Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/15/2010City of uiamand Bar City Council Agendj Tuesday, June 15, 201 6:30 p.m. — Regular Meetingi The Government Center South Coast Air Quality Management District/ Main Auditorium 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Carol Herrera Steve Tye Mayor Mayor ProTem Ling -Ling Chang Ron Everett Jack Tanaka Council Member Council Member Council Member City Manager James DeStefano City Attorney Michael Jenkins City Clerk Tommye Cribbins Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on file in the Office of the City Clerk, and are available for public inspection. If you have questions ons regarding an agenda item, please contact the City Clerk at (909) 839-7010 during regular business hours. In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title /I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the City of Diamond Bar requires that any person in need of any type of special equipment, assistance or accommodation (s) in order to communicate at a City public meeting, must inform the City Clerk a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. Have online access? City Council Agendas are now available on the City of Diamond Bar's web site at www.CityofDiamondBar.com Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking in the Council Chambers. The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled paper and encourages you to do the same. IIIh1011)d1Blfllli DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING RULES Welcome to the meeting of the Diamond Bar City Council. Meetings' are open to the public and are broadcast live on Time -Warner Cable Channel 3 and Verizon FiOS television Channel 47. You are invited to attend and participate. Members of the public may address the Council on any item of business on the agenda during the time the item is taken up by the Council. In addition, members of.the public may, during the Public Comment period address the Council on any Consent. Calendar item or any matter not on the agenda and within the Council's subject matter jurisdiction. Persons wishing to speak should submit a speaker slip to the City Clerk. Any material to be submitted to the City Council at the meeting should be submitted through the City Clerk. Speakers are limited to five minutes per agenda item, unless the Mayor determines otherwise. The Mayor may adjust this time limit depending on the number of people wishing to speak, the complexity of the matter, the length of the agenda, the hour and any other relevant consideration. Speakers may address the Council only once on an agenda item, except during public hearings, when the applicant/appellant may be afforded a rebuttal. Public comments must be directed to the City Council. Behavior that disrupts the orderly conduct of the meeting may result in the speaker being removed from the Council chambers. INFORMATION RELATING TO AGENDAS AND ACTIONS OF THE COUNCIL Agendas for regular City Council meetings are available 72 hours prior to the meeting and are posted in the City's regular posting locations, on DBTV Channel 3, Time -Warner Cable Channel 3, FiOS television Channel 47 and on the City's website at www.ci.diamond-bar.ca.us. A full agenda packet is available for review during the meeting, in the foyer just outside the Council chambers. The City Council may take action on any item listed on the agenda. ACCOMMODATIONS FOR THE DISABLED A cordless microphone is available for those persons with mobility impairments who cannot access the podium in order to make a public comment. Sign language interpretation is available by providing the City Clerk three business days' notice in advance of a meeting. Please telephone (909) 839-7010 between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. Monday through Thursday and 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on Fridays. Copies of agendas, rules of the Council, Cassette/Video ' tapes of meetings: (909) 839-7010 Computer access to agendas: www.ci.diamond-bar.ca.us General information: (909) 839-7000 HISMEETINGIS BEING BROADCAST LIVE FOR VIEWING ON TIME -WARNER CABLE CHANNEL 3 AND VERIZON ROS TELEVISION CHANNEL 47, AS WELL AS BY STREAMING VIDEO OVER THE INTERNET AND BY REMAINING IN THE ROOM, YOU ARE GIVING YOUR PERMISSION TO BE TELEVISED. THIS MEETING WILL BE RE -BROADCAST EVERY SATURDAY AND SUNDAY AT 9:00 A.M. AND, ALTERNATE TUESDAYS AT 8:00 P.M. AND ARE ALSO AVAILABLE FOR LIVE AND ARCHIVED VIEWING ON THE CITY'S WEB SITE AT WWW.CITYOFDIAMONDBAR.CIOM CITY OF DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA .June 15, 2010 CALL TO ORDER: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: INVOCATION: 091MINUM MITA Next Resolution No. 2010-18 Next Ordinance No. 04(2010) gm�. Mayor Pastor Mark Hopper, Evangelical Free Church Council Members Chang, Everett, Tanaka, Mayor Pro Tern Tye, Mayor Herrera Mayor 1. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS: 1.1 Presentation to the City by the Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs Organization. BUSINESS OF THE MONTH: 1.2 Presentation of City Tiles to Burger King, 2711 S. Diamond Bar Blvd., and 527 S. Grand Ave. as Business of the Month for June, 2010. 2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: "Public Comments" is the time reserved on each regular meeting, agenda to provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the Council on Consent Calendar items or matters of interest to Written materials distributed to the City Council within 72 hours of the City Council meeting are available for public inspection immediately upon distribution in the City Clerk's Office at 21825 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, California, during normal business hours, June 15, 2010 PAGE 2 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 CitV Council 4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT: Under the Brown Act, members of the City Council may briefly respond to public comments but no extended discussion and no action on such matters may take place. 5-. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 Planning Commission Meeting — June 22, 2010 — 7:00 p.m., AQMD/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Dr. 5.2 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting — June 24, 2010 — 7:00 p.m., AQMD/Government Center Hearing Board Room, .21865 Copley Dr. 5.3 4th of July Blast — July 4, 2010 - 5:00 p.m., Diamond Bar High School, 21400 Pathfinder Rd. Fireworks begin at 9:00 p.m. 5.4 4th of July Holidg — Monday, July 5, 2010 - City Offices will be closed in observance of 4t of July. Offices will reopen Tuesday, July 6, 2010 at 7:30 a.m. 5.5 City Council Meeting — July 6, 2010 6:30 p.m., AQMD/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Dr. 5.6 Concerts in the Park — July 7, 2010 6:30 — 8:00 p.m., The Answer (Classic Rock) — Sycamore Canyon Park, 22930 Golden Spgs. Dr. 5.7 Movies Under the Stars — July 7, 2010 — Planet 51 — Immediately following Concerts in the Park, Sycamore Canyon Park, 22930 Golden Spgs. Dr. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR: 6.1 City Council Minutes: (a) Study Session of May 18, 2010 —Approve as submitted. (b) Regular Meeting of May 18, 2010 —Approve as submitted. 6.2 Planning Commission Minutes - Regular Meeting of May 11, 2010 Receive and file. 6.3 Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes - Regular Meeting of April 22, 2010 - Receive and file. June 15, 2010 PAGE 3 6.4 Traffic and Transportation Commission Minutes - Regular Meeting of March 11, 2010 — Receive and file. 6.5 Ratification of Check Register — Dated May 14, 2010 through June 8, 2010 totaling $1,312,182.17. Requested by: Finance Department 6.6 Treasurer's Statement - Month of April, 2010. Recommended Action: Approve. Requested by: Finance Department 6.7 City Manager Department: (a) Adopt Resolution No. 2010 -XX: Declaring the City's Support for an Energy Partnership Between Southern California Edison and the City. Recommended Action: Adopt. (b) Adopt Resolution No. 2010 -XX: Consenting to Inclusion of Properties within the Incorporated Area of the City in the Los Angeles County Energy Program to Finance Distributed Generation Renewable Energy Sources and Energy and Water Efficiency Improvements, Approving the Report Setting Forth the Parameters of the Referenced Program and Certain Matters in Connection Therewith. Recommended Action: Adopt. (c) Approval of Contract Amendment with Fieldman/Rolapp & Associates. Recommended Action: Approve. (d) Approval of the City's Participation in the 2010 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program. Recommended Action: Approve. (e) Approve Cost of Living Increase to the Hourly Rates for City Attorney. Recommended Action: Approve and Authorize. June 15, 2010 6.8 Community Development Department Requests: (a) Approval of Amendment No. 4 to the Consulting Services Agreement with Diana Cho and Associates for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Labor and Contract Compliance Services in the Amount of $3,000 for FY 2009-10. Recommended Action: Approve. (b) Approval of Contract with Diana Cho and Associates for CDBG Contract Administrative Services for a Not -to -Exceed Amount of $25,000 for FY 2010-11. Recommended Action: Approve. (c) Approval of Amendment No. 1 to the City's Agreement for Legal Services in Conjunction with Code Enforcement with Dapeer, Rosenblit & Litvak, LLP. Recommended Action: Approve. 6.9 Public Works Department: (a) Approve Contract with Republic ITS for Traffic Signal Maintenance Services for Three Fiscal Years (FY 2010-2011, FY 2011- 2012 and FY 2012-13). Recommended Action- Approve. (b) Approval of Plans and Specifications and Award of Construction Contract with RJ Noble Company for Residential Area 6 (North of SR 60 Fwy 'and East of Diamond Bar Blvd.) Residential Road Maintenance Project in the Amount of $908,712; and Authorize a Contingency Amount of $91,000 for Contract Change Orders to be Approved by the City Manager, for a Total Authorization Amount of $999,712. Recommended Action: Approve and Award. (c) Approve Notice of Completion for Preventative Street Maintenance Program (Zone 3 and Zone 4 Arterial Street Rehabilitation Project) Federal Project No. ESPL-5455(013). Recommended Action: Approve. June 15, 2010 PAGE 5 (d) Approve Plans and Specifications and Award Construction Contract for Pathfinder Median Project Between the Northbound State Route 57 On/Off Ramps and Fern Hollow Dr. in the Amount of $89,937.50 to Kasa Construction and Authorize a Contingency Amount of $18,000 for Change Orders to be Approved by the City Manager for a Total Authorization Amount of $107,937.50. Recommended Action: Approve and Award. (e) Approve Plans and Specifications and Award Construction Contract for the Diamond Bar Blvd. Raised Modification Project in the Amount of $54,843.50 to Elite Companies US, Inc. and Authorize a Contingency Amount of $5,500 for Contract Change Orders to be Approved by the City Manager, for a Total Authorization Amount of $60,343.50. Recommended Action: Approve and Award. (D Approve Notice of Completion for Traffic Signal Battery Back - Up System Project. Recommended Action: Approve. 6.10 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT REQUESTS: (a) Approval of Increase in Contract Amount for Mega Way Enterprises in the Amount of $3,731 for Construction of Sycamore Canyon Trail Project— Phase 111. Recommended Action: Approve. (b) Adopt Resolution No. 2010 -XX: Approving Submittal of a Grant Application for Funding to Construct Freestanding Outdoor Interpretive Exhibits Along Sycamore Canyon Park Trail. Recommended Action: Adopt. 