HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/17/2005THIS 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
May 17, 2005
25
07(2005)
Next Resolution No. 2005 -
Next Ordinance No.
STUDY SESSION: 1:30 p.m., Room CC -7
♦ FY Budget 2005/06
♦ City Council Goals and Objectives
Public Comments
CALL TO ORDER: 6:30 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Presentation of Colors by Boy Scout Troop 711
INVOCATION: Monsignor James Loughnane
St. Denis Catholic Church
ROLL CALL: Council Members Herrera, Zirbes, Mayor Pro
Tem O'Connor, Mayor Chang
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Mayor
1. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS:
1.1 Proclaiming May 15 — 21, 2005 as "Public Works Week."
2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
2.1 Youth Master Plan Update
2.2 Presentation of Geographical Information System (GIS) and other Online
Applications by the Information Systems Division.
MAY 17, 2005 PAGE 2
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: "Public Comments" is the time reserved on each
regular meeting agenda to provide an opportunity for members of the public to
directly address the Council on Consent Calendar items or matters of interest to
the public that are not already scheduled for consideration on this agenda.
Although the City Council values your comments, pursuant to the Brown Act, the
Council generally cannot take any action on items not listed on the posted
agenda. Please complete a Speaker's Card and give it to the City Clerk
(completion of this form is voluntary).
There is a five-minute maximum time limit when addressing the City Council.
4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT: Under the Brown Act, members of the
City Council may briefly respond to public comments but no extended discussion
and no action on such matters may take place.
5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1 NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MEETING — May 23, 2005
— 7:00 p.m., Room CC2, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
(Neighborhood boundaries are Grand Ave. on the north, Brea Canyon
Rd./Golden Spgs Dr. on the west, Pathfinder Rd. on the south, and
Diamond Bar Blvd. on the east).
5.2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — May 24, 2005 — 7:00 p.m.,
Auditorium, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
5.3 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION — May 26, 2005 — 7:00 p.m.,
Hearing Board Room, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
5.4 NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MEETING — June 2 , 2005
7:00 p.m., Room CC3, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
(Neighborhood boundaries are SR -60 on the north, Golden Spgs Dr. on
the west, Grand Ave. on the south, and the City's easterly boundary).
5.5 PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING — June 6, 2005 — 7:00 p.m.,
Diamond Bar/Walnut Sheriff Station, 21695 E. Valley Blvd., Walnut
5.6 NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MEETING — June 6, 2005 —
7:00 p.m., Room CC2, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
(Neighborhood boundaries are northerly boundary, westerly boundary,
Pathfinder Rd. on the south and Brea Canyon Rd. on the east).
5.7 SPECIAL ELECTION DAY — June 7, 2005 — Polls open from 7:00 a.m., -
8:00 p.m., (one seat open).
5.8 CITY COUNCIL MEETING — June 7, 2005 — 6:30 p.m., Auditorium,
MAY 17, 2005 PAGE 3
AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR:
6.1 City Council Minutes:
6.1.1 Study Session Minutes - May 3, 2005 - Approve as submitted.
6.1.2 Regular Meeting Minutes — May 3, 2005 — Approve as submitted.
6.2 Planning Commission Minutes — April 12, 2005- Receive and file.
6.3 Parks & Recreation Commission Minutes — March 24, 2005 -
Receive and file.
6.4 Ratification of Check Register — Ratify Check Register dated May 17,
2005 in the amount of $351,379.03.
6.5 Amendment with Warren C. Siecke Transportation and Traffic
Engineering for Construction Inspection Services in the Amount of
$57,000 plus a Contingency amount of $5,700 for Change Orders to
be Approved by the City Manager, for a Total Authorization of
$62,700 for Construction of Traffic Signal Modifications (Left -Turn
Signals) on Diamond Bar Blvd. at Sunset Crossing Rd., Northbound
SR -57 On Ramp, and Cold Springs Ln.; and Construction of New
Traffic Signals at Diamond Bar Blvd. and Maple Hill Rd. and
Pathfinder Rd. and Peaceful Hills Rd. Project.
Recommended Action: Approve.
Requested by: Public Works Division
6.6 Accept Resignation of Public Safety Committee Member Robert
Marvin.
Recommended Action: Accept.
Requested by: City Council
6.7 Amendment to Graffiti Removal Contract with Graffiti Control
Systems in the amount of $8,000.
Recommended Action: Approve.
Requested by: Planning Division
MAY 17, 2005 PAGE 4
6.8 Adopt Resolution No. 2005 -XX: Accepting an Irrevocable Offer of
Dedication for Road Purposes from Hidden Mana Corp. and
Lewis—Diamond Bar, LLC., for Property Located at the Southeast
Corner of the Intersection of Golden Spgs. Dr. and Grand Ave.
Recommended Action: Adopt and Authorize.
Requested by: Public Works Division
6.9 Approve Second Reading by Title Only and Adopt Ordinance No.
06(2005) Establishing Business Registration and Amending the
Diamond Bar Municipal Code.
Recommended Action: Approve and adopt.
Requested by: Planning Division
6.10 Approve Valley Vista Services' Rate Adjustments for CPI and
Disposal Costs.
Recommended Action: Approve.
Requested by: Public Works Division
6.11 Approve Waste Management's Rate Adjustments for CPI and
Disposal Costs.
Recommended Action: Approve.
Requested by: Public Works Division
6.12 Award of Professional Services Contract to Charles Group
International in the Amount of $29,500 for Land Planning and
Architectural Services Related to the Golf Course Gateway
Development Study.
Recommended Action: Award.
Requested by: Planning Division
6.13 Approve Payment of Additional Funds ($4,000) for the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Litigation.
MAY 17, 2005 PAGE 5
Recommended Action: Approve.
Requested by: Public Works Division
6.14 Adopt Resolution No. 2005 -XX: Requesting $69,047 of Los Angeles
County Aid to Cities Funds for the Grand Avenue Project — Phase 1.
Recommended Action: Adopt.
Requested by: Public Works Division
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None.
8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: None
9. COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS:
10. ADJOURNMENT:
Agenda No. 6.1.1
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
MAY 3, 2005
STUDY SESSION: Mayor Chang called the Study Session to order at
5:09 p.m. in Room CC -8 of the South Coast Air Quality Management
District/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA.
Present: Council Members Herrera. Zirbes, Mayor Pro Tem
O'Connor and Mayor Chang.
Also Present: Linda Lowry, City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City
Attorney; David Doyle, Assistant City Manager; James DeStefano, Assistant City
Manager; David Liu, Director of Public Works; Bob Rose, Community Services Director;
Linda Magnuson, Finance Director; Sharon Gomez, Senior Management Analyst; Fred
Alamolholda, Senior Engineer; Ken DesForges, MIS Technician; Ryan McLean,
Community Services Coordinator and Tommye Cribbins, Assistant City Clerk.
Discussion of Cable TV Franchise and Local Programming Needs
Pathfinder Road Beautification
Budget Calendar Discussion
Library
Public Comments on Study Session Items
1) Discussion of Cable TV Franchise and Local Programming Needs:
ACM/Doyle presented staff's report on the review of the City's cable television
franchise agreement with particular attention to Adelphia's obligations to provide
a base level of customer service and to provide studio facilities in D.B. He
reported that Adelphia has failed to provide proper studio facilities in D.B.
Accordingly the City can request that Adelphia provide the City with a payment of
$60,000 to the City for capital equipment purchases. However, Adelphia could
pass these costs along to subscribers on an amortized monthly basis. The cost
per subscriber would be approximately $0.19 per month for the next 29 months.
ACM Doyle also asked the Council if they were interested in creating a dedicated
revenue stream through the Adelphia franchise for enhanced programming on
DBTV. He indicated that the City could generate about $100,000 a year by
placing a $0.78 pass through fee on the Adelphia bill. The cable subscribers
would have to pay the pass through fee but would receive enhanced
programming on DBTV in exchange for that cost.
C/Herrera asked what the $100,000 would be used for and ACM/Doyle
responded that the City would secure the services of the company to provide and
MAY 3, 2005 PAGE 2 CC STUDY SESSION
develop programming, the content and format of which is yet to be determined.
C/Zirbes said he was not interested in having additional costs tacked on to his
cable bill that he felt was outrageous at the current cost of $87 per month. And he
was not convinced that Adelphia would be able to do anything that D.B. would
like for them to do based on their past performance. He wondered if there was a
way to include a revenue stream from Adelphia to the City within a franchise
agreement.
ACM/Doyle commented that Mt. SAC's response to the City's request to use
students to provide City channel programming was that they were interested but
did not have money, equipment, or staff but if D.B. would provide them with
grants they could help with the programming. Staff felt that this option did not
provide a reasonable alternative for programming services. Staff could discuss
possible financing options with Adelphia.
ACM/Doyle responded to C/Herrera that the City has one video camera that it
has used for some public safety information. It is not of the quality and standard
to provide adequate programming. In addition, there are no staff members who
are skilled in the operation of the camera and editing except on a very limited
basis.
MPT/O'Connor agreed with C/Zirbes that she would not like to have her monthly
cable bill increased. However, there were 10,000 subscribers who would be
watching DBTV and would therefore be obliged to pay for it and people who do
not subscribe to Adelphia cannot view DBTV.
M/Chang said he would prefer not to place additional charges on the viewer
because the monthly rate was already significant. He would like for Adelphia to
fulfill their promise for placement of high-speed data lines within the business
areas of the City. ACM/Doyle responded that he will try to persuade Adelphia to
assist the City in enhancing DBTV during upcoming franchise negotiations but it
was unlikely that Adelphia would agree.
2) Pathfinder Road Beautification
CM/Lowry stated that although this item appeared on the list of Council goals
there was no existing appropriation to deal with the work.
PWD/Liu reported that the Pathfinder Road Beautification project was identified
as one of the Council's objectives for this fiscal year. In order for staff to proceed
with planning and design work, there needed to be an appropriation of $14,000
for the project. A preliminary cost estimate of a block wall along the south side of
Pathfinder Road between Evergreen Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard
of approximately 1900 linear feet was $500,000 including design and
construction management services. David Evans and Associates recommended
that the first step should be to thoroughly review the physical limitations and
conditions along the entire stretch of Pathfinder Road to determine how this
specific objective would fit in with the overall conditions along Pathfinder Road.
MAY 3, 2005 PAGE 3 CC STUDY SESSION
Staff is seeking Council's input with respect to appropriation of funds for any
portion of the project.
MPT/O'Connor asked how many homes were along the affected portion of
Pathfinder Road. PWD/Liu said that no homes front Pathfinder. There are
approximately 20 homes between Evergreen Springs and Diamond Bar
Boulevard.
PWD/Liu responded to C/Herrera that the wall was proposed for the south side of
Pathfinder only.
C/Zirbes explained that his concern in bringing this matter to the Council was that
there were a number of different types of fences along Pathfinder that were in
shabby condition. One of the goals and objectives was that if the City was able to
get money from Congressman Miller the project would move forward. CM/Lowry
said that the money from Congressman Miller was given to the City for
construction on Grand Avenue and that no General Funds had been allocated to
Grand Avenue so there were no offsetting funds that could be used on the
Pathfinder project. C/Zirbes felt that both sides of Pathfinder Road should be
taken into consideration in order to tie it all together. He elaborated.
C/Zirbes explained to MPT/O'Connor that the residents up above own the
fencing.
MPT/O'Connor opined that this discussion was about the City of D.B. spending
public funds to improve private property and that there are four DB homeowners
who had not been in their homes since January because of a landslide. Those
homeowners would love to have $500,000 to fix the hillside. She felt it was up to
code enforcement to get the property owners to clean up the area on Pathfinder
Road and for the City to encourage the property owners to join together to
complete a uniform beautification of the area.
C/Zirbes agreed and said he would like to see what could be done to ensure a
full and complete beautification of the entire street, not just the block between
Evergreen Springs and Diamond Bar Boulevard.
M/Chang said that with regard to the City's current budget situation and other
items on the Council's list of goals it would be an undue burden to consider doing
both sides at this time unless some of the special funds could be reallocated.
PWD/Liu responded that a possibility was the landscaping assessment district.
However, there were inadequate reserves at this time. He agreed with
MPT/O'Connor that the property owners should be asked to clean up the areas in
and around the fencing.
C/Zirbes said he would like for the Council to consider working with David Evans
and Associates to determine what kind of plan could be implemented. He was
under the impression that the City had the funds to begin work on this project this
summer. CM/Lowry explained that in next year's budget there is an anticipated
appropriation for a portion of the first million for the Grand Avenue project that the
MAY 3, 2005 PAGE 4 CC STUDY SESSION
City believes it will receive from the Federal government. But that those funds
are dedicated to the Grand Avenue project.
C/Herrera asked if the City had received any kind of commitment from
Congressman Miller that he would be able to follow through on providing the
funds. PWD/Liu said that the $1 million was earmarked for Grand Avenue.
