Cl
4.J_�n.J4G7: ,,I LEGA_ All - FF"1 1 99-047
-58.50
455054 :7 I5f1; LEGAL AD - FPL 99-054
5E:, 50
,550543-1/508 LEGAL _ FPL 99-055
58 0
45C0542i50:_ LEGAL AD - FPL 2700-001
I=4.55
TTrA, PF-PATri_
:Dire nz
.0)
TOTAL VOUCHERS
' 171.^5
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
310.05
..ANIMAL_(C
j22fi01 r�tTRL Slr5-MAR
r,437.i042
TOTAL FREPAIUE
(111
TOTAL VOUCHERS
5,437.00
TOT ?L DM!E VENDOR.
r _ 437.7171
TOTAL PREPAIrc,
.ran
TOTAL VOUCHERU
r: 5' 1.
7t'r i ;i:,- VE EOR
,A� L,.:w N..
6 rq1 ,,
_. ..V,
CITY OF DIAMOND BAP
RUN BATE: 03I0112c)ci0 17:39:31
VOUCHER REGISTER
PAGE' 10
DUE THRs: 031107x20,);;
PREPAII!
FUND,'SECT-ACCT-F'RO.!ECT-ACCT
PO #
WOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
RATE CHECt.
JOBS AVAILABLE
0014090-42115--
:(04IJ!10={C AD -SR AA c.. DCM
514.6-0
TOTAL PREPAIDS
";'
TOTAL VOUCHERS
514.60
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
514.60
'OBS IN GOVERNMENT
0014090-42115--
121 -1961 AD-DCM AND SR. AA
90.00
TOTAL PREPAID
•00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
90.0(l.
TOTAL DUE VE`;DOR
`'0.00
KENS HARDWARE
0015331-42210--
SUPPLIES -SYCAMORE CYN PK
41.4?
1)15:"'1-42210--
SUPPLIES -PETERSON PK
-.-8
[)015318-41400--
SUP'P'LIES-PANTERA PK.
`
316-42210!=--
SUPPLIES -MAPLE HILL Pr;
0015310-41300--
SUPPLIES -PARKS ADMIN
14.02
()015310-41200--
SUPPLIES -PARKS OPERATIONS
61.90
0015313-42210--
SUPPLIES -HERITAGE PK.
31.03
0014090-41200--
602/594588 SUPPIES-KEYS DUPLICATED
4�.'30
0015350-41200--
SUPPLIES -RECREATION
30.31
TOTAL PREPAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
356.53
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
=c6•'
NT ELECTRONICS
0015314-42210--
11166 REPAIR -SOUND SYSTM HERITG
492.73;
TOTAL PREPAIDS
•00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
49 2.1
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
42•7'J
GEC!F:GE KUO
C)+}1c210-441GG--
FLNI"J COMM -1!1111125
1,30. 00,
TOTAL PREPAIDS
00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
130.00
TOTAL DOE VENDOR
13C,,(n)
`7 ENID
h.. rii -414.!0--
cc;;
_
_
jGr`:r>r�qr SUGFq TES-SHIP;TS ILDGvSFTY
67,55
_ _•14,_,.-5-4
y
F'ROF SVCS -1_030 EMDFOIDERY
125.00,
TOTP'L PREPAIDS
•GL
TOTAL VOUCHERS
192.55
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
1`12.5``
LEA OF "F CA CITIES
.. 21
SOUTHWEST CORP TICKET E:
0" . [lir 01' 07 /'2ijOf) 5745
�,4: ` -!
pj , R.S CONF-H ZIR5E5: /i-'
_
2`! ,(J i .(2.'1)71(000 _:758
T T C ..
TOTA" F'R�PNID�
! 6`- 0 On,
•,'-
TOTAL DUE VENT ILOF'.
1, 69' l .O )
CITY OF DIAMON! BAR
RUN DATE: 03!01..12000 17:39:31
VOUCHER REGISTER;
PAGE: 11
DUE THFU: "!07;2V:-1.0
P'REP'AID
FUND ISECT- ACCT -FRO-:ECT-ACCT
PO #
INVOICE='E5CRIp;i N AMOUNT DATE CHEU.'.
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
='4=: AD -DOM FEE ISSUE
45`?•t?"
TOTAL FRI EFAIDS
00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
61'.'
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
4Grr,00
VIVIAN LEE
i
50401 REFND SCRTY DEF-FANTERA
200,00
TOTAL FREPAIDS
•00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
200.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
200.00
LEt-".IS ENGRAVING INC
0014090-42113--
052
4 _il ENGRVNG SVCS -NAME WOES
54. -
Iff-.1 ? PROF SVGS -NAME BADGES
TOTAL FREFAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
284.43
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
.84.43
LOS ANGELES SUSINIESS JOURNAL
°UBSCRIF'TIDN RENEWAL
"O G`
TO[AL RREFAIDS
U
TOTAL VOUCHERS
v:t{� .95
TOTAL DUE VENDOR,
X9.95
LOu ANGELES COUNT' SHERIFF'S: DEFT
0?14411-4540: --
'7 !�"'7 ' C;'TRFF CNTRL-6jPTRL-JANUC'
8'ti.l
;.,�? , ' ac4i�2--
�- "'°73? SCH/TRFFC CNTRL-JAN CK
2 09'S.1r_:
n� .:
001441 -4•,4r.1--
2354" CONTRACT SV CS-JAN 00
2.49
CLVRY TRFF CNTRL-JAN 0k)
b ; 17.64
TOTA1_ P'REF•r.CS
r.;1
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
3C?i?,S3f_:TF1
LOS AkINISELES TIMES
_
(A?:5C-42: 4- _
;
' Ar-MILLENTUM CELEe
t
840.00
TO F{; - IDS
TAL EF'A:
r?E?
TOTAL VC'JCHER33
840.00
C• G "Cn TCI TION
-
1`X47 TRFF IMPFRV-LEMONLYCOMINC,
; '
`'-- •',
5: 55 r 6 14�-. ?-41.4 1
y
'•:-:i•'-4:41''- _:, tI
:::
194? TEFF T—G'SRNOS'RFItVW
TM!FRY'
,
�.;_�,;;_ a^° ;-'f. +'
i--j,i.. 4641^ 1 �_4,_
' --
1':+47 TRFF IMPFV-B CYN!SLVR BLL
62,233.20
_
TOTAL FREFAIDS
•Of?
TOTAL VOUCHERS
94,362,_,;
TTAL '.0E VENDOR
O
94 7. f � -; 9
MAI�F:ID
(t,]i4?',"-4,_:-,r.--
y
SUPPLIES-TOWINI HLL MTG .=i_:
21.00 03/07.1200035764
'GTAL-F,EF'AIIIS
21,00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
.00
I.:
21
CITY OF LIAMOND AAF:
RUN DATE 03/01/2000 17:39:31
VOUCHER REGISTER
PAGE: 12
DUE THRU' (3/07/ 12t)
PREPAID
FUND/SECT-ACCT-FROJECT-ACCT
PO #
INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
DATE CHECK.
MAINTEX
n,
9035
;6S* 1 SUPPLIES - MAINT
22.4e
nO15-'14-41"'00--
X035
435442 SUFFFLIES-'H.ERITAC-E
95.51
01015314-412.00—`a03`_�
43"`.42 SUPPLIES - HERITAGE F't:_
164,:_u
0015314-41200--
9035
438919 SUPPLIES - SAFETI BELT
27.4;
i
0015314-41 2 tJ--
9025
43,_35 5UF'PLIES-HERITAGE PK.
lr.-•,qr :
TOTAL PREPAILS
•0'-)
TOTAL VOUCHERS
417.77
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
417.77 .
MONTEREY MARRIOTT
CONF-F'!COMM,UC'" "(i -3/,1r±
6P0.52 C):s/Ci7(2tlfifl `c:574�d
r-, oo _
00152,10-42330—
680.52
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
•00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
68 .52'
PHIL MARTIN
CLASS INSTRCTF-SWING DNCE
67•'20,
0015350-45300--96548
TOTAL PREPAIDS
•k
TOTAL VOUCHERS
67.20
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
67.20
JOE MCMANUS
PLNN COMM -141'11
65.`)x'•
C)f) j.��10-4 1 • .
TOTAL PREPAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
F5.On
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
65.00
CLARK MIPNIS
cfr:• REFND QUIT EICRSN
RE. N�,
=`•Ou
4
031-34-r'20--
.49
TOTAL PREF;AIDS
•00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
2.`_.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
C
.,• 00
25
MIRACLE.RECF:.EATION EOUIPMENT
42210
9440
50-372", RrFLCMi-BE:r ORILL 3LMMTRD
1 ,556.83_
TOTAL PREPAIDS
'0f)
"CHER S
TOTAL 40�,
1 556.8 3
�-
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
crL
1 .�•s.c_
tAOBILE MODULAR. MA"dAGEMEt OrMUP
ns. 5350 140-_
')1J.JJ�. -42
uc�g
:
�
17 j— LSE PPTAL BLDGS-" / 12-3"1"
46 •�'t'
TOTAL PREPAIDS
•00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
46!).06
TOTAL IUE VENDOR
4x'0•'0`
NATIONAL NOTARY ASSOCIATION
0014040-42215--
2 YR MEMARSHP-T CRIBEINS
59.00
TOTAL PREPAIDS
. 00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
59.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
59.00
RUN DATE: 03/01/2000 17:39:31
FUND/SECT—ACCT—PROJECT—ACCT
STEVEN G. NELSON
0015210-44100--
NEiTEL
0014090-4212!_--
NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
0014090 -42125 --
DEBORAH O`CONNGR
01(114010-42325--
OAK
,(i14010-42225--
OAK TREE LANES INC
00
fr^fir,— 5?EO--
PAYROLL TRANSFER
001-10200--
PENTAMATION ENTERPRISES INC
PERS HEALTH
0014090-40093-
001-21105—
CITY CF DIAMOND BAR
VOUCHER REGISTER
DUE THRU: 03/07/2D)0
Fu # INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
PLNN COMM -1/11,1,/25
TOTAL PREPA,IDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
C''9504 FEE SVCS—RAtiIO REPEAT
EF:
TOTAL PREF'A11IS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL [!LE VENDOR
_,15?—� PH CHRGS—COMM DEV FEB 00
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
REIMB—CHMBR MXR 9/14199
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
CLASS INSTRCTR—WINTR SESSN
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
PF'4B PAYROLL TRANSFER -PF' 4b
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
01-120lia0 DATA LINE CHRGS-JAN 00
TOTAL PREF'AIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
FEB ADMIN FEE
PES FEB—HEALTH INS PREMS
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TIDTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
PAGE: 1:
PREPAID
BATE CHECK
1 30 . iO
.00
13ia . is+'
130.00
`1C 95
.00
215.95
'415.95
502'.54
,Oi:
502.54
502.54
10.00
.00
10,00
10.Di;
92! .40
.00
'2.40
42.40
74,700.00 03/07/000 PP4B
74,700.00
.00
74,700.00
1[a.7d
.00
10.73
10.7;
55.48 03/07/2000 3574
12. b42.71 03/07/22000 : X5742
1?,698.19
.of)
CITY OF DIAMOND BA4..
RUN DATE: 001.101/2000 17:3Y:'_t1 VOUCHER EEGICTEF
DUE THRU: 0 /07/12rai;0
FUND/SECT-ACCT-PROJECT-ACCT PO # iNVOICE DESCRIPTION
PERS RETIREMENT FUND
001-211109-- F'Pc° RETIRE CONTRIB-EE
RETIRE
CONT RI. -ER
CIO 1-211x3`)-- PK LESS ADJUSTMENT
FP3 SUF:''IVOR BENEFI?
Cita 1-21109--
001-01104-- F'P:_ MILITAPY BJY BADi::
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TGTP-VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
PILtEPTON CONSULTANTS, IPC
10 --'14 TREE MA13rT-B, i.YFd�•�PTHFNDR
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHER;
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
PITNEY ES INC
0014090-42130-- ?000 3:161. -FBOO ED RNTL - FEB 00
0014090-42120-- 065.809 RESET CHARGES
TOTAL PREF'AIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR.
POSTMASTER
PURk::ISS ROSE -FSI
PAGE 14
PREPAID
AMOUNT BATE CHECK
-SKATE
ChiE_ TING SVCS -S ,A E K
n'1 -_30i0-- i??� PROF SV�S-FPL 92-059
C', -4„41 _ i 4 41 .. 5,, _G,: T
`— 55x;0- ` -INCi .,:C ,DATE PAR..
11:74 CIP-Si;ATE PARV FETERSON
tu
TOTAL PREPAID°
TOTAL VCUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDDR
R _. i` DIfCRj'tiT
11`_� X15-4::�i1t!-- k� .n':,t PRNTNB LVrC,_ L,TG"r:TD W :cTE
rn,aL ,FFEF'AII
TOTAL. VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VEP ,OR
5,x317.12 03/C:7/200n 15762
C 93_'.' 5 0 3/CJ7/2000 35761,
.7'r O:t./ia';;000 357 �
42.78 03/07/2000 357-62
!CQ9.69 03/07/2000 35762
4, 008.77
.0Cj
4,0011:.77
5100, 00
,00
50x3.00;
500,00
-
36`.:'.90
41.14
.00
411.04
411.04
1'1.75
11.75
11.75
11.75
2 200.00 03./07/2000 35756
2100 , CICa
47.00
247.00
4,`±11,05'
t r•, ra`
.0U
7 "0'.01
7 207.01
EXPRESS MAIL-FP
99-54
a'17 ia;
EY,F'RESS MAIL-FF'L
''-47
Ca0a1-=;ili0--
EXPRESS MAIL -FPL
?4-54
-;0'10--
5'17 Cab
EXPRESS MAIL-FFL
`5
POSTAGE-LA"•;TERMAiN PR:
TONAL F'REF'HIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL _JUE ' ENDO'`'
PURk::ISS ROSE -FSI
PAGE 14
PREPAID
AMOUNT BATE CHECK
-SKATE
ChiE_ TING SVCS -S ,A E K
n'1 -_30i0-- i??� PROF SV�S-FPL 92-059
C', -4„41 _ i 4 41 .. 5,, _G,: T
`— 55x;0- ` -INCi .,:C ,DATE PAR..
11:74 CIP-Si;ATE PARV FETERSON
tu
TOTAL PREPAID°
TOTAL VCUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDDR
R _. i` DIfCRj'tiT
11`_� X15-4::�i1t!-- k� .n':,t PRNTNB LVrC,_ L,TG"r:TD W :cTE
rn,aL ,FFEF'AII
TOTAL. VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VEP ,OR
5,x317.12 03/C:7/200n 15762
C 93_'.' 5 0 3/CJ7/2000 35761,
.7'r O:t./ia';;000 357 �
42.78 03/07/2000 357-62
!CQ9.69 03/07/2000 35762
4, 008.77
.0Cj
4,0011:.77
5100, 00
,00
50x3.00;
500,00
-
36`.:'.90
41.14
.00
411.04
411.04
1'1.75
11.75
11.75
11.75
2 200.00 03./07/2000 35756
2100 , CICa
47.00
247.00
4,`±11,05'
t r•, ra`
.0U
7 "0'.01
7 207.01
CITY OF DIAMONC HAS'.
RUN DATE: 0/01(2000 17:39:31 VOUCHER REGI°TER
DUE THRU: 02/07/2',_1010
FL!N!/SECT-ACCT-F'RO•ECT-ACCT PO # INVOICE DESCRIPTION
PACE: 15
PREPAID
AMOUNT DATE CHECK.
RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY
0015350-41200--
90401
SUPPLIES - TINY TOTS
36.71
0015350-41200—
946=0
SUPPLIES - TINY TOTS
6.06
0014090-42325--
9501
1009452x1 MEETING SPPLS - CENSUS
15.00
0014090-Q=25--
9.`x01
MTG SPPLS-YMCA
::x.70
TOTAL PREPAIDS
•00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
81.27
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
31.27
READWRITE EDUCATID4AL SOLUTION INC
CLASS INSTRCTR-WNTR SESSN
3,129.00 03107/2000 c:5754
0015350-45300--
°
_,1
TOTAL PREP AIDc'
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
'
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
3,19.00
REINBERGER PRINTWORKS INC
CRI;
7'
00140' 5-41.110--
91 ..1
i0275i102b : PRNTING SVCS -BUSINESS
.74
11x,-.44 PRNTNG SVCS -PAF FORMS
242.5'2
i;x114x:9x-4211c?__
TOTAL PREP AIDS{'
TOTAL VOUCHERS
311.26
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
-2.26
�.EMEDY
ar,4,
_
f!`5_' TEMP SVGS -1;26,"27 RECF'TN!
28' •61
0x114{i40-4400x1--
TOTAL PP.EP!IDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHEF'S-'
AcG F1
TOTAL DUE VEN;DC ;
UCHAR,L5, WAT ON' 5EIR HON
�-:-; , C - NOV
It} GENERA_ LEG 54�--��
i .3x-,0.'3
,-
flx%�
r`"'
-1,. ..
' c_i7 SF' LEGr'L SVCS -DEC LANTERN
21.77
L1-
�fii 00x11: c, ^ -r1GC
GENERAL LEGAIL �E
014.,
1111 •;, c4__---
-
1,j.,,_, _ JJf.,S
i=; -1c LEGAL SVCS-ARCIERO ROW -NV
17.5%
1
GEN;_rAL ! EGA SVCS - NOV
130.00
GENERAL LEGAL :VC1-NO"
-
x,16 i,:�0
-
, ' ; LEGAL SVCS -NOV
GENiE :. Q. nn_
182.00
-
% :�- -44x:-:;;--
_.L4 _. ,E
OENERAL IF AL SVL.S.-r. C.
,
�:,00'
X102' -44x11:% -
r�'="i GENdERAL LEGAL SoJCS-DES
1.1._:_x,
�•-
:11 11..- _.,, _ -:; __
`S1'"' GENERAL LEGAL SVCq "EC
27,;;x;
14 02 44r110tit:_.
='+27 E C'V S-AME`ELANCE OR
L GA' IV
`, :.-,c
-
105«6 SF' LEGAL S`v'CS-LA'NTEFMN NV1.
1, 407 , 73
s - -
�.n w
LEG 'L SVCS-5;Sfi!; DEC 0014f).0,;
c --=SVCS
-DEC572{0 , GENERAL AL LEGAL
i!`;e2 LEGA SVC-ARCIERi ROW -DEC
34'1.2•`_
ful '2t%-440='1--%{,
'
rri C, C_i'
;_';,_ GENERAL LE:�rk JdC, aF.0
,''{, 00
•-:..x
4!."'2'-'0-44
S, 1.,.{ • _
,
� � `I1_ J Jrli, NOV
00
y - )„1
011-:x,__
G� 5 -A "�� ANCE OF's -I:EC
1 ' 2:.12
4i1++-4
G -
1'.'5<:_:i GENERAL LEGAL WIS - N;0'.'
'.7�,{aC%
44 �{--
i'�` i , r-cp,E�;A;- `G^ S"CS-DEC
'=•0't=
12TAL PKtPAI^_
0ft
Tr.1TN yn.1' HERL
T07'! ri-E VEND"
11.6:.`'.6":
SAN GABRIEL VALLEY TRIBUNE
001-2'010--
CITU OF DIAMOND BAF;
RUN DATE: 03,/01!2000 17:39:31
VOUCHER REGISTER
001-x'010-_
DUE THRU: 0?/07/200,01
FUNDlSECT-ACCT-PROJECT-ACCT
PD # INVOICE I!ESCRIPTION AMOUNT
JOSEPH RUZICKA
TOTAL PREPAIDS
0015210-44100--
F'LNN COMM -1/11,1,2`
TOTAL P, IDS
SECTRAN SECURITY
TOTAL VD'JCHERS
0ta14090-44000_--
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
SAWS MOBIL
TOTAL PREPAIDS
0014090-43310--
;28670 FUEL - GENERAL JAN
CIO ltrzlO_4i 011_)__
D?rj 7t1 FUEL - COMM. DEV JAN
MICHAEL SHA"
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
SAN GABRIEL VALLEY TRIBUNE
001-2'010--
LEGAL AL' -FPL 94-054
C!01-2�C!lU--
LEGAL AD -FPL 99-0227
001-x'010-_
LEGAL AD-FF'L 2000-01,
LEGAL AI! -FPL 99-055
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
SECTRAN SECURITY
0ta14090-44000_--
e.. 2124 COURIER SVCS -FEE 2000
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR.
MICHAEL SHA"
REFUND REFPD BANNLF DEF-TSROC;-01
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL LLE VENDOR
S TI AN , FI INSURANCE DC RECAN
0 01-211'_01_:--
FEB FEB -LIFE INS PREMIUMS
C:1 -2110c,--
FEB FEB-SUFFL LIFE PREMS
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
PAGE: 1
PREPAID
DATE CHECK
030 , Ut_
.00
12;0. CIO
1 j .67
i96.29
00
2Eu r,F
2169.9k
74.10
74.1 C!
187.9"
74.10
.00
410.2`
410.28
198.00
.00
198.00
I9t-.00
100.00
.00
100.00
1.00.00
649. 60 03/07.12000 3`.,741
206.50 0307/2000 35741
856.10
.00
R56. 10
CITY OF DIAD?OND! BAR.
RUN DATE: 03/01j2000 17:39:31 VOUCHER REGISTER PAGE: 17
DUE THRU: c0/07/2100i
FUND/SECT-ACCT-PROJECT-ACCT
STAPLES
0015210-41200--
0014iagc,-4120D--
0015350-4120 !--
01!1•` 50 -41'200 --
0f,15510 -41200--
00140=f!-4120 a --
0014440-412Q0--
(-014090-4121!1,--
0014`} 30-4120,:
0015210 -41'20i --
0015210 -41200 --
STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND
0011 -21111 --
STEVE: ENTERPRISES
„015510-412Y0--
;;;.. !V nn.,
Hi4I l;
Tuc GLAESHOPPER
00 1 409'0 -46220 --
THE REI. NIS OF THE UNIVERS17 OF CA
PO 4 INVOICE
D'ESCRIP'TION
80'70/OPEN
SUPPLIES - PLANNING
S l0OF'EN
SUPPLIES - GENERAL
"37U/OPEN
SUPPLIES - RECREATION
&87011DPEN
SUPPLIES - RECREATION
SSI�a/OPEN
SUPPLIES - PUBLIC WORKS
"a87 /OPEN
SUF'F'LIES - GENERAL
x:870/OPEN
SUPPLIES - E.O.C.
837{k -a OPEN
SUPPLIES — GENERAL
8870/OPEN
SUPPLIES — CIT` MANAGER
: ,7(a1OPEN
SUPPLIES — PLANNING
::T},OPEN
SUPPLIES — PLANNINS
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE
VENDOR
PREPAID
AMOUNT DATE CHECK
26.53
57
6r: 2
7.62-
90. 6-.-3
.6290.6'
75.56
10.78
4`1.62
18.06
17.55
.00
463.24
46:.24
OCT—DEC WORKER 5 COMP PREM -0510
2,087.85 03/07/2000
35751
OCT — DECa!ORKER`S COMP PREM -9420
692". 15 021,107/2000
3:5761
OST — DEC WORKER COMP PREM -9410
1,075.0.5 03/07/2000
35761
TOTAL PREPAIDS
3,855.05
TOTAL VOUCHERS
•{'''
TOTAL DU'E VENDOR
3,855,05
0;,79 7',57 _: COPIER. — TONER
154.16
TOTAL PREPAIDS
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
164.16
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
164.16
MT0 SPPLS—COMM FND!TN 21/17 5.99
MEETING SPPLS-CENS!S 2/9 7.92
SPPLS—LAI!TERMN 21/7
7.98
TOTAL PREPAIDS •t'ra
TOIN VOUCHERS `l q5
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
CLASS INSTRCTR—WNTR. BUS 11 1,911.70
TOTAL PREPAIE{S, 00
TOTAL VOUCHERS 1,911.70
TOTAL DUE VENDOR 1,' 11.70,
144 FURNITURE—MIRS/CNCL OFFC 275.3(j,
TOTAL FR:EPAIDS .00
TOTAL VOUCHERS 275.3?
TOTAL "UE VEh#D'OR 275 —=[a
' I 1 1'SNIMP—L SMITH i5.00 0/07/200, 3576:°:r3
TOTAL PREPAMS 235 `a='
TOTAL VOUCHERS ,00
TOTAL D!UE VENDOR 7`
CITY OF DIAMF'1D PlHr'.
RUN DATE* 03/01;1'2000 17:39:31
'VOIUCHER REGISTER
IUJ_ L
PAGE, IS
DUE THRU: 6_/07/2Cijn
PREPAID
FUNDISECT-ACCT-PROI CT-ACCT
PO #
INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
DATE CHECK
THE VERNON COMPANY
v1=
7'6211.7500140u5-414ii-- Ct
TOTAL PREP'AIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
621,75
TOTAL DUE 'VENDOR
621t.75
THE WEEKLY NEWS-WALNUT
5r,r
(x014090-4::115--
_9
�J:IA
01"5. AD - BRAHMAS CIF
----
,:,;a,0 a
0014 x90-4''115--
C,014090-421115--
91591A
:_136 AD - ANNVRSRY CELE,
0014090-4211`--
95?IA
S37 AD - CENSUS COMMITTEE
00
'aiai�.
(aia14�a9ca-4:'115--
'x.4
; J: lA
38 AD—CENSUS T'HALL MTG 2 26
a•. _, ;
t
TOTAL PREPAIDS
,00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
680.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
2,680.00
THE WHOLE ENCHILADA INC
9065
569811 MTG SUPPLIES-CNCL 2/1/00
183.56
0014090-42325--
��
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
183.56
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
1'83.56
THE WORLD OF FANTASY
q�„7
1-25-Q0 PROF SVCS -MILLENIUM
?,141.71
,a01} �;ir-4::''54--
,
TOTAL PREPAID
.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS
', 241.78
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
7,241.78
TC SPORTSARE INCL
..5
-'-
�.. c-'' cr1 SFTB' �'EC
024640 T—SHIRT) LOLL � R..
807,49
0015350-41200--
15"15' 1120
cCa
r�6C
24`4' c.H?c'Tc-AD r ,S` ?:ALL REC
'r: V y Riv LI ..
54n; 7c:
'
--
0
N PREF'AILE
MAL
'00'
T Tr., VOUCHERS
1.348.20,
TOTAL DUE VENDOR.
`.2i
1,348.22
THOMAS 10 TOB",
CLASS INSTF::LTR.-«NT`s' SE'nN
,0)
_ r.i5:«� c�:;
-'�^
.420
ii
TOTAL ``REPAIII
,il .
TOTAL VOUI,:SER=:
40.00
TOTAL I'.UE VENICOR
410,00
^;nrFIC 40r=T'CL SER"iICE, INC.
� '_ CIP—SIGN REPLACEnENT
3.x0
�� : 1
---- 1! 4641'-1 _..-464 _
7
R,:
!-
-+. C�F,F -I! MI1•.{T
LS
j-'?i4.i_,y
4 3.1cr.,
,,:,.-__.11i-41251--
Aa: ?1
S$94� SPF' 'S-Rr' MAIN! ;
j.l,51
' 7
, -:;
�r.'�n1 CIF-570.1 REPLACEMENT
_c:::'::
7",64
iral_;;_,1,'-41''_v--
R~'4':;1
5P:n0 SUPPLIES -RD MAINT
J:_»i
20,97
TOTAL PREPAIDS
`r 1
—
T0TA.L VOUCHERS
Cy i.i
' %�8.81
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
STELLA TRAM
_5 REREAT I ON EFiV
5[, ((
pi1-347'0--
00
70TAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
50,00
TOTAL ...E vENI`D.
CITY OF DIAMD" [i BAR
RUN DATE: 03/01/2000 17:34:.1 VOUCHER REGISTER PAGE: 1't
L:UE THRU: 03/07/2000
PREPAID
FUNPEECT-ACCT-PROJECT-ACCT FO # INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK
TRUGREEN LANDCARE
0015322-45300--
26942"
ADDTL SVCS -R REAGAN PK.
65. Of)
0015325-45^-,n0--
269438
ADDTL SVCS-SUMMITRIDGE PK
65.00
138553e-42210--
275217
ADDTL MAINT-DIST 38
110.00
1395539-45500--
310621
MNTHLY MAINT-DIST 39 FEB
3,497.50
001.5316-45300--
sU? 21
MNTHLY MAINT-MAPLE HL FEB
708.10
1385538-45500--
310622
MNTHLY MAINT-DIST 38 FEB
3,48`.00
0015325-45300--
310621
MNTHLY MAINT-STRSHINE FEB
354.1C'
1415541-45500--
31062i
MNTHLY MAINT-DIST 41 FEB
2,050.00
02215322-45200--
MNTHLY MAINT-P. REAGAN FEB
1,038.55
i?C'`'16-45 00--
; 942 ,
ADDTL SVCS -MAPLE PV.
65.00
001531S-45300--
=:10621
MNTHLY MAINT-PANTERA FEB
2,563.51
0015331-45300--
3106=::1
MNTHLY MAINT-SYC CYN FEB
708.10
001`311-45300--
3106;21
MNTHLY MAINT-F' GROW FEB
2.85.13
0015:1'x-46300--
3106.21
MNTHLY MAINT-PETERSON FEB
1,4'='0.74
0015312-4530C:--
310621
MNTHLY MAINT-HERITAGE FEB
601.89
2,0153,L8-45_;00--
'106:21
MNTHLY MAINT-SUMMTRDG FEB
2,050.5'2
!1015:25-45100--
2694218.
ADDTL SVCS-STARSHINE PK
65..00
1415541-42210--
27.`-:217
ADDTL MAINT-DIST 41
810.00
0015311-45300--
�IP428
ADDTL. SVCS -PAUL GROW PK
65,00
0015314'-45300--
i6'>4: ,
ADDTL SVCS-FETERSON PK
65.00
Or, 153;1-45;01--
26942-01
ADDTL SVCS -SK CYN PK:
65.00
ADDTL SVCS -HERITAGE PK
6`.00
TOTAL PREPAIDS
,Cap
TOTAL VOUCHERS
2'1 ^7=°.17
J
TOTAL D'LIE VEt'DjR
21,'7.17
'-TEVENi TYE
001521:-441;10-- F'LPdP COMM-2'12,1/� 130.00
TOThl FREPAIDS •00
TOTAL 'VOUCHERS 1=:0, 00
TOTAL r', -.P- k,'ENL'OR 1'30.00
UCR EXTENSION
(1+.'15:1C' -4233C•-- APPLICATION SEMINP.R-? HEIdSLEY 415/00 144.f1:1
TOTAL FT;EPAIDS IDD
TOTAL VO; CHERS 144.021
TOTAL DUE ':?ENDOR 144.00
UNITED! STATES POSTAL SEP;:jICE
t�0i4Ct'0-421'0-- REPLENISH -POSTAGE METER
TOTAL PREP'AIDS •{?0
TOTAL VOUICHER: 2 1 01)0.0rli
T^`TAD DUE k0lrin,(1_'11,2221
U N 117 ci :,,nTES F`C�S!AL F,V.L.ES
Caia142i x-42120-- POSTG t-=1t"M h! '' ET'rER 1,`210.00 03107/2000 3574:.
EWS
T01AL KEPH"IDS 1,500.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS .QO
TOTAL DUE VENDOR 1,500.00
PAGE: y
PREPAID
DATE CHECK
62.40
.m
dsy
dmm
/� Km
.m
010 C,
'. CIO
l,),4. if, S&7 0 374
1,184.10
.w
G!# 20
Q.w
s§&
.y
2274
957
242.0
3GP
.00
E2b2
1,28.1
CITY OF ems BA:
RUN EIAS07401& e:$e1
VOUCHER REGISTER
DUET+a 01-11107/21-.100
egg S -«S gc2RS
G#
INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
3 EkeEReMEDICAL GROUP
0014090-422145--
S
S9#N PRE-EMLY PHISIEALS'
99LGeg3
TOTAL
VOUCHERS
iw
DUE VENDOR
9LtEelR 7mRSL& me INC
yl 40 4 W-
ge
!S
APPRAISAL S±ebR
TOTAL
PR. eg2
TIAL
VOUCHERS
TOTAL
WE' TOR
VISION »w:3 Ra
wa2107-
:YE
«Sim PREMIUMS
&
S9Qm
ST:Q2L5
AL
DUE VENDOR
WIALNUT HILLS R» PROTEETION S.
«S
DUE D%sS S= S
401#9-2 -
j_
4074
e± 5776 ¥I9
TJk
meR2
gl±
VOUCHERS,
ISw
DUE VENDOR
%907 LE' WA.7ER. DISTRICT
')01758- 45510--
mR g3 -TREE #IewS
1_v 13-
£ems S ! 3 JAN
!TOG
meQS
Ilk
c2RS
2
DUE' R
PAGE: y
PREPAID
DATE CHECK
62.40
.m
dsy
dmm
/� Km
.m
010 C,
'. CIO
l,),4. if, S&7 0 374
1,184.10
.w
G!# 20
Q.w
s§&
.y
2274
957
242.0
3GP
.00
E2b2
1,28.1
CITY OF DIAMCNI' DAF'.
RUN DATE: 02.101/2000 17,39:31 VOUCHER R=GISTEF PAGE: 21
DUE THRU• 03/07/2000
FUND/SECT-ACCT-PRO�EKT-ACCT
WARREN SIECKE
250`:510-464 ]':_-14x.99-46412
�__,{?5c] ii-46412-145"=�-46412
2505510-46412-14299-41:412
514 L-464 1
2505510-46412-14099-46412
001-23012--
2505510-46412-14C?9+-46412
25{?5510-4641 -141c"-46411.