6.11 IS DEPARTMENT REQUESTS: (a) Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Five Year Agreement with CompuCom for Microsoft Enterprise Agreement in an Amount Not -to -Exceed $105,651.65 ($21,130.33 Annually). Recommended Action: Authorize. June 15, 2010 PAGE 6 (b) Authorize the City Manager to Purchase Various. Networking Equipment and Computer Hardware from CDWG, in FY 2010-11 for an Amount Not -to -Exceed $181,000. Recommended Action: Authorize. 6.12 Finance Department Requests: (a) Adopt Resolution No. 2010 -XX: Setting Proposition 4 (Gann) Appropriations Limit for FY 2010-11 in Accordance with the Provisions of Division 9 of Title 1 of the Government Code. Recommended Action: Adopt. (b) Adopt Resolution No. 2010 -XX: Adopting the Statement of Investment for Fiscal Year 2010-11. Recommended Action: Adopt. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as matters may be heard. 7.1 Public Hearings for Lighting and Landscape Districts Nos. 38, 39 and 41: (a) Adopt Resolution No. 2010 -XX — Levying an Assessment on City of Diamond Bar Landscaping Assessment District No. 38 for the FY 2010-11. (b) Adopt Resolution No. 2010 -XX — Levying an Assessment on City Diamond Bar Landscaping Assessment District No. 39 for the FY 2010-11. (c) Adopt Resolution No. 2010 -XX — Levying an Assessment on City of Diamond Bar Landscaping Assessment District No. 41 for the FY 2010-11. Recommended Action: Receive Staff Presentation, Open the Public Hearing, Receive Testimony, Close the Public Hearing and Adopt (a) Resolution No. 2010 -XX (District 38); (b) Resolution No. 2010 -XX (District No. 39) and (c) Resolution No. 2010 -XX (District 41). Requested by: Public Works Department June 15, 2010 PAGE 7 7.2 Public Hearing- A Public Hearing to Consider I Various Actions Pertaining to Site D (a Site Comprised of Approximately 30.36 Acres Located at the Southeast Corner of Brea Canyon Rd. and Diamond Bar Blvd., Diamond Bar, California (Assessors Parcel Numbers 8714- 002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-903 and 8714-015-001) Including General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03, Zone Change No. 2007-04, Specific Plan No. 2007-01 ("Site D Specific Plan"), Tentative Tract Map No. 70687, and Consideration of Certification of Environmental Impact Report 2007-02 (SCH No. 2008021014). (a) Resolution No. 2010 -XX: Certifying the Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2008021014) and Approving the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program and Adopting Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Site D Specific Plan and Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 for a Site Comprised of Approximately 30.36 Acres Located at the Southeast Corner of Brea Canyon Rd. and Diamond Bar Blvd., Diamond Bar, California (Assessors Parcel Numbers 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002- 902, 8714-002-903 and 8714-015-001). (b) Resolution No. 2010 -XX: Approving General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 and Zone Change No. 2007-04 for Property Comprised of Approximately 30.36 Acres Located at the Southeast Corner of Brea Canyon Rd. and Diamond Bar Blvd., Diamond Bar, California (Assessors Parcel Numbers 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002- 902, 8714-002-903 and 8714-015-001). (c) Resolution No. 2010 -XX: Approving Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 for Subdivision of 30.36 Acre Site for Residential and Commercial Purposes with 202 -Unit Residential Units and 153,985 Gross Sq. Ft. of Commercial Use on Property Located at the Southeast Corner of Brea Canyon Rd. and Diamond Bar Blvd., Diamond Bar, California (APN 8714-002-900, 8714-002-903 and 8714- 045-001). (d) Ordinance No. 0X(2010): Approving Zone Change No. 2007-04 Changing the Existing Zoning to Specific Plan for Property Comprised of Approximately 30.36 Acres Located at the Southeast Corner of Brea Canyon Rd. and Diamond Bar Blvd., Diamond Bar, California, (Assessors Parcel Number 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-903 and 8714-015-001). (e) Ordinance No. 0X(2010): Approving Site D Specific Plan, Specific Plan No. 2007-01, for Property Comprised of Approximately 30.36 Acres Located at the Southeast Corner of Brea Canyon Rd. and Diamond Bar Blvd., Diamond Bar, California (Assessors Parcel Number 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-903 and June 15, 2010 M • 8714-015-001). Recommended Action: Open the Public Hearing, Receive testimony and Continue to a Date Specified by City Council 8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: None. 9. COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS: 10. ADJOURNMENT: Agenda No. 6.1(a) CITY OF DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MAY 18, 2010 D av F' STUDY SESSION: M/Herrera called the Study Session to order at 5:15 p.m. in Room CC -8 of the South Coast Air Quality M6nagement District/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA. Present: Council Members Ling -Ling Chang, Ron Everett, Jack Tanaka, Mayor Pro Tern Steve Tye and Mayor Carol Herrera. Staff Present: James DeStefano, City Manager; David Doyle, Assistant City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City Attorney; Ken *Desforges, IS Director; David Liu, Public Works Director; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Linda Magnuson, Finance Director; Susan Full, Senior Accountant; Anthony Jordan, Parks and Maintenance Superintendent; Christy Murphey, Recreation Specialist; Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; Ryan McLean, Assistant to the City Manager; Rick Yee, Senior Civil Engineer; Kimberly Molina, Associate Engineer; Marsha Roa, Public Information Manager; Anthony Santos, Management Analyst; Patrick Gallegos, Management Analyst; Dennis Tarango, Building Official; and, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk. 00. REVIEW OF DRAFT BUDGET FOR FY 2010-2011 — DISCUSSION AND ACTION CM/DeStefano presented the Council with an overview of the updated draft budget for 2010/11 indicating that the most notable change had to do with the proposed City Hall and Library building. When the Council previously discussed the budget on May 4 there was a basic discussion on the General Fund. Tonight staff would like to take the opportunity to answer any questions the Council may have regarding the General Fund as well as, answer questions about the Special Funds and/or Capital Improvement Program. CM/DeStefano stated that the biggest addition to the budget is the addition of roughly $12 million to the estimated resources coming from reserves for the purchase of the City Hall building and the resources needed to move our operations to the new location. Staff anticipates the close of escrow on the building and all or a substantial portion of the tenant improvements being constructed or encumbered within the next fiscal year. When the resources and the expenses are accounted for at the end of June 2011 staff anticipates having about $17,700,000 in reserves leaving the Council with substantial resources that are still higher than cities in the immediate vicinity of D.B. The bottom line is that the City is still in very, very good economic shape. CM/DeStefano pointed out a couple of things that have changed since the last budget discussion: The potential 2.4% CIP living adjustment for all full and part time staff for a total of about $144,000. The numbers have been refined as well as a mathematical error corrected adding up to an allotment totaling $153,161. Special Funds are a variety of different measures and resources that come to the City from the State, County and Lighting and Landscape Assessment Districts. MAY 18, 2010 PAGE 2 CC STUDY SESSION The budget message speaks to the use of those special funds and talks about how the City has been very careful with use of resources this year while relying more on Prop C monies in the next year for transit and then moving back to Prop A funds in the following year. The Integrated Waste Management Fund is part of the Special Funds (AB939 fees) that incorporate street sweeping and a variety of other things, along with air quality improvement fees, etc. The Landscape and Lighting Assessment Districts continue to be a drain on General Fund resources and that will continue to grow. CSD/Rose has done an outstanding job in an effort to keep costs as low as possible while keeping the medians and hillsides as green as possible. But it is getting tougher because the City's resources are static and yet the everyday expenses continue to rise. The Capital Improvement Projects Fund is about $4.5 million out of which key elements include street improvements, traffic management projects, traffic mitigation programs, curb installation, as well as fixing the drainage problem near the intersection of Brea Canyon Rd. at Via Sorella. Some of the more visible capital improvements staff hopes to complete and has budgeted for the next year are in Parks and Recreation for additional trail enhancement in Sycamore Canyon Park, development of Washington Park, and retrofits at the mini parks in the Summitridge/Longview area. C/Tanaka said he liked the way the budget was presented and found it very easy to follow. Public Comments: None Offered. 00. CITY FEES — DISCUSSION ATCM/McLean provided a PowerPoint presentation of the proposed phasing approach to increasing rates as was discussed at the previous study session. CSD/Rose then discussed how fees are calculated for different user groups when utilizing the various park facilities. C/Chang said she was comfortable with increases for all of the groups but not for individual residents. Both C/Tanaka and MPT/Tye were comfortable with rate increases as proposed by staff. CM/DeStefano stated that staff would bring back this item on June 15, 2010 for adoption. C/Evereft said he had a number of questions on various line items. CM/DeStefano stated that this City Council as well as City Councils' in the past have talked about attempting full -cost recovery. However the City would end up MAY 18, 2010 PAGE 3 CC STUDY SESSION with vacant buildings and angry residents if the City were to attempt to gain full cost recovery for service levels provided. C/Everett said he had great respect for staffs ability to make things work and balance the equations. He questioned whether the Maximus numbers were good honest numbers for full cost recovery. CM/DeStefano stated that Staff and in particular the departments that provide significant services to the public have all taken a look and as one can see staffs recommendations and Maximus's recommendations do not necessarily agree. Staff understands the Council's philosophy present and -past. Staff does not necessarily agree with the consultant that thousands of dollars for a service that staff believes can be provided for hundreds of dollars is an appropriate fee to establish. Therefore, staff tried to take a look at each and every item and attempted to be reasonable but at the same time very cognizant of cost recovery. C/Everett said he thought the fee schedule charts made sense. But that he was having trouble reconciling the different group identifications giving the example of "non-profit, residents and non-residents" and Groups A through G for field use and Group A through G for facilities. He asked if they could be more consistent. CSD/Rose said he understood what C/Everett was saying; however, the two groups are very different with one using fields and one using buildings. C/Evereft asked if CSD/Rose was saying the groups are so different that it wouldn't matter that there were two "Group A's" in