HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/31/2003CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
TREASURER'S MONTHLY CASH STATEMENT
January 31, 2005
SUMMARY OF CASH:
BEGINNING
TRANSFERS
ENDING
$103,225.44
BALANCE
RECEIPTS
DISBURSEMENTS
IN (OUT)
BALANCE
GENERAL FUND
$22,541,868.24
$3,073,464.94
$1,248,272.27
($776,358.59)
$23,590,702.32
LIBRARY SERVICES FUND
0.00
TOTAL DEMAND DEPOSITS
0.00
COMMUNITY ORG SUPPORT FD
(5,206.74)
$120,353.85
(5,206.74)
GAS TAX FUND
833,712.53
93,591.88
927,304.41
TRANSIT TX (PROP A) FD
1,305,254.22
120,544.67
122,146.50
1,303,652.39
TRANSIT TX (PROP C) FD
933,224.11
53,469.28
(Bond Proceeds Account)
(88,914.62)
897,778.77
ISTEA Fund
0.00
532,227.85
0.00
INTEGRATED WASTE MGT FD
537,500.30
46,568.30
23,923.73
560,144.87
AB2928-TR CONGESTION RELIEF FD
0.00
0.00
AIR QUALITY IMPRVMNT FD
172,266.12
917.76
911.27
172,272.61
PARK & FACILITIES DEVEL. FD
1,881,039.43
9,028.05
1,890,067.48
COM DEV BLOCK GRANT FD
(78,622.99)
96,829.00
11,339.97
6,866.04
CITIZENS OPT -PUBLIC SAFETY FD
315,151.24
1,452.70
1,904.94
314,699.00
NARCOTICS ASSET SEIZURE FD
314,314.22
1,508.55
315,822.77
CA LAW ENFORCEMENT EQUIP PRGM
71,135.79
341.39
71,477.18
LANDSCAPE DIST #38 FD
476,282.84
28,439.30
24,838.69
(24,162.80)
455,720.65
LANDSCAPE DIST #39 FD
261,417.16
17,467.81
11,659.12
267,225.85
LANDSCAPE DIST #41 FD
377,225.16
13,866.77
8,722.43
382,369.50
GRAND AV CONST FUND
111,579.53
111,579.53
CAP IMPROVEMENT PRI FD
(1,473,764.07)
17,007.81
889,436.01
(601,335.87)
SELF INSURANCE FUND
1,318,192.28
7,777.84
6,326.00
1,319,644.12
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND
194,996.31
935.88
195,932.19
COMPUTER REPLACEMENT FUND
(4,061.55)
(4,061.55)
PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY FUND
550,888.73
1,390.73
20,051.61
532,227.85
TOTALS
$30,634,392.86
$3,567,594.85
$1,497,104.34
$0.00
$32,704,883.37
SUMMARY OF CASH:
DEMAND DEPOSITS:
GENERAL ACCOUNT
$103,225.44
PAYROLL ACCOUNT
10,681.62
CHANGE FUND
250.00
PETTY CASH ACCOUNT
500.00
TOTAL DEMAND DEPOSITS
$114,657.06
INVESTMENTS:
US TREASURY Money Market Acct.
$120,353.85
LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FD
31,937,644.61
32,057,998.46
CASH WITH FISCAL AGENT:
US TREASURY Money Market Account
$382,145.29
LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FD
150,082.56
(Bond Proceeds Account)
532,227.85
TOTAL CASH
$32,704,883.37
Note: The City of Diamond Bar is invested in the State Treasurer's Local Agency Investment Fund. There are two LAIF accounts set up. The regular account's funds are available for
withdrawal within 24 hours. The LAIF Bond Proceeds account's withdrawals require 30 days notice.
As a secondary investment option, the City maintains the US Treasury Sweep Accounts with Wells Fargo and the City's Fiscal Agent, Union Bank of California. Any excess funds are
"swept" on a daily basis from the City's bank accounts and are invested overnight in a pool of US Treasury Notes. Interest is credited to the City's bank accounts on a monthly basis.
L.A.I.F - Effective Yield - January 2005 2.264%
Wells Fargo Money Mkt -Effective Yield - January 2005 1.529%
Union Bank Money Mkt - Effective Yield - January 2005 2.150%
All investments are placed in accordance with the City of Diamond Bar's Investment Policy.
The above summary provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet the next six month's
estimated expenditures.
Linda C. Lowry, Treasurer
THIS MEETING IS BEING BROADCAST LIVE BY ADELPHIA FOR AIRING ON
CHANNEL 3 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 8:00 P.M. ON
CHANNEL 3.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
March 1, 2005
04(2005)
CALL TO ORDER:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
INVOCATION:
ROLL CALL:
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Next Resolution 2005-13
Next Ordinance No.
6:30 p.m.
Mayor
Pastor Bob Stebe,
Northminister Presbyterian Church
Council Members Herrera, Zirbes, Mayor Pro
Tem O'Connor, Mayor Chang
Mayor
1. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS:
1.1 Proclaiming March 6-12, 2005 as Girl Scout Week.
BUSINESS OF THE MONTH
1.2 Presentation of City Tile to Dexter Mason, representing Rite Aid as
Business of the Month.
2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: "Public Comments" is the time reserved on each
regular meeting agenda to provide an opportunity for members of the public to
directly address the Council on Consent Calendar items or matters of interest to
the public that are not already scheduled for consideration on this agenda.
Although the City Council values your comments, pursuant to the Brown Act, the
Council generally cannot take any action on items not listed on the posted
agenda. Please complete a Speaker's Card and give it to the City Clerk
(completion of this form is voluntary).
There is a five-minute maximum time limit when addressina the Citv Council.
4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT: Under the Brown Act, members of the
City Council may briefly respond to public comments but no extended discussion
MARCH 1, 2005 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL
and no action on such matters may take place.
5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1 PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING - March 7, 2005 — 7:00 p.m.,
Diamond Bar/Walnut Sheriff Station, 21695 E. Valley Blvd. Walnut
5.2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — March 8, 2005 — 7:00 p.m.,
Auditorium, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
5.3 LIBRARY TASK FORCE MEETING — March 8, 2005 - 6:00 p.m.,
Room CC -8, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
5.4 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION — March 10, 2005 —
7:00 p.m., Hearing Board Room, AQMD/Government Center, 21865
Copley Dr.
5.5 CITY COUNCIL MEETING — March 15, 2005 — 6:30 p.m., Auditorium —
AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
5.6 CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATE FILING PERIOD - February 14, 2005 —
March 11, 2005.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR:
6.1 Traffic and Transportation Minutes — Regular Meeting of January 13,
2005 — Receive and file
6.2 Planning Commission Minutes:
6.2.1 Regular Meeting of January 25, 2005 — Receive and file.
6.2.2 Regular Meeting of February 8, 2005 — Receive and file.
6.3 Ratification of Check Register — Ratify Check Register dated March 1,
2005 in the amount of $784,150.29.
6.4 Treasurer's Statement - month of January 2005.
Recommended Action: Review and Approve.
Requested by: Finance Division
6.5 Adopt Resolution No. 2005 -XX: Requesting the Los Angeles County
Board of Supervisors to Undertake a Fair and Non -Arbitrary Audit of
the Sheriff's Cost Charged to the Taxpayers of the Contract Cities.
Recommended Action: Adopt.
MARCH 1, 2005 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL
Requested by: City Manager
6.6 Adopt Ordinance No. 03(2005): Establishing a Personnel System and
Rescinding Ordinance 21 (1989) in its entirety.
Recommended Action: Approve for second reading by title only, waive full
reading and adopt.
Requested by: City Manager
6.7 Approve Amendment No. 3 to Contract with McDermott Consulting,
Inc. in the amount of $36,000 for Transportation Planning Consulting
Services and appropriate necessary funds from General Fund
Reserves.
Recommended Action: Approve.
Requested by: Planning Division
6.8 Award of Design and Construction Administration Services for
Area 1 Slurry Seal and Asphalt Rubber and Aggregate Membrane
(ARAM) Project to Norris-Repke in the amount of $47,260 and
Authorize a Contingency Amount of $5,000 for Change Orders to be
approved by the City Manager for a total Authorization Amount of
$52,260.
Recommended Action: Award.
Requested by: Public Works Division
6.9 Adopt Resolution No. 2005 -XX: Ratifying an Emergency Declaration
Issued by the City Manager on February 22, 2005 Declaring a Local
Emergency.
Recommended Action: Adopt.
Requested by: City Manager
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
7.1 Approve First Reading of Ordinance No. OX (2005) Amending
Development Code Pertaining to Second Units, Guest Houses,
Second Kitchens, Number of Parking Spaces, Outdoor Display and
Sales, Discretionary Review Processes, Property Maintenance and
Definitions.
MARCH 1, 2005 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL
Recommended Action: Approve for first reading by title only and waive full
reading.
Requested by: Planning Division
8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
8.1 Approval of Letter to National Park Service Requesting the City of
Diamond Bar be Removed from the San Gabriel River Watershed
Special Resources Study Area.
Recommended Action: Approve.
Requested by: Legislative Sub -Committee Member Herrera
9. COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS:
10. ADJOURNMENT:
Agenda No. 6.1
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING OF
JANUARY 13, 2005
CALL TO ORDER:
Chair Pincher called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality
Management/Government Center Hearing Board Room, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond
Bar, California 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Virginkar led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL: Present: Chair Pincher, Vice Chairman Torng and
Commissioners Morris and Virginkar. Commissioner Shah was excused.
Also Present: David Liu, Director of Public Works; Jim DeStefano, Assistant City
Manager; Fred Alamolhoda, Senior Engineer; Kimberly Molina, Assistant Engineer;
Sharon Gomez, Senior Management Analyst and Debbie Gonzales, Administrative
Assistant.
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
A. Minutes of regular meeting of November 9, 2004.
C/Morris moved, VC/Torng seconded, to approve the November 9, 2004
minutes as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Morris, Virginkar, VC/Torng,
Chair/Pincher
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Shah
II. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Marilyn Walker, Triune Family Services, said that
in her opinion, traffic in and around the schools caused major traffic problems for
the City and safety concerns for the children. Her company offered door-to-door
service for children between their home and school and felt that the City might
want to utilize her services to relieve traffic congestion and provide a safe
environment for the transportation of the students.
III. CONSENT CALENDAR: None
IV. ITEMS FROM STAFF:
A. Traffic Enforcement Update — Received and filed on the following items:
1. Citations: December 2004
2. Collisions: December 2004
JANUARY 13, 2005 PAGE 2 T&T COMMISSION
3. Future Deployment of the Radar Trailer
V. OLD BUSINESS: None
VI. NEW BUSINESS: None
VII. STATUS OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS: None
VIII. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS:
VC/Torng expressed to Marilyn Walker that her traffic concerns would be
considered during the Neighborhood Traffic Management Study. Today he noticed
the new "No Right Turn on Red" sign/message board at the Diamond Bar Center
and he felt it was very effective. DPW/Liu explained that the sign lights only when
there is a potential conflict from the opposing traffic. VC/Torng asked about the
effectiveness of the speed hump on Leyland Drive because a resident complained
to him that people were still speeding through the area and the resident felt the
height of the speed hump was insufficient to deter speeding vehicles. DPW/Liu
explained that in accordance with the program staff continues to collect data for
review on a three to six month basis following installation. Staff also works with the
Sheriff's Department on a regular basis with respect to enforcement. The City
follows stringent criteria for speed hump heights and they may not exceed a height
of 2 and 5/8 inches.
IX. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
A. NTMP Meetings of January 6 and 11, 2005 with residents in District 1.
SE/ Alamolhoda reported that 13 residents, M/Chang and MPT/O'Connor attended
the January 6, 2005 meeting. In turn residents presented their comments in
written format and those comments were forwarded to the City's consultant for
review and evaluation. Approximately 20 residents and MPT/O'Connor attended
the January 11, 2005 meeting. Follow up meetings will be scheduled to address
the comments and questions.
C/Virginkar suggested the consultant prepare recommendations for two or three
streets, determine in which area the attendees reside and address only those
particular areas.
C/Morris liked Sgt. Blasnek's presentation at the January 11, 2005 meeting. The
consultant's presentation would have helped if it had addressed Sunset Crossing
Road from point of origin to Golden Springs Drive instead of Sylvan Glen Road. He
felt strongly that entry point improvements could be done in lieu of major fixes.
For example, one speaker talked about a center divider with mature trees and a
sign with an arrow directing traffic to Diamond Bar Blvd. to discourage traffic from
turning right unless they had specific business inside the neighborhood.
JANUARY 13, 2005 PAGE 3 T&T COMMISSION
Chair/Pincher said she sat next to a gentleman during the State Of The City
Meeting this morning who said he did not attend the neighborhood meeting
because he felt there was no problem on his street and liked it the way it was.
C/Morris felt that the City should pay attention to the silent majority that was happy
with their current situations and quantify requests for improvement when
considering use of the City's dollars.