27'50,55110-46412-1449`9-46412
REST COAST ARBORISTS INC
0015558-45509--
0{115551,-45516?z-
0015558-45509--
WEST COAST MEDIA
0014090-42115--
0014090-4:115--
0014000-4'2115--
=AUL WRIGHT
POn
IN'JOIGE
DE°GPIPTTON
X27'
446'
PRUF 5';'C-GlSPRPiG/LEMN/PFT:
:277
4444
PROF SVCS-G/SPRNG/RPDVIEW
9277
4444
PREF SVCS -B CYN/SLVR BLLT
,277
444x:
PROF SVCS -DB BL/57 ON RMF
9164
4426
PROF SVGS -E CYN/GLNBROOK
4447
PROF S'JCS-EN 98-022.7
91-14
4426
PROF SVCS -B CYN/SLVR BLL'
9164
4426
PROF SVCS -LEMON; LYCMING
9164
4426
PROF SVCS-G/SPRNG/RPDVW
`=1277
4444
PROF SVCS-LEMON/LYCMING
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL DUE VENDOR
PREPAID
AMOUNT DAT= GFEGY.
526.50
2.000.v
,037.50
111.0:1
SO .00
i{10.00
°010.00
.,000.00
00,
]4,260.00
1"',260.00
17237 C/WIDE TREE MAINT-1131/00 1,133.00
026 17 (197 C/WIDE TREE MAINT-1/00 10,758,00
1.1 C/WIDE TREE MAINT-JAN 00 6,537.00
TOTAL PREPAIDS o0
TOTAL VOUCHERS 18,428.00
TOTAL DUE VENDOR 1u,428,00
acyl :1.112069 AD - CENSUS 3/00 350.00
a5' 2 Mi1'069 AD
-CITY ANNVRSRY CELEB 350.00
9592 3012069 AD - HRAHMAS -CIF 3/00 350.00
TOTAL PREPAIDS .40
TOTAL VOUCHERS 1,050.00
TOTAL LUE VENDOR 1,050.00
S^;c= A/V SVC -F'/ -,CNC' T/DUPE 420.00 03/07/2000 35749
AIV SVCS -F','C,CNCL,T/DUPE 455.00 03;107/2000 35750
TOTAL PREPAIDS 875.00
TOTAL VOUCHERS ,00
TOTAL LUE VENDOR 875.00
14`?-STE 1=JAN ,Q7-410_ .52507/= COPIER MAINT4!? 70
8871A 10735;:5007(:' COPIER MAINT-STE 100 JAN h7.07
TOTAL PREPAIDS .00
TOTAL VGUC-ERS 674.14
TOTAL DUE VENDOR 674.14
CITY OF DIAMOND AAF:
RUN DATE: CY310112000 17:39:31 VOUCHER REGISTER
DUE THRU: O"'0712000
FUND/SECT-ACCT-PROJECT-ACCT FO # I"T OICE DESCP,1PT1ON.
YOSEMITE WATERS
0015314-41200-- A9152 JAN0ro-:I2 DRr'KNG 'W'ATER - HERITAGE
TOTAL PREPAIDS
TOTAL VOUCHERS
TOTAL IiUE VENDOR
REPORT TOTAL PREPAIDS
REPORT TOTAL VOUCHERS
REPORT TOTAL
PAGE: �2
PREPAID
AMOUNT DATE CHECK
19.nc�
1q. ,0
19.00
139,752.06
754;566.65,
°94,315.74
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO.
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: March 07, 2000 REPORT DATE: February 23, 2000
FROM: Linda G. Magnuson, Finance Director
TITLE:
Treasurer's Report — January 31, 2000
SUMMARY:
Submitted for the City Council's review and approval is the Treasurer's Statement for the month of January
2000
RECOMMENDATION:
Review and approve.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report
Resolution(s)
Ordinance(s)
Agreement(s)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
_ Public Hearing Notification
_ Bid Specification (on file in City
Clerk's office)
Other:
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
— Yes
_ No
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority vote?
_ Yes
_ No
3. Has environmental impact been assessed? N/A
_ Yes
_ No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? N/A
_ Yes
_ No
Which Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report? N/A
_ Yes
_ No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
REVI WED BY:
( 1 �6 �",
Terrence L. Belange
City Manager 0
DEPARTMENT HEAD:
Linda G. MagnudorO
Finance Director
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
MEETING DATE: March 07, 2000
AGENDA NO.
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Treasurer's Statement — January 31, 2000
ISSUE STATEMENT:
Per City policy, the Finance Department presents the monthly Treasurer's Statement for the City
Council's review and approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the January 2000, Treasurer's Statement.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
Submitted for the Council's review and approval is the Treasurer's Statement for the month of January
2000. This statement shows the cash balances for the various funds, with a breakdown of bank
account balances, investment account balances and the effective yield earned from investments.
PREPARED BY:
Linda G. Magnuson
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
TREASURER'S MONTHLY CASH STATEMENT
January 31, 2000
Note: The City of Diamond Bar is invested in the State Treasurer's Local Agency Investment Fund. All funds are available for withdra
within 24 hours. Investment in the Local Agency Investment Fund Is allowed under the City's formally adopted Investment po
As a secondary investment option, the City continues to maintain the US Treasury Sweep Account with Wells Fargo. Any
excess funds are "swept" on a daily basis from the City's bank accounts and are invested overnight into an Investment poo
of US Treasury Notes, Interest is credited to the City's bank account on a monthly basis
L.A.I.F - Effective Yield for December 1999 5.771%
Money Market -Effective Yield for December 1999 4.627%
All investments are placed in accordance with the City of Diamond Bar's Investment Policy.
Thea ove summary provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet the next six month's
esti ted expendity,Fes,
Terrence L, Belanger, Treasurer
BEGINNING
TRANSFERS
ENDING
BALANCE
R CEIIPTS
DISBURSEMENTS
IN (OUT)
BALANCE
GENERAL FUND
LIBRARY SERVICES FUND
$13,881,818.83
$1,175,992.44
$932,794,59
($28,156.17)
$14,096,860.51
COMMUNITY ORG SUPPORT FD
101,615.22
3,556.26
1,414.03
0.00
736.31
102,292.94
GAS TAX FUND
2,566,443.39
137,606.28
0.00
0.00
(124,598.26)
3,556.26
2,579,451.41
TRANSIT TX (PROP A) FD
1,373,133.48
125,353.19
42182,64
1,456,304.03
TRANSIT TX (PROP C) FD
2,049,577.89
80,295.15
422.43
(340,392.93)
1,789,057.68
ISTEA FUND
INTEGRATED WASTE MGT FD
0.00
245,556.78
4,888.18
0.00
(583,767.96)
(583,767.96)
AIR QUALITY IMPRVMNT FD
143,611.52
18,703.96
3,225.16
6,384.38
247,219.80
TRAILS & BIKEWAYS FD (SB 821)
31,219.82
428.26
155,931.10
PARK FEES FUND
522.42
1,982.47
0.00
(1,248.51)
31,648.08
1,256.38
FACILITIES & PARK REVEL, FD
1,200,771.73
18,415.38
1,219,187.11
COM DEV BLOCK GRANT FD
(226,845.35)
12,566.00
8,210.19
(222,489,54)
CITIZENS OPT -PUBLIC SAFETY FD
232,846.87
3,572.84
61.72
236,357.99
NARCOTICS ASSET SEIZURE FD
330,420.66
4,532.59
334,953.25
LANDSCAPE DIST #38 FD
544,060.85
27,322.59
30,969.32
540,414.12
LANDSCAPE DIST #39 FD
208,875.69
18,359.06
5,294.93
221,939.82
LANDSCAPE DIST #41 FD
315,840.04
15,921.12
10,088.97
321,672.19
GRAND AV CONST FUND
139,130.78
CAP IMPROVEMENT PRJ FD
465,446.42
629,215.84
1,091,569.77
1,078,163.83
139,130.78
1,081,256.32
SELF INSURANCE FUND
923,057.39
12,661.09
935,718.48
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND
0.00
17,026.82
(17,026.82)
TOTALS
SUMMARY OF CASH
$24,530,660.69
$2,289 230.47
$2,148 967.23
$000
$24,670,923.93
DEMAND DEPOSITS:
GENERAL ACCOUNT
$157,355.90
PAYROLL ACCOUNT
(20.21)
CHANGE FUND
250.00
PETTY CASH ACCOUNT
500,00
TOTAL DEMAND DEPOSITS
$158,085.69
INVESTMENTS:
US TREASURY Money Market Acct.
$557,909.38
LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FD
23,954,928.86
TOTAL INVESTMENTS
$24,512,838.24
TOTAL CASH
$24,670,923.93
Note: The City of Diamond Bar is invested in the State Treasurer's Local Agency Investment Fund. All funds are available for withdra
within 24 hours. Investment in the Local Agency Investment Fund Is allowed under the City's formally adopted Investment po
As a secondary investment option, the City continues to maintain the US Treasury Sweep Account with Wells Fargo. Any
excess funds are "swept" on a daily basis from the City's bank accounts and are invested overnight into an Investment poo
of US Treasury Notes, Interest is credited to the City's bank account on a monthly basis
L.A.I.F - Effective Yield for December 1999 5.771%
Money Market -Effective Yield for December 1999 4.627%
All investments are placed in accordance with the City of Diamond Bar's Investment Policy.
Thea ove summary provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet the next six month's
esti ted expendity,Fes,
Terrence L, Belanger, Treasurer
TO:
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO.(,,�_
Honorable Mayor and City Council
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000
REPORT DATE: February 23, 2000
FROM: Terrence L Belanger, City Manager
TITLE: Office Supply Purchase Order Increase for FY 1999-00
SUMMARY: On June 15, 1999, the City Council authorized the establishment of an open
purchase order for supplies with Staples in the amount of $15,000. This vendor was chosen
after a lengthy Request for Proposal process, and they were deemed to be the low bidder on
most commonly used office supplies. Due to the increase in staff activities and the change in
the provision of recreation services, it is necessary to increase the open purchase order by $4000
for a total of $19,000. In addition, since Staples has been the low bidder on other items, such as
paper, small tools, and equipment, it is requested that the City Council authorize a total
expenditure of an amount not to exceed $23,000 for FY99-00 for this vendor. It is understood
that staff will continue to solicit bids as necessary on items not considered normal office
supplies.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve an increase to the open purchase order for Staples from $15,000 to $19,000. Authorize
a total expenditure amount to Staples for an amount not to exceed $23,000 for FY 99-00.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: _ Staff Report
Resolution(s)
Ordinance(s)
Agreement(s)
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
Public Hearing Notification
_ Bid Specification (on file in
City Clerk's office)
Other:
1.
Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
_ Yes
_ No
by the City Attorney?
2.
Does the report require a majority vote?
_Yes
_ No
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
REV W D BY:
Terrence L. Be ger
City Manager
Linda G. Magnus n
Finance Director
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO, -7
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000 REPORT DATE: March 2, 2000
FROM: Terrence L Belanger. City Manager
TITLE: Reduction and Exoneration of Subdivision Improvement Bonds (Faithful Performance
and Labor & Material) for Tract No. 32400 (Standard Pacific).
SUMMARY: Standard Pacific has requested exoneration/reduction in security amounts (surety
bonds) commensurate with progress of work for various improvements required in accordance
with the subdivision agreement for Tract No. 32400. Diamond Bar West Partners has
satisfactorily completed substantial amounts of the work and has requested exoneration/reduction
of the amounts of certain bonds be authorized.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the reduction of
a) Bond No. 111 3331 7666 - Grading Bond from $2,685,256.00 to $671,314.00 (75%);
b) Bond No. 111 1940 5352 – Storm Drain from $736,639.00 to $184,159.75 (75%)-
c) Bond No. 1114160 9146 - Sewer/Street from $543,674.00 to $135,918.50 (75%); and the
exoneration of:
/a) Bond No. 111 3331 7591 -Domestic Water;
mob) Bond No. 1113331 7609 – Reclaimed Water;
c) Bond No. 1114160 9153 - Monumentation; and
direct the City Clerk to notify the Principal and Surety of these actions.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _Public Hearing Notification
_ Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification
_ Ordinances(s) x Other: Subdivision Improvement Bonds
_ Agreement(s) on file with the City Clerk
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?
5 Ar
N/A _ Yes _ No
Majority
N/A _ Yes _ No
N/A
e other departments affected by the report? Planning Division
_ Yes _ No
x Yes —No
REVIEWED BY:
Terrence L. Bel er James DeStefano 4DaG. iu
City Manager Deputy City Manager Deputy Director of Public Works
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000 AGENDA NO.
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Reduction and Exoneration of Subdivision Improvement Bonds
(Faithful Performance and Labor & Material) for Tract No. 32400
(Standard Pacific).
ISSUE STATEMENT
Consider reduction in security amount (surety bond) and exoneration commensurate with
progress of work for various improvements required in accordance with the subdivision
agreement for Tract No. 32400.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve the reduction of:
a) Bond No. 111 3331 7666 - Grading Bond from $2,685,256.00 to $671,314.00 (75%);
b) Bond No. 111 1940 5352 — Storm Drain from $736,639.00 to $184,159.75 (75%);
c) Bond No. 1114160 9146 - Sewer/Street from $543,674.00 to $135,918.50 (75%); and the
exoneration of:
a) Bond No. 111 3331 7591 - Domestic Water;
b) Bond No. 1113331 7609 — Reclaimed Water;
c) Bond No. 1114160 9153 - Monumentation; and
direct the City Clerk to notify the Principal and Surety of these actions.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
This action has no fiscal impact on the City.
BACKGROUND
In accordance with Section 66462 of the Subdivision Map Act, the City entered into agreement
with Standard Pacific (subdivider) to complete various improvements. The subdivider guaranteed
faithful performance of this agreement by posting with the City various surety bonds - bonds for
Grading Improvements, Streets, Sewer, and Storm Drains Improvements, Domestic Water and
Reclaimed Water Improvements and Monumentation. While the entirety of the agreement has not
been achieved, the subdivider has satisfactorily completed substantial amounts of the work and
has requested exoneration/reduction of the amounts of certain bonds be authorized.
DISCUSSION
The following surety bonds are recommended for reduction:
Account Number:
Original Amount:
New Reduced Amount:
Account Number:
Original Amount:
New Reduced Amount:
Account Number:
Original Amount:
New Reduced Amount:
111 3331 7666 Grading Bond
$2,685,256.00
$ 671,314.00
111 1940 5352 Storm Drain
$736,639.00
$184,159.75
111 4160 9146 Sewer/Street
$543,674.00
$135,918.50
The following surety bonds are recommended for exoneration:
Account Number:
Original Amount:
Account Number
Original Amount:
Account Number:
Original Amount:
Prepared by:
Rose Manela
111 3331 7591 -Domestic Water
$267,500.00
111 3331 7609 — Reclaimed Water
$195,000M
1114160 9153 - Monumentation
$9,375.00
2
s a a a a a
r r ^ N ) it
•F 'l,
l '0 r s
:a :Q I I 1 I I I aU aU sU sU sU sU aU sU I I I I I I O
C-) I I I --i
iu
I aQ Q I 40
aQ :Q aQ I 411CI sU sU aU aU I sU I sV I a a I r0 s0 s� s s sW
IXCL
W<
�L
�_
�--- F-
ZO m
WW
20
z
W"
�_N
8LILi
g 00
LL.
^ O
W 00
Qa O
w
a
0
m
0
w
0
w
a
a.
Ir
m
0
w
z
O
_D
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA NO. -�
1 v• honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000 REPORT DATE:. March 2, 2000
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
TITLE: Approval of Contract Amendment with Huls Environmental Management.
SUMMARY: On February 1, 2000, the City Council directed staff to issue a Request for
Proposal (RFP) and proceed with an open bidding process for the solid waste and recycling
collection services in the City.
The experience and knowledge of J. Michael Huls would assure a timely and comprehensive
approach to the City's desire to retain a single service provider for the community. Mr. Huls has
been providing technical support on various studies/reports pertaining to the solid waste and
recycling collection services in Diamond Bar. As the City's Integrated Environmental Services
Coordinator, Mr. Huls prepared the RFP which has been made available to all qualified refuse and
recycling services companies.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to execute the
contract amendment with Huls Environmental Management in an amount not -to -exceed $9,900.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report
_ Resolution(s)
_ Ordinances(s)
X Agreement(s)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION:
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
_ Public Hearing Notification
_ Bid Specification
X Other: J. Michael Huls Proposal,dated 2/4/00
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. Bel r
City Manager
c:\word\3ham\Agenda/HubAmend
X Yes_ No
Majority
N/A _ Yes _ No
N/A _ Yes _ No
_Yes _No
/ames DeStefano{
Liu
Deputy City Manager Deputy Director of Public Works
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of Contract Amendment with Huls Environmental
Management
ISSUE STATEMENT:
To amend the contract with Huls Environmental Management to provide technical assistance on the
selection of a single service provider for solid waste and recycling collection services.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract amendment with Huls
Environmental Management in an amount not -to -exceed $9,900.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
The City has budgeted $45,000 of Integrated Waste Management Fund and $20,000 General Fund in
Fiscal Year 1999-2000 for environmental management services. The major funding sources are Used
Oil Block Grant, AB 939, and the reimbursement program under an executed Memorandum of
Understanding with the County of Los Angeles for the NPDES Educational Site Visit Program. The
current contract amount with JMH is $48,900.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On February 1, 2000, the City Council directed staff to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) and
proceed with an open bidding process for selection of a single service provider for all businesses and
residents in the City.
As the City's Integrated Environmental Services Coordinator, Mr. J. Michael Huls prepared the RFP.
The RFP has been made available to all qualified refuse and recycling service companies since
February 29, 2000. Also, Mr. Huls has been providing technical support on various studies/reports
pertaining to the solid waste and recycling collection services in Diamond Bar. He is uniquely
qualified to facilitate the selection process.
Huls Environmental Management
March 7, 2000
Page Two
A mandatory pre -proposal conference has been scheduled for March 13, 2000 and the proposals are
required to be submitted by 4:00 p.m. on April 10, 2000.
The experience and knowledge of Mr. Huls would assure a timely and comprehensive approach to
the City's desire to retain a single service provider.
Prepared by:
David G. Liu
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA N0.
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000 REPORT DATE: March 1, 2000
FROM: Bob Rose, Director of Community Services
TITLE: Contract Agreement with Hirsch and Associates for the Design of Landscaping Improvements in
Diamond Bar.
SUMMARY: On January 4, 2000, the City Council awarded a contract to Hirsch and Associates to design
landscaping improvements in Diamond Bar in the amount of $22,000. Staff has determined that two additional
locations should be added to the scope of work for this contract. The additional work will cost $14,050, plus
$3,000 for reimbursables, for a total additional amount of $17,050. The two new locations are:
• Golden Prados median at Golden Springs
• Sunset Crossing dirt median/parkway at Chaparral
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the contract amendment with
Hirsch and Associates for $14,050, plus reimbursables of $3,000, for a total amendment not to exceed
$17,050. This will result in a total contract of $39,050, which includes $6,600 of reimbursables. It is further
recommended that the City Council allocate $17,050 from L.L.M.D. #38 reserves for this project.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification
Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's office)
Ordinance(s) X Other: Contract amendment
X Agreement(s)Proposal from Hirsch and Associates. dated 2/24/00
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
Which Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report? x Yes _ No
Report discussed with the following affected departments: Public Works
Terrence L. BelangerU
James DeStefano
City Manager Deputy City Manager
DEPAR ME AD:
Bob Rose
Director of Community Services
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000
AGENDA NO.
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Contract Amendment with Hirsch and Associates for the Design of Landscaping Improvements in
Diamond Bar.
ISSUE STATEMENT:
This contract amendment will result in the design of landscaping improvements for two new locations in Diamond
Bar.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the contract amendment with Hirsch and Associates for $14,050, plus
reimbursables of $3,000, for a total amendment not to exceed $17,050. This will result in a total contract of $39,050, which
includes $6,600 of reimbursables. It is fruther recommended that the City Council allocate $17,050 from L.L.M.D. #38
reserves for this project.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
There are no funds currently budgeted for this contract amendment. It is eligible for L.L.M.D. #38 funding. District #38 funds
are available for this project due to alternative funding sources utilized for other District #38 CIP projects during the 1999/2000
fiscal year. Specifically, Proposition C funds in the amount of $352,500 replaced the District #38 funds for the Golden
Springs/Lemon Avenue improvement project.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Diamond Bar has a contract with Hirsch and Associates to provide design services for the landscaping of three (3)
medians along Golden Springs. This contract, for a total of $22,000, will provide for construction documents for the following
locations:
• Golden Springs (south side) at Torito Lane
• Golden Springs (north side) at EI Encino
• Golden Springs (south side) at Ballena Drive
Staff is seeking City Council approval to add two additional locations to this contract:
• Golden Prados median at Golden Springs
• Large dirt median/parkway at Sunset Crossing and Chaparral
Cost to add these locations to the existing contract is $14,050, plus $3,000 for reimbursables, for a total contract amendment
of $17,050.
DISCUSSION:
The five locations described above are either unimproved dirt or filled with asphalt. Curbs and gutters are already in place.
The intent is to obtain a design for landscape improvements at each of the locations.
PREPARED BY:
Bob Rose
Community Services Director
FROM : HIRSCH+ASSOCIATES INCORPORATED PHONE N0. r:. �1• ===_ = - -
Q.t71
Mar -02-00 08:37/
AMENDMENT iil TO AGREEMENT
THIS AW-NDMEN'f #1 TO AGREEMENT ;� mude this 7"day of viarch, 2000. by and between the
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. a municipal corporation of the State of California. ("CITY") and HIRSCH
AND ASSOCIATES. it California corporation, (-CUNTRACT<)R').
Recitals:
a. CONTRACTOR entered into an agreement with CITY on January 4.2000 (the
"AGREEMENT-) to design landscaping improvements for three mCdians on Golden
Springs Drive.
h. Parties desire to amend the AGRE:EMEN'T to Providc for the design of landscaping
improvcmunts at two additional locations in Diamond Bar:
I. Golden Prados median at Golden Springs
Sunset Crossing median/parkway at Chaparral
Now. therefore, the parties agree to amend the AGREEMENT as follows:
Section I - Attachment "A" to the AGREEMENT is amended by adding thereto the following
additionui locations for design of landscaping improvements:
1. Golden Prados median at Golden Springs
?. Sunset Crossing median/Psrkwuy at Chaparral
Section 3 Section 3 of the AGREEMENT is amended to add compensation in the amount of
$17.050, for a t=1 authorization not to exceed $39.050.
Except as pr vidcd above. the AGREEMENT is in all other respects in full force and effect.
1N WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have. executed this AMENDMENT #1 TO AGREEMENT
on the date and year first written above.
A'1"I'l;S'(':
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
A Municipal Corporation
Of the State of California
Signed
Title
APPROVED TO FORM
City Attorney
Signed
HIRSCH AND ASSOCIATES.
City Clerk
Hirsch EXHIBIT "B"
Hi
b Associates lac.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE LA#1710
PARK PLANNING 8 DESIGN
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
SLA
Mr. Bob Rose, Director
Community Services Department
City of Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley Drive
Suite 100
Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177
Golden Prados and Chaparral Median Islands
Dear Mr. Rose,
February 24, 2000
The following professional fees are provided per your request to include the above referenced median
island in the Golden Springs Drive median island project. The phasing and numbers are per the original
scope of work. I have indicated a cost for each item of work since the projects may not run
simultaneously. If staff meetings can be combined I will reduced the cost accord to the meetings
actually attended. So the fees stated are the worst case scenario. Please review and give me all call if you
have any questions.
Phase I
Item
Respons. ibilily
Total
1.)
Hirsch & Associates, Inc.
$ 250.00
2•)
Dewan Lundin & Associates
$ 2,300.00
3•)
Hirsch & Associates, Inc.
(1) Public Meeting
$ 500.00
(2) Project Meetings @ $250/Each
$ 500.00
4.)
Hirsch & Associates, Inc.
$ 2,000.00
5•)
Hirsch & Associates, Inc.
$ 3,000.00
6.)
Hirsch & Associates, Inc.
$350.00
7•)
Hirsch & Associates, Inc.
$400.00
Subtotal
$ 9,300.00
Phase II
Item
Hourly Breakdown
Total
1.)
Hirsch & Associates, Inc.
$ 250.00
2•)
Hirsch & Associates, Inc.
$ 350.00
2221 EAST WINSTON ROAD., SUITE A, ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92806
PHONE 714-776-4340 FAX 714-776-4395 www.hha-landarch.com
3.)
Hirsch & Associates, Inc.
$ 350.00
4.)
Hirsch & Associates, Inc.
$ 250.00
5.)
Hirsch & Associates, Inc.
$ 400.00
6.)
Hirsch & Associates, Inc.
$ 1,500.00
(6) Site Visits @ $250/Each
7.)
Hirsch & Associates, Inc.
$ 250.00
8.)
Hirsch & Associates, Inc.
$ 450.00
9.)
Hirsch & Associates, Inc.
$ 350.00
10.)
Hirsch & Associates, Inc.
$600.00
Subtotal
$ 4,750.00
Total Fee
$ 14,050.00
Sincerely,
Mr.
President
1710 ASLA
Hirsch
Eiate7s,nc.
CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made as of January 4, 2000 by and between the City of Diamond Bar, a
municipal corporation ("City") and Hirsch and 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", the City's Request for Proposals dated November 23, 1999.
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 "B" the Consultant's Response, dated November 23, to the City's
Request for Proposals.
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 "B."
2. Term of Agreement. This Contract shall take effect January 4, 2000 , and shall continue
until December 31. 2000 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 invoices in the form specified by City. Total payment to Consultant
pursuant to this Agreement shall not exceed $22,000 .
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: City of Diamond Bar Consultant: Hirsch and Associates
Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager Pat Hirsch
21660 East Copley Drive 2221 E. Winston Rd., Ste. 100
Suite 100 Anaheim, CA 92806
Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177
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 at the standard of care and
skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession under similar conditions.
8. Indemnification. Consultant agrees to indemnify the City, its officers, agents, volunteers,
employees, and attorneys against, and will hold and save them and each of them harmless from, and all actions,
claims, damages to persons or property, penalties, obligations, or liabilities that may be asserted or claimed by
any person, firm, entity, corporation, political subdivision or other organization arising out of the acts, errors
or omissions of Consultant, its agents, employees, subcontractors, or invitees, including each person or entity
responsible for the provision of services hereunder.
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 times 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; (4) professional liability insurance (errors and omissions) to cover or partially cover damages
that may be the result of errors, omissions, or negligent acts of Consultant, in an amount of not less than
$1,000,000 per occurrence; and (5) 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 automotive liability. The policy (ies) as to comprehensive general liability, property damage, and
automobile liability shall provide that they are primary, and that any insurance maintained by the City shall
be excess insurance only.
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. All policies of insurance shall cover the obligations of Consultant pursuant to the terms of this
Agreement; shall be issued by an insurance company which is admitted to do business in the State of California
or which is approved in writing by the City; and shall be placed with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less
that A VII.
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", or a substantially similar form which the City has
agreed in writing to accept.
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, 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. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent Consultant prepares reports of a proprietary
nature specifically for and in connection with certain projects, the City shall not, except with Consultant's prior
written consent, use the same for other unrelated projects.
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. Either party may terminate this Agreement with or without cause upon fifteen
(15) days' written notice to the other party. However, Consultant shall not terminate this Agreement during
the provision of services on a particular project. 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. 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.
16. 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.
17. 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.
18. Compliance with Laws. Consultant shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, codes
and regulations of the federal, state, and local governments.
19. 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.
20. 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.
21. 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.
22. Governing Law. This Contract shall be interpreted, construed and enforced in accordance
with the laws of the State of California.
23. 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.
24. 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.
25. Exhibits. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement are incorporated herein by this reference.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first
written above.
"City"
ATTEST:
By: L ,C
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
By
City Attomey
lJjr-1f�i�: �
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
By;-,jj(g2Gam•
Mayor
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA N0. (o • t
TO: Terence L. Belanger, City Manager
MEETING DATE: Ma►=t 17, 2000 REPORT DATE: March 2, 2000
FROM: Bobf 3ose, Community Services Director
TITLE: Extension of Vendor .Services for Publicity Banners
SUMMARY: The City has ufliiized Dekra-Lite to provide vertical publicity banners for City events. The City's
Purchasing Ordinance limits the City Manager's purchasing authority to $15,000. The City Council previously
authorized expenditures of $29,004 for the Holiday Banner Program. This work was completed by Dekra-Lite.
The City is now purchasing bannemond banner support poles from Dekra-Lite to advertise the City Birthday
Party, at a cost of $9,000. Dekra-Lite has consistently been the low bidder with the best turn -around time for
this service.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the additional expenditure of
$9,000 from General Fund Reserves for the City Birthday Party publicity banners and banner support poles.
It is further recommended that the City Council authorize the purchase be made from Dekra-Lite, bringing the
total expenditure from this vendor for the current fiscal year to $38,000.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification
_ Resolution(s) _ Bid Specifications (on file in City Clerk's office)
Ordinance(s) _ Other:
_ Agreement(s)
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: WA
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been
reviewed by the City Attorney? N/A
_ Yes
X No
2. Does the report require a majority vote?
X Yes
_ No
3. Has environmental impact been assessed? N/A
_ Yes
X No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission?
_ Yes
X No
What Commission? N/A
5. Are other departments affected by the report? NIA
_ Yes
X No
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
REVIEWED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD:
T*rrence L. B
City Manager
James DeStefano
Deputy City Manager
-L
Bo Rose
Community Services Director
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA No. 6 -13 -
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council REPORT DATE: March 2, 2000
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
TITLE: Resolution No. 2000-xx "A Resolution of the City Council of the City Road Pur osf Diamond Bar
Accepting A Granting of Certain Real Property Herein Described forP
SUMMARY: Pursuant to Condition "dd" of Planning Resolution No. 99-13, the McDonald's
Corporation has made an irrevocable offer of dedication Road to the City for roadway improvements.y
adjacent to Golden Springs Drive and Brea Canyon
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council app d Bar Acceptingve and Resolution
Crrant ng of Certain Real
Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond
Property Herein Described for Road Purposes", and direct
the city Clerk to record the
Irrevocable Offer of Dedication with the LA County Recorder's
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:X Staff Report — Public Hearing Notification
Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification
x
— Agreement(s) x Other: Offer of Dedication
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST: x Yes — No
I , Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
by the City Attorney? Majority
2. Does the report require a majority or 4!5 vote? NIA Yes _ No
3. Has environmental impact been assessed. N/A Yes _ No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? —
Which Commission? N/A Yes — No
5. Are other departments affected by the report? —
REVIEWED BY:
qU
James DeStefano avi G.Aiu
Te rL. Bel r De ut Director of public Works
City Manager Deputy City Manager P y
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO. _
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2000-xx "A Resolution of the City Council of the City
of Diamond Bar Accepting A Granting of Certain Real Property
Herein Described for Road Purposes."
ISSUE STATEMENT
To accept the irrevocable offer of dedication for road purposes.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council approve and adopt Resolution No. 2000-xx "A Resolution of the City
Council of the City of Diamond Bar Accepting A Granting of Certain Real Property Herein
Described for Road Purposes", and direct the City Clerk to record the Irrevocable Offer of
Dedication with the LA County Recorder's Office.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
Acceptance of the offer of dedication will not have any financial impact on the City.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
Pursuant to Condition "dd" of Planning Resolution No. 99-13, the McDonald's Corporation has
made an irrevocable offer of dedication for a 5' wide portion of its property adjacent to Golden
Springs Drive and Brea Canyon Road to the City for roadway improvements. The current
dedicated right of way at the intersection of Golden Springs Drive and Brea Canyon Road is 100 -
feet.
The proposed dedicated 5 -feet wide portion along the total property frontage will allow for future
improvements, if required, such as widening of the intersection at that northwest corner.
Prepared by: David G. Liu/Rose Manela
1
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF DIAMOND BAR ACCEPTING A GRANTING OF
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED FOR
ROAD PURPOSES
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar on May 11, 1999 has
passed Resolution No. 99-13, approving the combined commercial fast food restaurant
and gas service station;
WHEREAS, Resolution 99-13 places conditions upon the developer to make an
irrevocable offer of dedication of a 5 -feet wide portion of its property adjacent to Golden
Springs Drive and Brea Canyon Road as required by the City Engineer;
WHEREAS, Section 65402 of the Government Code requires, in part, that no real
property shall be acquired until the location, purpose, and extent of the acquisition has
been reported on by the Planning Commission;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission Resolution, adopted pursuant to a duly noticed and
conducted public hearing as cited therein and considered in conformance with the General
Plan, shall be the Planning Commission's report on this matter;
WHEREAS, McDonald's Corporation, a California Corporation is the Owner of the
property herein above generally described and has offered the City of Diamond Bar a
dedication for such portions of property more particularly described in that Irrevocable
Offer of Dedication attached hereto as Exhibit "A";
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reviewed, approved, and recommends acceptance of
the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication; and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the acceptance of this offer and the adoption of this
resolution have occurred.
RESOLUTION
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby find that all of
the facts set forth in the Recitals of this Resolution are true and correct.
SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby accept the
Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for Road Purposes, attached hereto as Exhibit
"A", from the McDonald's Corporation and consents to recordation of this offer of
dedication.