two different lists. CSD/Rose agreed and explained how his department's fees have evolved over time. M/Herrera explained that in the past, City Council Members have agreed that there needs to be special consideration for certain groups and that is why there are so many different categories. C/Evereft stated that although it makes sense it is difficult for him and is concerned that it is confusing and therefore would be better if it went from A through L rather than repeating the alphabet. He looked at the reports Council received in December and last meeting. The report talks about non-profit current uses of $1100 going to $1200 and that D. B. residents are $2400. He stated that he has gotten enough questions from D.B. residents thinking they pay double what non -profits pay. It is a little different when he looks at the details of A through B and understands CSD/Rose is doing it this way to balance costs and revenues. CSD/Rose stated that non -profits were limited to the weekends for that rate. MAY 18, 2010 PAGE 4 CC STUDY SESSION C/Evereft reiterated that it bothers him that rates are significantly different for non -profits and D.B. residents because he is fighting for D.B. residents. If he looks at staffs recommended changes it makes him think that other people will expect some kind of a discount too so why reduce any of these —,they should be flat. CSD/Rose reiterated that Diamond Bar Center has always had a long list of different categories. Both Heritage and Pantera were much simpler over time and now staff has put in a non-profit rate for the Diamond Bar Center which was never before included. C/Evereft recommended keeping 55/55 going across or going up rather than giving a couple of people a minus. - Regarding field use December 2006 the Council tabled that item in May 2009 and there was a lot of public interest and he did not think that item was sunshined. It hasn't been in any of the Council studies and is not in the report today. It does not affect it as much as the 2009 recommendation did so he would like to see that sunshined for the athletic field users and teams. CSD/Rose said the group that was significantly recommended in 2009 Was then what is now "CS16 Athletic Field Group B" for which staff was recommending a $10 per participant fee in 2009 which staff has removed completely. That was the primary issue that brought people out who addressed that item as their greatest concern. What he heard at that meeting was that there was not a real concern with moving non-resident rates. So the CS2 recommendation is from May 19 and CS 4 — again, non-resident $12 per hour for lights was originally recommended to be $40 fee. Since staff is recommending that CS3 remain at $12 staff is also keeping the CS 4 rate the same. The only other recommendation that would affect residents is CS 5. C/Evereft wanted to know about teams. CSD/Rose explained that all of those qualify under CS 16. M/Herrera stated that C/Evereft is giving his opinion and that.staff needs to know if there is a majority of the City Council that agree with the changes that he is asking staff to make. M/Herrera stated that she is satisfied with the figures staff has and the rest of the Council needs to weigh in on these items. C/Evereft said he wanted to sunshine where changes are being made.. CM/DeStefano asked what C/Evereft meant by "sunshine" — advertise it and tell the public the numbers? Or, sun setting, a determination? MAY 18, 2010 PAGE 5 CC STUDY SESSION C/Everett said he is putting a spotlight on it at a minimum for Council and for public sessions and how broadly the Council goes he believes it needs to be fair. CM/DeStefano said that all fees are widely advertised and staff is very used to dealing with the public, the user groups and the folks that utilize the Diamond Bar Center. Council Members may not have intimate knowledge of all of the numbers and how they apply and what is the best bang for the buck for the users. C/Everett said he just wants to make sure the City is making it public and this one has,been almost consciously left out of almost every discussion the Council has had in the last month or two. Other than that all of the increases are going to be CPI where they are projected out three years. Because some fees in other areas such as engineering are flat and wondered if was an oversight. CM/DeStefano responded "No." Following further discussion, C/Everett said staff had clarified everything. M/Herrera said that in the beginning when Council talked about the different groups that would want to use the Diamond Bar Center there was a lot of input regarding D.B. residents and non -profits and that the non -profits were very vocal about being "given a break" in the rate. That is how they got into a different category versus residents who want to rent the Diamond Bar Center for private events where perhaps they have more money available to rent the facility and that is why there is a difference in those kinds of categories. M/Herrera asked for the Council's opinion about the flat $50 rate so that staff has clear direction for preparing final figures and reports. In short, is Council satisfied with the report in -general or support the changes as expressed by C/Everett. C/Chang said she was struggling with the increases for residents but was on board with the balance of the report. C/Tanaka said the increases have to happen as a cost of doing business. He does not want the City to get into a position of no longer being able to provide the quality programming the City has always provided. He said he was comfortable with staff's proposal for the $5 reduction. MPT/Tye said he did not think the fees had anything to do with the quality of service but wanted to make sure that everyone understood that if it costs $100 to use a building or field and the City charges $5 the City is subsidizing $95 whether it is a non-profit, D.B. resident or non-resident. So the City is subsidizing D.B. residents more than any other group other than non -profits because they get a break right out of the chute. The City is not ever going to recover the costs because if we did we would have empty parks and empty buildings. It makes no MAY 18, 2010 PAGE 6 CC STUDY SESSION sense to build landscape and water a park if they are not going to be used. It makes no sense to build a Diamond Bar Center if people cannot afford to use it. So the question is, we need to get as close as possible. CSD/Rose and CIVI/DeStefano said the Diamond Bar Center recovery was at about 75-80%. This figure is a little lower at this time than a year or two ago because of the economy. MPT/Tye stated that whether or not the resident is paying $5 or $50 the City is subsidizing these facilities and events. There are some things the City does for its residents and he thinks that the increases are appropriate and manageable but he does not want to go through this line by line and group by group. He stated that he didn't agree with everything the consultant recommended but that he trusts the (City) departments enough to say this is appropriate and therefore is comfortable with what staff is recommending. C/Evereft asked, whether or not the City should charge non -profits more?" M/Herrera said "Yes." Again, that's part of his argument that it is just a little higher from residents compared to the difference between non-profit and residents. CIVI/DeStefano said it goes back to the fact that there is a tipping point and at some point if you are not reasonably close to what the market is dictating then you will not get the non-residents to rent the facility and then you have an empty facility that you are still maintaining. We try -to be competitive the number should be higher than for a resident. But again, the City tries to be competitive in order to keep the facility occupied. M/Herrera felt the residents should have first preference and have better rates. Seniors will tell you every day of the week that they should have the most preference and the least rate. C/Chang said she was very surprised to see the report and it would probably be kind of a shock to the community because residents are probably under the assumption that rates have been subject to CPI all of these years. It is somewhat difficult for her but she can go with the report. CIVI/DeStefano addressed M/Herrera stating that with the assumption that there will not be a first meeting in June staff would plan to bring this back for adoption June 15. Public Comments: Sid Mousavi asked about an item to which staff responded it was a typo (duplicate item). MAY 18, 2010 PAGE 7 CC STUDY SESSION ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to discuss, M/Herrera adjourned the Study Session at 6:15 p.m. TOMMYE CRIBBINS, City Clerk The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this day of 2010. Agenda No. 6.1(b). MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MAY 18, 2010 STUDY SESSION: 5:15 p.m., Room CC -8 Review of Draft Budget for FY 2010-11 — Discussion and Action. User Fee Study — Discussion. Public Comments: None Offered. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Herrera called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in The Government Center/SCAQMD Auditorium, 21865 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA. CM/DeStefano reported that during this evening's Study Session Council discussed the draft Budget that staff will be asking the City Council to consider and adopt later this evening. During the review, the General Fund, Special Funds and Capital Improvement Projects were further discussed. Council also received more in depth discussion regarding potential User Fee changes which entail some increases and some decreases to the Development Services Fees, Community Services operations, etc. which is tentatively scheduled for possible adoption on June 15, 2010. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Herrera led the Pledge of Allegiance. INVOCATION: Monsignor James Loughnane, St. Denis Catholic Church, gave the invocation. ROLL CALL: Council Members Ling -Ling Chang, Ron Everett, Jack Tanaka, Mayor Pro Tern Steve Tye and Mayor Carol Herrera. Staff Present: James DeStefano, City Manager; David Doyle, Assistant City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City Attorney; Ken Deforges, IS Director; David Liu, Public Works Director; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Linda Magnuson, Finance Director; Greg Gubman, 'Community Development Director; Ryan McLean, Assistant to the City Manager; Susan Full, Sr. Accountant; Kimberly Molina, Associate Engineer; Patrick Gallegos, Management Analyst; Anthony Santos, Management Analyst; Cecilia Arellano, Public Information Coordinator; Rick Yee, Sr. Civil Engineer; and Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS MAY 18, 2010 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS OF THE MONTH: 1.1 M/Herrera and Council presented a City Tile to Garo, Kupelian, Manager of CVS Pharmacy #9667, 300 S. Diamond Bar Blvd. as Business of the Month for May 2010. 2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: None Offered. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Sally Seashore, Diamond Bar Library, spoke about the Summer Reading Program announcing several events scheduled during the summer. Marina RL, representing AYSO announced that the Youth 10 boys will participate in the AYSO American Youth Soccer Organization National Games in Palm Beach, Fl. She also announced that several fundraisers are under way to help support their attendance at the event and that anyone wishing to donate may call her at 562-254-5555. John Martin, 1249 S. Diamond Bar Blvd., spoke regarding Site "D" and asked that since this project affects the City as a whole, that all residents be notified of the project and not just those required by law. David Busse, 21455 Ambushers, spoke in opposition to Site "D". 