C/Virginkar liked the idea of bulges close to stop signs to force speeding drivers to
slow down.
SE/Alamolhoda stated that staff continues to learn from the neighborhood
meetings, and that it would be more fiscally responsible to consider only the areas
about which the City receives complaints.
B. Caltrans 57/60 Freeway Construction Project.
SE/Alamolhoda reported that the project was on schedule and there were no major
mudslides on the construction site. Completion of the project is anticipated for June
2006.
C/Morris asked if the City could initiate a request for a connection for the SR60
westbound to the SR57 northbound through Assembly Member Huff.
PWD/Liu stated that the property at the off -ramp belongs to JCC and that
ACM/DeStefano was working with the property owner to determine whether a
transfer to Caltrans was possible. Ultimately, the City would prefer to have the
State of California link that missing segment to alleviate traffic.
ACM/DeStefano spoke about his involvement in the process. He said that the
purpose of the acquisition was to bring the property into the City's jurisdiction, look
to landscape the base of the property as well as the hill and to consider the
property as the potential missing link between the westbound SR 60 and the
northbound SR 57. Certain property issues have led the City to shy away from
acquisition. However, possible acquisition via Caltrans would be considered for its
future use.
PWD/Liu stated that the MTA, Diamond Bar and the City of Industry have initiated
a feasibility study for the 57/60 corridor, the purpose of which is to consider a long-
term solution.
JANUARY 13, 2005 PAGE 4 T&T COMMISSION
C. ACE Brea Canyon Road Grade Separation Project.
DPW/Liu reported that portions of Washington Street and Currier Road would be
depressed as they intersect with Brea Canyon Road. As a result, a bridge would
be constructed to carry railroad traffic over the depressed Brea Canyon Road.
Construction is slated to commence October 2005 and continue for about two
years to November 2007. As a result of the construction, Brea Canyon Road will
be closed to the public with limited access to the Metrolink Park and Ride lot.
D. Diamond Bar Village Project (Southeast corner of Grand Avenue/Golden
Springs Drive). ACM/DeStefano reported on the economic situation in the City, and
how the City determined it would react to changing conditions at the state level and
ultimately position itself within the region. As a result staff worked with developers
to determine what types of development would be appropriate to generate the type
of development the City would need and how the City should determine what
future opportunities were available for development. In addition, the City has lost
major revenue sales tax producers and the depth of the City's financial resources
is limited and dependent upon the state for subventions that are subject to
removal. At this time, the City is concerned with increasing its sales tax revenue
through development and has worked to move such projects forward during the
past two years. In 2004, the City Council approved the project at Golden Springs
Drive and Grand Avenue. He explained the history of the area and outlined the
proposed development that would include residential (due to commence June
2005), a major anchor and related business improvements as well as adjacent
street improvements with signalization (commencing April 2005). The retail portion
results in an anchor store of about 130,000 square feet along with restaurant and
ancillary retail. The third component was the proposed expansion of the church.
However, the church elected to postpone future development plans except for a
parking area adjacent to the anchor retail building to replace the churches current
parking spaces.
C/Morris asked if the condominium/town home development would be a high-end
development. ACM/DeStefano responded that the development was divided into
two components, one a traditional Townhome product with units of 1,400 to 2,500
square feet selling in the price range of $550-$600,000.00 and the balance of the
project going to a small lot single-family home development of 1,400 to 2,800
square feet with an estimated selling price of $600-$700,000.00.
C/Morris asked about the City's plan for the Diamond Bar Honda property,
changes at the Diamond Bar Country Hills Towne Center and the Kmart Center.
ACM/DeStefano explained that when the City loses the Honda Dealership in early
2006 to the City of Industry, Diamond Bar hoped to preside over the property's
destiny. The City of Industry wants to purchase the property, not necessarily good
news for Diamond Bar. Cities can purchase land outside of their own jurisdiction,
(i.e. the purchase of Tres Hermanos 30 years ago.) Industry wants the property as
part of its larger development and staff is working with elected officials and staff of
Industry to persuade them not to acquire the property; or, should they acquire the
JANUARY 13, 2005 PAGE 5 T&T COMMISSION
property, enter into an agreement with the City of Diamond Bar allowing Diamond
Bar to turn it into another retailer that would generate tax revenue to the City.
Ideally, Diamond Bar would prefer that the property be demolished and turned into
a hotel/restaurant opportunity, a significant tax generator. Kmart is a major work in
progress. The current property owner plans new development on the site that
hinges on the outcome of the Sears acquisition of Kmart. At this moment the
outcome is undetermined. Staff is working with the property owner toward a new
development on the site. One year ago MCC Capital purchased The Country Hills
Towne Center. The owner recently announced that he would move forward with
development in a new direction and now plans to focus the center toward an Asian
orientation. MCC has a Letter of Intent with a market owner who will operate an
upscale, high-end Chinese grocery store. With that anchor in place other business
will follow and the center will be re -skinned and landscaped accordingly.
Chair/Pincher asked if Auto Club and the theater would remain at the center.
ACM/DeStefano responded that tenants such as Rite-Aid would remain until their
lease expired. Auto Club owns its parcel and would likely remain at the center. The
property owner said he would close the theater in January for major repair and
seek a viable operator or close the theater and look for an alternative business.
C/Virginkar thanked ACM/DeStefano and said it was very helpful to have a bigger
picture about what was happening around the City. He wondered why the project
at Grand Avenue and Golden Springs Drive would not have multi -story parking
lots. ACM/DeStefano responded that the principle reason was cost. A multi -story
parking lot can cost upward of $20,000 for each parking space and the
development intensity does not warrant building up. A multi-level parking structure
could be feasible for the Kmart property and/or the golf course property due to the
possibility of a more intense development.
VC/Torng asked if residents were concerned about having a Home Depot in the
City and ACM/DeStefano said that some were concerned. Home Depot told
Diamond Bar that its store would be similar to the Brea outlet and not to the City of
Industry store. ACM/DeStefano indicated to VC/Torng that in his opinion, Target
was the lead candidate for the Diamond Bar anchor.
Chair/Pincher asked if Montefino residents would be able to walk from their homes
to the new shopping center and ACM/DeStefano responded probably not because
the slope was too steep.
C/Morris offered economical reasons that a Target might be preferable to a Home
Depot.
ACM/DeStefano stated he would be happy to meet with the Commission upon
request. He voiced his appreciation for the Public Works staff that assists the
Commission and other staff members to implement all capital improvement
programs and process all of the private development projects for the City. DPW/Liu
is an outstanding department manager and ACM/DeStefano is thankful for David's
JANUARY 13, 2005 PAGE 6 T&T COMMISSION
presence and for his staff's performance.
AE/Molina reported that SBC is laying conduit along Golden Springs Drive and
Grand Avenue in an attempt to increase the telecommunication bandwidth for
QTC, a company in the Gateway Center. As a result, traffic along Golden Springs
Drive will be affected by lane closures. Verizon is conducting a three-week project
on Diamond Bar Blvd, a similar project for a different company located at 1400
Montefino Avenue.
X. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE CITY EVENTS — as agendized.
XII. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to come before the Traffic and
Transportation Commission, Chair/Pincher adjourned the meeting at 8:34 p.m.
Respectfully,
David G. Liu, Secretary
Attest:
Chair Liana Pincher
Agenda No. 6.2.1
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 25, 2005
CALL TO ORDER:
Vice Chairman Tanaka called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. in the South Coast Air
Quality Management District/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive,
Diamond Bar, California 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner McManus led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Vice Chairman Jack Tanaka; and Commissioners Ruth Low;
Joe McManus; and Steve Tye.
Chairman Dan Nolan was excused.
Also present: Nancy Fong, Planning Manager; Bradley Wohlenberg,
Assistant City Attorney; Ann Lungu, Assoociate Planner; and Stella Marquez,
Senior Administrative Assistant.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None
Offered.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Presented.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR:
4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 11, 2005.
C/Tye moved, C/McManus seconded to approve the minutes of the
Regular Meeting of January 11, 2005, as presented. Motion carried by the
following Roll Call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT
10. OLD BUSINESS:
COMMISSIONERS
COMMISSIONERS
COMMISSIONERS
None
11. NEW BUSINESS: None
Tye, McManus, Low, VC/Tanaka
None
Chair/Nolan
JANUARY 25, 2005
12. PUBLIC HEARING(S):
Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
7.1 Development Code Amendment No. 2005-01 - a request to amend
Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.36.
ARTICLE III - SECTION 22.36 — Sign Standards: Amendment relates to
the substitution of non-commercial messages for on-site signs.
PROJECT ADDRESS
APPLICANT:
Citywide
City of Diamond Bar
21825 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
PM/Fong presented staff's report and recommended Planning
Commission adopt resolution recommending City Council approval of
Development Code Amendment No. 2005-01.
ACA/Wohlenberg explained that this item was brought to the City as a
result of recent decisions handed down by the courts. There are two types
of speech, commercial speech and non-commercial speech. Non-
commercial speech includes political speech, which is considered to be a
greater more protected type of speech than commercial speech. Sign
ordinances covering businesses must not favor the less protected
commercial speech over the more protected non-commercial speech.
Accordingly, courts have advised cities to include the substitution clauses
in their sign ordinances. A number of cities have been sued for not having
these types of clauses included in their ordinances and this
recommendation comes to Diamond Bar to ensure that property owners'
rights are constitutionally protected and preserved as well as protecting
the City against potentially frivolous litigation.
ACA/Wohlenberg responded to C/Tye that the lawsuits were brought on
grounds of free speech. However, they were settled very quickly under
applicable federal statutes with attorneys' fees applied for and granted.
The substitution clause would take the City a further step away from
regulating sign content. PM/Fong said that the likelihood of businesses
removing their current signage to substitute signs was remote because of
the cost involved.
C/McManus asked ACA/Wohlenberg to elaborate on more protected
commercial speech/less protected non-commercial speech. ACA/
Wohlenberg explained that courts have identified a difference between
JANUARY 25, 2005 Page 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
commercial and non-commercial speech and have said that commercial
speech was less important than non-commercial speech because non-
commercial speech includes political speech or core speech. If the City
has a regulation allowing for only commercial signs and not for non-
commercial signs it would indicate favoritism toward the less protected
speech.
C/Low asked if the courts required actual damage before hearing a case.
ACA/Wohlenberg responded not always because they would argue that
there was a violation of the ability to engage in free speech because the
City was restricting the entities' ability to express itself in this fashion. If a
sign owner asked to put up a sign that contained certain language and the
City said no the owner would have established their standing at that point.
These lawsuits are filed under Section 1983 violation, the section of
federal law used to enforce constitutional rights. The attorneys' fees are
collected under Section 1988. If there are no other federal laws allowing
an individual to bring a lawsuit Section 1988 applies to allow attorneys
fees for an individual to pursue these types of lawsuits. The courts have
said that cities could require a sign be removed within a reasonable time
after an election but cities may not limit how early these signs could be
installed prior to an election. The proposed change merely allows an
individual/entity to change the copy of a permitted sign to read other than it
currently reads.
To C/Tye's concern, ACA/Wohlenberg said he felt that the practical effect
of the change would be minimal as pointed out by PM/Fong. However, in
order to keep the City from being sued the ordinance must allow people to
change their signs if they choose to do so.
C/McManus felt that the amendment would eliminate the two categories of
commercial and non-commercial speech. ACA/Wohlenberg agreed with
C/McManus's assessment. In this case however, the courts said that
individuals must be allowed to display any verbiage as long as it did not
violate any obscenity rules.
C/Tye said it seemed reasonable that businesses would be allowed to put
up commercial signs in commercial areas. What troubled him was that the
amendment appeared to favor commercial speech over non-commercial
speech which was not true. C/Tye felt this was nonsense and while he
wanted to limit the City's liability it was, in his opinion time for good people
to stand up and tell the 9t" Circuit Court they were making a mistake
because it defied logic.
JANUARY 25, 2005
Page 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
ACA/Wohlenberg responded to VC/Tanaka that this amendment applied
to signs on private property only and not on public property.
Vice Chair/Tanaka opened the public hearing.
With no one present who wished to speak on this item, Vice Chair/Tanaka
closed the public hearing.
C/McManus moved, C/Low seconded to adopt a resolution recommending
City Council approval of Development Code Amendment No. 2005-01.
Motion carried 3-1 by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS
McManus, Low, VC/Tanaka
Tye
Chair/Nolan
13. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS AND INFORMATION ITEMS:
On the subject of commercial speech over non-commercial speech, C/McManus
expressed that through his experience he understood there were things that did
not make sense. He had also learned that there was no such thing as common
sense and what seemed on its face to be prima facie and self-evident was not
always the case where others were concerned.
14. STAFF COMMENTS AND INFORMATION ITEMS:
PM/Fong advised the Commission that although tonight's meeting was short
there were four items scheduled for the February 8 meeting.