SECTION 3. The City Clerk of the City Council is hereby authorized and directed to
cause the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication to be recorded on behalf of the City in
the Office of the County Recorder and to execute any and all other documents as
may be necessary or convenient to effect the recordation; and to certify to the
adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7 1h day of March , 2000.
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 7" day of March, 2000 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES. COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK OF THE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
PLEASE COMPLETE THIS INFORMATION
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
The City of Diamond Bar
21660 East Copely Drive, Suite 190
Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177
ATTN:
Date: January 28, 2000
Dwg No.:
��iQ�T fi
(THIS SPACE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY)
Assessor's Parcel No(s): 8763-007-018,019,021
IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF DEDICATION - ROAD PURPOSES
City of Diamond Bar
County of Los Angeles, State of California
the undersigned, being the present title owner(s) of record of the herein described parcel of land, do hereby make an IRREVOCABLE
OFFER OF DEDICATION to the City of Diamond Bar, a California Municipal Corporation, and its successors or assigns, of a
permanent easement and right-of-way for street and highway purposes, and incidents and appurtenances thereto over, under, along
and across the real property situated in the City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, State of California more particularly described
in Exhibit "A" and as shown on Exhibit "B", both attached hereto.
It is understood and agreed that the City of Diamond Bar and its successors and assigns shall incur no liability with respect to such
offer of dedication, and shall not assume any responsibility for the offered parcel of land or any improvements thereon or therein, until
such offer has been accepted by action of the Diamond Bar City Council, or its authorized designee. The provisions hereof shall inure
to the benefit of an be binding upon heirs, successors, assigns, and personal representatives of the respective parties hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, these presents have executed this instrument this 28tbday of January 192000
McDONALD'S CORPORATION
—:�C. Counsel
This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by this instrument to the City of Diamond Bar, a municipal corporation, is
hereby accepted by the undersigned officer on behalf of the City of Diamond Bar,
Date:
For City Engineer
By
Deputy
NOTE: NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMEA
MUST BE ATTACHED
This information is available in alternative formats for persons with disabilities.
To request this information in alternative format, call the City of Diamond Bar
ACKNOWLEDGMENT - McDonald's Corporation
STATE OF ILLINOIS )
) SS:
COUNTY OF DUPAGE )
I, Sueann Fisher, a Notary Public in and for the county and state aforesaid, DO BEREBY CERTIFY
that Troy M. Brethauer, Senior Counsel of McDonald's Corporation, a Delaware corporation, who is
personally known to me to be the same person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument as such
Senior Counsel appeared before me this day in person and acknowledged that he signed, sealed and
delivered the said instrument as his free and voluntary act as such Senior Counsel and as the free and
voluntary act of said corporation for the uses and purposes therein set forth.
Given under my hand -and notarial seal, February 2, 2000
My commission expires 2/24/02
Notary Public
[OFFICIAL SEAL
SUEANN FISHER
NOTARY pt1C, STATE OF IIIN��., CDMR�t —04ON EXRRE8;0��l1/G2
... , ....n �r,..ww..• nwnR
EXHIBIT "A"
EASEMENT FOR STREET PURPOSES
PARCEL A
AN EASEMENT FOR STREET PURPOSES THROUGH, UNDER, OVER, AND ALONG A
PORTION OF PARCELS 1 AND 2, AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP 7207, FILED IN BOOK 132,
PAGE 44 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF LOS
ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. SAID EASEMENT MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF PARCEL 2 OF SAID PARCEL MAP; THENCE
NORTH 09°11'20" WEST, 4.02 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NONTANGENT CURVE
CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1546 FEET, A RADIAL TO THE
CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS NORTH 14°57'11" WEST; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG
SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11 °57'00" A DISTANCE OF 322.44 FEET TO
THE BEGINNING OF A COMPOUND CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 38 FEET, A RADIAL TO
THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS NORTH 26°54'11" WEST; THENCE EASTERLY
ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 96°58'21" A DISTANCE OF 64.31
FEET; THENCE NORTH 33052'32 WEST, 96.21 FEET; THENCE NORTH 72°51'43" EAST, 4.18
FEET; THENCE SOUTH 33°52'32" EAST, 95.01 FEET TO A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE
SOUTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 42 FEET, A RADIAL TO THE CENTER OF SAID
CURVE BEARS SOUTH 56°07'28" WEST; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 96058'21" A DISTANCE OF 71.08 FEET TO THE
BEGINNING OF A COMPOUND CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 1550 FEET, A RADIAL TO
THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS NORTH 26°54'11" WEST; THENCE EASTERLY
ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11057'54" A DISTANCE OF 323.68
FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
�l \,NND
Exp.9l30101 �F
No. 5562 Q
PLS 5562
EXPIRE 9/30/01
EXHW To
�
BASIS OF BEARINGS
THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS
p=96058'21
DRAWING IS THE NORTHERLY LINE
R_42.00
OF PARCEL LP.M.
��ppU
L_71.08'
BK 132, OF PARCEL MAPS,
�s
C�
IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
95,01' "
RECORDER OF LOS ANGELES
°
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
�
P�A- OC
I.E. N 24029'29" W
D
N26°54� W�
(RAD ._--
p
LEGEND
STREET DEDICATION . . . .
'"
DEDICATION
p=96°5821a
to
g j
c�
AREA OF STREET
ACRES
m N R=38.00 O N
h
0.04
a
L=64.31 ,\
PARCEL N0,
M
o ^
PARCEL I `.o �
� �
ASSESSOR'S
8 THRU 21
z763-007-18
P.M. NO. 7207
z
REFERENCE DRAWINGS
PARCEL MAP 7207, BOOK 132
N 67006'47" E
59.49'
►Ur) o c°
co
(BASIS OF BEARINGS)
c N
N 24029'29" W
V- '�
IV-,
ZN�DI�s AY
157.82 0100
0
0
cV
D �
rm
o M
N DWM M
BAS
0 II
N
'-
or- C4
0
0
GOLDEN
SPRINGS DR.
Z PARCEL 2
^
P.M. NO. 7207
II
VICINITY MAP
-�
NO SCALE
4
'90 'LAND
(RAD) N14057 -11-w`8
_' 82.20
'� NAS�7 .c
a��o
N 091011'20" W 4.02'
P.O.B
CORNER
� �
SCq�
� ~
4F L
2 `�'� E No.9/30/01
5562
��
�
�
60.
CA1-�F�
J.N. 998-032.2
®NASLAND ENGINEERING
STREET DEDICATION FOR-
CIVIL ENGINEERING • SURVEYDIG
9 LAND PLANNING
CANYON RD. AND GOLDEN SPRINGS DR
Street
San Diego, California. 92111
BREA
TO THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CA
858-292-7770
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO.: 6 1`1
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000 REPORT DATE: March 2, 2000
FROM: Terrence L Belanger City Manager
TITLE: Award of Design Services for Area 2 Slurry Seal Project.
SUMMARY: On January 21, 2000, the Public Works Division solicited proposals for design
services for the 1999-2000 Area 2 Slurry Seal Project. On February 4, 2000, two proposals were
received; from GFB-Friedrich & Associates and Charles Abbott Associates. At this time, Staff
proposes to award the design services contract to the most qualified consultant.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council award the 1999-2000 Area 2 Slurry Seal Project
design services contract to GFB-Friedrich & Associates, in an amount not to exceed $36,100.00.
Furthermore, it is recommended that the Council authorize an amount of $3,600.00 for contract
amendment(s) to be approved by the City Manager, for a total authorization of $39,700.00.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report Public Hearing Notification
_ Ordinances(s) _ Other: RFP dated 10/10/97 and
x Agreement(s) Consultants Proposals are on file
with the City Clerk
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. Are other departments affected by the report? _ Yes x No
REVIEWED BY:
Terrence L. Bela r James DeStefano David6.7111',
City Manager Deputy City Manager Deputy Director of Public Works
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: Award of Design Services for Area 2 Slurry Seal Project.
ISSUE STATEMENT
The project location for the 1999-2000 Slurry Seal Program is Area 2. It is proposed to award
the contract to the most qualified consultant.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council award the 1999-2000 Area 2 Slurry Seal Project design services contract to
GFB-Friedrich & Associates, in an amount not to exceed $36,100.00. Furthermore, it is
recommended that the Council authorize an amount of $3,600.00 for contract amendment(s) to be
approved by the City Manager, for a total authorization of $39,700.00.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
$700,000.00 Gas Tax Fund has been allocated for Area 2 Slurry Seal and residential street
improvements.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The City has been divided into five areas. This project will begin the second cycle of slurry
seal/residential street improvement activities on a Citywide basis. The project is to complete
approximately 22 miles of residential and collector streets and to remove/repair damaged A.C.
pavement, curbs and gutters, and sidewalks as determined by field conditions. The project
location of the 1999-2000 Slurry Seal Program is Area 2. See Exhibit "A".
On January 21, 2000, the Public Works Division solicited proposals for design services for the
1999-2000 Area 2 Slurry Seal Project. On February 4, 2000, two proposals were received; from
GFB-Friedrich & Associates and Charles Abbott Associates. At this time, Staff proposes to
award the design services contract to the most qualified consultant.
These proposals were reviewed and evaluated by the selection committee based on demonstrated
knowledge and ability, adequate number of staff assigned to the job, experience of team members,
ability to work with City staff, knowledge of local conditions, involvement with related projects,
ability to keep on schedule, ability to stay within budget and demonstrated interest by the
consultant.
In an effort to improve the City's total infrastructure, the program has expanded to a more
comprehensive project for residential streets since the first cycle of slurry seal areas. The City's
approach has been a very detailed review and emphasis on thorough field review effort of existing
conditions, problems and potential solutions.
In review of the two proposals, the selection committee discussed the two methods proposed by
the consultants. GFB-Friedrich & Associates has proposed a comprehensive field review to
completely cover the 22 miles in this area. Their proposal includes the walking of every street to
map and note field conditions from sidewalks, curb and gutters, pavement distress requiring
repair, pavement distress requiring crack seal treatment, and manholes. They propose to make
reference and cross reference by specific address and problem and repair solutions. They also
propose review of problem areas such as tree roots or weakend pavement sections and will make
recommendations for repair or removal. Charles Abbott Associates has proposed a more
standardized maintenance slurry seal program. Their proposal includes minimal hours for field
review for the total 22 miles in this area. There was no emphasis on the field review.
Based on the familiarity with the City's needs, proposed methodology and tasks and demonstrated
knowledge of the slurry seal and residential street improvements project requirements, staff
recommends the award of design contract to GFB-Friedrich & Associates.
GFB-Friedrich & Associates
Charles Abbott Associates
Will meet with City as -needed, minimum of 2,
to discuss project objectives, status, update,
proposed improvements.
Will meet with City 2 times, additional $300 for
each additional meeting.
Complete Field Review and measurements by
foot — 22 miles 236 hours
Complete Field Review — 22 miles (32 hours)
Complete 2 utility coordinations (l . Research
and comments, 2. Review of plans and
specifications and comments
Utility Research
Prepare sreadsheets of cross referenced data
Prepare plan andspecifications
Annotate plan maps with cross referenced data
Assist during Bidding and Construction phases
Prepare design base maps and bidspecs
$15,960.00
Prepare bid documents
Hourly rates - $76-151/hr
Assist during Bidding and Construction phases
7weeks to complete plans andspecs
$36,100.00
Hourly rates - $60-$90/hr
S weeks to complete plans andspecs
Prepared By:
David Lia/Rose Maneta
SCG=�U� SLURRY
Ln1L, Ln1 LRS LS Ln1
LOCAL STREET MILEAGE
. nc . a
C/T Y OF DIAMOND RA
R
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
February 1998
C /� /7 i l5 / / e -.-
CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made as of by and between the City of Diamond Bar, a
municipal corporation ("City") and ria 1•r; ,- ,..; ,. 'Consultant").
& Associates, Inc.
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 "B."
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 "B."
2. Term of Agreement. This Contract shall take effect , 2000, and shall continue
until the full and final completion of said project described in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B" to the
satisfaction of the City, 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."
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: City Manager
City of Diamond Bar
21660 East Copley Drive
Suite 100
Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177
1
Consultant:
GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC.
6529 Riverside Ave., #230
Riverside, CA 92506
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 indemnity provision. Consultant shall pay Indemnitees for
any attorneys' fees and costs incurred in enforcing this indemnification provision. Notwithstanding the
Page 2
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 times 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; (4) professional liability insurance (errors and omissions) to cover or
partially cover damages that may be the result of errors, omissions, or negligent acts of Consultant, in an
amount of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence; and (5) 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 automotive liability. The policy (ies) as to
comprehensive general liability, property damage, automobile liability, and professional liability shall
provide that they are primary, and that any insurance maintained by the City shall be excess insurance
only.
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
Page 3
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, 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
Page 4
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.
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.
Page 5
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.
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 WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first
written above.
"City"
ATTEST: CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
By: By:
City Clerk City Manager
Approved as to form:
"CONSULTANT"
By:
City Attorney
By: ' Gh
Its: '
Page 6
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO. ZL
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000 REPORT DATE: February 15, 2000
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
TITLE: DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO. 99-1 AND SUBDIVISION
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 99-1
SUMMARY:
The Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance have been in existence for over one year. The
implementation of both codes during this time period indicates that several amendments are needed in
order to continue to implement the purpose of both codes, better serve residents and the development
community. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments and on January 25, 2000
adopted Resolution No. 2000-02 recommending the City Council adopt the amendments.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council open the public hearing, receive public comments, discuss the
Planning Commission recommended amendments and direct staff to prepare an ordinance approving
said amendments to the Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report
Resolution
Ordinances
Agreements
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
_ Public Hearing Notification
Bid Specification (on file in City Clerk's Office)
X Negative Declaration No. 99-9
X PC Resolution No. 2000-02
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority vote?
3. Has environmental impact been assessed?
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission?
Which Commission? Planning Commission
5. Are other departments affected by the report?
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
REVIEWED BY:
aww
ence L. Belanger
City Manager
-At -J s DeStefano
I" Deputy City Manager
N/A Yes
No
X Yes
No
X Yes
No
X Yes
No
Yes X No
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
Agenda No.
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO.99-1 AND SUBDIVISION
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO.99-1
ISSUE STATEMENT:
The Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance have been in existence for over one year. The
implementation of both codes during this time period indicates that several amendments are needed in
order to continue to implement the purpose of both codes, better serve residence and the development
community. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments and on January 25, 2000
adopted Resolution No. 2000-02 recommending the City Council adopt the amendments.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council open the public hearing, receive public continents, discuss the
Planning Commission recommended amendments and direct staff to prepare an ordinance approving
said amendments to the Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
After many workshops and public hearings by Planning Commission and City Council, the City's
Development Code was adopted and became effective on December 3, 1998. The Subdivision
Ordinance was adopted and became effective on March 3, 1999.
The purpose of the Development Code is to implement the policies of the City's General Plan by
classifying and regulating the uses of land and structures within the City. In addition, the Development
Code protects and promotes the public health, safety, and general welfare of the residents, and
preserves and enhances the aesthetic quality of the City. The Development Code provides standards
for orderly growth and development and promotes a stable pattern of land uses. It is a tool utilized to
implement the land uses designated by the General Plan, thereby avoiding conflict between land uses.
The Development Code assists in protecting and maintaining property values, and conserving and
protecting the City's natural resources. Furthermore, the Development Code facilitates in protecting
the City's character, and social and economic stability, as well as assisting in maintaining a high
quality of life without unduly high public or private costs for development or unduly restricting private
enterprise, initiative, or innovative design.
The purpose of the Subdivision Ordinance is to supplement, implement and work with the Subdivision
Map Act of the California Government Code. The Subdivision Ordinance is not intended to replace
the Map Act. It is utilized in conjunction with the Map Act in the preparation of applications, the
review and approval, and construction of proposed subdivisions.
The City staff has been utilizing the Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance for over one year.
The implementation of both codes during this time period indicates that several amendments are
needed in order to continue to implement the purpose of both codes, better serve the residents and
development community while safeguarding the best interest of the City. As a result, the City of
Diamond Bar (pursuant to Code Sections 22.44 and 21.02) is requesting approval to amend the
Articles and Sections of City's Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance as present in this staff
report.
The proposed amendments to both codes were present to the Planning Commission on December 14,
1999 at a public hearing. At that time, the public hearing was continued to January 11, 2000. On
January 11, 2000, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a resolution recommending
approval to City Council of the proposed amendments. On January 25, 2000, the Planning
Commission adopted Resolution No. 2000-02 recommending approval of the proposed amendments as
follows:
DEVELOPMENT CODE
SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE
Article II
Article I
• Section 22.06.040, Table 2-2
• Section 2101.040
• Section 22.08.240, Table 2-4
• Section 22.10.030, Table 2-5 and Table 2-6
Article III
Article II
• Section 22.42.110, Table 3-15
• Section 21.20.110
• Section 22.42.060
Article IV
• Section 22.44.020, Table 4-1
Article V
• Section 22.68.030
2
DISCUSSION:
The following discussion/analysis will delineate each section with current standards, the issue/reason
for the amendment and the recommended amendment in
Article II
Section 22.06.040, (pg. H-7)
Current Standard:
DEVELOPMENT CODE
Zoning Consistency Matrix, Table 2-2
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION
EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT
APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT
CODE STANDARD
Rural Residential (RR)
R-1 40,000
Rural Residential (RR)
Max 1 DU/AC
RPD 20,000
Low Density Residential (RQ
R-1 20,000
Low Density Residential
Max 3 DU/AC
R-1 15,000
(RL)
Low Density Residential (RL)
R-1 10,000
Low Density Residential
Max 3 DU/AC
RPD 10,000
(RL)
R -A 10,000
R-1 9,000
R-1 8,500
Issue/Reason:
The current Zoning Consistency Matrix, Table 2-2 as previously prepared creates confusion with the
General Plan. According to the General Plan Land Use Map, the RPD 20,000 Zone is within the Low
Density Residential (RL) land use designation. PA-2/SP will be developed with 127 single-family
residences (Tract No. 52267/SunCal project) with lot sizes not exceeding 10,000 square feet. As such,
it is consistent with the General Plan Low Density Residential land use designation. Hence the
recommended amendments.
Recommended Amendment to Section 22.06.040:
Zoning Consistency Matrix, Table 2-2
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION
EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT
APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT
CODE STANDARD
Rural Residential (RR)
R-1 40,000
Rural Residential (RR)
Max 1 DU/AC
R-1 20,000
Low Density Residential (RQ
Low Density Residential
Max 3 DU/AC
"'W
(RL)
R-1 10,000
RPD 10,000
R -A 10,000
R-1 9,000
R-1 8,500
Section 22.08.240, (pg.11-12)
Current Standard:
Residential Zoning District General Development Standards, Table 2-4
Development Feature RR RL RLM
Fe
Setbacks Required
Rear 20 ft. 15 ft 15 ft.
Lot Coverage No Standard No Standard No Standard
Issue/Reason:
Setbacks
Originally, the City's intent was to increase the rear yard setback within the RR, RL and RIM Zones
by five feet. The increased setback will provide a better rear yard livability area and will be more
reflective of the existing setbacks in the referenced zones.
Lot Coverage
Pursuant to the Development Code, lot coverage is defined as the percentage of total site area occupied
by structures and paving for vehicle use. Structure coverage includes the footprint of the primary
structure, all accessory structures (e.g., carports, garages, patio covers, storage sheds, trash enclosures,
etc.) and architectural features (e.g., chimneys, balconies, decks above the first floor, porches, stairs,
etc.). Pavement coverage includes areas necessary for ingress, egress, outdoor parking and circulation
of motor vehicles.
Staff has contacted several cities (Malibu, La Verne, Covina, Fullerton, Rancho Cucamonga, Glendora,
La Habra Heights) regarding the maximum allowable lot coverage. Lot coverage varies from city to
city. Maximum lot coverage ranges from 20 to 60 percent. For example, the City of Rancho
Cucamonga has maximum lot coverage of 25 percent for half -acre lots or larger, 40 percent for 8,000
square foot lots and 60 percent for 5,000 square foot or smaller lots. In the hillside areas of Glendora,
lot coverage is based on the average slope. The allowed maximum lot coverage is as follows: 25
percent with a 10 to 25 percent average slope; 20 percent with a 25 to 35 percent average slope; 15
percent with a 35 to 40 percent average slope; 10 percent with a 40 to 45 percent average slope; and 5
percent with a 45 percent or greater average slope. In non -hillside areas, lot coverage is based on a
maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 35 percent. In La Habra Heights, lot coverage is determined by the
required setbacks. La Verne and Covina have a maximum lot coverage of 35 percent. However, in La
Verne maximum lot coverage for older homes is 45 percent. For the City of Fullerton, lots ranging
from 6,000 to 40,000 square feet have a lot coverage of 60 to 45 percent respectively. Malibu permits
the following lot coverage: up to 1/a acre — 45 percent; greater than 1/a acre but 1/2 acre or less — 35
percent; and greater than 1/z acre — 30 percent. In addition to the lot coverage thresholds, Malibu
utilizes the maximum square footage of a residential unit based on lot size.
0
As referenced above, the current Table 2-4 does not address lot coverage. Lot coverage is addressed in
Development Code Section 22.42.060, (pg. 111-176-177) Guest Houses at 40 percent. Within the RR,
RL and RLM Zones, the issues related to lot coverage are foremost. In these zones, lot square footage
is generally larger and there is the propensity toward greater lot coverage. A lot coverage of 30 percent
allows the City to continue providing a higher quality of aesthetics and orderly and attractive
development while ensuring functional design. A reduction in lot coverage will: assist in minimizing
negative impacts for surrounding residences; provide more open space to buffer adjacent neighboring
properties; reduce real or perceived crowdedness/intensity; assist in minimizing over development of a
site; provide more exterior livability area; assist in reducing view blockage; and ensure that new
development and the intensification of existing development yield a pleasant living environment for
the property owner and surrounding properties.
Recommended Amendment to Section 22.08.240:
Residential Zoning District General Development Standards, Table 2-4
5
Section 22.10.030, (pg.11-17)
Current Standard:
Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements For Office Zoning Districts, Table 2-5
LAND 119E I PERMIT RE UIREMENT BY DISTRICT
— -- — - -
OP
OB
CO
RETAIL TRADE USES
P
P
P
Alcohol beverage sales — off-site
Alcohol beverage sales — on-site
MCUP
MCUP
MCUP
Service stations
P
P
P
Issue/Reason:
The Development Code permits alcohol beverage sales for off-site consumption within the OP, OB,
and CO Zones; and motor fuel sales within the OP, OB and CO Zones. However, alcohol beverage
sales for off-site consumption in conjunction with the sale of motor fuel is not addressed except as
indicated in the current Table 2-5. The recommended amendment will permit the alcohol beverage
sales for off-site consumption in conjunction with the sale of motor fuel within the OP, OB and CO
Zones with a Conditional Use Permit. The Conditional Use Permit process is intended to allow for
specified uses whose effect on the surrounding area can not be determined before being proposed for a
particular location. The Conditional Use Permit is a discretionary process that enables the City to
ensure that potential impacts of a proposed use will not be detrimental to the public interest, health and
safety. It also enables the City to ensure that the proposed use will not be injurious to persons,
property, or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located as well as
review the location and design of the project. Furthermore, alcohol beverage sales for off-site
consumption in conjunction with motor fuel sales exist in these zones.
Recommended Amendment to Section 22.10.030:
Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements For Office Zoning Districts, Table 2-5
LAND USE PERMIT REQUIREMENT BY DISTRICT
OP OB CO
RETAIL TRADE USES P P P
Alcohol beverage sales — off-site
Alcohol beverage sales — on-site MCUP MCUP MCUP
Service stations P P P
rel
Section 22.10.030, (pg. 111-21)
Current Standard:
Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements For Office Zoning Districts, Table 2-6
LAND USE PERMIT REQUIREMENT BY DISTRICT
C -t C-11 r-3
RETAIL TRADE USES p vp p
Alcohol beverage sales — off-site
Alcohol beverage sales — on-site MCUP MCUP MCUP
Service stations p p p
Issue/Reason:
The Development Code permits alcohol beverage sales for off-site consumption within the C-1, C-2
and C-3 Zones; and motor fuel sales within the C-1, C-2 and C-3 Zones. However, alcohol beverage
sales for off-site consumption in conjunction with the sale of motor fuel is not addressed except as
indicated in the current Table 2-6. The recommended amendment will permit alcohol beverage sales
for off-site consumption in conjunction with the sale of motor fuel within the C-1, C-2 and C-3 Zones
with a Conditional Use Permit. As a discretionary permit, the Conditional Use Permit enables the City
to ensure that potential impacts of a proposed use will not be detrimental to the public interest, health
and safety. It also enables the City to ensure that the proposed use will not be injurious to persons,
property, or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located as well as
review the location and design of the project. Furthermore, alcohol beverage sales for off-site
consumption in conjunction with the sale of motor fuel exist in these zones.
Recommended Amendment to Section 22.10.030:
Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for Office Zoning Districts, Table 2-6
LAND USE PERMIT REQUIREMENT BY DISTRICT
C-1 C-2 C-3
RETAIL TRADE USES p p p
Alcohol beverage sales — off-site
Alcohol beverage sales — on-site MCUP MCUP MCUP
L.Service stations p p p
Article III
Section 22.42.110, (pg. III -189)
Current Standard:
Required Setbacks -Accessory Uses and Structures, Table 3-15
Single -Family Detached Homes
Accessory Structure
Type of Setback
Required Setback
Swimming pool, spa, fish pond, outdoor play
Sides, rear
3 ft.
equipment
Street side
As required by the main
structure
Issue/Reason:
Section 22.16.090.C.4.c. (page III -16) — Setback Regulations and Exceptions read as follows: "c.
Swimming pools and spas. Swimming pools and spas are allowed in side and rear setbacks provided
they are not closer than five feet to any property line." The current table is not consistent with the
text. The intent was and still is to require that said accessory structures have a five-foot side and rear
yard setback from the property line. To attain the intent and be consistent with the text, an amendment
to the table is recommended.
Recommended Amendment to Section 22.42.110:
Required Setbacks -Accessory Uses and Structures, Table 3-15
Single-FamilySingie-Family Detached Homes
Accessory Structure
Type of Setback
Required Setback
Swimming pool, spa, fish pond, outdoor play
Sides, rear
equipment
Street side
As required by the main
structure
0
Section 22.42.060, Guest Houses (pg. III -176-177)
Current Standard:
B.6. Size and permit requirements. A guest house of 500 square feet of gross floor area may be
approved by the Director. Guest house in excess of 501 square feet may be approved by a Minor
Conditional Use Permit in compliance with Chapter 22.56 (Minor Conditional Use Permit);
B.10. Parcel coverage. The guest house, along with the main dwelling and any other accessory
structures, shall not exceed an overall parcel coverage of 40 percent.
Issues/Reasons:
11.6. For the City of Diamond Bar, the issue relates to requests for guest houses that are almost as large
as the main dwelling. As a result, it is possible to conclude that a second dwelling unit is the actual
request. With a maximum guest house square footage, two dwelling units on a single-family
residential lot will not occur, thereby protecting the integrity of single-family residential areas.
However, if an applicant has a need for a guest house larger than 1,200 square feet or 25 percent of the
main dwelling, the Conditional Use Permit reviewed by the Planning Commission can be utilized.
Also, when considering the appropriate square footage for a guest house, keep in mind that State law
allows a second unit or "Granny Flat" of 1,200 square feet.
The staff has surveyed several cities ( Fullerton, Covina, Glendora, Rancho Cucamonga, Chino Hills,
La Habra Heights, Beverly Hills Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estate, Temecula, and Calabasas)
regarding the maximum allowed square footage for guest houses. The allowed maximum square
footage varies. The cities surveyed utilized one or a combination of the following standards: 35 to 65
percent of the main dwelling unit's square footage with the higher percentages requiring a
discretionary permit; square footage of all accessory structures, including a guest house is permitted if
less than 50 percent of the main dwelling unit and lot coverage does not exceed 35 percent; maximum
square footage is not utilized, guest houses of any size are permitted as long as setback and lot
coverage requirements are met; and a recorded deed restriction specifying the intended use and the fact
that the guest house can not be rented. All cities that permit guest houses require that adequate parking
be provided. The following is a synopsis of city development standards for a guest house.
City of Glendora
• Guest house requires a Conditional Use Permit
• Maximum size 900 square feet
• Shall not exceed maximum lot coverage requirements
City of Covina
• Allows a guest house when square footage of all accessory structures is less than 50 percent of
main dwelling unit
• Lot coverage does not exceed 35 percent
City of Chino Hills
• Does not have a maximum allowed square footage for guest house
• Believes the lack of kitchen facilities tends to limit the request in general for guest houses
• Discretionary permit not required
E
City of Rancho Cucamonga
• Maximum 640 square feet, approved administratively
• Larger requires a Conditional Use Permit
City of Fullerton
• Permits any size guest house if setbacks and lot coverage requirements are met
• Requires a recorded deed restriction specifying intended use and that guest house can not be rented.
City of La Habra Heights
• A guest house is not permitted
City of Beverly Hills
• Three types of residential areas that permit a guest house/accessory structure
Flats which consists of smaller lots not within a hillside area
o Shall meet the required setbacks
o Not exceed a 14 foot height
o Not exceed 500 square feet
Hillside
o Maximum size governed by maximum cumulative floor area
o Not to exceed a maximum cumulative floor area of 15,000 square feet unless permitted by a
Planning Commission Hillside R-1 Permit
o Without a level pad, or a level pad of less than 750 square feet, and average slope of 20
percent or greater, the maximum cumulative floor area for all structures shall not exceed 20
percent of site area
o Site area of 15,000 square feet or less, maximum permitted cumulative floor area for all
structures shall not exceed 40 percent of level pad plus 10 percent of slope area
o Site area between 15,001 and 25,000 square feet, maximum permitted cumulative floor area
for all structures shall not exceed 37 percent of level pad plus 10 percent of slope area
o Site area between 25,001 and 30,000 square feet, maximum permitted cumulative floor area
for all structures shall not exceed 34 percent plus 10 percent of slope area
o Site area greater than 30,000 square feet, the maximum permitted cumulative floor area for
all structures shall not exceed 31 percent of level pad plus 10 percent of slope area
o Site area equals or exceeds two acres, cumulative floor area may exceed the limitations set
forth in items above with Hillside R-1 permit approval
Santa Monica Area
Must meet the required setbacks, not exceed a 14 foot height and all structures shall not
exceed a maximum 40 percent cumulative floor area plus 1,500 square feet
Meet all required development standards, city staff completes the review and approval
Exceptions to development standards requires a Planning Commission Hillside R-1 Permit
10
City of Rolling Hills
• Permits a guest house, maximum 800 square feet, on any residential lot with net lot coverage not
greater than 20 percent
• Occupied only by the property owner's guest
• Review and approval process is a Conditional Use Permit
• Main dwelling must maintain minimum three car garage
• Vehicle access or paved parking not allowed within 50 feet of the guest house
• Guest house can only be occupied 30 days within a six month time period
City admits this requirement is difficult to enforce
City of Rolling Hills Estates
• Does not have maximum square footage for a guest house
• Required to maintain same setbacks as main dwelling with an eight foot separation from main
dwelling
• Occupied only by temporary guests of the main dwelling
• Review and approval completed by city staff
City of Temecula
• Guest house/second dwelling unit utilize same development standards
• Review and approval completed by city staff
• Permitted in all residential districts
• Hillside areas, maximum 10 percent lot coverage permitted
• Other residential areas, lot coverage varies from 25 to 35 percent depending on the density
Parking requirements relate to number of bedrooms
Two bedrooms requiring one covered parking space
Three bedrooms requiring two covered parking spaces.
City of Calabasas
• Guest house same setbacks as an accessory structure
• Lot coverage, 50 percent for under a third of an acre
• Lot coverage, 35 percent for over a third of an acre
Reviewed and approved by city staff
B.10. The overall parcel coverage amendment of 30 percent is needed for consistency with Section
22.08.240, Residential Zoning District General Development Standards, Table 2-4.
Recommended Amendment to Section 22.42.060:
B.6. Size and permit requirements. A guest house of 500 square feet of
may be approved by a
Minor Conditional Use Permit in compliance with Chapter 22.56. (Minor Conditional Use Permit);
B.10. Parcel coverage. A guest house, along with the maindwelling and any other accessory
_
structures, shall not exceed an overall parcel coverage of percent.
11
Article IV
Section 22.44.020, (pg. IV -4)
Current Standard:
Authority for Land Use and Zoning Decisions, Table 4-1
Type of Permit or Decision
Di rector
Hearing
Planning
City
Officer
Commission
Council
Program
Planned Sign Pro
Final
A eal
Issue/Reason:
The Development Code refers to this process as a Comprehensive Sign Program. Therefore, the Table
needs to be amended to reflect the proper name of the process.
Recommended Amendment to Section 22.44.020:
Authority for Land Use and Zoning Decisions, Table 4-1
Type of Permit or Decision Director Hearing Planning City
Officer Commission Council
Si n Program Final Appeal
12
Article V
Section 22.68.030, Restrictions on Nonconforming Structures (pg. V-14)
Current Standard:
B. Changes to, or expansion of, a structure. The addition, enlargement, extension, reconstruction,
relocation or structural alteration of a nonconforming structure, may be allowed with Minor
Conditional Use Permit approval, in compliance with Chapter 22.56 (Minor Conditional Use Permit),
if the additions or improvements conform to applicable provisions of this Development Code and the
exterior limits of new construction do not exceed the applicable height limit or encroach further into
the setbacks than the comparable portion of the existing structure. The Hearing Officer may approve a
Minor Conditional Use Permit only if the following findings can be made, in addition to those
contained in Section 22.56.040 (Finding and Decisions).