4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS: None offered. 5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 Planning Commission Meeting — May 25, 2010 — 7:00 p.m., AQMD/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Dr. 5.2 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting — May 27, 2010 — 7:00 p.m., AQMD/Government Center Hearing Board Room, 21865 Copley Dr. 5.3 Memorial Day — May 31, 2010 — City Hall closed in observance o * f Memorial Day — City offices reopen Tuesday, June 1, 2010 at 7:30 a.m. 5.4 City Council Meeting — June 1, 2010 — 6:30 p.m., AQMD/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Dr. 5.5 Second Neighborhood Meeting at Silver Tip Park — June 12, 2010 — 10:00 a.m., 900 Longview Dr. (at Summitridge Dr.). MAY 18, 2010 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL 6. CONSENT CALENDAR: MPT/Tye, C/Tanaka seconded, to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Everett, Tanaka, MPT/Tye M/Herrera NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 6.1 APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6.1.1 Study Session of May 4, 2010 —As submitted. 6.1.2 Regular Meeting of May 4, 2010 —As submitted. 6.2 RECEIVED AND FILED PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — Regular Meeting of April 27, 2010. 6.3 RATIFIED CHECK REGISTER — Dated April 29, 2010 through May 13, 2010 totaling $685,579.26. 6.4 SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 03 (2010): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING THE ZONING REGULATIONS GOVERNING GROUP HOMES AND ADOPTING PROVISIONS FOR REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION. 6.5 APPROVED CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 5 WITH ADVANTEC CONSULTING ENGINEERS FOR THE ONGOING CITYWIDE TRAFFIC SIGNAL TIMING PROGRAM IN ' THE AMOUNT OF $26,000 FOR A TOTAL AUTHORIZATION AMOUNT OF $26,000. 6.6 APPROPRIATED $65,000 FROM THE TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT FUND AND APPROVED CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH FEHR & PEERS IN THE AMOUNT OF $65,000 FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RELATED TO THE STATE ROUTE 57/60 FREEWAY CONGESTION RELIEF STRATEGY. 6.7 APPROVED AMENDMENT NO. 10 WITH EXCEL LANDSCAPE FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES AT LIGHTING AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS 38, 39 AND 41 FOR FY 2010/11 IN THE AMOUNT OF $329,675; PLUS A CONTINGENCY AMOUNT OF $43,000 FOR AS -NEEDED WORK, FOR A TOTAL AUTHORIZATION OF $372,675, SUBJECT TO ADOPTION OF THE FY 2010/11 BUDGET. 6.8 APPROVED FY 2010/11 CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES. 6.9 APPROVED ADJOURNING THE JUNE 1, 2010 CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO JUNE 15, 2010. MAY 18, 2010 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL 6.10 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2010-13: AMENDING RESOLUTION 2009-37 ESTABLISHING SALARY GRADES AND FRINGE BENEFITS FOR ALL CLASSES OF EMPLOYMENT EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2010 (Total corrected amount $153,161) 6.11 APPROVED CONTRACT WITH THE COMDYN GROUP, INC. FOR AS - NEEDED INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES IN AN AMOUNT NOT -TO -EXCEED $32,500 FOR FY 2010/11. 6.12 ACCEPTED WORK PERFORMED BY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CONTRACTORS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SYCAMORE CANYON PARK ADA RETROFIT OF THE RESTROOM/OFFICE BUILDING; DIRECTED THE CITY CLERK TO FILE THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION AND RELEASE THE RETENTION THIRTY-FIVE DAYS AFTER THE RECORDATION DATE. 6.13 (a) ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2010-14: DECLARING THE CITY'S INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR LANDSCAPE DISTRICT NO. 38 AND DIRECTED THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO BE SET FOR THE JUNE 15, 2010 REGULAR MEETING. (b) ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2010-15: DECLARING THE CITY'S INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR LANDSCAPE DISTRICT NO. 39 AND DIRECTED THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO BE SET FOR THE JUNE 15, 2010 REGULAR MEETING. (c) ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2010-16: DECLARING THE CITY'S INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR LANDSCAPE DISTRICT NO. 41 AND DIRECTED THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO BE SET FOR THE JUNE 15, 2010 REGULAR MEETING. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None 8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: 8.1 ADOPT. RESOLUTION NO. 2010-17: APPROVING AND ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR. COMENCING JULY 1, 2010 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2011 INCLUDING MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS, SPECIAL FUNDS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS; AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR ACCOUNTS, DEPARTMENTS, DIVISIONS, OBJECTS AND PURPOSES THEREIN SET FORTH. CM/DeStefano stated that the this year's draft budget has a General Fund estimate of resources for next year at $31,077,230 with appropriations of MAY 18, 2010 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL $30,824,350. The presumption is that at the end of the budget year will result in an increase of approximately $253,000 to the General Fund Reserve. This year contains the anomaly of the purchase of the building across the street, as previously agreed to by the City Council, as a new city hall as well as efforts to gain access for the library to develop a facility twice what is now available. The budget includes the use of General Fund Reserves in the amount of $12,427,964 which includes $9.9 million for the building purchase and the $2.1 million estimated to relocate City Hall. Once approved, and at the conclusion of the 2010/11 budget year, staff anticipates General Fund Reserves ending at $17,706,843. The budget also includes the use of Special Funds as well as, the Capital Improvement Program estimated to cost $4,486,989. Review of this year's budget began on May 4 and at that meeting staff and the City Council discussed General Funds and the various components of resources that were needed within each of the City's operating departments as well as, the use of those resources to continue programs and services provided by the City. During tonight's Study Session there was detailed discussion pertaining to the General Fund, Special Funds and the Capital Improvement Program. The General Fund resources are comprised of a variety of sources. Reducing the estimated resources of $31,077,230 by the building cost of $12 million is about $1 million less than the 2008/09 budget year levels, which is a direct result of the current economic recession. Property taxes for 2010/11 are estimated at $3,840,000 which is slightly higher than the current budget year. Staff believes that some reassessments will continue and that number will remain flat or drop during the next couple of years until real estate values begin to trend upward and reassessments take place so that the numbers again begin to increase. In a general category of "Other Taxes and Fees" that includes sales taxes, hotel transient occupancy taxes, franchise taxes and others is about $5,222,000. Staff tends to estimate these resources very conservatively. This year D.B. is likely to see a slight decrease in sales tax; however, there are signs that consumer purchasing is on the increase. Staff anticipates that State Subvention revenues will remain even with the current fiscal year at about $4,610,000, the majority of which is in vehicle license fees coming from the State of California. Another highlighted area is the City's investment earnings. As everyone knows, investment earnings have dropped significantly for individuals as well as, the City's investments that are made with the public's dollars and as a result, staff expects that the investment earnings will remain static with the current fiscal year at about $300,000. The City Hall building purchase price is $9.9 million. Staff is finalizing the purchase agreement and expects that escrow will not close until sometime in August. Therefore, the purchase and all relocation costs amounting to about $2.1 million has been included in the 2010/11 budget. The City Hall purchase will initially be made through the use of cash reserves. However, the City Council adopted a resolution that provided an 18 -month window after the close of escrow to consider whether to maintain the cash purchase or to augment MAY 18, 2010 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL that purchase with some sort of financing. If escrow closes in August/September as projected, the Council will have until January 2012 to conclude the financing decision. Staff is developing a Request for Proposal from architectural firms to assist the City in the development of City Hall and to assist the County Library with development of a new library on the ground floor of the building. An extensive amount of work will be done in the next year including the approval of an extension for the lease with AQMD for the current facilities. Staff has negotiated a lease extension on a month to month basis at a favorable rate and has negotiated at a staff to staff level the use of the AQMD auditorium once City Hall moves across the street which is expected to take place August or September 2011. CM/DeStefano further reported that staff utilized General Fund reserves for economic development activities. Within the current budget year $300,000 of unused money was set aside. In the proposed budget year the amount set aside is $112,500. The Lighting and Landscape Assessment Districts have their own funding sources; however, General Fund reserves are used to supplement those district costs with about $72,000 being used in the upcoming budget year. This is an area that has a Council subcommittee looking at very carefully. As the cost to maintain these districts continue to increase the revenues for those districts have remained static for 20 years. There has been no CPI or other adjustments and none proposed for next year so it means that the City's General Fund continues to have to support these assessment districts. Capital Improvement Projects have historically been augmented in their resource needs by the use of reserves. There are a variety of funds used for physical improvements made in the community's buildings, parks and roads. This year $215,000 is proposed to be taken from General Fund Reserves to help support the $4.4 million set aside. Within the Capital Improvement Budget for 2010/11 projects include slurry seals and overlays, traffic signal improvements, curb ramp installation improvements, drainage improvements, an additional leg of the Sycamore Canyon Park trail, Washington Street (Presidents) Park construction, American's with Disabilities Act (ADA) retrofit of Stardust, Silvertip and Longview Mini Parks and design of a future improvement within Sycamore Canyon Creek. The law enforcement budget for 2010/11 is $5,549,800, an increase of slightly less than 2% over the current budget year with no decreases in any service levels and no changes in the number of deputies, vehicles and programs. Staff anticipates an increase of about $125,000 in Liability and Workers' Compensation