However, it appeared that the feds could obligate only $661,000 for the Grand
Avenue project. The $1.6 million was a separate request through the
Transportation Bill Re -Authorization that had not yet been authorized because
the bill must pass through the senate and two houses and the president must
sign it. Staff was not certain what would happen to the remaining $339,000.
PWD/Liu responded to M/Chang that the $14,000 for conceptual plans could
come from the Public Works budget.
C/Zirbes moved, C/Herrera seconded, to move forward with a conceptual plan for
Pathfinder Road from the westerly end of D.B. to Diamond Bar Boulevard
specifically from the SR 57 east with funding for the plan to be appropriated from
the Public Works budget.
M/Chang explained why he felt the project would be unaffordable for the City at
this time.
PM/Fong in response to a question stated that the City no longer allowed chain
link for new fencing. In the case of established properties the City could not
require the chain link be changed to a different type of fence. ACM/DeStefano
said that code enforcement could tell the private homeowners to deal with
accumulated trash in their back yard as well as the trash up against the fence.
Code enforcement could also talk with the homeowners about taking down the
high weeds. Code enforcement could monitor the area to make sure that it
remained in a well-maintained condition.
MPT/O'Connor reiterated that she found it difficult to consider spending $500,000
to get a block wall built. Instead, code enforcement should contact the
homeowners to see how many would be interested in fixing the fences and
whether they would agree to put up a block wall. She felt there were other more
important issues on the table such as the landslide mitigation.
Motion failed by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Herrera, Zirbes
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
3. Budget Calendar Discussion
CM/Lowry asked for concurrence to bring the proposed 2005/2006 FY budget
before the City Council on May 17 with adoption on June 7 or 21. She said that
the package would be available for Council review with the prior Friday agenda
MAY 3, 2005 PAGE 5 CC STUDY SESSION
packet.
C/Herrera recommended scheduling an alternate Tuesday study session on May
24 to begin at 4:00 p.m. for purposes of concentrating on the budget. M/Chang
suggested May 17 at 1:00 p.m. C/Zirbes asked for a 1:30 meeting. Council
concurred to meet on May 17 at 1:30 p.m. to discuss the budget.
ACM/Doyle asked if Council wanted to rank the goals within each category or to
list all of the goals numerically.
MPT/O'Connor felt that it would be prudent to take the new goals and see
whether they fit into the current goals or whether they should be eliminated.
M/Chang suggested one list in sequence.
C/Zirbes agreed with MPT/O'Connor that the new goals and objectives should be
listed and then ranked by the Council based on funds and time constraints.
ACM/Doyle said he would provide Council with a new list within a couple of days.
4. Library
CM/Lowry reported that MPT/O'Connor, C/Zirbes and ACM/Doyle met with
Supervisor Knabe to discuss possible funding for a new library.
C/Zirbes felt that initially Supervisor Knabe was opposed to discussing funding
for a new D.B. library but as the discussion evolved Supervisor Knabe was
somewhat amenable to looking at a variety of options including consideration of a
24,000 square foot facility for D.B., selling the current facilities and using it toward
the new libraries, closing the existing Hacienda Heights library, building a new
30,000 square foot facility in Hacienda Heights, and keeping the Rowland
Heights branch open. Supervisor Knabe said he would need about 30 days to
look into the matter and get back to D.B. with his decision.
MPT/O'Connor asked if staff followed up with a letter to Supervisor Knabe.
ACM/Doyle responded that he had not but that he left a message for Gail
Tierney, Knabe's Senior Assistant who is heading up the library project. He called
the County to see if they had heard anything. The County Librarian is in
Washington and will not be available until next week. MPT/O'Connor asked that a
follow up letter be sent to Supervisor Knabe outlining the content of the meeting
and how D.B. felt the matter was left at the end of the meeting. She agreed with
C/Zirbes about the meeting with Supervisor Knabe coming to the realization that
three small libraries could be pared down to two with the profit going toward
making two more affordable. Supervisor Knabe also indicated that he was not too
happy about putting a huge library at Schubarum Park. MPT/O'Connor said she
left the meeting feeling somewhat hopeful that the door was open to further
discussion.
C/Zirbes said staff also learned that Supervisor Knabe did not want a library
MAY 3, 2005 PAGE 6 CC STUDY SESSION
named for him.
M/Chang thanked MPT/O'Connor, C/Zirbes and ACM/Doyle for taking the time to
meet with Supervisor Knabe.
Public Comments on Study Session Items: None Offered.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to come before the City Council,
M/Chang adjourned the Study Session at 6:17 p.m.
Linda C. Lowry, City Clerk
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this day of , 2005.
WEN CHANG, Mayor
Agenda No. 6.1.2
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MAY 3, 2005
STUDY SESSION: Mayor Chang called the City Council Study Session to
order at 5:09 p.m. in Room CC -8 of the SCAQMD/Government Center Building, 21825
Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Discussion of Cable TV Franchise and Local Programming Needs
Pathfinder Road Beautification
Budget Calendar Discussion
Library
Public Comments on Study Session Items
M/Chang adjourned the Study Session to the Regular Meeting at 6:17 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Chang called the Regular City Council meeting
t o order at 6:35 p.m. in The Government Center/SCAQMD Auditorium, 21865 Copley
Dr., Diamond Bar, CA.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member Herrera led the Pledge of Allegiance.
INVOCATION: Ahmad H. Sakr, Ph.D., Islamic Education Center,
gave the Invocation.
ROLL CALL: Council Members Herrera, Zirbes, Mayor Pro
Tem O'Connor and Mayor Chang.
Staff Present: Linda Lowry, City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City
Attorney; David Doyle, Assistant City Manager; James DeStefano, Assistant City
Manager; David Liu, Director of Public Works; Bob Rose, Community Services Director;
Nancy Fong, Planning Manager, Ryan McLean, Sr. Management Analyst; and Fred
Alamolholda, Sr. Engineer.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Approved as presented.
1. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS:
1.1 Mayor Chang presented a Certificate of Recognition to Robert Gauthier,
resident and winner of a Pulitzer Prize (Public Service) for the series of
stories depicting the level of care to patients at the Martin Luther King Jr./
Drew Medical Center.
MAY 3, 2005 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL
1.2 Mayor Pro Tem O'Connor presented a Proclamation proclaiming May 2-8,
2005 as "Public Service Week" to Sgt. Chris Blasnek. Walnut/D.B.
Sheriff's Department.
1.3 Mayor Chang presented Josephine Pan with a Proclamation proclaiming
the month of May 2005 as "Asian Pacific American Heritage Month."
1.4 Council Member Herrera presented a Proclamation to Gregg Zimmerman,
Director of Operations, proclaiming the month of May 2005 as "Water
Awareness Month."
1.5 Council Member Zirbes presented Certificates of Recognition to the 2005
Cottontail Country Classic Tournament Committee members.
BUSINESS OF THE MONTH:
1.6 Mayor Pro Tem O'Connor presented a City Tile to Steve Loye, Vice
President accepting on behalf of Goodrich Corporation, Hoists & Winches
Power Systems; Business of the Month for May 2005.
2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: None
Offered.
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Ken Schafer, DBHS Swim Coach said that
while interest in swimming continues to grow there is no D.B. facility and
individuals who wish to partake in the sport must use the Walnut facility.
Mike Spence reported that D.B. has 112 swimmers on its team all of whom carry
a B+ or better GPA. The swim team has a lot to offer the community and with a
good pool the City could attract water polo teams from the region to hold
tournaments here. The pool could also be used for other community activities.
The City of Industry has offered $2.5 million to the school district and Industry
has now made the same offer to Chino Hills and it appears that Chino Hills will
accept the offer. Mr. Spence felt that a structure would look good on either the
D.B.H.S. campus or at Summitridge Park. The swim team is being short changed
by having to wait or share the Walnut facility with little kids during practice
sessions. Over the years many students have left D.B.H.S. for other high schools
so that they could take advantage of water polo and other swimming programs.
He asked the City and City Council to please reconsider having a swimming pool
in D.B.
Brittany Roberto, member of the D.B.H.S. swim team, asked the City Council for
its help in getting the City a swimming pool. Every weeknight the team practices
at Walnut school and must coordinate use of the facility with several other
groups. This year is D.B.'s best year in swimming. This year, much to the dismay
of the swimmers, Coach Shafer is retiring and it would be a wonderful legacy to
him if there were a pool built in his name. She knows that building and
maintaining a pool is very expensive but it would provide another community
MAY 3, 2005 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL
venue for activities and the pool could be rented out to club teams. The Division I
swim team competes at a very high level and a local pool would help the team
reach its full potential and would be a great asset to the City.
Sehna Choi and Shelly Song, swim team members, told the Council that it had
been difficult for them to be on the team during the past two years because they
were only able to practice during the evening. As a result it was very difficult to
maintain a high GPA when they had to study late into the evening. The D.B.H.S.
team is second in the league and if D.B. had a pool it would be very likely that
D.B. would be first in the league. It is also difficult to see banners for tennis,
badminton, soccer, football, etc. displayed at the high school when there is no
banner for swimming. The swim team does not enjoy the same level of respect
that other sport teams enjoy. In fact, until this year most people were not aware
that the high school had a swim team and a local pool would give the swim team
a sense of pride.
Patrick Murphy, Assistant Swim Coach, D.B Swim Team, said that like business,
the swim team needed change. This was the eighth year for the swim team
without a pool and as the heir apparent to the D.B. swim dynasty he was fearful
that the swim team would hit the wall at D.B.H.S. and would not be able to reach
first place status even though the talent to do so was available. Now is the time to
take a new direction at D.B.H.S. and he believed that incorporating that as a
vision with an aquatic complex would help the kids achieve their full potential.
Jessica Spence stressed the need for a pool at D.B.H.S. A pool would not only
benefit the high school and the swim team, it would also benefit the community.
Lydia Plunk thanked the City for supporting her first Windmill issue.
4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS: M/Chang responded to speakers
that the City Council included a Sports Complex on its goals list. Staff is working
to find both land and money to build facilities that the residents want.
C/Zirbes asked if the speakers had gone before the Walnut Valley School District
to voice their desire to have a pool and what type of response they had received
from the School Board.
5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — May 10, 2005 — 7:00 p.m.,
Auditorium, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
5.2 NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MEETING — May 10, 2005
— 7:00 p.m., Room CC -7, AQMD/Government Center, 21825 Copley Dr.,
neighborhood boundaries are Pathfinder Rd. on the north, westerly
boundaries, Brea Canyon Rd. on the south, and Diamond Bar Blvd. on the
east.
5.3 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING — May 12,
MAY 3, 2005 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL
2005 — 7:00 p.m., Hearing Board Room, AQMD/Government Center,
21865 Copley Dr.
5.4 CITY COUNCIL MEETING — May 17, 2005 — 6:30 p.m., Auditorium,
AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Zirbes moved, C/Herrera seconded to approve the
Consent Calendar as presented with the exception of Item 6.8. Motion carried by
the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
M/Chang
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS
6.1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Herrera, Zirbes,
None
None
6.1.1 Study Session of April 19, 2005 — As Submitted.
6.1.2 Regular Meeting of April 19, 2005 — As Submitted.
MPT/O'Connor,
6.2 RECEIVED AND FILED TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES — Regular Meeting of March 10,
2005.
6.3 RATIFIED CHECK REGISTER DATED MAY 3, 2005 IN THE AMOUNT
OF $938,383.31
6.4 RECEIVED AND FILED TREASURER'S STATEMENT FOR THE MONTH
OF MARCH 2005.
6.5 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-21: AUTHORIZING THE RENEWAL
OF THE GENERAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF
LOS ANGELES.
6.6 APPROPRIATED $25,000 FROM PROP A (TRANSPORTATION FUNDS)
FOR DEVELOPMENT OF ONLINE TRANSIT PASS SOFTWARE.
6.7 APPROVED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AWARDED
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $570,972 TO
MACADEE ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION; AND AUTHORIZED A
CONTINGENCY AMOUNT OF $57,000 FOR CONTRACT CHANGE
ORDERS TO BE APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER, FOR A TOTAL
AUTHORIZATION OF $627,972 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF TRAFFIC
SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS (LEFT -TURN SIGNALS) ON DIAMOND BAR
BLVD. AT SUNSET CROSSING RD.; NORTHBOUND SR57 ON RAMP
AND COLD SPRINGS LN; AND CONSTRUCTION OF NEW TRAFFIC
SIGNALS AT DIAMOND BAR BLVD. AND MAPLE HILL RD., AND
MAY 3, 2005 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL
PATHFINDER RD. AND PEACEFUL HILLS RD.