10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As listed in tonight's agenda.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission,
VC/Tanaka adjourned the meeting at 7:28 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Nancy Fong
Planning Manager
Attest:
JANUARY 25, 2005 Page 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
Jack Tanaka, Vice Chairman
Agenda No. 6.2.2
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 8, 2005
CALL TO ORDER:
Vice Chairman Tanaka called the meeting to order at 7:09 p.m. in the South Coast Air
Quality Management District/Government Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond
Bar, California 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner McManus led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Vice Chairman Jack Tanaka and Commissioners Ruth
Low, Joe McManus and Steve Tye.
Chairman Dan Nolan was excused.
Also present: James DeStefano, Assistant City Manager; Nancy
Fong, Planning Manager; Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner, Linda Smith,
Development Services Associate and Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative
Assistant.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None
Offered.
KI
4.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
CONSENT CALENDAR:
As Presented.
4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 25, 2005.
C/McManus moved, C/Tye seconded to approve the minutes of the
Regular Meeting of January 25, 2005 as presented. Motion carried by the
following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Tanaka, Low, McManus, Tye
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Nolan
10. OLD BUSINESS: None
FEBRUARY 8, 2005 Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
11. NEW BUSINESS: None
12. PUBLIC HEARING(S):
12.1 Development Review No. 2004-42 - In accordance with Diamond Bar
Municipal Code Section 22.48, this was a request to remodel and
construct an approximate 860 square feet addition to the existing 1,280
livable square foot one story, single family residence with two car garage.
PROJECT ADDRESS
PROPERTY OWNER
21238 Bronco Lane Drive
(Lot 27, Tract 25985)
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Michael Shackelford
21238 Bronco Lane
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
APPLICANT: Susan Raskulinecz, AMR Design
20 Kendall Place
Foothill Ranch, CA 92610
DSA/Smith presented staff's report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of Development Review No. 2004-42, Findings of
Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution.
C/Tye said he found nothing in the report to indicate that this project would
add a second story. DSA/Smith said she would correct the report to reflect
that the project was a one-story addition. She explained that justification
for the new addition's proximity to the existing pool was a Building and
Safety requirement indicating that when a pool is added the homeowner is
required to show the justification and structural stability of the pool based
on the surcharge the new addition would require.
Adrian Raskulinecz, designer, explained the proposed addition and said
he read staff's report and concurred with the conditions. In response to
VC/Tanaka, Mr. Raskulinecz said the structure would be about four feet
from the existing pool and that the footings would have to be installed so
that they extended below the deepest portion of the pool at their point of
existence.
VC/Tanaka opened the public hearing.
FEBRUARY 8, 2005 Page 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
With no one present who wished to speak on this item, VC/Tanaka closed
the public hearing.
C/Tye moved, C/McManus seconded to approve Development Review
No. 2004-42, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within
the resolution with the appropriate changes included. Motion carried by the
following Roll Call vote:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS
Tye, McManus, Low, VC/Tanaka
None
Chair/Nolan
12.2 Extension of Time for Development Review No. 2002-03(1) -In
accordance with Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.66.050 -this
was a request for a one-year extension of time of the approved project that
allowed the construction of a two-story office building of approximately
25,000 gross square feet. The Planning Commission approved this project
on December 10, 2002, and the extension of time request does not alter
the approved project.
PROJECT ADDRESS
PROPERTY OWNER/
APPLICANT:
21671 E. Gateway Center Drive
(Lot 4, Tract No. 39679)
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Dr. Acbar Omar
222 N. Sunset Avenue
W. Covina, CA 91790
AssocP/Lungu presented staff's report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of the Extension of Time for Development Review
No. 2002-03(1), Findings of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed
within the resolution.
C/McManus asked if it took longer than a year to get through plan check
and AssocP/Lungu said it was possible and depended upon certain
factors. In December 2002, only the architectural drawings were
completed.
C/Lowe asked if the project was on course and if the one-year extension
would be sufficient to which AssocP/Lungu responded that a one-year
extension should suffice since the applicant was in plan check. She
explained that this approval would grant a one-year extension and that the
FEBRUARY 8, 2005 Page 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
resolution stated the applicant could request a one-year extension of time.
Because it is already February six months may not be sufficient to allow
the applicant to complete the process and it would make sense to approve
a one-year extension at this time.
Dr. Acbar Omar said he did not know why it took two years to go through
this process but felt it was about 95 percent completed. He hoped he
would be able to complete the plan check process and commence
construction soon.
VC/Tanaka opened the public hearing.
With no one present who wished to speak on this item, VC/Tanaka closed
the public hearing.
At C/Tye's request for elaboration of C/Low's question, the Planning
Commission could approve either two six-month extensions or one-year.
Because it is already February staff feels that a one-year extension would
be more prudent. C/Tye referred to Condition 5 (t) that cites Chapter 22.72
that consideration of an extension would be one year. AssocP/Lungu said
that the Planning Commission could grant two six-month extensions or
one one-year extension.
C/McManus said he hoped it would not take the applicant much longer to
complete plan check and hoped the project could be fast -tracked.
C/McManus moved, C/Tye seconded, to approve one-year Extension of
Time for Development Review No. 2002-03(1), Findings of Fact, and
conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Motion carried by the
following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: McManus, Tye, Low, VC/Tanaka
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Nolan
12.3 Development Review No. 2004-43 and Minor Conditional Use Permit
No. 2005-01 - In accordance with Diamond Bar Municipal Code
Sections 22.48.020(a), 22.30.080(5) and 22.56.010 - this was a request to
construct a two story, single family residence of approximately 11,000
gross square feet including balconies, porch, covered patio and attached
four car garage. The Minor Conditional Use Permit was for a driveway
wider than the maximum 14 feet allowed at the property line.
FEBRUARY 8, 2005 Page 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
PROJECT ADDRESS
PROPERTY OWNER
3138 Windmill Drive
(Tract 50314, Lot 13)
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Windmill Estates, LLC
3480 Torrance Boulevard #300
Torrance, CA 90503
APPLICANT: Richard Gould
3480 Torrance Boulevard #300
Torrance, CA 90503
AssocP/Lungu presented staff's report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of Development Review No. 2004-43 and Minor
Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-01, Findings of Fact, and conditions of
approval as listed within the resolution.
C/Low asked why at the bottom of page 3 it read' that the separation
between adjacent residential structures indicates that the zoning
requirement is 40 feet when the proposed separation indicates 32.51 and
92 feet and then states that the proposed distances meet the zoning
requirements. AssocP/Lungu responded that the wrong numbers were
inserted into the report and that the actual separation was between
structures and would likely be in excess of 40 feet.
Kurt Nelson and Richard Gould confirmed that the separation between
structures was about 45 feet at the closest point, definitely more than 40
feet. On the other side the separation was about 90 feet. Mr. Nelson
thanked staff for the report and subsequent recommendation for approval.
VC/Tanaka opened the public hearing.
With no one present who wished to speak on this item, VC/Tanaka closed
the public hearing.
C/McManus moved, C/Low seconded, to approve Development Review
No. 2004-43 and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-01, Findings of
Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Tanaka, Low, McManus, Tye
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
FEBRUARY 8, 2005 Page 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Nolan
FEBRUARY 8, 2005 Page 7 PLANNING COMMISSION
12.4 Development Review No. 2004-44 - In accordance with Diamond Bar
Municipal Code Section 22.48.020(a) - this was a request to construct a
two story, single family residence of approximately 12,300 gross square
feet including balconies, porch and attached four car garage.
PROJECT ADDRESS
PROPERTY OWNER
2869 Oak Knoll Drive
(Lot 2, Parcel Map 26235)
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Windmill Estates, LLC
3480 Torrance Boulevard #300
Torrance, CA 90503
APPLICANT: Richard Gould
3480 Torrance Boulevard #300
Torrance, CA 90503
AssocP/Lungu presented staff's report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of Development Review No. 2004-44, Findings of
Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution.
C/Tye asked if page 6, Item 5 (g) should read wet bar instead of wet. He
asked if it would require City approval if a future owner wanted to put
appliances in the rumpus room. PM/Fong said that if the owner wanted to
put appliances in the rumpus room it would be considered as a second
unit and would then be subject to the City's second unit development
criteria that limits the size of the second unit.
C/McManus wanted to know if staff was recommending a cupola or some
other architectural or landscape feature to break up the roofline to which
PM/Fong responded that staff would prefer an architectural feature to
landscaping.
Curt Nelson thanked staff for the thorough report. He said that the
distance from the rear of the structure to the toe of the slope was only
about 25 feet and a retaining wall fronted the slope that ascended 100 feet
and that the nearest home on the upper level was 240 feet away from the
project. He asked that the project be allowed to consider 5 (h) fulfilled with
the addition of the Pilasters and not include a cupola or bay window
because of the grade and distance differential.
FEBRUARY 8, 2005 Page 8 PLANNING COMMISSION
C/McManus suggested that at the point of the turret the roof could be
elevated with a cupola on top to satisfy staff's concerns. Richard Gould
said he felt such an adjustment could work and said he would study the
adjustment to determine whether it was feasible.
C/McManus asked why there were two master bedrooms proposed, one
downstairs and one upstairs, and would this constitute possible multiple
use. Mr. Nelson responded that homes in Diamond Bar of this size and
less have a recorded covenant and agreement that runs with the land and
states that the dwelling shall never be used for multi -family, subdivision
and hotel California type uses. Frequently in the Asian community
grandparents live in the home and are often provided a second master
suite as part of their living area.
VC/Tanaka opened the public hearing.
With no one present who wished to speak on this item, VC/Tanaka closed
the public hearing.
C/Tye asked if in light of the previous discussion 5(h) should be stricken?
PM/Fong recommended that staff and the applicant work together to
possibly implement C/McManus' recommendation in order to eliminate
condition 5(h).
C/Tye moved, C/McManus seconded, to approve Development Review
No. 2004-43 and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-01, Findings of
Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution.
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS
Tye, McManus, Low, VC/Tanaka,
None
Chair/Nolan
13. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS AND INFORMATION ITEMS: None
Offered.
14. STAFF COMMENTS AND INFORMATION ITEMS: PM/Fong reported
that today staff received the development proposal from Brookfield Homes for the
Calvary Chapel site and the development plans will be brought to the Planning
Commission very soon.
FEBRUARY 8, 2005 Page 9 PLANNING COMMISSION
ACM/DeStefano reminded the Commission that the Planning Commissioners
Institute would be held April 13-15, 2005, in Pasadena. Please let SAA/Marquez
or
any staff member know as soon as possible if you would like to register for the
event.
C/McManus felt it would be prudent for the Commission and staff to travel to the
event daily rather than book hotel rooms. ACM/DeStefano suggested that during
one day of the event staff and the Commissioners should meet for dinner.
10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As listed in tonight's agenda.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission,
VC/Tanaka adjourned the meeting at 7:52 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
James DeStefano, Assistant City Manager
Attest:
Jack Tanaka, Vice Chairman
Agenda No. 6.3
NOTICE REGARDING THE CHECK REGISTER
Please note that the Check Register has not been included in
the electronic versions of the City Council Agenda Packets on the
City's Web Site because severe formatting errors occur when
attempting to convert this material. If you are interested in receiving
a copy of the Warrant Register, please contact the City Clerk's office
at 909-839-7010 to receive a FAXed copy or to pick one up in
person.
We apologize for the inconvenience.
Agenda #
Meeting Date:
s
Mar. 1, 2005
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
TITLE: Treasurer's Statement — January, 2005
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the January 2005, Treasurer's Statement.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
No Fiscal Impact
BACKGROUND:
Per City policy, the Finance Department presents the monthly Treasurer's Statement for the City
Council's review and approval. This statement shows the preliminary cash balances for the various
funds, with a breakdown of bank account balances, investment account balances and the effective
yield earned from investments.