Issues/Reasons:
The Planning Division staff receives many requests for additions less than 50 percent of the existing
residential structure. The issue relates to such requests when the existing setbacks are not consistent
with the new Development Code. In the past, the City has allowed additions (less than 50 percent of
the existing square footage, with the appropriate permits) to single-family residential structures as long
as the additions followed the development line of the existing residential structure. Such projects were
approved administratively in Diamond Bar. This practice is typical in many cities. Pursuant to the
above referenced Development Code section, additions of less than 50 percent and improvements as
minimal as a patio cover (that follow the development line of the existing residential structure) to a
legal non -conforming structure can only be approved through the Minor Conditional Use Permit
(MCUP) process that requires a public hearing by the Hearing Officer (Deputy City Manager). This
process is costly, burdensome and time consuming for the resident. In most cases, this process is not
necessary for a high quality evaluation for compliance with the Development Code and City Design
Guideline that are now in place. Furthermore, the Development Code grants the Director the ability to
elevate a development project to the next level of processing if necessary.
Recommended Amendment to Section 22.68.030:
The addition, enlargement, extension, reconstruction, relocation or structural alteration of a
nonconforming structure, may be allowed with Minor Conditional Use Permit approval, in compliance
with Chapter 22.56 (Minor Conditional Use Permit). The Hearing Officer may approve a Minor
Conditional Use Permit only if the following findings can be made, in addition to those contained in
Section 22.56.040 (Finding and Decisions).
13
2. An addition or improvement conforms to all oiher�upplicable provisions of this
Development Code; and
3. The exterior limits of new construction do not:exceed:the applicable height limit or
encroach further into the setbacks—than, the co»FprtEor=of the existing szticture
(follow the line of the existing structure,); hoxtever %� hel .sti�tg itie yarli-setbac s
less than five feet, the exterior limits of new construction shall m' diniain a minimum
five-foot side yard setback.
14
SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE
Article I
Section 21.01040, Applicability (pg. I-3)
Current Standard:
A. Subdivision approval required. All subdivisions within the City shall be authorized through
the approval of a map or other entitlement in compliance with Chapter 21.03 (Subdivision Map
Approval Requirements), and all other applicable provisions of this Title.
Issue/Reason:
The appropriate process is not discussed within the Subdivision Ordinance.
Recommended Amendment to Section 21.01040:
A. Subdivision approval required. All subdivisions within the City shall be authorized through
the approval of a map or other entitlement in compliance with Chapter 21.03 (Subdivision Ma
Approval Requirements), and all other a licable provisions of this Title
Article II
Section 22.20.110, Changes to Approved Tentative Map or Conditions, (pg. H-10)
Current Standard:
A. Limitation on allowed changes. Changes to a Tentative Map that may be requested by a
subdivider in compliance with this Section include major adjustments to the location of proposed lot
lines and improvements, and reductions in the number of approved lots (but no increase in the number
of approved lots), and any changes to the conditions of approval, consistent with the findings required
by Subsection D. of this Section. Other changes shall require the filing and processing of a new
Tentative Map.
Issue/Reason:
The Subdivision Ordinance needs clarification regarding the allowed changes to a Tentative Map.
Recommended Amendment to Section 22.20.110:
A. Limitation on allowed changes. Changes to a Tentative Map that may be requested by a
subdivider in compliance with this Section include major adjustments to the location of proposed lot
lines and improvements, and reductions in the number of approved lots (but no increase in the number
of approved lots), and any changes to the conditions of atmmval_ consistent with the f;wtl;noc ,p.n„;rp.t
new Tentative Map.
15
- ---- ------a -- r-�_.,...,_ .b — -
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15070, the
City has determined that a Negative Declaration is required for this project. Negative Declaration No.
99-9 has been prepared. The Negative Declaration Review period began November 23, 1999 and
ended December 12, 1999.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
Notice for this project was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune
on February 15, 2000. Pursuant to Planning and Zoning Law Government Code Section 65091 (a)(3),
if the number of property owners to whom a public hearing notice would be mailed is greater than
1,000, a local agency may provide notice by placing a display advertisement of at least one -eight page
in at least one newspaper of general circulation. The City placed a one -eight page display
advertisement in the above mentioned newspapers of general circulation. Furthermore, public notices
were posted in five public places (City Hall, South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond
Bar Library, Country Hills Town Center Community Board, and Vons/Savon Community Board) on
February 14, 2000.
Pre ared by:
An L g
Associate Planner
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2000-02;
2. Negative Declaration No. 99-9;
3. Planning Commission Minutes for December 14, 1999, January 11 and January 25, 2000; and
4. Correspondence dated January 3, 2000 from Samuel Tricoli.
16
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-02
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO. 99-1, SIIBDIVISION ORDINANCE
AMENDMENT NO. 99-1 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 99-9.
A. RECITALS.
1. The City of Diamond Bar has initiated an application for
Development Code Amendment No. 99-1, Subdivision
Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1 and Negative Declaration
No. 99-9. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject
Development Code Amendment, Subdivision Ordinance
Amendment and Negative Declaration shall be referred to
as the "Application".
2. The Community and Development Services Department has
determined that the following existing development
standards within the Development Code require
modification in order to implement the General Plan:
Article II, Sections 22.06.040 -Table 2-2, 22.08.240 -
Table 2-4 and 22.10.030 -Tables 2-5 and 2-6;
Article III, Sections 22.42.110 -Table 3-15 and 22.42.060-
B.6. and B.10.;
Article IV, Section 22.44.020, Table 4-1; and
Article V, Section 22.68.030.
3. The Community and Development Services Department has
determined that the following existing standards within
the Subdivision Ordinance require modification in order
to implement the General Plan:
Article I, Section 22.01.040-A.; and
Article II, Section 22.20.110-A.
4. Pursuant to Planning and Zoning Law Government Code
Section 65091 (a) (3) requiring at least a one -eight page
display advertisement in at least one newspaper of
general circulation, on November 23, 1999, notification
1
of the public hearing for this Application was provided
in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily
Bulletin newspapers. Furthermore, on November 22, 1999,
public notices were posted in five public places (City
Hall, South Coast Air Quality Management District,
Diamond Bar Library, Country Hills Town Center Community
Board, and Vons/Savon Community Board.)
5. On December 14, 1999, the Planning Commission of the City
of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on
the Application. On December 14, 1999, the public
hearing was continued to January 11, 2000. On
January 11, 2000, the Planning Commission directed staff
to prepare a resolution recommending approval of the
Application to City Council. The public hearing was
continued to and was concluded on January 25, 2000.
6. Following due' consideration of public testimony, staff
analysis, and the Commission's deliberations, the
Planning Commission has determined that Development Code
Amendment No. 99-1 and Subdivision Ordinance Amendment
No. 99-1 attached hereto as Exhibit "A" implements the
Strategies of the General Plan.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows:
1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that
all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of
this Resolution are true and correct.
2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Initial
Study review and Negative Declaration No. 99-9 have been
prepared by the City of Diamond Bar in compliance with
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) of 1970 and guidelines promulgated thereunder,
pursuant to Section 15070. Furthermore, Negative
Declaration No. 99-9 reflects the independent judgement
of the City of Diamond Bar.
3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and
determines that, having considered the record as a whole
including the findings set forth below, and changes and
alterations which have been incorporated into and
conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the
application, there is no evidence before this Planning
K
Commission that the project proposed herein will have the
potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or
the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon
substantial evidence, this Planning Commission hereby
rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in
Section 753.5 (d) of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations.
4. Based on.the findings and conclusions set forth above, the
Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City
Council adopt Development Code Amendment No. 99-1 and
Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No.99-1 attached hereto as
Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference.
The Planning Commission shall:
(a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
(b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this
Resolution to the City Council forthwith.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH OF JANUARY 2000, BY THE
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
BY:
Steve Tye Chairman
I, James DeStefano, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and
adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a
regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 25th day of
January 2000, by the following vote:
AYES: Tye, Nelson, Ruzicka, Kuo
NOES: None
ABSENT: McManus
ABSTAIN: None
ATTEST: WM-10
James DeS efano, Secretary
3
CITY OF DIAMOND HARD
Exhibit "A"
ZONING CODE A14ENDNEW NO. 99-1
ARTICLE II
Amendment to Section 22.06.040, Zoning Consistency Matrix, Table 2-2
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT
APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT
CODE STANDARD
Rural Residential (RR)
R-1 40,000
Rural Residential (RR)
Max 1 DU/AC
R-1 20,000
Setbacks Required
Low Density Residential
RPD 20,000
Low Density Residential
(RL) Max 3 DU/AC
R-1 15,000
20 ft. from the
20 ft. from the
R-1 10,000
property line or
property line or
RPD 10,000
buildable pad on a
R -A 10,000
buildable pad on a
R-1 9,000
descending slope
descending slope
R-1 8,500
whichever is
whichever is
PA -2 /SP
Amendment to Section 22.08.240, Residential Zoning District General
Development Standards, Table 2-4
Development
RR
RL
RIM
Feature
Setbacks Required
Rear
25 ft. from the
20 ft. from the
20 ft. from the
property line or
property line or
property line or
buildable pad on a
buildable pad on a
buildable pad on a
descending slope
descending slope
descending slope
whichever is
whichever is
whichever is
applicable
I applicable
I applicable
Lot Coverage
1 30 percent
1 30 percent
1 30 percent
1
Amendment to Section 22.10.030, Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements
For Office Zoning Districts, Table 2-5
LAND USE PERMIT REQUIREMENT BY DISTRICT
nP nR ('n
RETAIL TRADE USES
P
P
P
Alcohol beverage sales - off-site
5 ft.
outdoor play equipment
Alcohol beverage sales - off-site - in
CUP
CUP
CUP
conjunction with the sale of motor fuel
the main
Alcohol beverage sales - on-site
MCUP
MCUP
MCUP
Amendment to Section 22.10.030, Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements
for Office Zoning Districts, Table 2-6
LAND USE
PERMIT REQUIREMENT BY DISTRICT
C-1 C-2 C-3
RETAIL TRADE USES
P
P
P
Alcohol beverage sales - off-site
5 ft.
outdoor play equipment
Alcohol beverage sales - off-site - in
CUP
CUP
CUP
conjunction with the sale of motor fuel
the main
Alcohol beverage sales - on-site
MCUP
MCUP
MCUP
Article III
Amendment to Section 22.42.110, Required Setbacks -Accessory Uses and
Structures, Table 3-15
Sincle-Family Detached Rees
Accessory Structure
Type of Setback
Required Setback
Swimming pool, spa, fish pond,
Sides, rear
5 ft.
outdoor play equipment
Street side
As required by
the main
structure
Amendment to Section 22.42.060, Guest Houses
B.6. Size and permit requirements. A guest house of 500 square feet
of gross floor area may be approved by the Director. Guest houses in
excess of 501 square feet and not exceeding 1,200 square feet or up
to 25 percent of the main dwelling's square footage, whichever is
less, may be approved by a Minor Conditional Use Permit in compliance
with Chapter 22.56 (Minor Conditional Use Permit).
B.10. Parcel coverage. The guest house, along with the main dwelling
and any other accessory structures, shall not exceed an overall
parcel coverage of 30 percent.
Article IV
Amendment to Section 22.44.020, Authority for Land Use and Zoning
Decisions, Table 4-1
Type of Permit or Decision
Director
Rearing
Officer
Planning
Ccamission
City
Council
Comprehensive Sign Program
Final
Appeal
Article V
Amendment to Section 22.68.030, Restrictions on Non -conforming
Structures
The addition, enlargement, extension, reconstruction, relocation or
structural alteration of a nonconforming structure, may be allowed
with Minor Conditional Use Permit approval, in compliance with
Chapter 22.56 (Minor Conditional Use Permit). The Hearing Officer
may approve a Minor Conditional Use Permit only if the following
findings can be made, in addition to those contained in
Section 22.56.040 (Finding and Decisions).
In the case of residential dwelling units, the Director may approve
the following if:
1. An addition or improvement is less than 50.percent of the
existing square footage of all structures on site and lot
coverage does not exceed 30 percent as listed in Table 2-4;
2. An addition or improvement conforms to all other applicable
provisions of this Development Code; and
3. The exterior limits of new construction do not exceed the
applicable height limit or encroach further into the setbacks
than the comparable portion of the existing structure (follow
the development line of the existing structure); however, if the
existing side yard setback is less than five feet, the exterior
limits of new construction shall maintain a minimum five-foot
side yard setback.
3
SUBDIVISION CODE AMENDIUM NO. 99-1
Article I
Amendment to Section 21.01.040, Applicability
A. Subdivision approval required. All subdivisions within the City
shall be authorized through the approval of a map or other
entitlement in compliance with Chapter 21.03 (Subdivision Map
Approval Requirements), and all other applicable provisions of this
Title. All subdivision applications shall follow the same process as
a Development Code Amendment.
Article II
Amendment to Section 22.20.110, Changes to &pproved Tentative Map or
Conditions
A. Limitation on allowed changes. Changes to a Tentative Map that
may be requested by a subdivider in compliance with this Section
include major adjustments to the location of proposed lot lines and
improvements, and reductions in the number of approved lots (but no
increase in the number of approved lots), and any changes to the
conditions of approval, consistent with the findings required by
Subsection D. of this Section. The City Engineer, except as
otherwise provided by this Section may approve said changes to a
Tentative Map. Other changes shall require the filing and processing
of a new Tentative Map.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGZTM 96
CITY OF DIAMOND BAA
1. LYNDA BURGESS, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY
OF DIAMOND BAR, DO HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER
PENALTY OF PERJURY IINDER THE LAWS OF THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE FORGOING TO BE A
FULL, TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL AS SAME APPEARS ON FILE IN MY
OFFICE.
IN WITNESS WHER%UF, I HAVE HEREUNTO SET
MY HAND AND AFFIXED THE SEAL OF THE CITY
OF D 1�4 ND BAR, THIS DAY
OF ,g-0�7
LYNDA BURGESS, CITY CLERK
v .__[tsJJ"
�-tom._
4
DECEMBER 14, 1999 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
8. PUBLIC HEARING:
8.1 Development Code Amendment No. 99-1 and Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1
(pursuant to Code Section 22.44) is a request to amend the following Articles of the
Development Code:
Presentation by AssocP/Lungu.
Article II
Zoning Consistency Matrix, Section 22.6.040, Table 2-2, amend to read as follows: RPD -
20,000, R-1-20,000 and R-1-15,000 - Low Density Residential RL); and PA-21SP - RL.
Chair/Tye asked if the intent is to drop RPD -20,000, R-1-20,000 and R-1-15,000 down from the
current location of Rural Residential to Low Density Residential RL.
AssocP/Lungu responded that RPD -20,000 and R-1-15,000 will drop down to Low Density
Residential instead of Rural Residential for consistency with the General Plan. R-1-20,000 zones
exist currently.
DCM/DeStefano explained that a large portion of the area around South Point Middle School
area is zoned R-1-15,000. The area along Longview Drive, Summitridge Drive, some portions of
Goldrush Drive and those general areas surrounding the Ralphs Shopping Center is zoned RPD -
20,000. However, those lots are clearly not 20,000 square foot lots. The RPD was a category of
zoning that the County permitted which allowed for smaller lot sizes and changes in street
configurations in turn for open space being granted to the homeowners association, the City, etc.
These two areas have been encumbered with a development code that says you shall use the
Rural Residential Development Code standards. And those standards were primarily designed
for "The Country Estates" properties that are already at 1/2 or one acre or greater in size. Rural
Residential requires greater setbacks. This matrix requires greater development setbacks than
what is seemingly achievable within these currently developed areas. Therefore, staff is
suggesting that this Zoning Consistency Matrix Table 2-2 be revised which will eliminate the
need for variances and other development permits that would seemingly be unnecessary with this
proposed change.
Residential Zoning District General Development Standards, Section 22.08.240, Table 2-4,
modify the rear yard setback from 20 to 25 feet in the RR Zone; modify the rear yard setback
from 15 to 20 feet in the RL and RLM Zones; and add Lot Coverage, maximum 30 percent
within the RR, RL and RLM Zones.
C/McManus asked if the 30 percent is calculated strictly on the buildable pad.
AssocP/Lungu responded that the 30 percent is calculated on the entire lot area. Lot coverage
would include the main structure and any accessory structures including sheds, guest houses,
patio covers, balconies, etc. as well as, access to the site (driveway).
DECEMBER 14, 1999 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
Chair/Tye asked if 30 percent coverage is reasonable in the case of a site that has unusable slope.
AssocP/Lungu indicated that buildable pad areas that have been approved in the past seem to be
large enough to accommodate larger homes. These houses may have a footprint of 5,000 but
may have a total square footage of 10,000 square feet because of a second floor.
Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for Office Zoning Districts, Section 22.10.030, Table
2-5, amend to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages (off site consumption) in conjunction with
the sale of motor fuel with a Conditional Use Permit in the OP and CO Zones.
C/Ruzicka asked if this amendment would address the problem with respect to the gas station at
Pathfinder Road adjacent to Diamond Bar High School.
AssocP/Lungu stated that the old code under which the project was processed addressed the issue
and allowed the use in the zone with a discretionary use permit. The current code does not
address that issue at all.
DCM/DeStefano stated that the code addresses the issue in the sense that no alcohol sales for off
site consumption are permitted within 150 feet of any school. Therefore, that particular location
will not be able to receive a permit for the sale of alcohol unless the Development Code is
amended accordingly. The project came before the Planning Commission because of the
combination of uses proposed under the old development code. The project was ultimately
denied. As a result of the denial, the Planning Commission and the City Council began to
consider numerical distances from schools and certain other land uses. Staff conducted a detail
study on the matter and ultimately, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council
adopt the 150 feet.
Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for CommerciaUlndustrial Zoning Districts, Section
22.10.030, Table 2-6, amend to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages (off site consumption) in
conjunction with the sale of motor fuel with a Conditional Use Permit in the C-1, C-2 and C-3
Zones.
Article III
Required Setbacks -Accessory Uses and Structures, Section 22.42.110, Table 3-15, amend the
three-foot rear and side yard setback to five feet for swimming pools and similar accessory
structures.
Guest Houses, Section 22.42.060, amend to allow guest houses up to 25 percent of the main
residence, not to exceed 1,200 square feet with a Minor Conditional Use Permit; and to amend
overall parcel coverage to 30 percent.
C/McManus asked if the amendment should say "whichever is the lesser of the two."
DECEMBER 14,1999 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
Chair/Tye agreed that the wording should encompass the City's objective.
AssocP/Lungu said she believes the City's objective is to preserve the integrity of a single family
residential zone and not be creating another house on a lot.
Chair/Tye stated that the way the amendment reads, a home of 22,000 square feet could add a
guest home of 5,000 square feet. Therefore, the wording should be changed to reflect the intent.
DCM/DeStefano stated that if the Commission feels that a guest house of 2500 square feet for a
home of 10,000 is too large, staff can study this matter further to determine what other
jurisdictions are doing for the larger estate properties as well as, other large properties in this
community. There may be different answers for different zones.
The Commission asked staff to consider this matter further in order to restrict the potential size
of the structure.
Significant Ecological Area, add Section 22.22.160, to discuss development within a
Significant Ecological Area
AssocP/Lungu suggested that this matter be discussed at the January 11, 2000 meeting.
Article IV
Review Authority, Section 22.44.020, Table 4-1, amend Planned Sign Program to
Comprehensive Sign Program.
Article V
Restrictions on Nonconforming Structures, Section 22.68.030, amend to allow additions not to
exceed 500 square feet if the exterior limits of the new construction do not exceed the
applicable height or encroach further into the setbacks than the comparable portions of the
existing structure.
C/Ruzicka voiced concern that these smaller encroachments could be injurious to the neighbors.
AssocP/Lungu stated that if there is a concern about the proposed project, the Hearing Officer
can refer the project to the Planning Commission for public hearing.
DCM/DeStefano indicated that the Planning Commission may wish to further define staff's
guidelines and/or limit its discretion.
VC/Nelson asked if a provision exists to notify neighbors prior to the Administrative Review
process.
AssocP/Lungu explained that if the proposed project is within the parameters of staff's approval,
the neighbors are not notified.
DECEMBER 14,1999 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
VC/Nelson suggested the Commission consider requiring public notification for all projects.
DCM/DeStefano pointed out that such notification creates opportunities for further confusion
and personal vendettas. In addition, the City's legal counsel has found such notification to not be
supportable.
VC/Nelson said he sees little difference in public notification for the neighbors adjacent to the
Evangelical Free Church who may be bothered by light and other conditions, for instance, and for
neighbors adjacent to single family residences who may encounter the same conditions.
AssocP/Lungu pointed out that the code now contains guideline regarding lighting which the
code did not previously contain.
Chair/Tye said that as a resident, he would want to know about possible construction of a lighted
basketball court or tennis court next door to his property.
DCM/DeStefano reiterated that if the Commission would like to include a provision that under
certain circumstances, that notice is given or that a hearing be conducted, that can be
accomplished.
C/Ruzicka said that the current staff has a sense of judgement about these issues. However, in
future years, that may not hold true and he believes that there ought to be language within the
Development Code that will assist not only current staff, but future staff as to what is appropriate
for the situation in order to safeguard the City's neighborhoods. He stated that when residents
improve their own family's style of living it is possible to infringe upon neighbors. There ought
to be safeguards built into the code to insure that these kinds of things do not occur. He cited
examples of projects that have occurred in his neighborhood: 20 houses down from his a
neighbor wanted to nearly double the size of his house; 10 doors down on the opposite site of the
street a health facility was established and his next door neighbor built an addition onto his house
that infringed upon the privacy of his backyard. Staff needs to have questions directed toward
the applicant that asks if the applicant has considered how their project will affect their
neighbors.
C/McManus asked whether verbiage is included that guarantees the peaceful enjoyment of ones
home to the extent that neighbors will not impinge upon that enjoyment with view, air, light, and
noise pollution.
DCM/DeStefano responded that there is language to that effect in different parts of the code.
The language may not be specific enough because it winds up being a judgement call on the part
of the person reviewing the project.
VC/Nelson proposed that staff conduct a defined compatibility analysis. If the project is
determined to exceed the threshold, then notification is appropriate.
DECEMBER 14,1999 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
DCM/DeStefano stated that "the threshold" is the part that is missing. In lieu of a defined
threshold, the threshold becomes the judgement of the staff which will change from time to time
as people change and philosophies change.
C/Ruzicka said he believes that as long as the code is being amended, language should be
inserted to further assist staff.
AssocP/Lungu confirmed that the intent of the proposed amendment is to eliminate the Minor
Conditional Use Permit for residential areas under certain circumstances. The amendment may
need to be reworded in order to make it clearer.
Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1 (pursuant to Code Sections 21.02) is a request to amend
the following Articles of the Subdivision Ordinance:
Article I
Applicability, Section 21.01.040, amend to add that all subdivisions within the City shall
follow the same process as a Development Code Amendment.
Article II
Changes to Approved Tentative Map or Conditions, Section 21.20.110, amend the process to
allow proposed changes to a Tentative Map or conditions of approval to be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer, except as otherwise provided by this Section.
PROPERTY ADDRESS: Citywide
APPLICANT: City of Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Chair/Tye opened the public hearing.
There was no one present who wished to speak on this matter.
C/Ruzicka moved, C/McManus seconded, to continue the public hearing for Development Code
Amendment No. 99-1 and Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1 to January 11, 2000. Motion
carried 5-0 by Roll Call vote.
Chair/Tye continued the public hearing to January 11, 2000.
JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
7.1 Development Code Amendment No. 99-1 and Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1
(Continued from December 14, 1999).
Development Code Amendment No. 99-1 (pursuant to Code Section 22.44) is a request to amend
the following Articles of the Development Code:
Presentation by AssocP/Lungu. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the
public hearing, receive public comments, discuss the recommended amendments as indicated in
staffs report and direct staff to prepare a resolution recommending approval of the amendments
to the City Council to be forwarded to the Commission on January 25, 2000. Additionally, staff
recommends that the discussion on the Significant Ecological Area be continued to January 25,
2000.
Article II
Zoning Consistency Matrix, Section 22.6.040, Table 2-2, amend to read as follows: RPD -
20,000, R-1-20,000 and R-1-15,000 - Low Density Residential RL); and PA-21SP - RL.
Residential Zoning District General Development Standards, Section 22.08.240, Table 2-4,
modify the rear yard setback from 20 to 25 feet in the RR Zone; modify the rear yard setback
from 15 to 20 feet in the RL and RLM Zones; and add Lot Coverage, maximum 30 percent
within the RR, RL and RLM Zones.
Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for Office Zoning Districts, Section 22.10.030, Table
2-5, amend to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages (off site consumption) in conjunction with
the sale of motor fuel with a Conditional Use Permit in the OP and CO Zones.
Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts, Section
22.10.030, Table 2-6, amend to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages (off site consumption) in
conjunction with the sale of motor fuel with a Conditional Use Permit in the C-1, C-2 and C-3
Zones.
Article III
Required Setbacks -Accessory Uses -and Structures, Section 22.42.110, Table 3-15, amend the
three-foot rear and side yard setback to five feet for swimming pools and similar accessory
structures.
Guest Houses, Section 22.42.060, amend to allow guest houses up to 25 percent of the main
residence, not to exceed 1,200 square feet with a Minor Conditional Use Permit; and to amend
overall parcel coverage to 30 percent.
JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
Significant Ecological Area, add Section 22.22.160, to discuss development within a
Significant Ecological Area.
AssocP/Lungu suggested that this matter be discussed at the January 25, 2000 meeting.
Article IV
Review Authority, Section 22.44.020, Table 4-1, amend Planned Sign Program to
Comprehensive Sign Program.
Article V
Restrictions on Nonconforming Structures, Section 22.68.030, amend to allow additions not to
exceed 500 square feet if the exterior limits of the new construction do not exceed the
applicable height or encroach further into the setbacks than the comparable portions of the
existing structure.
Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1 (pursuant to Code Sections 21.02) is a request to amend
the following Articles of the Subdivision Ordinance:
Article I
Applicability, Section 21.01.040, amend to add that all subdivisions within the City shall
follow the same process as a Development Code Amendment.
Article II
Changes to Approved Tentative Map or Conditions, Section 21.20.110, amend the process to
allow proposed changes to a Tentative Map or conditions of approval to be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer, except as otherwise provided by this Section.
PROPERTY ADDRESS: Citywide
APPLICANT: City of Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
VC/Nelson suggested that he should recuse himself from the January 25, 2000, discussion of the
Significant Ecological Area issue because the firm he works with is conducting an update for
Los Angeles County.
JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
DCM/DeStefano responded that it is likely that VC/Nelson should recuse himself. He will investigate
the matter further and keep VC/Nelson advised.
Chair/Tye re -opened the public hearing.
There was no one present who wished to speak on this matter.
Chair/Tye referred to a letter addressed to the City from Samuel C. Tricoli which cited Article V,
Section 22.68.030 and asked that staff explain how these changes will effect Mr. Tricoli's concerns.
AssocP/Lungu responded that Mr. Tricoli wants to add 200 square feet to his home. Apparently,
Mr. Tricoli has a legal non -conforming issue because his house is not built to the current setback
requirements. In order for Mr. Tricoli to proceed with his 200 square foot addition, he needs to go
through the public hearing process, notify property owners within a 500 foot radius of his project site,
post his site with a 4 x 6 foot board advertising what he intends to do on his site for a minimum of
10 days prior to the hearing and through the 10 calendar day appeal period and provide a $1,000 deposit
to the City. Mr. Tricoli is disturbed because he believes that a 200 square foot addition is minimal and
he does not understand why the City would require him to go through this process.
Chair/Tye said he is not sure that he would disagree with Mr. Tricoli.
C/Ruzicka asked if the proposed amendment will solve Mr. Tricoli's concern.
AssocP/Lungu indicated that if the Commission recommends approval of this amendment and the City
Council adopts this amendment, Mr. Tricoli's problem is solved because it will not be necessary for him
to go through the Minor Conditional Use Permit public hearing process time and related costs.
C/Ruzicka asked staff to identify the sections in the Development Code that substantiates a negative
impact on surrounding uses will be minimized.
AssocP/Lungu identified specific sections of the Development Code that would support that concern.
C/Ruzicka moved, VC/Nelson seconded, to prepare a resolution recommending approval of the
amendments as outlined in staffs report for Development Code Amendment No. 99-1 and Subdivision
Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1 to the City Council to be forwarded to the Commission on January 25,
2000 for final approval, and to continue the public hearing on the Significant Ecological Area discussion
to January 25, 2000. Motion carried 5-0 by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kuo, McManus, Ruzicka, VC/Nelson, Chair/Tye
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
JANUARY 25, 2000 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
7. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
7.1 Development Code Amendment No. 99-1 and Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1
(Continued from January 11, 2000).
Development Code Amendment No. 99-1 (pursuant to Code Section 22.44) is a request to
amend the following Articles of the Development Code:
Zoning Consistency Matrix, Section 22.6 040, Table 2-2, amend to read as follows: RPD -
20,000, R-1-20,000 and R-1-15,000 - Low Density Residential RL); and PA-21SP - RL.
Residential Zoning District General Development Standards, Section 22.08.240, Table 2-4,
modify the rear yard setback from 20 to 25 feet in the RR Zone; modify the rear yard setback
from 15 to 20 feet in the RL and RLM Zones; and add Lot Coverage, maximum 30 percent
within the RR, RL and RLM Zones.
Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for Office Zoning Districts, Section 22.10.030, Table
2-5, amend to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages (off site consumption) in conjunction with
the sale of motor fuel with a Conditional Use Permit in the OP and CO Zones.
Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for CommerciallIndustrial Zoning Districts, Section
22.10.030, Table 2-6, amend to allow the sale of alcoholic beverages (off site consumption) in
cor{junction with the sale of motor fuel with a Conditional Use Permit in the C-1, C-2 and C-3
Zones.
Article III
Required Setbacks Accessory Uses and Structures, Section 22.42.110, Table 3-15, amend the
three-foot rear and side yard setback to five feet for swimming pools and similar accessory
structures.
Guest Houses, Section 22.42.060, amend to allow guest houses up to 25 percent of the main
residence, not to exceed 1,200 square feet with a Minor Conditional Use Permit; and to amend
overall parcel coverage to 30 percent.
Significant Ecological Area, add Section 22.22.160, to discuss development within a
Significant Ecological Area.
AssocP/Lungu suggested that this matter be discussed at the January 25, 2000 meeting.
JANUARY 25, 2000 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
Article IV
Review Authority, Section 22.44.020, Table ¢I, amend Planned Sign Program to
Comprehensive Sign Program.
Article V
Restrictions on Nonconforming Structures, Section 22.68.030, amend to allow additions not to
exceed 500 square feet if the exterior limits of the new construction do not exceed the
applicable height or encroach further into the setbacks than the comparable portions of the
existing structure.
Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1 (pursuant to Code Sections 21.02) is a request to amend
the following Articles of the Subdivision Ordinance:
Article I
Applicability, Section 21.01.040, amend to add that all subdivisions within the City shall
follow the same process as a Development Code Amendment.
Article II
Changes to Approved Tentative Map or Conditions, Section 21.20.110, amend the process to
allow proposed changes to a Tentative Map or conditions of approval to be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer, except as otherwise provided by this Section.
PROPERTY ADDRESS: Citywide
APPLICANT: City of Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Presentation by AssocP/Lungu. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Resolution
No. 2000-2, recommending that the City Council adopt Development Code Amendment No. 99-1,
Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1, and Negative Declaration No. 99-9, Findings of Fact and
conditions of approval as listed within the resolution.
Chair/Tye re -opened the public hearing.
There being no one present who wished to speak on this matter, Chair/Tye closed the public hearing.
JANUARY 25, 2000 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
C/Ruzicka moved, VC/Nelson seconded, to approve Resolution No. 2000-2 recommending that the City
Council adopt Development Code Amendment No. 99-1, Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1,
and Negative Declaration No. 99-9, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within the
Resolution. Motion carried 4-0 by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kuo, McManus, Ruzicka, VC/Nelson, Chair/Tye
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: McManus
Sent Via E -Mail
City of Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley
Suite 190
Diamond Bar, California 91765
Planning Department
Attention: Ann Lungu
Re: Code Section 22.68.030
Restrictions on Non -Conforming Structures
January 03, 2000
'00 AN -4 .18 :29
I am taking the time to write this letter to express my displeasure about Code Section
22.68.030 and how it affects my plans to add approximately 200 square feet to my
residence at 1527 Strawflower Lane, Diamond Bar.
With the addition of a baby girl and the need for some additional living space, my wife
and I decided to add on to our home. Anyone that has ever had to go through the add-on
process can understand just how important it is to keep a handle on the purse strings.
Well, right from the get -go we were faced with a financial obstacle presented to us from
the City of Diamond Bar in the form of Code Section 22.68.030.
Imagine this...
1) You want to add some living space to your home.
2) Your room addition is well within the designated set -backs.
3) The City Planning Commission requires a variance and more than a thousand dollars
because your home (an existing structure) is not within the set -backs of a new code.
WHO WROTE THIS CODE?
WHAT IN THE HELL WERE THEY THINKING?
