The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12/03/2002Tuesday, December 3, 2002 5:30 p.m. — Study Session CC -8 6:30 p.m. — Regular Meeting Redevelopment Agency Meeting Public Financing Authority Meeting South Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center Main Auditorium 21865 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Mayor Wen P. Chang Mayor Pro Tem Debby O'Connor Council Member Carol Herrera Council Member Bob Huff Council Member Bob Zirbes City Manager Linda C. Lowry 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) 860-2449 during regular business hours. In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the City of Diamond Bar requires that any person in need of any type of special equipment, assistance or accommodation(s) in order to communicate at a City public meeting, must inform the City Clerk a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking in the Council Chambers, The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper and encourages you to do the same. DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL RULES (ALSO APPLIES TO COMMISSION AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS) PUBLIC I PUT The meetings ofthe Diamond Har City Council are open to the public. A member ofthe public may address the Council on the subject of ase or more agenda items and/or other items of interest which ace 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 Cleric. As a general rule the opportunity for public s will take place at the discretion of the Chair. However, in order to facilitate the meeting, persons who are interested parties for an item may be requested to give their presentation at the time the item is called on the calendar. The Chair may limit the public input on any item or the total amount oftime allocated for public testimaty based on the number of people requesting to speak and the business ofthe Council. Individuals are requested to refimin from personal attacks towards Council Members or other citizens. Comments which are not conducive to a positive b,•smess 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 firm time to time dispense with public comment on items previously considered by the Council. (Does not apply to Committee meetings.) 1 In accordance with State I aw (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 sul4ett matter arises subsequent to the posting ofthe 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 Har City Council. A. Disorderly behavior toward the Council or any member ofthe staffthere4 tending to interrupt the due and orderly course of said meeting. B. A breach ofthe 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 refiain from addressing the Board: and D. Any other unlawful interference with the due and orderly conduct ofsaid ateeli W, 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 arc available electronically and may be accessed by a personal computer through a phone modem. Every meeting ofthe City Council is recorded on cassetle 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 ofthe meeting. Please telephone (909) 860-2489 between 8 am and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. HELPFUL PHONE NUMBERS Copies of Agenda, Rules ofthe Council, Cassette Tapes of Meetings (909) 860-2489 Computer Access to Agendas (909) 860 -LINE General Information (909) 860-2489 NOTE: ACTION MAY BE TARN ON ANY ITEM IDENTIFIED ON THE AGENDA. THIS MEETING IS BEING BROADCAST LIVE BY ADELPHIA FOR AIRING ON CHANNEL 17, AND BY REMAINING IN THE ROOM, YOU ARE GIVING YOUR PERMISSION TO BE TELEVISED. THIS MEETING WILL BE RE -BROADCAST EVERY SATURDAY AT 9:00 A.M. AND EVERY TUESDAY AT 6:30 P.M. ON CHANNEL 17. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA December 3, 2002 1. STUDY SESSION: 5:30 p.m., CC -8 ➢ Home Improvement Program CLOSED SESSION: None CALL TO ORDER: 6:30 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor INVOCATION: 1St Councilor Ralf Lorenzen, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints ROLL CALL: Council Members Herrera, Huff, Zirbes, Mayor Pro Tem O'Connor, Mayor Chang APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Mayor 2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS: 2.1 Introduction of Anthony Rose, Sr. Management Analyst 2.2 Proclaiming December, 2002 as "YOU DRINK & DRIVE. YOU LOSE." Month 3. CITY COUNCIL REORGANIZATION 3.1 SELECTION OF MAYOR 3.2 SELECTION OF MAYOR PRO TEM 3.3 PRESENTATION TO OUTGOING MAYOR, WEN P. CHANG RECESS: RECONVENE: CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 4.A PUBLIC COMMENTS: "Public Comments" is the time reserve on each regular meeting agenda to provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the Council on Consent Calendar items or matters of interest to the public December 3, 2002 PAGE 2 that are not already scheduled for consideration on this agenda. Although the City Council values your comments, pursuant to the Brown Act, the Council generally cannot take any action on items not listed on the posted agenda. Please complete a Speaker's Card and give it to the City Clerk !completion of this form is voluntary). There is a five-minute maximum time limit when addressing_the_City Council 4.13 RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT: Under the Brown Act, members of the City Council may briefly respond to public comments but no extended discussion and no action on such matters may take place. 5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 HOLIDAY RIDE — November 29, 2002 to January 2, 2003 —t=ree to all D.B. residents 18 years and older (children under 18 must be accompanied by an adult). Please call 1-800-578-6555 for pick up. 5.2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — December 10, 2002 — 7:00 p.m., AQMD/GOVERNMENT CENTER Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.3 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING -- December 12, 2002 — 7:00 p.m., AQMD/GOVERNMENT CENTER Hearing Board Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. Meeting will be adjourned due to an anticipated lack of quorum. 5.4 WINTER SNOW FEST — December 14, 2002 — 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Pantera Park, 738 Pantera Dr. 5.5 CITY COUNCIL MEETING — December 17, 2002 — 6:30 p.m., AQMD/GOVERNMENT CENTER Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.6 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION — December 19, 2002 — 7:00 p.m., AQMD/GOVERNMENT CENTER Hearing Board Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. Meeting will be adjourned due to an anticipated lack of quorum. 5.7 CHRISTMAS HOLIDAY — Tuesday, December 24 and Wednesday, December 25, 2002, City offices will be closed in observance of the Christmas Holiday. Offices will reopen, Thursday, December 26, 2002. City Offices will be closed Wednesday, January 1, 2003 in observance of New Year's Day. Offices will reopen on Thursday, January 2, 2003. 5.8 CITY -SPONSORED ELECTRONIC WASTE PICK UP — December 26, 2002 to January 17, 2003 — Free removal of TV's, VCR's Monitors, CD Players, Telephones, Radios, etc. Call 800-449-7587. December 3, 2002 PAGE 3 5.9 CHRISTMAS TREE RECYCLING PROGRAM — December 26 through January 10, 2003. Place tree at curbside on regular trash pick up day for Disposal. 5.10 COMMUNITY FOUNDATION "SILENT AUCTION"— Saturday, January 11, 2003 —1:00 — 4:00 p.m., Deane Homes Swim Club, 1010 Overlook Ridge Drive. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR: 6.1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — Regular Meeting of October 29, 2002 - Receive and file. Requested by: Planning Division 6.2 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES — Regular Meeting of October 10, 2002 - Receive and file. Requested by: Public Works Division 6.3 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES — Regular Meeting of October 24, 2002 - Receive and file. Requested by: Community Services Division 6.4 WARRANT - Approve Warrant Register dated November 21, 2002 in the amount of $547,901.82. Requested by: Finance Division 6.5 APPROVAL OF APPLICATION FOR TREE CITY USA RECERTIFICATION FOR 2002 AND AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE APPLICATION Recommended Action: Approve the application Requested by: Community Services Division 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None 8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: 8.1 CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 2002-78 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ND2002-8) FOR THE PROPOSED SUMMITRIDGE LIBRARY PROJECT December 3, 2002 PAGE 4 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution Requested by: City Manager 8.2 CONSIDERATION OF ESTABLISHING A HOME IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TO ASSIST ELIGIBLE LOW -AND -MODERATE INCOME RESIDENTIAL OWNER/OCCUPANTS IN HOME REHABILITATION Recommended Action: Approve establishment of Home Improvement Program Requested by: Neighborhood Improvement Subcommittee RECESS TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1. CALL TO ORDER: Chair ROLL CALL: Agency Members Chang, Herrera, Huff, VC/Zirbes, C/O'Connor 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 Agency Members values your comments, pursuant to the Brown Act, the Members 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 voluntarv). There is a five-minute maximum time limit when addressina the Redevelopment Agencv. 3. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REORGANIZATION 3.1 SELECTION OF CHAIR 3.2 SELECTION OF VICE CHAIR 3.3 PRESENTATION TO OUTGOING CHAIR, DEBORAH H. O'CONNOR 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: None 5. 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. ADJOURN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING December 3, 2002 PAGE 5 RECESS TO PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY CALL TO ORDER: Chair ROLL CALL: Authority Members Herrera, Huff, Zirbes, V/Chair O'Connor, Chair/Chang 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 Authority on Consent Calendar items or matters of interest to the public that are not already scheduled for consideration on this agenda. Although the Financing Authority values your comments, pursuant to the Brown Act, the Authority generally cannot take any action on items not listed on the posted agenda. Please complete a Speaker's Card and give it to the Authority Secreta!y (cvmlletion of this form is voluntary). There is a five-minute maximum time limit when addressing the Financina Authoritv. 3. PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY REORGANIZATION 3.1 SELECTION OF CHAIR 3.2 SELECTION OF VICE CHAIR 3.3 PRESENTATION TO OUTGOING CHAIR, WEN P. CHANG 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: None 5. AUTHORITY CONSIDERATION: 5.1 APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT (POS) FOR THE VARIABLE RATE LEASE REVENUE BONDS, 2002 SERIES A (COMMUNITY/SENIOR CENTER PROJECT) Recommended Action: Approve the revised Preliminary Official Statement Requested by: Executive Director 6. AUTHORITY MEMBER COMMENTS: Items raised by individual Authority Members are for Authority discussion. Direction may be given at this meeting or the item may be scheduled for action at a future meeting. ADJOURN PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY MEETING RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING: 9. COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS/ COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS: December 3, 2002 PAGE 6 10. ADJOURNMENT: VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK FROM: DATE: I 3a z ADDRESS: �c�`� �_ PHONE: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. VOLUNTARY REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY CLERK FROM: _ �Iot Jr— 1 M DATE: t ADDRESS:�l ]Z15iLI olps PHONE: ORGANIZATION: AGENDA #/SUBJECT: I expect to address the Council on the subject agenda item. Please have the Council Minutes reflect my name and address as written above. Signature Agenda No. 6.1 MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 22, 2002 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Ruzicka called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality ManagementfGovernment Center Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Tanaka led the pledge of allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Joe Ruzicka, Vice Chairman Steve Tye, and Commissioners Steve Nelson, Dan Nolan, and Jack Tanaka. Also Present: James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager, Ann Lungu, Associate Planner, Linda Smith, Development Services Assistant, Stella Marquez, Administrative Assistant, David Meyer and Milan Garrison, LDM Associates. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of Study Session of October 8, 2002. C/Tanaka moved, C/Nolan seconded, to approve the Study Session Minutes of October 8, 2002. Without objection, the motion was so ordered. 4.2 Minutes of Regular Meeting of October 8, 2002. C/Tanaka moved, C/Nolan seconded, to approve the Regular Meeting minutes of October 8, 2002 as presented. Without objection, the motion was so ordered. 5. OLD BUSINESS: None, 6. NEW BUSINESS: None. OCTOBER 22, 2002 Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 7. PUBLIC HEARING (S): 7.1 Development Review No. 2002-27 (pursuant to Code Section 22.48.020.A.1 and 22.54) is a request to construct a two story, single-family residence with porch, balconies/covered patio, and dual two car garages totaling approximately 11,983 gross square feet. The request also includes a site retaining wall in areas of varying topography that varies in exposed height from 42 inches to a maximum of ten (10) feet. The ten -foot section of retaining wall requires Variance approval. (Continued from September 24, 2002) PROJECT ADDRESS: 24037 Goldrush Drive (Lot 3, Tract No. 31977) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Goldrush Investment Group 1595 S. McPher in Avenue Monterey Park, CA 91754 APPLICANT: Andrew King 1595 S. McPherrin Avenue Monterey Park, CA 91754 DSA/Smith presented staff's report. Staff recommends Planning Commission approval of Development Review No. 2002-27 and Variance No. 2002-04, the Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Andrew King, applicant, said he concurs with staff's conditions for the revised plans. Mr. King indicated to C/Tye that he was familiar with Item 5(c) on page 7, specifying the condition in which the property and all other lots in the development must be maintained. Mr. King stated he has been cleaning up the property as needed and as soon as litter is apparent. He anticipated the problem would lessen because he planned to fence the property. Chair/Ruzicka opened the public hearing. There being no one present who wished to speak on this matter, Chair/Ruzicka closed the public hearing.. At the request of C/Tye, DSA/Smith explained how this 11,000 plus square foot home fits into the character of the surrounding neighborhood. OCTOBER 22, 2002 Page 3 PLANNING COMMISSION DCM/DeStefano responded to C/Nolan that staff viewed the property this afternoon and the majority of the site is clean of the type of debris with which the Planning Commission was previously concerned. C/Nolan• moved, Chair/Ruzicka seconded, to approve Development Review No. 2002-27 and Variance No. 2002-04, the Findings of Facts, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson, Nolan, Tanaka, VC/Tyc, Chair/Ruzicka NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 7.2 Conditional Use Permit No. 2002-07, Variance No. 2002-02 and Development Review No. 2002-I8 - Pursuant to Code Sections 22.42.130.G.4, 22.58, 22.54, and 22.45 this application is a request to install a wireless telecommunications facility with Antennas (mounted on a mono -cypress) camouflaged as a cypress tree and equipment cabinet. The Variance relates to the height of the mono -cypress that exceeds the maximum allowable 35 -foot height. The Development Review relates to architectural/design review. (Continued from October 8, 2002) PROJECT ADDRESS: I' ; • ' ti • .pl 11 APPLICANT: 2151 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Roman Catholic Abp 3424 Wilshire Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90010 Cingular 2521 Michelle Drive Tustin, CA 92780 AssocP/Lungu presented staff's report. Staff recommends Planning Commission approval of Conditional Use Permit 2002-07, Variance No. 2002-02 and Development review No. 2002-18, the Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. OCTOBER 22, 2002 Page 4 PLANNING COMMISSION John Halminsky, The Consulting Group, presented live and faux material samples to the Commissioners for their perusal. He pointed out proposed location and size of the representation materials. Chair/Ruzicka reopened the public hearing. There being no one present who wished to speak on this matter, Chair/Ruzicka closed the public hearing. Mx. Halminsky responded to VC/Tye that he had exhausted all remedies for possible location of the equipment. The church would not allow him to place the equipment in the tower. Additionally, there are a number of stained glass windows that would be obscured by the equipment if it were placed in the pedestrian walkway area. If the equipment were placed in the courtyard the only potential location would be in a landscaped area. The proposed location is screened from public view, the main reason for requesting the location. In addition, the proposed location offers an option for a mono -cypress. Chair/Ruzicka asked for assurance that the mono -cypress would not fall during a strong wind. Mr. Halminsky explained that the mono -cypress is a substantial structure built from steel, calculated out for wind loads and bolted to a foundation. C/Nelson thanked Mr. Halminsky for providing the visual simulation. He asked who would be responsible and how quickly the faux tree could be repaired in the event of damage. Mr. Halminsky responded that Cingular Wireless would be responsible for maintenance. Their turnaround time is within 24 hours of notification. VC/Tye felt he did not receive an adequate response to his question about why the equipment could not be located in the bell tower and courtyard areas. AssocP/Lungu said that the church did not want the equipment located in the tower because it would require 24-hour access. C/Nelson moved, C/Nolan seconded, to approve Conditional Use Permit 2002-07, Variance No. 2002-02 and Development Review No. 2002-18, the Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. VC/Tye asked that the motion be amended to limit this location to one (1) cell site. C/Nelson and C/Nolan accepted the amendment. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: OCTOBER 22, 2002 Page 5 PLANNING COMMISSION AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson, Nolan, Tanaka, VC/Tye, Chair/Ruzicka NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 8. PUBLIC HEARING(S): 8.1 Development Review No. 2002-24 - Pursuant to Code Section 22.48.020(A)(1), this application is to request to remodel and add approximately 1,487 square feet to an existing two-story, single-family residence of 2,512 square feet including porch and two car garage. PROJECT ADDRESS: 21925 Tolani Court Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER/ David and Susan Victoria APPLICANT: 21925 Tolani Court Diamond Bar, CA 91765 DSA/Smith presented staff's report. Staff recommends Planning Commission approval of Development Review No. 2002-24, the Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. David Victoria said he read staff's report and concurs with staff's recommendations for approval. Chair/Ruzicka opened the public hearing. There being no one present who wished to speak on this matter, Chair/Ruzicka closed the public hearing. VC/Tye moved, C/Tanaka seconded, to approve Development Review No. 2002-24, the Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson, Nolan, Tanaka, VC/Tye, Chair/Ruzicka NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None OCTOBER 22, 2002 Page 6 PLANNING COMMISSION 8.2 Development Review No. 2002-23 and Thee Permit No. 2002-09 - Pursuant to Code Sections 22.48.020.A. and 22.38, this application is a request to construct a two-story office building of approximately 35,000 square feet on a vacant lot. A Tree Permit is required for the removal/replacement of approximately eight California Pepper trees and one Walnut tree. PROJECT ADDRESS: 20625 Lycoming Street Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Dante Senese Southcoast Cabinet 755 Pinefalls Avenue Diamond Bar, CA 91789 APPLICANT: Design Arc 27231 Burbank, Suite 201 Foothill Ranch, CA 92610 AssocP/Lungu presented staff's report. Staff recommends Planning Commission approval of Development Review No. 2002-23 and Tree Permit No. 2002-09, the Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. DCM/DeStefano stated that staff received a letter from a resident residing on Lycoming Avenue within a 500 -foot radius of the site. The Commissioners were provided a copy of the letter. The letter states the writers concern about additional traffic that might be generated as a result of this project. VC/Tye asked for an explanation of required parking. He felt that instead of the 56 parking spaces, 61 should be required which would render the project nine parking spaces deficient. AssocP/Lungu concurred with VC/Tye's calculations. Staff estimated that five (5) carpool spaces mitigated the lack of parking space deficiency. Each use would be required to comply with the City's transportation demand programs. AssocP/Lungu responded to VC/Tye that applicant is required to widen Lycoming Avenue along the project frontage area only. Responding to Chair/Ruzicka, AssocP/Lungu explained that the rear portion of the property abuts the railroad track and not a residential area. Therefore, the three-foot setback is adequate. OCTOBER 22, 2002 Page 7 PLANNING COMMISSION Steve Kemp, Design Arc, stated he read staff's report and concurs with the conditions of approval. Although the building was planned for use by a single tenant, the building owner, the building is designed to be sub -divided for multiple tenants in the event that becomes a requirement. Some of the employees who currently work at other locations owned by Southcoast Cabinet will be moving to this site so there will be no additional traffic parking on Lycoming as a result of this project. He believed that staff's original calculations for parking was adequate based upon warehouse/office use space. Mr. Kemp further explained the tree replacement proposal. Mr. Kemp indicated to C/Nolan that the greatest number of employees expected to be at the site at any one time would be 30. C/Nelson asked if the applicant is proposing to use the proposed landscape plan as a completely adequate plan. Mr. Kemp said his proposal as outlined is proposed to be adequate for replacement. C/Nelson said he was concerned about future parking considerations. He does not see a fit between the building and the proposed 56 parking spaces. Mr. Kemp explained to C/Nelson that the second floor glass front was created to enhance the facade. The area is not intended for tenant occupancy. C/Nelson explained why he is concerned about future under parking. Mr. Kemp reiterated that any future tenant would be required to submit to the permit process and comply with parking requirements. Mr. Kemp responded to VC/Tye that only a portion of this applicant's business would be relocated to this site. They plan to maintain other portions of the business in .current locations. Chair/Ruzicka opened the public hearing. There was no one who wished to speak on this matter. Chair/Ruzicka closed the public hearing. C/Tanaka moved, VC/Tye seconded, to approve Development Review No. 2002-23 and Tree Permit No. 2002-9, the Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. OCTOBER 22, 2002 Page 8 PLANNING COMMISSION C/Nelson explained why he would not be able to support the project. He was somewhat concerned that the project would not address future concerns about parking and tenants. C/Nolan echoed C/Nelson's comments. He felt it was a beautiful building and thought the project should have further discussions between the applicant and staff about mitigating for additional parking spaces. He also believed that there should be further consideration regarding tree replacement. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Tanaka, VC/Tye, Chair/Ruzicka NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson, Nolan ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 8,3 Development Review No. 2002-03 - Pursuant to Code Sections 22.48.020.A., this application is a request to construct a two-story office building of approximately 25,000 square feet on a vacant lot within Gateway Corporate Center. PROJECT ADDRESS: 21671 E. Gateway Center Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER:. Acbar Omar 222 N. Sunset Avenue West Covina, CA 91790 APPLICANT: Southwest Design 7201 Haven Avenue, Suite E-309 Alta Loma, CA 91701 AssocP/Lungu presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue the public hearing for this project to a future date in order to give the applicant time to submit the traffic impact analysis report and geotechnical report for the City's review and approval. VC/Tye asked why this project came before the Planning Commission this evening absent two essential reports. OCTOBER 22, 2002 Page 9 PLANNING COMMISSION DCM/DeStefano explained that staff would prefer not to provide the Planning Commission with incomplete applications. However, the developer has a right to bring this matter before the Planning Commission. Staff discussed this matter with the applicant over the past several weeks. Lack of documentation came to the attention of staff in the past few days and staff asked the applicant whether he wished to proceed or continue the project. The property owner and applicant requested staff to proceed with the project. VC/Tye questioned the lack of mitigation for traffic in connection with this project. DCM/DeStefano explained that staff just received the traffic report and has not had an opportunity to review the document. Alan Smith, Southwest Designs, said that the soils report has to be updated for building and structural in conjunction with 1998 UBC and CCB. With respect to traffic, the applicant anticipated that there would be no required mitigation. The applicant has gone through this process before and understands what is expected. If the Commission would feel more comfortable giving the City's traffic engineer an opportunity to review the report, it would be best to continue the item. Chair/Ruzicka opened the public hearing. There was no one present who wished to speak on this matter. Chair/Ruzicka closed the public hearing. VC/Tye moved, C/Nolan seconded, to reopen the Public Hearing and continue the matter to November 26, 2002. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson, Nolan, Tanaka, VC/Tye, Chair/Ruzicka NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 8.4 General Plan Amendment 2002-01, Zone Change 2002-01, Specific Plan No. 2002701 Development Review 2002-07 Conditional use Perrnit No. 2002-05 Tentative Parcel Map No. 26771 Tree Permit No. 2002-10 and -Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact No. 2002-07 - The proposed project is a request for approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Specific Plan, Development Review, Conditional Use Permit, Tentative Parcel Map and Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. This would allow for OCTOBER 22, 2002 Page 10 PLANNING COMMISSION the construction of a retail/commercial shopping center consisting of a three-story hotel, two freestanding restaurants, and two officetretail building pads totaling approximately 70,370 square feet of gross building area. The proposed development will be located on an approximate 6.50 gross acre site. PROJECT ADDRESS: 850 Brea Canyon Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Louis Marcellin 20326 Fuerte Drive Walnut, CA 91789 APPLICANT: Phil Williams (Extended Stay America) 2525 Cherry Avenue #310 Signal Hill, CA 90806 Milan Garrison and David Meyer, LDM Associates, presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing, receive testimony, close the public hearing and direct staff to prepare a resolution of approval, with conditions, as appropriate for consideration at the next regularly scheduled meeting. DCM/DeStefano stated that staff received a letter from Mr. Ortiz, a resident living adjacent to the project, opposing the project based upon concerns about additional traffic, privacy issues, and excessive noise and light issues. In addition, the letter refers to concerns about illegally parked trucks on Brea Canyon Road. Al Anz, representing the development group, Alan Taylor, Extended Stay America, and Mario Tutino, CASCO (project architect) summarized the proposed project. Mr. Anz responded to VC/Tye that he would not be interested in purchasing this property except for the proposed zone change. C/Nelson asked what theme the architect was attempting. Mr. Tutino explained that the architectural theme was Extended Stay America's standard prototype with minor enhancements. OCTOBER 22, 2002 Page 11 PLANNING COMMISSION Responding to C/Nolan, Mr. Tutino stated that rooms open only to the inside and not to the outside. Mr. Taylor stated an average across -the -country night's fee for the past quarter was $320 per week. This property will generate closer to a $400 per week fee ($80 per night). Mr. Marcellin said that about 100 of the vehicles currently stored on his property are owned by D.B. residents. C/Tanaka asked if all of the Extended Stay America's are three (3) stories to which Mr. Taylor responded that all are three stories at a minimum and go up to seven or eight stories. To Chair/Ruzicka's question, Mr. Taylor stated that the proposed project consists of 116 studios. VC/Tye asked if Extended Stay America has a restaurant in the facility and Mr. Taylor responded "no." Mr. Meyer explained the discretionary permits that were requested for this project and their relationship to the City's General Plan. The applicant has determined that there is no demand for office use and industrial use. As a result, they are requesting the City of Diamond Bar to modify its General Plan to a land use designation of General Commercial. Staff reviewed the, request and given current development trends in and around the area, agree that the request is an appropriate modification to the General Plan. The General Plan Amendment needs to be accomplished if this plan is to move forward. Secondly, staff is suggesting that if the General Plan is amended to General Commercial that pursuant to the State mandate, the zone should be changed to a zone that implements that land use designation, zone district C-2. Further, staff suggests a Specific Plan overlay for this project and staff is recommending that a Specific Plan be prepared for the six and one-half acre site. The Specific Plan overlay would create zoning standards applicable to this unique six and one-half acre parcel. Nowhere else in the City of Diamond Bar would these standards be applied un] ss a similar Specific Plan was created for a different area. Staff is concerned that is ambitious project may not go forward for a variety of reasons such as financi g, tenant agreements and finalization of the property sale from the current owne . If something should occur that this project were not completed, the Specific Plan would be in place and regulate whatever future or alternative types of deve opment that could occur on this site. VC/Tye asked what could be built at the site under the current General Plan land use designation. OCTOBER 22, 2002 Page 12 PLANNING COMMISSION Mr. Meyer explained that if the Commission declined to recommend the General Plan amendment, staff would recommend an appropriate land use zone appropriate for the current land use category, C-1 for office buildings. Chair/Ruzicka opened the public hearing. Lowanna Owens, 826 Dryander Drive, said her property faces this project. She was concerned that the development of the property and the noise and lights would adversely affect the quality of their lives. She was also concerned about the safety of children crossing Brea Canyon Road and Lycoming to get to Walnut Elementary School. With all of the City of Industry development along with this development, there would be a proliferation of fast food restaurants. She wanted to know how traffic could enter and leave the project with only one ingress/egress. She opposed the project and felt it would interfere with her quality of life and privacy. Nina Munoz, 810 Silver Fir Road, felt she had moved to a safe and quiet area. If she had known about this proposed project she would not have purchased her condo. She currently enjoys a southerly view of the mountains from her second story living room. If this project is built she will be looking at the hotel's third floor and she will have the odor of fast food cooking. She has had near mishaps with motorists leaving Farmer Boys Restaurant and now the traffic will be much worse. The fast food operations will generate continuous in and out traffic. Directly south of the freeway there are at least six eating establishments at this time. Four more is overkill in a small area. She opposed the project. Janet Fissado, 21040 Lycoming Street, immediately next door to Farmer Boys Restaurant, said they moved to this bedroom community for its quaint and quiet qualities and they are very concerned about the proposed changes. When Farmer Boys opened 18 -wheelers started parking on their street. She was very concerned about traffic and when truck deliveries would be made to the site. She asked if the City would require the applicant to erect barriers between the houses and the businesses on Lycoming. She was also concerned about privacy and felt that with a three-story hotel, residents would be able to readily look into their back yard and that the lights would be shining into their back yard. They get the light and smell from the Farmer Boys Restaurant at this time. The cement in their driveway is cracking and shifting from all of the 18 -wheelers driving up and down their street. She was also concerned about deteriorating home values and the type of signage that the hotel and business would use. She is opposed to this project. OCTOBER 22, 2002 Page 13 PLANNING COMMISSION Ted Owens, 826 Dryander, has been living in his residence for more than 20 years and the house faces this project. There has already been a tremendous impact to the Brea Canyon Road traffic and this project would create more gridlock and safety problems. Children walk the area and are at risk when they cross the street on their way to school. Where is the ingress/egress proposed for this project? He suggested that the General Plan not be modified to accommodate this project. He did not believe the project would benefit Diamond Bar or the residents in its immediate vicinity and did not support the project. Maria Diaz, 820 Dryander Drive, supported the statements of the prior speakers. She was very familiar with Extended Stay America type facilities and believed that even though some people would stay for a couple of weeks, tenants would stay for almost a year. She and her family of five lived in such a facility for eight months when they suffered a kitchen fire in their home. People are free to come and go 24 hours a day. There are families with children and teenagers who make noise. The facility she used did not have a restaurant but served a continental breakfast every morning Monday through Thursday. She felt there would be a lot of traffic and noise. She did not feel this facility would be safe for the community and would create traffic problems. Rachel Posey, 20968 Northampton, concurred with other speakers. She presented the Commission with copies of photographs enclosed in a letter from Mr. Ortiz residing at that address. The photos show the difference between the streetlight and the light from Farmer Boys that flow into their back yard and the neighbors front yard as well as the large trucks parked on the opposite side of their backyard fence. She felt this development would bring more traffic. The streetlight is 35 -foot lumens and the Farmers Boy light.is 100 -foot lumens, a large difference. Chair/Ruzicka asked staff to summarize the advantages and disadvantages to the City of Diamond Bar for this project to be developed in the manner presented. DCM/DeStefano acknowledged that there would be two perspectives to advantages and disadvantages — one the applicant's and the other, staff's. Mr. Turin pointed out that on page 2 of the Executive Summary, staff has outlined a number of benefits to the community. Mr. Meyer elicited that the environmental document also addresses some of the concerns propounded by residents. Staff did not observe 18 -wheelers parked along Brea Canyon Road for long periods of time. Staff has not conducted a traffic study and would explore the issue and options with the City's Engineer and Public Works Director. Staff felt that there were sufficient horizontal separations between the OCTOBER 22, 2002 Page 14 PLANNING COMMISSION existing residential dwelling units and the proposed structure to mitigate invasion of privacy. Perhaps the applicant could provide the Commission with additional photo simulations to promote better understanding of the relationship of the buildings to the residential area. Staff's observation was that the project would not have a major impact on the ambient noise level in the area. Lighting was considered an issue and staff requested a lighting study based on parking lot lighting to insure that none of the lights would create an impact on the surrounding neighborhood. If the Farmer Boys Restaurant lighting is spilling over into the surrounding residential areas, shielding needs to be provided. The overriding issue appears to be that of invasion of privacy resulting from a three-story hotel. Mitigation measures could be incorporated to eliminate that concern. VC/Tye questioned how 292 automobile visits to this site would not increase the ambient noise level. Is it because of the proximity to the freeway? Mr. Meyer responded affirmatively and pointed out that not all of the 292 vehicles would move at the same time and there would be no "peak hour' traffic concerns. The primary ambient noise is generated from the freeway and railroad tracks to the north. Mr. Tutino said the initial study indicated this project would be within the threshold of ambient the noise Ievels indicated within the City's General Plan Noise Element for commercial development. C/Nelson said he believes there is a need to make the City's zoning consistent with a General Plan amendment regardless of the proposed uses. The City can act on this matter in parts. The idea of this type of project is appealing to him. It is an upgrade to the site and benefits the City. He feels compelled to separate the merit of this project from the "sizzle" it offers to make certain it is right for the community. He also feels a need to separate the merit of the concerns and wants to base his decision on facts. In his view, the Commission should start thinking about what additional facts would be essential to making an informed decision with regard to the entire issue. VC/Tye was troubled by Mr. Meyer's prior statement that there was not an interest in developing the property in professional offices, etc. Other developments are proposed for sites less than a mile from this proposed site. To him it seems self- serving that this property owner wants a commercial development. He is troubled that the recommendation does not include professional office use for the property that OCTOBER 22, 2002 Page 15 PLANNING COMMISSION would make it a quieter use. The area should be developed and how can that be done to incorporate the objectives of the City and allow the residents to maintain as much of their neighborhood as possible. DCM/DeStefano explained that the City has several objectives, one of which is to attempt ..to provide the appropriate mix of land uses to provide services to the residents and business community and provide revenue from those land uses that can be used to provide City services. This particular location with its freeway orientation/on/off ramp/adjacency to Brea Canyon Road (a major arterial) provides an opportunity to capture some of those land uses that could provide businesses that residents, industrial patrons and freeway customers passing the area would use. This project is attempting to capture a customer base from all of those segments. In short, the consideration may be how to insure that the proposed palate of uses (this project or any proposed project) best integrates with the existing character of the neighborhood. C/Nelson felt the City should meet with the residents in order to understand their specific concerns and address the issues raised. C/Nolan echoed prior statements about effecting residents' quality of life. He wanted to know the financial implications of this project to the City. VC/Tye asked Mr. Taylor if the project would work as a two-story project. Mr. Taylor said no from an aesthetic standpoint. Given the nature and economics of the project.it would enlarge the site to where this proposal would not work. Extended Stay America has never built a two-story prototype because it does not work aesthetically. C/Nolan asked what would happen to the vehicles currently housed at the site. C/Nelson moved to continue the public hearing to December 10, 2002, and to direct staff to conduct one or two public outreach meetings to address residents concerns. Further, staff is directed to provide specific information regarding "quality of life" issues and their potential effect to the surrounding neighborhood. These issues include light and glare, odors, privacy issues, traffic and safety issues specific to congestion, truck parking on Brea Canyon Road, Lycoming and other residential streets adjacent to the project, pedestrian and child safety, and ambient noise levels. Chair/Ruzicka asked that line drawings of traffic patterns, proposed islands and barriers also be provided. VC/Tye asked that the motion include information regarding the possible different uses for the site. C/Nolan asked that information regarding financial ramifications (jobs, tax revenue, etc.) of this project be included. OCTOBER 22, 2002 Page 16 PLANNING COMMISSION Mr. Ariz said he understood the Commission and public's concerns and would address those concerns in a public outreach meeting. He pointed out that there are other issues associated with this area. This is not a simple project. The project is situated at the intersection of two major freeways that are already significantly impacted with major congestion problems that are in the process of being solved by CalTrans. Those mitigation measures will impact this project, the surrounding neighborhood and the City of Diamond Bar. He believed these issues should be discussed as well. In addition, the flood control channel on the north side of the property and traffic concerns on Brea Canyon Road must be taken into consideration. Those issues will not go away regardless of whether or not this project or any other project is developed at this site. The traffic problems on the SR57 and SR60 will continue to exist regardless of this or any other proposed project. He understands the concerns propounded by the residents and will address those issues. He stated his team would respond to the issues raised by the Planning Commissioners and the residents on December 10, 2002 following a meeting with the adjacent homeowners. He believed that with the current property barriers his proposed project was the highest and best use of the site. C/Nelson encouraged the applicant to work with LDM Associates and City staff on all of these issues. DCM/DeStefano said that either a developer -initiated or City -initiated community meeting would need to be scheduled. VC/Tye seconded the motion. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 9. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS: Nelson, Nolan, Tanaka, VC/Tye, Chair/Ruzicka None None None Offered. 10. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: DCM/DeStefano reported that today staff received a letter from a restaurant operator on Brea Canyon Road who received a Conditional Use Permit from the Planning Commission and City about a year ago. He expressed concern with his ability to operate without some sort of modification to his operating conditions. The Ietter does not specifically apply for a modification. Staff will contact the operator to determine whether he wishes to initiate a formal process for modification. DCM/DeStefano OCTOBER 22, 2002 Page 17 PLANNING COMMISSION advised Chair/Ruzicka that the matter could be brought to the Planning Commission for approximately $1,000 to $1,500. Chair/Ruzicka said he has spoken to this person a number of times and he is primarily concerned about the amount of money it would take to initiate the process. 10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As presented in the agenda. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chairman Ruzicka adjourned the meeting at 10:55 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Agenda No. 6.2 MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 10, 2002 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Virginkar called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. in the South. Coast Air Quality Management/Government Center Hearing Board Room, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Pincher led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Virginkar, Vice Chairman Morris, and Commissioners Kashyap, Pincher, and Torng. Also Present: David Liu, Director of Public Works, Sharon Gomez, Management Analyst, and Debbie Gonzales, Administrative Assistant. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: IV V. Minutes of September 12, 2002. C/Torng moved, C/Pincher seconded, to approve the minutes of the September 12, 2002 meeting as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSION COMMENTS: Kashyap, Pincher, Torng, VC/Morris None Chair/Virginkar None None Offered. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered. CONSENT CALENDAR: None Vl. ITEMS FROM STAFF A. Traffic Enforcement Update -- Report by Deputy Mark St. Amant - Received and filed on the following items: 1. Citations: September 2002 2, Collisions: September 2002 3. Radar Trailer Development 4. Results of Traffic Operations 5. Future Deployment of the Radar Trailer OCTOBER 10, 2002 PAGE 2 T&T COMMISSION C/Kashyap asked for a separate accounting of street sweeping related citations. Deputy St. Amant felt that the numbers would change. During the second week of enforcement, about 50 percent fewer citations were issued and the numbers are expected to decline over time. VC/Morris said he received complaints about the tone of the officer's language directed toward offenders. He thought the dialogue could be friendlier. DPW/Liu acknowledged that most problems during the first week citations were due to timing difficulties. Mitigation requires cooperation between the City and the schools. C/Kashyap wanted to know if street sweeping around schools could be done on Saturdays and what the additional cost would be. Deputy St. Amant explained that traffic in and around schools is much more troublesome on weekends than on weekdays. The schools suggested street sweeping take place earlier in the day prior to the start of school. VC/Morris felt the two school districts should be contacted and asked to keep the City apprised of times of activities in and around schools. ChairNirginkar asked the Sheriff's Department to pay closer attention to Diamond Bar High School, particularly in the areas of Evergreen Springs Drive and Birch Hill Drive and coming down Pathfinder Road to Diamond Bar Boulevard. Deputy St, Amant explained that due to changes in traffic patterns around the school everyone who wishes to travel westbound on Pathfinder Road has to go eastbound on Pathfinder Road and make a U-turn. Alternate patterns are being considered that should alleviate the situation. Vll. OLD BUSINESS A. Diamond Bar Boulevard/Gold Rush Drive. MA/Gomez presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission receive public comments and discuss the modification to re -stripe the southbound left -turn lane for Diamond Bar Boulevard at Gold Rush Drive. Kwang Ho Lee, 23746 Gold Rush Drive, stated that one month ago the City's Public Works Department installed three-way stops between Gold OCTOBER 10, 2002 PAGE 3 T&T COMMISSION Rush Drive and Chandelle Place. Many neighbors are pleased about this installation that has resulted in an overall reduction of speed on Gold Rush Drive. He explained why he favored staff's proposal to re -stripe the southbound left -turn lane on Diamond Bar Boulevard at Gold Rush Drive. C/Pincher moved, C/Torng seconded, to concur with staff's recommendation to re -stripe the southbound left -turn lane on Diamond Bar Boulevard at Gold Rush Drive. Commission discussion ensued. C/Kashyap suggested widening lane 41. VC/Morris said that nearly 90 percent of the left turn lane traffic makes U- turns at that location. Would it be possible to have two left -tum lanes with the inside lane being dedicated to U-turn traffic only to which DPW/Liu responded "no" and stated the reasons. VC/Morris asked staff to create a better look to the cross -hatch area and ask Lorbeer Middle School to assist in providing informational flyers to parents and area residents advising them of the changes and seeking their cooperation. DPW/Liu responded to C/Kashyap that he would consult with the City's Traffic Engineer to determine if the cross -hatch area could be narrowed providing room to widen the #1 lane. Chair/Virginkar wanted the record to reflect the Commission's concern that staff receive the Commissioners' comments and alleviate unsafe conditions while not introducing new unsafe conditions. C/Kashyap asked the maker of the motion to consider revising her motion to ask staff to review the dimension and concept in order to maximize the number of cars able to tum left onto Gold Rush Drive. Chair/Virginkar explained that he previously asked staff to take the Commission's comments under consideration and that there would be no need to modify the motion. Following discussion, motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Kashyap, Pincher, Torng, VC/Morris, Chair/Virginkar NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None OCTOBER 10, 2002 PAGE 4 T&T COMMISSION B. Redflex Report presented by MA/Gomez — Receive and File. C/Torng felt that regional data would be more helpful than data from northern California cities. C/Pincher asked for clarification of the statement "in San Jose, speeding citations are nothing more than glorified parking tickets." MA/Gomez indicated she had left several voice mail messages at the City of San Jose. To date, she had not received a response. DPW/Liu said he believed that San Jose has a photo -radar system. C/Pincher felt that the proposed system was somewhat sophisticated and needed citizen approval. She felt that Mr. Rosenburg's response to question #3 and other questions was inconclusive. C/Kashyap thought the answers were vague. Deputy St. Amant responded to C/Kashyap that the Rowland Heights and San Dimas systems were under the jurisdiction of the California Highway Patrol. The Commission asked to have Dr. Rosenburg present to answer questions at the next meeting. VC/Morris believed this type of system would be very useful to the community in improving the level of service. Chair/Virginkar wanted the following information included in a proposal to the City Council: 1) cost, 2) projected revenue, 3) possible installation location for a pilot program. C. Emergency Vehicle Warning/Preemptive Systems MA/Gomez presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission receive a staff presentation and concur with staff's continuing efforts to obtain the best and most cost effective early warn in g/p ree mptive system. C/Kashyap offered his expertise in this area. He recommended staff exclude the solar panel installation from consideration. VC/Morris felt that Station 121 would make a good location for a solar panel pilot program because it is located in a residential area. OCTOBER 10, 2002 PAGE 5 T&T COMMISSION VIII. NEW BUSINESS. A. Diamond Bar Boulevard/Cold Spring Lane MA/Gomez presented staff's report. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission concur with staff's recommendation to install the pavement markings and signs for the westbound Cold Spring Lane intersection to allow for right turns only in the curb lane and left -turn and through traffic from the inside lane. Kuei-Chiu (K.C.) Lin, 3315 Falcon Ridge Road reiterated her urgent request for installation of the left tum signal. She believed that installation of the "No U-turn" sign would create a hazardous situation. She was concerned that the change in lane designations on Cold Spring Lane at Diamond Bar Boulevard would create confusion for the residents and she asked that this proposal be reconsidered. C/Torng felt the changes would increase the right turn traffic and more possibility of accidents. He thought the intersection should remain as is. DPW/Liu said that this intersection should be studied during peak traffic hours related to all of the traffic turning movements in order for the Commission to make an informed decision. C/Pincher believed that at one time the proposed measures were in place and the intersection was very unsafe. She felt that the intersection should remain as currently configured with arrows on eastbound and westbound Cold Spring Lane. All of the U-turns are made on Diamond Bar Boulevard and most of the U-turns are initiated from the southbound lanes. DPW/Liu stated that this intersection is a candidate for a left turn signal. C/Kashyap said that definitely, there should be no U-turn. He believed that traffic should proceed to Brea Canyon Road to make a U-turn. He concurred with Mrs. Lin that there should be a left turn signal from Cold Spring Lane onto Diamond Bar Boulevard. VC/Morris said he would defer to people who live in the area. He disagreed that motorists would continue down to Brea Canyon Road to make a U-turn. He believed they would pull into a tract at the first opportunity to make a U- turn. ChairNirginkar would find it helpful to have the accident history for the intersection. He wanted consideration of installation of a left -turn lane from Cold Spring Lane onto Diamond Bar Boulevard included in staff's report and recommendation, if warranted. OCTOBER 10, 2002 PAGE 6 T&T COMMISSION IX. STATUS OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS: DPW/Liu reported that at next Tuesday's City Council meeting staff will recommend award of contract to a company for the Grand Avenue design phase project. X. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS: C/Torng asked staff to look at the speeding issues around the area of Avenida Rancheros/Temple Avenue and at Golden Springs Drive. Turning onto Grand Avenue from Diamond Bar Boulevard toward Golden Springs Drive, the left turn signal is very short. C/Pincher asked if it would be possible to place the vehicle counter on Pathfinder Road near Presado Drive just west of Diamond Bar Boulevard. She felt that Pathfinder was too close to the high school to allow 45 -mph speed. It seems too fast and dangerous. VC/Morris asked if staff could include information about developer stop signs and traffic lights during "informational items." XI. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: DPW/Liu reported on the following items: A. Traffic Concerns at Diamond Bar High School. B. Adelphia Parking C. Joint -Meeting of the Traffic and Transportation Commission and City Council XII. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE CITY EVENTS — as agendized. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Traffic and Transportation Commission, Chairman Morris adjourned the meeting at 9:56 p.m. Respectfully, David G. Liu, Secretary Attest: Chairman Arun Virginkar Agenda ,rNa. 5.3 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION HEARING BOARD ROOM OF S.C.A.Q.M.D.ITHE GOVERNMENT CENTER 21865 E. Copley Drive OCTOBER 24, 2002 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Torres called the meting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Hearing Board Room of the SCAQMD/Government Center Building, 21865 E. Copley Drive. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Lyons led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman Torres, Vice Chairman Hull and Commissioners Grundy, Lyons and Lui. Staff: Bob Rose, Director of Community Services; Kim Crews, Senior Management Analyst; Marisa Somenzi, Administrative Assistant and Chris Daugherty, TruGreen Landcare. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE: None Offered. CALENDAR OF EVENTS: As presented in the agenda. CONSENT CALENDAR 1.1 Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes of September 26, 2002. VC/Hull moved, C/Lyons seconded, to approve the minutes of the September 26, 2002 meeting as presented. Without objection, the motion was so ordered. 