PREPARED BY:
Susan Full, Senior Accountant
Department Head
Attachments:
Treasurer's Statement
Deputy City Manager
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
TREASURER'S MONTHLY CASH STATEMENT
January 31, 2005
BEGINNING
TRANSFERS
ENDING
BALANCE
RECEIPTS
DISBURSEMENTS
IN (OUT)
BALANCE
GENERAL FUND
$22,541,868.24
$3,073,464.94
$1,248,272.27
($776,358.59)
$23,590,702.3
$23,590,702.3
2
LIBRARY SERVICES FUND
0.00
0.00
0.0
COMMUNITY ORG SUPPORT FD
(5,206.74)
(5,206.74)
(5,206.74
GAS TAX FUND
833,712.53
93,591.88
927,304.41
927,304.4
TRANSIT TX (PROP A) FD
1,305,254.22
120,544.67
122,146.50
1,303,652.39
1,303,652.3
TRANSIT TX (PROP C) FD
933,224.11
53,469.28
(88,914.62)
897,778.77
897,778.7
ISTEA Fund
0.00
0.00
0.0
INTEGRATED WASTE MGT FD
537,500.30
46,568.30
23,923.73
560,144.87
560,144.8
AB2928-TR CONGESTION RELIEF FD
0.00
0.00
0.0
AIR QUALITY IMPRVMNT FD
172,266.12
917.76
911.27
172,272.61
172,272.6
PARK & FACILITIES DEVEL. FD
1,881,039.43
9,028.05
1,890,067.48
1,890,067.4
COM DEV BLOCK GRANT FD
(78,622.99)
96,829.00
11,339.97
6,866.04
6,866.0
CITIZENS OPT -PUBLIC SAFETY FD
315,151.24
1,452.70
1,904.94
314,699.00
314,699.0
NARCOTICS ASSET SEIZURE FD
314,314.22
1,508.55
315,822.77
315,822.7
CA LAW ENFORCEMENT EQUIP PRGM
71,135.79
341.39
71,477.18
71,477.1
LANDSCAPE DIST #38 FD
476,282.84
28,439.30
24,838.69
(24,162.80)
455,720.65
455,720.6
LANDSCAPE DIST #39 FD
261,417.16
17,467.81
11,659.12
267,225.85
267,225.8
LANDSCAPE DIST #41 FD
377,225.16
13,866.77
8,722.43
382,369.50
382,369.5
GRAND AV CONST FUND
111,579.53
111,579.53
111,579.5
CAP IMPROVEMENT PRI FD
(1,473,764.07)
17,007.81
889,436.01
(601,335.87)
(601,335.87
SELF INSURANCE FUND
1,318,192.28
7,777.84
6,326.00
1,319,644.12
1,319,644.1
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND
194,996.31
935.88
195,932.19
195,932.1
COMPUTER REPLACEMENT FUND
(4,061.55)
(4,061.55)
(4,061.5E
PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY FUND
550,888.73
1,390.73
20,051.61
532,227.85
532,227.8
TOTALS
$30,634,392.8
$3,567,594.8
$1,497,104.34
$0.00
$32,704,883.
$32,704,883.3
6
5
37
SUMMARY OF CASH:
DEMAND DEPOSITS:
GENERAL ACCOUNT
$103,225.44
PAYROLL ACCOUNT
10,681.62
CHANGE FUND
250.00
PETTY CASH ACCOUNT
TOTAL DEMAND DEPOSITS
INVESTMENTS: US TREASURY Money Market Acct.
LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FD
CASH WITH FISCAL AGENT: US TREASURY Money Market
Account
LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FD
(Bond Proceeds Account)
500.00
$114,657.06
$120,353.85
31,937,644.61
32,057,998.4
6
$382,145.29
150,082.56
532,227.85
TOTAL CASH $32,704,883.
37
Note: The City of Diamond Bar is invested in the State Treasurer's Local Agency Investment Fund. There are two LAIF accounts set up. The
regular account's funds are available for withdrawal within 24 hours. The LAIF Bond Proceeds account's withdrawals require 30 days notice.
As a secondary investment option, the City maintains the US Treasury Sweep Accounts with Wells Fargo and the City's Fiscal Agent, Union Bank
of California. Any excess funds are "swept" on a daily basis from the City's bank accounts and are invested overnight in a pool of US Treasury
Notes. Interest is credited to the City's bank accounts on a monthly basis.
L.A.I.F - Effective Yield - January 2005 2.264%
Wells Fargo Money Mkt -Effective Yield - January 2005 1.529%
Union Bank Money Mkt - Effective Yield - January 2005 2.150%
All investments are placed in accordance with the City of Diamond Bar's Investment Policy.
The above summary provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet the next six month's
estimated expenditures.
Linda C. Lowry, Treasurer
CITY COUNCIL
Agenda # 6.5
Meeting Date: March 1, 2005
AGENDA REPORT
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Via: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
Title: Resolution Requesting the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors to
Undertake a Fair and Non -Arbitrary Audit of the Sheriffs Costs Charged to the
Taxpayers of the Contract Cities
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the resolution and direct staff to
circulate the resolution to the entire Board of Supervisors (BOS).
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to this proposed action; however, the audit
currently underway may lead the BOS to increase future charges to the contract cities for
Sheriff services.
BACKGROUND: The BOS has directed the County Auditor to gather additional information
to valid his claim that the Sheriff does not bill contract cities for $243 million of service
search year. To this end the Auditor has begun a multi -phased audit routine reviewing
selected components of the Sheriffs operation which are not included in the costs billed out
to his contract client cities.
DISCUSSION: Contract Cities (CCCA) representatives have been working as closely as
possible with the County Auditor as he reports his on-going audit findings to the BOS. He
has reviewed specific portions of the Sheriff operations which have not been included in the
formula historically used to calculate the annual billing rates to contract cities, operations
which he believes should be charged to the cities. It is the position of CCCA, unanimously
adopted at the CCCA meeting of February 15, 2005, that the BOS should conduct an
impartial and complete, systematic, unrushed review of the billing practices, after which,
County -wide public safety matters should be publicly discussed in connection with any
considerations of changing the billing practices.
Changing the billing structure is intended to bring more revenue to the County at the
expense of the cities. Contract cities will be effected first, then independent cities during the
next phase of the audit. The economic reality that many client cities will not be able to pay
additional dollars and will only reduce the amount of service purchased will result in a lower
level of law enforcement within the County.
Attachment: Resolution
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REQUESTING THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
TO UNDERTAKE A FAIR AND NON -ARBITRARY AUDIT
OF SHERIFF'S COSTS CHARGED TO THE TAXPAYERS
OF THE CONTRACT CITIES
WHEREAS, the contract cities of Los Angeles County provide significant support
to the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department through the reimbursement of
additional costs incurred by the Sheriff in providing extra services to the residents of
contract cities; and
WHEREAS, the County, through the Board of Supervisors, has established a
policy concerning which of the Sheriff's services will be provided on a county -wide basis
and thus are not legally chargeable to the contract cities and has implemented a cost
model designed to determine the amount of the costs appropriately charged to the
contract cities; and
WHEREAS, the provision of specified public safety services on a county -wide
basis for both contract and independent cities promotes a coordinated and seamless
approach to public safety; and
WHEREAS, the importance of interjursidictional cooperation has been
highlighted since the September 11, 2001 attacks; and
WHEREAS, should the Board adopt the Auditor -Controller's recommendations
which could lead to a reduction in current county -wide public safety services;
WHEREAS, any such reduction in county -wide public safety services should be
subject to careful and deliberative debate and consideration and not considered hastily;
and
WHEREAS, the Auditor -Controller of the County of Los Angeles has for decades
annually reviewed those rates that are properly charged to the contract cities; and
WHEREAS, the Auditor -Controller has not undertaken a complete audit of all
areas of Sheriff's costs but rather has confined his audit to those areas which he
considered most likely to result in increases in charges to contract cities in accordance
with his predetermined goal; and
WHEREAS, the Auditor -Controller has undertaken to date only a partial review of
Sheriff's Department costs and the various interim reports show numerous revisions and
changes in approach; and
2
WHEREAS, the Auditor -Controller's approach to date has provided the
appearance of bias and has resulted in a loss of confidence in the process by many
contract cities and their residents; and
WHEREAS, the Auditor -Controller is rushing its selective audit in order to attempt
to propose changes for the 2005-2006 fiscal year, we believe a complete and careful
review including areas where contract cities have been potentially overcharged for
Sheriff's services, should at least require 18-24 months; and
WHEREAS, after the Auditor -Controller completes his present work, fairness
dictates that the contract cities be provided a reasonable opportunity to review and
comment on that work, but if the audit is only partial and if the contract cities do not
have a reasonable opportunity to review and verify the findings and recommendations of
the Auditor -Controller study, those results will be contested through litigation if they
result in questionable cost allocations, thereby increasing County and municipal legal
expenses at a time when revenues are strained for all local governments; and
WHEREAS, contract cities earnestly seek to prevent city -county conflict over
Sheriff cost allocations through negotiation; and
WHEREAS, the contract cities fully support the annual review of contract cost
under existing policies but are opposed to a drastic change in current procedures,
methodology and policy; and
WHEREAS, the current partial audit results (not including any changes in the
cost of county -wide services), combined with other potential increases in Sheriff
department costs which are properly billable to contract cities, may result in a double
digit percentage increase; and
WHEREAS, a significant increase in the cost of Sheriff services due to an
incomplete and rushed audit and/or a change in underlying County policy regarding the
scope of county -wide services will result in cities either contracting with other police
agencies or reducing their contract level of services with the Sheriff; and
WHEREAS, a reduction in public safety services provided to the residents of
contract cities by the Sheriff will result in a corresponding reduction in revenue to the
County with the result being a probable decrease in total revenue to the County and a
reduction in public safety services to the citizens of the County; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby
request that the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors direct the Auditor -Controller
to undertake a complete and thorough review, not a partial, selective and rushed audit
of all aspects of costs and expenses relating to the Sheriff's delivery of services to
contract cities, including areas of potential current overcharging, and also address the
unintended consequences of reduced public safety services to all of Los Angeles
County residents with due deliberation and consultation with all affected parties and
including time for the affected parties to review and verify such conclusions, as your
Board directed in May of 2004.
3
ADOPTED AND APPROVED THIS DAY OF MARCH, 2005.
Mayor Wen Chang
I, Linda C. Lowry, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, California do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council
of the City of Diamond Bar, California, at its regular meeting held on the day
of , 2005, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
LINDA C. LOWRY, CITY CLERK
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
4
Agenda # 6.6
Meeting Date: March 1, 2005
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
TITLE: Adoption of Ordinance 3 (2005) establishing a personnel system and rescinding
Ordinance No. 21 (1989) in its entirety
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve for second reading by title
only, waive full reading, and adopt Ordinance No. 3 (2005).
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 3 (2005) was introduced at the City Council meeting of February 15,
2005.
DISCUSSION: Ordinance No. 3 delineates the processes and procedures for administering the
personnel system and the adoption and amendments to the Personnel Rules and Regulations. It also
includes a non discrimination provision, in compliance with state and federal law.
PREPARED BY:
Kim Crews
Senior Management Analyst
ORDINANCE NO. 3 (2005)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
ESTABLISHING A PERSONNEL SYSTEM
The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does ordain as follows:
Section 1. Rescind Ordinance No. 21 (1989) in its entirety.
Section 2. Sections 2.20.010 through 2.20.070 of Chapter 2, Administration and Personnel
shall read as follows:
Sec. 2.20.010. Adoption of System.
In order to establish an equitable and uniform system for dealing with personnel matters; to
attract to municipal service the best and most competent persons available; to assure that
appointments and promotions of employees will be based on the merit; the following personnel
system is adopted.
Sec. 2.20.020. Definitions.
The terms used to administer the personnel system shall be defined in the personnel rules and
regulations.
Sec. 2.20.030. Administration.
The City Manager shall administer the city personnel system and may delegate any or all of
the powers and duties of such administration to any other officer or employee of the city or may
recommend that such powers and duties be performed under contract as provided in section
2.20.060. The City Manager shall:
(1) Act as the appointing authority for the city;
(2) Administer all the provisions of this chapter and of the personnel rules and regulations not
specifically reserved to the City Council;
(3) Prepare or cause to be prepared personnel rules and regulations and revisions. The City
Attorney shall approve the legality of such rules and regulations prior to submission to the
City Council for approval;
(4) Recommend to the City Council personnel policy issues involving financial commitments
such as, but not limited to, pay rates, authorization of positions and employee benefit
programs;
(5) Prepare or cause to be prepared a position classification plan, including class
specifications, and revisions of the plan;
(6) Prepare or cause to be prepared a plan of compensation, and revisions of such plan,
covering all classification titles for authorized city positions. The plan and any revisions of
the plan shall become effective upon approval of the City Council;
(7) Have the authority to discipline employees in accordance with this chapter and the
personnel rules and regulations of the city;
(8) Have the authority to terminate the employment relationship of an employee employed at -
will without cause or right to appeal, at any time;
(9) Provide for the recruitment and selection of city employees based upon open or
promotional recruitments and;
(10)Perform any other duty that may be required to administer the personnel system.
Sec. 2.20.040. Competitive service.
The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all offices, positions, and employments in the
service of the city, except:
(1) Elective officers;
(2) The City Manager and any assistants or deputies to the City Manager;
(3) The City Attorney and any assistants or deputies of the City Attorney;
(4) Members of appointive boards, commissions, and committees;
(5) Department heads and other management positions so designated by the City Manager;
(6) Persons engaged under contract to supply expert, professional, technical or any other
services for a definite period of time;
(7) Volunteer personnel, who receive no regular compensation from the city;
(8) All council -appointed city officers;
(9) Emergency employees who are hired to meet the immediate requirements of an
emergency condition, such as extraordinary fire, flood, or earthquake which threatens life
or property;
(10) Employees hired for an indefinite term into a budgeted position to work less than 1,040
hours per year;
(11) Seasonal part time employees are employees who work on a seasonal or partial year
basis, but not more than 1,000 hours per fiscal year;
(12) Intermittent part time employees are employees who work an average of 19'/2 hours or
less and no more than 1,000 hours per fiscal year;
(13) Part time employees working 20 hours or more per week, hired after February 15, 2005.