WHY SHOULD AN EXISTING STRUCTURE THAT WAS A PART OF A PLANNED
COMMUNITY AND BUILT MORE THAN 23 YEARS AGO, BE SUBJECT TO A
NEW CODE RESTRICTION? (Grandfather Provision/Clause?)
When my contractor went to the Diamond Bar Planning Department he was told that my
room addition required a variance because the original structure was non -conforming (i.e.
did not meet the new set -back requirements dictated under Code Section 22.68.030). He
was also told that I had to pay more than a thousand dollars for such variance and that I
had to put a four -foot sign in front of my property explaining that I have requested such a
variance. GIVE ME A BREAK... WHAT KIND OF A SCAM IS THIS?
He couldn't believe it and tried explaining it to me. I couldn'tbelieve it either so I called
the Planning Department myself. I figured that there must have been some misunder-
Page 2 of 2
standing because no code could be that stupid! Well, to make a long story short,
someone didn't think through Code Section 22.68.030 and it desperately needs to be
amended.
Someone please explain why I must get a variance for a room addition that is well within
the current setbacks. Why should a structure built and approved nearly 23 years ago be
subject to a new law? If you think that this makes sense, consider having all of the
Diamond Bar residents with non -conforming structures make four -foot signs and pay one
thousand dollars to the City of Diamond Bar. What a terrific money -making scam this
would be for the City of Diamond Bar.
Code Section 22.68.030 should be an embarrassment to its author. Please put some
sanity into your review process and fix this mistake and do so immediately for the
residents of Diamond Bar.
Sincerely yours,
Samuel C. Tricoli
Diamond Bar Resident
PLEASE BRING YOUR
DEVELOPMENT CODE
SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AMENDMENT
to
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 99-9
for
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO. 99-1
AND
SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE NO. 99-1
City of Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190
DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CA 91765
Environmental Finding
Initial Study (Environmental
Information and Environmental
Checklist)
November 1, 1999
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
NEGATIVE DECLARATION 99-1
Project Description and Location
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
FOR INITIAL STUDY
Pursuant to Guidelines for California Environmental Quality Act § 15063 (f), this form, along with
the Environmental Information Form completed by the applicant, meets the requirements for an
Initial Study.
This form is comprised of five parts:
Part 1 Background
Part 2 Summary of Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
Part 3 Determination
Part 4 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Part 5 Discussion of Environmental Impacts
PART 1 -BACKGROUND
1. City Project Number: Development Code Amendment No. 99-1 and Subdivision Ordinance
Amendment No. 99-1
2. Project Address/Location: Citywide
3. Date of Environmental Information Form submittal: August 24, 1999
4. Applicant: City of Diamond Bar
Address: 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190
City/State/Zip: Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Phone: (909) 396-5676
Fax: 909) 861-3117
5
Property Owner
Address: N/A
City/State/Zip:
Phone: N/A
Fax: N/A
N/A. Citvwide
N/A
6. Lead Agency: City of Diamond Bar
Contact: James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager and Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner
1
Address: 21660E Copley Drive, Suite 190
City/State/Zip: Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Phone: (909) 396-5676
Fax: (909) 861-3117
7. General Plan Designation: Variable
8. Zoning: Variable
9. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to
later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for
its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary).
The nroiect involves amending the following Articles of the City's Development Code:
Article II• Zoning Districts and Allowable Land Uses
Article III: Site Planning and General Development Standards
Article IV • Land Use and Development Permit Procedures
Article V • Development Code Administration
Article VI: Development Code Definitions
The project also involves amending the following Articles of the City's Subdivision
Ordinance:
Article I: Purpose and Applicability of Subdivision Ordinance
Article Il: Subdivision Review Procedures
2
The City's Development Code was adopted on November 3, 1998 and became effective
on December 3, 1998. The City's Subdivision Ordinance was adopted on February 2,
1999 and became effective on March 2, 1999. The Development Code and Subdivision
Ordinance embodies regulations and the procedures and requirements for development
applications while implementing the goals, policies, and strategies of the Diamond Bar
General Plan. After implementing the Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance for
several months, the City is aware that certain areas of both codes require amending to suit
the development needs of Diamond Bar.
10. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings:
The Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance's proposed amendments will apply on
a Citv-wide basis.
11. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement.):
No other public agency approvals are required.
12. List City of Diamond Bar related applications for this project that must be processed
simultaneously:
No other City of Diamond Bar related applications are required.
13. List prior projects for this parcel:
None.
PART 2 - SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the
following pages.
1.
Land Use and Planning
_ 9.
Hazards _
2.
Population and Housing
_ 10.
Noise _
3.
Geologic Problems
_ 11.
Public Services _
4.
Water
_ 12.
Utilities & Service
Systems _
5.
Air Quality
_ 13.
Aesthetics _
6.
Transportation/
Circulation
_ 14.
Cultural Resources _
7.
Biological Resources
_ 15.
Recreation _
8.
Energy & Mineral
16.
Mandatory Findings
Resources
of Significance _
4
PART 3 - DETERMINATION Project Number: DCA No. 99-1/SOA No. 99-1
To be completed by Lead Agency
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.
X
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 on
an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least
one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as
described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" OR "potentially
significant unless mitigated. " An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it
must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
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 all potentially significant effects (a) have
been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been
avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that
are imposed upon the proposed project.
Ann J. Lungu
Printed Name
5
November 1, 1999
Date
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
NEGATIVE DECLARATION 99-1
Initial Study
(Environmental Information and
Environmental Checklist)
PART 4 - EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses
following each question. A No Impact answer is adequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should
be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g.
the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific
screening analysis.)
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as
on-site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as
well as operational impacts.
3. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect
is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the
determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation
of mitigation measures has reduced an affect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a
"Less than Significant Impact. " The lead agency must described the mitigation measures
and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation
measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced).
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063 (c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section SVII at the end of the
checklist.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information
sources for potential impact (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a
previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference
to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached,
and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
1.1
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
7
Potentially
Significant
Potentially
Unless Less Than
Significant
Mitigation Significant No
Impact
Incorporated Impact Impact
1 LAID USE. ANI�,ePLA1'NNEENG. Would the project -.1,
a.
Conflict with General Plan
designation or zoning?
X
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.1 thru 1.1.10 (I-10);
b.
Conflict with applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural
community plan? _
_ _ X
Source #s: General Plan, Strategy
1. 2.2 (III -11);
C.
Be incompatible with existing land
uses in the vicinity?
X
Source #s: General Plan, Strategy
2.2.1 (I-19);
d.
Disrupt or divide the physical
arrangement of an established
community (including a low-income
X
or minority community)?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategy
1.2.1 thru 1.2.4 (I-13);
2 POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the, project:
a.
Displace substantial numbers of
people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
X
elsewhere?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.4 &1.1.5 (11-26);
b.
Induce substantial growth in an area _
_ _ X
7
either directly or indirectly (e.g.
through projects in an undeveloped
area or extension of major
infrastructure)?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategy
1.1.5 (II -26);
C. Displace substantial numbers of
existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategy
2.2.1 (II -28);
3. GEOLOGIC . TROBLEMS. Would the
potential impacts=involving:
a. Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based
on other substantial evidence of
known fault?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.2 & 1.1.3 (IV -9);
b. Strong seismic ground shaking?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.2 & 1.1.3 (IV -9);
C. Seismic -related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.2 & 1.1.3 (IV -9);
d. Landslides?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.2.1 thru 1.2.3 (IV -9 & 10);
e. Substantial soil erosion or the loss of
top soil?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.1 thru 1.1.3 (IV -9);
Q
X
0
X
X
X
X
f. A geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or would become unstable
as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on -or off-site X
landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.1 thru 1.1.3 (IV -9);
g. Expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building
Code (1994), creating substantial X
risks to life or property?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.1 thru 1.1.3 (IV -9);
h. Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not X
available for the disposal of
wastewater?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.1 thru 1.1.3 (IV -9);
4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would°the project result in:
a, Changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate and
amount of surface runoff? _ _ X
Source #s: General Plan, Strategy
1.2.1 (IV -9);
b. Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as
flooding? _ _ _ X
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.2.1 thru 1.2.3 (IV -9 & 10);
C. Violate any water quality standards
or waste discharge requirements?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.2.1 thru 1.2.3 (IV -9 & 10);
11
X
d. Substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially
with ground water recharge such
that there would be a net deficit in
aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table (e.g., the
production rate of pre-existing _ _ X
nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing
land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.2.1 thru 1.2.3 (IV -9 & 10);
e. Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, in a
manner which would result in _ _ _ X
substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.2.1 thru 1.2.3 (IV -9 & 10);
f. Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, or
substantially increase the rate or X
amount of surface runoff in a
manner, which would result in
flooding on- or off-site?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.2.1 thru 1.2.3 (IV -9 & 10);
g. Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned storm water
drainage systems or provide X
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.2.1 thru 1.2.3 (IV -9 & 10);
10
h. Otherwise substantially degrade
water quality?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.2.1 thru 1.2.3 (IV -9 & 10);
X
i. Substantial reduction in the amount
of groundwater otherwise available
for public water supplies? X
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies — — — —
1.2.1 thru 1.2.3 (IV -9 & 10);
j. Place housing within a 100 -year
flood hazard area as mapped on the
Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other
flood hazard delineation map or
place within a 100 -year flood hazard — — — X
area structures, which would impede
or redirect flood flows?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.2.1 thru 1.2.3 (IV -9 & 10);
b. Expose sensitive receptors to
pollutants? X
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies — —
1.9.1 thru 1.9.5 (IV -12);
C. Result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non -attainment _ — _ x
under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions,
11
which exceed quantitative thresholds
for ozone precursors)?
Source #s: General Plan, 1.9.2 &
1.9.3 (IV -12)
d. Create objectionable odors?
Source #s: General Plan, 1.9.2 & _ _ X
1.9.3 (IV -12);
e. Violate any air quality standards or
contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality
violation? _ _ _ X
Source #s: General Plan, 1.9.2 &
1.9.3 (IV -12);
6. TRANPORTA:TION/MCULATION, Wouldbe,prgj et r ulf ui:
a. An increase in vehicle trips which is
substantial in relation to the existing
traffic load and capacity of the street
system (i.e. result in substantial
increase in either the number of
vehicle trips, the volume to capacity _ _ x
ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.9.4 (IV -12), 1.1.4 (V-22) & 3.2.1
(V-27);
b. Substantially increase hazards due to
design feature (e.g. sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g. farm _ _ _ X
equipment)?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.2.3, 1.3.1 & 1.3.3 (V-24);
C. Inadequate emergency access?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies _ _ _ X
1.2.3 & 1.3.3 (V-24);
12
d. Inadequate parking capacity on-site?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies X
2.11, 2.1.5 & 2.1.8 (V-25), & 4. 1.1
thru 4.2.4 (V-27);
e. Exceeding, either individually or
cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the county
congestion management agency for X
designated roads and highways?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.2.3 (V-24), 2.1.8 & 22.1 (V-25),
3.1.6 (V-26 ) & 3.2.1 (V-27);
f. Conflict with adopted policies,
plans, or programs supporting
alternative transportation (e.g. bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)? _ _ _ X
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.2.3 (V-24), 2.1.8 & 22.1 (V-25,
3.1.6 (V-26 ) & 3.2.1 (V-27);
g. Change in rail, water, or air traffic
patterns, including either and
increase in traffic levels or a change
in location that results in substantial _ _ _ X
safety risk?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
2.1.4 & 2.1.9 (V-25);
7. BIOLOGICAL, RESOURCES. Would the project result in:
a. Substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive,
or special status species in local or X
regional plan, policies, or
regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
13
1.1.11, 1.1.12,&1.2.5(III-11&
12);
b. Substantial adverse effect on and
riparian habitat, federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404
Clean Water Act, or other sensitive
natural community identified in local
or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California —
Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.11, 1.1.12, & 1. 2.5 (III -11 &
12);
C. A conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance? —
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.11, 1.1.12,&1.2.5(III-11&
12);
d. Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat — — —
conservation plan?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.2.1 & 1.2.2 (III -11&12) & 1.2.5
(III -12);
e. Substantial interference with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife —
nursery sites?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.13 (III -11), 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3,
&1.2.5(III-11&12);
14
x
f. Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (including, but not
limited to, marsh vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct _ _ _ X
removal, filling, hydrology,
interruption, or other means?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.13 (I11-11), 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3,
&1.2.5(III-11&12);
8. ENERGY A RAL R SOMCM. Woul therprajecv
a. Conflict with adopted energy
conservation plans?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies X
2.2.1. thru 2.2.10 (II1-15), 2.3.2 &
2.3.2, & 2.4.1 thru 2.4.4 (III -16 &
17);
b. Result in the loss of availability of
locally important mineral resources
recovery site delineation on a local
general plan, specific plan or other
land use plan?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies -
None. Issue Analysis Number 8 _ _ X
(Mineral Resources) states as
follows: "There are no significant,
concentrated mineral resources in
Diamond Bar, with the possible
exception of oil and hydrocarbons".
(III -9);
C. Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would
be of future value to the region and
the residents of the State? X
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies -
None. Issue Analysis Number 8
(Mineral Resources) states as
follows: "There are no significant,
15
concentrated mineral resources in
Diamond Bar, with the possible
exception of oil and hydrocarbons" .
(III -9);
9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a. Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials; or
create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonable foreseeable upset and _ X
accident conditions involving the — —
release of hazardous materials into
the environment?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
2.1.2 (I-19), 2.5.2 & 2.5.10 (III -17
& 18), 1.8.1 & 1.8.2 (IV -12), &
2.3.3 (VI -7);
b. Impair the implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or X
emergency evacuation plan?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.6.1 thru 1. 8.2 (IV -11 &12);
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or actively hazardous
materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an X
existing or proposed school? — — —
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
f.8.1 & 1. 8.2 (IV -12) & 2.3.3 (VI -
7);
d. Be located on a site which is
included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to — — — X
Government Code Section 65962.5
and, as a result, would it create a
16
significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.8.1 & 1. 8.2 (IV -12) & 2.3.3
(IV -7);
e. Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or where X
residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.4.1 & 3.3.5 (I-14 & 21), 1.1.7
(III -10), & 1.3.1 thru 1.4.2 (IV -10);
f. Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonable foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into X
the environment?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
2.1.2 (I-19), 2.5.2 & 2.5. 10 (III -17
& 18), 1.6.1 thru (IV -11 & 12), &
2.3.3 (VI -7);
g. For a project located within an
airport land use plan or, where such
a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project
result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project
area? — — __– X
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies -
None. Issue Analysis Number 5
(Aviation) states as follows: "There
are no aviation facilities located
within the City of Diamond Bar.
Passenger air carrier and air cargo
facilities are located at Ontario
17
International Airport located 15
miles to the east. The closest
general aviation airports are
Brackett field in La Verne,
approximately 9 miles to the north;
and Chino Airport in Chino,
approximately 11 miles to the east"
(V-17);
h. For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project
result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project
area?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies -
None. Issue Analysis Number 5
(Aviation) states as follows: "There
are no aviation facilities located
within the City of Diamond Bar.
Passenger air carrier and air cargo _ _ _ x
facilities are located at Ontario
International Airport located 15
miles to the east. The closest
general aviation airports are
Brackett field in La Verne,
approximately 9 miles to the north;
and Chino Airport in Chino,
approximately 11 miles to the east".
(V-17);
10. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a. Exposure of persons to or gener-
ation of noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other X
agencies; or exposure of persons to
or generation of excessive ground -
borne vibration or groundborne
noise levels?
18
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.10.1 thru 1.10.12 (IV -13 &14);
b. A substantial permanent increase or
temporary or periodic in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the _ _ — X
project;
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.10.1 thru 1.10.12 (IV -13 &14);
C. For a project located within an
airport land use plan or, where such
a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would project
expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies -
None. Issue Analysis Number 5
(Aviation) states as follows: There
are no aviation facilities located _ _ X
within the City of Diamond Bar.
Passenger air carrier and air cargo
facilities are located at Ontario
International Airport located 15
miles to the east. The closest
general aviation airports are
Brackett Field in La Verne,
approximately 9 miles to the north;
and Chino Airport in the City of
Chino, approximately 11 miles to
the east". (V-17);
d. For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project
exposed people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise X
levels?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies -
None. Issue Analysis Number 5
(Aviation) states as follows: There
19
are no aviation facilities located
within the City of Diamond Bar.
Passenger air carrier and air cargo
facilities are located at Ontario
International Airport located 15
miles to the east. The closest
general aviation airports are
Brackett Field in La Verne,
approximately 9 miles to the north,
and Chino Airport in the City of
Chino, approximately 11 miles to
the east". (V-17);
1. PUBLIC SERVICES. W-ild the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental
facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, --the construction of
which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public
services:
a. Fire Protection?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies _ X
1.3.1 thru 1. 4.2 {IV -10),
b. Police Protection?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies _ X
1.5.2 & 1.5.2 (IV -11);
C. Schools?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies _ _ X
1.3.1 thru 1.3.4 (VI -5)
d. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies X
2.3.1 &2.3.2(I-19),1.1.5&1.1.6
(V-23), 3.1.4 (V-26), & 2.2.1 (VI -
7);
e. Other governmental services`'
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
X
2.3.1 (I-19), 1.1.1 (VI -4), 1.2.1, —
0
1.2.2, 1.3.3, 1.4.1 & 1.4.3 (VI -5),
& 2.2.1 thru 2.3.3 (VI -7);
12. UMMES, SERVIC SYSTEMS. Woulti:the project:
a. Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control
Board? _ _ _ X
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.1 thru 1.1.5 (VI -4), 1.2.1 (VI -
5), & 2.2.1 (VI -7);
b. Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider,
which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity
to serve the project's projected
X
demand in addition to the provider's — — —
existing commitments?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.1 thru 1.1.5 (VI -4), 1.2.1 (VI -
5), & 2.2.1 (VI -7);
C. Require or result in the construction
of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant — — X
environmental effects?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.1 thru 1.1.5 (VI -4), 1.2.1 (VI -
5), & 2.2.1 (VI -7);
d. Comply with federal, state, and
local statutes and regulations related
to solid waste?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies x
—
1.1.1 thru 1.1.6 (VI -4), 1.2.1 (VI -5)
and 2.2.1 (VI -7);
e. Require or result in the construction X
of new storm water drains e
21
facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environ-
mental effects?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.2.2 (IV -10), 1.1.1 thru 1.1.5 (VI -
4), 1.2.1 (VI -5), & 2.2.1 (VI -7);
f. Be served by a landfill with
sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid
waste disposal needs? X
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
2.5.1 thru 2.5.10 (III -17), 1.1.1 thru
1.1.5 (VI -4), 1.2.1 (VI -5), & 2.2.1
(VI -7);
g. Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources,
or are new or expanded entitlements
needed? _ _ X
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.1.1 thru 1.1.5 (VI -4), 1.2.1 (VI -
5), & 2.2.1 (VI -7);
13. AESTHETICS.' Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse affect on
a scenic vista or damage scenic
resources, including, but not limited
to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state _ _ _ X
scenic highway?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1. 1.6 ( I-12), 1.2.3 (I-13), 2.6.2
(III -18), & 1.1.9 (V-24);
b. Substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of the site
and its surroundings? _ _ — X
22
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
1.2.3 (I-13), 3.1.2 (I-20), & 1.1.9
(V-24);
C. Create a new source of substantial
light or glare, which would
adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area? — — x
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
3.2.3 (I-20), 1.2.2 (III -11), & 2.2.2
(III -5);
14. C, MITYRAL-RESGURCES. Would ;the, project;
a. Directly or indirectly destroy a
unique paleontological resource or X
site or unique geologic features? — — —
Source #s: Note l;
b. Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to — — — X
§ 15064.5
Source #s: Note l;
C. Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of historical X
resources as defined in §15064.5? —
Source #s: Note 1;
d. Disturb any human remains,
including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
Source #s: Note 1;
Note 1: This category, entitled " 14.
Cultural resources", as well as its — — — X
five individual categories (a. thru
e.) are not specifically addressed in
the 1995 General Plan. Therefore,
Strategies 1.5.6 (I-16), 1.6.4 &
2.1.1 (I-18), 3.3.4 (I-21), & 1.1.6
(III -10) serve to provide a general
23
framework with which to ensure that
new or modified development
proposals, or the installation/
extension of public or private
services, would not endanger, or
have an adverse impact on any of
the resources identified above.
15. RECREATION. Would,the project:
a. Increase the demand use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or
other recreational facilities such that
substantial deterioration of the
facility would occur or be _ _ _ X
accelerated?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
3.2.1 (I-20) & 1.3.1 thru 1.3.8 (III -
12 & 13);
b. Include recreational facilities or
require the construction or
expansion of.recreational facilities,
which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment? _ _ _ X
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies
3.2.1 (1-20) & 1.3.1 thru 1.3.8 (III -
12 & 13);
16. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a. Convert prime farmland, unique
farmland, or farmland of statewide
importance, as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program
of the California Resources Agency,
to non-agricultural use? — — —
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies -
None. Issue Analysis Number 7
(Agriculture) states as follows:" The
City of Diamond Sar presently has
no important agricultural farmlands
L 'f
M
according to the California
Department of Conservation,
Division of Land Resources
Protection, and the Soil
Conservation Service of the U.S.
Department of Agriculture". (III -7);
b. Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural uses, or the William Act
contract?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies -
None. Issue Analysis Number 7
(Agriculture) states as follows:" The
City of Diamond Bar presently has X
no important agricultural farmlands
according to the California
Department of Conservation,
Division of Land Resources
Protection, and the Soil
Conservation Service of the U.S.
Department of Agriculture". (III -7);
C. Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their
location or nature, could result in
conversion of farmland, to non-
agricultural use?
Source #s: General Plan, Strategies -
None. Issue Analysis Number 7
(Agriculture) states as follows:" The X
City of Diamond Bar presently has
no important agricultural farmlands
according to the California
Department of Conservation,
Division of Land Resources
Protection, and the Soil
Conservation Service of the U.S.
Department of Agriculture". (III -7);
117. MANDATOR'Y'FMINGS OF'SIGNIFICA CE
a. Does the project have the potential X
to degrade the quality of the
PA61
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 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 pre -history?
b. Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals?
C. Does the project have impacts that
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means
that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the
effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the
affects of probable future projects)
►M
X
d. Does the project have environmental
effects, which will cause substantial X
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
NRI
18. EARLIER ANALYSES
Earlier analyses may be used here, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the
following on attached sheets:
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available
for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analyses.
C) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated. " describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined
from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific
conditions for the project.
27
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
NEGATIVE DECLARATION 99-1
Environmental Finding
PART 5 - DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Discussions within each section may be grouped.
No discussion is required since there are no apparent adverse impacts that would result from the
implementation of the proposed project (revisions to the Development Code and Subdivision
Ordinance as evidenced by the answers to the questions specified in Part 4 (Evaluation of
Environmental Impacts) beginning on page 8 of this Environmental Checklist, above.
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING
a.
b.
C.
d.
2. POPULATION AND HOUSING
a.
b.
C.
3. GEOLOGICAL PROBLEMS
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
f.
9.
h.
4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALLITY
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
f.
9.
h.
i.
28
5. AIR QUALITY
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
f.
9.
7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
f.
8. ENERGY
a.
b.
C.
9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
f.
9.
h.
29
10. NOISE
a.
b.
C.
d.
11. PUBLIC SERVICES
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
f.
9.
13. AESTHETICS
a.
b.
C.
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES
a.
b.
C.
d.
15. RECREATION
a.
b.
16 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
a.
b.
C.
30
17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a.
b.
C.
d.
31
NOTICE OF
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN BY THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR that the City Council will
conduct a public hearing on the following items to determine whether or not
the subject Development Code/Subdivision Amendments shall be approved under
the provisions of State law and the City of Diamond Bar's Development Code:
Development Code Amendment No. 99-1 (pursuant to Code Section 22.44) is
a request to amend the following Articles of the Development Code:
Artir-la TT
• Zoning Consistency Matrix, Section 22.06.040, Table 2-2 amend to read
as follows: RPD -20,000, R-1-20,000 and R-1-15,000 - Low Density
Residential RL); and PA-2/SP - RL.
• Residential Zoning District General Development Standards, Section
22.08.240, Table 2-4 modify the rear yard setback from 20 to 25 feet
in the RR Zone; modify the rear yard setback from 15 to 20 feet in the
RL and RLM Zones; and add Lot Coverage, maximum 30 percent within the
RR, RL and RLM Zones.
• Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for Office Zoning Districts,
Section 22.10.030, Table 2-5 amend to allow the sale of alcoholic
beverages (off site consumption) in conjunction with the sale of motor
fuel with a Conditional Use Permit in the OP and CO Zones.
• Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for Commercial/Industrial Zoning
Districts, Section 22.10.030, Table 2-6 amend to allow the sale of
alcoholic beverages (off site consumption) in conjunction with the
sale of motor fuel with a Conditional Use Permit in the C-1, C-2 and
C-3 Zones.
Article III
• Required Setbacks -Accessory Uses, and Structures, Section 22.42.110,
Table 3-15 amend the three foot rear and side yard setback to five
feet for swimming pools and similar accessory structures.
• Guest Houses, Section 22.42.060 amend to allow guest houses up to 25
percent of the main residence, not to exceed 1,200 square feet with
a Minor Conditional Use Permit; and to amend overall parcel coverage
to 30 percent.
• Significant Ecological Area, add Section 22.22.160 to discuss
development within a Significant Ecological Area.
z,rtir•la TV
• Review Authority, Section 22.44.020, Table 4-1 amend Planned Sign
Program to Comprehensive Sign Program.
hrti rrl a V
• Restrictions on Nonconforming Structures, Section 22.68.030 amend to
allow additions not exceeding 500 square feet if the exterior limits
of the new construction do not exceed the applicable height or
encroach further into the setbacks than the comparable portions of the
existing structure.
• Administrative Responsibility, add Section 22.64.070 to discuss
administrative responsibilities of the Significant Ecological Area
Technical Advisory Committee.
Tr�inlo VT
• Definitions, Section 22.80.020, add Significant Ecological Area
Technical Advisory Committee.
Subdivision Ordinance Amendment No. 99-1 is a request to amend the
following Articles of the Subdivision Ordinance:
Article I
• Applicability, Section 21.01.040 amend to add that all
subdivisions within the City shall follow the same process as
a Development Code Amendment.
A -r; r+l c TT
• Changes to Approved Tentative Map or Conditions, Section
21.20.110 amend the process to allow proposed changes to a
Tentative Map or conditions of approval to be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer, except as otherwise provided by
this Section.
The Planning Commission reviewed the listed Development Code and Subdivision
Ordinance Amendments. On January 25, 2000, the Planning Commission
recommended approval of said amendment to the City Council.
PROJECT ADDRESS: Citywide
APPLICANT: City of Diamond Bar, 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 190,
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Environmental Determination: Pursuant to the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15070, the Cit,.r has
determined that a Negative Declaration is required for this project.
Negative Declaration No. 99-9 has been prepared. The Negate -.re
Declaration's review period began November 23, 1999 and ended
December 12, 1999.
If you are unable to attend the public hearing, but wish to send written
comments, please write to the Diamond Bar Community and Development Services
Department/Planning Division at the address given below. You may also obtain
additional information concerning this case by phoning (909) 396-5676.
If you challenge this application and project in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the
Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing.
TIME OF HEARING: 6 : 3 0 p . m. (or as soon thereafter that the matter can be heard)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Tuesday, March 7, 2000
LOCATION: South Coast Air Quality Management District
Auditorium
21865 E. Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, California 91765
CASE MATERIALS: Are available for review between 8:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. at
the City of Diamond Bar Community and Development Services Department/
Planning Division, 21660 Copley Drive, Suite 190, Diamond Bar, CA 91765.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
AND AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
I, John Ilasin, declare as follows:
I am employed by the City of Diamond Bar in the Community and Development Services
Department. On February 14, 2000, I personally posted a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing
regarding Development Code Amendment No. 99-1, Subdivision Ordinance Amendment
No. 99-1, attached hereto, at the following locations:
Diamond Bar City Hall, 21660 E. Copley Drive
South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 E. Copley Drive
Diamond Bar Library, Grand Avenue
Country Hills Town Center Community Board, Diamond Bar Boulevard
Vons/Savons Community Board, Diamond Bar Boulevard
The Country Estates Clubhouse Bulletin Board
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on February 14, 2000, at Diamond Bar, California.
n sin
Community and Development Services Dept.
D:Ms%affidavitpnsfing.doc
AGENDA NO. 8.1
NO DOCUMENTATION AVAILABLE
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO. 9.1
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000 REPORT DATE: February 29, 2000
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
TITLE: CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA,
DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE A PORTION OF HIGHCREST
DRIVE IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
SUMMARY: The City has received a request from the Highcrest Homeowners Alliance to
vacate the portion of Highcrest Drive located southerly of Gold Rush Drive. This matter asks
the City Council to consider the vacation request, to initiate the vacation proceedings in
accordance with the Streets and Highways Code, and to set a public hearing for April 18, 2000.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar
approve Resolution No. 2000 -XX "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond
Bar, California, declaring its intention to vacate a portion of Highcrest Drive in the City of
Diamond Bar."
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification
X Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification
Ordinances Other
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: Highcrest Homeowners Alliance
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority vote?
3. Has environmental impact been assessed?
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report?
REVIEWED BY:
qumqrk
Terrence L. Belan r
City Manager
ames DeStefano
Deputy City Manager
X Yes _ No
X Yes _ No
N/A _ Yes _ No
_ Yes X No
X Yes No
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
Agenda No.
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -XX: A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION
TO VACATE A PORTION OF HIGHCREST DRIVE IN THE CITY
OF DIAMOND BAR.
ISSUE STATEMENT
Shall the City Council approve the initiation of vacation proceedings for a portion of Highcrest
Drive located southerly of Gold Rush Drive?
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
Approval of the Resolution of Intention has no impact upon the City budget. The applicant shall
remunerate costs associated with the processing of the vacation request.
BACKGROUND
A vacation proceeding is undertaken in accordance with Division 9, Part 3 (Public Streets,
Highways, and Service Easements Vacation Law, of the State Streets and Highways Code.) The
Code prescribes the procedure and requirements for vacating streets. Section 8309 of the Streets
and Highways Code defines a "vacation" as ". . . the complete or partial abandonment of
termination of the public right to use a street, highway, or public service easement."
The City has received a request from the Highcrest Homeowners Alliance to vacate the portion
of Highcrest Drive located southerly of Gold Rush Drive. This matter asks the City Council to
consider the vacation request, to initiate the vacation proceedings in accordance with the Streets
and Highways Code, and to set a public hearing for April 18, 2000.
DISCUSSION
The property in interest was dedicated to the public for use as a street with the recordation of
Tract No. 31941. There exists public sewer, storm drain and utilities within the fully improved
street. The portion Highcrest Drive proposed to be vacated is approximately 1,100 feet in length.
The adoption of a resolution of intention does not result in the vacation of Highcrest Drive. The
Resolution, if adopted, establishes the intent of the City Council to cause further study by staff,
coordination with utility companies, Planning Commission review of the vacation request for
conformity with the General Plan (Government Code Section 65402), and notification of the City
Council public hearing. Upon the receipt of testimony at the public hearing, the City Council
may approve the vacation request subject to certain findings and necessary conditions to be
satisfied prior to recordation of the action.
The Resolution of Vacation may provide for the reservation and exception of easements for
sewers, storm drains, water lines, and utilities such as electricity, gas, cable TV, and telephone.
The Highcrest Homeowners Alliance petition describes a proposal to relocate the previously
approved gate for the Pulte Home Corporation project, a private gated community, (Tract
No. 52267) from the southerly terminus of Highcrest Drive to location near Gold Rush Drive.
The potential for relocation of the Pulte gate should be an important component of the street
vacation analysis, although, if applied for, it would require a separate approval process. The City
has previously approved an access gate from the private Pulte residential development to
Highcrest Drive, presently a public street. Should the vacation of Highcrest Drive be approved,
access for the future Pulte residents to a public street, through the southerly terminus of
Highcrest Drive or through a gate relocated to an area near the intersection of Highcrest Drive at
Gold Rush Drive must be assured.
Diamond Bar has several single family and multi -family residential projects developed with
private street access. These neighborhoods are located within the Country Estates and at several
other locations within the City. The private communities may or may not have incorporated
access through gates. Four separate homeowners associations reside within the Country Estates
and utilize the two access points to the residential community. None of the private developments
in the City require passage through multiple gates to access dwelling units. Consideration of a
gate on Highcrest Drive in the area of Gold Rush Drive should be carefully examined. There
must be confidence through the design and City review process that the gate area is properly
designed for pedestrian and vehicle access, gate setbacks, vehicle queuing, vehicular turnaround
area, emergency services access, key system, and adherence to Fire and Sheriff Department
standards.
Highcrest Drive serves a well-defined neighborhood. The street currently provides the point of
ingress and egress for the twenty (20) families residing on the cul-de-sac. The proposal has the
support of the property owners. There are no current or planned bicycle, pedestrian, or
equestrian facilities on the street. The publicly owned open space (360 acres) acquired as a
result of the Pulte project is not accessible from Highcrest Drive, therefore, vacation of the street
2
would not inhibit access to any public open space. The vacation would not appear to require the
relocation of any utilities.