insurance premiums for 2010/11. Generally speaking, the appropriation levels for the next fiscal year are consistent or slightly lower than what the City Council approved in the FY 2009/10 mid -year revision in. February 2010. The City obtains resources as a result of voter MAY 18, 2010 PAGE 7 CITY COUNCIL Initiatives passed county -wide such as Measure R for which the City receives a small portion of $500,000 for street improvements. There are gasoline taxes imposed by the State for which the City receives a portion that will continue to be used for improvements to the City's roadways. The City receives transit funds, a voter approved sales tax augmentation within LA County that are used for various transit programs. Proposition. C is being used for additional transit programming resources and can also be used for Capital Improvements within the community along its roadways. There are resources that come from the Integrated Waste Management Fund, a direct result of waste hauler franchise agreements with Valley Vista and Waste Management and those dollars pay for street sweeping, storm drain maintenance, composting programs, literature, etc. Air Quality Improvement Funds are used to assist in the transportation management system, signalization, fluid leakage, and previously were used to purchase Hybrid vehicles. Lighting and Landscape Assessment District funds come from residences that directly benefit from and are within those districts and are augmented by General Fund dollars. CM/DeStefano stated that this year's budget is comprised of significant resources with expenditures and appropriations that have been laid out in detail. The City Council has had the opportunity to review the proposed budget in two Study Sessions and has asked staff a lot of questions during the process. This is the toughest budget that he has had to put together since becoming the City's Manager and it came with a lot of help from his staff. Staff believes the tide will turn and resources will begin to increase through various opportunities. The City is in very good financial shape unlike many other cities, a testament to the frugality of the Council and 14 other Council Members who preceded the current Council. CM/DeStefano recommended that the City Council adopt the Fiscal Year 2010/11 Budget to take effect July 1, 2010 by Resolution. M/Herrera thanked staff members for puffing together such a thoughtful budget and advised residents that while the City has constrained a lot of the administration within City Hall, the programs and services that the community has come to know and love have not been cut or reduced. D.B. continues to take care of its streets and landscaped areas. She thanked staff for their hard work and diligence in continuing to run the City on a very tight budget. C/Tanaka thanked staff and in particular the Department Heads for the budget that has been presented to the City Council and to CM/DeStefano for presenting a very easy to read and understandable report. MPT/Tye echoed his colleague's sentiments thanking the Department Heads for their hard work. He stated he would trust them with his wallet and credit cards and appreciates all of staffs efforts and for a job well done. MAY 18, 2010 PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL C/Everett thanked staff and the City's contractors including the Sheriff's Department in helping to maintain the public safety and service levels. He was also delighted that Council supported a 2.4% COL adjustment for staff. He acknowledged the very aggressive and creative use of State and Federal funding possible to keep the roads and services at their highest levels. C/Chang echoed her colleague's comments. After reviewing previous Water Department budgets and this, year's City's budget she was very impressed with CM/DeStefano and his staff for coming up with a creative use of this year's limited budget. She thanked department heads for running a tight ship and helping the Council run a tight ship. There was no one present who wished to speak on this item. C/Everett moved, C/Chang seconded, to Adopt Resolution 2010-17 Approving and Adopting a Budget for the Fiscal Year Commencing July 1, 2010 and Ending June 30, 2011 including Maintenance and Operations, Special Funds and Capital Improvements; and Appropriating Funds for Accounts, Departments, Divisions, Objects and Purposes Therein Set Forth. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang,, Everett, Tanaka, MPT/Tye, M/Herrera NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 9. COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS: C/Everett spoke about his attendance at the SCAG Conference and Annual Assembly on May 5, 6 and 7 and SCAG's role in the Southern California Region. Friday, May 14 he attended "Music from the Silver Screen" performed by the Chaparral String Orchestra. Last Friday it was announced that D.B.H.S. Principal Dennis Paul will retire on June 17 after 38 years serving as an educator. C/Everett stated that this past Sunday he encountered a rattlesnake on his driveway and that The Inland Valley Humane Society responded to his call and educated him about the importance of these creatures in the cycle of life. He thanked Inland Valley Humane Society for their professionalism. He again thanked staff for the budget. C/Tanaka celebrated Cinco de Mayo with the Seniors monthly dinner dance on May 5. On May 7 he attended the 5t" Annual Asian -American Pacific Islander Heritage Month celebration with C/Chang at the Southern California Edison Customer Technology and Application Center in Irwindale. On Monday, May 10 the Diamond Bar Day at the LA County Fair committee met with the LA County Fair staff and, that C/Everett had joined the committee. Diamond Bar Day at the MAY 18, 2010 PAGE 9 CITY COUNCIL Fair will be, held on Thursday, September 16. On May 11 he and C/Everett attended a Neighborhood Watch meeting at the Knoll Court area. Last Thursday he participated in Career Day at Diamond Ranch High School. He thanked his wife Wanda and C/Evereft and his wife Kay for their help in chaperoning at the DB4-Youth in Action Middle School Dance at the Diamond Bar Center. C/Chang attended the Southern California Edison Asian -American Heritage Month celebration with C/Tanaka. On May 13-15, she, CM/DeStefano, ACM/Doyle and Captain Halm attended the Contract Cities Conference. She encouraged residents to help in raising funds for the AYSO team for their trip to Florida. MPT/Tye said it was a privilege to be elected as the City's representative to California Contract Cities Association. As a contract city D.B. benefits from their vigilance on different issues and he looks forward to serving as a delegate -at - large and representing D.B. in a leadership role with that organization. Before the Council meets again graduations will be underway and he congratulated Nathan Lyon Smith on receiving his MBA from Claremont Graduate School and his hs sister Alex who received her degree from Duke in Raleigh, North Carolina. Congratulations to all graduates. M/Herrera updated residents as the City's representative on the Foothill Transit Board on her previous report of a budget deficit of $12.5 million and impending budget cuts for services and administration. The State has subsequently funded one of the categories in the amount of $3.7 million and on tomorrow's Board meeting agenda there is an item to have a 25 cent fare increase which will generate another $1.1 million. The expenditures for the current year budget are less than anticipated which will result in additional savings. What this means is that instead of having to make $10 million of cuts in services Foothill Transit will now have to make only $3.2 million in cuts in the lower ridership service lines. The end result for D.B. is that Line #286 which runs down Diamond Bar Blvd. will not suffer in service cuts. She thanked everyone who showed up at the hearing to testify about how potential service cuts for Line #286 would hurt especially those individuals living in D.B. who's only means of getting to their jobs is the bus line. She was very pleased that the Council adopted the 2010/11 budget. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Herrera adjourned the Regular City Council meeting at 7:50 p.m. to June 15, 2010 at 7:50 p.m. TOMMYE CRIBBINS, CITY CLERK The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this day of 7 2010. CAROL HERRERA, MAYOR Agenda No. 6.2 0A F;tEGJLAR RIEEWAG OF TAF PLAr1e1'1&.1%Ai�-V#1r1Tr1M1•1, MAY 113 2010 Chairman Torng called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: C/Nelson led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: - ' Commissioners Kwang Ho Lee, Steve Nelson, Jack Shah, Vice Chairman Kathy Nolan, and Chairman Tony Torng. Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; Brad Wohlenberg, Assistant City Attorney; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; Natalie Tobon, Planning Technician; David Alvarez, Assistant Planner; and Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant. Consultants: Mark Rogers, TRG Land; and Peter Lewandowski, Environmental Impact Sciences. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 27, 2010. C/Shah moved, VC/Nolan seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 13, 2010, as corrected. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 5. OLD BUSINESS: None 6. NEW BUSINESS: None 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Lee, Shah, VC/Nolan, Chair/Torng None Nelson None 7.1 Comprehensive Sign Program No. PL 2010-30 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.36.060, the applicant requested approval for a Comprehensive Sign Program for Firestone. The lot is zoned Regional MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION Commercial (C-3) zoned parcel with a consistent underlying General Plan Land Use designation of General Commercial (c). Comprehensive Sign Programs are requested when two or more signs are requested on the same frontage. 