3. OLD BUSINESS: 3.1 Parks Walk-through Schedule with Commissioners - Discussion of Park maintenance with TruGreen Landcare representatives, the City's landscape maintenance contractor. Chair/Torres explained his concerns about the watering of Pantera and Peterson Parks and the fact that Pantera Park was twice closed for reseeding during high usage periods. He has seen standing water on the OCTOBER 24, 2002 PAGE 2 P&R COMMISSION Pantera Park field on numerous occasions. Of even greater concern is that he has witnessed standing water on the field at 4:30 p.m., Friday, prior to major usage on Saturday mornings. Chris Daugherty said TruGreen realizes there have been ongoing problems at various parks in the City and they are taking steps to remedy the situation. Some areas are progressing slower than other areas, Pantera Park being one. Some of the irrigation systems for fields are completely shutdown. Peterson Park has been shutdown for about 10 days and some of the areas are not up to par, especially for soccer usage. TruGreen is attempting to resolve the irrigation problems so that the fields are not muddy. On the other hand, if the fields are not properly watered, dry spots would result and there would be complaints about dry spots as well as, standing water. TruGreen learns of problems immediately and attempts to resolve the issues as quickly as possible. Some of the mitigation measures did not work the first time around and he apologized to the Commissioners. C/Grundy pointed out that the Commissioners were concerned that the monitoring may not be adequate. What the Commission found difficult to understand is how this situation could continue for several weeks in a row without attention. Mr. Daugherty explained that September was a very hot month and water must be applied to the field in order to keep the grass green or it will stress rapidly. Some of the areas with standing water were low spots. There may have been other things that should have been done at that time. However, the fields are constantly monitored and he does not really have an answer. C/Grundy asked if TruGreen submits a report to staff on a regular basis. Mr. Daughtery responded "no, there is no formal irrigation report." C/Grundy asked if staff would consider requesting such a report and sharing the information with the Commission on a regular basis. CSD/Rose explained that P&D is currently conducting a myriad of tests to determine the true amount of time that each valve should be turned on in order to meet and not exceed the irrigation needs. In all fairness to TruGreen and P&D, this is a long-term project. During this past week, staff members met with Mr. Daughtery to discuss irrigation matters in response to concerns voiced by Commissioners. The most urgent areas of concentration are soccer fields at Pantera, Peterson and Paul C. Grow Parks. TruGreen is limited to watering on three days at this time. During those days they must put enough water onto the fields to meet the needs for the entire seven-day period. The best staff can do at this point is to continue testing and report back to the Commission next month. C/Grundy said it would help give the Commission a better impression of the work being done to have a monthly report included in meeting packets. OCTOBER 24, 2002 PAGE 3 P&R COMMISSION Chair/Torres said that the P&D data would be helpful but more emphasis should be given to real-time proactive care of the fields. The comfort level will only increase for the Commission when results are visible. VC/Hull reiterated that he was in a park on a Saturday morning and witnessed sprinklers working at 6:30 a.m. Mr. Daugherty said that the sprinklers are not programmed to come on during weekend hours. He believed that what VC/Hull witnessed was a test program that did not get zeroed out. Hopefully, that scenario will not be repeated. CSD/Rose asked Commissioners to call the Sheriffs Department and asked to have a staff member paged in the event they witness a problem on the weekend. Staff will present an irrigation report to the Commission at future meetings. Schedule of Future Park Visits: Commissioner Park Date Time VC/Hull Peterson 11/14/02 8:30 a.m. Chair/Torres Pantera 10/30/02 3:00 p.m. ClLyons Ronald Reagan/ Starshine 11/05/02 9:00 a.m. C/Lui Heritage 11/12102 10:00 a.m. C/Grundy Sycamore Canyon 11/19/02 8:00 a.m. VC/Hull Paul C. Grow/ Maple Hill 12/05/02 8:30 a.m. *Staff will visit Summitridge Park 2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 2.1 Recreation Program Report — by SMA/Crews CSD/Rose explained to ClLyons that the reason the senior's organization is limited in membership is because of the Heritage Park 115 person space limitation. That situation should be remedied when the new Community/Senior Center opens. SMA/Crews stated that the City's programs are open to all seniors. Chair/Torres felt it would be reasonable to request each field user group to provide the total number of participants in their programs and the number of families that have completed the Code of Ethics. VC/Hull concurred and asked staff to determine how the groups feel about the forms and whether they believe the form has worked to their advantage. OCTOBER 24, 2002 PAGE 4 P&R COMMISSION 2.2 C.I.P. Program Report — by CSD/Rose on the following items: a. Community/Senior Center b. Sycamore Canyon Park Trail C. Starshine Park ADA Retrofit Project d. Sycamore Canyon Park ADA Retrofit Project — Phase Two VC/Hull asked that a climbing wall be considered in the design. C/Grundy stated that rather than squaring off the corners, the original concept included a snaking pathway that would tend to follow a truer contour of the landscape. C/Lyons asked if parking would be increased. CSD/Rose responded "yes." The upper tot lot may have more room. ClLyons suggested the lower tot lot be converted to a tween lot and include the wall climbing feature. She would not want the teens to lose any space by taking away the two trailers. She wondered if barbecues would be included because they were not shown on the drawing. CSD/Rose said the future picnic shelter would include barbecues. Additionally, the picnic table pad would include barbecues. When the first phase was completed, barbecues were not included with the picnic tables and they, should be added at this time. CSD/Rose thought that once the retrofit was completed, Sycamore Canyon Park might once again become one of the most popular picnic areas. ClLyons felt it would be good to have a basketball hoop for the tweens. CSD/Rose explained if the City obtains ownership of the Caltrans facility on Golden Springs, the City could use it as a storage yard. If that should happen, the current City storage lot at Sycamore Canyon Park could be used for a half -court basketball facility. C/Lui suggested that a pond feature be included at some point in the water stream to expand the use. CSD/Rose responded to VC/Hull that the Commission would have another opportunity to discuss this matter prior to it being considered by Council. VC/Hull felt C/Lyons should join C/Grundy in working out the details during the next subcommittee meeting. e. Pantera Park Picnic Shelters OCTOBER 24, 2002 PAGE 5 P&R COMMISSION The cost estimate is $120,000 for two shelters. The budget is $72,600. CSD/Rose intended to move forward to receive bids by listing one shelter as a bid alternate. The options are to redesign one shelter or to bid alternate the second shelter. Chair/Torres supported one shelter for that outlying area and that it be torn up one time only. CSD/Rose responded to C/Lyons that about 25-30 individuals could be seated in one shelter. VC/Hull agreed that it should be done properly the first time and not traumatize the area a second time. The price is outrageous. C/Grundy, C/Lui and C/Lyons also agreed with Chair/Torres. CSD/Rose said that based upon the Commissioners' input, staff would pursue a redesign for one shelter. VC/Hull thought that the shelter was about 20 feet by 20 feet. Youth Master Plan. $50,000 is budgeted for the project and an RPP is being prepared. 2.3 Meeting schedule of Commission during Holidays — Thursdays - November 21 and December 19, 2002. The Commission agreed to keep the November 21 date and go dark on December 19 due to an anticipated lack of a quorum. VC/Hull asked to be excused for the November 21 meeting due to a prior commitment. 2.4 Department Reorganization CSD/Rose reported that Kim Crews was promoted to Senior Management Analyst. Ryan .Wright was promoted to Recreation Supervisor in charge of the Athletics Program. The City has an opening for the Community Services Coordinator for Youth and Adult Sports position. Applications for the position will be accepted through November 27 with the expectation that the position would be filled by the first of the year. Sara West has taken over the supervision of Contract Classes. Sara will attend the facilities allocation meeting with Ryan in November and Ryan will assume allocation duties for the period January 1 through July 31, 2003. 4. NEW BUSINESS: None 5. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: C/Lui asked staff to coordinate the parking lot lights at the City's parks due to the end of daylight savings time. OCTOBER 24, 2002 PAGE 6 P&R COMMISSION C/Lyons said that October has been very successful for "Read Together Diamond Bar." The Friends of the Library is conducting an essay contest that will culminate on October 31 with winners recognized during the November 19 City Council meeting. VC/Hull congratulated Kim Crews and Ryan Wright on their promotions. In response to VC/Hull, CSD/Rose stated the CPRS Conference would be held in March. VC/Hull asked CSD/Rose to send him the dates via e-mail. The other Commissioners requested that the information be e-mailed to them as well. Chair/Torres thanked the City for last meeting's Special Presentations. ADJOURNMENT: Upon motion by VC/Hull seconded by C/Lyons, and there being no other business to come before the Commission, Chairman Torres adjourned the meeting at 8:55 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, /s/ Bob Rose Bob Rose Secretary Attest: Isl Marty Torres Chairman Marty Torres Agenda # 6.4 Meeting Date: December- 3,2002 CITY COUNCIL " AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager , TITLE: Approval of Voucher Register dated November 21, 2002, totaling $547,901.82. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Voucher Registers. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Expenditure of - $547,901.82 of budgeted funds. BACKGROUND: At the September 17, 2002 City Council meeting, the City established a policy of issuing accounts payable checks on a weekly basis with City Council ratification and approval at its next regularly scheduled City Council meeting. DISCUSSION: The list of accounts payable bills, in the form of a voucher register, was reviewed and recommended for payment by the Finance Subcommittee. The Finance Subcommittee has reviewed the Voucher Register dated November 21, 2002 for $547,901.82. The voucher register is now being presented to the City Council for ratification and approval. PREPARED BY: Linda G. Magnuson Finance Director REVIEWED BY: b6) Departme t Yead Deputy Ci y Manager Attachments: Voucher Register -- 11/21/2002 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Pro Tem O'Connor and Councilmember Huff FROM: Linda G. Magnuson, Finance Director SUBJECT: Voucher Register, November 21, 2002 DATE: November 21, 2002 Attached is the Voucher Register dated November 21, 2002. As requested, the Finance Department is submitting the voucher register for the Finance Committee's review and approval prior to the creation of the warrants. The Voucher Register will subsequently be entered on the consent calendar for the City Council meeting on December 3, 2002. The checks will be produced after the scheduled meeting time and any recommended changes are made. Please review and sign the attached. 7. CITY OF L?TAMOhiD BAR VOUCHER REG Y 1 S-Tt1 E APPROVAL 1'h --s attache'd listing of vouchers dated NQvember^ 21, 2002 have been re's ie`F#i d , appY'r°7`r'ed, and for payment. Pc3';'37E+nts are het^ahy allovied from the following s=urds in these amounts FUND DE CRTPTION P REPAID VOUCHERS TOTAL. 1 GE-NERALFU i :(G33,089.62 475,:321.39 5 � , 411 .01. 1142 F'L'OP R - TRAMISI'T- FUND " .00 8,729-67 3," 9.t 7. 115 I NTE.i. RA ED WASTE MT FUND"..00 7,502.83 7 , 502.8' 118 AIR DLTY Y i i': -' # -i- 1! '.yi'.'i .? I -tel-: C� : ,:.. w 0100 . r'e 5 100. C�v5 1.x-_,6...' C1 i 1ZEN'-_: t�:F'�T1 —PU'_;LIC �,,Y,-: Y wn'rp,�. ��f.:e �L7 51t .96 133- L...AD #38 T�L.:!`D a00 14.L�� 14a39 25CAPITAL I MPRO V/ PRC : EUCLID . 00 237091.01 23,05/1.G1 REPORT FOR ALL FUNDS 33'08962 514,812.20 54-7,901 e2 APPROVED 15,Y,. 7 r^. - z Deborah H. O'Connor .. v.jry lir .moi. ±•' Cot; c i J..tYsemb er CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RUN DATE: 11/20/2002 17:27:12 VOUCHER REGISTER PAGE. 1 DUE THRU: 11/21/2002 PREPAID FUND/SECT-ACCT-PROSECT-ACCT PO # INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK 3 CviA 0014095-42315-- MEMBERSHIP DUES-BLAKEY 350.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 350.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 350.00 AMERICAN CLASSIC SANITATION 0015340-42130-- 12420 774013 RENTAL-LORBEER SCH OCT 67.44 0015340-42130-- 72420 77012 RENTAL-LORBEER SCH OCT 72.85 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 140.29 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 140.29 CHRISTINE ANN ANGELI 0015350-45300-.- 12232 CONTRACT CLASS -FAIL, 27.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 ISI TOTAL VOUCHERS 27.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 27.00 AT&T 0014090-42125-- LONG DIST CHARGRS 29.41 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 - TOTAL VOUCHERS 29.41 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 29.41 BEST LIGHTING PRODUCTS 0015340-42210-- 126BG 3043 MAINT-HERITAGE,PANTERA PK 1,168.46 0015350-42210-- 126S6 3044 MATNT-74ERITAGE,PANTERA PK 597.02 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 1,765.50 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 1,765.50 APRIL BLAKEY 0014090-4'-20D-- REIMS -HOLIDAY CELEB 62.11 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 62.11 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 62.11 BNI BULIDTNG NEWS 0015510-42320-- 33314 PUBLICATION -PUBLIC WORKS 50.65 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 50.65 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 50.65 BOISE CASCADE OFFICE PRODUCTS 0015210-41200-- P/O 12318 SUPPLIRS-BLDG & SETY 39.34 0GI5350-41200-- P/O 12318 SUPPLIES-PECREATION 85.88 0014040-41200-- P/O 12318 SUPPLIES -CITY CLERK 106.41 0015210-4=200-- P/O 12315 SUPPLIES -PLANNING 206.28 001409D-41200-- P/0,12318 gUPPLIES-GENERAL 181.41 TOTAL PREPAIDS •00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 619.32 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 619.32 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RUN DATE: 11/20/2002 17:27:12 VOUCHER REGISTER PAGE: 2 DUE THRU: 11/21/2002 PREPAID FUND/SECT-ACCT-PROJECT-ACCT PO # INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK BONTERRA CONSULTING 001-23011-- 2698 PROF.SVCS-FER 96-02B 2,109.80 TOTAL PREPAIDS -00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 2,109.80 TOTAL DUB VENDOR 2,109.80 BOULEVARD BAGELS 0014090-42325-- 1292 MTC SUPPLIES-TRNG 244.50 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 244.50 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 244.50 BSN SPORTS 0015340-42210-- 91032809 SUPPLIES -PARKS 116.04 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 116.04 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 116.04 COMMERCIAL GRAPHICS CORP 2505215-56420-13899-46420 PROF.SVCS-COMM SR CNTR 231.48 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 231.48 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 231.48 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES PUBLIC LTB€,A€R 0015240-44000-- PROF.SVC-MRKTPLC ZIP CODE 21.35 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 21.35 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 21.35 CPRS 0015350-42115-- AD -CS COORDINATOR NOV 65.00 TOTAL PREPATDS -00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 65.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 65.00 CPRS DISTRICT XIII - 0015350-42340-- MTG-C MURPHEY 10.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 10.00 TOTAL ❑UE VBNDOR 10-00 D & J MUNICIPAL SERVICES, INC 0015220-45201-- 12402 2002DB-16 BLDG&SFTY SVC -10/21-11/13 27,128.39 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 27,128.39 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 27,128.39 DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC 2505510-46416-- 12564 111452 PROF.SVCS-BREA CYN CUTOFF 2,225.75 - TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 2,225.75 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 2,225.75 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RS4 DATE: 11/20/2002 17:27:12 VOUCHER REGISTER PAGE: 3 DUE THRU: 11/21/2002 PREPAID FUND/SECT-ACCT-PROJECT-ACCT PO # INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK DAY & NITE COPY CENTER 0015210-42110-- 12307 165329 PRINT SVCS -PLANNING 22.58 0015350-42110-- 12166 164438 - PRINT SVCS-F/FUN FESTIVAL 27.06 TOTAL PREPAIDS -00 TO'T'AL VOUCH:)" RS 49.64 TOTAL, DUE VENDOR 49.64 SIM DEFRIEND 0014070-42340-- REIMB-MISCA CONF 472.21 TOTAL PREPAIDS -00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 472.21 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 472.21 DELTA CARE PMT CO1-21:04-- FC 21-22 NOV 02 -DENTAL PREMIUMS 413.99 21/21/2002 55202 TOTAL PREPAIDS 413.99 TOTAL VOUCHERS .00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 413.99 CAROL DENNIS 0014030-44000-- 12383 DBCF10H702 PROF.SVCS-DB FOUNDATION 150.00 0014040-44000-- 12383 DBCC110502 PROF.8VCS-CNL MTG 11/5 300.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 450.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 450.00 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 0015350-453.0Q-- 12371 409920 EMPLOYMENT BACKGROUND CK 32.00 0014060-42345-- 12371 409920 EMPLOYMENT BACKGROUND CK 32.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 64.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 64.00 DEWAN LUNDIN & ASSOCIATES 2505215-46420-17202-46420 11859 DB0306 DESIGN SVCS-CDBG SIDEWALK 664.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 664.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 664.00 DIAMOND BAR IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION 0D1409S -42115-- 12404 4592 NOV ADS -INFO TO GO/H/RIDE 900.06 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 900.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 900.00 DIAMOND BAR MOBIL 0014090-42310-- OCT 02 FUEL -GENERAL 141.25 0015310-42310-- OCT 02 FUEL -COMM SVCS 381.20 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 522-45 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 522.45 CITU OF DIAMOND 3AR RLTa DATE: 11/20/20C2 17:27:12 VOUCHER REGISTER PAGE: 4 DUE THRU: 11/21/2092 PREPAID FL74D/SECT-ACCT-PROJECT-ACCT PO # INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE C14ECK DIAMOND PHOTO 0015350-42112-- 407427 PHOTO DEV -FALL F/FESTIVAL 24.90 TOTAL PREPAIDS - .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 24.90 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 24.90 DOCUMENT IMAGING SERVICE CORP 0914040-44000-- 12384 2885 PROE.SVC-BLDG & SFTY PMT 1,040-02 TOTAL PREPAIDS ,00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 1,040-02 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 1,040.02 DOG DEALERS, INC C015350-45300-- 12214 CONTRACT CLASS -FALL 240.90 TOTAL, PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 240-00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 2.40.00 FEDERAL EXPRESS 0014090-,2120-- 44SS36267 EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL 73.19 0014090-42120-- 445897643 EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL 100.95 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL, VOUCHERS 174.14 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 174.14 FILTERFRESH 0014090-42325-- 456720 MTG SUPPLIES -GENERAL 40.72 TOTAL PREPAIDS -00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 40-72 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 40.72 FOOTHILL TRANSIT 1125553-45533-- 12552 14059 CITY SUBSIDY-NOV 02 1,395.14 1125553-45535-- 12552 14059 FOOTHILL PASSES-NOV C2 5,784-80 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 7,179.94 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 7,179.94 NLAR,GARET FRAIZLER 0015350-45300-- 12244 CONTRACT CLASS -FALL 96.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 96-00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 96.00 GRAFFITI CONTROL SYSTEMS 0015230-45520-- 12134 D309102 GRAFFITI CONTRL-OCT 02 2,670.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 2,670.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 2,670.00 S.,LANNQN GRIFFITHS 0015350-45300-- 12329 CONTRACT CLASS -FALL 136.80 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 136.80 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 136.80 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RUN DATE: 11/20/2002 17:27:12 VOUCHER REGISTER. PAGE: 5 DUE THRU: 11/21/2002 PREPAID FUND/SECT-ACCT-PROSECT-ACCT PO # INVOICE DESCRIPT-ION AMOUNT DATE CHECK JESSICA HALL 0015350-45390-- 12216 CONTRACT CLASS -FALL 125.55 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 125.55 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 125.55 HARLAND 0014050-41200-- 51623-04 SUPPLIES -W2/1099 99.72 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 99.72 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 99.72 JAMES `i' HULL 0015350-45300-- A12252 CONTRACT CLASS -FALL 1,530.60 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 1,530.60 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 1,530.60 HULS ENVIRONT9ENTAL M-ANAGRMENT, LLC 0015510-44250-- 12316 2304 NPDES-QCT 02 4,155.00 1155515-44000-- 12316 2305 SOLID WASTE -OCT 02 4,560.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 8,715.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 8,715.00 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST -457 001-21108-- PP 24/02 NOV 02-PAYROL1- DEDUCTIONS 4,457.34 001-21108-- PP 23 NOV 02 -PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS 23,276.91. 11f21/2.002 55201 TOTAL PREPAIDS 23,276.91 TOTAL VOUCHERS 4,457.34 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 27,734.25 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 001-23010-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2002-07 154.35 001-23014-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2002-17 211.05 001-23010-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2002-54 152.25 001-23010-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2002-48 163.80 ODI -23010-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2002-42 205.80 0014040-42115-- 12280 115360 AD -PUBLIC HEARING/BONDS 321.28 0OI-23010-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2002-51 193.20 001-2.3010-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2002-32 200.55 001-23010-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2002-41 183.75 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 1,766.03 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 1,786-03 SENKINS & HOCIN, LLP 0014920-44020-- 10766 GEN LEGAL SVCS -COM SVC 162.00 0014020-44020-- 10765 GEN LEGAL SVCS -COM DEV 202.50 0,)14020-44026-- 10764 GEN LEGAL SVCS -OCT 02 6,372.60 0014020-44020-- 10767 GEN LEGAL SVCS-P/WKS OCT 54.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCI18RS 6,790.50 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 6,790-50 CITY OP DIAMOND BAR RUN DATE: 11/20/2002 17:27:12 VOUCHER REGISTER PAGE: 6 DUE THRU: 11/21/2002 PREPAID FUND/SECT-ACCT-PR0JECT-ACCT PO # INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK JOBS AVAILA31,E OC14D60-42115-- 12372 219034 AD -JOB ANNOUNCEMENT 92.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS _00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 92.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 92.00 JUDICIAL DATA SYSTEMS CORPORATION 0014411-45405-- 3142 PRKNG CITE ADMIN -OCT 02 1,858.20 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 1,858.20 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 1,858.20 i -&V BLUEPRINT SERVICE INC 0015510-41200-- 72449 SUPPLIES -TONER 281 -BB TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 281.88 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 281.88 KENS HARDWARE R2 v'4411-41200-- 26705 SUPPLIES -SHERIFF STATION 51.96 TOTAL PREPAIDS -00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 51.96 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 51.96 ANGEL Y KWAN 0015350-45300-- - 12216 - CONTRACT CLASS -FALL 252.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 252.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 252.00 LA ROYAL VISTA GOLF COURSE 0015350-42140-- 12293 A.R02030659 CONTRACT CLASS -SUMMER 736.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 - TOTAL VOUCHERS 736.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 736.00 LELC$TON & ASSOCIATES, INC 2505215-46420-13899-46420 A11453 LEI0013881 PROF.SVCS-COMM SR CTR 19,969.78 001-23012-- LEI0013852 PROF -SVCS -EN 01-323 629.36 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 20,599.14 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 20,599-14 LEWIS ENGRAVING INC 0014090-42113-- 12319 10267 ENGRAVING SVCS -CITY TILE 17.32 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 17.32 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 17.32 `$IiIWEI LI 001-34780-- 50657 RECREATION REFUND 125.00 TOTAL, PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 125.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 125.00 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RUN DATE: 11/20/2002 17:27:12 VOUCHER REGISTER PAGE: 7 DUn THRU: 11/21/2002 PREPAID FUND/SECT-ACCT-PROSECT-ACCT PO k INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK LOS ANGELES COUNTY - MTA 1125553-45535-- 12553 11020443 MTA PASSES-NOV 02 947.30 1125553-45533-- 12553 11020443 CITY SUBSIDY -NCV 02 493.70 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 1,4.41.00 TOTAL 'DUE VENDOR 1,441.00 LOS ANGELES COUNTY SFIBRIFF'S DEPT 0014411-45402-- SCH TRFFC CONTROL -OCT 02 3,028.08 1125553-45533-- TRANSIT SALES -OCT 02 108-73 0014=11-45402-- CLVRY CHAPEL TRFFC-OCT 02 6,770.07 0014411-45402-- 52061 CONTRACT SVGS -OCT 02 333,513.41 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 343,420.29 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 343,420.29 LOWE'S 0015350-41209-- 72640 SUPPLIES -HAUNTED HOUSE 71.62 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 71.62 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 71.62 MAINTEX 0015340-42210-- 12540 618375 SUPPLIES -PARKS 150.03 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 150.03 - TOTAL DUE VENDOR 150.03 MCE CORPORATION 0015554-45502-- 12253 210074 ROAD MAINT-OCT 02 4,407.34 0015558-45508-- 12156 0210075 VEGETATION CNTRL-OCT 02 6,055.05 0015554-45522-- 12284 210074 RTGHT OF WAY -OCT 02 2,397.11 0015554-45506-- 12286 210074 STRIPING MATNT-OCT 02 654.72 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 13,514.22 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 13,514.22 MCO THE MICROFILM COMPANY 0015210-41200-- 4692 SUPPLIES -TONER 171.04 0015210-42200-- 4692 MAINT-MICROFISCHE MACHINE 160.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 331.04 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 331.04 MICHAEL DRANDMAN ASSOCIATES INC 001-23010-- 32125 PROP.SVCS-FPL 94-25 1,027.36 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 1,027.36 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 1,027.36 GARY I, NEELY 0015210-44000-- 12343 103102-19 PROF.SVCS-GOV CONSULTANT 3,240.00 TOTAL, PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 3,240.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 3.240.00 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RUN DATE: 11/20/2002 17:27:12 VOUCHER REGISTER PAGE: 8 D13E THRU: 11/21/2002 PREPAID FUND/SECT-ACCT-PROJECT-ACCT PO # INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK PERS RETIREMENT PUND _ 007.4010-40080-- PP 24/02 CC -RETIRE CONTRIB-E$/ER 291.45 0014010-40090-- PP 24/02 CC -SURVIVOR BENEFIT 10.00 001-21109-- PP 24/02 RETIRE CONTRIB-EE 5,616.23 001-21'-09-- PP 24/02 SURVIVOR BENEFIT 35.34 001-21109-- PP 24/02 RETIRE CONTRI9-ER 3,737.20 CCI -21109-- PP 23/02 RETIRE CONTRIB-ER 3,141.18 11/21/2002 55203 001-21'09-- PP 23/02 SURVIVOR BENEFIT 35.34 11/21/2002 55203 001-21109-- PP 23/02 RETIRE CONTRIB-EE 5,622.20 11/21/2002 55203 TOTAL PREPAIDS 9,398.72 TOTAL VOUCI3ERS 9,690-22 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 19,068.94 POMONA JUDICIAL DISTRICT 001-32230-- SEPT 02 PRKNG CITATION FEES -SEPT 65.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 65.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 65.00 POMONA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 00'-5354-42140-- 12225 03025 FACILITY RENTAL -AUG -SEPT 120.00 0015350-42140-- 12225 03036 FACILITY RENTAL -SEPT -OCT 780.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 900.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 900.00 PRINCE SHANT CORP 0015554-42210-- 117506 -OCT FUEL -PUBLIC WORKS 249-20 0015230-42310-- 117506 -OCT FUEL-NEIGFBORI300D IMP 346.40 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 595.60 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 595.60 R & D BLUEPRINT 0015210-42110-- 12308 1561 PRINT SVCS -PLANNING 147.54 TOTAL PREPAIDS -00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 147,84 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 147.84 R F DICKSON COMPANY 1155515-45500-- 12112 1142826 DEBRIS COMPSTNG-OCT 02 2,942.83 0015554-45501-- 12113 1142842 ST SWEEPING -OCT 02 25.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS -00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 2,967.83 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 2,967,83 RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY 0014090-42325-- 12179 10303792 SUPPLIES -GENERAL 5.73 TOTAL PREPAIDS -00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 5.73 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 5.73 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RUN PATE; 11/20/2002 17:27:12 VOUCHER REGISTER PAGE: 9 DUE THRU: 11/21/2002 PREPAID 7T=/SECT-ACCT-PROJECT-ACC^ PO INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK RSINSERGER PRINTWERKS 0015210-42110-- 12169 12280 PRINT SVCS-MAINT GUIDES 2,407.48 0015510-42110-- 12511 12!34 PRINT SVCS -ST SWEEPING 900.