CONCLUSION
The requested street vacation is submitted to the City Council for consideration. The City
Council is not compelled to act either to approve or deny the request. The action of the City
Council does not approve the vacation request. Approval of the resolution of intention sets the
matter for a future public hearing where evidence and testimony is provided. Upon conclusion
of the public hearing, the City Council may approve, with conditions, and continue for further
study or deny the request.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar approve Resolution
No. 2000 -XX "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, California,
Declaring its Intention to Vacate a Portion of Highcrest Drive in the City of Diamond Bar."
Prepared by:
James DeStefano
Deputy City Manager
Attachments:
A: Draft Resolution No. 2000 -XX and Map of proposed area to be vacated
B: Letter and Petition from the Highcrest Homeowners Alliance
C: Letter to Highcrest Drive residents
RESOLUTION NO. 2000
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION
TO VACATE A PORTION OF HIGHCREST DRIVE IN THE CITY
OF DIAMOND BAR.
A. RECITALS
(i) WHEREAS, the vacation of a portion of Highcrest Drive in the vicinity of the
cul-de-sac of Highcrest Drive southerly of Gold Rush Drive is requested for the
purpose of development of a private street in the vicinity of the cul-de-sac, and;
(ii) WHEREAS, the City has received the request of interested person or persons to
vacate a portion of Highcrest Drive, and;
(iii) WHEREAS, it is appropriate, therefor, to now consider the vacation of a portion
of Highcrest Drive, the location and extent of which is generally shown as the
"Area to be Vacated" on Exhibit "A", attached.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
B. RESOLUTION
Section 1 That the public interest, convenience and necessity so requiring, it is the intention
of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar to vacate a portion of
Highcrest Drive southerly of Gold Rush Drive, the general location and extent of
which is shown in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof.
Section 2 That the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar hereby initiates this proceeding
to vacate a portion of Highcrest Drive at the request of interested person or
persons and elects to proceed with said vacation pursuant to the provisions of
Chapter 3, General Vacation Procedure of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Streets and
Highways Code of the State of California.
Section 3 That the Planning Commission review the proposed vacation for conformance
with the Diamond Bar General Plan as required by Section 65402 of the
Government Code of the State of California.
Section 4 That on the 18th day of April, 2000, at 6:30 p.m., in the South Coast Air Quality
Management District Auditorium at 21865 East Copley Drive in the City of
Diamond Bar, California, 91765, is hereby fixed as the time and place at which a
public hearing will be held before the City Council at which time all persons
interested in the proposed vacation may appear and be heard.
Section 5 That the City Engineer is authorized and directed to post notices of said vacation
conspicuously along the line of said street to be vacated at least two (2) weeks
before the date of said hearing. Such notices shall be prepared and posted
pursuant to Section 8323 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of
California.
Section 6 That the City Clerk shall publish or post this resolution of intention in the manner
prescribed for the publication and posting of resolutions of the City Council of the
City of Diamond Bar as such publication or posting is required pursuant to
Section 8322 (c) of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.
Section 7 That the City Clerk shall give notice of the date, hour and place of the public
hearing on the resolution of intention, as herein above fixed, by publication for at
least two (2) successive weeks prior to the hearing in a weekly newspaper
published and circulated in the City of Diamond Bar. Such notices shall be
prepared and published pursuant to Section 8322 (a) of the Streets and Highways
of the State of California.
Section 8 That the City Clerk shall, within 10 days of the adoption of this resolution of
intention, give written notice to those public bodies or public utilities which are
contained on the City of Diamond Bar's index of requests for notice of vacation
proceedings. Such notices shall be given pursuant to Sections 8346 and 8347 of
the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.
IM
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 7th DAY OF MARCH, 2000.
Mayor, City of Diamond Bar
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 7th day of March. 2000, by the following roll call vote:
ATTEST:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS
City Clerk, City of Diamond Bar
2
i O
f
<n
s_
e
d
ss
no
N
i
O
^
O
NP
00
N
G i
0
co
L 10 l _ eNS '£00-Ll0-LOL9 - L6-9661 'VO 'SaIa6Uy Sod
m
HIGHCREST HOMEOWNERS
ALMANCE
24008 Mghcrest Drive c
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
November 8, 1999
City of Diamond Bar '
C/O Mr. Jim Distefano
21660 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
RE: Petition to Vacate Highcrest Drive
Dear Mr. DiStefano:
Attached please find a petition signed by 100% of the residents whose homes are located on the
portion of Highcrest Drive positioned above the juncture of Goldrush and extending to the end of
the cul -d -sac requesting the approval of the City of Diamond Bar to vacate this portion of
Highcrest Drive.
This section of Mgbc= Drive abuts the proposed SunCal development project. The vacating of
this portion of Higberest Drive is necessary in order to allow the repositioning of the secondary
exit gate prnpoa 4 by SunCal to the end of Highcrest Drive at the Goldrush juncture, as agreed to
by SunCal. The homeowners represented on this petition are extremely concerned with the
negative impact the SunCal development will have on their property values, as well as the safety
of their families, both during and after the construction phases of this massive development. In
an ei%rt to mitigate the negative impact on our street, the homeowners are hereby petitioning the
City of Diamond Bar to approve the privatization of our street. Since this portion of Highcrest
ends at a cuW-sac, approval of this request would not in any way hamper or restrict public
traffic, and the positiomag of the secondary gate would significantly reduce unwarranted and
excess traffic on this portion of I Trgherest Drive. The residents of this portion of Kigherest Drive
understand and accept that street and light maintenance would become their responsibility.
Representatives of this portion of Mghcrest Drive have met with SunCal on two occasions and
with a representative of the proposed developer, Poulte. SunCal has provided Poulte with
preliminary plans drawn by SunCal illustrating the Positioning of the secondary exit gate at the
juncture of Nighcrest and Goldrush. SunCal, Pointe and the Higbc rest residents have agreed that
the secondary gate is to be restricted to egress, or emergency exit, only.
We would appreciate approval of our request as expeditiously as possible. It is our understanding
that there is precedence already established regarding the vacating of City streets, and that this
request would not establish any new precedence.
Thank you for your prompt consideration.
Sincerely,
Highcrest Homeowners Alliance
The following residences hereby request the City to vacate a portion of Highcrest Drive in Diamond Bar.
24008 Highcrest Drive
--, ,.,- rte• --�
Diamond Bar, CA
24011 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
24022 Highcrest Drive
--G
r,
Diamond Bar, CA
24033 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
24032 Highcrest Drive
n ++ _
Diamond Bar, CA
24036 Highcra!st Drive
-
Diamond
Bar, CA
—
24046 Highcrest Drive
� r� �4GCL e.. rK-♦<" ' tet. . ,�.'' �'
`
Diamond Bar, CA
L
j 240 Highcrest Drive
-_
Diamond Bar, CA —
i 2405 —`
,iahcrest Drive
.�
,,A
Diamond Bar, CA ; 4Lf%'I
'
24059 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
24069 Highcrest Drive
i
Diamond Bar, CA
c`—
Th : following residences hereby request the City to vacate a portion of Highcrest Drive in Diamond Bar.
24008 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
24011 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar; CA
24022 Highcrest Drive
I
Diamond Bar, CA
24033 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
24032 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
r-24-038 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
24046 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
24049 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
`
24054 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
24059 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
y
24069 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
The following residences hereby request the City to vacate a portion of Highcrest Drive in Diamond Bar.
The following residences hereby request the City to vacate a portion of Highcrcst Drive in Diamond Bar.
24066 Highcrest Drive
i
Diamond Bar, CA
i
i
24075 Higharest Drive
add
'i
Diamond Bar, CA`
-
24081 Higherest Drive
'--1, l2� �-rri 1
—?- �sc-Tl}
Diamond Bar, CA
24087 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
I
24076 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
---%
24082 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
24088 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
24089 Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
Highcrest Drive
Diamond Bar, CA
List of Highcrest Residences
24008 hav* Drive
Erickson
24011 HOcrog Drive
Trice
24022 Highaast Drive _
24033 Highcrest Drive --
—_ _ ' Herrin
- �Camsj --- --
24032 Highctest Orive _
24036 H+gh rW Drive
-- - — Torres -
Sotrwartz —_--
--
24046 HWhaW Drive
--
lOura�n
24066 Hiph rW Detre
fAcendez
24054 Higherest Drive
IMcBrWe
24059 HVtw4 t Drive
IN&Ydu
24069 Higharst Drive
iTadme —
24075 HkOcrost Drive __
24061 Hohcrest Drive _—_--
24087H�Frcrrst Drive
24076 HWhmW Drive
__ SafPari
— . :Sethia
Liu
Song
24082 Hiphaes; Drive
! Gueth _
24088 Highaest DriveCook
-
lHHwa - -
24089 avW Drive
240?? HWhcrW Drive
Deborah H. O'Connor
Mayor
Eileen R. Ansari
Mayor Pro Tem
Wen Chang
Council Member
Carol Herrera
Council Member
Robert S. Huff
Council Member
Recycled paper
February 29, 2000
City of Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100 • Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177
(909) 860-2489 • Fax (909) 861-3117
www.CityofDiamondBar.com
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO
VACATE A PORTION OF HIGHCREST DRIVE SOUTHERLY
OF GOLD RUSH DRIVE
Dear Highcrest Drive Residents:
On behalf of the City of Diamond Bar, I would like to inform you that the City Council
will be discussing and considering a request from the Highcrest Homeowners Alliance to
vacate Highcrest Drive southerly of Gold Rush Drive, on Tuesday, March 7,2M, at
6:30 P.M., at the South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium,
21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar.
According to the California Streets and Highways Code, the City Council must first
declare its intent to vacate the street. Should the City Council approve a Resolution
declaring its intent to vacate, the Planning Commission will then conduct a General Plan
conformity review. The City Council subsequently will conduct a public hearing on the
proposed street vacation.
You are invited to attend the City Council meeting to discuss and express any concerns
you may have. If you have any questions, please contact Rose Manela, Associate
Engineer, at (909) 396-5671.
Sincerely,
Ant -f
James DeStefano
Deputy City Manager
cc: Rafik Tadros, Highcrest Homeowners Alliance
Rose Manela, Associate Engineer
JDS:sm
Deborah H. O'Connor
Mayor
Eileen R. Ansari
Mayor Pro Tem
Wen Chang
Council Member
Carol Herrera
Council Member
Robert S. Huff
Coundl Member
Recycled paper
February 29, 2000
City of Diamond Bar
21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 100 - Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177
(909) 860-2489 • Fax (909) 861-3117
www.CitYofDiamondgar.com
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO
VACATE A PORTION OF HIGHCREST DRIVE SOUTHERLY
OF GOLD RUSH DRIVE
Dear Highcrest Drive Residents:
On behalf of the City of Diamond Bar, I would like to inform you that the City Council
will be discussing and considering a request from the Highcrest Homeowners Alliance to
vacate Highcrest Drive southerly of Gold Rush Drive, on Tuesday, March 7, 2000, at
6:30 P.M., at the South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium,
21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar.
According to the California Streets and Highways Code, the City Council must first
declare its intent to vacate the street. Should the City Council approve a Resolution
declaring its intent to vacate, the Planning Commission will then conduct a General Plan
conformity review. The City Council subsequently will conduct a public hearing on the
proposed street vacation.
You are invited to attend the City Council meeting to discuss and express any concerns
you may have. If you have any questions, please contact Rose Manela, Associate
Engineer, at (909) 396-5671.
Sincerely,
JPs
Deputy Cit' Manager
cc: Rafik Tadros, Highcrest Homeowners Alliance
Rose Manela, Associate Engineer
JDS:sm
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA NO. 9.2
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000 REPORT DATE: February 29, 2000
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
TITLE: RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -XX "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE
TRES HERMANOS CONSERVATION AUTHORITY JOINT EXERCISE OF
POWERS AGREEMENT TO ADD THE CITY OF INDUSTRY AS A PARTY
TO THE AGREEMENT AND MEMBER OF THE BOARD."
SUMMARY: The City of Industry Urban Development Agency is the majority property owner of the
undeveloped area commonly known as the Tres Hermanos Ranch located within the incorporated
boundaries of the City of Diamond Bar and the City of Chino Hills. In December 1999, the Tres
Hermanos Conservation Authority (THCA) adopted a Resolution approving the participation of the City
of Industry (Industry) as an Ex -officio Member of the Authority. In January 2000, the City Council
approved an Amendment to the THCA Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement to add the City of Industry
as an Ex -officio Member of the Authority. On February 28, 2000, the THCA Board considered and
approved full membership of the City of Industry contingent upon the approval of the Cities of Diamond
Bar and Chino Hills.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar approve
Resolution No. 2000 -XX. "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Approving
Amendment No. 2 to the Tres Hermanos Conservation Authority Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement."
It is further recommended that the Mayor be authorized to execute the Supplemental Agreement.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS X Staff Report _ Public Hearing Notification
X Resolution(s) _ Bid Specification
_Ordinance(s) —Other
EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: City of Chino Hills, City of Industry, THCA
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? N/A
— Yes
— No
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? N/A
— Yes
— No
5. Are other departments affected by the report?
— Yes
X No
REVIEWED BY:
Terrence L. Belang
City Manager
r. e§tefano
Deputy City Manager
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
Agenda No. 9.2
MEETING DATE: March 7, 2000
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -XX: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE TRES HERMANOS
CONSERVATION AUTHORITY JOINT EXCERCISE OF POWERS
AGREEMENT TO ADD THE CITY OF INDUSTRY AS A PARTY
TO THE AGREEMENT AND A MEMBER OF THE BOARD."
ISSUE STATEMENT:
Shall the City Council approve a proposed amendment to the Tres Hermanos Conservation
Authority Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement in order to add the City of Industry as a Party to
the Agreement and member of the Board.
BACKGROUND:
The Tres Hermanos Conservation Authority (THCA) was established in January 1999 in order to
create a public entity to coordinate and plan the overall development and conservation of the
property commonly known as the Tres Hermanos Ranch (Ranch).
On October 25, 1999, THCA extended an invitation to the City of Industry (Industry) to
participate as an Ex -officio Member of the Authority. The City of Industry is the majority
property owner of the large undeveloped Ranch area, which is located within the incorporated
boundaries of the City of Diamond Bar and the City of Chino Hills. In November 1999, the City
of Industry accepted the invitation to participate. The Cities of Diamond Bar and Chino Hills
subsequently approved an amendment to the THCA Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement in
order to add the City of Industry as an ex -officio member.
On February 28, 2000, the THCA Board of Directors considered and approved full membership
of the City of Industry contingent upon the approval of the Cities of Industry, Diamond Bar and
Chino Hills.
Pursuant to the Joint Exercise of Powers Law (Government Code Section 6500 et seq.), and
Article VI, Subsections (5) and (9) of the Tres Hermanos Conservation Authority Joint Exercise
of Powers Agreement relating to amendments, the Agreement may be amended, by a
Supplemental Agreement executed by all of the parties to the Agreement. The Authority Board
approved the request on February 28, 2000, contingent upon the approval of the referenced
cities. This Resolution is being brought forth to the City Council for consideration and adoption.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
There is no financial impact to the City of Diamond Bar.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar approve Resolution
No.2000- XX: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar Approving
Amendment No.2 to the Tres Hermanos Conservation Authority Joint Exercise of Powers
Agreement to add the City of Industry as a Party to the Agreement and Member of the Board." It
is further recommended that the Mayor be authorized to execute the Supplemental Agreement.
Prepared by: James DeStefano
Deputy City Manager
Attachments:
A: Proposed Resolution No. 2000 -XX
B: THCA Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AMENDMENT
NO.2 TO THE TRES HERMANOS CONSERVATION
AUTHORITY JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT TO
ADD THE CITY OF INDUSTRY AS A PARTY TO THE
AGREEMENT AND A MEMBER OF THE BOARD AS AN
EX -OFFICIO MEMBER.
WHEREAS, on January 19, 1999, the Tres Hermanos Conservation Authority
(Authority) was established to create a public entity to coordinate the overall development and
conservation of the property known as the Tres Hermanos Ranch; and
WHEREAS, on October 25, 1999, the Governing Board of the Authority adopted
Resolution No. 99-2 extending an invitation to the City of Industry to participate as an ex -officio
member of the Authority; and
WHEREAS, on November 17, 1999, the City of Industry accepted the invitation to
participate as an ex -officio member of the Authority; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 1999, the Authority adopted Resolution No. 99-5
approving the participation of the City of Industry as an ex -officio member; and
WHEREAS, on January 18, 2000, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar adopted
Resolution No. 2000-05 approving the participation of the City of Industry as an ex -officio
member; and
WHEREAS, on February 8, 2000, the City Council of Chino Hills adopted Resolution
No. R00-13 approving the participation of the City of Industry as an ex -officio member; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Joint Exercise of Powers Act (Government Code
Section 6500 et seq.) and Article VI, Subsections (5) and (9) of the Joint Exercise of Powers
Agreement relating to amendments and new parties, the Agreement may be amended, by
supplemental agreement executed by all parties to the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the interests of the Authority are related to the area of real property
commonly known as the Tres Hermanos Ranch (Ranch), the majority of which is in the
incorporated boundaries of the City of Diamond Bar and the City of Chino Hills; and
WHEREAS, the City of Industry is the majority property owner of the Ranch; and
WHEREAS, to provide coordination and encourage continuity of planning among local
governments in the Ranch area it is in the interest of the Authority to have the full participation
of the City of Industry as a member of the Authority.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND DECLARED
BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, AS
FOLLOWS:
That the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar resolves and agrees to amend the
Tres Hermanos Conservation Authority Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement as stated within the
attached Supplemental Agreement No. 2 (Exhibit "A") contingent upon the approval of the City
of Chino Hills and the City of Industry.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2000.
Mayor, City of Diamond Bar
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 , by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS
City Clerk, City of Diamond Bar
2
Exhibit "A"
TRES HERMANOS CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO.2
Pursuant to Article VI, Section (5) and (9), upon approval by the Board and by their
governing bodies, additional Cities may become parties to the joint Exercise of Powers
Agreement.
Therefore, the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement shall be amended to add the City of
Industry as a Party to the Agreement and a Member of the Board of Directors. The
address of the principal business office of the City of Industry shall be identified as P.O.
Box 3366, 15651 E. Stafford Street, City of Industry, California 91744.
2. Article I, Section (3) is hereby amended to remove Subsection:
"(d) Ex -officio Member. A member of the City Council of the City of Industry shall
serve as an Ex -officio, non-voting, member of the Authority."
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment No.2 to be
executed and attested by their proper officers thereunto duly authorized and their official seals to be
hereto affixed, on the day and year set opposite the name of each of the parties.
CITY OF CHINO HILLS
MICHAEL WICKMAN, MAYOR
ATTEST:
LINDA D. RUTH, CITY CLERK
ATTEST:
LYNDA BURGESS, CITY CLERK
ATTEST:
JODY SCRIVENS, CITY CLERK
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
DEBORAH H. O'CONNOR, MAYOR
CITY OF INDUSTRY
DAVE WINN, MAYOR
2
HARRY W. STONE
CHAIRMAN
February 28, 2000
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE/
INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE
900 SOUTH FREMONT AVENUE, ALHAMBRA, CALIFORNIA 91803-1331
P.O. BOX 1460, ALHAMBRA, CALIFORNIA 91802-1460
The Honorable Debby O'Conner
City of Diamond Bar
21660 East Copley Drive, Suite 100
Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4177
Dear Mayor O'Conner:
STATE WASTE DIVERSION REQUIREMENTS AND COMPLIANCE MEASUREMENT
ASSEMBLY BILL 1939 (VINCENT AND MARGETT)
This is a follow-up to the Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Task
Force (Task Force) letter of June 7, 1999 (Enclosure A), encompassing a number of
recommendations to address deficiencies with the current State methodology in measuring
jurisdictions' compliance with the waste reduction mandates of State law. I am pleased to
inform you that the Task Force's legislative recommendations have been formulated into
the Los Angeles County -sponsored Assembly Bill 1939 (AB 1939), introduced on
February 15, 2000 (Enclosure B). This Bill is jointly authored by Assembly Members
Ed Vincent (Inglewood) and Bob Margett (Arcadia), with principal co-authors
Robert Pacheco (Walnut) and Carl Washington (Compton). AB 1939 is also co-authored
in the Assembly by Assembly Members Mike Briggs (Fresno), Dave Cox (Sacramento),
and George Runner (Santa Clarita/Antelope Valley), and in the Senate by Senators
Richard Mountjoy and Richard Polanco.
`The Bill olaces n im lement ' s to
�e iciently utilize limited local resources gnd_not to reauirP Inial governments to ao through
to ensure
reduction mandate as insisted by the G Pment Board
(Waste B.oard). The Bill also promotes alternative technologies to reduce dependence on
landfilling and incineration as well as requiring the Waste Board to maintain a local office
in Los Angeles County.1 I believe this is a landmark legislation and, therefore, I request
that your City carefully s udy the proposal, strongly support it, and follow through to ensure
its enactment by the State legislature and the Governor. A description of the existing
deficiencies and proposed legislative remedies embodied in Assembly Bill 1939 is further
provided in Enclosure C.
The Task Force recommendations were developed with extensive input from the cities, the
waste management industries, and the public. For many years, jurisdictions have
expressed concerns about the difficulties with "accurately" accounting for the waste
February 28, 2000
Page 2
originating within their boundaries forthe purpose of measuring compliance with the State's
50 percent waste reduction mandate. This is particularly accute in Los Angeles County,
with 88 cities, numerous unincorporated communities, dozens of solid waste facilities
(which are used by over 200 jurisdictions throughout the State), hundreds of permitted
waste haulers, and thousands of self -haulers and contractors. The complexity of our solid
waste management system makes it extraordinarily diff icultto accurately track all the waste
generated within each jurisdiction from the point of origin, through various intermediate
processing points, and to the ultimate point of diversion and/or disposal. The only system
that can partially accomplish such a daunting task to assure State -required mathematical
compliance is to place a bar code on every trash container, and a weight scale, a Global
Positioning equipment, and a computer on every trash truck (and still, what do we do about
the self haulers?).
I strongly request that your City contact the Bill authors and the Los Angeles County
Legislative Delegation informing them of your support for Assembly Bill 1939. We believe
that with your support we will have the momentum necessary to ensure passage of this
very important Bill. For your convenience, I have enclosed a sample letter that may be of
use in preparing your City's communication with the Bill's authors (Enclosure D) and a
listing of the legislative representatives (Enclosure E).
Let me thank you in advance for your support. By joining together, we can allow
jurisdictions in Los Angeles County, as well as throughout the State, to focus on
implementing waste diversion programs to protect the public health and safety while
conserving our natural resources.
Should you have any questions, please contact me at the City of Glendale, at
(818) 548-4844, or contact Mr. Mike Mohajer, of the Los Angeles County Department of
Public Works, at (626) 458-3502.
Sin ely,
GINGER 6,kEMBERG, Vice -Chair
Los Angeles County Solid Waste M
Integrated Waste Management Ta
Mayor, City of Glendale
PA: my\P:\sec\ab 1939.frm
Enc.
nent Committee/
rce and
cc: Each Member of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors
Each Member of the Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Task Force
City Recycling Coordinator
FROM : Panasonic FAX SYSTEM PHONE N0. : 8610701 Mar. 02 2000 05:22Ht'
SAMPLE LETTER
, 2000
The Honorable Edward Vincent
State Capital, -Room 5119
Sacramento, CA 95814
The Honorabie-Bob Margett
State Capital, Room 5160
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Assembly Members:
ASSEMBLY BILL 9939 (FEBRUARY 15, 2000)
SOLID WASTE DIVERSION REQUIREMENTS AND COMPLIANCE MEASUREMENT
Our City strongly supports AB 1939 which you authored. AB 1939 addresses our City's
longstanding concerns with the existing State methodology being used to measure the
efforts of jurisdictions to comply with the State's 50 percent waste diversion mandate. The
current measurement methodology, coupled with the California integrated Waste
Management Board's increasing insistence on strict mathematical compliance ("bean
counting"), will exhaust our limited resources that could be best used to implement waste
diversion programs. As a result, our City may be subject to a penalty of up to $10,000 per
day for failing to mathematically achieve the State's waste diversion mandate.
Your proposed legislation and its requirement to place emphases on implementing waste
diversion programs, including promoting the development of non=burn transformation
technologies, will greatly enhance our efforts to maximize our waste diversion activities,
while reducing our dependence on landfilling and promoting the conservation of our natural
resources.
Thank you for your efforts in addressing the concerns of local governments by introducing
AB 1939. Should you have any questions, please contact
Sincerely,
Mayor, City of
cc: Governor Gray Davis
Speaker of the Assembly (Antonio R. Villaraigosa )
Senate President Pro Tem (John Burton)
Honorable Robert -M. Hertzberg
FROM : Panasonic FAX SYSTEM PHONE NO. : 86107,01 Mar. 02 2000 05:2 -AM P1
The Honorable Edward Vincent
The Honorable Bob Margett
, 2000
Page 2
Honorable Robert Pacheco
Honorable Carl Washington
Honorable Mike Briggs
Honorable Dave Cox
Honorable George Runner
Honorable Richard Mountjoy
Honorable Richard Poianco
Each Member of the Los Angeles County State Legislative Delegation
Each Member of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors
Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Task Force (Ginger Bremberg/
Mike Mohajer)
League of California Cities
HARRY W. STONE
CHAIRMAN
June 7, 1999
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE!
INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT TASK FORCE
900 SOUTH FREMONT AVENUE, ALHAMBRA, CALIFORNIA 91803-1331
P.O. BOX 1460, ALHAMBRA, CALIFORNIA 91802-1460
FIELD(CITY MAYOR)
FIELD(CITY)
FIELD(ADDRESS)
FIELD(CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE)
Dear Mayor FIELD(SALUTATION):
ASSEMBLY BILL 939 COMPLIANCE
FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE
THE CURRENT DISPOSAL REPORTING SYSTEM
As a follow-up to my April 22,1999, letter regarding measures to improve the current State
disposal quantity reporting system, I am pleased to inform you that on May 20, 1999, the
Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Task Force (Task Force) approved
a series of recommendations designed to improve the system (see Enclosure A). As you
may know, most jurisdictions in Los Angeles County share the concern that the current
system does not accurately quantify the amount of solid waste disposed by jurisdictions
due to its inherent deficiencies. These deficiencies may cause many jurisdictions to
mathematically fail in achieving the State's 50 percent waste reduction mandate by the
year 2000 resulting in penalties of up to $10,000 per day.
The Task Force's recommendations propose to make (a) changes in State law
emphasizing the quality of waste diversion programs implemented ratherthan relying solely
on quantity measurement; (b) changes in California Integrated Waste Management Board
(Waste Board) regulations, policies, and other activities including expediting the review of
annual reports to help jurisdictions gauge their progress in achieving the State's waste
reduction mandate; (c) measures that solid waste facility operators can implement
including extending the origin survey period to more than one week per quarter. and
(d) measures that local jurisdictions can implement within a relatively short time.
ENCLOSURE A
PAGE 1 OF 2
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE -1994-2000 REGULAR SESSION
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 1939
Introduced by Assembly Members Vincent and Margett
(Principal coauthors: Assembly Members Robert Pacheco
and Washington)
(Coauthors: Assembly Members Briggs, Cox, and Runner
(Coauthors: Senators Mountjoy and Polanco)
February 15, 2000
An act to amend Sections 40001, 40201, 40503, 40507, 41780.1,
41783. 41825. 41850, and 42006 of, and to add Section 40150.1
to, the Public Resources Code, relating to solid waste.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 1939, as introduced, Vincent. Solid waste diversion
requirements: nonburn transformation.
(1) The existing California Integrated Waste Management
Act of 1989, which is administered by the California
Integrated Waste Management Board, establishes an
integrated waste management program. The act requires
each city, county, city and county, and regional agency, if any,
to develop a source reduction and recycling element of an
integrated waste management plan containing specified
components. For the first revision of the element, those
entities are required to divert, by January 1, 2000 from disposal
or transformation, 50% of the solid waste through source
reduction, recycling, and composting subject to the element,
except as specified. Existing law defines transformation as
including incineration, pyrolsis, distillation, gasification or
biological conversion.
99
ENCLOSURE B
PAGE 1 OF 16
-3— AB 1939
evidence in the record, that the city, county, or regional
agency has failed to make a good faith effort to implement
those elements. The bill would provide that a city, county, or
regional agency is deemed to be implementing those
elements if it has executed specified programs identified in
the reduction or hazardous waste element or certain
alternative programs. The bill would additionally require the
board to consider, in imposing those civil penalties, the
findings and recommendations in the progress report
concerning the disposal reporting system and would require
the board to annually update the enforcement criteria
included in the enforcement policy.
(5) Existing law requires the board to develop a
comprehensive market development plan using existing
resources, that will stimulate market demand in the state for
postconsumer waste material and secondary waste material
generated in the state, including specified goals. The plan is
required to include provisions for periodic review and
revision in response to changing market factors or actual
changes in secondary waste materials markets.
This bill would require the board to annually review, and,
if necessary, update the plan, in response to those changes,
and to forward the revised plan to the Legislature and to local
agencies.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State -mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
1 SECTION 1. Section 40001 of the Public Resources
2 Code is amended to read:
3 40001. (a) The Legislature declares that the
4 responsibility for solid waste management is a shared
5 responsibility between the state and local governments.
6 The state shall exercise its legal authority in a manner that
7 ensures an effective and coordinated approach to the safe
8 management of all solid waste generated within the state
9 and shall oversee the design and implementation of local
10 integrated waste management plans.
99
0
ENCLOSURE B
PAGE 3OF16
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
—5— AB 1939
(b) "Transformation " does not include eerpesti�g—ter
biomms . any of the following:
(1) Composting.
(2) Biomass conversion.
(3) Nonburn transformation, for the purpose of
measuring compliance with the diversion requirements
of Section 41780.
SEC. 4. Section 40503 of the Public Resources Code is
amended to read:
40503. The board shall maintain its headquarters in
the County of Sacramento, and may establish regional
offices in any part of the state that the board deems
necessary. Subject to the availability of funds, the board
shall establish a regional office in any county that has a
population greater than 5,000,000.
SEC. 5. Section 40507 of the Public Resources Code is
amended to read:
40507. (a) On or before March 1 of each year, the
board shall file an annual report with the Legislature
highlighting significant programs or actions undertaken
by the board to implement programs pursuant to this
division during the prior calendar year. The report shall
include, but is not limited to, the information described
in subdivision (b).
(b) , Ote The board shall
file annual progress reports each January 1 with the
Legislature covering the activities and actions
undertaken by the board in the prior fiscal year. The
board shall prepare the progress reports throughout the
calendar year, as determined by the board, on the
following programs:
(1) The local enforcement agency program.
(2) The research and development program.
(3) The public education program.
(4) The market development program.
(5) The used oil program.
(6) The planning and local assistance program.
(7) The site cleanup program.
(c) The progress report shall specifically include. but
is not limited to, all of the following information:
ENCLOSURE B
PAGE 5 OF 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
—7— AB 1939
recommendations on administrative and legislative
changes to improve the program's effectiveness.
(D) A report on the effectiveness of the integrated
waste management educational program and teacher
training plan implemented pursuant to Section 42603,
including recommendations on administrative and
legislative changes which will improve the program.
(E) A summary of available and wanted materials, a
profile of the participants, and the amount of waste
diverted from disposal sites as a result of the California
Materials Exchange Program established pursuant to
sttb ' Section 42600.
(4) Pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (b), all of
the following information:
(A) A review of market development strategies
undertaken by the board pursuant to this division to
ensure that markets exist for materials diverted from solid
waste facilities. including recommendations for
administrative and legislative actions which will promote
expansion of those markets. The recommendations shall
include, but not be limited to, all of the following:
(i) Recommendations for actions to develop more
direct liaisons with private manufacturing industries in
tete this state to promote increased utilization of recycled
feedstock in manufacturing processes.
(ii) Recommendations for actions whriek that can be
taken to assist local governments in the inclusion of
recycling activities in county overall economic
development plans.
(iii) Recommendations for actions to utilize available
financial resources for expansion of recycling industry
capacity.
(iv) Recommendations to improve state, local. and
private industry product and material procurement
practices.
(B) Development and implementation of a program
to assist local agencies in the identification of markets for
materials that are diverted from disposal facilities
through source reduction, recycling, and composting
pursuant to Section 40913.
VA -
ENCLOSURE B
PAGE 7 OF 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
—9— AB 1939
payment required by Section 48650 and the recycling
incentive, and plans for present and future programs to
be conducted over the next two years.
(6) Pursuant to paragraph (6) of subdivision (b), all of
the following information:
(A) The development by the board of the model
countywide or regional siting element and model
countywide or regional agency integrated waste
management plan pursuant to Section 40912, including its
effectiveness in assisting local agencies.
(B) The adoption by the board of a program to provide
assistance to cities, counties, or regional agencies in the
development and implementation of source reduction
programs pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 40912.
(C) The development by the board of model programs
and materials to assist rural counties and cities in
preparing city and county source reduction and recycling
elements pursuant to Section 4094 4 40912.
(D) A report on the number of tires that are recycled
or otherwise diverted from disposal in landfills or
stockpiles.
(E) A report on the development and implementation
of recommendations, with proposed implementing
regulations, for providing technical assistance to counties
and cities that meet criteria specified in Section 41782, so
that those counties and cities will be able to meet the
objectives of this division. The recommendations shall,
among other things, address both of the following
matters:
(i) Assistance in developing methods of raising
revenue at the local level to fund rural integrated waste
management programs.