1150 S. Grand Avenue Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Bridgestone Retail Operations 333 E. Lake Street Bloomingdale, IL 60108 Sharon Willison Williams Sign Company 111 S. Huntington Street Pomona, CA 91766 PT/Tobon presented staffs report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Comprehensive Sign Program No. PI -2010-30, base on the Findings of Fact, subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. There were no ex parte disclosures. Chair/Torng opened the public hearing. There was no one pre'sent who wished to speak on this item. Chair/Torng closed the public hearing. VC/Nolan moved, C/Shah seconded, to approve Comprehensive Sign Program No. PI -2010-30, base on the Findings of Fact and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. Motion carried by the following Poll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee, Nelson, Shah, VC/Nolan, Chair/Torng NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 7.2 Conditional Use Permit No. PL2010-89 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.58, James Kim submitted a request to operate a music and art school under the business name Orchepia School of Music. The proposed music and art school will provide music lessons to school age children and young adults. The proposed hours of operation are from 2:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on Saturday. The subject property is zoned C-2 (General Commercial) with an underlying General Plan designation of MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION General Commercial. Approval of a Conditional Use Permit is required to operate a music school. PROJECT ADDRESS: 2751 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard, Suite A Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Country Hills Holdings LLC 8115 Preston Road #400 Dallas, TX 75225 APPLICANT: James Kim 21700 Copley Drive, Suite 290 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 SP/Lee presented staffs report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Conditional Use Permit No. PI -2010-89, based on the Findings of Fact and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. C/Shah asked if the applicant intended to rent the hall for other uses or was it intended strictly,for their own use and SP/Lee said she believed. it was intended strictly for use by the music and art school but she would ask the applicant to clarify that point. C/Shah said if the hall was rented out he would be concerned about the time and the one door ingres's/egress at the side of the hall. C/Nelson asked why the school was restricted to 65 students. SP/Lee responded that there are 29 individual classrooms and the number of students is related to the parking, traffic impacts and capacity. She confirmed to C/Nelson that there is surplus parking. C/Nelso.n asked why the City would restrict a business that is coming into an area that has been vacant for years. SP/Lee stated that part of the analysis includes a new office building at the north end of the shopping center which was submitted to the Planning Department today for consideration, all of which has to do with the parking and traffic impacts of the shopping center. CDD/Gubman further stated that the applicant proposed that a maximum of 60 students was anticipated at any one time. Staff normally places restrictions on the maximum enrollment, hours of operation, days of the week, etc. Staff also wanted to provide some flexibility should there be an increase in enrollment because staff did not feel it should limit enrollment so tightly that if there might be 61 students for ex * ample, they would have to come back and request an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit. In this instance, staff's intent was to create a bit of a cushion for the business to exceed their 60 student peak enrollment at any one time without having to seek a modified approval. Certainly, if the Planning Commission feels the cushion is insufficient the parking analysis would allow for more of a cushion. However, he believes that there should be some sort of a cap set during this process. The 65 number was arrived at by adding a 10 percent MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION contingency. Any other number the Commission would like to discuss can certainly be brought forward for consideration. VC/Nolan asked for the building occupancy limit and CDD/Gubman responded that would be determined by the Building Official. CDD/Gubman said VC/Nolan would have to ask the applicant how that number was reached but certainly they would have done a preliminary building code analysis to determine exits and what kind of improvements would have to be included in the tenant improvements to accommodate this occupancy. C/Nelson asked how many parking places the proposed north end office building would require and SP/Lee responded that staff had not yet analyzed that since the application was submitted only today. The building is proposed to be a three-story office building but she does not have the actual square footage figures. C/Nelson said he was concerned about restricting an existing use because of the potential for future uses and while he thinks it is good to plan ahead he would prefer to know what the future needs might because it might reveal that the Commission could increase the opportunity for the operations in -hand. SP/Lee confirmed to C/Nelson that if the applicant experiences problems they have a condition that allows them 'to come back for a possible increase. C/Nelson asked if the Commission were to increase the number of students and it became a problem, the applicant could come back for reconsideration as a condition of this approval and SP/Lee confirmed that was accurate. C/Lee said he was not comfortable with children and young adults occupying the same space without supervision. He wanted to know what age and what kind of people. SP/Lee referred C/Lee to the applicant to answer the question. Chair/Torng said he recalled that the Commission approved a three-story office building for the south end and a two-story office building for the north end and wanted to know if the 158,922 square feet included the previous approval and CDD/Gubman responded that the square footage includes the most recent entitlement and accounts for the approved replacement for the theater building and cancellation of the medical building at the south end as well as the remodel of the Tai Kwando in-line shops building and the daycare building. SP/Lee responded to Chair/Torng that the north end office building square footage is included in the entitlement. Chair/Torng asked if there would be a large crowd for recitals and wanted to know the capacity for the recital hall. Staff suggested that the applicant respond to that question. There were no ex parte disclosures. Chair/Torng invited the applicant to speak. MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION Bob Poyner, Country Hills Holdings LLC, stated that the recital room is for the applicant's use only and not for rental. The recital facility has room for 150 seats. Recitals take place twice a year and take place on the weekend. The interior drawing showing the doors is their preliminary plan and obviously, the property owner must complete construction drawings and go through the City's Building Department with respect to proper ingress/egress and signage interior to the space. The drawing submitted to the Commission this evening is a concept drawing. The age of the children and young adults, this facility is for elementary, middle and high school children. The 65 number was based on the rooms — a guess by the client. The 65 is acceptable for this approval based on the assumption that if the applicant required more capacity they could come back to request an increase from the Commission subject to traffic and parking considerations. C/Shah asked if the applicant means a maximum 65 students at any one time and Mr. Poyner responded yes. VC/Nolan asked for confirmation that the overall enrollment was greater than 65 and Mr. Poyner responded "yes." C/Nelson said that if Mr. Poyner wants 65, he gets 65. What he was thinking about was cuts to the public school music programs and where students will go. Chair/Torng asked Mr. Poyner if he read staff's report and concurred with the Conditions of Approval and Mr. Poyner responded affirmatively. Chair/Torng opened the public hearing. With no one present who wished to speak on this item, Chair/Torng closed the public hearing. CDD/Gubman requested that the Commission amend Condition No. 6 (future reviews) as follows: "Once the music school is in operation and should traffic and/or parking problems arise in the sole judgment of the City, the applicant shall provide parking management services to ease traffic flow and congestion, etc." C/Lee moved, C/Shaw seconded, to approve Conditional Use Permit No. PL2010-89 as amended by staff. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee, Nelson, Shah, VC/Nolan, Chair/Torng NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION 7.3 Development Review and Variance No. PL2010-17 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.418, the applicant requested approval to construct a 6,352 square foot new single family residence on a 48,252 net square foot (1.11 net acres), Rural Residential (RR) zoned parcel with a consistent underlying General Plan Land Use designation of Rural Residential (RR). Variances are requested to allow the building height to be increased from 35 feet to 40 feet 7 inches, and a driveway extension to provide for access to the front door and allow adequate turning radius. for fire trucks as, required by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. PROJECT ADDRESS: -51, �*i1060 2718 Steeplechase Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Terry and Rachel. Hao 60 Seasons Irvine, CA 92603 Jack Mitchell JWM Construction 2902 Calle Heraldo San Clemente, CA 92673 SP/Lee presented staffs report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review and Variance No. PI -2010-17, based on the Findings of Fact and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. VC/Nolan asked staff to elaborate on the design of the metal roof with a large pitch and whether it would present a. nuisance to other neighbors. SP/Lee explained that the roof is sloped and if the applicant were to design the project to meet the building height it is possible that there would not be a sloped roof that is usually typical in very modern contemporary designs. In terms of impact to adjacent properties, again, the building is set back behind the two adjacent homes. VC/Nolan wanted to know what a metal roof would look like. SP/Lee said it was an actual metal roof instead of a clay tile or shingles. I C/Shah wanted to make sure that the fire department had approved the roadway system all the way to the building because he questioned the 15 percent grade. Also he looked at the color rendering and the building is mostly a modern looking building. SP/Lee said she did not believe the color printer justified the actual colors that were submitted on the color board. The paint colors are beige tones. With respect to the LA County Fire Department, the applicant submitted plans to the LA County Fire Department which reviewed and approved the conceptual plan and the applicant is in building plan checked at their own risk prior to getting Commission approval. The applicant has further comment from the fire department MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION for which he can elaborate. CDD/Gubman said the driveway configuration has a switchback design to reduce the grade from what a straight line would create. In addition, the turnaround area was incorporated into the site plan at the front door after consultation with the fire department. So, the applicant has done some due diligence in that regard and still has to go through the formal plan check process. However, the applicant attempted to come up with a design that reduces the driveway grade given the steep slope front to back on this property. C/Shah said that the plan indicates a 15 percent grade which is clearly a difficult grade. As long as the fire department approves it he is okay with it. CDD/Gubman indicated that 15 percent is the maximum grade that they would accept and there needs to be a rounding off at the brow to keep the vehicle from bottoming out. The applicant is attempting to work with the property as best they can. C/Shah asked if there would be cut and fill and CDD/Gubman responded that about 600 cubic yards of export. C/Shah asked if there was any way the cut -and fill could be balanced within the site because 600 yards could easily be used on the graded south side. CDD/Gubman said that would be a good question for the applicant. C/Nelson asked why the City's development standards restricted height to 35 feet. CDD/Gubman said that it seems that if one looks into any zoning code 35 feet is the default height limit. C/Nelson felt that if the Commission did not understand the reason for the standard how can it meaningfully determine whether a five foot seven inch variance would be acceptable. How many variances has the City granted to building heights for residential structures in the past three