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS -00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 3,307.48 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 3,307.48 MONICA RODRIGUEZ 001-34780-- 51123 RECREATION REFUND 28.25 TOTAL PREPAIDS -00 TOTAL, VOUCHERS 28.25 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 28.25 MARY ROH 001-34740-- 51375 RECREATION REFUND 118.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .co TOTAL VOUCHERS 118.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 116.00 SAFEWAY SIGN COMPANY 0015554-45506-- 12188 45594 ST SIGNS -AREA 4 3,829-28 TOTAL PREPAIDS •00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 3,825.26 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 3,829.28 SAN GABRIEL VALLEY TRIBUNE 001-23010-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2002-48 180.60 001-23010-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2002-32 225.95 001-23010-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2002-17 230.16 001-23010-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2042-19 155.82 001-23010-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2002-07 1.73-88 001-23410-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2002-51 216.72 001-23010-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2002-41 215.04 001-23010-- LEGAL AD-FPI. 2002-16 228.48 001-23010-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2002-24 155.82 00%-23010-- LEGAL AD -FPL 2002-54 152.88 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 1,935.36 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 1,935.36 RICK SCHROTH 001-34780-- 51073 RECREATION REFUND 170.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS •00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 170.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR - 170..00 SCMAF 0014060-42115-- 0018892 -IN AD -JOB ANNOUNCEMENT 25.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 25.00 ' TOTAL DUE VENDOR 25.00 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RUN DATE: 11/21/2002 08:19:59 VOUCHER REGISTER PAGE: 10 DUE THRU: 11/21/2002 PREPAID ^UND/SECT-ACCT-PROSECT-ACCT PO # INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE CHECK SOITTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 0015510-42126-- ELECT SVCS-TRFFC CONTIRL 76.54 1385538-42126-- ELECT SVCS-DIST 38 14.39 C0=5510-42126-- ELECT SVCS-TRFFC CONTRL 93.32 0015510-52'26-- ELECT SVCS-TRFFC CONTP2, 279.16 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 463.41 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 463.41 SOUTHERN CALIFOR'lTIA GAS COMPAiINY 0015340-42120'-- CAS SVCS-HRTG COMM CTR 104.99 TOTAL PREPAIDS -00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 104.99 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 104.99 STITCHES UNIFORMS & EMBROIDERY 001535C-41200-- 12570 3658 SUPPLIES-RECREATION 871.61 0015350-41200-- 12570 3659 SUPPLIES-RECREATION 764-58 0015350-41100-- 12570 3651 SUPPLIES-RECREATION 1,237,30 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 2.873.49 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 2,873.49 THE WEEKLY NEWS-WALNUT 0014095-42115-- 12403 3437 AD-FALL P5TVL/HAUNTED HSE 325-00 0019095-42115-- 12403 3436 AD-FALL FSTVL/HAUNTED HSE 325.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 650.00 TOTAL, DUE VENDOR 650.00 RITA TORRaS 001-34740-- 51542 RECREATION REFUND 59.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 59.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 59 00 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 0015350-42120-- A843T4452 EXPRESS MAIL-COM SVCS 55.50 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 5$.50 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 55.50 US YEALTHWORKS MEDICAL GROUP 0014060-42345-- 12373 028042133 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS 60.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 80.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 80.00 VAN WINKLE AND AFFILIATES 0015210-44000-- 22297 VIDEO DOC SVCS-NOV 02 1,500.,00 TOTAL, PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 1,500.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 1,500.00 RUN DATE:. 11/20/2002 17:27:12 FUND/SECT-ACCT-PROJECT-ACCT VERIZON CALIFORNIA 0015340-42125-- 0015340-42125-- 0015340-42125-- 0014010-42125-CC4C3-42125 0014090-42125-- 1185095-42125-- VERIZON WIRELESS MESSAGING SVCS 0014090-42125-- WAL^rJT VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST. 0015350-42140-- 0015350-42140-- MEE YEON WANG 001 -34740 -- WEST COAST ARHORISTS INC C015558 -45509 -- 0015558 -45509 -- 0015558 -45509 -- 0015558 -45509 -- 0015556 -45509 -- 0015558 -45509 -- WEST COAST MEDIA 0014095 -42115 -- SUN WON 001 -34780 -- PAGE: 11 CITY OF DIAMOND EAR 59.00 VOUCHER REGISTER .00 DUE THRU: 11/21/2002 59.00 PO `n INVOICE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 13135 9098619220 PH.SVCS-SYC CYN PK 92.22 12135 9093965680 ?R.SVCS-HERITAGE COMM CTR 30.91 12136 9093967182 PH -SVCS -DAY CAMP 28.41 12i35 9096120740 PH.SVCS-FAX LINE/COUNCIL 20.62 12136 9091973128 PH-SVCS-CLYRRA.L 1,476.42 12135 9098608931 PH.SVCS-TELEWORK-ACES 100..95 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 1,749.53 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 1,749.53 12405 L8416988C1 PAGER SVCS-SEPT-NOV 67.16 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 67.18 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 67.18 12243 AR02030658 FACILITY RENTAL -OCT 02 72.00 12243 AR02030654 FACILITY RENTAL -10/23 24.00 TOTAL, PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 96.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 96.00 PAGE: 11 PREPAID DATE CHECK 51597 RECREATION REFUND 59.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 59.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 59.00 13135 25914 TREE MAINT-OCT 02 3,542.2.0 12135 26049 WATERING -OCT 02 830.70 12136 25915 C/WIDE PLNTNG SVCS -OCT 3,636.60 12i35 26050 TREE MAINT-OCT 02 5,747.40 12136 26049 C/WIDE PLNTNG SVCS -OCT 02 7,800.60 12135 25915 WATERING -OCT 02 553.80 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 22,111.36 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 22,111.30 12405 11032032 NOV AD -INFO TO GO 475.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 475.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 475.00 51580 RECREATION REFUND 35.00 TOTAL PREPAIDS .00 TOTAL VOUCHERS 35.00 TOTAL DUE VENDOR 35.00 PREPAID DATE CHECK RUN DATE: 11/20/2002 17:27:12 FUND,/SECT-ACCT-PROSECT-ACCT YOSEMITE WATERS 0015310 -42130 -- CITY OF DIAMOND BAR VOUCHER REGISTER DUE THRU: 11/21/2002 PO # INVOICE DESCRIPTION 12165 OCT0O191998 E4 RENTAL -OCT 02 TOTAL PREPAIDS TOTAL VOUCHERS TOTAL DUE VENDOR REPORT TOTAL PREPAIDS REPORT TOTAL VOUCHERS REPORT TOTAL PAGE: 12 PREPAID AMOUNT DATE CHECK 12.00 .00 12.00 12.00 33,069.62 514,8.12.20 547,901.62 CITY COUNCIL r9�,9 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manage Agenda # 6.5 Meeting Date: 12/03/02 AGENDA REPORT TITLE: Approval of Application for Tree City USA Recertification for 2002 and Authorization for the Mayor to Sign the Application. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the application. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: The National Arbor Day Foundation, in cooperation with the United States Forest Service and the National Association of State Foresters, recognizes towns and cities across America that meet the criteria of the Tree City USA program. The City of Diamond Bar successfully met the four standards by; 1) establishing a department to oversee the tree maintenance program; 2) establishing a forestry program with an annual budget of at least $2 per capita; 3) establishing a community tree ordinance; and 4) proclaiming Arbor Day in the City of Diamond Bar; thereby receiving the distinction of being recognized as a Tree City USA during 2001. DISCUSSION: The recertification recognizes that Diamond Bar continued to meet the four standards from January 2002 until December 2002. The recertification application must be submitted to the California Department of Forestry by December 31, 2002 and requires the Mayor's signature. PREPARED BY: Kim Crews, Senior Management Analyst REVIEW BY: 0 R ose J s DeStef no Community Services Director Deputy City Manager Attachment: Tree City USA Application for Recertification TREE CITY USA Application for Recertification Mail completed application with requested attachments to your state forester no later than December 31. The TREE CITY USA award is made in recognition of work completed by the city during the calendar year. Please provide information for the year ending. (Some states require information in addition to that requested on this application. Check with your state forester.) As Mayor of the city of Diamond Bar (Title — Mayor or other city official) I herewith make application for this community to be officially recertified as a Tree City USA for 2002 , having achieved the standards set forth by The National Arbor_ Day Foundation as noted below. "'ear' Standard 1: A Tree Board or Department List board members, and meeting dates for the past year; or name of city department and manager. Community Services Division Bob Rose Community Services Director Standard 2: A Community Tree Ordinance Check one: CXOur ordinance as last submitted is unchanged and stili in effect. lJ Our ordinance has been changed. The new version is attached. Standard 3: A Community Forestry Program with an Annual Budget of at Least $2 Per Capita Total community forestry expenditures............................................................................................... $ 131 2830.02 Community population--.... ............... ...................................... ___ ......... .... __ ..................................... 97,000 Attach annual work plan outlining the work carried out during the past year. Attach breakdown of community forestry expenditures. Standard 4: An Arbor Day Observance and Proclamation Date observance was held Friday,March 8 2002 Attach program of activities and/or news coverage. Attach Arbor Day proclamation. Mayor Signature Please type or print the following: Mayor or equivalent Title: Mayor Address: 21825 E. Copley Drive city, State, Zip: Diamond Bar, CA 91765 �'hL•�:i.^i�A�� : • December 3, 2002 Title Date City Forestry Contact Name: Bob Rose Title: Community ervi Address: 21825 E. Copley Drive City, State, zip: Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Phone#:_QQ,g 'jQ6_5694 NOTE: Application will not be processed without Standard 3 and 4 attachments. Certification (To Be Completed By The State Forester) (Community) The above named community has made formal application to this office. I am pleased to advise you that we reviewed the application and have concluded that, based on the information contained herein, said community is eligible to be recertified as a Tree City USA, for the calendar year, having in my opinion met the four standards of achievement in urban forestry. Signed State Forester Date Person in State Forester's Office who should receive recognition material: Name: UPSAddress: Title: City, State, Zip: Agency: Phone #: CITY COUNCIL Agenda # _ i Meeting Date: December 3, 2002 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of, the City Council VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manage p� " TITLE: CONSIDERATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ND 2002-8) FOR THE PROPOSED SUMMITRIDGE LIBRARY PROJECT RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2002 -XX approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration. BACKGROUND: The City has initiated planning efforts to construct a new public library at Summitridge Park. An environmental evaluation of the project has been prepared to identify the potential environmental effects associated with the library construction and use. The environmental evaluation resulted in the preparation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) which has been prepared for City Council consideration. The City is currently in the process of preparing an application for the next Library Bond Act funding cycle. The completion of all environmental documentation is a mandatory component of the application. Project Characteristics On an approximate 0.8 acre graded pad located within Summit Ridge Park, the proposed library would be located west of the Community/Senior Center (under construction.) The library building would be an approximate 25,000 square -foot, single -story structure. Facilities to be provided at the library include, but would not be limited to the following: Book stacks and seating, reference collection, Friends of the Library, computer areas, study and meeting rooms, lounge area, lobby/checkout/registration area, cultural/historical display, children's library area, offices, communication room and homework center. A maximum of 20 library staff would be on duty at any given time to operate the facility. Eighty-one parking spaces will be provided to accommodate library users. An additional 198 spaces adjacent to the Community/Senior Center will also be available for library patrons. Access to the site will be provided from Grand Avenue. To ensure visual consistency, the proposed library project will include landscaping and exterior architectural treatments consistent with the Community/Senior Center to the east. Wood, stone, and earth toned concrete would be used to give a natural/classic expression. Native vegetation would be incorporated into the landscape plan. The proposed site plan and elevations (west and south) for the library building are presented within the Mitigated Negative Declaration. DISCUSSION: The proposed construction of a Library at Summit Ridge Park is a "project" pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City of Diamond Bar approved a contract amendment with BonTerra Consulting to prepare the environmental documentation for the project. Upon further review of the proposal, the City determined that the preparation of an Initial Study (1S) and Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND 2002-8) for the proposed development was necessary. Based on the environmental checklist form prepared for the project and supporting environmental analysis, the proposed construction of the proposed project would have no impact or less than significant impacts in the following environmental impact areas: Agricultural resources; hazards and hazardous materials; hydrology and water quality; population and housing; land use and planning; biological resources; noise; mineral resources; public services; recreation; transportation/traffic; utilities and service systems; cultural resources; and geology and soils. The IS identifies potentially significant effects on the environment in the following environmental impact areas: Aesthetics; and air quality. Revisions to the project plans made by or agreed to by the City of Diamond Bar before the proposed IS and Negative Declaration were released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant impacts on the environment would occur. Pursuant to the Public Resources Code Section 21080(c)(2), a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared. Public Review / Response to Public Comments: On November 6, 2002 the City published a Notice of Availability and Intent to Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration within the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune. Approximately 426 notices were mailed to residents and property owners surrounding the project site. Notices were posted upon the project site and at seven locations throughout the City of Diamond Bar. The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration have been distributed to affected public agencies and placed within the Library and at City Hall for public review. The public review and comment 2 period closed on November 26, 2002. Comments have been received from the County Sanitation District. The comment letter does not require changes to the document. Mitigation Monitorina Proaram: The Mitigated Negative Declaration has identified potential significant effects upon the environment as a result of the development of the proposed project. As required by CEQA, a Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared which addresses the environmental impacts and recommends measures to mitigate these impacts. The MMP includes measures to mitigate the aesthetics and air quality impacts identified in the report. CONCLUSION: The Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with CEQA to identify the environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of a Library at Summit Ridge Park. Changes have been incorporated within the project design and mitigation measures have been created to reduce the potential effects of the development resulting in a less than significant impact upon the environment. No new environmental issues have been raised as a result of the comments received from agencies, organizations or individuals. A Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared to ensure that the identified mitigation measures are implemented throughout the final design and construction of the project. The City of Diamond Bar, as the lead agency, is responsible for the implementation of the Program. Staff has prepared Resolution No.2002 - XX approving Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND 2002-8). PREPARED BY: 4a9-� � Jam6fbeStefao, Deputy City Manager Attachments: 1. Mitigated Negative Declaration No.2002-08 2. Resolution No. 2002 - XX A. RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (ND 2002-08) FOR THE SUMMITRIDGE LIBRARY PROJECT RECITALS. (i) The City of Diamond Bar proposes development of a 25,000 square foot Library upon a site comprised of approximately 0.8 — acre within the northern portion of the existing 17.3 acre Summitridge Park located at the northwest corner of Grand Avenue and Summitridge Drive (the "Project" hereinafter.) In accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 at. seq. ("CEQA"), the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000 at. Seq., the City prepared an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND 2002-08) dated November 5, 2002, (the "IS/MND") and Mitigation Monitoring Plan ("MMP") to analyze the proposed Project. (iii) On November 6, 2002, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15072, a Notice of Availability and Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was published within the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Daily Tribune. In addition, on November 6, 2002, copies of the Notice were posted on-site and displayed off-site at seven public locations within the City of Diamond Bar. Approximately 426 owners of property located within 1,000 feet of the Project were mailed the Notice. (iv) A public review period for the proposed MND was provided from November 6, 2002, through November 26, 2002. Copies of the proposed IS/MND were made available for public review at the Diamond Bar Library and at City Hall. (v) In accordance with CEQA Guidelines, the IS/MND was circulated to interested parties and agencies for public comment. In response to the circulation of the IS/MND, the City received written and oral comments regarding the adequacy of the IS/MND. The City caused preparation of written responses where required to all comments which raised project related environmental issues. The City has incorporated the comments and responses into the MND where appropriate. (vi) On December 3, 2002, the City Council held a duly noticed public meeting on the IS/MND. At the meeting, interested parties were provided an opportunity to present oral and written comments regarding the IS/MND. On December 3, 2002, the City Council concluded the public meeting. B. RESOLUTION. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, as follows: The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The City Council finds and determines that the public and governmental agencies have been afforded ample notice and opportunity to comment on the IS/MND. 3. In accordance with CEQA, the City Council finds and determines that the IS/MND has been independently analyzed by the City and its staff, and that the IS/MND represents the independent judgment of the lead agency with respect to the Project. 4. The Project will not result in significant impacts; that said MND and MMP are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the Project based on the finding that the documents reflect the independent judgment of the lead agency; that it has considered the IS/MND and MMP together with any comments and responses received during the public review and meeting process; and further finding on the basis of said documents that there is no substantial evidence that, with the implementation of the mitigation measures identified in MMP, the Project will have a significant effect on the environment. 5. The City Council, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said meetings determined that the IS/MND and the MMP were prepared in compliance with the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act and State CEQA Guidelines. 6. The City Council approves and adopts the IS/MND and MMP for the proposed Project, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference as the environmental documentation for the Project. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2002. , MAYOR 2 f I, Lynda Burgess, City Clerk of the City of Diamond, 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 3rd day of December, 2002, AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: FAINi0"s Lynda Burgess, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar J E, i i u u Wen P. Chang Mayor Deborah H. O'Connor Mayor Pro Tem Carol Herrera Council Member Robert S. Huff' Council Member Robert P. Zirbes Council Member Rlgtied pa per City of Diamond Bar 21825 E. Copley Drive • Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4178 (909) 860-2489 • Fax (909) 861-3117 www.CityofDiamond Bar.com NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY AND INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE, DECLARATION In accordance to Section 15072 of the State of California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, this notice is intended to inform the general public and City residents that the City of Diamond Bar proposes to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the following project: Project Title: Summit Ridge Library Project Description: The proposed project consists of the construction of a new library building in the City of Diamond Bar. The library would be approximately 25,000 square feet in size. The project would be constructed on an aproximate 0.8 acre site within the northwestern portion of the existing 17 -acre Summit Ridge Park, adjacent to and west of the approved Community/Senior Center which is currently under construction. Access to the site would be from Grand Avenue and Summit Ridge Drive. Project Location: The proposed project would be located within Summit Ridge Park on the northwestern comer of Grand Avenue and Summit Ridge Drive in the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California. N n S, _} a n Project Site a � G—dA- I Review Period: November 6 to November 26, 2002 Lead Agency: City of Diamond Bar Adoption Date: The Diamond Bar City Council is scheduled to consider and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration at a public meeting on December 3, 2002, at 6:30 p.m. Public Meeting South Coast Air Quality Management District/ Location: Government Center Auditorium 21865 E. Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Contact Person: James DeStefano Deputy City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21825 East Copley Drive Diamond Bar, California 91765-4177 Phone No.: (909) 396-5676 Fax No.: (909) 861-3117 The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study will be available for public review at the City of Diamond Bar City Hall and at the Diamond Bar Public Library located at 1061 Grand Avenue, Diamond Bar, CA. Please submit any comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration to the above listed contact person on or before November 26, 2002. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact Mr. DeStefano. Summit Ridge Libra I LIST OF EXHIBITS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Follows Page 1. INTRODUCTION.................................................... 1.1 Purpose of the Initial Study ............................ 1-1 . ......... 1-1 .......................................... 2-2 1.2 Summaryof Findings ........................................... 1.3 Project Approval Process ........................................ 1-1 1-1 2-2 ........... ..................... 3-1 1.4 Organization of the Initial Study ................................... 1-2 . .......... I ............ I ........ 1. 3-1 2. PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING . . ................. 2-1 5-2 2.1 Project Location ........................................... -.. 2-1 2.2 Environmental Setting ................•-------------.._.._.._.... 2.3 Project Objectives 2-1 2-2 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .. . ........................... 3.1 Project Approvals Required ...................................... ............ 3-1 3-1 3.2 Project Characteristics- .... • .......... • ... • ... • .......... 3.3 Project Phasing • • • . • .. 3-1 . 3-1 4. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM .................................. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION ...................................... 4-1 5-1 1 6. REPORT PREPARERS AND CONTRIBUTORS ............................ 6-1 7. REFERENCES.------•............................................. 7-1 LIST OF TABLES Table No. Page 1 2 Existing Intersection Capacity Utilization .............................. Forecast Traffic Volumes—Proposed Library ........................... 5-18 5-18 3 Summary of Intersection Capacity Utilization Impacts .................... 5-18 I LIST OF EXHIBITS I IR.\ProjeasMar-VMIS MNO-110562.wpd i Initial Study1hfitigated Negative Declaration Exhibit Follows Page 1 Regional Location Map .......................................... 2-2 2 3 Local Vicinity Map ................................................ Site Plan ..................... 2-2 ........... ..................... 3-1 4 Building Elevations ............ . .......... I ............ I ........ 1. 3-1 5 Site Photographs ................................................. 5-2 I IR.\ProjeasMar-VMIS MNO-110562.wpd i Initial Study1hfitigated Negative Declaration s Summit Ridge Libra SECTION i — INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE INITIAL STUDY The purpose of this Initial Study (IS) is to describe the proposed Summit Ridge Library project, hereafter referred to as the proposed project, and provide an evaluation of the potential environmental effects associated with the project's construction and use. This IS has been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code §21000 at seq.), and in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, §15000 et-seq.). Pursuant to Section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Diamond Bar is the lead agency for the project. The lead agency is the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project that may have a significant effect upon the environment. 1.2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Based on the environmental checklist form prepared for the project and supporting environmental analysis, the proposed construction of the proposed project would have no impact or less than significant impacts in the following environmental impact areas: • Agricultural Resources • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Hydrology and Water Quality • Population and Housing • Land Use and Planning • Biological Resources • Noise • Mineral Resources • Public Services • Recreation • Transportation/Traffic • Utilities and Service Systems • Cultural Resources • Geology & Soils The IS identifies potentially significant effects on the environment in the following environmental impact areas: • Aesthetics • Air Quality Revisions to the project plans made by or agreed to by the City of Diamond Bar before the proposed IS and Negative Declaration were released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant impacts on the environment would occur. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(c)(2), a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared. 1 1,3 PROJECT APPROVAL PROCESS This IS and proposed MND have been -submitted to potentially affected agencies and individuals. Notices of Availability of the IS and MND for review and comment have been posted onsite and at .the Diamond Bar City Hall. Newspaper notices announcing the availability of the IS/MND were published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin and in the San Gabriel Tribune. Referenced documents are available for review at the City of Diamond Bar Community and Development Services Department. n IRAPro}ectsOEarWMMS MND-110502.wpd 1-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Summit Ridge Libra A 20 -day public review period has been established for the IS and proposed MND in accordance with Section 15073 of the CEQA guidelines. In reviewing the IS and proposed MND, persons and public agencies should focus on the proposed finding that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. if reviewers believe that the project may have a significant effect, they should: (1) identify the specific effect; (2) explain why they believe the effect would occur; and (3) explain why they believe the effect would be significant. The environmental documentation is available for review at the following locations: Diamond Bar Public Library 1061 South Grand Avenue Diamond Bar, California 91765 Comments on the analysis contained herein may be sent to the following: James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21825 E. Copley Drive Diamond Bar, California 91765 Following receipt and evaluation of comments from agencies, organizations, and/or individuals, the City of Diamond Bar will determine whether any substantial new environmental issues have been raised. If so, further documentation, such as an environmental impact report (EIR) or a revised IS may be required. If not, the project and environmental documentation is scheduled to - be adopted by the Diamond Bar City Council on December 3, 2002. 1.4 ORGANIZATION OF THE INITIAL STUDY The IS is organized into the following sections: • Section 1 — Introduction. This section provides an introduction and overview describing the findings of the IS. • Section 2-- Project Location and Environmental Setting. This section provides a brief — description of the project location, the existing environmental setting of the project site and vicinity, project objective and project history. • Section 3 — Project Description. This section provides a detailed description of the physical and operational characteristics of the proposed project. • Section 4 — Environmental Checklist Form. The completed CEQA checklist form provides an overview of the potential impacts that may or may not result from project implementation. The environmental checklist form also includes "mandatory findings of significance" required by CEQA. • Section 5 — Environmental Evaluation. This section contains an analysis of — environmental impacts identified in the environmental checklist and identifies mitigation measures that have been recommended to eliminate potential significant effects or reduce them to a level that is less than significant. • Section 6— Report Preparers and Contributors. This section identifies those individuals responsible for preparing and contributing to the IS and proposed MND. RAProj9ctsOBar\101011S MND-110502.wpd 1-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ISummit Ridge Libra • Section 7— References. This section identifies those references used in preparation of the IS. The following sections will be added to the MND upon completion of the public review period: • Section 8 — Determination. A statement on the determination that a MND is the appropriate environmental documentation is included in this section. • Section 9 — Responses to Comments. This section contains the comments that were received during the public review period and the prepared responses to those comments. • Section 10 — Mitigation Monitoring Program. This section contains the Mitigation Monitoring Program prepared in compliance with Public Resources Code 21081.6. R:1Projects%DHar1J01051S MN0-110502.wpd 1-3 Initial StudyNitigated Negative Declaration T Summit Ridge Library SECTION 2 — PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION The proposed project site consists of an approximate 0.8 -acre within the northern portion of the existing 17.3 acre Summit Ridge Park on the northwest corner of Grand Avenue and Summit Ridge Drive in the eastern portion of the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California. The regional location and local vicinity of the project site are depicted in Exhibits 1 and 2, respectively. Vehicular access to the project site would be provided from an existing entrance on Summit Ridge Drive and a revised entrance on Grand Avenue. Regional access to the project site is provided by the State Route 57 freeway (SR -57). The project site is bounded to the south by Grand Avenue and single-family estate homes, to the east by Summit Ridge Drive and single-family homes, and to the north and west by vacant land. 2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The project site is within the existing 17.3 -acre Summit Ridge Park in the City of Diamond Bar. The upper porton of the park is currently being graded for construction of the Community/Senior Center building with associated parking, open space, and landscaped areas. The existing open turf play areas and baseball diamond are being retained; however, public access is being restricted during the grading for the Community/Senior Center. These facilities will become available to the public upon completion of grading in early 2003. The perimeter of the park is landscaped primarily with eucalyptus trees and is partially blocked from view by surrounding residences. The project site is designated in the City of Diamond Bar general plan as a park and is zoned as a residential development zone. The site slopes downhill from north to south. Elevations within the project site range from approximately 1,250 feet above mean sea level (msl) to 1,160 feet (msl). The following identifies the land uses surrounding the project site as well as the general plan land use designations of surrounding areas. rSurrounding Land Uses: North: Vacant Land South: Rural Residential East: Low Density Residential West: Vacant Land and Low Density Residential General Plan Designations for Surrounding Areas: North: Planning Area 2/Specific Plan Overlay South: Rural Residential (max. 1 dwelling unit (du)/acre) East: Low Density Residential (max. 3 du/acre) West: Planning Area 2/Specific Plan Overlay and Low Density Residential (max. 3 du/acre) Zoning Designations of Surrounding Areas: North: Residential Planned Development Zone (RPD) 1 du/10,000 ft South: Single Family Residential R-1) 1 du/40,000 square feet (ft2) East: Residential Planned Development Zone (RPD) 1 du/10,000 ft2 West: Single Family Residential R-1) 1 du/8,000 ft' R:TrojectslDBarSJt MIS MN9-110502.wpd 2-1 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Summit Ridoe Libra 2.3 PROJECT OBJECTIVES A consultant team and task force was appointed by the Diamond Bar City Council in 1998 to make recommendations regarding the development of a Civic Center and community facilities to serve --- the residents of the City of Diamond Bar. The task force considered the development and content of six different types of community facilities during the process. Those facilities consisted of a City Hall, community center, library, performing arts center, senior center, and sports complex. The task force also recognized that many types of uses could be accommodated in more than one facility. With implementation of the proposed project, one of the previously mentioned facilities, a library, would be provided. A community center with a senior center and youth center were previously approved for the site and are currently under construction. The project objective is as follows: 1. To construct a library adjacent to the Summit Ridge Community/Senior Center site within Summit Ridge Park. R:1Projecls\DBarU0101JS MND-110502.wpd 2-2 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration t i e, v � fir Jel Project XV m �\ s NO 4. R, Source: US Census Bureau TIGER 2000 Local vicinity Summit Ridge library Project 4 0.25 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Exhibit 2 3 C, Ch'5 1 :=NG 5:1GYS_ExhibPtsNDbarJOifl_LV_9 Y07402,pdf Edwards Air Farce Lass Kern Kern Ventura Los Angeles Las Pad— N.6 adres is itio nil Fafcit © Arz ngsiss Il hi[ionil Fa re3[ \ 1.. . ._. Summit &dge Library SECTION 3 — PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 PROJECT APPROVALS REQUIRED ' This proposed IS/MND is intended to serve as the primary environmental document for all actions associated with the proposed project, including project construction and operation. In addition, this is the primary reference document for the formulation and implementation of a mitigation monitoring program for the proposed project. The anticipated discretionary approvals required for the project are identified below. Lead Agency City of Diamond Bar • Approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration • Approval of the Plans and Specifications for the Summit Ridge Library Pursuant to Section 22.02.030 of the City Code, the proposed library project is exempt from development and land use approval requirements. 3.2 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS The project site consists of an approximate 0.8 -acre graded pad within the Summit Ridge Parke The proposed library would be located west of the Community/Senior Center (under construction), on the site previously approved as an open space area. The library building would be an approximate 25,000 square -foot, single -story structure. Facilities that would be provided at the library include, but would not be limited to the following: book stacks and seating, reference collection, Friends of the Bookstore, computer areas, study and meeting rooms, lounge area, lobby/checkouttregistration area, cultural/historical display, children's library area, offices, communication room and homework center. A maximum of 20 library staff would be on duty at any given time to operate the facility. ■ Parking to accommodate library users would also be provided. There would be 81. parking spaces ■ provided adjacent to the library; however, there would be an additional 198 spaces adjacent to the Community[Senior Center that would also be available for library patrons. Access to the site would be provided from Summit Ridge Drive and Grand Avenue. To ensure visual consistency, the proposed library project would include landscaping and exterior architectural treatments consistent with the Community/Senior Center to the east. Wood, stone, and earth toned concrete would be used to give a natural/classic expression. Native vegetation would be incorporated into the landscape plan. The proposed site plan and elevations (west and south) for the library building are presented in Exhibits 3 and 4, respectively. ' 3.3 PROJECT PHASING The proposed project would be constructed in one phase. The rough grading for the site has already been initiated as part of the Community/Senior Center project. Finish grading for the library is projected to begin in fourth quarter 2003 or first quarter 2004; building construction would begin immediately thereafter. Occupancy is projected for mid -2005. RAProjectsM8arW 10V8 MND-110502.wpd 3-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration I r-] �._ Summit Ridge Library SECTION 4 — ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM This section includes the completed environmental checklist form for the proposed library project. The checklist is used to assist in evaluating the potential environmental impacts of the proposed I project. The checklist identifies potential project effects using the following categories: (1) Potentially Significant Impact; (2) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated; (3) Less Than Significant Impact; and, (4) No Impact. Substantiation and clarification for each checklist response is provided in Section 5 (Environmental Evaluation) as required by CEQA. Included in each discussion are mitigation measures, as appropriate, that are recommended for implementation of the Summit Ridge Library project. 1 i [l R.Tr*ds\DBarU010US MNO-110502.wpd 4-1 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (see attachments for information sources) Summit fWdge.Lrb y Less Than Potentially Significant I Less Than Significant I With Significant No a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which ❑ ■ ❑ ❑ would adverse affect. day or nighttime views in the area? a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, -to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ Williamson Act contract? 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? a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the ❑ ■ ❑ ❑ applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ number of people? RAFrole ctslnearuotoUs MND-110502.wpd 42 Initial Study/Mittgated Negative Declaration ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (see attachments for information sources) Summit Ridge Libra Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant I No a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ through habitat modification, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department .of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ habitat 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 Service? c) 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 directremoval, filling, hydrological interni tion, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or im ede the use of native nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ❑ ❑ ❑ Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantiai adverse change in the significance ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ resource or site or unique geological feature? d) Disturb any human resources, including those interred ❑ ❑ ❑ outside of formal cemeteries? RAProjectsMBarU0101JS MND -1 M02mpd 4-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES (see attachments for information.sources) Summit Ride Libra Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant I With I Significant I No a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1) Rupture of a known earthquake fauft, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ Zoning Map issues by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ■ iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ liquefaction? iv Landslides? ❑ ❑ ■ b) Result in a substantial soil erosion or the loss of ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in onsite or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?_ d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1- ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the dis osal of waste water? a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the El ❑ ❑ ■ environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ environment through reasonablyforeseesble upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter -mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? R:Trpjec %D8aAJ010115 MNi3-110502.wPd 4-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Summit Ri ge Library IRAProjects4DBarL OMIS MNQ-110502.wpd 4-5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Less Than ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Less Than (see attachments for information sources) Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ❑ ❑ ❑ i 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 or people residing or working in a project area? f) 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? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ adopted emergency response pian or emergency evacuation Ian? h) Expose people or structures to a significant riskof loss, ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ injury, ordeath involving wildland fires, including where wildiands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere ❑ © ❑ ■ substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which ermits have been ranted? c) 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 substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite? d) 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 amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding onsite or offsite? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of pollutant runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or f=lood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures ❑ D ❑ ■ which would impede or redirect flood flows? IRAProjects4DBarL OMIS MNQ-110502.wpd 4-5 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Summit Ridge U6rary a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plans, policy, or ❑ regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mltigati2q an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan ❑ or natural communi conservation elan? 8 ' a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ❑ resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important ❑ mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other aaencies? LEI Less Than -- ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Less Than ■ (see attachments for information sources) S-ignificant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 1) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 1 ❑ 1 ❑ 1 ❑ ■ a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plans, policy, or ❑ regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mltigati2q an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan ❑ or natural communi conservation elan? 8 ' a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ❑ resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important ❑ mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other aaencies? LEI ❑ ❑ ■ ~� ❑ ❑ ■ b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ roundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without theproject? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without theproject'? e) 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 expose people residing orworking in the project area to excessive noise levels? _ f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? RAProodsWaNOMIS MND-4105D2.wpd 4-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration -- ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ ❑ ■ ~� ❑ ❑ ■ b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ roundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without theproject? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without theproject'? e) 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 expose people residing orworking in the project area to excessive noise levels? _ f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? RAProodsWaNOMIS MND-4105D2.wpd 4-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Summit L? a Libra Less Than ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Less Than (see attachments for information sources) Significant With Significant No Irr...�..4 r11:4:r.�4inn Emn�rf Irnn�-► a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ❑ ❑ © ■ directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through the extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 1. a) Wouldthe project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physicallyaltered govemmentfacilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in orderto maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ Police protection? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ Schools? ❑ ❑ ©' ■ Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ 0 ■ a) Would the project increase the use of existing ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacityratio on roads orcon estion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of ❑ ❑ ■ p service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? R:1?ro1ectsMBar=0115 MND-110502.wpd 4-7 Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration _ — - — Summit Ridge Library R'ProjeotsMarUDINS MND-110502.wPd 4-8 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration �" Less Than ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Less Than (see attachments for information sources) Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ either an increase in traffic levels or change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses e.., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ f) Result in inadequate parking capacity. 0 ❑ ❑ ■ g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ supporting aitemative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ Regional Water QualityControl Board? quire or result in the construction of new water or ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ rlivable stewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing iiiiiies, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? C) Require or result in the construction of new storm water ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ provider which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ re ulations related to solid waste? R'ProjeotsMarUDINS MND-110502.wPd 4-8 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration �" C C C J s Summit Ridge library DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ 1 find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ■ 1 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 of the mitigation measures described in the Mitigated Negative Declaration © I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ 1 find that the proposed project is consistent with the Program EIR on: An:��2 �': "Shu�) Thomas E. Smith, Jr., AICP Environmental Planning Consultant Date: 115J 09 I2 IR.1PrajedMQE3aAJ010V5 NINA-110502.wpd 4-9 initiat StudyfMitigated Negative Declaration Less Than ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Less Than (see attachments for Information sources) Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact a, Does the project have the potential to degrade the ❑ ❑ ❑ qualify of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wild- life population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short- p ❑ ❑ ■ term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long- term environmental goals? c. Does the project have environmental effects which will ❑ ❑ p ■ cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? d. Does the project have impacts that are individually ❑ p p E 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 effects of probable future projects)? DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ 1 find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ■ 1 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 of the mitigation measures described in the Mitigated Negative Declaration © I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ 1 find that the proposed project is consistent with the Program EIR on: An:��2 �': "Shu�) Thomas E. Smith, Jr., AICP Environmental Planning Consultant Date: 115J 09 I2 IR.1PrajedMQE3aAJ010V5 NINA-110502.wpd 4-9 initiat StudyfMitigated Negative Declaration Summit Ridge Library SECTION 5— ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION L AESTHETICS—Would the project. a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact. The project site is not located in the vicinity of any designated scenic vistas or highways nor would it impede views of scenic resources. There are no scenic resources, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings located on or adjacent to the project site. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? ' Less than Significant Impact. Exhibit 5 provides photographs of the project site taken from vantage points along Grand Avenue and Summit Ridge Drive. As shown in the photos, the project site is being graded for the Summit Ridge Community/Senior Center which was approved by the City in February, 2002. The project site would be visible from Grand Avenue and selectively visible from some residences to the south, east and west. The greatest number of viewers would be along Grand Avenue due to the volume of passing traffic. The proposed single -story library structure would not substantially affect views from vantage points surrounding the site. Views from the south, east and west would not be ' obstructed. Existing views from these residences would be altered; however, construction of the proposed building on the project site would not substantially alter the existing condition because it is set back more than 300 feet from Grand Avenue. Furthermore, the project site is not a focal point for these viewsheds. The background view of the surrounding hills are prominent visual features from most structures in the project vicinity. These views would not be impacted by the proposed project. iLandscaping throughout the park and on the perimeter of the project site would serve to soften the visual appearance of the proposed structure and parking areas. The project would be compatible with the visual character and/or quality of the Community/Senior Center building (under construction), existing park areas, and surrounding residential land uses and would therefore not have an adverse effect on the visual character of the study area. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less than Significant with Mitigation. The proposed project would involve the construction of a library, and associated landscaped areas. The proposed structures would include exterior windows and other reflective surfaces and nighttime lighting, and parking lots would require lighting for security. During the day, reflective surfaces could create a source of glare for adjacent residents, and nighttime security lighting could be visible from adjacent residential areas. However, implementation of the mitigation program would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. i I R.1ProjectsXDBarU0VAIS MNt}110502.wpd 5_1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declara#ion Summit Ridge Library MITIGATION PROGRAM MM 1-1 To minimize excessive light and glare, building exteriors shall use a low reflectance glass. Mirrored glass and other highly reflective building materials shall not be used on the exterior of the building. MM 1-2 Plant material, sidewalk paving, and other architectural design features included in the project landscape plans shall be incorporated on and around buildings to decrease reflectivity of constructed facilities and light and glare toward adjacent residences. MM 1-3 Outside light fixtures shall be consistent with the City of Diamond Bar Building Code, and the National Electrical Code, and shall be designed and installed at downward angles. Exterior lighting fixtures shall use low glare, shielded fixtures to reduce light intrusion onto adjacent land uses and open space. With application of the mitigation program, the proposed project would not result in significant aesthetics impacts. No additional mitigation is required. II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? 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? No Impact The proposed project site has recently been graded as part of the Summit Ridge Community/Senior Center project. Previously, the project site was a portion of an active park. The proposed project would not convert farmland to non-agricultural use. The site is not covered by a Williamson Act Contract nor located on land designated Prime r. Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, according to 1997 Natural Resource Conservation Service mapping. No agricultural resources impacts are anticipated. Ill. AIR QUALITY— Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate anyair quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant forwhich the project region is in non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than Significant with Mitigation (a);less than significant (b,c,d). California is divided by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) into air basins which share similar meteorological and topographical features. The project site is within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), a 6,660 square mile area comprised of Orange County and the non -desert R.Vr*ds0BaAJ030U5 MND-110502.wpd 5-2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 1 i Photo C Site Photographs Summit Ridge Library Project Exhibit 5b C a N 5 U C T 1 N G Source: Bon Terra Consulting. October 2902. S�GIS_vthibiIsMBAWJC 10Ex�iibi15b_110402.pdf ill � Y I ' tSi 7 C Site Photographs Summit Ridge Library Project Exhibit 5b C a N 5 U C T 1 N G Source: Bon Terra Consulting. October 2902. S�GIS_vthibiIsMBAWJC 10Ex�iibi15b_110402.pdf ISummit Ridae Lr6rary portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. The Basin's climate and topography are highly conducive to the formation and transport of air pollution. The air pollutants of greatest concern in the SCAB are ozone (03), carbon monoxide (CO), and fine particulate matter (PM,,). Peak concentrations have dropped significantly throughout the air basin as a result of strict new emission controls and reformulated gasoline sold in winter months. tThe SCAB is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Diamond Bar. is in the Pomona/Walnut Valley Air Monitoring Subregion Source Receptor Area 10 (SRA -10). The pollutant for which SRA -10 of the SCAB is designated a non -attainment area for national ambient standards is Ozone (03). 