6.9 APPROVED LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS.
6.10 APPROPRIATED NECESSARY FUNDS FROM THE INTEGRATED
WASTE MANAGEMENT SPECIAL FUND AND APPROVED
CONSULTANT SERVICES CONTRACT WITH HILTON, FARNKOPF
AND HOBSON IN THE AMOUNT OF $35,300 FOR AUDIT OF SOLID
WASTE HAULER SERVICES AND AUTHORIZED A CONTINGENCY
AMOUNT OF $5,000, TO BE APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER,
FOR A TOTAL AUTHORIZATION AMOUNT OF $40,300.
6.11 APPROVED GENERAL FUND RESERVE APPROPRIATION FOR
PURCHASE OF COPIERS FOR CITY HALL IN THE AMOUNT OF
$35,000.
6.12 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-22: ACCEPTING AN
IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF DEDICATION FOR ROAD PURPOSES
FROM DIAMOND HILLS RANCH MAINTENANCE CORPORATION, THE
OWNER OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE TERMINUS OF
HIGHCREST DR.
MATTERS WITHDRAWN FROM CONSENT CALENDAR:
6.8 APPROVAL OF APPROPRIATION OF $8,000 FOR FY 2004/05
EXPANDED SUMMER DAY CAMP PROGRAM.
C/Herrera asked if the summer day camp program was open to other
individuals and if the fees charged would cover the cost of the program.
CM/Lowry responded affirmatively. The inclusion of the D.B. Chinese
School expands expenditures in the current year beyond what the
appropriation allows. However, the $8,000 appropriation will be offset by
$8,000 in generated revenue.
MPT/O'Connor moved, C/Zirbes seconded to approve the appropriation of
$8,000 for FY 2004/05 the expanded summer day camp program. Motion
carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Herrera, Zirbes, MPT/O'Connor,
M/Chang
None
None
MAY 3, 2005 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL
7.1 ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 2005-23: DETERMINING THAT
UNDERGROUNDING UTILITIES IS IN THE GENERAL PUBLIC
INTEREST AND ESTABLISHING THE BREA CANYON
RD/WASHINGTON STREET UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT.
SE/Alamolhoda reported that this item was to approve a resolution to
establish the Brea Canyon Rd at Washington St. underground utility
district as part of the Alameda Corridor East Construction Authority's Brea
Canyon Road grade separation project at Union Pacific/Metrolink, a $42
million project. The Cities of D.B. and Industry as well as Alameda
Corridor East Construction Authority have started a program to remove 13
power poles and all overhead wires and fixtures and install them
underground. The limits of the project within D.B. are as follows: On Brea
Canyon Rd. from the railroad tracks to approximately 800 feet south of
Washington St; on Washington St. approximately 400 ft. east of Brea
Canyon Rd. A total of 10 poles are scheduled for removal from both sides
of Brea Canyon Rd. and 3 poles on Washington. The overhead lines
belong to Edison, telephone companies and possibly cable companies. All
affected property owners were notified by direct notice, newspaper
advertisements and posted notices and were asked to attend tonight's
meeting. Construction is slated to commence late November or early
December. The City of Industry and Ace will coordinate the work and
approval of this resolution will also cause undergrounding of future
installations. There is no cost to D.B. residents for this project.
SE/Alamolhoda responded to C/Herrera that D.B. has several utility
districts. Before incorporation several were established and after
incorporation at least two or three were established.
PWD/Liu stated that the last underground district was along Diamond Bar
Blvd from Temple Ave on the north south to Gold Rush Dr.
M/Chang opened the Public Hearing.
With no one present who wished to speak on this item, M/Chang closed
the Public Hearing.
C/Zirbes moved, MPT/O'Connor seconded, to adopt Ordinance No. 2005-
23. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Herrera, Zirbes, MPT/O'Connor,
M/Chang
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
7.2 (a) APPROVE FOR FIRST READING ORDINANCE NO. 06(2005)
ESTABLISHING BUSINESS REGISTRATION AND AMENDING THE
MAY 3, 2005 PAGE 7 CITY COUNCIL
DIAMOND BAR MUNICIPAL CODE
(b) RESOLUTION NO. 2005-24: ESTABLISHING A FEE FOR
BUSINESS REGISTRATION AND BUSINESS REGISTRATION
RENEWAL AND AMENDING THE EXISTING FEE SCHEDULE TO
INCLUDE BUSINESS REGISTRATION FEES.
ACM/DeStefano stated that since incorporation in 1989 the City had
contracted through a General Services Agreement with the County of Los
Angeles to provide business license services for the D.B. There are about
200 types of businesses for which the County requires a license. The
overwhelming majority of those 200 businesses do not exist in D.B.
Instead, businesses usual to D.B. are restaurants, facilities that serve
alcohol for on-site and off-site consumption and other similar types of land
uses. Two years ago the County received about $28,000 for D.B.'s
licensing service. During several study sessions over the past two years
the City Council received information regarding business licensing and
decided to bring business registration to D.B. in July 2005 for the purposes
of determining what businesses occur in D.B. Staff believes there are
approximately 1500 to 1800 businesses in D.B. and the City would like to
learn about those businesses and provide them with a Certificate. In
exchange for the Certificate the City would receive information on the type
of business, business owner/operator, telephone numbers, contacts, etc.
The list of business operations would provide the City with an inventory
that could be provided to public safety services (police, sheriff and fire),
better establish who was doing business in the City and provide a means
by which the City could confirm the list of businesses within the two zip
codes to ensure that business taxes were being properly apportioned back
to the City from the State especially for home based businesses.
Additionally, staff could establish the business conforms to the City's
zoning. ACM/DeStefano emphasized that this registration was not
regulatory it was not a tax and was not a business license. This was in
fact a business registration offered for a low initial registration fee of $10
and a $10 annual renewal fee thereafter. He stated that the proposed fee
is substantially lower than fees charged by other cities in California. Mr.
DeStefano stated that businesses that are currently required to obtain a
County business license would continue to register their business with the
County . Staff is recommending that with adoption the resolution would
establish an annual renewal date 12 months from original certificate date
rather than all certificates coming due for renewal on January 1.
ACM/DeStefano responded to C/Herrera that the first year of the program
would be labor-intensive for staff. Subsequent years would not be because
of the implementation of tracking software that would be used by the City.
M/Chang opened the Public Hearing.
MAY 3, 2005 PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL
With no one present who wished to speak on this item, M/Chang closed
the Public Hearing.
ACM/DeStefano responded to C/Zirbes that failure to register a business
results in an initial doubling of the fee as indicated on Page 5, Section
5.200.120 A 1.
C/Zirbes felt it was important for the City to be able to account for the
businesses in the City for the sake of the consumers and it was also
important for the City to know who was conducting what type of business
in the neighborhoods for the sake of the residents. He said he found it
difficult to place a fee on a home-based business and he proposed that
both sections be approved with a change to the fee schedule for a zero
startup cost for home-based businesses and zero annual renewal. All
other businesses would pay a $20 initial fee and a $10 renewal fee.
MPT/O'Connor suggested the program be implemented as recommended
by staff and reviewed in one year for compliance and possible
consideration of a change in the fee structure.
M/Chang said that D.B. wanted to be a business -friendly community.
However, it would cost the City about $75 for each registration and he
would not feel comfortable with the City spending money on a program to
benefit the entire community by subsidizing the home-based businesses.
In addition, he felt it would burden staff to have differing criteria for
registration.
Council discussion ensued.
C/Zirbes moved, M/Chang seconded to approve for first reading
Ordinance No. 06(2005) establishing business registration and amending
the Diamond Bar Municipal Code. Motion carried by the following Roll Call
vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Herrera, Zirbes, MPT/O'Connor,
M/Chang
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
C/Zirbes moved, C/Herrera seconded to adopt Resolution No. 2005-24:
establishing a fee for business registration and business registration
renewal and amending the existing fee schedule to include business
registration fees with the following revision: That home-based businesses
be charged a zero initial fee and a zero renewal fee and that all other
businesses would be charged $20 for the initial fee and $10 each year
thereafter.
MAY 3, 2005 PAGE 9 CITY COUNCIL
MPT/O'Connor referred to Council Study Session Minutes for January 18,
2005 and said that during discussions the Council Members generally
agreed to the $10 fee. She felt that the resolution should stand as written
with the provision that the matter come back to the Council in one year for
further consideration.
C/Zirbes reiterated his desire to have the fees changed.
M/Chang stated that the Council had discussed this matter for two years
and felt that the Council had reached concurrence to lower the fee from
$75 down to $10 to be business -friendly in spite of the fact that the City
would be subsidizing the program.
Motion failed by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Herrera, Zirbes
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
MPT/O'Connor moved, M/Chang seconded to adopt Resolution No. 2005-
24: As presented by staff. Motion failed by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Herrera, Zirbes
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
CA/Jenkins suggested that M/Chang's recommendation to reschedule the
matter for Study Session was one alternative. Another alternative would
be that since the Ordinance would not take effect until 30 days after the
Second Reading and that the Council would have a 5t" member after June
7th, the Resolution could be put back on the June 21 agenda. A third
alternative would be to reach a compromise.
Council concurred to have the Second Reading placed on the June 21
agenda.
COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: None
9. COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS:
C/Zirbes understood the community's interest in having a swimming pool and a
sports complex. The City of Industry made an offer to D.B.H.S. that should be
considered by the Walnut Valley School District. Both land and money are scarce
at this time and careful consideration needs to be given to what amenities the
City can afford. Last week he and MPT/O'Connor met with Sup. Don Knabe to
discuss the possibility of a shared agreement for construction of a new library in
D.B. C/Zirbes said he expected the City would hear back from the Supervisor
MAY 3, 2005 PAGE 10 CITY COUNCIL
within the next 30 days. He thanked the Friends of the Library for allowing him to
participate in their Wine Soiree. The event was very well attended and he
congratulated everyone associated with the Soiree. He encouraged residents to
continue calling him with their recommendations and concerns.
C/Herrera attended the Council of African-American Parents Cultural Fair on
Saturday and it was a great event. She felt it was important for everyone to
remember his/her heritage. She also attended the Wine Soiree and it appeared
to be one of the most successful events ever presented by the Friends of the
Library. C/Herrera appreciated hearing from the D.B.H.S. coaches and
students/swimmers. She does not want residents to get the impression that a
swimming pool is not important to the City. The City Council has discussed this
matter for a number of years and it is part of the Sports Complex study. The City
is proud of what the students achieve and it is a matter of whether the City can
afford to provide all of the
amenities that it would like to have. Currently, there are other projects such as a
new library competing for City funds. A library could cost $9 million or more and a
sports complex and swimming pool $5 million or more and although the City has
good reserves it also has very serious economic development problems that
have to be addressed. D.B. is losing between $800,000 to $1.2 million per year in
the very near future and the City must bring in new business that will replace the
sales tax dollars that will be lost. It is a serious situation. As an example, the
Diamond Bar Center costs the City about $350,000 per year to maintain and
other facilities such as a library and a sports complex would require significant
ongoing maintenance and operational funds as well. D.B. is losing major tax
contributors and the State of California is withholding about $400,000 in tax
dollars a year that would otherwise come to the City. D.B. needs to invest the
money it has on hand to bring new businesses to the City so that it can afford to
do the things the residents want done. The City is off to a good start in its quest
to add new businesses such as Target and perhaps a Sears to replace Kmart.
MPT/O'Connor said it was her pleasure last Saturday to represent the Council at
the Arbor Day festivities at Pantera Elementary School. Everyone should be very
proud of the students and teachers. Each class gave a presentation and staff
provided six donated trees that the students planted at the school. Today she
attended the Pomona Unified School District's recognition ceremony during
which volunteers were given their community service awards. She hoped that the
City of Industry had made the same offer to fund a swimming pool to the Pomona
Unified School District and not just the Walnut School District. Diamond Ranch
High School might have room for a pool and she hoped that D.B. would pursue
that possibility as well. She apologized for not being able to attend the Counsel of
African-American Parents and the Friends of the Library Wine Soiree. Her
daughter played on an under 16 team in the AYSO tournament in Santa Clarita
this past weekend and despite playing short, her daughter's team tied the first
game and won the second game. With a full team on Saturday they were able to
win the tournament. Tomorrow night the Chamber of Commerce and League of
Women Voters will hold a Candidate Forum for candidates running in the Special
City Council election and Mr. Tye and Mr. Tanaka will be present to field
MAY 3, 2005 PAGE 11 CITY COUNCIL
questions. The forum will begin at 5:30 p.m. here in the SCAQMD/Government
Center Auditorium. She encouraged everyone to vote and any resident who
wishes to vote on an absentee ballot could do so.