(14) Any new position created by the City Council, unless declared by the City Council to be in
the competitive service at the time of creation or thereafter.
(15) Employees not included in the competitive service under this section shall serve at the will
of their appointing authority and either the employee or city may terminate the
employment relationship without cause or right to appeal, at any time.
Sec. 2.20.050. Adoption and Amendment of Rules and Regulations.
Personnel rules and regulations shall be adopted by resolution of the City Council. These
rules and regulations shall govern the personnel system including, but not limited to:
(1) Preparation, installation, revision, and maintenance of a position classification plan
covering all positions in the competitive service including employment standards and
qualifications for each class;
(2) Preparation, revision, and administration of a plan of compensation directly correlated with
the position classification plan providing a rate or range of pay for each class;
(3) Open and promotional recruitments to fill regular positions;
(4) The making of temporary and emergency appointments;
(5) Establishment of probationary testing periods;
(6) Transfer, promotion, demotion, discipline, and reinstatement of employees;
(7) Evaluation of the job performance of employees;
(8) Separation of employees from the city service;
(9) Content, maintenance, and use of personnel records and forms; and
(10)The establishment of any necessary appeal procedures.
Sec. 2.20.060. Contracts for special service.
The City Manager shall consider and make decisions regarding the extent to which the city
should contract for the performance of technical services in connection with the establishment
or operation of the personnel system. The City Manager and/or City Council may contract with
any qualified person or public or private agency for the performance of all or any of the
responsibilities and duties imposed by this chapter.
Sec. 2.20.070. Discrimination.
No person employed by the City of Diamond Bar or seeking employment with the city, shall be
discriminated against in recruitment, examination, appointment, training, promotion, retention,
discipline, or any other aspect of personnel administration because of race, color, religion,
national origin, ancestry, marital status, sex, age, physical or mental disability, sexual
orientation, political or religious opinions or affiliations, union activities or affiliations, taking of
FMLA or pregnancy disability leave, religious creed, medical condition, or any other
characteristic protected by law.
Section 3. Severability: The City Council declares that, should any provision, section,
paragraph, sentence, or word of this Ordinance be rendered or declared invalid by any final court
action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining
provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences, and words of this Ordinance shall remain in full force
and effect.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this
day of , 2005.
Mayor
I, LINDA C. LOWRY, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond
Bar held on the day of , 2005, and was finally adopted at a regular meeting of
the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar on the day of 2005, by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ATTEST:
Linda C. Lowry, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar
Agenda # 6.7
Meeting Date: March 1, 2005
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
TITLE: AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO CONTRACT WITH MCDERMOTT CONSULTING, INC. IN
THE AMOUNT OF $36,000 FOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING CONSULTING
SERVICES AND APPROPRIATE NECESSARY FUNDS FROM GENERAL FUND
RESERVES
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of the contract amendment and appropriation request will reduce the General Fund
unreserved fund balance and increase FY 2004-2005 General Fund expenditures.
BACKGROUND:
Since June 2003, the City has engaged McDermott Consulting, Inc. to provide transportation -
consulting services to the City. The consultant has provided an assessment of the status and
prospects of the SR 60 / SR 57 Interchange; Tonner Canyon Bypass Road; SCAG's SR 60 Truck
Lane/ Eastern Gateway Corridor Study and related local and regional transportation projects.
McDermott prepared a strategy for achieving Diamond Bar's regional transportation goals, which was
presented to the City Council in February 2004.
The Consultant will assist the City in continuing to implement all elements of the City transportation
infrastructure strategy. The Consultant activities include assisting the City with intergovernmental
relations at the regional, state and Federal levels; development of a funding strategy; research; and
the creation of all collateral materials (such as position papers, etc.) required for implementation.
The Consultant shall also assist the City with the following tasks:
1. Assisting the City in relations with the MTA, specifically implementation and oversight of the
MTA's proposed preliminary study of options for improving the 57/60 Interchange.
2. Assisting in the formation of the Joint COGs Task Force on Goods Movement with the aim of
addressing and mitigating impacts created by regional goods movements.
3. Assisting the City in developing a "white paper" and video presentation describing the local and
regional significance of the 57/60 Interchange and for use in educating local and regional
audiences about the need for improving the Interchange.
4. Assisting the City in developing a regional transportation advocacy role for the Four Corners
Coalition.
5. Assisting the City in monitoring the activities of SCAG that may affect the City.
City Council approval authorize the City Manager to execute a $36,000 contract amendment to
continue consulting services with McDermott. The contract amendment will increase the total
contract amount with this consultant to $114,500.
Prepared by:
James DeStefano
Assistant City Manager
Attachment: Terms of Agreement and Work Scope dated February 2, 2005
2
Agenda # 6.8
Meeting Date: March 1, 2005
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
TITLE: AWARD OF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
SERVICES FOR AREA 1 SLURRY SEAL AND ASPHALT RUBBER
AND AGGREGATE MEMBRANE (ARAM) PROJECT TO NORRIS-
REPKE IN THE AMOUNT OF $47,260.00 AND AUTHORIZE A
CONTINGENCY AMOUNT OF $5,000.00 FOR CHANGE ORDERS TO
BE APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER FOR A TOTAL
AUTHORIZATION AMOUNT OF $52,260.00.
RECOMMENDATION:
Award.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The FY 2004-2005 Budget allocated a total of $600,000.00 for the Area 1 Slurry Seal
and Asphalt Rubber and Aggregate Membrane (ARAM) Project.
BACKGROUND:
On February 2, 2004, six (6) proposals were received. These proposals were reviewed
and evaluated based on 1) general responsiveness to the City's request for proposal
(RFP), 2) staff and firm qualifications, 3) approach/methodology, 4) hours and level of
effort, 5) ability to meet the City's schedule and expectations, and 6) references. The
following are the six firms that submitted proposals with their proposed fees:
Firm Name
Proposed Fee
Advanced Applied
Engineering, Inc.
$55,958.00
Bryan A. Stirrat & Associates
$91,464.00
CNC Engineering
$71,520.00
Dewan, Lundin & Associates
$44,819.00
Hall & foreman, Inc.
$108,668.00
Norris-Repke
$47,260.00*
* Proposed Fee after negotiations
DISCUSSION:
In April of 2004, the City updated its pavement management program for the residential
streets from a five-year program to a seven-year program in an effort to reduce General
Fund expenditures on the City's slurry seal program, and to ensure that the City
receives maximum return on street rehabilitation expenditures. With the change in the
pavement management program from a five-year to a seven-year program, the City's
slurry seal area boundaries were redrawn. The initial centerline mileage of Area 1
under the five-year program was 19.6 miles. The new centerline mileage of Area 1 is
17.6 miles.
In consideration of the six criteria mentioned above, staff concurred that the best firm for
this project is Norris-Repke. Due to the fact that the area boundaries have been
updated since the original RFP went out, we requested an updated proposal from Norris-
Repke. Attached is the firm's scope of services (Attachment "A"), fee schedules
(Attachment "B" and "C"), and Consulting Services Agreement.
The project schedule is tentatively set as follows:
Award of Contract
Notice to Proceed with Design
Approval of Plans and Specifications/
Authorize Advertisement
Bid Opening
Award of Construction Contract of
Notice to Proceed with Construction
Completion of Construction
PREPARED BY:
Kimberly Molina, Assistant Engineer
REVIEWED BY:
David G. Liu, Director of Public Works
Attachments:
Attachment A
Attachment B
March 1, 2005
March 15, 2005
April 8, 2005
May 4, 2005
May 17, 2005
May 30, 2005
August 1, 2005
Date Prepared: February 26, 2005
Jim DeStefano, Assistant City Manager
Attachment C
Consulting Services Agreement
2
Agenda # 6.9
Meeting Date: March 1, 2005`
CITY COUNCIL \\ 47 AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
TITLE: Resolution No. 2005 -XX ratifying an Emergency Declaration issued
by the City Manager on February 22, 2005 declaring a Local
Emergency
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Adoption of the Resolution may assist the City and private property owners in securing
State and/ or Federal funds, if any become available, to offset the repair costs for the
damage caused by the February storms.
BACKGROUND:
Beginning February 12, 2005 conditions perilous to the safety of persons and property
have arisen as a result of the February Winter Storms in the City. These conditions,
which worsened during the ten (10) days thereafter, necessitated the proclamation of
the existence of a local emergency throughout the City.
On Saturday, February 19, 2005 the City experienced flooding and several landslides
effecting both public and private properties. Several hillsides, located on private
property, failed after being saturated by a series of torrential rains. In addition,
residential properties experienced significant flooding. Fortunately, there were no
injuries resulting from the landslide and only one property owner was displaced from
their home. The home did not experience structural damage but the threat of additional
flooding required the residents to be evacuated. Five properties located on Minnequa
Drive and Sunset Crossing Road already damaged as a result of the January storm
experienced additional damage as a result of the February storms.
In addition to the damage to private property, City streets and storm drain facilities were
significantly challenged by the torrential rains. Sycamore Canyon Park has damage
which may result in significant repair costs.
On February 22, 2005 the attached Emergency Declaration proclaiming a local
emergency was issued by the City Manager. Subsequently the City Manager issued the
attached Emergency Order 2005-02 authorizing the Building Official and Public Works
Director to enter and inspect private property for the purpose of abating hazardous
conditions.
The City Manager is empowered, through Municipal Code Section 8.00.050, to declare
a local emergency if the safety of lives or property is threatened. The Emergency
Declaration is a necessary requirement for requesting Federal or State funds, if any
become available.
DISCUSSION:
The Municipal Code requires the City Council to ratify the proclamation act within (7)
days from issuance. Therefore, the City Council should approve Resolution No. 2005 -
XX ratifying the emergency declaration issued on February 22, 2005.
Following approval, City staff will forward the resolution and associated documents to
the appropriate County, State and Federal agencies.
PREPARED BY:
James DeStefano
Assistant City Manager
Attachment
1. Resolution No. 2005 -XX ratifying Emergency Declaration 2005-02 declaring a
local emergency.
2. Emergency Declaration issued by City Manager
3. Emergency Order 2005-02
RESOLUTION NO. 2005 -XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RATIFYING
EMERGENCY DECLARATION 2005-02
DECLARING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL
EMERGENCY
WHEREAS, beginning February 12, 2005 conditions perilous to the safety of persons
and property existed as a result of the February Winter Storms throughout the City.
These conditions, which deteriorated during the ten (10) days thereafter, necessitated
the proclamation of the existence of a local emergency throughout the City.
WHEREAS, on Saturday, February 19, 2005 the City experienced flooding and several
landslides effecting both public and private properties. Several hillsides, located on
private property, failed after being saturated by a series of torrential rains. In addition,
several residential properties experienced significant flooding. One property owner was
displaced from their home.
WHEREAS, five (5) properties located on Minnequa Drive and Sunset Crossing Road
already damaged as a result of the January storms experienced additional damage as a
result of the February storms.
WHEREAS, the conditions were found to be beyond the control of local resources and
warranted the proclamation of the existence of a local emergency; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager, on Tuesday, February 22, 2005, issued a declaration
proclaiming a local emergency, and
WHEREAS, the Diamond Bar Municipal Code, Section 8.00.050 requires the City
Council to ratify the proclamation within seven (7) days from issuance.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY PROCLAIMED AND ORDERED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby find that the aforesaid conditions of extreme
peril did warrant and necessitate the proclamation to the existence of a local
emergency; and
SECTION 2. The said local emergency shall be deemed to continue to exist throughout
the City, until the threat is alleviated.
SECTION 3. This declaration of emergency shall be reviewed at every regular City
Council meeting until the need for continuing the local emergency is terminated.
SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 111 day, of March, 2005.
Wen P. Chang, Mayor
I, LINDA C. LOWRY, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved and adopted at the regular meeting of
the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on 1 st day of March, 2005 by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Linda C. Lowry, City Clerk
DECLARATION OF LOCAL EMERGENCY
(By the Director of Emergency Services)
AN EXECUTIVE ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY
SERVICES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DECLARING THE
EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY
The Director of Emergency Services for the City of Diamond Bar does hereby
find, order and declare as follows:
WHEREAS, Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 8.00.050 authorizes the
Director of Emergency Services to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a
local emergency when the City Council is not in session; and
WHEREAS, Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 8.00.050 identifies the City
Manager as the Director of Emergency Services; and
WHEREAS, Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 8.00.020 defines an "local
emergency," in part, as the existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the
safety of persons or property within the territorial limits of a county, city and county, or
city caused by such condition as air pollution, fire, flood, storm, epidemic, riot, drought,
sudden and severe energy shortage, plant or animal infestation or disease ...; and
WHEREAS, conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property
have arisen as the result of several intense rainstorms that delivered record rainfall; and
WHEREAS, as the result of the weather conditions, the City has experienced
land slides, mud slides, slope failures, flooding, traffic accidents and property damage;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council is not presently in session and is not scheduled to
meet again until March 1, 2005; and
WHEREAS, there are several areas currently threatened with slope failure and
flooding as a result of the saturated ground and threaten the safety of persons and
property;
NOW THEREFORE THE DIRECTOR HEREBY proclaims that a local state of emergency now
exists throughout the City; and
IT IS FURTHER PROCLAIMED AND ORDERED that during the existence of this local
emergency, the powers, functions and duties of the emergency organization of this City shall be those
prescribed by State law, the ordinances and resolutions of the City and by the City's Emergency Plan.