03 is a colorless, odorless pollutant formed by a chemical reaction between volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOJ in the presence of sunlight. The primary sources of VOCs and NO, are mobile, including cars, trucks, buses, agricultural and construction equipment. SRA -10 does not currently measure ambient PMlalevels. However, many subregions within SCAG consistently exceed state standards fro PM,, concentrations. PM10 consists of fugitive dust caused by soil disturbances such as construction grading and causes a greater health risk than larger -sized particles, since these fine particles can be inhaled more easily and irritate the lungs by themselves and in combination with gases. A project's air quality impacts can be separated into short-term impacts from construction and long-term permanent impacts from project operations. The potential short-term and long-term impacts of the proposed project are discussed below. To determine whether emissions resulting from construction of a project are significant, the SCAQMD recommends significance thresholds in its CEQA Air Quality Handbook, as revised in November 1993 and approved by the SCAQMD's Board of Directors. The pollutants addressed by the SCAQMD thresholds include carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur oxides (SOX), nitrogen oxides (NOx), particulate matter (PM,a), and reactive organic compounds. Based on the size of the project (approximately 0.8 acre) there is a low potential for PM,D emissions thresholds to be exceeded by the proposed project. The SCAQMD has established a threshold of 150 pounds per day, and 6.75 tons per quarter for PM10 emissions. The City has determined that these thresholds are appropriate for the project, in order to ensure regional consistency, and based on the best available scientific information. CONSTRUCTION -RELATED AIR QUALITY IMPACTS Air quality impacts of a project may occur during construction on both a regional and local scale. Construction impacts can include airborne dust from grading, demolition, and dirt hauling, and gaseous emissions from heavy equipment, delivery and dirt hauling trucks, employee vehicles, and paints and coatings. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook estimates that each acre of disturbed. soil creates 26.4 pounds/day of PM,,. The project site was planned as an open, landscaped area as part of the Summit Ridge Community/Senior Center project and has already been rough graded for that use. Implementation of the proposed library project would require additional grading to develop a pad for the proposed library structure. If the entire approximately 0.8 acre library site were to be graded in one day, PM,, emissions would be approximately 21.1 pounds per day, prior to implementation of standard conditions of approval. In actuality, the project site R:1Pro;ectslDBarU0101€S MNO-110502.wpd 5-3 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Summit Ridge Library would not be graded .in one day, and the daily emission levels would be less. These emission levels would not exceed the SCAQMD's threshold for PM10 of 100 pounds per day. It should be noted that the grading for the Summit Ridge Community/Senior Center would be completed prior to initiation of the final grading for the proposed library. Additionally, with implementation of the standard conditions of approval listed below, there would be no cumulative impacts as fugitive dust emissions from areas previously graded would be eliminated by ensuring that these areas are watered as often as necessary each day in order to maintain a crust and prevent any dust from being released to the atmosphere. Therefore, short-term construction -related air quality impacts are not considered significant. LONG-TERM OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS The primary source of operational emissions associated with the proposed project would be from residents using the library, and employee vehicle travel to and from the project site. Based upon the relatively few traffic trips per day generated by the project (i.e., 400 average daily trips), emissions from this source is not considered significant. A comparatively small amount of gaseous emissions would occur from natural gas and electricity usage. Therefore, the project would not have a significant long-term air quality impact from operations and would not conflict with implementation of the AQMP. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? No Impact. The proposed project involves the construction of a library and would not involve uses which could create odors considered objectionable to surrounding residential uses. No impacts are anticipated. MITIGATION PROGRAM MM 3-3 All construction contractors shall comply with SCAQMD regulations, including Rule 402, the Nuisance Rule, and Rule 403, f=ugitive Dust. Because the area undergoing grading is below the size for which Rule 403 requires that a grading plan be developed and submitted to the District prior to beginning work, it is exempt from this portion of the rule. However, the rule requires that all grading projects apply at least one of the best available control measures for fugitive dust. To insure that the project is in full compliance with both dust regulations and that there is no nuisance impact off-site, the contractor will implement all of the following; • Moisten soil not more than 15 minutes prior to moving it. • Apply chemical stabilizers to disturbed surface areas (completed grading areas) within five days of completing grading or apply dust suppressants or vegetation sufficient to maintain a stabilized surface. • Water exposed surfaces at least twice a day under calm conditions and as often as needed on windy days or during very dry weather in order to maintain a surface crust and prevent the release of visible emissions from the construction site. • Cease grading when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. RAProjectslMar',JOIO 1S MND-710502.wpd 5-4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Summit 22ae Library • Provide for street sweeping, as needed, on adjacent roadways to remove dirt dropped by construction vehicles or mud which would otherwise be carried off by trucks departing project sites. rMaintain two feet of freeboard capacity on all trucks hauling dirt. • Tightly cover all loads of dirt with a tarp on all trucks leaving the site. • Apply extra water; if needed, to comply with provisions of SCAQMD Rule 402, Nuisance, to insure that no visible emissions from construction activities can be observed beyond the property line. After mitigation, all construction emissions will be reduced to a level 'considered less than significant. Mitigation measures, including adherence to Rule 402, will prevent exposure of any adjacent sensitive receptors to adverse emissions. Operational emissions and local carbon monoxide concentrations are not significant and require no mitigation. There will be no significant adverse odors associated with the project during either construction or operation. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES—Would the project. a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No impact The project site has been graded as part of the Summit Ridge Community/Senior Center project which was previously approved by the City. The loss of vegetation associated with grading the approximate 7 -acre Community/Senior Center (including the -approximate 0.8 -acre site for the proposed library) was addressed in the ISIMND prepared for the Summit Ridge Community/Senior Center, and required mitigation has been implemented. There is no vegetation remaining on the project site; therefore, the proposed project would not impact any biological resources. The native vegetation which remains in park areas surrounding the project site (coastal sage scrub, coast live oak woodland, and non-native grassland) does provide resources for wildlife. Common amphibian and reptile species observed or expected on the site include Pacific tree frog (1-1y1a regilla), western toad (Bufo boreas), Pacific slender salamander (Batrachoseps pacificus), western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), side -blotched lizard (Ufa stansburinana), southern alligator lizard (Gerrhonotus mulficarinatus), gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus), and western rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis). Common bird species observed during the survey include mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna), Nuttall's woodpecker (Picoides nuttallh), black phoebe (Sayomis nigricans), Say's phoebe (Sayornis saya), western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), western bluebird (Sialia mexicana), northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglnttos), cedar waxwing (Sombycilla cedrorum), yellow-rumped warbler (Dendroica coronate), white - crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), lesser goldfinch (Carduelis psaltria), and house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus). The northern harrier (Circus cyaneus) was the only raptor (bird of prey) species observed during the biological survey conducted on the site during preparation of the IS/MND for the Community/Senior Center. The northern harrier would be expected to nest in the grassland within and adjacent to the park. Other common raptor species, such as the American kestrel (Falco sparvedus) and red -shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), are expected to forage and potentially nest in trees within the park and IRAPrajects4WarUOIOUs Mr413-110542.wpd 5-6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Summit Ridge Library surrounding areas. There are no trees on the proposed library site. Mammal species or evidence of their presence observed within the project area (prior to grading activities) included desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonil) and coyote (Canis latrans). Coastal sage scrub occurs in some areas within the park which have not been impacted by grading activities. Sage scrub is considered a special status vegetation type because of its high potential to support Threatened and Endangered wildlife species, including the coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptiia californica californica). The proposed project would not impact coastal sage scrub habitat or the coastal Caiifomia gnatcatcher because the project site has already been graded, and there is no vegetation remaining. The coastal Califomia gnatcatcher has been reported in the Cities of Walnut and Yorba Linda, in Bonelli Regional Park and in the Chino Hills (CDFG 2001). However, the project site is not located within critical habitat for the coastal California gnatcatcher. Due to the lack of -� vegetation/habitat, the coastal California gnatcatcher would not occur on the project site. There are no trees located on the project site; therefore, the project would not have direct impacts on any raptor (bird of prey) species. However, raptor species may nest in the large oak, and gum (Eucalyptus spp.) trees that were retained to the east of the project site. Also, the northern harrier has potential to nest in the grassland on the slopes below the park. The Regulations by the CDFG prohibit activities having the potential to disturb active raptor nests, a protection that is generally discontinued once nesting activity is completed. The nesting season for raptors is February 1 to June 30. Construction activities for the proposed library project would not occur during the nesting season; therefore, no indirect impacts to raptors would result from implementation of the proposed project. No mitigation is required. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat 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 Service? c) 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 removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially 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 nursery sites? No Impact. Wetlands and "waters of the United States" are protected under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and are under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). The project site has been graded and there are no wetlands or riparian habitat on the project site. There are drainages south of the project site which may be used for wildlife movement; however, the proposed project would not impact these drainages, and would not interfere with wildlife movement. No impacts to riparian habitat, wetlands, or wildlife movement would result from implementation of the proposed project. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact. The City of Diamond Bar has a Tree Preservation and Protection Ordinance. Any removal of oaks (Quercus sp.), walnuts (Juglans sp. ), sycamores (Platanus racemosa), willows (Salixsp.), or naturalized pepper trees (Schinus molle) would be subject to the local tree ordinance. Any trees removed are required to be mitigated at a ratio of 3:1. Coast live R;1ProjectSV3BaN010115 MND-110502.wpd 5-6 Initial StudylWgated Negative Declaration Summit Ridae Library oaks (Quercus agrifolia) are located within the coast live oak woodland on the slopes below the project site. However, the project site has been graded, and there are no trees located on the project site. The City's tree ordinance also requires protection of trees adjacent to proposed development during construction. There are no trees in proximity to the site which would be Impacted during construction. No mitigation is required. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact. The project site is not within an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other habitat conservation pian area. No impacts are anticipated. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES—Would the project: No Impact. The project site is located on a hilltop which was graded during construction of the original Summit Ridge Park and, more recently, the Community/Senior Center. No historic or paleontological resources were uncovered during grading and none are known to exist on the project site. Furthermore, no historic or paleontological resources were uncovered during grading and construction of surrounding homes in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Additional grading that would be required for construction of the proposed library would occur on fill material and would not have the potential to impact cultural resources. No mitigation is required. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS—Would the project. a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: I) 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 a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in onsite or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No Impact. The project site is not located within an established Alquist-Priolo Study Zone as delineated by Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. The potential for ground rupture from fault movement within the site boundaries is considered to be WrajectsMaNO1OMS MND-110502.wpd 5-7 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §75064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique d) geological feature? Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? No Impact. The project site is located on a hilltop which was graded during construction of the original Summit Ridge Park and, more recently, the Community/Senior Center. No historic or paleontological resources were uncovered during grading and none are known to exist on the project site. Furthermore, no historic or paleontological resources were uncovered during grading and construction of surrounding homes in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Additional grading that would be required for construction of the proposed library would occur on fill material and would not have the potential to impact cultural resources. No mitigation is required. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS—Would the project. a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: I) 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 a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in onsite or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No Impact. The project site is not located within an established Alquist-Priolo Study Zone as delineated by Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. The potential for ground rupture from fault movement within the site boundaries is considered to be WrajectsMaNO1OMS MND-110502.wpd 5-7 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Summit Ridge Library negligible as there are no major active or potentially active faults known to traverse the project site. The potential for liquefaction or other seismically induced ground failure such as ground lurching, and seismically induced settling during periods of high ground shaking is considered to be negligible for the developed site, due to the presence of dense soils and the absence of shallow ground water. The project site is currently being graded in accordance with approved plans for the Community/Senior Center. Upon completion of grading activities, there would be no potential impacts associated with soil stability. Previous soil conditions identified within or surrounding the project site have been remediate d during the current grading activities. The proposed project would not involve the use of septic tanks or alternate wastewater disposal systems. No impacts would result, and no mitigation is required. a) -continued iii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iv) Landslides? b) Result in a substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located in southern California, a seismically active region. There are a number of known active faults in the region, resulting in the potential for seismic ground shaking to occur at the site. Active faults include the Chino Elsinore fault (located approximately one mile to the southeast of the project site), Elysian Park thrust Puente Hills segment (located approximately three miles to the west of the project site), the Central Avenue fault (located approximately four miles to the east of the project site), the San Jose fault (located approximately five miles to the north of the project site), and the Whittier fault (located approximately six miles to the southwest of the project site). The Chino Elsinore fault is the closest active fault to the project site. The relatively close proximity of this fault (approximately one mile distant) places the region in an area of high seismic activity, exposing the project site to potentially severe ground shaking hazards. The maximum credible earthquake magnitude from this fault is 6.7 and the peak horizontal ground acceleration is 0.59 g (g is the acceleration of gravity, equal to 32 feettsecond). The San Jose, Central Avenue, and Whittier faults are all of late Quarternary age and have not experienced activity for several thousand years. The project site is underlain by bedrock of the upper Miocene Puente Formation which is composed primarily of marine sediments such as thinly bedded siltstone with interbeds of light brown, fine to medium -grained sandstone. Surficial units consist of landslide debris, alluvium, colluvium, and artificial fill. Landslide debris consists of weathered and broken bedrock that has accumulated on the natural slopes in the northwest portion of the site. Alluvium is concentrated in the undeveloped canyon areas north and west of the site. Colluvium is present in the majority of the project site and underlies the topsoil at a depth of one to two -feet. Controlled artificial fill has been placed along the eastern portion of the park. This fill was placed to achieve design grade for the ball field and access road areas during original park grading in the late 1980's. There is a potential for soil erosion during grading and construction operations. However, provisions for surface drainage, terrace drains, slope planting, and other measures outlined RAgje&stDBar.1010US MND-110502.wpd 5-8 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration _ ,.; Summit Ridge Library in the approved Stormwater Pollution and Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the Community/Senior Center project site (which includes the proposed library site) are discussed in Section 8 (Hydrology and Water Quality) of this Initial Study would reduce the erosion potential to a level considered less than significant. During current grading activities at the site, the soil was over -excavated in areas where highly expansive clays were encountered. Additionally, further testing would be performed after rough grading on near -surface soils in order to determine final foundation recommendations for the proposed library. The project would not have impacts related to expansive soils. The proposed library and structure are required to be designed in accordance with Uniform Building Code (UBC) standards, and other City of Diamond Bar, state, and federal agency requirements. Design would undergo review by the City Engineer to ensure compliance with the aforementioned standards. With proper design, impacts associated with seismic groundshaking, landslide hazards, erosion, and/or expansive soils would be considered less than significant. VIi. 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? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter -mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adapted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or people residing or working in a project area? f) 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? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response pian or emergency evacuation plan? h) 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 residences are intermixed with wildlands? lNo Impact. The project site was vacant prior to its development as a community park. No uses involving the transport, storage, use, emission, or disposal of hazardous materials has occurred on the project site. The proposed project would not involve the routine transport, storage, use, emission, or disposal of hazardous materials. The site is not located within one -quarter -mile of an existing school nor would it emit hazardous emissions or involve the handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials or substances. The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites as compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, nor is it located within an airport land use plan or within the vicinity of a private airstrip. The project would not physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. RAProjectSOS rW010 S MND-110502.wpd 5-9 initiai Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Summit Ridge Library The proposed structure (i.e., the library project ) will be constructed adjacent to natural open space which could be considered to be wildlands. However, the project does not involve the construction of residential structures and would not increase the risk of loss, �. injury, or death involving wildland fires. No significant impacts are anticipated. Vill. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY—Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less than Sign cant impact Construction activities such as grading; excavation, and trenching for site improvements would result in disturbance of soils on the project site. Runoff from the project site during construction could transport soils and sediments from these activities. Spills or leaks from heavy equipment and machinery, staging areas, or building sites could also enter runoff. Typical pollutants could include petroleum products and heavy metals from equipment and products such as paints, solvents, and cleaning agents that could contain hazardous constituents. Potentially significant short-term water quality impacts could result if polluted runoff enters downstream receiving waters. The Federal Clean Water Act establishes a framework for regulating potential water quality impacts from construction activities through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Construction activities that involve more than five acres are required to obtain coverage underthe general NPDES Permit for stormwater discharges associated with construction activities issued bythe State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The Regional Water Quality Control Boards oversee the implementation and enforcement of the general permits. The City of Diamond Bar is within the Los Angeles Basin Region (4). Diamond Bar is a co -permittee with the County of Los Angeles for local NPDES permits. Potential erosion, siltation and other water quality impacts during construction of the proposed library project would be managed through the implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Although the proposed library site is exempt from regulation under the NPDES program because it is less than one acre, the SWPPP that was prepared by the City of Diamond Bar for the Summit Ridge Community/Senior Center is applicable to the library project, which is within the CommunitylSenior Center site. The SWPPP is available for review at the Diamond Bar Planning Department. The plan describes the measures and practices to control pollutants during both the construction and post -construction phases of the project. The SWPPP contains a list of target structural and non-structural best management practices (BMPs) which would be used to control, prevent, remove or reduce pollution that might result during project construction and operation. Structural BMPs involve the construction, modification, operation, maintenance, or �. monitoring of facilities developed to minimize the introduction of pollutants into the drainage system or to remove pollutants from the drainage system. Non-structural BMPs are activities, programs, and other non-physical measures that contribute to the reduction of pollutants from non -point sources to the drainage system. BMPs within the SWPPP include erosion control measures (e.g., temporary desalting basins, concrete waste management, down drains, gravel bag or UV treated sand bag dikes, street sweeping and washing, and slope protection), management of contaminated soils, hazardous waste management, vehicle and construction equipment storage and maintenance procedures, and the timing of grading to avoid the rainy season (November through April). In addition to the requirements of the NPDES program, provisions of the Uniform Building Code, and grading permit requirements specified by the City include R'AftjectsWMaMMVS MND-110502.wpd 5-10 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration t i i t Summit Ridge Libra elements that also require reduction of erosion and sedimentation impacts. Implementation of the SWPPP would ensure full compliance with applicable local, state, and federal water quality standards and reduce impacts to a level considered less than significant. Once developed, the proposed project would have the potential to cause water quality impacts typical of urbanization, including oil, grease, refuse and tire particulate matter from vehicles parking and driving within the parking lots. The increase in pollutant sources leads to an increase in pollutant loads found in storm water, while the increase in impervious surfaces prevents natural processes from reducing those pollutant loads. The impervious surfaces associated with urbanization prevent storm water from infiltrating into the soil resulting in storm water flows that are typically higher in volume and pollutant loads. implementation of the SWPPP would reduce impacts to a less than significant level through post construction BMPs such as weekly street sweeping/washing of project parking lots. It should be noted that landscaping can contribute pesticides and phosphate fertilizers to stormwater runoff. As noted in the project description, landscaping on the project site will consist primarily of native vegetation, thereby substantially reducing the need for pesticide and fertilizer use onsite. No significant impacts are anticipated. b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby -wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? c) 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 substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site orarea, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a. manner which would result in flooding onsite or offsite? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of pollutant runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? 1) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? No Impact. The proposed project is located in the San Gabriel watershed which encompasses 462,080 acres in the Los Angeles and Orange Counties. Aquifer recharge occurs primarily within the gullies, canyon bottoms, and washes in the vicinity of the project site. Given that the project site is located on a hilltop and stormwater generated onsite would either flow into natural open space areas and storm drains or percolate into onsite soils, the proposed project would not impact aquifer recharge. The project site is located at the top of a hill and is currently under construction for the 1 Community/Senior Center project. Upon completion, the developed project site would be divided into three main drainage areas: the eastern portion of the eastern parking lot; the I RAPrajeatsMar1 OWIS MND-110502.wpd 5-11 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Summit WOW Library eastern parking lot and Community/Senior Center and associated landscaping; and the western parking lot/proposed library and associated landscaping. Stormwater flows originating on the eastern portion of the eastern parking lot would be conveyed by curb gutters in two directions to catch -basins which will drain to existing storm drains in Softwind Drive and Summit Ridge Drive. Flows originating in the majority of the eastern parking lot, the proposed structures, and associated landscaping at the center of the project site would be conveyed via street and curb gutters to a catch -basin at the top of the Summit Ridge entryway and conveyed to the open field adjacent to the baseball diamond where it will be allowed to percolate into the gradual turf slope. Flows originating in the western parking lot, the site of the library, and portions of the landscaped areas in the north -central portion of the project site will drain to a gunnite bench drain which will drain to three rip -rap dissipaters in the natural area to the north of the project site and thereafter into natural open space off-site (to the north). Construction of the proposed library project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern or increase offsite stormwater flows. - Therefore, the proposed project would not be expected to result in erosion, siltation, or flooding on the site and/or surrounding area nor result in stormwater flows which could exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. No impacts are anticipated. The project does not involve the construction of housing. Additionally, the project site is located atop a hill and is not within a 100 -year flood hazard area. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a risk of loss of life or injury involving flooding, including potential failure of a levee or dam. - Tsunamis are seismically induced sea waves generated by offshore earthquake, submarine landslide, or volcanic activity. Due to the distance from the ocean, the proposed project is not subject to tsunami hazards. Seiches are another type of water -related seismically induced hazard involving flooding resulting from the overtopping of an inland water body's banks by seismically induced waves. Given the altitude of the project site it is not at risk of inundation by selche event. Furthermore, there are no major lakes or open water impoundments in the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, the site is not subject to seiche hazards. No impacts are anticipated. MITIGATION PROGRAM MM 7-1 Mitigation requirements outlined in the SWPPP for the Community/Senior -` Center project site (which includes the library site) shall be implemented during construction of the library project. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING —Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? --� c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No Impact. The proposed project site is located at the center of three different community/neighborhoods which have formed as a result of highly variable.topography and distinct general plan land use designations. The project site is designated as park space by the City of Diamond Bar general plan and acts as a hub that is shared by local residents within these neighborhoods, as well as other residents within the City. The project would not result in the physical division of an established community. Additionally, the project site RAProjectsWarL1010US MND-140502.xpd 5-12 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Deciaration M.-, i Summit Ridge Library is not covered under a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. No impacts are anticipated. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plans, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No Impact The City of Diamond Bar was incorporated in 1989. Prior to incorporation, the City followed the guidelines and policies of the County of Los Angeles general plan and zoning code. The City of Diamond Bar adopted its own general pian and zoning map in 1995. The project site is currently designated in the Diamond Bar general plan as park space (PK). The PK designation includes existing and future public parks; however, this land use designation does not specifically define the types of park facilities provided or place restrictions on types of structures that can be developed on park facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the general plan designation. The project site is zoned R-1. The proposed library project would be consistent with the R- 1 zoning district. The proposed project will fulfill the Intent of the land use designation imposed upon the property by the City of Diamond Bar general plan. Furthermore, the project involves the addition of infrastructure to an existing park and would not result in a change of land use. Therefore, the change would not result in a significant land use impact. X. MINERAL RESOURCES --Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? No Impact The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA) mandated the initiation of mineral land classification by the State Geologist in order to help identify and protect mineral resources in areas within the State subject to urban expansion or other irreversible land uses which would preclude mineral extraction. SMARA also allowed the State Mining and Geology Board (SMGB) to designate lands containing mineral deposits of regional or statewide significance in accordance with classification criteria from the State Geologist. Four mineral resource zone (MRZ) categories have been identified by the State Geologist: The MRZ-1 designation identifies areas where adequate geologic information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. The MRZ-2 designation identifies areas where geologic data indicates that significant resources or inferred resources are present. The MRZ-3 designation identifies areas of undetermined mineral resources. The MRZ-4 designation identifies areas where geologic information does not rule out either the presence or absence of mineral resources. The project site is currently designated as MRZ-3 by California Division of Mines and Geology mineral resources maps. The project site is considered an area of undetermined R-.TmjecC DBatV070us MKE3-1106G2.wpd 5-13 Inifiai Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Summit Ridge Library mineral resource significance. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. Additionally, the City of Diamond Bar general plan does not identify any locally -important mineral resource recovery sites. No impacts are anticipated. XI. NOISE—Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) Asubstantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less than rSignificantimpact. Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is a description of the noise levels that occur over a 24-hour period. CNEL is the sound level, in decibels (dB) usually measured with an A -weighting scale and denoted as dBA, that corresponds to the average energy content of sounds (or noise) measured over a 24-hour period. Certain periods within the 24-hour cycle are weighted to account for the sensitivities of humans to noise events in the evening hours: a 5 dB weighting is assigned for the period of 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. and a 10 dB weighting is assigned for noises that occur during the period 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. The City of Diamond Bar noise ordinance requires that noise levels in the exterior areas of single-family residences not exceed 50 CNEL from the hours of 7 a.m. to 10 p.m., and 45 CNEL from 10 p.m. to 7 p.m. The ordinance also requires that interior noise levels for single-family residences not exceed 40 CNEL . Where the ambient noise level is higher than the measured noise condition, the ambient becomes the relevant standard. Short-term Noise Impacts Short-term construction -related noise would be generated by site grading, excavation, and associated construction activities. The level of noise generated by construction activities is based upon the type of equipment, the number of each type of equipment, the time of day the equipment is used, and the percentage of the day each activity occurs. Noise generated by construction equipment and construction activities can reach high levels, ranging from 68 to 105 dBA depending on the type of equipment being used. Pile driving noise levels are the highest noise levels associated with construction. However, this project will not employ pile driving. Grading activities generally have the next highest levels of noise associated with them. At 50 feet, grading activities commonly have average noise levels (e.g., Leq noise levels) of 85 dBA with maximum noise levels as high as 95 dBA. General building construction is considered to be quieter than grading operations. The same peak noise levels are often reached during general construction as during grading, but the average noise levels are 5 to 10 dBA less. There are residential uses to the east, south and west of the project site, and these uses are considered sensitive noise receptors. These sensitive receptors could potentially experience noise levels during project grading thatwould exceed the City's noise standards, depending on their distance from the operating equipment. The closest existing residences R:11roieclsU6ar1JD1011S MND-110502.wpd 5-14 Initial StudylWgated Negative Declaration IRAPro1ects%D8aAJ010MS MND-110502.wpd 5-15 Initial 5tudyAditigated Negative Declaration Summit Ridge Library outdoor construction activities shall not take place between the hours of 7:00 1 are located approximately 500 feet from the proposed grading limits and are therefore not expected to be subjected to noise levels as high 85 to 95 dBA during construction. Nevertheless, residents in the areas adjacent to the project site may be subjected to noise levels during construction which could exceed the City's noise standards, which would be considered a significant impact prior to mitigation. The most effective method of controlling construction noise is through local control of construction hours. The City of Diamond Bar Noise Ordinance does not allow construction activities between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays and Saturdays, or at any time on Sunday or a Federal holiday, and exempts construction activities occurring at other times (i.e., during daytime hours) from the noise ordinance threshold. Compliance 1 with the noise ordinance is required as a condition of issuance of grading permits and would therefore reduce potential short-term noise impacts to a level considered less than significant. Long-term Noise Impacts The proposed project would be located within the approved Community/Senior Center site and would not result in a significant increase in evening ambient noise levels for the residents to the east of the project site. The noise generated by proposed uses would be associated with patrons of the facilities walking to and from their vehicles and traffic noise from vehicles entering the site. These noise sources are not expected to exceed the noise standards outlined in the City's noise ordinance. The traffic generated by the project has the potential to increase noise levels on vicinity roadways. The daily traffic volumes with the project on Summit Ridge Drive in the vicinity of the project site would be approximately 400 vehicles. Noise levels in adjacent homes on Summit Ridge Drive are not expected to exceed City standards. Therefore, the project would not cause long-term traffic -related noise impacts. Short-term noise impacts would be reduced to a level considered less than significant with implementation of the mitigation program. e) 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 expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact The proposed project is not located within an airport' land use plan or within Ithe vicinity of a private airstrip. No impacts are anticipated. .MITIGATION PROGRAM IRAPro1ects%D8aAJ010MS MND-110502.wpd 5-15 Initial 5tudyAditigated Negative Declaration MM 11-1 The City of Diamond Bar has adopted a Noise Ordinance which specifies that outdoor construction activities shall not take place between the hours of 7:00 1 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays and Saturdays, or at any time on Sunday or a Federal Holiday. These time restrictions shall be included on the contractor specifications and shall be verified by the Building Official. IRAPro1ects%D8aAJ010MS MND-110502.wpd 5-15 Initial 5tudyAditigated Negative Declaration Summit Ridge Libra MM 11-2 All construction vehicles or equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with r properly operating and maintained mufflers. This requirement shall be shall be included on the contractor specifications and shall be verified by the Building Official. MM 11-3 Stockpiling and/or vehicle staging areas shall be located onsite and as far as practical from sensitive noise receptors, i.e., residential areas. This requirement shall be shall be included on the contractor specifications and shall be verified by the Building Official. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING—Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through the extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. The proposed project does not involve the construction of new homes, businesses, or other growth -inducing infrastructure. The project will introduce a new (minor) source of employment. Furthermore, short-term construction and long-term operational employment are expected to be filled by the local labor pool. The project site does not contain habitable structures nor would it displace existing housing or people. No impacts are anticipated. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result insubstantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, need for new or physically altered government 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 ther public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Less than Significant Impact. l=ire and police services in the City of Diamond Bar are provided by the County of Los Angeles Fire and Sheriff Departments (LAFD and LASD). Although the project would result in an increased demand for fire and emergency services and police protection at the project site, these increases would be nominal and would not affect existing service ratios. Therefore, the proposed project is not expected to result in a need for additional officers, equipment, or facilities. No mitigation is required. Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? No Impact The proposed project would not result in the need for additional school or park capacity. The project would not result in population growth which could otherwise increase R.TrojectsMar1 MOMS MNO-110502.wpd 5-16 Initial Study/Mltigated Negative Declaration F_ Summit Ridge Libra the burden on such public facilities. Additionally, the project would provide a public library for use by the residents of the City. No impacts are anticipated. XIV. RECREATION: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact. The proposed project would not result in population growth which could otherwise increase the burden on park andlor other recreational facilities. No impacts are anticipated. The proposed project does not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. No impacts would result and no mitigation is required. XV. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC—Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard estabiished by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Less than Significant Impact The proposed project is located on the north side of Grand Avenue west of Summitridge Drive. Upon project completion, the primary vehicular access point to the project will be from a driveway on Grand Avenue opposite the private roadway Shotgun Lane. A secondary access is currently provided via Summitridge Drive. An Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis was conducted by Warren C. Siecke (December 2001) to evaluate the traffic operating conditions at the intersections of Grand 1 Avenue at Diamond Bar Boulevard and Grand Avenue at Summitridge Drive. The traffic analysis considered development of the Community/Senior Center project as well as a library. The study intersections were selected for evaluation because they are close to the project site and most likely to be impacted by activities at the project site. By calculating ICU's for these intersections the operating conditions which are defined in terms of Level of Service (LOS) A, B, C, D, E or F can be determined. LOS is described as a value, which is associated with vehicle delay times (in seconds), where W is considered a free-flow condition (i.e., an average delay of less than 10 seconds per vehicle) and "F" is beyond capacity (i.e., an average delay of more than 80 seconds per vehicle). Using these criteria, the existing intersection capacity utilization and operating conditions were determined. The results of the analysis are presented in Table 1. IR:1Pro1ectMDBerU010MS MNE)-110502.wpd 5-17 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Summit Ride Library TABLE I EXISTING INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION Traffic volumes generated by the proposed project were calculated using generation rates in the Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (i.e., Land Use Code 498, Recreational Community Center). Using the ITE generation rates, the traffic volumes entering and leaving the site were projected. It should be noted that a significant portion of the traffic generated by library uses is "passby". In other words, patrons of the library are expected to combine their visit with other trips, such as shopping. The traffic generated by the library as identified in this section is the "new traffic" (trips that are not already being generated by other land uses). Project- related traffic volumes were added to the existing intersection capacity utilization values for Grand Avenue and Diamond Bar Boulevard, and Grand Avenue and Summit Ridge Drive in order to determine the — project impact. The projected traffic volumes for the proposed library project are presented in Table 2. A summary of intersection capacity utilization impacts is presented in Table 3. Note that the ICU values included in Table 3 include traffic generated by the Community/Senior Center project which has already been approved and is under construction. TABLE 2 FORECAST TRAFFIC VOLUMES PROPOSED LIBRARY TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION IMPACTS RAProjeotaloeah.lotous MNn 1ia5oz.,pd 5-18 initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration I_ Summit Ridge Libra Within the entire Community/Senior Center development site, 300 parking spaces would be provided; 81 would be adjacent to the library. The parking available at the site would be sufficient to accommodate the proposed library uses, and no parking impacts would result. The project library project would not conflict with adopted City policies, plans, or programs ' supporting alternative transportation. No mitigation is required. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) 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 environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment providerwhich serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Less than Significant Impact. Wastewater service in the City of Diamond Bar is currently provided by the County of Los Angeles Sanitation District. Wastewater generated in the RAProAtU O3aFW1QVS MND-110502.wpd 5-19 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The proposed library project would generate an additional 400 daily trips to and from the project site. Project related traffic would result in changes in ICU that are less than 0.006 (0.6 percent) during peak hours and would not result in a significant impact to intersections in the project vicinity. An ICU increase of 0.01 or more is generally considered significant. The intersection of Grand Avenue and Diamond Bar Boulevard is currently operating beyond capacity and is impacted in the existing condition. Nonetheless, the proposed library project's contribution is de minimis and would not discernibly impact traffic at this intersection. No significant impacts are anticipated. Although not required as mitigation, the traffic report recommends that Grand Avenue Drive west of the intersection with Summitridge Drive be modified to remove the existing raised median, and that the roadway be restriped, and reconfigured to provide a means of ingress/ egress to the park for both directions of traffic on Grand Avenue. This improvement is currently being designed by the City. c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ' f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. The proposed project would not affect air traffic patterns, nor would it increase hazards due to design. The project includes two access roads thereby allowing adequate emergency access. Within the entire Community/Senior Center development site, 300 parking spaces would be provided; 81 would be adjacent to the library. The parking available at the site would be sufficient to accommodate the proposed library uses, and no parking impacts would result. The project library project would not conflict with adopted City policies, plans, or programs ' supporting alternative transportation. No mitigation is required. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) 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 environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment providerwhich serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Less than Significant Impact. Wastewater service in the City of Diamond Bar is currently provided by the County of Los Angeles Sanitation District. Wastewater generated in the RAProAtU O3aFW1QVS MND-110502.wpd 5-19 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Summit Ridge Library City is conveyed to the San Jose Creek Water Reclamation Plant in the City of Whittier. Restroom facilities associated with the proposed project would generate a negligible amount of wastewater and would not .result in the exceedence of wastewater treatment requirements, construction. of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities, or result in a determination by the County of Los Angeles Sanitation District that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project's demand in addition to existing commitments. No significant impacts are anticipated. As discussed in Section 8, Hydrology and Water Quality, the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the project site. The project would require the construction of stormwater conveyance infrastructure on the project site, including catch -basins, gunnite bench drains, and rip -rap dissipaters. Significant impacts associated with the construction of devices are not expected to occur. Furthermore, the project would not add appreciably to flows entering storm drains in Softwind Drive and Summit midge Drive, No significant impacts are anticipated. The Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD) would provide domestic water service to the proposed project. The WVWD is supplied by the Three Valleys Municipal Water District (TVMW D) and the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) of Southern California. Current water supplies and infrastructure would be adequate to serve the proposed project, particularly given the negligible water usage expected of the proposed library facilities. Water use on the project site would consist primarily of landscape irrigation (which is not expected to exceed the water usage for existing park landscaping) and restrooms. No significant impacts are anticipated. f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No Impact. The proposed project would be served by the County of Los Angeles Sanitation District for solid waste disposal. Solid waste would be transferred to the Puente Hills Landfill #6 located in the City of Whittier. The landfill is permitted to accept both construction and mixed municipal waste, has a permitted throughput of 13,200 tons/day, and remaining capacity of 20,200,000 cubic yards. The proposed project would generate a negligible amount of solid waste in the City-wide or regional context. The Puente Hills Landfill has sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the proposed project's solid waste disposal needs. The proposed project will comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. No significant impacts are anticipated. R;SProjedsOBarU0101ES MNd-110502.wpd 5-20 Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Summit Ridge library ' SECTION 6 — REPORT PREPARERS AND CONTRIBUTORS LEAD AGENCY Deputy City Manager . ..................................... James DeStefano Deputy City Manager .......................................... David Doyle Director of Public Works ........................................... David Liu Associate Planner......................................... Ann Lungu BONTERRA CONSULTING 1 Project Manager ................................... Thomas E. Smith, Jr., AICP Environmental Analysis.................................. Christina L. Andersen t t t i i 1 1 i R1Pr0jects=arW61011S RANO-110502.wpd 6-1 Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration ISummit Ridge Libra ' SECTION 7 — REFERENCES California Integrated Waste Management Board. Solid Waste Information System (SWIS). 1www.ciwmb.ca.gov/SWIS/ City of Diamond Bar. July 1995. General Plan. City of Diamond Bar, November 1998. Development Code. City of Diamond Bar. February 2002. Mitigated Negative Declaration for Summit Ridge ICommunity/Senior Center. Department of Mines and Geology. 2000. Seismic Hazards Maps - Yorba Linda Quadrangle. Hunsaker & Associates. January2002. Storm WaterPollution Prevention Plan for the Community Center in the City of Diamond Bar. iLeighton & Associates. December 2001. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Community Center at Summitridge Park. Leighton & Associates. January2002. Addendum to Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Community Center at Summitridge Park. } I Siecke, Warren, 2002. Traffic Analysis for the Summitridge Community/Senior Center, Southern California Air Quality Management District. 1999. CEQA Handbook. US Environmental Protection Agency. 2000. Watershed Assessment Database www.eoa.gov1surf3/states/CA Warren C. Seike. December 4, 2001. Letter Report from Warren C. Seiki to Mr. David Liu, Director of Public Works, City of Diamond Bar addressing traffic impact analysis for the Community/Senior Center and Library Project. t IRAProjecMD13arlJ01MIS MND-110502.wpd 7-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Agenda # s . 2 Meeting Date: December 3, 2002 CITY COUNCIL - AGENDA DEPORT L�=Gcx�cR: x98g TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manago�g� TITLE: CONSIDERATION OF A HOME IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council review and approve the establishment of a Home Improvement Program. BACKGROUND: The Neighborhood Improvement Sub -committee of the City Council has drafted a proposed Home Improvement Program, which is designed to augment ongoing neighborhood improvement activities by assisting low and moderate -income homeowners with funding for home improvements The purpose of the City of Diamond Bar Home Improvement Program is to preserve and enhance single family residential neighborhoods throughout the City; to provide grants and loans to eligible homeowners of single family detached dwellings for the preservation of safe, decent and sanitary housing; to correct hazardous structural conditions; to make modifications necessary to provide handicapped access to the dwelling; to improve the overall exterior appearance of the home; to eliminate an appearance of blight; and to correct exterior code violations through the grants and loans. Under the program grants and loans will be offered to eligible low- and moderate- income owner occupied single family households to cover the cost of housing repairs in accordance with the criteria outlined within this program. The eligible improvements will depend on the type of program that is utilized for assistance. DISCUSSION: It is proposed that eligible homeowners may utilize assistance under a grant, emergency grant, and/or deferred loan program. Adjusted Gross annual household income may not exceed 80% ($44,100.00 for a family of four) of the Los Angeles County median income adjusted for family size as provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City will require documentation of both household size and household income information in order to determine applicant eligibility. If approved, the program will provide the following home improvement programs to assist low- and moderate -income households with necessary improvements to their residences. Grant Program Target Income Group: L80 % of area median family income (MFI) Maximum Amount: $5,000 Project Location: Citywide Availability: Owner occupied Single -Family Properties - One time only per household per address Eligible Improvements Correction of hazardous structural conditions; modifications necessary to provide handicapped accessibility to the dwelling; improvements to the overall exterior appearance of the home; elimination of an appearance of blight; correction of exterior code violations. Priority will be given to exterior improvements that are visible from any public right-of-way. Emergency Grant Program The emergency grant is designed to assist households who are faced with unexpected repairs to their residence, which are of a critically urgent nature and pose an immediate threat to the household's health and safety. Target Income Group: <_80% of area median income Maximum Amount: $2,000 Project Location: Citywide Availability: Unlimited per special requirements Special Requirements: May only be used to address existing zoning/ building code violations, structural conditions that require immediate attention to prevent future damage to the property, and/or conditions that threaten the health and safety of the unit's occupants after homeowner has exhausted all other available forms of eligible assistance. Funds may be used to repair approved interior emergency items. 