M/Chang said that his colleagues had covered most every subject he had
intended to speak on this evening. He reiterated that the CAPS and Wine Soiree
events were great events. He applauded the Friends of the Library for their
efforts and believed the fundraising event was very successful with all of the
proceeds going to support the library. The guests of the Soiree talked about the
splendor of the Diamond Bar Center and the fact that it was a great showcase for
the event. Recently an Asian radio station that broadcasts throughout the entire
southern California area held an education fundraising event at the D.B.H.S.
campus. One hundred percent of the funds collected are used for scholarships
and education. Today he and MPT/O'Connor attended the Seniors Mother's Day
luncheon. With respect to business licensing, he and every other business in
Montclair pays a license fee based on a percentage of the annual company
revenue. Rather than a business license fee like the City of Montclair, DB would
only charge $10, reduced from the original $75 fee, to maintain a business -
friendly climate. He felt that after many months of discussion the Council should
move forward without further changes to the Business Registration program.
10. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Chang adjourned the
meeting at 8:33 p.m.
91IIII671
LINDA C. LOWRY, CITY CLERK
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this day of
WEN CHANG, MAYOR
Agenda No. 6.2
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 12, 2005
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman McManus called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. in the South Coast Air
Quality Management District/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive,
Diamond Bar, California 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Tye led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Chairman Joe McManus; Vice Chairperson Ruth Low;
and Commissioners Dan Nolan; Jack Tanaka; and Steve Tye.
Also present: James DeStefano, Assistant City Manager; Ann
Lungu, Associate Planner; Linda Smith, Development Services Assistant; 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 March 22, 2005.
C/Tye moved, C/Nolan seconded to approve the minutes of the Regular
Meeting of March 22, 2005, as presented. Motion carried by the following
Roll Call vote:
AYES
NOES:
ABSENT
COMMISSIONERS
COMMISSIONERS
COMMISSIONERS
10. OLD BUSINESS: None
Nolan, Tanaka, Tye, VC/Low,
Chair/McManus
None
None
APRIL 12, 2005 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
11. NEW BUSINESS:
6.1 Artwork in Public Places.
ACM/DeStefano stated that at the direction of the Planning Commission,
staff obtained an artwork inventory and current policy manual from the City
of Brea that deals with their 1 % for Artwork program" and kicks in with
projects that exceed $1.5 million construction valuation. He verified that
there is a provision in Diamond Bar's General Plan for artwork in public
spaces.
ACM/DeStefano responded to Chair/McManus that although most cities
have not done so, Diamond Bar could choose to incorporate single-family
residential construction in the resolution.
C/Nolan felt the Brea policy manual was well presented and found the
concept to be excellent and he found it especially intriguing that the
program would possibly contribute to increased property values. C/Nolan
asked how the community had reacted to the Cougar at Summitridge
Park. ACM/DeStefano said that as a result of private donations the City
Council accepted the artists rendering as a donation to the City.
C/Nolan said that overall he was in agreement with the concept of Brea's
plan. He would, however, suggest that the commission be made up of five
members rather than three. He encouraged the City to move forward to
adopt a policy similar to Brea's policy.
C/Low echoed C/Nolan's enthusiasm and felt that Brea's manual was
fabulous and that it was thoughtful and thorough. She also agreed with the
City's rationale for having such a project that it would increase property
values and distinguish the City. She did not see a downside for the
community and would like to have the program implemented. As she
stated during the last Commission meeting and C/Nolan reiterated there
are exciting projects currently underway in the City and it would be a good
idea to implement the program before the those projects obtained their
building permits.
ACM/DeStefano responded to Chair/McManus that staff would notify the
City Council that the Commission wished to move forward and get
approval from CM/Lowry to invest time and energy toward putting a
document together for the Commission's approval.
APRIL 12, 2005 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
12
C/Tye cautioned the Commission about adding burden to the Target
project, the condo project and the MCC project. C/Nolan felt C/Tye's point
was well taken. Diamond Bar has no downtown/epicenter. Perhaps
Diamond Bar could exclude problematic sites by waiving the fees. He
acknowledged that Diamond Bar has business development problems. He
failed to see how it would burden the Target project but felt it could burden
the project at the south end of town. C/Low suggested that in certain
cases the City could grant developers an extension of time to allow for 100
percent occupancy and positive cash flow in order to meet the 1%
commitment.
ACM/DeStefano responded to Chair/McManus that the City would
probably continue to see construction of custom single-family homes, a
few more condominiums, hillside tracts and very little else unless the Tres
Hermanos and the area between D.B. and Brea were to open up. On the
commercial side there was potential for new development at Kmart, Site D
and not much else. However, if this project were to move forward it would
not preclude the Commission's goal for providing artwork, it would more
likely be on an incremental approach basis. However, it was unlikely that
this undertaking would be in place in time to capture the Target project
and the residential project.
ACM/DeStefano stated that with the Commission's direction staff would
proceed as previously outlined. The Commission concurred.
PUBLIC HEARING(S):
7.1 Development Review No. 2005-09 — In accordance with Diamond Bar
Municipal Code Section 22.48, 22.38, 22.52 and 22.56, this was a request
to construct a two story, single family residence of approximately 10,640
gross square feet including porches, deck/covered patio, and five car
garage. The request included site improvements as well as a Minor
Variance approval for a series of retaining walls to a maximum eight (8)
feet exposed height in the rear yard, a Minor Conditional Use Permit
approval for a circular driveway and a Tree Permit approval to remove and
replace protected/preserved trees.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 1948 Flint Rock Road (Lot 97, Tract 30091)
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
PROPERTY OWNER: Christopher and Heidi Leu
1948 Flint Rock Road
APRIL 12, 2005 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
APPLICANT: Pete Volbeda
615 N. Benson Avenue, Unit C
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
DSA/Smith presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission
approval of Development Review No. 2004-29, Tree Permit No. 2004-12, Minor
Variance No. 2004-08 and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-05, Findings
of Fact, and conditions of approval as listed within the resolution.
C/Tye asked if staff was comfortable that the walls would be sufficiently
camouflaged. DSA/Smith responded to C/Tye that the walls were at the rear of
the property and that they would be somewhat visible and camouflaged with
hillside slope plantings.
VC/Low asked if the entire eight -foot retaining wall was above ground.
DSA/Smith responded that eight feet was the exposed height of the wall at its
maximum height. VC/Low asked where the residents who are opposed to the
tree permit resided in relationship to the project site. DSA/Smith pointed out that
Sandra Starkey and Louis Alvarado lived on Rusty Spur Rd., a considerable
distance from the property. DSA/Smith indicated to VC/Low that the guesthouse
was attached and had an entrance separate from the main structure. With this
approval the guesthouse cannot have a kitchen, etc., in accordance with the
covenant and agreement. In addition, these units cannot be sold separately.
C/Tanaka said he visited the site and found it to be very challenging. He was
surprised that such a large home could be built on the pad.
DSA/Smith concurred with C/Nolan that contrary to the statement contained in
the April 11 protest letter there was a large home on Flint Rock Road and there
were other vacant properties in the immediate area that would likely
accommodate large homes. The 10,000 square feet for the project site included a
very large deck, patio covers, etc., with livable area at approximately 8,000
square feet.
C/Nolan felt that the City should consider relocating trees instead of approving
replacement at 3:1 ratios. Chair/McManus said that it was very difficult to relocate
Oak trees. C/Nolan pointed out that the most public relocation of an Oak tree in
southern California was successful and he would like to push the envelope.
VC/Low agreed that the City should do everything possible to see that relocated
trees thrived. Chair/McManus pointed out that if the relocation effort were
APRIL 12, 2005 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
unsuccessful the City would lose out on the 3:1 replacement of boxes that were
much more likely to survive.
Chair/McManus opened the public hearing.
Pete Volbeda stated that this project includes a 13-14 foot high basement ceiling
and it was a challenge to get the first floor lowered in order to reduce the grading.
Initially, there were three walls in the rear and because it appeared "busy" he
agreed to two walls only. The three new oaks shroud the base of the house. He
said he would consult with his Arborist to see if it was possible to relocate the oak
tree to the side. If the oak tree does not survive the relocation, it shall be
replaced with three 24 -inch box trees. C/Nolan said he appreciated
Mr. Volbeda's gesture. Mr. Volbeda responded to C/Nolan that there was a
chance that they could grade down and come up sooner to reduce the height of
the walls.
C/Tanaka said he was impressed with the design of the house.
C/Tye said he appreciated Mr. Volbeda's effort to relocate the tree.
Chair/McManus closed the public hearing.
C/Nolan moved, VC/Low seconded to approve Development Review No. 2004-
29, Tree Permit No. 2004-12, Minor Variance No. 2004-08 and Minor Conditional
Use Permit No. 2005-05, with the amendment to Condition (gg) on page 12 to
include verbiage to attempt to replant the Oak tree or replace the Oak tree with
the required 3:1 ratio, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within
the draft resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS
NOES: COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS
Nolan, VC/Low, Tanaka, Tye,
Chair/McManus
None
None
13. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS AND INFORMATION ITEMS:
C/Tye said he hoped to see everyone at the City's 16' Birthday Party at Pantera
Park on Sunday, April 17.
C/Nolan echoed C/Tye's sentiments and said that the Diamond Bar Improvement
Association would sponsor the classic car show and beer booth.
APRIL 12, 2005 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
Chair/McManus said that unfortunately he would be out of town during the April
17 celebration. He asked if the community facilities district could be used in lieu
of redevelopment. ACM/DeStefano explained that in the late 70's early 80's Mello -
Roos Districts were popular as a vehicle for financing developer's requirements
for infrastructure and that the cost of the generally unpopular financing vehicle
was borne by the future homeowner. The City was approached by Lewis to
consider this type of financing vehicle. Generally speaking, City management has
opposed such a structure for a number of reasons. The City is gearing up for a
City Council study session on community facilities districts in May or June.
Typically, these financing vehicles apply to new construction.
14. STAFF COMMENTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
ACM/DeStefano stated that earlier this evening in his capacity as Hearing Officer
he approved architectural changes to the Vons Grocery Store on North Diamond
Bar Blvd. He explained the proposed project using the plan drawings. He said he
felt the contemporary architecture would set the stage for future development in
the City. Additionally, the entire parking lot area in front of Vons is scheduled for
90 degree parking and landscaping and a sign will be placed on the street. He
thanked PM/Fong, staff and Vons for pushing the envelope on this project
ACM/DeStefano responded to C/Tye that over the years staff has discussed the
possibility of Vons increasing its square footage. In fact, there have been
discussions about Vons and Sav-On swapping because Vons wants to be about
55,000 square feet — Sav-On is 53,000 square feet and Sav-On wants to be 25-
30,000 square feet and the current Vons store is about 25-28,000 square feet.
However, the companies could not agree on a swap.
C/Nolan reported that Vons was spending $100 million on the entire corporate
chain to brand the Safeway/Vons shopping experience. ACM/DeStefano pointed
out that an interesting new feature that would tend to capture additional shopping
time and dollars was the addition of a Starbucks' Kiosk in the central portion of
the store.
ACM/DeStefano reported that about two weeks ago staff brought a moratorium to
the City Council for their approval to prohibit a land use that eliminates the ability
for medical marijuana dispensaries to be created in the City. The moratorium was
enacted during the most recent City Council meeting. Next week staff will ask the
City Council to approve a 10'/2 month extension of the moratorium.
ACM/DeStefano stated that this year's Annual League of California Cities
Planning Commissioners Conference is being held in Pasadena.
APRIL 12, 2005 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION
ACM/DeStefano further stated that included within tonight's packet was staff's
report on Business Registration, a matter currently before the City Council. In
response to C/Nolan, ACM/DeStefano advised that for 16 years the County had
managed the City's business licensing of approximately 190 businesses in the
City. Several concerns regarding the application and administration led the City
to consider bringing it in-house. Staff believes there are between 1300 and 1800
businesses in the City. Therefore, in order to capture accurate information and
promote the businesses the City Council is contemplating business registration
with a small registration fee in conjunction with the County's business licensing.
C/Tye said that for years he has maintained an office in his home in connection
with his corporate employment and wondered if he would be subject to business
registration. He also wondered if $10 per registration would cover the cost of staff
to handle the program. ACM/DeStefano said that the $10 fee would not cover the
City's first year startup and would not cover subsequent costs.
11. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As listed in tonight's agenda.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission,
Chair/Nolan adjourned the meeting at 8:20 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
James DeStefano, Assistant City Manager
Attest:
Joe McManus, Chairman
Agenda No. 6.3
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
HEARING BOARD ROOM OF S.C.A.Q.M.D./THE GOVERNMENT CENTER
21865 Copley Drive
MARCH 24, 2005
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Grundy called the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting to order at
7:11 p.m. in the SCAQMD/Government Center Building Hearing Board Room, 21865
Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Chairman Grundy led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Chairman Dave Grundy and Commissioners Ling -Ling Chang, Benny
Liang and Marty Torres.
Vice Chairman Nancy Lyons was excused.