Dated: February 22, 2005
ATTEST:
James DeStefano
Assistant City Manager/
Acting Assistant City Clerk
Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
EMERGENCY ORDER NO. 2005-02 OF THE DIRECTOR OF
EMERGENCY SERVICES AUTHORIZING THE BUILDING
OFFICIAL AND THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR TO ENTER,
INSPECT AND ABATE HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS EXISTING
ON PRIVATE PROPERTY
WHEREAS, due to recent rainstorms, the City has received extremely heavy rains and
significant soil saturation causing damage to structures, mudslides, rockslides, landslides, and
flooding; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Emergency Services has proclaimed the existence of a local
emergency created by these weather conditions; and
WHEREAS, during the existence of the local emergency, the Director may find it necessary in
order to protect the public health, safety and welfare to abate immediately the hazardous conditions
created by the rainstorms; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Emergency Services does hereby find that conditions of extensive
peril to life, limb, health, property, safety and welfare of the public exist because of the potential for
soil erosion, landslides, falling trees and rocks, structure movement, flooding and other hazardous
conditions existing in the affected areas;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that during the duration of the local
emergency, the Building Official and the Public Works Director, along with all other appropriate City
agencies and departments and their authorized representatives, including contractors and
subcontractors, are directed to inspect and abate any and all dangerous conditions that come to their
attention and that represent an imminent hazard to the public health, safety and welfare;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that during the duration of the local emergency, the Building
Official and the Public Works Director, along with all other appropriate City agencies and departments
and their authorized representatives, including contractors and subcontractors, are directed to enter
into private property whenever it shall be necessary to inspect and abate any and all hazardous
conditions existing therein and to impose any and all safety measures deemed necessary to protect
the public health, safety and welfare;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that during the duration of the local emergency, the Building
Official and the Public Works Director, along with all other appropriate City agencies and departments
and their authorized representatives, including contractors and subcontractors, are directed to adopt
and implement erosion control measures in watershed areas and areas where, in the judgment of the
Building Official, it is deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that during the duration of the local emergency, the Building
Official and the Public Works Director, along with all other appropriate City agencies and departments
and their authorized representatives, including contractors and subcontractors, are directed to alter,
change or terminate any and all private erosion control measures adopted by property owners and/or
their agents, if such private measures are found to interfere with the overall erosion control plans of
the City or if such private measures adversely impact facilities;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the City may cause a lien to be placed on private property for
the recovery of costs associated with the abatement of hazardous conditions existing on private
property;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the City may seek appropriate insurance recovery for the
costs associated with the abatement of hazardous conditions existing on private property and that any
action taken by the City to protect the public health, safety and welfare will be subject to budget and
resource constraints.
Dated: February 22, 2005
Linda C. Lowry
City Manager
CITY COUNCIL
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
Agenda # 7.1
Meeting Date: March 1, 2005
AGENDA REPORT
TITLE: DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2005-02 Pertaining to Second
Units, Guest Houses, Second Kitchens, Number of Parking Spaces, Outdoor
Display and Sales, Discretionary Review Processes, Property Maintenance and
Definitions
RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a public hearing and approve the first reading of Ordinance
No. (2005).
BACKGROUND:
As the staff implements the Development Code, it becomes evident from time to time that
amendments are needed to better serve the City and the development community or to
comply with changes in State law or case law. On June 1, 2004, the City Council adopted
Interim Ordinance No. 01-A (2004). The purpose of the Interim Ordinance was to allow staff
time to investigate and create standards related to the appropriate size of second units and
guest houses in specific residential zoning districts. The Interim Ordinance expires on April
19, 2005. Therefore, new standards must be in effect prior to this date and are part of
Development Code Amendment No. 2005-02.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
On February 22, 2005 the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing and
reviewed proposed modification to the specified articles and sections of the Development
Code. There were no comments from the public. At the meeting, the Commission focused
their discussion on holiday lights and decorations and cooking facilities for the guest house.
The Commission raised concerns that the new standard of displaying holiday lights and
decorations three days before and removing them three days after the holiday was too
restrictive. The Commission recommended a time frame of 14 days before and after the
holiday because it is more reasonable and it allows more time to celebrate a holiday.
For guest houses, the Commission felt that the list of prohibited kitchen or cooking facilities
may be too restrictive. Allowing a microwave or hot plate would be reasonable and would
allow for the preparation of snacks. However, the Commission did not recommend amending
the Code to allow microwaves or hot plates in guest houses. If the Council, after reviewing
the new criteria for the guest house, concurs with the discussion of the Planning Commission
with respect to the list of prohibited kitchen facilities, the Council may consider eliminating
"microwave" and "hotplates" from the list.
On February 22, 2005, the Planning Commission recommended City Council approve
Development Code No. 2005-02 with the following modifications to the following articles and
sections of the Development Code:
ARTICLE II
Section 22.08.030. Residential zoning district land uses and permit requirements—Table 2-3.
Section 22.10.030. Commercial/Industrial district land uses and permit requirements —Table 2-
5 and Table 2-6.
ARTICLE III
Section 22.16.140.
Second Kitchen.
Section 22.30.040.
Number of parking spaces required. — Table 3-10.
Section 22.34.030.
Property Maintenance standards for single-family.
Section 22.34.040.
Property Maintenance standards for multi -family.
Section 22.34.050.
Property Maintenance standards for commercial.
Section 22.34.060.
Property Maintenance standards for industrial.
Section 22.42.120.
Secondary housing units.
Section 22.42.060.
Guest houses.
Section 22.42.080.
Outdoor display and sales standards.
ARTICLE IV
Section 22.48.040. Development Review. findings and decisions.
Section 22.50.060. Temporary Use Permit. action by the director.
Section 22.52.040. Minor Variance. findings and decision.
Section 22.54.040. Variance findings and decision.
Section 22.56.040. Minor Conditional Use Permit. findings and decision.
Section 22.58.040. Conditional Use Permit. findings and decision.
ARTICLE VI
Section 22.80.010. Definition of specialized terms and phrases.
DISCUSSION:
The following information represents the current standard and the recommended amendment
for specific sections in the Development Code. Italics/bold delineates the recommended
amendment and strikeouts indicates deletions.
2
ARTICLE II
Section 22.08.030. Residential zoning district land uses and permit requirements.
Staff Comment:
Allowing second units or guest houses in Low Medium or Medium density zones is not
appropriate because lots are generally smaller. In the zoning districts that provide for multi-
family residences (i.e. condominium and apartments) second units and guest houses are not
appropriate.
Recommendation:
TABLE 2-3
ALLOWED USES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING
DISTRICTS
Land Uses (1)
RR RL RLM RM RMH RH See standards
in section:
RESIDENTIAL USES
Secondary re&,�units
P P P P P P 22.42.120
Guesthouse
P P 22.42.60
Section 22.10.030. Commercial/Industrial district land uses and permit requirements (Tables
2-5 and 2-6)
Staff Comment:
(Table 2-5) Restaurants are listed in the OP, OB and CO zones but outdoor dining is not
listed. Restaurants and outdoor dining are listed in the C-1, C-2 and C-3 zones. For
consistency, this modification is recommended.
(Table 2-6) Retail sales are not permitted in the Light Industrial (1) zoning district. For
economic development purposes, the City would like the option to allow retail land uses within
the Light Industrial (1) zoning district if appropriate.
(Table 2-6) The modification to this table is recommended to clarify the zoning district where
the uses are allowed and to ensure that operational characteristics are suitable of the land
use are appropriate for the location by the review process.
3
Recommendation:
TABLE 2-5
ALLOWED USES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICE ZONING
DISTRICTS
Land Uses(1)
OP OB (3) CO See standards in section:
RETAIL TRADE USES
C-3
I
See standards in
section:
Restaurant with outdoor
dining
MCUP MCUP MCUP 22.16.070, 22.42.080
TABLE 2-6
ALLOWED USES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL
ZONING DISTRICTS
Land Uses(1)
C-1
C-2
C-3
I
See standards in
section:
RETAIL TRADE USES
Schools - Rub4G-a-nd Private
CUP
P -CUP
P
Schools - Public
P
P
P -
Retail sales
Schools - Specialized education and
training and non -degree
P -CUP
P CUP
CUP
P CUP
Restaurant with outdoor
dining
MCUP
MCUP
MCUP
GUR
22.16.070, 22.42.080
Land Uses(1)
C-1
C-2
C-3
I
See standards
in section:
RECREATIONAL, EDUCATION & PUBLIC ASSEMBLY USES
Schools - Rub4G-a-nd Private
CUP
P -CUP
P
Schools - Public
P
P
P -
Schools - Specialized education and
training and non -degree
P -CUP
P CUP
P-
P CUP
Studios - Ar I dance, rRYsis
photograph, portrait, etc.
CUP
CUP
GUR
ARTICLE III
Section 22.16.140. Second kitchen.
Staff Comment:
This is a new section. Currently, second kitchen standards are located in Section 22.42.120.
Secondary housing units. Staff is suggesting moving it to a more appropriate chapter and
adding this new section number to the Table of Contents.)
Recommendation:
Second kitchens shall be permitted within the Rural Residential (RR) zone in single-
family residences that are a minimum of 6,000 square feet in floor area. A second
kitchen shall not constitute approval of a second unit and such kitchen shall not be so
located as to facilitate the establishment of the second independent dwelling including
4
a servant's quarters.
Section 22.30.040. Number of parking spaces required.
Staff Comment:
Staff's experience indicates that this is a land use that requires more parking than the code
currently allows. The suggested modification will provide a parking requirement consistent
with health and fitness facilities.
These land uses are not listed in the tables designating allowed uses in specific zoning
districts. Therefore, staff is recommending deleting the parking requirements from TABLE 3-
10.
Recommendation:
TABLE 3-10
PARKING REQUIREMENTS BY LAND USE AND USE TYPE
Land Use T peVehicle
Spaces Required
Recreation, education, public assembly:
Studios for art, dance and martial arts
1 space for each 2-W 150 sq. ft. of gross floor area
and 1 space for each employee
Land Use Type I Vehicle Spaces Required
Residential Uses:
P. fd,le.r oo.�h hod! plus �s 1 for Rph_611 R hodlo fee guest o o
naFkiRg 1 c o fer oa.6h o pleyee
Section 22.34.030. Single-family standards.
Staff Comment:
Currently, there are no standards that address the display and removal of holiday lights and
decorations. In order to maintain the Diamond Bar's high aesthetic standards and to assist
the Neighborhood Improvement Officers, this modification is suggested for single-family, multi-
family, commercial and industrial area.
Recommendation:
(g) Display of holiday decorations and lights.
(1) Excepting Christmas, no holiday decorations or lights shall be displayed
on private property earlier than 14 days prior to a holiday or after 14 days
following a holiday.
(2) Holiday decorations or lights celebrating Christmas may be displayed on
5
private property starting November 15 and shall be entirely removed
therefrom by January 15.
(3) The display of Holiday decorations or lights during permissible times, as
stated in this subsection, shall be exempt from the requirements and
regulations of Chapter 22.26. - Sign Standards, unless they contain
commercial speech, in which case they shall constitute temporary signs
and be subject to that chapter.
(4) It shall be a public nuisance and unlawful for holiday decorations and
lights to be displayed on private property except at permissible times as
stated in this subsection.
Section 22.34.040. Multi -family standards.
Recommendation:
(i) Display of holiday decorations and lights.
(1) Excepting Christmas, no holiday decorations or lights shall be displayed
on private property earlier than 14 days prior to a holiday or after 14 days
following a holiday.
(2) Holiday decorations or lights celebrating Christmas may be displayed on
private property starting November 15 and shall be entirely removed
therefrom by January 15.
(3) The display of Holiday decorations or lights during permissible times, as
stated in this subsection, shall be exempt from the requirements and
regulations of Chapter 22.26. - Sign Standards, unless they contain
commercial speech, in which case they shall constitute temporary signs
and be subject to that chapter.
(4) It shall be a public nuisance and unlawful for holiday decorations and
lights to be displayed on private property except at permissible times as
stated in this subsection.
Section 22.34.050. Commercial standards.
Recommendation:
(h) Display of holiday decorations and lights.
(1) Excepting Christmas, no holiday decorations or lights shall be displayed
on private property earlier than 14 days prior to a holiday or after 14 days
following a holiday.