2 Funding for implementation of the Home Improvement Program will come from the City's annual Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) allocation. The Community Development Commission (CDC) of the County of Los Angeles through a sub -contract with the City acts as an agent for and receives Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds made available by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). These funds are specifically targeted to benefit low- and moderate- income households and eliminate slums and blight. The City is obligated to follow and fulfill the terms and conditions of its contract with the CDC, established CDC policies and procedures and Federal and local rules and regulations. The City receives an annual allocation of monies from the CDBG program. If the proposed Home Improvement Program is approved, the City will immediately prepare an application to the CDC to reprogram approximately $50,000.00 from the current FY 2002-2003 CDBG allocation for the HIP during the balance of the budget year. We anticipate recommending a CDBG allocation of approximately $125,000.00 for FY 2003-2004. It is the desire of the Subcommittee to make these funds available to qualified residents. The City would be responsible for marketing the home improvement program; processing and packaging all applications; and perform all on-site inspections. It is expected that some or all of these administrative procedures will require the use of specialty consultants. PREPARED BY: r� a Ja es DeSteyano Deputy City Manager Attachments: 1. Draft Home Improvement Program 2. Draft Resolution No. 2002 -XX 4 RESOLUTION NO. 20021 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING A HOME IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM WHEREAS, on August 22, 1974, the President of the United States signed into Law the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (Act); and WHEREAS, the primary goals of Title 1 of the Act are the development of viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment, and expanding economic development opportunities, principally for persons of low and moderate income; and WHEREAS, the City receives an annual allocation of Federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to further the attainment of these goals; and WHEREAS, the City desires to augment its current and ongoing neighborhood improvement activities by assisting low and moderate income homeowners with the utilization of CDBG funding for eligible home improvements. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: The Home Improvement Program, dated December 3, 2002 attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference is hereby approved. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2002. , MAYOR I, Lynda Burgess, City Clerk of the City of Diamond, 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 3rd day of December, 2002. AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: 11197 M-�elfill ► 1031111 ►711_4 6.1... JAZ6 1 ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST: Lynda Burgess, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar 2 r:= J CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Home Improvement C YTY Program December 3, 2002 I. OVERVIEW OF PROGRAM A. Purpose and Goal The purpose of the City of Diamond Bar Home Improvement Program is to preserve and enhance single family residential neighborhoods throughout the City; to provide grants and loans to eligible homeowners of single family detached dwellings for the preservation of safe, decent and sanitary housing; to correct hazardous structural conditions; to make modifications necessary to provide handicapped access to the dwelling; to improve the overall exterior appearance of the home; to eliminate an appearance of blight; and to correct exterior code violations through the grants and loans. The eligible improvements will depend on the type of program that is utilized for assistance. B. Objective The objective of the Home Improvement Program is to provide grants and loans to assist eligible low- and moderate- income residential ownerloccupants in maintaining the City's existing residential neighborhoods through home rehabilitation C. Programs Grants and Loans shall be provided to eligible low- and moderate- income households of owner occupied single-family detached homes to cover the cost of housing repairs in accordance with the criteria outlined within this program. D. Source of Funds The source of funds for implementation of the Home Improvement Program is the Community Development Commission (CDC) of the County of Los Angeles through a sub -contract with the City of Diamond Bar. The CDC acts as an agent for and receives Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds made available by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). These funds are specifically targeted to benefit low- and moderate- income households and eliminate slums and blight. The City of Diamond Bar desires to make these funds available to qualified residents by marketing the program; processing and packaging all applications; and perform all onsite inspections. The City is obligated to follow and fulfill the terms and conditions of its contract with the CDC, established CDC policies and procedures and Federal and local rules and regulations. This document establishes City Council policy and procedures for the Home Improvement Program. II. HOME IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS Eligible homeowners may utilize assistance under the grant, emergency grant, and deferred loan programs. Repeat assistance will be allowed for loans once every ten (10) years provided that the balance of all outstanding loans may not exceed $25,000. Grants are available on a one-time only basis. The City will offer the following home improvement programs to assist low- and moderate -income housholds with necessary improvements to their residences. Participation in the Home Improvement Program is subject to the additional requirements described in Sections II through V of this policy. A. Grant Program Target Income Group: <_ 80 % of area median family income (MFI) Maximum Amount: $5,000 Project Location: Citywide Fees: None Availability: Owner occupied Single -Family Properties - One time only per household per address Eligible Improvements Correction of hazardous structural conditions; modifications necessary to provide handicapped accessibility to the dwelling; improvements to the overall exterior appearance of the home; elimination of an appearance of blight; correction of exterior code violations. Priority will be given to exterior improvements that are visible from any public right-of-way. B. Emergency Grant Program An emergency grant is designed to assist households who are faced with unexpected repairs to their residence which are of a critically urgent nature and pose an immediate threat to the household's health and safety. Target Income Group: <_80% of area median income Maximum Amount: $2,000 Project Location: Citywide Fees: None Availability: Unlimited per special requirements Special Requirements: May only be used to address existing zoning/ building code violations, structural conditions that require immediate attention to prevent future damage to the property, and/or conditions that threaten the health and safety of the unit's occupants after homeowner has exhausted all other available forms of eligible assistance. Funds may be used to repair approved interior emergency items. 2 C. Deferred Loan Program Target Income Group: 80% of area median income Maximum Loan: $10,000 Project Location: Citywide Security: Recorded Trust Deed / Promissory Note Loan Rate and Term: 0% interest 1 Deferred loan payable upon sale, transfer of title or refinancing of any loan in prior position to that of the City. Fees: All Fees associated with the loan such as PIRT Policy and recordation fees shall be added to loan principal. Availability: Owner occupied Single -Family Properties - Repeat assistance may be allowed for loans once every ten (10) years provided that the balance of all outstanding loans may not exceed $25,000. Special Requirements: Home Improvement Program loans must be recorded against the property in second position or higher. Exceptions will be reviewed on a case by case basis. Eligible Improvements Correction of hazardous structural conditions; modifications necessary to provide handicapped accessibility to the dwelling; improvements to the overall exterior appearance of the home; elimination of an appearance of blight; correction of exterior code violations. Priority will be given to exterior improvements that are visible from any public right-of-way. III. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA A. Homeowner Eligibility Requirements Household Income Adjusted Gross annual household income may not exceed SO% of the Los Angeles County median income adjusted for family size as provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City will require documentation of both household size and household income information in order to determine applicant eligibility. a. Definition of Household: For the purposes of determining Program eligibility, "household" means a person or persons occupying a housing unit as the principal place of residence. b. Definition of Annual Income: For the purposes of determining Program eligibility, annual income will include: • Adjusted gross income; • Cash income received from such sources as rents, Social Security benefits, pensions, and periodic income from insurance policy annuities; • Periodic cash benefits from public assistance and other compensation, including AFDC, SSI, Worker's Compensation, State Disability Insurance and unemployment benefits; and • Interest earned on savings and investments. Annual Income does not include: • Non-cash income such as food stamps or vouchers received for the purpose of food or housing; • Capital gains or losses; • One time unearned income such as scholarships and fellowship grants, accident, health or casualty insurance proceeds, prizes or gifts, inheritances; and • Payments designated specifically for medical or other costs, foster children or their non -disposable income. The City will make the final decision in situations where the classification of income is disputed. 2. Ownership of Real -Pro erty_Other Than Primary Residence Ownership of rental property household's primary residence an application for assistance. 4 )r other real estate holdings other than the is prohibited and will result in the rejection of B. Property Eligibility Requirements In accordance with the requirements of Section ILA. above, following determination of homeowner eligibility, the owner must demonstrate property eligibility. To be eligible to receive Program assistance, real property will be evaluated and must meet each of the requirements set forth below: 1. Location and Type of Property The property must be a detached single-family residence located within the city limits of the City of Diamond Bar. 2. Condition The property must be in need of exterior repairs to (i) correct existing nonconforming development standards, (ii) correct existing nonconforming local and/or state code requirements, (iii) correct existing local and/or state code violations, (iv) protect the structural integrity of the property, (v) promote neighborhood preservation and /or safety, (vi) refurbish exterior and/or eligible interior improvements (necessary for health and safety), or (vii) aid the mobility of the physically disabled and/or elderly. All repairs must qualify as eligible repairs as defined in Section III. Note: Existing City code violations visible from a public right-of-way may be resolved using Home Improvement Program funds. Any non eligible code violation must be resolved by the homeowner through the City's normal procedures. 3. Ownership and Owner -Occupancy_ Requirements The income eligible homeowner(s) must hold record fee simple title to the property, and must occupy the property as a principal residence. The City will not approve homeowners listing their home for sale. 4. Equi The total indebtedness of all recorded liens, including the City's Home Improvement Program loan, may not exceed ninety-five percent (95%) of the fair market value of the home after rehabilitation. For the purposes of this calculation, encumbrances must include the proposed principal amount of the Program loan requested by the eligible owner. 5. Hazard Insurance All properties must be insured with an all-risk property insurance policy in an amount equal to the full replacement value of all structures located on the property. Furthermore, all properties located within the 100 -year floodplain that receive assistance under the Program must maintain flood insurance in the amount of the improvements for the term of the loan. 6. Pro a /Income Tax Delinguency or Liens All property taxes and assessments must be paid current, and the property must not have any recorded property or income tax liens. 7. Outstanding Judgments and Obligations All outstanding mortgages recorded against the subject property must be current. Furthermore, outstanding tax liens, mechanics liens and/or judgments recorded against the property to be rehabilitated must be paid prior to participating in the program unless waived by the Home Improvement Screening Committee. IV. ELIGIBLE/INELIGIBLE IMPROVEMENTS A. Order of Priorities for Eligible Improvements The following order of priorities will apply to all eligible improvements made under the Home Improvement Program. All improvements listed within any given priority category must be addressed prior to the inclusion of items identified as having a lower priority. 1. Mandatory improvements including those needed to alleviate conditions that present an immediate threat to the health and safety of the property's occupants and those needed to correct existing building, zoning and public nuisance code violations. 2. General property exterior improvements needed to repair or replace broken, damaged and/or deteriorated items. 3. Lead based paint improvements as required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. B. Eligible Improvements All eligible improvements must be physically attached to the property and be permanent in nature. In order to be eligible for Program assistance, the City's Deputy City Manager, Building Official, or designee, following an inspection of the property in accordance with Program requirements, must approve proposed improvements. All rehabilitation work must be completed by qualified, licensed, and insured contractors selected in accordance with Program procedures. The Home Improvement Program is designed to provide for the repair, and if necessary, the replacement of damaged, deteriorated or failing items or improvements that already exist on an eligible property. in the event that replacement of damaged, deteriorated or failing items or improvements is necessary, said items will be replaced with materials considered to be standard grade material. Luxury quality items will not be used in making necessary repairs. The program is not designed to provide for the upgrade of single-family homes. Some eligible improvements are subject to material allowances. A description of all applicable cost allowances will be provided to the applicant if requested. A listing and description of all eligible improvements, including item-speciFc restrictions (if applicable) is provided below: 1. Abatement of Code Violations: All work including but not limited to demolition, construction, rehabilitation, replacement, and installation needed to abate violations of the City codes. 2. Accessibility Modifications: All modifications, alterations, or additions necessary to facilitate access and use of the home by disabled persons are permitted. These may include the installation of handicap ramps, grab bars, and accessible shower enclosures; the modification of doorways, hallways, and countertop elevations; and other adaptive measures. 7 3. Deadbolt locks: Installation of deadbolt locks is re uired on all entry doors. 4, DoorsMindows: Repair and replacement of worn or damaged exterior doors or windows is permitted with those of similar type and/or quality. Enlargement of door/window openings is permitted only where the existing door/window area is non-compliant with current building codes, and only to the extent needed to achieve building code compliance. 5. DrivewaysMalkways:. Repair or replacement of damaged or deteriorated driveways and walkways. Driveways and walkways may only be replaced with broom -finished concrete. The use of decorative stone or brick is not permitted. 6. Electrical: Repair and upgrading of electrical system, if required under National Electrical Code, including service panels, wiring, outlets, and switches. Replacement of fixtures and installation of security lighting is eligible subject to a $40.00 per fixture cost allowance. 7. Energy conservation: Installation or replacement of insulation, weather stripping, water heater blankets, and attic ventilators. Installation of energy efficient doors and windows is allowable provided that the conditions outlined under Doors/Windows are met. S. Fencing/Block Walls: Repair or replacement of existing fencing or block walls (in kind) is eligible where the wall is constructed adjacent to a public right-of- way. Chain link fences may however, be replaced with a wood (cedar or redwood) fence. For properties with pools, the repair or installation of fences, gates and safety hardware/devices as needed to comply with Uniform Building Code requirements is permitted. 9. Garage Doors: The repair or replacement of garage doors, including the replacement of inoperable garage door openers and broken springs is eligible. 10. HVAC Systems: Repair or replacement of failed, failing, damaged or inoperative HVAC system components included furnaces, air conditioning compressors, forced air units, heat pumps, ducts and vents are permitted. The installation of new air conditioning equipment is not permitted except in cases where medically necessary as prescribed by a doctor. 11. Front Yard Landscaping: The replacement of dead sod is permitted to the extent necessary to meet minimum municipal code requirements. The planting of replacement trees, shrubs, ground covers (other than sod), hard landscaping, and permanent planter boxes is permitted. All sod replacements must include the installation of an automated irrigation system. 12. Overgrown/Dead Vegetation: The trimming of overgrown vegetation and the removal of dead vegetation or living vegetation whose root system is causing structural damage are permitted. Dead vegetation, other than sod, that is removed may not be replaced. 13. Painting (exterior): Exterior painting is eligible and must be undertaken if the current condition represents a violation of the City Code as determined by the City's Neighborhood Improvement Officer. All painting must comply with the Lead Based Paint requirements of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 14. Termite/Pest Control: Eradication of insect infestations and repairs to improvements damaged by insect infestation is permitted. 15. Plastering, siding, and stucco: Repairs (e.g. patching, filling or localized replacement) to damaged plaster, stucco or siding is permitted. 16. Plumbing/Sewer Pipes and Fixtures: Repair or replacement of leaking or damaged water/sewer pipes and fixtures (including toilets, bathtubs, shower enclosures, faucets and garbage disposals) to the extent necessary to complete rehabilitation, not customization. 17. Property Clean-up: Removal of overgrown vegetation and debris and trash located on the property's front, side and rear yards is permitted. Removal of excessive debris and trash from the inside of the home is permitted only where the homeowner(s) is/are physically incapable of completing such work. 18. Roofing: Complete repair or replacement of deteriorated or damaged roofing is permitted. Materials of the same type and quality as the existing roof must be used (i.e. composition shingle must be replaced by composition shingle) except where 1) different roofing materials are needed to match the type and quality of roofs found on a majority of homes in the immediate neighborhood, or 2) the existing roof is made of wood shake in which case a tile roof may be installed. Roof replacements that require an engineering survey or engineered structural modifications are not permitted. 19. Smoke Detectors: Smoke detectors must be installed throughout the home as required under the Uniform Fire Code, 20. Structural Repairs/Modifications: Structural repairs/modifications are permitted to the extent that such repairs/modifications 1) correct existing structural deficiencies as defined by the Uniform Building Code; and/or 2) provide accessibility to disabled persons. 21. Water Heaters: Repair or replacement of deteriorated or inoperable water heaters including the repair or installation of enclosures, insulation blankets, earthquake strapping and/or pressure release valves is permitted. C. ineligible Improvements Ineligible improvements include, without limitation, improvements that are 1) accessory uses including but not limited to greenhouses, patio covers, barbecue pits and outdoor fireplaces, bathhouses, swimming pools, saunas and hot tubs, valances, cornice boards, drapes, blinds, and indoor or outdoor furnishings; 2) any improvements not approved by the City. M V. ELIGIBLE/INELIGIBLE COSTS A. Eligible Costs. Home Improvement Program proceeds may only be used for the actual reasonable costs of materials and services necessary to complete all rehabilitation work approved by the City as set forth in the Authorized Bid List as follows: 1. Building permits and inspection and other related fees necessary for the completion of the approved rehabilitation work; 2. Costs of loan processing, including without limitation, credit reports, property appraisals, and if necessary, preliminary title reports and recording fees; and 3. Costs of temporary relocation in connection with the rehabilitation work if required by local, state and federal laws, regulations, and/or policy. B. Ineligible Costs. Specific costs not eligible for payment under the Home Improvement Program include, but are not limited to the following: 1. Materials, fixtures, or equipment of a type or quality that exceeds that customarily used in properties of the same general use as the property to be rehabilitated; 2. Purchase, installation or repair of interior or exterior home furnishings; 3. Compensation/reimbursement of owner's personal labor; and 4. Compensation/reimbursement for ineligible improvements or any work not included and authorized in the Authorized Bid List or subsequent approved change orders. 5. Any repair work not listed as eligible in this Program and any work contractually entered into prior to approval by the City. 10 VI. TERMS AND C A. Maintenan Assisted properties Municipal Codes ai to exceed the maxi Housing and Urbar activities to occur deterioration or dE maintained any put DITIONS OF PROGRAM ASSISTANCE cy Requirements shall be maintained in compliance with all City of Diamond Bar d ordinances. Assisted properties shall maintain occupancy not num occupancy limits as established by the U.S. Department of Development (HUD). Property owners shall not permit criminal on the property or permit property improvements to suffer -line, or maintain, cause to be maintained, or permit to be is or private nuisance on or about the property. B. Hazard Insurance Property owners receiving Program loan assistance shall maintain, throughout the term of the loan, an all-risk property insurance policy, including flood insurance if the property is located in a flood zone, insuring the property in an amount equal to the full replacement value of the structures on the property. The insurance policy or policies shall name the City of Diamond Bar as an additionally insured/loss payee. C. Nondiscrimination There shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any person or group of persons in accordance with Executive Order 11246, Title Vi of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 109, Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, in the selection of contractors or subcontractors to complete the rehabilitation work financed with Program assistance, or in the sale, leasing, transferring, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of assisted properties. D. Compliance with Program Policies and Procedures Throughout the applicable term of Program assistance, Program participants shall comply with all Program requirements and procedures as set forth in these Policies and Procedures, and as required by the City and as set forth in Grant and Loan agreements and related attachments. 11 VII. PROGRAM AMENDMENT PROCEDURES The City of Diamond Bar City Council must approve all amendments to the Home Improvement Program Procedures. AUTHORITY Agenda #: PFA 5.1 Meeting Date: December 3, 2002 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Chair and Board Members of the Diamond Bar Public Financing Authority FROM: Linda C. Lowry, Executive Director TITLE: APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY VARIABLE RATE LEASE REVENUE BONDS, 2002 SERIES A (COMMUNITY/SENIOR CENTER PROJECT) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the attached revised Preliminary Official Statement (POS) for the pending sale of lease revenue bonds by the Diamond Bar Public Financing Authority (DBPFA). FISCAL IMPACT: This action is one among a number of actions proposed to be taken at the last meeting of the DBPFA. Approval of this document is related to a lease revenue bond sale that will ultimately net the City of Diamond Bar $12,500,000 in cash to fund the construction of the Community/Senior Center and other facility projects. The costs of issuance of the bonds will incur a debt higher than the net. The interest rate of the debt will vary depending on the bond market since the bonds shall be variable with a rate capped at 4.5% for the first ten years. The debt service will also vary during the first ten years between an approximate average of $651,000 per year to $798,000 depending on the market interest rates. The City will retire the debt through the payment of a Community/Senior Center annual lease in an amount that will mirror the annual debt service and trustee costs experienced by the DBPFA. Staff has estimated that a conservative projected revenue stream of the City General fund will permit this amount of lease expense to be appropriated each year without threatening the funding of current services and programs.. In addition, consideration of future annual operations has included generous costs to operate the new Community/Senior Center. Furthermore, if the City's financial condition were to materially change, the City could use funds on hand to pay off the Bonds as the Bonds variable nature allows them to be retired at any time without penalty. BACKGROUND: On November 5, 2002, the City Council of Diamond Bar adopted Resolution No. 2002-76 declaring its intent to issue tax-exempt obligations for Community/ Senior Center and other capital improvement projects and to allow for the reimbursement of City expenditures made prior to the issuance of such obligations and appoint a financing team in connection therewith. Approving the POS was one of the actions proposed to the newly formed Board at the last meeting on November 19th. The Board requested that the document be revised, corrected, and returned for consideration at the next meeting of December 3, 2002. DISCUSSION: In connection with marketing of the Bonds, the Authority must authorize the Underwriter (Piper Jaffray) to distribute a Preliminary Official Statement (POS) relating to the Bonds. The POS is the Authority's offering document used by the Underwriter to market the Bonds to potential purchasers. The POS summarizes the provisions of the various legal documents associated with Bond Issuance and provides historical, factual and financial information about the City of Diamond Bar. The document attached has been compiled with by the Financing Team and with cooperation of Diamond Bar staff. Attachments: Preliminary Official Statement