Staff Present: Bob Rose, Director of Community Services; Ryan Wright,
Recreation Supervisor; Bryan Petroff, Parks and Maintenance Supervisor; Alison
Meyers, Recreation Coordinator; Krista Berentis, CS Coordinator/Athletics, and Marisa
Somenzi, Administrative Assistant.
C. PRESENTATION OF YOUTH BASKETBALL SPORTSMANSHIP AWARDS —
RS/Wright.
RECESS: Chair/Grundy recessed the meeting at 7:14 p.m.
RECONVENE: Chair/Grundy reconvened the meeting at 7:34 p.m.
A. SELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR FOR THE PARKS AND
RECREATION COMMISSION.
Commissioner Torres nominated Commissioner Lyons to serve as Chair.
Nomination seconded by Commissioner Grundy.
Commissioner Liang nominated Commissioner Grundy to serve as Chair.
Commissioner Grundy respectfully declined the nomination.
There were no other nominations offered. Commissioner Lyons was unanimously
elected to serve as Chairperson of the Parks and Recreation Commission.
Commissioner Grundy nominated Commissioner Torres to serve as Vice Chair.
MARCH 24, 2005 PAGE 2 P&R COMMISSION
Commissioner Liang seconded the nomination. There were no other nominations
offered. Commissioner Torres was unanimously elected to serve as Vice
Chairperson of the Parks and Recreation Commission.
VC/Torres assumed the gavel.
B. INTRODUCED KRISTA BERENTIS, CS COORDINATOR/ATHLETICS—
RS/Wright.
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE: None Offered.
CALENDAR OF EVENTS: As presented in the agenda.
1. CONSENT CALENDAR
C/Grundy moved, C/Chang seconded, to approve the Consent Calendar as
presented. Without objection the motion was so ordered with Chair/Lyons being
absent.
1.1 Minutes of the February 24, 2005 Regular Meeting — as presented.
2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
2.1 Recreation Program Report — RSII/Wright
CSD/Rose announced that recreation program registrations are now being
accepted via the Internet through the City's website www.diamondbar.com
The June 29 summer concert is being sponsored by the Diamond Bar
Community Foundation.
2.2 Park Visit Transmittal Report — PMS/Petroff
2.3 Diamond Bar Community Foundation Oral Report — C/Chang
C/Chang reported that due to lack of quorum no meeting was held in
March. She attended the March 15 City Council meeting during which the
Council approved proposed changes to the Foundation bylaws.
2.4 City Birthday Party Oral Report — C/Chang
No report offered.
2.5 Library Task Force Oral Report
CSD/Rose stated that the message sign in front of the library was up and
running. The task force met and discussed the list of items for
recommendation to the City Council for upgrading the current facility.
Future discussions will include discussion of possible funding sources for
anew library facility. C/Grundy stated that on Monday, March 28 the task
force will meet with the consultant who handles library collections.
MARCH 24, 2005 PAGE 3 P&R COMMISSION
W
2.6 C.I.P. Program Report — CSD/Rose
a. Diamond Bar Center — First Anniversary of Grand Opening — March
20, 2005.
b. Sycamore Canyon Park ADA Retrofit Phase II — Bid Opening —
Tuesday, April 12 at 3:00 p.m.
CSD/Rose explained that due to plan check corrections the bid
opening may be set back about one week.
C. Starshine Park ADA Retrofit —
CSD/Rose stated that construction commenced Monday, March 21,
2005 and should be completed within 60 days.
d. Lots 1 and 61 — Proposed Sports Complex Site
CSD/Rose reported that this site would likely net out about 41 acres
for a facility, parking and amenities (six or seven soccer fields). He
visited the site today with a developer who builds sports complexes
for cities. The developer captures a portion of the site for
commercial with the remaining portion turned back to the City for
use as it deems appropriate.
CSD/Rose responded to
sports complex became
Commission.
OLD BUSINESS:
C/Grundy that as information about a
available he would bring it to the
3.1 Consideration of Change to Skate Park Rules to allow use of Scooters in
the Skate Park.
RS/Wright reported that staff researched this matter extensively and
asked CA/Jenkins for his comments as well. CA/Jenkins confirmed that
similar to roller blades and bikes the City was not legally exempt from
Razor injuries. A JPIA representative stated that so far there had been no
cases or lawsuits brought against cities involving Razors in skate parks
and until a claim was brought the JPIA would not take a stance, rather
provide only a recommendation to protect the City and its assets.
CA/Jenkins was concerned only about whether Razors would be any more
dangerous than a skateboard should they become flying objects. Laverne
and Claremont were aware of Razors in their parks and although the cities
do not condone their use it is unsupervised. Because of the lack of
immunity the cities indicate that they are hesitant to allow them in the
skate parks.
MARCH 24, 2005 PAGE 4 P&R COMMISSION
CSD/Rose responded to VC/Torres that the City did not allow bicycles in
the skate park.
C/Grundy said he had hoped that the City Attorney would submit a strong
statement for or against this type of activity because it would make the
Commission's job much easier. He was concerned that there was
insufficient information to permit the Commission to make a decision to
allow Razors in the skate park.
In response to VC/Torres, RS/Wright said that today he spoke with
representatives of Brea and Rancho Santa Margarita and their comments
were similar to the JPIA that there was no precedence for allowing Razors
in the skate park.
Lora Illig, 23568 Prospect Valley Drive said that her son and others had
submitted their comments to the Commission in January. She felt it was
very important for kids of her son's age to be able to participate in positive
activities. They like to scooter and they are good at it. However, they are
not allowed to use them anywhere in the City. She asked the Commission
to consider allowing Razors in the skate park.
Rick Illig said that the Razors stayed in the hands of the user and when
the user fell the Razor stayed with the rider. On the other hand,
skateboards fly free when kids fall. He would be very disappointed if the
kids were not allowed to participate with their scooters.
VC/Torres asked if scooters were allowed or disallowed at this time.
CSD/Rose responded that the code specifically disallows scooters in the
skate park, a decision that was rendered upon opening of the skate park.
Currently, officers have a right to request that kids using scooters leave
the skate park or issue a citation if they feel it is necessary. He believed
that Razor scooters and bicycles have been used at the skate park. Some
have been cited and some have not. Although information regarding this
meeting was posted at the skate park staff received no telephone calls
from interested or concerned residents.
VC/Torres said he agreed with C/Grundy that he hoped the City would
take a position one way or the other on this issue.
C/Chang asked for additional time to consider this request. C/Grundy said
that regardless of the timeframe he would not be comfortable rendering a
policy decision with no recommendation for or against from the City and
the City Attorney and he wanted to know if there was a chance that staff
could provide additional information that would allow the Commission to
make an informed decision.
CSD/Rose responded that the next opportunity for staff to speak with the
coalition would be in two months. In the interim staff could send out a
letter to the members asking for additional feedback.
MARCH 24, 2005 PAGE 5 P&R COMMISSION
C/Grundy asked if JPIA had specific exclusions in coverage for certain
activities and CSD/Rose responded "no."
VC/Torres felt that Razor scooters might present a hazardous activity and
why would cities not move to have immunity for bike riding and/or scooters
in skate parks? CSD/Rose explained that the State Legislature legislates
whether it is a hazardous activity. Bicycling, skateboarding, skiing,
skydiving, trick bicycle riding, etc. are defined under state code as
"hazardous recreational activities." Under state code hazardous
recreational activities are limited from liability if an individual is 18 years
old or older. The uniqueness of skateboarding is that the state legislature
lists skateboarding down to the age of 14 for limited liability. If a child age
14 breaks a wrist in the skate park, for instance, as long as the City
constructed the skate park to industry standards the City would face no
liability. This would not be the case for other activities. The only reason it
works for skateboarding is that there were so many issues with
skateboarders using commercial parking lots, streets, etc. that agreement
was reached at the state level that it would be better to take a chance on a
few kids being hurt than put them at greater risk in the public arena.
VC/Torres asked if staff saw a conflict in allowing scooters in the skate
park along with skateboards. CSD/Rose said he did not see a built-in
conflict. One of the main reasons scooters were listed at the beginning
when the skate park first opened was because staff witnessed young kids
aged 7 and 8 on scooters. The bottom of the Razor was scraping the
concrete and Purkiss-Rose was concerned that the scooters would break
the concrete. Likewise, the designer was concerned about bicycles
because the sprocket breaks the concrete. Someone who is experienced
in the use of scooters would not damage the concrete. Skateboards also
have metal parts and when the user grinds his skateboard the bolt on the
axel damages the concrete. In his opinion, it was unlikely that scooters
would cause any more damage than skateboards.
Rick Illig said that the scooter riders are currently using commercial
parking lots and streets. If they were able to use the skate park it would
provide a safe arena and cut down on the safety risks. CSD/Rose
explained that immunity for skate parks for minors is that 1) cities
supervise the skate park during hours that it is open for use or 2) cities do
not supervise the skate park and post and enforce the rules. JPIA says
that in order to provide the safest possible facility with respect to liability
cities should require that any minor under 14 sign a waiver and that the
City should maintain that waiver on file prior to allowing that individual to
use the skate park. In order to enforce this, a staff person would have to
be present to enforce the rules during hours when the park was open.
Under this scenario the City would be liable for any use whether it was
authorized or unauthorized.
C/Grundy recommended that staff ask the City Attorney to consider these
two scenarios and make a specific recommendation to the Commission
MARCH 24, 2005 PAGE 6 P&R COMMISSION
about the viability of posting rules that state "Razors are not allowed
unless you have filed a waiver of liability with the City." He also wanted to
know if CA/Jenkins felt this would provide the City with adequate
protection.
CSD/Rose cautioned the Commission that whereas Razor scooters would
not interfere with the use of the skate park, bicycles would interfere unless
there were specific hours set aside for bicycling only.
C/Chang felt that in retrospect scooters and skateboards were very
similar. In fact, having used a scooter she felt skateboards were more
dangerous.
C/Grundy moved, C/Liang seconded to continue the matter to the April 28
meeting with the recommendation that staff follow up with CA/Jenkins for
responses prior to the meeting as well as attempt to find other cities that
allow scooters in skate parks. Without objection, the motion was so
ordered with Chair/Lyons being absent.
3.2 Damage to Parks due to Illegal Vehicle Entry
In response to C/Grundy, CSD/Rose explained that the strongest law is
the California Vehicle Code that calls out a $300 fine plus damages. The
City Code terms this type of damage an infraction and the first offense is
$100, $200 for the second and $500 for the third offense. C/Grundy
wanted to know what prevented the City from having a very aggressive
penalty such as $1,000 or $5,000 and would it be enforceable?
C/Grundy suggested that the City reconsider the City Code penalty for this
type of offense, re -codify it as a misdemeanor and increase the amount of
penalty.
3.3 Youth Master Plan
C/Grundy recommended that Commissioners study the Claremont plan
before making a decision on the revised D.B. plan. He further
recommended that the Commission schedule a study session to reach a
decision about the plan based on a thorough study of both documents
prior to the meeting. VC/Torres concurred.
The Commission agreed to schedule a study session for Wednesday,
April 13 at 7:00 p.m., location to be announced.
4. NEW BUSINESS:
4.1 Project List for the 2005/06 FY Budget.
CSD/Rose asked if the Commissioners felt any of the listed items should
be deleted or given priority. Peterson Park should include removal of
MARCH 24, 2005 PAGE 7 P&R COMMISSION
poison Oak along the trail. He reported that the portable building at
Sycamore Canyon Park would soon be removed due to its poor condition.
Commissioners concurred to include Peterson Park poison Oak removal
along the trail. C/Liang said that from personal experience the poison Oak
should absolutely be removed for the protection of the children. He
wondered why the City Council would not consider this a priority budget
item.
C/Liang urged CSD/Rose to erect a sign warning people about the
mudslide at Sycamore Canyon Park because in his opinion, the yellow
tape was not sufficient.
C/Grundy asked if the list was complete and CSD/Rose said there was
some concern about a guardrail along the access road from Grand
Avenue to the D.B. Center. He believed the item was included in the
Public Works budget list because it was a traffic issue.
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/Liang asked if staff contacted the County
Department of Flood Control regarding the handrail. CSD/Rose responded yes
and that it had been taken down. Staff will get back in touch with the County to
discuss reinstallation.
C/Grundy asked for an update on negotiations regarding the synthetic turf at
Lorbeer and whether discussions had begun with the Walnut Valley Unified
School District. CSD/Rose responded that staff had not begun discussions with
the Walnut School District and that CM/Lowry would be in touch with Patrick
Leier to further discuss this matter.
C/Grundy reported that Jeff Hull was experiencing health concerns. Mr. Hull
served on this Commission and was a member of the Diamond Bar Community
Foundation and C/Grundy recommended that the Commission send a bouquet of
flowers with a card expressing the Commission's well wishes.
VC/Torres thanked outgoing Chairman Grundy for his outstanding service to the
Commission and the City.