(ii) Assistance in developing alternative methods of
source reduction, recycling, and composting of solid
waste suitable for rural local governments.
(F) A report on the status and implementation of the
"Buy Recycled" program established pursuant to
subdivision (d) of Section 42600, including the waste
collection and recycling programs established pursuant
to Sections 12164.5 and 12165 of the Public Contract Code.
ENCLOSURE B
PAGE 9 OF 16
-11— AB 1939
1 The method prescribed in Section 41780.2 shall be used to
2 determine the maximum amount of disposal allowable to
3 meet the diversion requirements of Section 41780.
4 (c) To determine achievement of the diversion
5 requirements of Section 41780 in 1995 and in the year
6 2000, projections of disposal amounts from the source
7 reduction and recycling elements shall be adjusted to
8 reflect annual increases or decreases in population and
9 other factors affecting the waste stream, as determined
10 by the board. By January 1, 1994, the board shall study the
11 factors which affect the generation and disposal of solid
12 waste and shall develop a standard methodology and
13 guidelines to be used by cities, counties, and regional
14 agencies in adjusting disposal projections as required by
15 this section.
16 (d) The amount of additional diversion required to be
17 achieved by a regional agency to meet the diversion
18 requirements of Section 41780 shall be equal to the sum
19 of the diversion requirements of its member agencies. To
20 determine the maximum amount of disposal allowable for
21 the regional agency to meet the diversion requirements
22 of Section 41780, the maximum amount of disposal
23 allowable for each member agency shall be added
24 together to yield the agency disposable maximum.
25 (e) For any city, county, or regional agency source
26 reduction and recycling element submitted to the board,
27 the amount of solid waste that a city, county, or regional
28 agency is required to divert to meet the 50 percent
29 diversion requirement specified in paragraph (2) of
30 subdivision (a) of Section 41780 may include solid waste
31 that is diverted using nonburn transformation, if the
32 project complies with the requirements of Section 44150.
33 except that, for purposes of such a nonburn
34 transformation project's compliance with those
35 requirements. the term "transformation, " as used in
36 Section 44150, includes nonbum transformation.
37 SEC. 7. Section 41783 of the Public Resources Code is
38 amended to read:
39 41783. Per Except as provided in subdivision (e) of
40 Section 41780.1, for any city, county, or regional agency
VE
ENCLOSURE B
PAGE 11 OF 16
-13— AB 1939
1 SEC. 8. Section 41825 of the Public Resources Code is
2 amended to read:
3 41825. (a) At least once every two years, the board
4 shall review each city, county, or regional agency source
5 reduction and recycling element and household
6 hazardous waste element. If, after a public hearing,
7 which, to the extent possible, is held in the local or
8 regional agency's jurisdiction, the board firgs adopts
9 written findings, based on a substantial evidence in the
10 record that the city, county, or regional agency has failed
11 to make a good faith effort, as defined in Section 41850,
12 to implement its source reduction and recycling element
13 or its household hazardous waste element, the board shall
14 issue an order of compliance with a specific schedule for
15 achieving compliance. -The
16 (b) For purposes of subdivision (a), a cin: county or
17 regional agency shall be deemed to be implementing its
18 source reduction and recycling element or household
19 hazardous waste element, if the city, county, or regional
20 agency has executed those selected programs identified
21 in the source reduction and recycling element or
22 household hazardous waste element that is approved by
23 the board, or suitable alternative programs mutually
24 agreed upon by the board and the city, county, or regional
25 agency.
26 (c) A compliance order issued pursuant to subdivision
27 (a) shall include those conditions whieh that the board
28 determines to be necessary for the local agency or
29 regional agency to complete in order to implement its
30 source reduction and recycling element or household
31 hazardous waste element.
32 SEC. 9. Section 41850 of the Public Resources Code is
33 amended to read:
34 41850. (a) Except as specifically provided in Section
35 41813, if, after holding the public hearing and issuing an
36 order of compliance pursuant to Section 41825, the board
37 finds that the city, county, or regional agency has failed
38 to implement its source reduction and recycling element
39 or its household hazardous waste element, the board may
40 impose administrative civil penalties upon the city or
72
0
ENCLOSURE B
PAGE 13 OF 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
— IS — AB 1939
(1) (A) The extent to which a city, county, or regional
agency has made good faith efforts to implement its
source reduction and recycling element or household
hazardous waste element.
(B) (i) For the purposes of this paragraph, "good faith
efforts" means all reasonable and feasible efforts by a city,
county, or regional agency to implement those programs
or activities identified in its source reduction and
recycling element or household hazardous waste
element, or alternative programs or activities that
achieve the same or similar results.
(ii) For purposes of this paragraph, "good faith efforts"
may also include the evaluation by a city, county, or
regional agency of improved technology for the handling
and management of solid waste that would reduce costs,
improve efficiency in the collection, processing, or
marketing of recyclable materials or yard waste, and
enhance the ability of the city, county, or regional agency
to meet the diversion requirements of paragraphs (1) and
(2) of subdivision (a) of Section 41780, provided that the
city, county, or regional agency has submitted a
compliance schedule pursuant to Section 41825, and has
made all other reasonable and feasible efforts to
implement the programs identified in its source
reduction and recycling element or household hazardous
waste element.
(iii) In determining whether a jurisdiction has made a
good faith effort, the board shall consider the
enforcement criteria included in its enforcement policy,
as adopted on April 25, 1995, or as subsequently arne
On or before January 1, 2001, and on or before January
1, annually thereafter, the board, in consultation with
local agencies, the solid waste industry, and nonprofit
organizations, shall update the enforcement criteria to
reflect any applicable changes in state law.
(2) The extent to which a city, county, or regional
agency has implemented additional source reduction,
recycling, and composting activities to comply with the
diversion requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2) of
subdivision (a) of Section 41780.
I_
ENCLOSURE B
PAGE 15 OF 16
SUMMARY OF EXISTING
DEFICIENCIES AND PROPOSED
LEGISLATIVE REMEDIES
ASSEMBLY BILL 1939
(INTRODUCED FEBRUARY 15, 2000)
SUMMARY OF EXISTING LAW
The California Integrated Waste Management Act, commonly known as AB 939, has
imposed mandates on each city and county in California to divert 25 and 50 percent,
compared to 1990 figures, of solid waste from disposal at landfills or transformation
facilities by 1995 and the year 2000, respectively. The Act also stipulated preparation of
planning documents, reporting requirements, and measurement methodologies on how to
quantify the amount of waste being generated, disposed, and/or diverted. Failure to
comply with the Act's requirements, including mathematically substantiating achievement
of the waste diversion mandates, may subject the jurisdiction to penalties of up to $10,000
per day.
AB 939 also requires each county and the cities within that county to convene a task force
to assist, among other things, in coordinating the development of jurisdictions' recycling
and other planning documents as well as ensuring a coordinated and cost-effective
regional waste management system. The membership of the task force, as required by
AB 939, is determined by the county and by a majority of the cities within the county which
contain a majority of the incorporated population.
In Los Angeles County, this task force which has been in existence since the enactment
of AB 939 is known as the Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Task
Force.
LOS ANGELES COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Los Angeles County is the most populous county in the State and approximately one out
of three Californians resides in this County. The County encompasses 88 cities and over
80 unincorporated communities. Los Angeles County is also larger than 42 states in the
nation and economically ranks 16 among the world's industrialized countries.
Los Angeles County is home to one of the most complex and diverse solid waste
management systems in the nation. Residential waste collection is provided by a
combination of municipal forces, franchises, and private/independent waste
collectors/haulers who operate on an open -market basis. Commercial waste collection is
generally being provided by franchise and independent haulers, mostly under an open -
market system.
ENCLOSURE C
PAGE 1 OF 5
SUMMARY OF EXISTING
DEFICIENCIES AND PROPOSED
LEGISLATIVE REMEDIES
ASSEMBLY BILL 1939
(INTRODUCED FEBRUARY 15, 2000)
PAGE 3
In order to minimize our needs for landfill capacity, efforts to increase diversion activities
must be expanded by promoting development of alternative disposal technologies, i.e.,
transformation. However, under the current law, transformation includes "incineration" and
as such is considered "disposal." Additionally, jurisdictions utilizing facilities are allowed
to claim not more than ten percent diversion credit (toward the 50 percent diversion
mandate) for the waste managed at these facilities. Because of these limitations,
development of new transformation facilities in California has come to halt. Non -burn
transformation technologies divert waste from landfills and incinerators and, therefore,
should be eligible for full diversion credit. This change to the Statute would also greatly
enhance development of these technologies.
In addition to the issues listed, many local jurisdictions find that to get their concerns
properly responded to by the Waste Board, they must attend meetings in Sacramento due
to the lack of a local Waste Board office in Southern California. This has created a
financial hardship for many jurisdictions in the County. Since Los Angeles County (88
cities and the County) provides approximately one-third of the Waste Board's budget which
is being funded by imposition of fees on solid waste generated in Los Angeles County,
then it is justifiable and necessary for the Waste Board to maintain a local (or regional)
office in Los Angeles County.
SUMMARY OF NEEDED ACTION
Since the enactment of AB 939, the cities in Los Angeles County, the County, and the Los
Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Task Force have gained substantial
experience developing and implementing a wide range of innovative waste diversion
programs, many of which are being used as models throughout the nation. So far, these
programs have helped jurisdictions make tremendous progress toward achieving the 50
percent. However, getting to the 50 percent and/or maintaining that diversion rate remain
a challenge which is further compounded due to lack of adequate markets for diverted
materials.
In recognition of the jurisdictions' concerns with the Waste Board's Disposal Reporting
System, the Act's requirements to insure mathematical compliancewith its waste reduction
mandates, and otherfactors listed in previous sections, the Los Angeles County Integrated
ENCLOSURE C
PAGE 3OF5
SUMMARY OF EXISTING
DEFICIENCIES AND PROPOSED
LEGISLATIVE REMEDIES
ASSEMBLY BILL 1939
(INTRODUCED FEBRUARY 15, 2000)
PAGE 5
• AB 1939 would require the Waste Board to annually review and, if necessary, update
the comprehensive market development plan required under current State law, in
response to changing market factors or changes in secondarywaste materials markets.
Also, the Bill would require the Waste Board to forward the revised plan to the
Legislature and to local agencies.
• AB 1939 would require the Waste Board to establish a regional office in Los Angeles
County subject to availability of funds.
• AB 1939 would require the Waste Board to include in its annual progress reports to the
Legislature a report evaluating the accuracy and effectiveness of the Disposal
Reporting System adopted by the Waste Board including recommendations to address
any deficiencies in the system.
MMM:mal
AB939.MMM.021700
ENCLOSURE C
PAGE 5OF5
SAMPLE LETTER
, 2000
The Honorable Edward Vincent
State Capital, Room 5119
Sacramento, CA 95814
The Honorable Bob Margett
State Capital, Room 5160
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Assembly Members:
ASSEMBLY BILL 1939 (FEBRUARY 15, 2000)
SOLID WASTE DIVERSION REQUIREMENTS AND COMPLIANCE MEASUREMENT
Our City strongly supports AB 1939 which you authored. AB 1939 addresses our City's
longstanding concerns with the existing State methodology being used to measure the
efforts of jurisdictions to comply with the State's 50 percent waste diversion mandate. The
current measurement methodology, coupled with the California Integrated Waste
Management Board's increasing insistence on strict mathematical compliance ("bean
counting"), will exhaust our limited resources that could be best used to implement waste
diversion programs. As a result, our City may be subject to a penalty of up to $10,000 per
day for failing to mathematically achieve the State's waste diversion mandate.
Your proposed legislation and its requirement to place emphases on implementing waste
diversion programs, including promoting the development of non -burn transformation
technologies, will greatly enhance our efforts to maximize our waste diversion activities,
while reducing our dependence on landfilling and promoting the conservation of our natural
resources.
Thank you for your efforts in addressing the concerns of local governments by introducing
AB 1939. Should you have any questions, please contact
Sincerely,
Mayor, City of
cc: Governor Gray Davis
Speaker of the Assembly (Antonio R. Villaraigosa)
Senate President Pro Tem (John Burton)
Honorable Robert M. Hertzberg
ENCLOSURE D
PAGE 1 OF 2
ASSEMBLY MEMBER LIST
MR THOMAS M CALDERON MR TONY CARDENAS
STATE CAPITOL RM 2148 STATE CAPITOL RM 4005
SACRAMENTO CA 95814 SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MR MARCO A FIREBAUGH MR RICHARD FLOYD
STATE CAPITOL RM 3126 STATE CAPITOL RM 4016
SACRAMENTO CA 95814 SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MS SALLY HAVICE MR ROBERT M HERTZBERG
STATE CAPITOL RM 5150 STATE CAPITOL RM 319
SACRAMENTO CA 95814 SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MS SHEILA JAMES KUEHL MR ALAN LOWENTHAL
STATE CAPITOL RM 3013 STATE CAPITOL RM 4139
SACRAMENTO CA 95814 SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MR TOM McCLINTOCK MR GEORGE NAKANO
STATE CAPITOL RM 4153 STATE CAPITOL RM 2158
SACRAMENTO CA 95814 SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MS GLORIA ROMERO MR GEORGE RUNNER
STATE CAPITOL RM 2117 STATE CAPITOL RM 6027
SACRAMENTO CA 95814 SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MS NELL SOTO MR ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA
STATE CAPITOL RM 5164 STATE CAPITOL RM 219
SACRAMENTO CA 95814 SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MR CARL WASHINGTON MR HERB WESSON
STATE CAPITOL RM 2136 STATE CAPITOL RM 2179
SACRAMENTO CA 95814 SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MR RODERICK WRIGHT MR MIKE BRIGGS
STATE CAPITOL RM 6012 STATE CAPITOL RM 2111
SACRAMENTO CA 95814 SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MR GIL CEDILLO
STATE CAPITOL RM 5016
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MR MARTIN GALLEGOS
STATE CAPITOL RM 6005
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MR WALLY KNOX
STATE CAPITOL RM 6025
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MR BOB MARGETT
STATE CAPITOL RM 5160
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MR ROBERT PACHECO
STATE CAPITOL RM 4177
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MR JACK SCOTT
STATE CAPITOL RM 4146
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MR EDWARD VINCENT
STATE CAPITOL RM 5119
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MR SCOTT WILDAN
STATE CAPITOL RM 3091
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MR DAVE COX
STATE CAPITOL RM 2002
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
ENCLOSURE E
PAGE 1 OF 2
FROM : Panasonic FAX SYSTEM PHONE NO. : 86107101 Mar. 02 2000 05:18PIN P1
To: Solid Waste Task Force
From: Nancy Pfeffer, Senior Planner, 213-236-1869, pfeffer@SCag.ca-gov i
Date: February 14, 2000
RE: Proposed AB 1939 Amending the California Integated Waste Management Act
RECONIlVIENDATION:
The Task Force should recommend that the Energy and Environment Committee and
Regional Council support the bill.
SUNEM ARY:
In Spring 1999, the Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Task Force adopted a
number of recommendations to address AB 939s deficiencies. The recommendations included
legislative changes, regulatory changes, and operational chatigcs The bill proposed by Los Angeles
County would implement the Task Force's recommended legislative changes to the Act. For the
purpose of measuring compliance with the Act's 50% waste reduction, the proposed bili shifts the
emphasis from mattiemancal compliance to implcmaitation of waste diversion programs.
Additionally, the proposal would remove disincentives to commercial development of ahemadvc
technologies to landfilling and waste incineration. It would also clarify the states role in developing
markets for recycled mausials, and would establish an office of the California Integrated Waste
Management Board in Southern California, if funds are available to do so.
The California Integrated Waste Management Act, commonly known as AB 939, has imposed
mandates on each city and county in California to divert 25 and 50 percent, compared to 1990 figures,
of solid waste from disposal at landfills or transformation facilities by 1995 and the year 2000,
respectively. The Act also supulated preparation of planning docmnents, reporting rcgtn MCI3u, and
measumneru methodologies on how to quantify the amount of waste being generated,
and/or diverted Fallon- to comply with the Act's requirements, inchuhng matwmaticallY
substantiating achievement of the waste diversion mandates, may subject the jurisdiction to penalties
of up to $10,000 per day.
To measure a jurisdiction's compliance with the 50 percent waste diversion mandate, the
California Integrated Waste Management Board developed the Disposal Reporting System to uncle
the quantities of solid waste disposed by each jurisdiction. Since the implementation of the Disposal
Reporting System in 1995, concertis by local jurisdictions have been mounting regarding the accuracy
of the System in determining and quantifying the waste by the jurisdiction of origin. The jurisdictions'
concerns have been further compounded by the California Integrated Waste Management Board's
heavy emphasis on numerical accounting whose awu=y .has clear and substantial limitations.
In order to insure mathemancal compliance with the waste seduction mandates of the Act and
avoid potential penalties, each waste collector must aecwltely quantify the amount of waste collected
from each customer (truck with scale) and by jurisdiction of origin (customer's site address)- 1n an
#33205 vl - SWTF Meme on AB
1939 4r%
SOUTHERN CAUFORNIA
ABSOCIAT101i of GOVERNMENTS
FROM : Panasonic FAX SYSTEM PHONE NO. : 8610701 Mar. 02 2000 05:30AM PT
urbanized arta such as Los Angeles County with 88 cities, over 80 unincorporated communities, over
160 independcnt haulers, and many thousands of self haulers and couactors, inzplet xmwWon of such
a system is not practical, economically not feasible, and will exhaust local resources that can nest be
used to implement waste reduction programs which is the fimdasnartai goal of AB 939.
A re= LA Times article (January 6, 2000) indicated that "In Califomia, 80% of
lnuaicipatities fam 4 S10,000 -a -day fine, unless they drastically slash their trash before the year cods."
In the saate article Dan Eaton, Chairman of the Waste Board, was quoted as saying, "California
diverted 34% of its trash in 1997, far short of 2000's deadline of Mali" Fawn put 1998's tentative WW
at about 33%.
In order to minimize our Deeds for landfill capacity, efforts to inc cease diversion activities
must be expanded by promoting development of alternative disposal txhnologies, i.e., mon.
However, under the current law tranrfiorm m includes ` " and as such is considered
"disposal" Additionally, jurisdictions utilizing facilities are allowed to claim rat movie than, ten -
per omt diversion credit (toward the 50 permat diversion mandate) for the waste managed at these
f5CWdex. Because of these limitations, developom of now I, founatiodn facilities in CaliEomi a has
come to a halt. Non4wrn transformation technologies divert waste fiemz I—ds" and incinerators and,
tberefore, should be eh&le for full diversion credit. This age to the Statute would also grtaRly
enhance development of these technologies.
Los Angeles County (88 cities and the Co=y) provides approximately one-third of the waste
Board budget through imposition of fees on disposal etc. However•, the Waste Hoard docs
not maintain a local (or regional) office in Los Angeles County to respond to local jurrisAddons'
inquirics/coacerns. Twee local jurisdictions for the moat part do not have staff or adequate 5mulew
resourcxs to travel to Sammn auo to get their eros responded to. I. .
YJ13113KII 9 u�xr r
In reeogaition of the jurisdictions' concerns with the Wane Board's Disposal Reporting
System, the Act's regmrements to insure mathematical compliance with its waste reduction mandates,
and other factors listed in the previous section, the Los Angeles County bogged Waste
Management Task Form adopted a series of noornrneadations to acidness jurisdictions' concerns on
May 20, 1999 (see attachment). Subsequently, the rcoomme ndarions were adopted by many
jurisdictions in Los Angeles and Ventura Counties, by the Loa Angeles County Board of Sgmvisors,
which took formal action on July 27, 1999, and by the Southern CAlifinnia, Association of
Governments on September 2, 1999 (sec attachment). Tire Los Angeles County Integrated Waste
Management Task Force's raxximt -a ndations were formulated after extensive xnsaltation with cities
in Los Angeles County, the County, waste mrmagcnu= industries, rad the m* ic. The
recorrunendations include measures that can be impleraerzoed at a local level and/or the Waste
Board to remedy those deficiencies that do not require changes in •the State law. Mie: recr -moons
also included a mznber of proposals requiring State legislative actions that have bean fc :: �;uleted into
ft Los Angeles County legislative proposal, AB 1939-
#33205 v1 - SW*M Memo on AB
1939
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
b04 ASSOCIATION of BOVERN.M>EM
OGS
PROM : Panasonic PAX SYSTEM PHONE NO. : 8610701 Mar. 02 2000 05:18AM P2
The main elements of AB 1939 are:
(a) AB 1939 declares that the intem of the Legislature and the policy of the stale is to place
Primary emphasis on implementation of waste diversion programs to efficiently utilize limited
local resources, and not to require local agencies to go to extraordinary lengths to ensure
mathematical compliance with the requirements of AB 939, as amended.
(b) To encourage development of alternatives to landfilling and incineration, AB 1939 would
allow the required 50 percent diversion rate to include diversion through non -bean
transformation, as defined, if specified conditions ane met with regard to the project and the
residues generated from the project
(c) AB 1939 would revise the conditions for the issuance of a compliance order to a jurisdiction
by requiring the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) to issue an order
only after the CIWMB adopts written findings, based on substantial evidence on the record,
that the jurisdiction has failed to make a good faith effort to implement its Source Reduction
and Recycling Element (SRRE) or its Household Hazardous Waste Element (H>•iWE). As
part of its good faith evaluation, the CIWMB must also consider the impact of the Disposal
Reporting System. Additionally, the Bill would provide that a jurisdiction is deemed to be
impleincnting those elements if it has executed specified programs identified in its SRRfi or
HHWE or certain alternative programs as agreed upon by the jurisdiction and the CIWMB.
The proposal would further require the CIWIv!$ to inview and update its April 25, 1995,
e farnetnent policy, in regard to measuring compliance with the AB 939 waste reduction
rates, on an annual basis with input from local jurisdictions and others to address changes due
to legislation, regulations, markets, etc.
(d) AB 1939 would require the CIWMB to annually review and, if necessary, update the
comprehensive market development plan required under current State law in response to
changing market factors or changes in secondary waste materials markets, Also, the Bill
would require the CIWMB to forward the revised plan to the L,Viature and to local agencies.
(e) AB 1939 would require the CIWMB to establish a regional office in Los Angeles County,
subject to availability of funds.
(fl AB 1939 would require the CIWMB to include, in its annual progress reports to the
L.egislatrae, a report evaluating the accuracy and effectiveness of the Disposal Reporting
System adopted by the CIWMB, including recoaamendations to address any deficiencies in
the system
#33205 VI.- SWTF Memo on AB
I939
SOUTHERN CAUFORNIA
ASSOCIATION Of GOVERNMENTS
04
FROM ; Pana Sonic FAX SYSTEM PHONE NO. : 8610701 Mar. 02 2000 05:19AM P3
SAMPLE RESOLUTION SUPPORTING AB 2939
WHEREAS, the City/County of supports AB 1939, introduced by
Assembly Member Vincent of the California Legislature and sponsored by the County of
Los Angeles; and
WHEREAS, the California Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB939) requires cities and
counties to divert 25 and 50 percent of their solid waste from landfills or
"transformation" facilities by 1995 and the year 2000. respectively; and
WHEREAS, the failure to comply with the Act's requirements, including
mathematically substantiating achievement of the waste diversion mandates, may subject
a local jurisdiction to penalties of up $10,000 per day; and
WHEREAS, several Southern California jurisdictions have struggled to meet the 50%
requirement for several reasons. including; concerns by local jurisdictions regarding the
accuracy of the reporting system in determining and quantifying the waste by jurisdiction
and a whole host of problems associated with numerical accounting; and
WHEREAS, AB 1939, declares the intent of the Legislature to place primary emphasis
on implementation of waste diversion programs to efficiently utilize limited local
resources and not to require local agencies to go to extraordinary lengths to ensure
mathematical compliance with the requirements of AB 939; and
WHEREAS, to encourage development of alternatives to land filling and incineration,
AB 1939 would allow the required 50 percent diversion rate to include diversion through
no -burn transformation; and
WHEREAS, AB 1939 would revise the conditions for the issuance of a compliance
order to a jurisdiction by the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CMNIB),
based upon substantial evidence on the record that the jurisdiction has failed to make a
good faith effort to implement Source Reduction and Recycling Element or its Household
Hazardous Waste Element; and
WHEREAS, the proposal would further require the CIWMB to review and update its April
25. 1995, enforcement policy, in regard to measuring compliance with the AB 939 waste
reduction rates, on an annual basis with input from local jurisdictions and others, to address
changes due to legislation, regulations, markets, etc; and
WHEREAS, AB 1939 would require the CIWNM to establish a Southern California regional
office, located in Ins Angeles County, subject to availability of funds; and
WHEREAS, AB 1939 would require the CrWN B to include, in its annual progress reports to
the Legislature, a report evaluating the accuracy and effectiveness of the Disposal Repotting
System adopted by the CIWMB, including recommendations to address any deficiencies in
the system;
FROM : Panasonic FAX SYSTEM PHONE NO. : ee10701 Mar. 02 2000 05:29AN P5
NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City/Counry
of supports AS 1939 in its efforts to place primary emphasis on the
implementation of waste diversion programs, encourage development of alternatives to
landfilling and incineration and provide reasonable guidelines for jurisdictions to follow for
the purposes of diverting waste.
--anct5onic -H,' ter. PHONE NO. : 8610701 Mar. 02 2000 05:20AM P4
SUMMARY OF EXISTING
DEFICIENCIES AND PROPOSED
LEGISLATIVE REMEDIES
ASSEMBLY BILL 1938
(INTRODUCED FEBRUARY 15, 2000)
MMARY OF I-XISTING LAW
The California Integrated Waste Management Act, commonly known as AS 939, has
imposed mandates on each city and county in California to divert 25 and 50 percent,
compared to 1990 figures, of solid waste from disposal at landfills or transformation
facilities by 1995 and the year 2000, respectively. The Act also stipulated preparation of
planning documents, reporting requirements, and measurement methodologies on howto
quantify the amount of waste being generated, disposed, and/or diverted. Failure to
comply with the Act's requirements, including mathematically substantiating achievement
of the waste diversion mandates, may subject the jurisdiction to penalties of up to $10,000
per day.
AB 939 also requires each county and the cities within that county to convene a task force
to assist, among other things, in coordinating the development of jurisdictions' recycling
and other planning documents as well as ensuring a coordinated and cost-effective
regional waste management system. The membership of the task force, as required by
AB 939, is determined by the county and by a majority of the cities within the county which
contain a majority of the incorporated population.
In Los Angeles County, this task force which has been in existence since the enactment
of AS 939 is known as the Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Task
Force,
LOS ANGELES COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Los Angeles County is the most populous county in the State and approximately one out
of three Californians resides in this County. The County encompasses 88 cities and over
80 unincorporated communities. Los Angeles County is also larger than 42 states in the
nation and economically ranks 16 among the world's industrialized countries.
Los Angeles County is home to one of the most complex and diverse solid waste
management systems in the nation. Residential waste collection is provided by a
combination of municipal forces, franchises, and private/independent waste
collectorwbaulers who operate on an open -market basis. Commercial waste collection is
generally being provided by franchise and independent haulers, mostly under an open -
market system.
FPOM : Panasonic FAX SYSTEM PHONE NO. : 8610701 Mar. 02 2000 05:28AM P4
SUMMARY OF EXISTING
DEFICIENCIES AND PROPOSED
LEGISLATIVE REMEDIES
ASSEMBLY BILL 1939
(INTRODUCED FEBRUARY 15, 2000)
PAGE 2
Businesses and residents in Los Angeles County generate approximately 50,000 tons of
solid waste per day (7 -day week). About one-third of the waste is diverted from disposal
facilities and the remaining waste is disposed of at in- and out -of -County disposal facilities
(approximately 2,500 tons/day at out -of -County facilities and the remainder at in -County
permitted disposal facilities which at last count were utilized by over 200 jurisdictions). On
a daily basis, approximately 60 percent of collected solid waste in need of disposal is taken
to landfills and incineration facilities via transfer stations. The remaining 40 percent is
generally delivered directly by self haulers, independent haulers, and others to disposal
facilities.
A majority of the County's solid waste management facilities are owned and operated by
the private sector.
SUMMARY OF THE PROBLEM
To measure a jurisdiction's compliance with the 50 percent waste diversion mandate, the
California integrated Waste Management Board developed the Disposal Reporting System
to track the quantities of solid waste disposed by each jurisdiction. Since the
implementation of the Disposal Reporting System in 1995, concerns by local jurisdictions
have been mounting regarding the accuracy of the System in determining and quantifying
the waste by the jurisdiction of origin. The jurisdictions' concerns have been further
compounded bythe California Integrated Waste Management Board's heavy emphasis on
numerical accounting whose accuracy has clear and substantial limitations.
In order to insure mathematical compliance with the waste reduction mandates of the Act
and avoid potential penalties, each waste collector must accurately quantify the amount
of waste collected from each customer (truck with scale) and by jurisdiction of origin
(customer's site address). in an urbanized area such as Los Angeles County with
88 cities, over 80 unincorporated communities, over 160 independent haulers, and many
thousands of self haulers and contractors, implementation of such a system is not
practical, economically not feasible, and will exhaust local resources that can best be used
to implement waste reduction programs which is the fundamental goal of AB 939.
The County and the 88 cities in Los Angeles County must be commended for their efforts
and support to insure full compliance with the requirements of the Act while continuously
striving to maximize their waste diversion efforts. As a result, waste disposal in
Los Angeles County has been reduced by one-third compared to 1990 quantities.
However, we must also recognized that there will remain a need for landfills to insure
proper management of residuals waste remaining after all diversion activities have been
completed.
FROM : Panasonic FAX SYSTEM PHONE N0. : 8610701 Mar. 02 2000 05:2-H''
SUMMARY OF EXISTING
DEFICIENCIES AND PROPOSED
LEGISLATIVE REMEDIES
ASSEMBLY BILL 1939
(INTRODUCED .FEBRUARY 15, 2000)
PAGE 3
In order to minimize our needs for landfill capacity, efforts to increase diversion activities
must be expanded by promoting development of alternative disposal technologies, i.e.,
transformation. However, under the current law, transformation includes "incineration" and
as such is considered "disposal." Additionally, jurisdictions utilizing facilities are allowed
to claim notmore than ten percent diversion credit (toward the 50 percent diversion
mandate) for the waste managed at these facilities. Because of these limitations,
development of new transformation facilities in California has come to halt. Non -bum
transformation technologies divert waste from landfills and incinerators and, therefore,
should be eligible for full diversion credit. This change to the Statute would also greatly
enhance development of these technologies.
In addition to the issues listed, many local jurisdictions find that to get their concerns
properly responded to by the Waste Board, they must attend meetings in Sacramento due
to the lack of a local Waste Board office in Southern California. This has created a
financial hardship for many jurisdictions in the County. Since Los Angeles County (88
cities and the County) provides approximately one-third of the Waste Board's budget which
is being funded by imposition of fees on solid waste generated in Los Angeles County,
then it is justifiable and necessary for the Waste Board to maintain a local (or regional)
office in Los Angeles County.
SUMMARY OF NEEDED ACTION
Since the enactment of AB 939, the cities in Los Angeles County, the County, and the Los
Angeles County integrated Waste Management Task Force have gained substantial
experience developing and implementing a wide range of innovative waste ,diversion
programs, many of which are being used as models throughout the nation. So far, these
programs have helped jurisdictions make tremendous progress toward achieving the 50
the 50
cent
Ercent. However, getUng r challenge which further compounded due tort lack of maintaining diversion
marketsdequate
as
9 frdiverted
materials.
In recognition of the jurisdictions' concerns with the Waste Board's Disposal Reporting
System, the Act's requirements to insure mathematical compliance with its waste reduction
mandates, and other factors listed in previous sections, the Los Angeles County Integrated
-- . -en., On ;, c - ; , � r o = PHONE NO. : 8610701 Mar. 02 2000 05 : 27AM PS
SUMMARY OF EXISTING
DEFICIENCIES AND PROPOSED
LEGISLATIVE REMEDIES
ASSEMBLY BILL 1939
(INTRODUCED FEBRUARY 16, 2000)
PAGE 4
Waste Management Task' Force adopted a series of recommendations to address
jurisdictions' concerns on May 20, 1999. Subsequently, the recommendations were
adopted by many jurisdictions in Los Angeles and Ventura Counties, the Southern
California Association of Governments, and the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors
which took formal action on July 27, 1999, see attachment. The Los Angeles County
Integrated Waste Management Task Force's recommendations were formulated after
extensive consultation with cities in Los Angeles County, the County, waste management
industries, and the public. The recommendation includes measures that can be
implemented at local level and/or by the Waste Board to remedy those deficiencies that
do not require changes in State law. The recommendation also included a number of
proposals requiring State legislative actions that have been formulated into the Los
Angeles County legislative proposal. These are:
• AB 1939 declares that the intent of the Legislature and the policy of the State is to
place primary emphasis on implementation of waste diversion programs to efficiently
utilise limited local resources and not to require local agencies to go to extraordinary
lengths to ensure mathematical compliance with the requirements of AS 939, as
amended.
• To encourage development of alternatives to landfilling and incineration, AS 1939
would allow the required 50 percent diversion rate to include diversion through non -
bum transformation, as defined, if specified conditions are met with regard to the
Project and the residues generated from the project.