6
(2) Holiday decorations or lights celebrating Christmas may be displayed on
private property starting November 15 and shall be entirely removed
therefrom by January 15.
(3) The display of Holiday decorations or lights during permissible times, as
stated in this subsection, shall be exempt from the requirements and
regulations of Chapter 22.26. - Sign Standards, unless they contain
commercial speech, in which case they shall constitute temporary signs
and be subject to that chapter.
(4) It shall be a public nuisance and unlawful for holiday decorations and
lights to be displayed on private property except at permissible times as
stated in this subsection.
(5) Prior to the installation of holiday decorations and lights, a permit shall be
obtained from the Building and Safety Division.
Section 22.34.060. Industrial standards.
Recommendation:
(h) Display of holiday decorations and lights.
(1) Excepting Christmas, no holiday decorations or lights shall be displayed
on private property earlier than 14 days prior to a holiday or after 14 days
following a holiday.
(2) Holiday decorations or lights celebrating Christmas may be displayed on
private property stating November 15 and shall be entirely removed
therefrom by January 15.
(3) The display of Holiday decorations or lights during permissible times, as
stated in this subsection, shall be exempt from the requirements and
regulations of Chapter 22.26. - Sign Standards, unless they contain
commercial speech, in which case they shall constitute temporary signs
and be subject to that chapter.
(4) It shall be a public nuisance and unlawful for holiday decorations and
lights to be displayed on private property except at permissible times as
stated in this subsection.
(5) Prior to the installation of holiday decorations and lights, a permit shall be
obtained from the Building and Safety Division.
7
Section 22.42.120. Secondafy housigg units
Staff Comment:
The purpose of this modification is to comply with State law and provide development
standards that do not degrade the integrity of a single-family zoning district while allowing
second units.
Recommendation:
The purpose of this section is to implement State law and permit second units in
certain residential zones and to ensure that the second unit does not degrade the
residential neighborhood by overcrowding the streets, utilities, parks, open spaces
and other community facilities and downgrading the living environment in the City.
This section provides standards for the establishment of seconda-ry residual units.
(1) Secondafy-units may shall be allowed in the zoning districts specified in Section
22.08.030 (Residential district land uses and permit requirements) subject to the
approval of the Director. The appliGant shall be the owner and resident (eGGi roant) of
the main dwelling.
(2) Number of units allowed. Only one seconda-ry dwelling unit shall be allowed on a
legal single-family parcel. A single-family parcel shall not be allowed to have both
second unit and guest house.
(3) Site requirements. The parcel proposed for a second dwelling unit shall comply with
all the following requirements:
a. The parcel shall have a minimum area of 10,000 gross square feet and a
minimum buildable pad area of 8,000 square feet, a minimum width of 50
feet; and a minimum depth of 100 feet; and a minim, rn buildable pad size of
400 square feet, exGl si ely for seGendar„ „nits; and
b. The parcel shall be developed with not more than one single-family only one
existing owner GGGUpied single _fam�aot�Ted main dwelling unit primary
residence. The owner of the parcel must live in the primary residence or
the second unit, and shall demonstrate such occupancy to the
satisfaction of the City prior to issuance of permits.
(4) Location of seconda-ry unit. A seconda-ry unit may be within, attached to, or detached
from the existing main dwelling unit primary residence. If detached, the secondary
unit shall be located within the rear portion of the subject parcel and shall be
separated from the existing main rlweiiinn „nit primary residence a minimum of 10
feet. If attached to or within the primary residence, a separated entrance shall be
provided and said entrance shall not be located on the front of the primary
residential structure or facing the street on which the primary residence fronts.
(5) Design standards. A secondary dwelling unit shall:
M
q
detaGhe�'�t; Not exceed 600 gross square feet in floor area and is
allowed if the parcel is between 10,000 and 20,000 gross square feet with a
minimum buildable pad area of 8,000 square feet and has a minimum
width of 50 feet and a minimum depth of 100 feet.
b. Not exceed 1,200 square feet in gross floor area and is allowed if the
parcel is over 20,000 gross square feet with a minimum 10,000 square foot
buildable pad area.
C arGhteGtUrallmna4ihle with the main dwelling „nom Match the
architectural styJle of the primary residence and design features, such as
but not limited to, materials, colors, roofing, scale, surface treatments and
details;
d. Comply Utilize the same with setback requirements fer as the main dwelling
primary residence; not exceed one story or 15 feet in height as measured
from the natural of finished grade to highest area of the roofline; not
exceed the maximum lot coverage permitted in the zone where the subject
lot is located, and the design of the second unit shall not change the
character of the surrounding residential neighborhood,
e. Contain separate kitchen and bathroom facilities and have a separate entrance
from the main dwelling -primary residence; and
f. Contain no more than two bedrooms.
(6) Parking. The seGendar„ dwelling unit shall provide one Goyered off street garbing
garage,
in addition to the required parking for the main dwelling
unit, r�Ce with Chapter 22.30 20 (Off_Ctreet Parking and Leading Standards)
One off-street parking space shall be provided for the second unit, in addition to
the required and existing parking provided for the primary residence. Said
parking space shall be accessible from the existing driveway approach.
Existing driveway may be widened to accommodate the one off-street parking
space pursuant to Code Section 22.30.080.- Driveways and site access.
(7) Rental of second units. A seconda-ry dwelling unit may be rented, although rental is
not required.
18•por •• • of • • unit. The seGendary dwelling Yni
shall be GOMpatible with the design of the main dwelling unit and the surrounding
and shall not SUffiGiently Ghange the GharaGter of the surrounding residential
neighberh The sale or subdivision of a second residential unit separate from
the primary residence shall be prohibited.
9
(9) Utilities. Utilities serving the second unit (e.g., electricity, gas, sewer, and water)
shall be common to and dependent on the primary residence. The second unit
shall not be provided with separate metered utilities. Furthermore and prior to
the issuance of any City permits, the property owner shall submit written
certification from the affected water and sewer district that adequate water and
sewer facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed second unit. For
units using septic facilities allowed by the California Regional Water Quality
Control Board and the City, written certification of acceptability shall be
submitted.
(10) Covenant and Agreement. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the owner
of record shall sign and record a Covenant and Agreement, in a form provided
by the City, which shall place future buyers on notice of the maximum size of
the second unit, the required amount of off street parking to be provided for the
second unit, that the second unit may not be sold, transferred or assigned
separately from the primary residence, that the owner of record shall reside on
the property and that such restrictions shall run with the land and be binding
upon all future owners.
Section 22.42.060. Guest houses
Staff Comment:
The purpose of the suggested modification for a guest house is to clarify development
standards and provide private temporary living quarters for guests of property owner.
Recommendation:
This section establishes standard for the development and operation of guest houses in
zoning districts where guest houses are allowed in compliance with aArticle II (Zoning
Districts and Allowable Land Uses), and subject to the approval of the Director provided
all of the following standards are met:
(1) Intended use. A guest house, which may include only a sleeping area, living area, and
bathroom, is intended to provide temporary living quarters within a detached or
attached residential accessory structure, located on the same premises with the main
dwelling primary residence, for use by guests of the occupants of the premises. an4-
shall not be rentod or gtheRymse used as a separate dwelling
(2) Development standards. The location and construction of guest houses shall comply
with the following standards and as such may be approved by the Director:
a. Number.Only e—guest house beallwed n��single legal parnel gf
reeerd. A guest house shall not be permitted on any parcel for which a
second unit has been permitted.
b. Location. A guest house may be within, attached to, or detached from the
existing primary residence. If detached, the guest house shall be located
H
within the rear portion of the subject parcel.
C. Access. The location of a detached guest house shall provide minimum of five-
foot wide pedestrian access to the main development;
d. Site requirements. The parcel proposed for a guest house shall have a
minimum area of 10,000 gross square feet and a minimum buildable pad
area of 8,000 square feet, a minimum width of 50 feet, and a minimum
depth of 100 feet,
e. Floor area. The guest house floor area shall not exceed 600 square feet if
the parcel is between 10,000 and 20,000 gross square feet. For parcels
greater than 20,000 square feet, the guest house floor area may exceed
600 square feet but shall not be greater than 900 square feet or 30 percent
of the existing living area of the primary residence, whichever is smaller,
f. Architectural compatibility. The architectural style of the guest house in
design features, such as but not limited to, materials, colors, roofing,
scale, surface treatments and details shall match the primary residence.
g. Setbacks. The guest house shall: utilize the same setback requirements
as the primary residence; not exceed one story or 15 feet in height as
measured from the natural or finished grade to the highest area of the
roofline; not exceed the maximum lot coverage permitted in the zone
where the subject lot is located, and the design of the guest
house shall not change the character of the surrounding residential
neighborhood,
h. Utilities. Utilities serving the guest house (e.g., electricity, gas, sewer, and
water) shall be common to and dependent on the main dwelling. The guest
house shall not be provided with separate metered utilities;
Plumbing and electrical installations. Plumbing shall be limited to that required
for a single bathroom, water closet, lavatory, and a shower or tub. Electrical
installation shall be limited to the minimum required for heating, light, and
ventilation. Line drawings shall be submitted for approval, and shall delineate
all plumbing and electrical installations proposed in compliance with this
standard;
Kitchens prohibited. The guest house shall not contain a kitchen or other
cooking facilities. For the purpose of this section, a kitchen or cooking facilities
are defined as to include, but not limited to, the following:
1. Cooking stove with or without an oven;
2. Hot plates;
3. Kitchen sink, cabinets and appurtenant plumbing;
4. Microwave or convection ovens; and.
5. All appurtenances, related to the above.
L Rental is prohibited. The guest house shall not be separately rented or leased
from the main dwelling, whether compensation is direct or indirect; or
otherwise used as a separate dwelling.
M. Subdivision prehibit Sale or subdivision of a guest house. Subsequent -
subdivision
bsegi ion+
from -
the guest house, shall not be allowed; The sale or subdivision of a guest
rr r�g�c s«va�.�r, vvv
house separate from the primary residence shall be prohibited;
n. Covenant and Agreement. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the
owner of record shall sign and record a Covenant and Agreement, in a
form provided by the City, which shall place future buyers on notice of the
maximum size of the guest house, that the guest house may not be sold,
transferred or assigned separately from the primary residence, that the
owner of record shall reside on the property and that such restrictions
shall run with the land and shall be binding upon all future owners.
Section 22.42.080. Outdoor disDlav and sales standards.
Staff Comment:
The purpose of the suggested modification is to correct typographical errors and ensure that
outdoor dining areas do not encroach on to the public right-of-way and comply with ADA
requirement. Additionally, staff desires to simplify the processing for small outdoor dining
areas that comply with the required standards listed within this code section.
Recommendation
(3) Outdoor dining and seating areas. Outdoor dining and seating areas are allowed
subject to the approval of a Minor o -Conditional u Use p -Permit, in compliance with
chapter 22.58 (Minor Conditional Use Permits) and the following standards:
a. Alcoholic beverage sales. Areas in which alcoholic beverages will be served
12
Ip imi
L Rental is prohibited. The guest house shall not be separately rented or leased
from the main dwelling, whether compensation is direct or indirect; or
otherwise used as a separate dwelling.
M. Subdivision prehibit Sale or subdivision of a guest house. Subsequent -
subdivision
bsegi ion+
from -
the guest house, shall not be allowed; The sale or subdivision of a guest
rr r�g�c s«va�.�r, vvv
house separate from the primary residence shall be prohibited;
n. Covenant and Agreement. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the
owner of record shall sign and record a Covenant and Agreement, in a
form provided by the City, which shall place future buyers on notice of the
maximum size of the guest house, that the guest house may not be sold,
transferred or assigned separately from the primary residence, that the
owner of record shall reside on the property and that such restrictions
shall run with the land and shall be binding upon all future owners.
Section 22.42.080. Outdoor disDlav and sales standards.
Staff Comment:
The purpose of the suggested modification is to correct typographical errors and ensure that
outdoor dining areas do not encroach on to the public right-of-way and comply with ADA
requirement. Additionally, staff desires to simplify the processing for small outdoor dining
areas that comply with the required standards listed within this code section.
Recommendation
(3) Outdoor dining and seating areas. Outdoor dining and seating areas are allowed
subject to the approval of a Minor o -Conditional u Use p -Permit, in compliance with
chapter 22.58 (Minor Conditional Use Permits) and the following standards:
a. Alcoholic beverage sales. Areas in which alcoholic beverages will be served
12
shall comply with the standards established by the s_ -State d—Department of
aAlcoholic bBeverage EControl, and the following standards:
1. Accessible. The dining area shall be accessible from inside the
restaurant only, unless the director waves this requirement in
circumstances where this is not feasible or practical;
2. Physically defined. The dining area shall be clearly and physically
defined. It shall be clearly a part of the restaurant serves; and.