ADJOURNMENT: Upon motion by C/Chang, seconded by C/Liang and there being no
further business before the Parks & Recreation Commission, VC/Torres adjourned the
meeting at 9:21 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Bob Rose, Secretary
Attest:
MARCH 24, 2005 PAGE 8 P&R COMMISSION
Marty Torres, Vice Chairman
Agenda No. 6.4
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 # 6.5
Meeting Date: May 17, 2005
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
TITLE: AMENDMENT WITH WARREN C. SIECKE TRANSPORTATION
AND TRAFFIC ENGINEERING FOR CONSTRUCTION
INSPECTION SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $57,000.00 PLUS
A CONTINGENCY AMOUNT OF $5,700.00 FOR CHANGE
ORDERS TO BE APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER, FOR A
TOTAL AUTHORIZATION AMOUNT OF $62,700.00 FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS (LEFT -
TURN SIGNALS) ON DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD AT SUNSET
CROSSING ROAD, NORTHBOUND SR -57 ON RAMP, AND
COLD SPRING LANE; AND CONSTRUCTION OF NEW TRAFFIC
SIGNALS AT DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD AND MAPLE HILL
ROAD AND PATHFINDER ROAD AND PEACEFUL HILLS ROAD
PROJECT.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The traffic signal modifications and full intersection signalizations were approved as part
of the FY 2004-05 budget. The budget for this project is as follows:
Prop C Funds $636,000
General Funds (Prop A Funds Sale Swap) $140,000
Total Project Funding $776,000
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Based on the warrant studies, three intersections were recommended for the 2004-05
CIP budget for left -turn modifications and two intersections were included for full
signalization. The left -turn modifications are for the intersections of Diamond Bar
Boulevard at Sunset Crossing Road, Northbound SR -57 On Ramp, and Cold Spring
Lane. Diamond Bar Boulevard at Maple Hill Road and Pathfinder Road at Peaceful Hills
Road have been approved for full signalization.
At the May 3, 2005 meeting, the City Council awarded the construction contract to
Macadee Electrical Construction in the amount of $570,972.00. Staff requested Warren
C. Siecke to submit a proposal to provide construction administration and inspection
during construction of the project.
PREPARED BY:
Sharon Gomez, Senior Administrative Analyst Date prepared: May 16, 2005
REVIEWED BY:
David G. Liu, Director of Public Works James DeStefano, Assistant City Manager
Attachment: Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement
2
AMENDMENT NO. 11
TO THE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Amendment No. 11 to the Agreement is made and entered into this 17th
day of May, 2005, between the CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, a Municipal Corporation
(hereinafter referred to as "CITY") and WARREN C. SIECKE TRAFFIC &
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT").
A. RECITALS:
(i) The CITY has heretofore entered into an Agreement, with
Consultant to provide Professional Traffic Engineering Services, which the Agreement
was dated October 16, 2001.
(ii) The CONSULTANT submitted a proposal, a full, true and correct
copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" to provide construction administration
and inspection services for the Traffic Signal Installation at Pathfinder Road/Peaceful
Hills Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard/Maple Hill Road and for the Traffic Signal
Modifications at Diamond Bar Boulevard/Cold Spring Lane, Diamond Bar Boulevard/SR
57 Northbound On -Ramp, and Diamond Bar Boulevard/Sunset Crossing Road.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between CITY and CONSULTANT:
Section 1: Section 1.A. Scope of Services of the Agreement is hereby
amended to read as follows:
"A. Scope of Services. The nature and scope of the specific
services to be performed by Consultant are as described in Exhibit "A", dated May 4,
2005, for construction administration and inspection services for the Traffic Signal
Installation at Pathfinder Road/Peaceful Hills Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard/Maple
Hill Road and for the Traffic Signal Modifications at Diamond Bar Boulevard/Cold Spring
Lane, Diamond Bar Boulevard/SR 57 Northbound On -Ramp, and Diamond Bar
Boulevard/Sunset Crossing Road.
Section 2: Section 3 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as
follows:
Compensation. "City agrees to compensate Consultant for
each service which Consultant performs to the satisfaction of City in compliance with the
schedule set forth in Exhibit "A". Payment will be made only after submission of proper
invoices in the form specified by City. Total payment to Consultant pursuant to this
Agreement shall not exceed Fifty-seven thousand ($57,000.00) dollars."
1
Section 3: Each party to this Amendment No. 11 acknowledges that no
representation by any party which is not embodied herein nor any other agreement,
statement, or promise not contained in this Amendment No. 11 shall be valid and
binding. Any modification of this Amendment No. 11 shall be effective only if it is in
writing signed by the parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this
Agreement No. 11 as of the day and year first set forth above:
APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONSULTANT:
WARREN C. SIECKE
City Attorney Warren C. Siecke, P.E.
ATTEST:
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
Linda C. Lowry, City Clerk Date
2
Agenda # 6.6
Meeting Date: May 17, 2005
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
TITLE: Accept Resignation of Public Safety Committee member Robert Marvin
RECOMMENDATION:
Captain Mike Kwan of the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department recommends the City Council accept
Robert Marvin's resignation from the Public Safety Committee.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no financial implication associated with this action.
BACKGROUND:
The Public Safety Committee is comprised of representatives from Diamond Bar, Walnut and the
unincorporated area of Los Angeles County. The Committee meets monthly and reviews the public
safety information associated with the Diamond Bar/Walnut station.
DISCUSSION:
Recently the City received an e-mail from Mr. Marvin indicating his desire to resign from the Public
Safety Committee. In anticipation of the Council's acceptance of the letter of resignation, the City has
been advertising the vacancy and encouraging interested parties to apply. To date, we have not
received any applications for the position. As soon as an application is received, we will forward to
the Council for consideration and schedule the appointment on a future agenda.
PREPARED BY:
Assistant City Manager
CITY COUNCIL
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
Agenda # 6.7
Meeting Date: May 17, 2005
AGENDA REPORT
TITLE: Amendment to Graffiti Removal Contract with Graffiti Control Systems
in the amount of $8,000.
Recommendation: Approve.
Background: On May 19, 1993, the City Council first awarded a contract to Graffiti Control
Systems for graffiti removal in Diamond Bar. In July 2004 the City council approved an extension of
the contract for Fiscal Year 2004-2005 in the amount of $35,000.
In the past few months graffiti activity has increased throughout local cities as well as in the City of
Diamond Bar. As a result it is necessary to increase the current contract with an additional
appropriation of $8,000 for use during the remainder of FY 2004-2005. This amount should be
sufficient for graffiti removal services through June 30, 2005. The proposed contract amendment will
be funded via a budget transfer from the Planning Division to the Neighborhood Improvement
Division. The amendment will increase the total FY 2004-2005 contract amount with this contractor to
$43,000. The Sheriff's Department is aware of the increase in graffiti and is working toward a
solution.
Prepared by
James DeStefano
Assistant City Manager
Attachment: Letter of Agreement
Agenda: 6.8_
Meeting Date: May 17, 2005
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
1959
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
TITLE: RESOLUTION NO. 2005 -XX ACCEPTING AN IRREVOCABLE OFFER
OF DEDICATION FOR ROAD PURPOSES FROM, HIDDEN MANA
CORP. AND LEWIS-DIAMOND BAR, LLC., THE OWNERS OF THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE
INTERSECTION OF GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE AND GRAND AVENUE
RECOMMENDATION:
Accept and authorize the Director of Public Works to sign the Irrevocable Offer of
Dedication.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
This action has no financial impact on the City.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
As part of the Traffic Mitigations required for the proposed commercial and residential
development at the southeast corner of the intersection of Grand Avenue and Golden
Springs Drive, a second right hand turn lane from northbound Golden Springs Drive to
eastbound Grand Avenue as well as an acceleration/deceleration lane along eastbound
Grand Avenue will be constructed. In order to proceed with the construction and include
these proposed improvements into the public street system, portions of the property at
the southeast corner of the intersection must be dedicated to the City.
Hidden Mana Corp. and Lewis -Diamond Bar, LLC have prepared the attached Legal
Descriptions, Exhibits A as well as the Grand Avenue and Golden Springs Drive
dedication maps, Exhibits B, which have been reviewed by staff. The documents
conform to the City standards and staff recommends Council to accept this offer of
dedication. The property owner has executed the attached Irrevocable Offer for the
City's approval and acceptance.
PREPARED BY:
Kimberly Molina, Assistant Engineer
REVIEWED BY:
David G. Liu
Director of Public Works
James DeStefano
Assistant City Manager
Attachments: Aerial Map
Resolution No. 2005 -XX
Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for Road Purposes
RESOLUTION 2005 -XX
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
ACCEPTING AN IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF DEDICATION FOR ROAD
PURPOSES.
A. RECITALS:
(i) WHEREAS, Hidden Mana Corp. and Lewis -Diamond Bar, LLC are the
owners of the properties located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Grand
Avenue and Golden Springs Drive and have offered the City of Diamond Bar a
dedication for such portions of property more particularly described in Exhibits A and B
of the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for Road Purposes attached hereto;
(ii) WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reviewed, approved and recommends
acceptance of the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for Road Purposes; and
(iii) WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the acceptance of this offer and the
adoption of this resolution have occurred.
B. RESOLUTION:
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR,
CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby find that
all of the facts set forth in the recitals of this resolution are true and correct.
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby accepts
the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for Road Purposes attached hereto from Hidden
Mana Corp., and Lewis -Diamond Bar, LLC and consents to recordation of this offer of
dedication.
Section 3. The City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar is hereby authorized and
directed to cause the Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for Road Purposes to be recorded
on behalf of the City in the Office of the County Recorder and to execute any and all
other documents as may be necessary or convenient to effect the recordation, and to
certify to the adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of May, 2005.
Wen Chang, Mayor
ATTEST:
Linda C. Lowry, City Clerk
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 a regular meeting of the
City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 17'" day of May, 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
Agenda # 6.9
Meeting Date: May 17, 2005
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
TITLE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 06 (2005) ESTABLISHING BUSINESS
REGISTRATION AND AMENDING THE DIAMOND BAR MUNICIPAL CODE.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve second reading by title only and adopt Ordinance No. 06 (2005).
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
On May 3, 2005, the City Council conducted a hearing on Ordinance No. 06 (2005) which provides for
the establishment of a City Business Registration Program. First reading of the Ordinance occurred
on May 3, 2005. Upon approval of second reading, the Ordinance will be effective July 1, 2005.
PREPARED BY:
Ann J. Lungu, Associate Planner
REVIEWED BY:
Nancy Fong, Planning Manager
Attachment:
Ordinance No. 06 (2005)
James DeStefano, Assistant City Manager
ORDINANCE NO. 06 (2005)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING BUSINESS REGISTRATION
AND AMENDING THE DIAMOND BAR MUNICIPAL CODE
The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby ordain as follows:
Section 1. Title 5 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended by adding thereto a new Chapter
5.200 to read as follows:
Chapter 5.200. Business Registration
Division 1. General Regulations
Section 5.200.010. Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this title, shall have the meanings ascribed to
them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
Business means any employment avocation, occupation, profession, trade, calling, lawful game,
show, exhibition, event, venture, fund-raising activity, commercial enterprise, company, corporation,
joint enterprise, place of business, partnership or other activity or enterprise engaged in for gain,
profit, benefit, advantage, or livelihood, whether or not a gain, profit, benefit, advantage or livelihood is
earned by such business.
Branch Establishment means a location where a business is conducted in addition to its main or fixed
place of business.
Business Registration means a process provided for in this chapter by which each business owner
having a business or is doing business in the City is required to provide general information to the
City.
Business Registration Certificate means a written statement issued by the City to a business owner
as evidence of registering a business in the City.
City means the city of Diamond Bar.
Home Based Business means a business conducted within a single-family residential dwelling unit or
residential site, employing occupants of the dwelling unit, with the business activity being subordinate
to the residential use of the property.
Person means and includes any business owner, individual, firm, co -partnership, joint venture,
association, corporation, estate, business trust, or any other group or combination acting as a unit.
Premises means all lands, structures, places and also the personal property, equipment and
appurtenances connected or used in any business.
Section 5.200.020. Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to establish a regulatory mechanism whereby the City may maintain
accurate record of businesses conducting business in the City, for statistical purposes and to assist in
zoning compliance.
Section 5.200.030. Business Registration and Fee Required.
A. Business Registration.
1. No person shall conduct any business in the City without first having obtained a
Business Registration Certificate, paid the applicable business registration fee and
complied with any and all applicable provisions of this code.
2. When a business registration fee is imposed upon any business pursuant to this chapter
and such business is conducted at one or more fixed place of business and one or more
branch establishment, the fee shall be computed as if each fixed place of business and
branch establishment are separate and independent.