AB. 1939 would revise the conditions for the issuance of a "compliance order" to a
jurisdiction by requiring the Waste Board to issue an order only after the Waste Board
adopts written findings, based on substantial evidence on the record, that the
jurisdiction has failed to make a good faith effortto implement its Source Reduction and
Recycling Element (SRRE) or its Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE). As
a part of its good faith evaluation, the Waste Board must also consider the impact of
the Disposal Reporting System. Additionally, the Bill would provide that a jurisdiction
is deemed to be implementing those elements if it has executed specked programs
identified in its SRRE or HHWE or certain altemative programs as agreed upon by the
jurisdictions and the Waste Board.
The proposal would further require the Waste Board to review and update its April 25,
1995, enforcement policy, in regard to measuring compliance with the AB 939 waste
reduction rates, on an annual basis with input from local jurisdictions and others to
address changes due to legislation, regulations, markets, etc.
FROM : Panasonic FAX SYSTEM PHONE NO. : 8610701 Mar. 02 2000 05:�:.H" -�
SUMMARY OF EXISTING
DEFICIENCIES AND PROPOSED
LEGISLATIVE REMEDIES
ASSEMBLY BILL 1939
(INTRODUCED FEBRUARY 15, 2000)
PAGE 5
• AS 1939 would require the Waste Board to annually review and, if necessary, update
the comprehensive market development plan required under current State law, in
response to changing marketfactors or changes in secondarywaste materials markets.
Also, the Bill would require the Waste Board to forward the revised plan to the
Legislature and to local agencies.
• AS 1939 would require the Waste Board to establish a regional office in Los Angeles
County subject to availability of funds.
• AB 1939 would require the Waste Board to include in its annual progress reports to the
Legislature a report evaluating the accuracy and effectiveness of the Disposal
Reporting System adopted by the Waste Board including recommendations to address
any deficiencies in the system_
MMM:mal
AB939.MMM.021700
AB 2067 Assembly Bili - INTRO-) .
BILL NUMBER: AB 2067 lldTRCIDJCED
BILL TEXT
INTRODUCED BY Assembly N:enber Washington
FEB RUAR,f 22, 2000
An act to amend Sections 40001, 40201, 40503, 40507, 41780.1,
41783, 41825, 41850, and 42006 of, and to add Sections 40150.1 and
41825.1 to, the Public Resources Code, relating to solid waste.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 2067, as introduced, Washington. Solid waste diversion
requirements: nonburn transformation: County of Los Angeles.
(1) The existing California Integrated Waste Management Act of
1989, which is administered by the California Integrated Waste
Management Board, establishes an integrated waste management program.
The act requires each city, county, city and county, and regional
agency, if any, to develop a source reduction and recycling element
of an integrated waste management plan containing specified
components. For the first revision of the element, those entities
are required to divert, by January 1, 2000, from disposal or
transformation, 50% of the solid waste through source reduction,
recycling, and composting subject to the element, except as
specified. Existing law defines transformation as including
incineration, pyrolysis, distillation, gasification, or biological
conversion.
This bill would allow the 50% diversion amount requirement for the
County of Los Angeles, and the cities and regional agencies located
within that county, to include diversion through nonburn
transformation, as defined, if specified conditions are met with
regard to the project and the residues generated from the project.
The bill would revise the definition of transformation, for purposes
of this exemption, to exclude nonburn transformation, for purposes of
measuring compliance with the act's diversion requirements.
(2) Existing law requires the board to maintain headquarters in
Sacramento and authorizes the board to establish regional offices.
This bill would require the board to establish a regional office
in the County of Los Angeles, subject to the availability of funds.
(3) Existing law requires the board to file annual progress
reports with the Legislature covering the activities and actions
undertaken by the board in the prior fiscal year. The board is
required to adopt regulations requiring practices and procedures for
performing periodic tracking surveys on the disposal tonnages that
are disposed of at each disposal facility.
This bill would require the progress report to also include a
report evaluating the accuracy and effectiveness of the disposal
reporting system adopted by the board with regard to the County of
Los Angeles and the cities and regional agencies located within that
county, including recommendations to address any deficiencies in the
system.
(4) Existing law requires the board to issue an order of
compliance if the board finds that a city, county, or regional agency
has failed to implement its source reduction and recycling element
or household hazardous waste element in the integrated waste
management plan. The board is also authorized to impose
administrative civil penalties upon a city or county that fails to
implement those elements, and in determining whether or not to impose
http://www.legi nfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/asmlab_2051-2100/ab_2067_bill_20000222_introduced.html 3/3/00
H.-; LUb / tissem :). y = >.... - _-N
any penalties, -tic hoa::i :.s :required to consider only those relevant
circumstances t1 at. hav'? prevcnzed a city, county, or regional agency
::rom meeting th=_ requ_i:rements D:: the act, including the enforcement
criteria inclad=_d in t.ie board's enforcement policy.
Phis bill Rodd revise the ::onditions for the issuance of a
compliance order V7ith r=-gard to the County of Los Angeles and the
cities and regi --nal ag=_ncies lcrated within that county, to instead
:'equire the board tc iasue an D: --der if the board adopts written
:=indings, based ori Eubstant.Lal evidence in the record, that the
County of Los A-gelEs, or a cit, or regional agency located within
._hat county, ha= failed tc make a good faith effort to implement
.hose elements. �hE bill would provide that the County of Los
,kngeles, or a city cr regional .agency located within that county, is
deemed to be implemEming those elements if it has executed specified
programs identified :in the reduction or hazardous waste element or
certain alternative p:rcgrams. The bill would additionally require
:.he board to cons:_de::, in imposing those civil penalties with regard
to the County of Lo; Angeles, or a city or regional agency located
within that county, the findings and recommendations in the progress
report concerning the disposal reporting system and would require the
board to annually update the enforcement criteria included in the
enforcement policy with regard to the County of Los Angeles, or a
city or regional agency located within that county.
(5) Existing law :requires the board to develop a comprehensive
market development plan using existing resources, that will stimulate
market demand in •=he state for postconsumer waste material and
secondary waste material generated in the state, including specified
goals. The plan ;is required to include provisions for periodic
review and revision in response to changing market factors or actual
changes in secondary waste materials markets.
This bill would, with regard to the County of Los Angeles, or a
city or regional agency located within that county, require the board
to annually review, and, if necessary, update the plan, in response
to those changes, and to forward the revised plan to the Legislature,
the county, and to specified local agencies.
(6) The bill would make a related statement of legislative intent.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State -mandated local program: no.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 40001 of the Public Resources Code is amended
to read:
40001. (a) The Legislature declares that the responsibility for
solid waste management is a shared responsibility between the state
and local governments. The state shall exercise its legal authority
in a manner that ensures an effective and coordinated approach to the
safe management of all solid waste generated within the state and
shall oversee the design and implementation of local integrated waste
management plans.
(b) The Legislature further declares that it is the policy of the
state to assist local governments in minimizing duplication of
effort, and in minimizing the costs incurred, in implementing this
division through the development of regional cooperative efforts and
other mechanisms which comply with this division.
(c) The Legislature further declares that market development is
the key to successful and cost-effective implementation of the
X25 pereeflb and 59 r -_ _ ___ _ 25 percent and 50
percent diversion requirements required pursuant to Section
41780, and that the state must take a leadership role, pursuant to
.: c.` G c 'J..
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/publbill/asmlab_2051-2100/ab_2067_bill_20000222_introduced.htm] 3/3/00
.-'age.) o:: - „,
Chapter 1 (commencing with Sec�Lon 42000) of Part 3, 4i°t
by having the primary responsibility, with local
agencies having a supplementary role, for encouraging the
development and expansion of markets for recycled products by
working cooperatively with the public, private, and nonprofit
sectors.
(d) The Legislature further declares that it is the policy of the
state, and the intent of the Legislature, to place primary emphasis
on implementation of waste diversion programs to efficiently utilize
limited local resources, and not to require local agencies within the
County of Los Angeles to go to extraordinary lengths to ensure
mathematical compliance with the requirements of Section 41780.
SEC. 2. Section 40150.1 is added to the Public Resources Code, to
read:
40150.1. "Nonburn transformation," for the purpose of subdivision
(e) of Section 41780.1, means pyrolysis, distillation, gasification,
or biological conversion. "Nonburn transformation" does not include
incineration, composting, or biomass conversion.
SEC. 3. Section 40201 of the Public Resources Code is amended to
read:
40201. (a) Except as
provided in subdivision (b), "transformation" means
incineration, pyrolysis, distillation, gasification, or biological
conversion other than composting.
(b) "Transformation" does not include eempesting or
b}etnesee+an�=e -.-. . any of the following:
(1) Composting.
(2) Biomass conversion.
(3) Nonburn transformation, for the purpose of subdivision (e) of
Section 41780.1.
SEC. 4. Section 40503 of the Public Resources Code is amended to
read:
40503. The board shall maintain its headquarters in the County of
Sacramento, and may establish regional offices in any part of the
state that the board deems necessary. Subject to the
availability of funds, the board shall establish a regional office in
the County of Los Angeles.
SEC. 5. Section 40507 of the Public Resources Code is amended to
read:
40507. (a) On or before March 1 of each year, the board shall
file an annual report with the Legislature highlighting significant
programs or actions undertaken by the board to implement programs
pursuant to this division during the prior calendar year. The report
shall include, but is not limited to, the information described in
subdivision (b).
(b) The
board shall file annual progress reports each January 1
with the Legislature covering the activities and actions
undertaken by the board in the prior fiscal year. The board shall
prepare the progress reports throughout the calendar year, as
determined by the board, on the following programs:
(1) The local enforcement agency program.
(2) The research and development program.
(3) The public education program.
(4) The market development program.
(5) The used oil program.
(6) The planning and local assistance program.
(7) The site cleanup program.
(c) The progress report shall specifically include, but is not
limited to, all of the following information:
(1) Pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the status of
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/asmlab_2051-2100/ab_2067_bill_20000222_introduced.html 3/3/00
A.::, L:,10 i i- ssem xy .:,i.__ - ....11 ...�.., .,1 .�.�
the certification and evaluation of local enforcement agencies
pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencirig with Section 43200) of Part 4.
(2) Pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b), all of the
following information:
(A) The results of the research and development programs
established pursuant to Chapter 13 (commencing with Section 42650) of
Part 3.
(B) A report on information and activities associated with the
establishment of the Plastics Recycling Information Clearinghouse,
pursuant to Section 42520.
(C) A report on the progress in implementing the monitoring and
control program for the subsurface migration of landfill gas
established pursuant to Section 43030, including recommendations, as
needed, to improve the program.
(D) A report on the comparative costs and benefits of the
recycling or conversion processes for waste tires funded pursuant to
Chapter 17 (commencing with Section 42860) of Part 3.
(3) Pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), all of the
following information:
(A) A review of actions taken by the board to educate and inform
individuals and public and private sector entities who generate solid
waste on the importance of source reduction, recycling, and
composting of solid waste, and recommendations for administrative or
legislative actions -.oma- that will
inform and educate these parties.
(B) A report on the effectiveness of the public information
program required to be implemented pursuant to Chapter 12 (commencing
with Section 42600) of Part 3, including recommendations on
administrative and legislative changes to improve the program.
(C) A report on the status and effectiveness of school district
source reduction and recycling programs implemented pursuant to
Chapter 12.5 (commencing with Section 42620) of Part 3, including
recommendations on administrative and legislative changes to improve
the program's effectiveness.
(D) A report on the effectiveness of the integrated waste
management educational program and teacher training plan implemented
pursuant to Section 42603, including recommendations on
administrative and legislative changes which will improve the
program.
(E) A summary of available and wanted materials, a profile of the
participants, and the amount of waste diverted from disposal sites as
a result of the California Materials Exchange Program established
pursuant to 9 -'--=--= -' e (a) ei Section 42600.
(4) Pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (b), all of the
following information:
(A) A review of market development strategies undertaken by the
board pursuant to this division to ensure that markets exist for
materials diverted from solid waste facilities, including
recommendations for administrative and legislative actions which will
promote expansion of those markets. The recommendations shall
include, but not be limited to, all of the following:
(i) Recommendations for actions to develop more direct liaisons
with private manufacturing industries in -the-
this state to promote increased utilization of recycled
feedstock in manufacturing processes.
(ii) Recommendations for actions -
that can be taken to assist local governments in the inclusion
of recycling activities in county overall economic development plans.
(iii) Recommendations for actions to utilize available financial
resources for expansion of recycling industry capacity.
(iv) Recommendations to improve state, local, and private industry
product and material procurement practices.
Page 4 of 10
h ttp://www.leginfo.ca. gov/pub/bi I1/asnVab_2051-2100/ab_2067_bill_20000222_introduced.httnl 3/3/00
H.:c L(_1b i tissem Z) -.y z.1_- - -,.-\ ...tt . ,c 1-i J
(B) Develo2m=nt and implemeit-ation of a program to assist local
ager.cies in tae _;tent:=_ E icat_.on of markets for materials that are
diverted from disposa:. Ear_i:.ities through source reduction,
recycling, and conpost ag pursaant to Section 40913.
(C) A report on the? 3ecycling Market Development Zone Loan Program
provided for in-gttb<i-e�&tt-+e- of Section
--42 G i H - 42023.1 , pursuant co
Ser_ :ion
-2023.5 .
(D) A report orc impL=_mentation of the Compost Market Program
pursuant to Cha;te:r 5 (commencing with Section 42230) of Part 3.
(E) A report ori the progress in developing and implementing the
comprehensive Mar},et D velopmen. Plan, pursuant to Article 2 of
Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 42005) of Part 3.
(F) The number of :retreaded ---ires purchased by the Department of
General Services during the prior fiscal year pursuant to Section
,12414.
(G) The results cf the study performed in consultation with the
Department of General Services pursuant to Section 42416 to determine
If tire retreads, proc'ared by the department, have met all quality
and performance criteria cf a new tire, including any recommendations
_o expand, revise, or curtail the program.
(H) The number of recycled lead -acid batteries purchased during
_he prior fiscal year by the Department of General Services pursuant
zo Section 42443..
(I) A list of established price preferences for recycled paper
.products for the prior fiscal year pursuant to paragraph (1) of
subdivision (c) of Section 12162 of the Public Contract
Code.
(J) A report on the implementation of the white office paper
recovery program pursuant to Chapter 10 (commencing with Section
42560) of Part 3.
(5) Pursuant to paragraph (5) of subdivision (b), both of the
following information:
(A) A report on the annual audit of the used oil recycling program
established pursuant to Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 48600) of
Part 7.
(B) A summary of industrial and lubricating oil sales and
recycling rates, the results of programs funded pursuant to Chapter 4
(commencing with Section 48600) of Part 7, recommendations, if any,
for statutory changes to the program, including changes in the
amounts of the payment required by Section 48650 and the recycling
incentive, and plans for present and future programs to be conducted
over the next two years.
(6) Pursuant to paragraph (6) of subdivision (b), all of the
following information:
(A) The development by the board of the model countywide or
regional siting element and model countywide or regional agency
integrated waste management plan pursuant to Section 40912, including
its effectiveness in assisting local agencies.
(B) The adoption by the board of a program to provide assistance
to cities, counties, or regional agencies in the development and
implementation of source reduction programs pursuant to subdivision
(b) of Section 40912.
(C) The development by the board of model programs and materials
to assist rural counties and cities in preparing city and county
source reduction and recycling elements pursuant to Section
49914 40912 .
(D) A report on the number of tires that are recycled or otherwise
diverted from disposal in landfills or stockpiles.
(E) A report on the development and implementation of
recommendations, with proposed implementing regulations, for
providing technical assistance to counties and cities that meet
- alone J U.. _
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pubibill/asnVab_2051-2100/ab_2067_bill-20000222_introduced.html 3/3/00
AB 2067 Assembly Bill - INTRODUCED
criteria specified in Section 41782, so that those counties and
cities will be able to meet the objectives of this division. The
recommendations shall, among other things, address both of the
following matters:
(i) Assistance in developing methods of raising revenue at the
local level to fund rural integrated waste management programs.
(ii) Assistance in developing alternative methods of source
reduction, recycling, and composting of solid waste suitable for
rural local governments.
(F) A report on the status and implementation of the "Buy Recycled"
program established pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 42600,
including the waste collection and recycling programs established
pursuant to Sections 12164.5 and 12165 of the Public Contract Code.
(G) A report evaluating the accuracy and effectiveness of the
disposal reporting system adopted by the board pursuant to
subdivision (d) of Section 41821.5, and analyzing its impact on the
ability of the County of Los Angeles, and the cities and regional
agencies located within that county, to meet the requirements of
Section 41780. The report shall include recommendations developed in
partnership with municipalities, nonprofit organizations, and
private entities located within the County of Los Angeles to address
any deficiencies in the disposal reporting system.
(7) Pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (b), a description of
sites cleaned up under the Solid Waste Disposal and Codisposal Site
Cleanup Program established pursuant to Article 2.5 (commencing with
Section 48020) of Chapter 2 of Part 7, a description of remaining
sites where there is no responsible party or the responsible party is
unable or unwilling to pay for cleanup, and recommendations for any
needed legislative changes.
SEC. 6. Section 41780.1 of the Public Resources Code is amended to
read:
41780.1. (a) Notwithstanding any other requirement of this part,
for the purposes of determining the amount of solid waste that a
regional agency is required to divert from disposal or transformation
through source reduction, recycling, and composting to meet the
diversion requirements of Section 41780, the regional agency shall
use the solid waste disposal projections in the source reduction and
recycling elements of the regional agency's member agencies. The
method prescribed in Section 41780.2 shall be used to determine the
maximum amount of disposal allowable to meet the diversion
requirements of Section 41780.
(b) Notwithstanding any other requirement of this part, for the
purposes of determining the amount of solid waste that a city or
county is required to divert from disposal or transformation through
source reduction, recycling, and composting to meet the diversion
requirements of Section 41780, the city or county shall use the solid
waste disposal projections in the source reduction and recycling
elements of the city or county. The method prescribed in Section
41780.2 shall be used to determine the maximum amount of disposal
allowable to meet the diversion requirements of Section 41780.
(c) To determine achievement of the diversion requirements of
Section 41780 in 1995 and in the year 2000, projections of disposal
amounts from the source reduction and recycling elements shall be
adjusted to reflect annual increases or decreases in population and
other factors affecting the waste stream, as determined by the board.
By January 1, 1994, the board shall study the factors which affect
the generation and disposal of solid waste and shall develop a
standard methodology and guidelines to be used by cities, counties,
and regional agencies in adjusting disposal projections as required
by this section.
(d) The amount of additional diversion required to be achieved by
a regional agency to meet the diversion requirements of Section 41780
Wage b o* ..0
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/asnVab_2051-2100/ab_2067_bill_20000222_introduced.html 3/3/00
AB 2067 Assembly Bill -_V! - C -_ -)
shall be equal :o the ;.im o:= tae diversion requirements of its
member agencies. Tc determ.Lne 1 --he maximum amount of disposal
allowable for the rECIlDnal agency to meet the diversion requirements
of Section 41780, tYe .naximwn amount of disposal allowable for each
member agency sha_l be adced together to yield the agency disposable
maximum.
(e) Notwithstanding any Dther provision of law, the amount of
solid waste that the County of Los Angeles, or a city or regional
agency located with; -2 that oounty, is required to divert to meet the
50 percent diversion requirement specified in paragraph (2) of
subdivision (a) of Section 41780 may include solid waste that is
diverted using nonburn transformation, if the project complies with
the requirements of Section 44150, except that, for purposes of such
a nonburn transformation project's compliance with those
requirements, the term "transformation," as used in Section 44150,
includes nonburn transformation.
SEC. 7. Section 41783 of the Public Resources Code is amended to
read:
41783. —Fel,- Except as provided in
subdivision (e) of Section 41780.1, for any city, county, or
regional agency source reduction and recycling element submitted to
the board after January 1. 1995, the 50 percent diversion requirement
specified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 41780 may
include not more than 10 percent through transformation, as defined
in Section 40201, if all of the following conditions are met:
(a) The transformation project is in compliance with Sections
21151.1 and 44150 of this code and Section 42315 of the Health and
Safety Code.
(b) The transformation project uses front-end methods or programs
to remove all recyclable materials from the waste stream prior to
transformation to the maximum extent feasible.
(c) The ash or other residue generated from the transformation
project is routinely tested at least once quarterly, or on a more
frequent basis as determined by the agency responsible for regulating
the testing and disposal of the ash or residue, and, notwithstanding
Section 25143.5 of the Health and Safety Code, if hazardous wastes
are present, the ash or residue is sent to a -elassz
hazardous waste disposal facility that is classified
as a class 1, landfill in accordance with Chapter 15 (commencing with
Section 2510) of Division 3 of Title 23 of the California Code of
Regulations .
(d) The board holds a public hearing in the city, county, or
regional agency jurisdiction within which the transformation project
is proposed, and, after the public hearing, the board makes both of
the following findings, based upon substantial evidence on the
record:
(1) The city, county, or regional agency is, and will continue to
be, effectively implementing all feasible source reduction,
recycling, and composting measures.
(2) The transformation project will not adversely affect public
health and safety or the environment.
(e) The transformation facility is permitted and operational on or
before January 1, 1995.
(f) Th6 city, county, or regional agency does not include biomass
conversion, as authorized pursuant to Section 41783, in its source
reduction and recycling element.
SEC. 8. Section 41825 of the Public Resources Code is amended to
read:
41825. orb Except as provided in Section
41825.1, at least once every two years, the board shall review
each city, county, or regional agency source reduction and recycling
element and household hazardous waste element. If, after a public
hearing, which, to the extent possible, is held in the local or
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pubibi 11/asmlab_2051-2100/ab_2067_bill_20000222_introduced.html 3/3/00
Pussein x) S .�, „'—„ -
regional agency's jurisdiction, the board finds that the city,
county, or regional agency has failed to implement its source
reduction and recycling element or its household hazardous waste
element, the board shall issue an order of compliance with a specific
schedule for achieving compliance. The compliance order shall
include those conditions which the board determines to be necessary
for the local agency or regional agency to complete in order to
implement its source reduction and recycling element or household
hazardous waste element.
SEC. 9. Section 41825.1 is added to the Public Resources Code, to
read:
41825.1. (a) At least once every two years, the board shall
review the source reduction and recycling element and household
hazardous waste element of the County of Los Angeles and each city
and regional agency located within that county. If, after a public
hearing, which, to the extent possible, is held in the local or
regional agency's jurisdiction, the board adopts written findings,
based on a substantial evidence in the record that the County of Los
Angeles, or a city or regional agency located within that county, has
failed to make a good faith effort, as defined in Section 41850.1,
to implement its source reduction and recycling element or its
household hazardous waste element, the board shall issue an order of
compliance with a specific schedule for achieving compliance.
(b) For purposes of subdivision (a), the County of Los Angeles, or
a city or regional agency located within that county, shall be
deemed to be implementing its source reduction and recycling element
or household hazardous waste element, if the county, city, or
regional agency has executed those selected programs identified in
the source reduction and recycling element or household hazardous
waste element that is approved by the board, or suitable alternative
programs mutually agreed upon by the board and the county, city, or
regional agency.
(c) A compliance order issued pursuant to subdivision (a) shall
include those conditions that the board determines to be necessary
for the County of Los Angeles, or a city or regional agency located
within that county, to complete in order to implement its source
reduction and recycling element or household hazardous waste element.
SEC. 10. Section 41850 of the Public Resources Code is amended to
read:
41850. (a) Except as specifically provided in Section 41813, if,
after holding the public hearing and issuing an order of compliance
pursuant to Section 41825 or 41825.1 , the board finds
that the city, county, or regional agency has failed to implement its
source reduction and recycling element or its household hazardous
waste element, the board may impose administrative civil penalties
upon the city or county or, pursuant to Section 40974, upon the city
or county as a member of a regional agency, of up to ten thousand
dollars ($10,000) per day until the city, county, or regional agency
implements the element.
(b) In determining whether or not to impose any penalties, or in
determining the amount of any penalties imposed under this section,
including any penalties imposed due to the exclusion of solid waste
pursuant to Section 41781.2 which results in a reduction in the
quantity of solid waste diverted by a city, county, or regional
agency, the board shall consider only those relevant circumstances
which have prevented a city, county, or regional agency from meeting
the requirements of this division, including the diversion
requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (a) of Section
41780, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
(1) Natural disasters.
(2) Budgetary conditions within a city, county, or regional agency
which could not be remedied by the imposition or adjustment of solid
Page 8 of 10
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/billiasmJab_2051-2100/ab_2067_bill_20000222_introduced.html 3/3/00
A_7i 2Ub J ASSem:)..y
waste fees.
(3) Work sto;:;peLges w. --:-ch d.iroctly prevent a city, county, or
:-egional agency frorr im,-.1-_ementing its source reduction and recycling
element or household ]i3.zardous waste element.
(4) The impa_t of tie failure of federal, state, and other local
agencies locate'. within the jurisdiction to implement source
:-eduction and r_cyclinj prograns in the jurisdiction on the host
jurisdiction's ab_.lity to meet .he requirements of paragraph (2) of
subdivision (a) o:` Sectior. 41780.
(5) With regard to the County of Los Angeles, and any city or
regional agency loco ted within that county, the findings and
recommendaticns cf t;he report prepared pursuant to subparagraph (G)
of paragrap? (6) of subdivision (c) of Section 40507 and the impact
of the disposal reporting system adopted by the board pursuant to
Section 41821.5 cal t:.hose -'urisdictions' ability to meet the
requirements of Eectcion 4i 780.
(c) In ac.diti.cn to the factors specified in subdivision (b), the
board shall consider all of the following:
(1) (A) TY:.e ex::ent to which a city, county, or regional agency has
made good faith efforts to implement its source reduction and
recycling element oi.- hcusehold hazardous waste element.
(B) (i) For the purposes of this paragraph, "good faith efforts"
means all reascnGale and feasible efforts by a city, county, or
regional agency to ;mplement those programs or activities identified
in its source reducticn and recycling element or household hazardous
waste element., or a;ternative programs or activities that achieve the
same or similar results.
(ii) For purposes cf this paragraph, "good faith efforts" may also
include the evaluation_ by a city, county, or regional agency of
improved technology for the handling and management of solid waste
that would reduce costs, improve efficiency in the collection,
processing, or marketing of recyclable materials or yard waste, and
enhance the ability of the city, county, or regional agency to meet
the diversion requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision
(a) of Section 41780, provided that the city, county, or regional
agency has submitted a compliance schedule pursuant to Section 41825
or 41825.1 , and has made all other reasonable and
feasible efforts to implement the programs identified in its source
reduction and recycling element or household hazardous waste element.
(iii) in Except as provided in clause
(iv), in determining whether a jurisdiction has made a good
faith effort, the board shall consider the enforcement criteria
included in its enforcement policy, as adopted on April 25, 1995, or
as subsequently amended.
(iv) With regard to determining whether the County of Los Angeles,
or a city or regional agency within that county, has made a good
faith effort, the board shall consider the enforcement criteria in
its enforcement policy, which shall be updated on January 1, 2001,
and on or before January 1, annually thereafter. The board, in
consultation with local agencies, the solid waste industry, and
nonprofit organizations, shall conduct the update of the enforcement
criteria pursuant to this clause to reflect any applicable changes in
state law.
(2) The extent to which a city, county, or regional agency has
implemented additional source reduction, recycling, and composting
activities to comply with the diversion requirements of paragraphs
(1) and (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 41780.
(3) The extent to which a city, county, or regional agency is
meeting the diversion requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2) of
subdivision (a) of Section 41780.
(4) Whether the jurisdiction has requested and been granted an
extension to the requirements of Section 41780, pursuant to Section
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/asmlab_2051-2100/ab_2067_bill_20000222_introduced.html 3/3/00
AB 2067 Assembly Bill - INTROD°-CED
41820, or an alternative recfairement
to Section 41780, parsuant to Section 41785.
SEC. 11. Section 42006 o_ the Public Resources Code is amended to
read:
42006. (a) The plan required by Section 42005 shall describe and
prioritize actions that sho'ild be undertaken to meet the goals
specified in subdivision (b) of Section 42005.
(b) ire-- Except as provided in subdivision
(c), the plan shall include provisions for periodic review and
revision in response to changing market factors or actual changes in
secondary waste materials markets.
(c) The board shall review the plan as it applies to the County of
Los Angeles and the cities and regional agencies within that county
annually, and, if necessary, update the plan in response to changing
market factors or actual changes in secondary waste materials
markets. The board shall forward the revised plan to the
Legislature, to the County of Los Angeles, and to all cities and
regional agencies within that county.
SEC. 12. The Legislature finds and declares that a special statute
is necessary and that a general statute cannot be made applicable
within the meaning of subdivision (b) of Section 16 of Article IV of
the California Constitution, due to the following facts:
(a) One in three Californians live in the County of Los Angeles
and 55,000 tons of solid waste are generated within the county each
day.
(b) The management of these solid wastes in these large amounts
poses significant hurdles for each of the County of Los Angeles, 88
cities and unincorporated communities.
(c) The limited resources of the County of Los Angeles should be
dedicated towards establishing and implementing effective solid waste
diversion programs, instead of using those limited resources for
solid waste management accounting.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/asmlab_2051-2100/ab_2067_bill_20000222_introduced.html 3/3/00
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 4�y
FEBRUARY 15, 2000
1. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Huff called the meeting to order at 9:39 p.m.
in the South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley
Drive, Diamond Bar, California.
K
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
ROLL CALL: Agency Members Ansari, Herrera, O'Connor, Vice
Chairman Chang and Chairman Huff.
Also present were: Terrence L. Belanger, Executive Director; Mike Jenkins,
Agency Attorney; James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager; David Liu, Deputy
Director of Public Works; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Linda
Magnuson, Finance Director; Mike Nelson, Communications & Marketing Director
and Lynda Burgess, Agency Secretary.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: None
CONSENT CALENDAR: AM/O'Connor moved, VC/Chang seconded, to approve
the Consent Calendar as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: AGENCY MEMBERS - Ansari, Herrera, O'Connor, VC/Chang,
Chair/Huff
NOES: AGENCY MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: AGENCY MEMBERS - None
3.1 APPROVED MINUTES - Regular Meeting of February 1, 2000 - As
submitted.
3.2 APPROVED VOUCHER REGISTER - dated February 15, 2000 in the
amount of $23,213.19.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: None
OLD BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS: None
AGENCY MEMBER COMMENTS: AM/O'Connor expressed her frustration with
the pending litigation involving the Redevelopment Agency.
FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 2 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to conduct, Chair/Huff
adjourned the meeting at 9:41 p.m.
ATTEST:
Chairman
LYNDA BURGESS, Agency Secretary
DIAMOND BAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA N0. E3 .,3
TO: Terrence L. Belanger, Executive Director
MEETING DATE: March 07, 2000REPORT DATE: February 23, 2000
`x`
FROM: Linda G. Magnuson; Finance Director
TITLE:
Treasurer's Report — January 31, 2000
SUMMARY:
Submitted for the Redevelopment Agency Board's review and approval is the Treasurer's Statement for the
month of January 2000.
RECOMMENDATION:
Review and approve.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS: X Staff Report
_ Resolution(s)
Ordinance(s)
Agreement(s)
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST:
_ Public Hearing Notification
_ Bid Specification (on file in City
Clerk's office)
Other:
1. Has the resolution, ordinance or agreement been reviewed
by the City Attorney?
2. Does the report require a majority vote?
3. Has environmental impact been assessed? N/A
4. Has the report been reviewed by a Commission? N/A
Which Commission?
5. Are other departments affected by the report? N/A
Report discussed with the following affected departments:
REVIEWED BY:
. g
Terrence L. Belanger
Executive Director
DEPARTMENT HEAD:
Linda G. MagnusorO
Finance Director
—Yes —No
Yes _ No
Yes _ No
_ Yes _ No
Yes —No
DIAMOND BAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REPORT
AGENDA NO.
MEETING DATE: March 07, 2000
TO: Chairman and Members of the Board
FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Treasurer's Statement — January 31, 2000
ISSUE STATEMENT:
Per Agency policy, the Finance Department presents the monthly Treasurer's Statement for the
Redevelopment Agency Board's review and approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the January 2000 Treasurer's Statement.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
Submitted for the Board's review and approval is the Treasurer's Statement for the month of January
2000. This statement shows the cash balances for the Redevelopment Agency, with a breakdown of
bank account balances, investment account balances and the effective yield earned from
investments.
PREPARED BY:
Linda G. Magnuson
DIAMOND BAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TREASURER'S MONTHLY CASH STATEMENT
January 31, 2000
BEGINNING TRANSFERS ENDING
BALANCE RECEIPTS DISBURSEMENTS 1N (002 BALANCE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CIPFID $1,167,238.36 $30,135.75 $27,998.68 $1,169,375.43
LOW & MOD INCOME HOUSING FD
REDEVELOPMENT DEBT SVC FD -
TOTALS
DEMAND DEPOSITS:
INVESTMENTS:
1,167,238.36 $30,135.75 $27,998.68 $0.00 1,169,375.43
GENERAL ACCOUNT
TOTAL DEMAND DEPOSITS
TIME CERTIFICATES
LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FD
TOTAL INVESTMENTS
TOTAL CASH
$160,385.81
1,008,989.62
n nn
$160,385.81
$1,008,989.62
$1,169,375.43
Note: The Redevelopment Agency approved a development and disposition agreement with "Triple T Diamond Gate
This agreement requires the Agency to invest $983,040.50 in a Time Certificate of Deposit. The agreement
provides that the developer guarantee the current LAIF investment yield.
L.A.I.F - Effective Yield for January 2000
Certificate of Deposit Yield (11/11/99-05/10/00,1
4f*�Q y - g
Terrence L. Belanger, Treasurer ()
5,771%
4.550%