3. Supervision. The dining area shall be supervised by a restaurant
employee to ensure compliance with laws regarding on-site consumption
of alcoholic beverages.
b. Parking requirements. Outdoor dining and seating areas shall comply with the
following off-street parking requirements:
1. Parking calculations. Off-street parking requirements shall be calculated
in compliance with chapter 22.30 (Off -Street Parking and Loading
Standards). The director may reduce or waive parking requirements for
outdoor dining areas less than 400 square feet in area that are operated
on a seasonal basis; and
2. Additional off-street parking. Outdoor dining areas that are not part of a
specific restaurant, but are used in common with several restaurants or
tenants within a commercial center, shall not be required to provide
additional off-street parking for these common outdoor areas.
C. Cleanup facilities. Outdoor dining areas, whether part of a restaurant or seating
in common, shall provide adequate cleanup facilities, and associated
procedures, in the following manner:
1. Cleaning schedule. Outdoor dining areas shall be cleaned on a continual
basis for removal of litter and food items which constitute a nuisance to
public health and safety; and
2. Waste receptacles. Outdoor dining areas shall contain waste receptacles
for use by the public and/or restaurant employees.
d. Design compatibility. Outdoor dining and seating areas are subject to
compatibility with surrounding uses and a high standard of design quality, the
following standards shall be implemented:
1. Compatible elements. Outdoor dining and seating areas and associated
structural elements, awnings, covers, furniture, umbrellas or other
physical elements which are visible from the public rights-of-way, shall be
compatible with the overall design of the main structure(s);
13
2. Entertainment. Outdoor dining and seating areas that provide dancing,
entertainment or amplified music shall require the preparation of a noise
analysis with appropriate mitigation measures to ensure that noise levels
will not exceed those specified in chapter 22.28 (Noise Control);
3. Pedestrian experience. The use of awnings, plants, umbrellas and other
human scale elements is encouraged to enhance the pedestrian
experience;
4. Potential impacts. Outdoor dining and seating areas and their relation to
churches, hospitals, public schools and residential uses shall be
considered by the review authority. Proper mitigation measures shall be
applied to eliminate potential impacts related to glare, light, loitering and
noise;
5. Obstructions. Outdoor dining and seating areas shall not obstruct
vehicular or pedestrian traffic flow and not necessitate the removal of
existing pedestrian or vehicular movement areas;
6. Separation requirements. Outdoor dining and seating areas shall be
separated from residential uses, at a minimum distance of 200 feet,
except in mixed-use projects;
7. Setbacks. Outdoor dining and seating areas shall be set back a minimum
of five feet from property lines or parking lots and shall not encroach on
to the public right-of-way.
8. Waste receptacles. Waste receptacles shall be provided in outside
seating areas, where and when appropriate.
9. Americans With Disabilities Act. Outdoor dining shall meet ADA
requirements.
e. One year review required. Minor Conditional use permits for outdoor dining and
seating areas are subject to review after one year, at which time the director
shall conduct a study to determine if adverse impacts have resulted from the
use. If none are found, then a permanent conditional use permit may be
granted.
f. The Director may wave the Minor Conditional Use Permit process for
outdoor dining in connection with an existing approved restaurant if the
outdoor dining does not exceed an occupancy of eight patrons and meets
the development standards in this section (Section 22.42.080. Outdoor
display and sales standards).
ARTIr.I F I\/
14
Section 22.48.040. Findings and decisions.
Staff Comment:
This modification is suggested by the City Attorney to clarify the processing of following
development applications.
Recommendation:
A development review or adMinistratiye development ro„io,n, application shall be reviewed by
the applicable review authority identified in section 22.48.050 (Responsibility for development
review), below and shall not be approved, with or without conditions, unless all of only the
following findings are made:
Section 22.50.060. Action bV the director.
Recommendation:
A temporary use permit may be approved, modified, conditioned, or disapproved by the
director, without the requirement for a noticed public hearing. The director shall not may
approve, modified, or conditionally approved a temporary use permit application, for up to one
year, unless only i# all of the following findings can be made:
Section 22.52.040. Findinas and decision.
Recommendation:
The director, without the requirement for a noticed public hearing, shall record the
decision in writing with the findings on which the decision is based, in compliance with state
law, or may refer the application to the commission. A minor variance application shall not
may be approved, modified, conditioned, or disapproved by the director, without the-
rorri iiromon4 fnr a nntiGed p bliG hearing unless only all the following findings can be made:
Section 22.54.040. Findings and decision.
Recommendation:
Following a public hearing, the commission shall record the decision in writing with findings
on which the decision is based, in compliance with state law. The commission shall not may
approve a -e a variance application with or without conditions unless only all of the following
findings can be made:
Section 22.56.040. Findings and decision.
Recommendation:
15
Following a public hearing, the hearing officer shall record the decision in writing with the
findings on which the decision is based, or may refer the application to the commission. The
minor conditional use permit application shall not be approved, with or without conditions,
unless only i# all of the following findings can be made:
Section 22.58.040. Findings and decision.
Recommendation:
Following a public hearing, the commission shall record the decision in writing with the
findings on which the decision is based. The conditional use permit application shall not be
approved, with or without conditions, unless only all of the following findings can be made:
ARTICLE VI
Section 22.80.010. Definition of specialized terms and phrases.
Staff Comment:
The purpose of modifying the following definitions is to provide a clearer understanding of
various land uses and Development Code terminology.
Recommendation:
(b) Definitions, "B". The following definitions are in alphabetical order:
Basement. Habitable and Non -habitable space within a structure where less than
one-half of the distance from its floor to ceiling is below grade. A basement shall be
considered a story.
Recommendation:
(c) Definitions, "C". The following definitions are in alphabetical order:
Cellar. Non -habitable space within a structure where one-half or more of the distance
from its floor to ceiling is below grade. A cellar shall be considered a story.
Recommendation:
(g) Definitions, "G". The following definitions are in alphabetical order:
Guest house. A detached or attached structure of 400 300 square feet or more,
accessory to a single-family dwelling, accommodating living/sleeping quarter, but
without kitchen or cooking facilities. (Refer to Section 22.42.060.)
Recommendation: (Holiday: Currently not defined.)
16
(h) Definitions, "H". The following definitions are in alphabetical order:
Holiday. Any officially recognized or declared federal, state, or local day. Such
a day may involve the cessation of general commercial activities or the
commemoration or celebration of a particular event or occasion. A "Holiday"
includes, but is not limited to New Year's Day. St. Valentines Day, President's
Day, St. Patrick's Day, Easter, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day,
Halloween, Thanksgiving Day, Veteran's Day, and Christmas Day.
Recommendation:
(Holiday Decorations and Lights: Currently not defined.)
Holiday Decorations and Lights. Any form of temporary decorations (including
without limitation, strings, streamers and balloons), and any devices, light
fixtures or objects, materials, or signs not containing commercial speech or
combination thereof, that are displayed, or that reasonably appear to be
displayed, in connection with a holiday, and that are viewable from public or
neighboring private property.
(s) Definitions, "S". The following definitions are in alphabetical order:
Recommendation:
School. PubliG and private edUcati�nstitut+o, rolling, An institution of
learning, whether public or private that offers instruction, training, testing,
apprenticeship, tutoring, exam preparation, educational guidance, counseling
and evaluation. Learning may occur at training facilities, educational
institutions, and through correspondence, television, Internet, or other means
such as:
Boarding schools
Business, secretarial, and vocational schools
Community colleges, colleges and universities
Elementary, middle, and junior high schools
Establishments providing courses by mail or Internet
High schools
Military academies
Professional schools (law, medicine, etc.)
Seminaries/religious ministry training facilities
Also includes specialized non -degree grant schools offering instructions in:
Art studio
Ballet and other dance studios
Computers and electronics
Drama studio
Drivers' education
Language
Martial arts studio
Math
17
Music
Science
Tutorial services
Recommendation:
(s) Definitions, "S". The following definitions are in alphabetical order:
Seconda-ry residential unit. A second permanent dwelling unit, or "granny flat",
attached or detached; that is accessory to a primary dwelling residence on the same
site. A secondary residential unit provides complete, independent living facilities for
one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating,
cooking, sanitation, and parking.
Recommendation:
(Tutorial services: Currently not defined.)
(t) Definitions, "T". The following definitions are in alphabetical order:
Tutorial services. A type of business designed to provide individualized
instructions to persons generally in fields of general education or the arts with
no more that two students per one instructor on the premises at the same time.
Tutorial services, not in a classroom setting, shall include, but are not limited to,
instructing, tutoring, educational counseling, testing, training, etc. Students
typically do not stay more than two hours.
CONCLUSION:
The purpose of the Development Code is to implement the policies of the City's General Plan
by classifying and regulating the uses of land and structures within the City. In addition, the
Development Code protects and promotes the public health, safety, and general welfare of
the residence, and preserves and enhances the aesthetic quality of the City. The
Development Code provides standards for orderly growth and development and promotes a
stable pattern of land uses. It is a tool used to implement land uses designated by the
General Plan, thereby avoiding conflict between land uses. The Development Code assists
in protecting and maintaining property values, and conserving and protecting the City's
natural resources. Furthermore, the Development Code facilitates in protecting the City's
character, and social and economic stability, as well as assisting in maintaining a high quality
of life without unduly high public or private costs for development or unduly restricting private
enterprise, initiative, or innovative design,
The Planning Commission and staff believe that the standards set forth in the recommended
amendment will implement the policies of the General Plan, are in keeping with the purpose
of the Development Code, and will assist in ensuring a high quality of life and high level of
safety.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15162
(a) of Article 5 of the California Code of Regulations and Guidelines promulgated thereunder,
the City has determined that this project is consistent with the previously adopted Negative
Declaration No. 97-03 for the City's Development Code. Therefore, no subsequent Negative
Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration is required to be prepared.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
Notice for this project was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley
Tribune on February 18, 2005. Pursuant to Planning and Zoning Law Government Code
Section 65091 (a) (3), if the number of property owners to whom a public hearing notice
would be mailed is greater than 1000, a local agency may provide notice by placing a display
advertisement 1/8 page in one newspaper of general circulation. The City placed a 1/8 page
display in the above-mentioned newspapers of general circulation. Furthermore, on
February 17, 2005, public notices were posted at the following nine public places: City
Hall/Government Center; Diamond Bar Library; Heritage Park; Country Hills Town Center
Community Board; Ralph Shopping Center -Diamond Bar Boulevard; JoAnne Fabrics - 21070
Golden Springs Drive; 990 Diamond Bar Boulevard — Oak Tree Shopping Center; and 1235
Diamond Bar Boulevard — Albertson's.
PREPARED BY:
Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner
REVIEWED BY:
Nancy Fong, Planning Manager
Attachments:
1. Ordinance No. XX (2005); and
2. Planning Commission Resolution No
Development Code Amendment No.
James DeStefano, Assistant City Manager
2005-08 recommending approval to City Council of
2005-02.
19
CITY COUNCIL
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
Agenda # 8.1
Meeting Date: Mar. 1, 2005
AGENDA REPORT
TITLE: APPROVE SENDING A LETTER TO THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE REQUESTING
THAT THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR BE REMOVED FROM THE SAN GABRIEL
RIVER WATERSHED SPECIAL RESOURCE STUDY AREA
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council direct staff to prepare and send a letter to the National Park
Service as described in the title.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION:
In July of 2003, President Bush signed H.R. 2691, an Interior Department Appropriations bill that
included H.R. 519 by Rep. Hilda Solis. H.R. 519, the San Gabriel River Watershed Act, provides
funding for the National Park Service to conduct a study of portions of the San Gabriel River and the
San Gabriel Mountains to determine whether they meet the criteria for addition to the National Park
Service and offer recommendations for their protection.
The study area includes the San Gabriel River and its tributaries north of Santa Fe Springs. This area
includes the City of Diamond Bar and portions of the City of Chino Hills and Tres Hermanos (see
attached map). The study will also look at how the federal government could improve the area's
recreational and environmental opportunities, taking into consideration flood control, drainage and
public infrastructure needs.
There is a distinct possibility that a portion of the study area would be recommended for protection
from future development (i.e. roads) - the existing open space in Tres Hermanos being the potential
target. With that outlying possibility, the proposed Tonner Canyon Bypass Road could be in jeopardy.
On the other hand, being included in the study area could result in particular improvement projects
and/or funding to build or enhance recreation areas within the City.
The National Park Service has an open comment period through April 19th, 2005. During this time the
City of Diamond Bar can submit a letter requesting that it be removed from the study area.
Prepared by:
Jim Clarke, Legislative Analyst
Attachment:
San Gabriel River Watershed study area map
Agenda No.
NOTICE REGARDING THE CHECK REGISTER
Please note that the Check Register has not been included in
the electronic versions of the City Council Agenda Packets on the
City's Web Site because severe formatting errors occur when
attempting to convert this material. If you are interested in receiving
a copy of the Warrant Register, please contact the City Clerk's office
at 909-839-7010 to receive a FAXed copy or to pick one up in
person.
We apologize for the inconvenience.