(a) A separate Business Registration Certificate shall be obtained for each business
location and for each separate type of business at the same location.
3. A Home Based Business shall be required to obtain a Business Registration Certificate
prior to conducting business within a residential dwelling unit or on residential property.
4. In any business where a county, state, federal license is required, such license shall be
shown to the City before a Business Registration Certificate is issued.
5. A Business Registration Certificate shall not be issued to a business which requires
Workers' Compensation Insurance until satisfactory proof of having Workers'
Compensation Insurance is provided to the City.
B. Fee Required.
1. Every person engaging in business in the City shall pay a business registration fee as
prescribed by resolution adopted by the City Council.
2. The business registration fee is not a revenue raising device, but shall bear a
reasonable relationship to the service to be performed by the City and the costs incurred
by the City in reviewing, processing and action upon the application.
3. The City Council shall, from time to time, review the resolution fixing the business
registration fee and shall revoke, modify, adjust, add or determine any amount or rate of
such business registration fee.
Section 5.200.040. General Application Procedures.
A. Every person operating a business in the City shall apply to obtain a Business Registration
Certificate. Upon receipt of a completed application and any fee required, the City shall
process the application and issue a Business Registration Certificate. The application may be
reviewed by other City departments or governmental agencies to determine if the business
premises to be occupied meet the requirements of federal, state, and local laws.
B. Contents of Application.
1. Each business registration application shall contain the following:
(a) Business name;
(b) Business address;
(c) Mailing address;
(d) Phone number;
(e) Fax number;
(f) Employer I.D. Number (or Social Security number);
(g) State resale permit;
(h) State employer I.D. number;
(i) State contractors/business and profession license number (if applicable);
(j) Type of business being conducted;
(k) Days and hours of operation:
(1) Start date;
(m) Type of ownership;
(n) Owners or principal officers;
(o) Description of all vehicles and mechanical equipment owned by or under the
control of the business.
(p) Business license number;
(q) Business Registration fee paid;
(r) Health permit number;
(s) Workers' Compensation Insurance Policy number, date and date of expiration if
applicable; and
(t) Such other information as may be required by the application form or requested
by the City for enforcement and administration of this chapter.
Section 5.200.050. Contents of Business Registration Certificate.
A. Upon the payment for business registration, the City shall issue to the applicant a Business
Registration Certificate which shall contain the following:
1. Type of business;
2. Name of business
3. Business location;
4. Business tax number;
5. Business owner;
6. Expiration date;
7. Amount of fee paid for business registration; and
8 Such other information as deemed necessary by the City.
Section 5.200.060. Annual Renewal of Business Registration.
A. Business registration fees shall be due and payable annually in advance.
B. Any person applying to renew a business registration shall submit to the City a completed
renewal application and pay the renewal fee. Business Registration Certificates shall be
renewed annually. Renewal shall occur prior to the last day of the month of the following year
that the Business Registration Certificate was issued.
C. If deemed necessary, the City may establish alternative registration periods for individuals or
businesses. In no instance shall a registration period extend for more than one year or less
than one day.
Section 5.200.070. Refunds.
No business registration fees or penalties collected shall be refundable.
Section 5.200.080. Duplicate Business Registration/Modification to Business Registration/ Transfer
of Business Registration.
A. Duplicate Business Registration. Upon filing a statement indicating that a Business
Registration Certificate has been lost of destroyed, and after paying a fee, a duplicate
Business Registration Certificate shall be issued by the City.
B. Modification to Business Registration. Where a Business Registration Certificate is issued
authorizing a person to engage in a business under a particular business name at a particular
location, the Business Registration Certificate may be amended to reflect the modification after
paying the business registration fee.
C. Transfer of Business Registration Certificate. Upon change of ownership, a Business
Registration Certificate is transferable subject to the filing of a new application and paying the
business registration fee.
Section 5.200.090. Business Registration Fee Received by Mail.
Whenever any payment, statement, report or other communication is received after a deadline
prescribed by this chapter, but is received in a sealed envelope with a postmark dated on or before
such deadline, the City may regard such payment, report or other communication as having been
received within the appropriate time frame.
Section 5.200.100. Posting and Keeping Business Registration Certificate.
A. Any person engaging in business at a fixed location or branch establishment in the City shall
keep a Business Registration Certificate posted in a conspicuous place upon the premises
where the business is carried on.
B. Any person engaging in business, but not operating at a fixed location or branch establishment
in the City, shall be in possession of a Business Registration Certificate at all times while on
such business in the City.
Section 5.200.110. Authority to Enforce/Entry to Inspect.
A. Authority to Enforce. The City shall have authority to enforce each of the provisions of this
chapter. The Los Angeles County Sheriff Department and other City departments shall render
assistance in the enforcement of this chapter as may be necessary. The City Attorney is
authorized to file a complaint against any persons found in violation of this chapter.
B. Entry to Inspect. The City, deputy sheriffs, fire inspector, an other City officers empowered to
enforce the provision of this chapter, shall have the power and authority to enter into a
business, free of charge and at any reasonable time, and required to see the Business
Registration Certificate posted in a conspicuous place upon the premises. If the business does
not have a Business Registration Certificate and/or posted Business Registration Certificate,
the business owner is guilty of a misdemeanor.
Section 5.200.120. Penalties for Delinquency/Action to Collect.
A. Penalties for Delinquency. Any person engaging in business in the City who fails to pay the
appropriate business registration fee shall be subject to the following penalties:
1. For failure to pay a business registration fee when due, the City shall double the fee on
the day following the last day of each consecutive thirty day interval following the due
date while the fee remains unpaid.
2. For failure to secure a Business Registration Certificate to engage in business, the
business registration fee shall be due and payable from the first date the person
engaged in the business together with applicable penalties provided in subsection A. 1.
of this section.
B. Action to Collect. Notwithstanding subsection A.1. of this section, should court action be
required to collect any business registration fee and/or penalties, an additional penalty shall be
charged equal to the cost incurred by the City for court action, including attorney fees. All
penalties shall be added to the business registration fee and shall become due and payable
along with the delinquent business registration fee.
Section 5.200.130. Withholding a Business Registration Certificate.
The City shall withhold a Business Registration Certificate to engage in business from any person
when there are pending violations of any City code against such person and/or business applying
for a Business Registration Certificate, or when a debt is owed to the City as a result of a violation
of this Code.
Section 5.200.140. Appeal.
Any person aggrieved by any decision of the City with respect to the issuance or denial of a
Registration Certificate shall have the right to appeal to the City Council by filing an appeal with
the City Clerk within ten (10) days of the date of the action being appealed and paying any appeal
fee determined by resolution of the City Council.
Section 5.200.150. Remedies Cumulative.
All remedies prescribed in this chapter shall be cumulative and the use of one or more remedies
by the City shall not prohibit the use of any other remedy for the purpose of enforcing the
provisions of this chapter.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR.
Wen P. Chang, Mayor
2005, BY THE CITY
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 passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Diamond Bar held on the day of , 2005 by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members:
NOES: Council Members:
ABSENT: Council Members:
ABSTAIN: Council Members:
Linda C. Lowry, City Clerk,
City of Diamond Bar
0 SECOND RIGHT
� TURN LANE TO BE
r s CONSTRUCTED \
/* ACCELERATION/
DECELERATION LANE %-W; ,
/ CONSTRUCTED'
OP QMMERCIAL&
T AL DEVELOPMENT ,.
Agenda # 6. 10
Meeting Date: May 17, 2005
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
r'o'c-orzroa,z�o
j989
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
TITLE: Approve Valley Vista Services' Rate Adjustments for CPI and
Disposal Costs
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve rate adjustments.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no financial impact to the City; the proposed rate adjustments will be paid for by
Valley Vista Services customers (i.e. bin users). The rate adjustment ranges from a
monthly fee increase of $2.47 for a 1.5 cubic yard (CY) bin to $5.19 for a 6 CY bin, with
the 1.5 CY bin size having the lowest increase. The requested rate adjustments have
been reviewed and found to be accurate, as well as within industry and area standards.
BACKGROUND:
In August 2000, the City Council awarded an exclusive contract to Valley Vista Services
to collect refuse and recyclables in the commercial (bin) sector. All requests for rate
adjustments are approved in accordance with the Rate Adjustment Methodology
(Attachment A) appended to the service provider's agreement:
(a) A cost of living, Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustment to the service
component (i.e. non -disposal portion) of the rate, pursuant to cost -of -living
changes based on the Los Angeles/Anaheim/ Riverside Area Index, covering
the period of April 1, 2004 through March 31, 2005.
(b) An increase for that portion of the rate which is impacted by aggregated
disposal costs (i.e. dumping/tipping fees).
(c) Adjustment for other extraordinary costs.
Of the above rate adjustments, the City Manager is authorized to approve a CPI related
rate adjustment; Disposal and Extraordinary costs are subject to review and approval by
the City Council. Effective dates of rate adjustments are July 1St, if the rate requests are
timely and complete.
DISCUSSION:
In April 2005, Valley Vista Services submitted their request for adjustments to their
existing rates. Staff thoroughly reviewed their request, which includes the following
items:
(a) A CPI adjustment factor of 4.02% was applied to the service component for the
year April 1, 2004 through March 31, 2005.
(b) A Disposal Cost adjustment of $1.77 was applied to the dumping fee component
due to increased costs associated with recent County of Los Angeles mandated
fees and taxes that are applied uniformly to all commercial haulers.
(c) There is no request for extraordinary costs increase at this time.
Valley Vista Services has provided a Rate Schedule (Attachment B) that illustrates the
breakdown of the percentage increase in the CPI and disposal costs, which are
collectively distributed relative to the size of the container. No surcharges or other costs
are adjusted so as to keep the system as simple as possible.
The proposed commercial rates have been compared to other local communities for
comparison below:
Commercial Monthly Rate
for a 3 Cubic Yard Bin
Collected Once Weekly
CITY
TOTAL RATE*
La Verne
$84.71
Walnut
$86.49
Diamond Bar
$88.53
Claremont
$88.91
Azusa
$94.69
San Dimas
$106.10
Covina
$113.55
San Gabriel
$121.95
Glendora
$124.85
West Covina
$127.76
Baldwin Park
$128.16
Temple City
$134.50
* Includes franchise, AB 939 and other fees for all cities
Based on the above comparison, the City of Diamond Bar's commercial rates are
among the lowest of the selected sample of like -cities.
In conclusion, staff finds Valley Vista Services rate adjustment request to be reasonable
and appropriate. Although Valley Vista Services proposes to implement the new rates
immediately, staff recommends an implementation date of July 1, 2005, in order to
provide their customers with sufficient notice.
Page 2 of 3
PREPARED BY:
Javier Peraza, Management Analyst
REVIEWED BY:
David G. Liu, P.E.
Director of Public Works
Attachments:
Jim DeStefano
Assistant City Manager
A. Exhibit A from the Agreements (Rate Adjustment Methodology for Valley Vista
Services )
B. Request for Rate Adjustment from Valley Vista Services
Page 3 of 3
Agenda # 6. 11
Meeting Date: May 17, 2005
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
TITLE: Approve Waste Management's Rate Adjustments for CPI and
Disposal Costs
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve rate adjustments.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no financial impact to the City; the proposed rate adjustments will be paid for by
Waste Management's customers (i.e. barrel users). The increase ranges from $1.86 to
$2.40 based on variable container size, with the 35 -gallon barrel having the lowest
increase. The requested rate adjustments have been reviewed and found to be
accurate, as well as within industry and area standards.
BACKGROUND:
In August 2000, the City Council awarded an exclusive contract to Waste Management
to collect refuse and recyclables in the residential sector. All requests for rate
adjustments are approved in accordance with the Rate Adjustment Methodology
appended to the service provider's agreement:
(a) A cost of living, Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustment to the service
component (i.e. non -disposal portion) of the rate, pursuant to cost -of -living
changes based on the Los Angeles/Anaheim/ Riverside Area Index, covering
the period of April 1, 2004 through March 31, 2005.
(b) An adjustment for that portion of the rate which is impacted by aggregated
disposal costs as reflected by a net disposal cost increase.
(c) Adjustment for other extraordinary costs.
Of the above rate adjustments, the City Manager is authorized to approve a CPI related
rate adjustment; Disposal and Extraordinary costs are subject to review and approval by
the City Council. Effective dates of rate adjustments are July 1St, if the rate requests are
timely and complete.
DISCUSSION:
In April 2005, Waste Management submitted their request for adjustments to their rates.
Staff thoroughly reviewed their request, which includes the following items:
(a) A CPI adjustment factor of 4.02% was applied to the service component for the
year April 1, 2004 through March 31, 2005.
(b) A Disposal Cost adjustment based on actual increases/decreases in the
amounts of refuse and green waste placed at the curb for collection and
disposition.
(c) There is no request for extraordinary costs increase at this time.
With respect to the Service component, the CPI -related rate adjustment was determined
by taking the total billed charges* (i.e., gross receipts), deducting any disposal -related
charges, and multiplying the remaining operational charges by 4.02%. With respect to
the Disposal component, the rate adjustment was determined by taking the difference
(i.e. increase or decrease) in total tonnages between the years 2003-04 and 2004-05 for
both refuse and green waste (i.e. increase of 790 tons and decrease of 92 tons,
respectively) and multiplying the difference in tonnages against the per ton costs for
each material type. Lastly, an adjustment of 1 % for FY 03-04 disposal costs will be
concurrently implemented as they were not included in last year's rate adjustment
process due to insufficient information/documentation. It is noted that only the Service
Component was adjusted due to a 1.75% increase in CPI costs.
In order to assign an appropriate rate increase relative to the size of the container,
Waste Management has taken the combined rate adjustment noted above, and divided
that by the total billed charges to determine an aggregated percentage increase of
4.88% to be distributed among all service levels (Attachments illustrate all related
calculations). This will meet the intent of our "Pay -As -You -Throw Program"/variable rate
structure as those residents that are committed to recycling, and have smaller refuse
containers, will pay less of a percentage increase than customers with additional and/or
larger refuse containers. No surcharges or other costs are adjusted so as to keep the
system as simple as possible. The current and proposed rates, incorporating a 4.88%
increase, are presented in the following table:
Service
35 Gallon
64 Gallon
96 Gallon
Component
Current
Proposed
Current
Proposed
Current
Proposed
Refuse,
$13.45 $14.07
$16.73 $17.51
$20.01 $20.95
Recycling &
Green
Waste
$4.27 $4.48
$6.41 $6.72
$8.55 $8.97
Additional
Refuse Cart
Surcharge
$11.55 $12.08
$14.33 $14.99
$17.12 $17.92
Senior Rate
Note: The above listed rates include City AB 939 fees of $0.75 per household per month
* Based on approximately 15,175 combined Single -Family Units and Multi -Family Units.
Page 2 of 4
While Staff finds the requested residential rate adjustments to be reasonable, a rate
comparison of other local communities was conducted as illustrated in the following
table:
Residential Monthly Rate
for a
64 Gallon Capacity Container
CITY
TOTAL RATE*
La Verne
$16.05
Diamond Bar
$17.51
San Dimas
$17.66
Baldwin Park
$17.80
Walnut
$18.47
Azusa
$18.67
Covina
$19.01
Claremont
$19.45
Glendora
$19.94
San Gabriel
$20.25
West Covina
$20.29
Temple City
$21.34
Note: The above listed rates include each City's
respective fees (i.e. AB 939, Franchise, etc.) but do not
account for slight variations in type of services (i.e. Fully
automated 3 -Barrel System, etc.)
Based on the above comparison, the City of Diamond Bar's residential rates are among
the lowest of the selected sample of like -cities.
In conclusion, Staff finds Waste Management's rate adjustment request to be
reasonable and appropriate. Waste Management proposes to implement the new rates
beginning July 1, 2005. Based on Waste Management's billing cycles, the adjustments
for the month of July will be included in the residential fall quarterly billing (i.e. August,
September, and October) which is scheduled to be mailed in late July 2005. Prior
notices will also be mailed to residents upon approval of the requested rate adjustment.
PREPARED BY:
Javier Peraza, Management Analyst
REVIEWED BY:
David G. Liu
Director of Public Works
Jim DeStefano
Assistant City Manager
Page 3 of 4
Attachments:
A. Exhibit A from the Agreements (Rate Adjustment Methodology for Waste
Management )
B. Request for Rate Adjustment from Waste Management, including a revised Rate
Schedule for Residential Accounts
Page 4 of 4
Agenda # 6.12
Meeting Date: May 17, 2005
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
TITLE: Award of a Professional Services Contract to Charles Group International in the
amount of $29,500 for land planning and architectural services related to the Golf
Course Gateway development study.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The proposed contract is consistent with the adopted FY 2004-2005 Budget (001-5240-44000).
BACKGROUND:
Economic Development Study Sessions with the City Council have included discussion regarding real
estate project opportunities for several commercial sites in the City. The "Mid Term" development
opportunities include a potential reuse of the Golf Course property to focus on sales tax producing
land uses for this significant freeway oriented site. The FY 2004-2005 Budget has incorporated
resources to conduct feasibility studies for a joint County / City retail and entertainment project on the
property.
The City is in the process of considering a proposal to the County of Los Angeles, which may reduce
and/or relocate a portion of the County Golf Course and redevelop the property with private retail
uses. This analysis will consist of two distinct studies as follows: 1) analyze the market and
development feasibility of a portion of the existing golf course consisting of approximately 55acres,
and 2) analyze development types and feasibility of the entire golf course property which consists of
approximately 165 acres.
The City has retained Kosmont Partners, an economics and real estate consulting firm, to prepare a
market study to review the retail market potentials and extent of any retail leakage from the City for
the purpose of assessing the development potential of the Golf Course property. The study is
intended to assist the City in considering the potentials for new retail and auto dealership
development for the site. The study will consider unmet or underserved retail and auto market
demand within the trade area. The Kosmont study scope includes a delineation of the trade area,
population characteristics, retail demand, and retail supply for the City and 5 -mile radius. In addition,
the study will examine retail leakage, an analysis of the auto market and a review of the City's retail
history.
The City Council Economic Development Subcommittee has assisted the City staff and Kosmont
Partners in the selection of a design firm to prepare a land use development study plan based upon
the results of the market study. Three architectural design firms (Charles International, MCG
Architecture and Rothenberg Sawasy Architects) were invited to be interviewed by the Subcommittee
members on March 4, 2005. The interview panelists unanimously recommended that the City enter
into a contract with Charles International to provide services for this assignment.
Charles International is an outstanding design firm whose founder, Mr. Charles Pigg, spent 23 years
as an original partner with The Jerde Partnership. Mr. Pigg has worked on several projects
throughout the world including Horton Plaza and the Bellagio Resort. Small projects such as Del Mar
Plaza and very large complex projects in Bejing and Shanghi.
The Scope of Services will entail a review of the site in terms of suitability and competitiveness for
development of a regional serving retail shopping center at the subject site. The task will also include
the preparation of two conceptual site plans delineating maximum retail development, associated
parking and other related uses. One plan will be developed for the south 55 -acre site and one for the
entire 165 -golf course property. The plans will also consider the feasibility and appropriateness of
adding high density residential uses to each development.
The studies will include site planning options to define a unique strategy to create a fitting town center
project to create a new city gathering spot on the sites. Charles will provide development examples,
reference imagery and sketch perspective studies to define the key aspects of spirit of the potential
development. The completion of the Scope of work is estimated to require two months to complete.
The cost for the services and deliverables is a lump sum fee of $29,500.00
PREPARED BY:
James DeStefano
Assistant City Manager
Attachment: Proposal dated April 20, 2005
2
Agenda: 6.13
Meeting Date: May 17, 2005
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
INC(RP�TtiIUv
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
TITLE: APPROVING THE PAYMENT OF ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
(NPDES) PERMIT LITIGATION
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The request for $4,000 will be funded by the City's Environmental Services
budget allocation for FY 2004-2005.
BACKGROUND:
The City is currently implementing the third, five-year NPDES Permit. The permit
covers Los Angeles County as the Principal Permittee and eighty-three (83) of
the incorporated cities as individual Permittees. Prior storm water permits
focused on the City implementing cost-effective Best Management Practices
(BMPs), such as street sweeping, trash containers for residents, catch basin
cleaning, public education, waste/oil recycling programs, construction site run-off
mitigation measures, and assurance that the private sector install certain pre -
and post -construction structural treatment control measures.
The latest storm water permit increases requirements by stipulating that storm
water run-off not violate water quality objectives or standards contained in the
Water Quality Control Basin Plan for the Los Angeles Region. This storm water
permit could be interpreted to require that storm water meet drinking water
standards in many locations with significant potential costs to the City. As a
result, on January 7, 2003, the City joined with the Coalition for Practical
Regulation (CPR) cities to challenge the permit (Resolution No. 2003-01).
Page l of 2
DISCUSSION:
The CPR's initial litigation funding request was received in February 2003; the
City paid its share of $3,000 towards anticipated legal expenses. In February
2004, the City paid an additional share of $3,600 for ongoing expenses. In
August 2004, the City paid its final share of $3,000. It is noted that all previous
litigation funding requests were divided among 31 of the 43 CPR member cities
that joined. To date, the City has contributed $9,600 towards the litigation.
In March 2005, the presiding judge ruled against the
the cities a 60 -day window to file an appeal. As such,
funds, in the amount of $4,000 per city, to pursue an
on some outstanding issues relating to the NPDES
Maximum Extent Practicable Standard). Once again
be based on the anticipated contribution of at least
joining the appeal case.
PREPARED BY:
Javier Peraza, Management Analyst
REVIEWED BY:
David G. Liu
Director of Public Works
Attachments:
1. Resolution No. 2003-01
2. CPR Email Request, dated May 3, 2005
Page 2 of 2
litigating cities, but granted
the CPR is now requesting
appeal and acquire closure
Permit (e.g. clarification of
the amount requested will
11 of the 43 member cities
James DeStefano
Assistant City Manager
Agenda # 6.14
Meeting Date: May 17, 2005
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Linda C. Lowry, City Manager
TITLE: RESOLUTION NO. 2005 -XX REQUESTING AN ALLOCATION AND
PAYMENT OF $69,047.00 OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY AID TO CITIES
FUNDS FOR THE GRAND AVENUE PROJECT- PHASE I
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Resolution No. 2005 -XX.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Fiscal Year 04/05 Capital Improvement Project budget included $69,000 of County Aid
to Cities Funds (ATC) for the Grand Avenue Project. Upon approval by the County
Board of Supervisors, the City will receive $69,047.00 of these ATC funds.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The County of Los Angeles has appropriated $69,047.00 to the City of Diamond Bar as
County Aid to Cities Funds. These funds can be used towards regional signal
synchronization, transportation system management, and congestion management
projects that improve regional traffic mobility; or the design, right of way, and
construction of roadways on the County's highway plan which are of the general County
interest and regional significance.
The Grand Avenue Beautification/Betterment Project is a regionally significant project
consisting of improvements to the roadway, median islands, and aesthetic enhancement
to the roadway/intersections. These improvements will include asphalt pavement,
reconstruction of curbs, replacement of irrigation system, landscaping, planting, and
concrete work. Traffic safety enhancement such as installation/modification of street
lights, signal timing synchronization, striping, and drainage improvements have also
been incorporated into the Project. The construction contract was awarded on April 5,
2005.
Upon receiving the City's resolution requesting the payment of $69,047 ATC Funds, the
County Board of Supervisors will consider the request in May. City staff has been
working with County staff and believe this regionally significant project is in accordance
with the County's policies regarding the use of ATC Funds.
PREPARED BY:
Fred Alamolhoda, Senior Engineer Date Prepared: May 10, 2005
REVIEWED BY:
David G. Liu
Director of Public Works
Attachments: Resolution 2005 -XX
Jim DeStefano
Assistant City Manager
RESOLUTION NO. 2005 -XX
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
REQUESTING AN ALLOCATION AND PAYMENT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY
AID TO CITIES FUNDS
WHEREAS, the County of Los Angeles (LACO) has appropriated certain funds to
the City of Diamond Bar as County Aid To Cities Funds;
WHEREAS, the (LACO) Board of Supervisors have adopted policies limiting the
use of ATC funds to regional traffic signal synchronization, transportation system
management (TSM), and congestion management (CM) projects that improve regional
traffic mobility; or the design, acquisition of right of way, and construction of city streets
on the County's highway plan which are of general County interest and regional
significance; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to expend all of the $69,047.00 of these
funds allocated to the City for the Grand Avenue Beautification/Betterment Project —
Phase I in accordance with said policies; and
WHEREAS, said project is Categorically Exempt in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Diamond Bar, California, does hereby resolve, determine, and order as follows:
Section 1. The (LACO) is hereby requested to allocate $69,047 of the ATC
funds apportioned to the City for the work specified above which will improve
regional traffic mobility in accordance with the (LACO) Board of Supervisors
policies regarding the use of ATC funds.
Section 2. Upon the Board of Supervisors approval of the allocation, the
City will request to send allocated funds to the City. The City will begin using the
funds for the project according to the terms of the allocation.
Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution and
shall forward a certified copy to the LACO Department of Public Works for
processing.
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED at a regular meeting of the City Council
this 17th day of May, 2005.
Wen Chang
Mayor
ATTEST:
Linda C. Lowry, City Clerk
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 a regular meeting of the
City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 17th day of May, 2005, by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBER:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBER:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER:
ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER:
Linda C. Lowry, City Clerk
City of Diamond Bar, CA