years, for example, and how many more requests will the City get in the future. He does not think the City should grant a variance without a good and' consistent reason moving forward. If the City cannot define why it has a standard of 35 feet why does the City have any standard? SP/Lee said -in an attempt to respond to why the code is 35 feet the rural residential zone for the City is predominately permitted single family detached homes which is the maximum height for those types of homes. C/Nelson said, so why are we allowing five feet seven inches on this one if most houses are 35 feet? SP/Lee responded that because this property has unique characteristics such as a steep slope and unusual topography that justifies a variance. C/Nelson said "we've had steep slopes in the past without having to grant variances for height — am I right?" CDD/Gubman responded "that is true." C/Nelson said it was perhaps a question for the architect and he did not mean to put anyone on the spot but wanted to be very careful about the variances the City is granting going forward. CDD/Gubman said that the elevations for the property show compound slopes in terms of having an ascending slope from the street and then a lateral slope that warps the property in a unique way. All properties obviously have some unique topographic characteristics. The ones that characterize this property are the steep ascending slope and the side to side slope as well. And architecturally, what the applicant attempted to do was slope the roof to follow the side to side slope but in the design challenge to take into account the varying topographic elevations, there is a small wedge — portion that does hook up above the 35 foot envelope. MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION C/Shah felt the floor heights were standard heights and that itwas the architectural feature that raises the height beyond 35 feet. In viewing the section on drawing A 1.9 section (a) it clearly depicts why the height exceeded 35 feet. Chair/Torng asked if the retaining wall met the six foot height requirement and SP/Lee responded affirmatively. There were no ex parte disclosures. John Danielian, Danielian Associates, 60 Corporate Park, Irvine, and Jack Mitchell, JWM Construction responded to Commissioner's questions. Mr. Danielian responded to C/Shah that with respect to slope of the roof, the site slopes from north to south and the envelope of the home is within the 35 feet of the natural grade. When measuring the five additional feet, it is artificially taken from the new established finished grade. So when designing the home, they stayed within the natural grade. With regard to why the roof is sloping, the attempt is to mimic and follow the contours of the site i.e. responding to the site conditions. C/Shah asked the applicant to speak to the grade of the entrance ramp and the color of the building. Mr. Danielian responded that prior to commencing the project he met with the fire department to discuss critical issues. This is a very difficult site with a 29 1/2 percent slope and they attempted to minimize the steepness of the driveway. The fire department required the project to be no more than 15 percent and 14 feet in width and that is what is pictured in the design of the driveway. Anything over 15 percent is unacceptable. The turnaround space was also required by the fire department and the arch itects/applicants have been working closely with the fire department since day one. And since that time the applicant has submitted plans at will and at the architect's own risk and have received comments back, one of which was to confirm that there was an appropriate turning radius at the top (of the driveway). The rest of the fire department comments addressed minor structural issues. In addition, the pool water will be used for emergency water as needed. C/Shah asked why the applicant was unable to balance the site without exporting dirt. Mr. Danielian said they did everything they could to balance the site. Unfortunately, because there is a basement it requires removing a lot of'soil from the site but they are doing everything possible to distribute the dirt throughout the site and help with the driveway grade. CDD/Gubman responded to C/Nelson that the 35 foot requirement is from "finished" grade. As - the architect stated, the natural grade was at a higher elevation than the finished grade so the visual impact of the overall building height is mitigated to a certain extent by the fact that the pad is being lowered. so that the MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION effective height when viewed from Steeplechase which is at a fixed grade, would be mitigated by that feature of the development. C/Nelson said he would suggest the Commission keep that in mind for the future. VC/Nolan asked when the Hillside Management Ordinance was put in place and whether it was put in place because of the conditions where people are building more on the hillsides because of less area. And was the 35 foot limit in place prior to that ordinance. CDD/Gubman responded that the Hillside Ordinance was developed out of consideration for Diamond Bar and its topography and there is a need wherever a jurisdiction is in a hillside situation or with this type of topography to avoid some of the mass grading for steep roadway design that occurred in hillside developments in the 60s and 70s where development occurred directly on ridgelines and was destroying the natural features. The Hillside Development Standards are an effort to require homes and development overall to be designed to fit the overall topography rather than alteringthe topography to fit the development. SP/Lee stated the Hillside Management Development Standards were adopted in 1998. CDD/Gubman responded to VC/Nolan that the 35 foot height limitation is in all of the residential zones so the height limit for the hillside district is overlayed on this additional concept of the building height envelope that is determined by some diagrams in the Hillside Development Standards where one creates height envelopes from site property lines and from the grade from the front to the back of the property. SP/Lee said the 35 foot height limit requirement was also included in the Hillside Standards. C/Shah asked how many truckloads of dirt would be required to export the 600 cubic yards of export and Mr. Mitchell responded that due to the site he would have to bring in smaller trucks to accommodate the shared driveway for about 100 trips of six to seven yards per truck. The dirt will be hauled to the landfill just off the SR60. He plans to remove the dirt in a slow and methodical manner so as to present as little interruption as possible to the neighborhood. When he first looked at the site dirt export was his initial concern. As a result, he designed retaining walls for an earth retention system that uses modular blocks and uses the onsite materials that are reprocessed and re -compacted onsite. Mr. Danielian responded to Chair/Torng that he read staffs report and concurs with the conditions of approval. Chair/Torng opened the public hearing. Victor Natividad, 2730 Steeplechase Lane, said he was not present to object but was, in fact, pleased to welcome a new neighbor. He had concerns about the shared access road that is sifting on a steep slope and over 100 truckloads of dirt will be moved across the shared access road that proceeds through six lots. This access road is owned by the land owners and it is not maintained by "The Country Estates" which is unfortunate because the road is in very, very bad condition. With MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSION the exception of Lot 52 which is partially paved with concrete and asphalt and Lot 55 which is paved with concrete, the rest of the roadway is in very poor condition. The concrete on his lot is only four inches thick and in 2005 during the paving the waterline broke because it was not buried deep and also because of the heavy load. Informally, he mentioned this fact to Jack Mitchell on May 6 and suggested that a metal plate be placed on top of the concrete to protect the water and sewer lines and Mr. Mitchell assured him there should be no issue. Second, he was not sure how the concrete would handle the truckloads and whether there would be damage to the access road. If large cracks result from hauling the dirt he would like to have the damage repaired as soon as possible before it developed into a bigger problem. The downside of living in the area is the hill erosion from the access road. He found the mitigation to be very expensive and the damage was not covered by insurance. Fortunately, he was able to secure access through other lots 56 and 57 to his house. He is requesting that any big cracks be repaired at once. It becomes worrisome when the construction coincides with the rainy season. He is sure there will be minor cracks which can be repaired later and he is willing to share that with his neighbor. Third, he accesses his property from the south end of Steeplechase from lot 57 through 56 and the up to his lot 55. It is in extremely poor condition and because there are no houses on lots 57 and 56 it continues to deteriorate because the absentee owners do not want to pave the road. If there are any potholes, he would implore the Commission to have them fixed before any hillside erosion occurs again. Chair/Torng closed the public hearing. SP/Lee asked for the applicant to comment on sharing the costs of improvements should there be damage to the concrete portion of the access road. Mr. Mitchell stated that it is implied that damage done by construction activities are the responsibility of the applicant. With respect to a steel plate, it is generally conditioned on any larger grading job that he is required to have a "shaker plate," a 1/4 inch steel plate with ridges on it that shakes the dirt off the tires of the equipment as it leaves the site and comes onto the site. He said he would place the steel plate on top of Mr. Natividad's plumbing and he will take photographs and if any condition worsens of course he would rectify it. With regard to the asphalt road in front of his client's property, it might as well be a gravel road because it has pretty much deteriorated to the point that it is almost non-existent and obviously, that will have to be rectified and the project has budgeted for the inevitability. The only issues are that "The Country Estates Homeowners Association" is resistant on the use of asphalt; however, there is asphalt in place at this time so that is an issue that must be addressed with the HOA. All of the paving surfaces would have to be left in good condition when they are finished. With regard to Mr. Natividad's pipes being shallow, he would hope that the steel plate would mitigate that but if they are shallow and something happens they have to be fixed in the normal course of business. MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION CDD/Gubman explained that the access from Steeplechase to these properties has to be traversable and for this project to get through the fire department plan check process the applicants will have to demonstrate that the roadway is going to be surfaced to accommodate emergency vehicles. With respect to damage to the private drive and potential damage to water lines, this is a private property and reciprocally used, owned and accessed between private property owners so the City would not impose any requirements in this regard. This is a civil matter that would need to be dealt with in that venue should there be .any claims or damage caused by this construction project. VC/Nolan asked the length of the access road and Mr. Mitchell responded he believed it was 500 to 600 feet traversing five or six lots. There are sections that are in very poor repair. For his fire department requirements he has to maintain emergency access at all times during combustible construction. There are rules and responsibilities that other agencies have that are standards and if one causes damage it has to be repaired. C/Shah said he believed the architect could design the lot by balancing the dirt onsite rather than having dirt exported. C/Lee was confident that the applicant knew what he was doing and the City has full enforcement authority to take care of those concerns. C/Lee moved, VC/Nolan seconded, to approve Development Review and Variance No. PL2010-17, based on the Findings of Fact and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 8. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: Lee, Nelson, VC/Nolan, Chair/Torng Shah None 8.1 Site "D" Specific Plan — Pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act; Title 21 — City's Subdivision Ordinance; and Title 22 — Development Code Sections 22.60 and 22.70, the proposed project is to recommend approval of the following to the City Council. General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 — A request to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan (SP). MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 12 PLANNING COMMISSIOil,— Zone Change No. 2007-04 – A request to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential (RL) and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan (SP). Specific Plan No. 2007-01 – a Request to adopt the Site D Specific Plan for approximately 30.36 -acre site for the construction of 202 residential dwelling units at a density of 20 units per acre; 153,985 gross square feet of commercial use at 0.35 floor area ratio; and approximately 10 acres of Open Space areas, easements and rights-of-way. Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 – A request to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes. Environmental Impact Report No. 2007-02 – A request to certify the final EIR which provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the Specific Plan area. The EIR includes mitigation measures for the project, addresses project alternatives, identifies the environmentally nvironmentally superior project alternative, and adopts a statement of overriding considerations. (Continued from April 27, 2010) Project Address: Site comprised of approximately 30.36 -acres located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Numbers 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902,8714-002,093, and 8714-015-001.) Applicant: Walnut Valley Unified School District and City of Diamond Bar Lead Agency: City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department C/Nelson recused himself and left the dais and the meeting. ' Chair/Torng explained the Commission's direction on this item and announced that in addition to the agenda packet the Commission also received a letter from Mary Rodriquez and an email from David Busse he requested be placed in the public record. CDD/Gubman stated that on April 27 there was intent to recommend certification of the MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION Environmental Impact Report and adoption of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. There was general support for the Specific Plan, but there was a lack of consensus about how to craft the recommendation pertaining to the incorporation of a park element on this site. The three supporting Commissioners expressed a desire to have some requirement for a park or public space as part of this project but continued the matter to allow staff to conduct further research and to come back to the Commission with its recommendation. Staff is ready to present information to help the Commission make its decision.this evening. CDD/Gubman further stated that what staff heard from the Commission were two different concepts discussed. One was a dedication of a traditional public park as a standalone feature on this site. The second concept staff heard was the integration of one or more public spaces into the future commercial development comprised of some minimum acreage that would incorporate amenities such as tot lot, shade structure, picnic table, features thatwould be found in a traditional park but more integrated into the commercial development. Tonight's presentation tation is in two parts, the first of which he will present to the Commission using a PowerPoint presentation that depicts an overview of parks in the City of different sizes to help the Commissioners visualize what one and two acres and different sizes and palettes of amenities that parks of different sizes could accommodate. This presentation will be followed by a discussion of the. public space option for the commercial development by Mark Rogers who will present an interactive design exercise to help the Commission consider that option as well. CDD/Gubman first presented an overview of seven City parks that are within the size range discussed at the last meeting. These parks range in size from .3 acres (16,000 square feet) to about 3.4 acres. Staff will then show graphics. of polygons that will. give the Commissioners an idea of how those different sized parks would compare to the footprint of Site D. The staff report calls out acreages in the table and when staff went through the actual graphic verification of park sizes more exact acreages were determined. CDD/Gubman first presented the approved construction plan for the new Washington Street Park at the intersection of Washington and Lincoln Streets. This .3 acre site has a tot lot, open green space, gazebo, five picnic tables, three benches and a walkway. This park is a neighborhood park and does not accommodate off-street parking. This park is intended to serve the neighborhood and visitors would 'have to park on the street. The next larger park is Longview Park South which was about .83 developed acres and has planned for it a basketball court, turf volleyball court, tot lot, two picnic tables and a barbecue. Stardust Park is .98 acres and features a tot lot, open green space, two benches and a paved walking trail. Longview Park North is .99 acres with .8 acres improved. There is a grove/grouping of vegetation at the rear portion of the site that reduces the usable acreage. This park includes a tot lot, open green, two benches and a paved walking trail. Summitridge Mini Park (down slope from the Diamond Bar Center) is about 1.27 acres and is entirely passive green space. Starshine Park is 1.66 acres and includes tot lot, open green space, two picnic tables, two benches, a barbecue and a MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 14 PLANNING COMMISSION concrete walkway. Heritage Park is about 3.4 acres and includes a 1.5 acre softball field, tot lot, open green space, a recreation building, five picnic tables, three barbecues and a. concrete walkway. He showed a diagram of the overview of the parks to scale so that the Commissioners could get a better idea of what they would look like on Site D. He overlayed the polygons onto the diagram to give the Commissioners an idea of the relative size of that park within Site D. C/Lee asked if there was a general standard or formula for a park size with respect to population or households. He thought the inclusion of small sites was irrelevant to Site D without having a formula to guide them. Where is the formula or general understanding for the standard for park sizes and population ratio? CDD/Gubman said he did not have that information for C/Lee but there is a standard amount of recreation space per capita or per 1,000 persons. He does not have that information because that is not what was requested for this evening's meeting. The direction staff was given was to provide options for a park or open space area so that is the focus of this presentation. C/Lee said he understood but what he wants to know is there a standard size or shape that should have a certain foundation and why did staff bring in the small size parks and how was it appropriate for this project. Without a general understanding about size and population ratio and park size it is very difficult to understand. CDD/Gubman said the reason he is showing these parks is because there was a menu of amenities the Commission asked for, and needed a better understanding of the acreage needed to accommodate them. VC/Nolan said that staff brought back to the Planning Commission a good visual and it helps to see the possible locations for the park. C/Shah said that this park could be in one of those green areas shown on the drawing where the trees are shown and the roads can go around it. CDD/Gubman said he would say it that it can be adjacent to those green areas. A lot of those green areas are slopes so it will give some visual contiguity if the park is abutted against those green areas. C/Shah said it could be part and parcel of the overall development. CDD/Gubman agreed. C/Shah asked the area of the commercial portion of the- project and CDD/Gubman responded 10.1 acres, about three times the size of Heritage Park. C/Lee asked if there were a certain number of people that could use a certain sized park. For example, Washington Park is 0.8 acre — how many people can it accommodate. CDD/Gubman said he did not have that information. C/Lee said that there should be a certain standard to build a park - a park based on the population of neighbors. CDD/Gubman reiterated that he did not have that information available. VC/Nolan asked at what point does a park need its own parking lot. There are pocket parks that are less than half an acre and to provide guesstimation of how large would a MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 15 PLANNING COMMISSION park be before it deeds its own dedicated- parking or parking that would be inclusive of the commercial lot. CDD/Gubman'said it would depend on context. A neighborhood park is going to use neighborhood streets for parking or it is going to be accessed by pedestrians in the immediate vicinity. This park given its adjacency to an arterial and potentially not being within a neighborhood, it is going to need to rely on the off street parking provided by the shopping center. Mark Rodgers took the podium and explained to the Commission that he would lead them through an interactive sketch exercise to illustrate concepts of how usable public spaces could be integrated into a commercial shopping center environment. He then proceeded, using the auditorium's overhead projection system, to sketch diagrams onto Site D base maps to show different ways buildings and public plazas could be configured on the commercial portion of the site. VC/Nolan said she appreciated all of the presentations. It really puts a name to the face. VC/Nolan said that she visited a number of parks in the area. She visited both Longview Parks, Stardust Park, Starshine Park, Washington Park and other parks outside of the area. The smaller parks in residential areas did not fit what she envisions. The parks that she visited today were basically used by residents within those few blocks. Of all of those parks she visited there wasn't one person at any of them and it was during after school hours. She envisions something that is for the community. Something that can be used by everyone. She said they talked about this being the gateway to Diamond Bar and she would like to see something that is visual. V/C Nolan said that she liked how it is incorporated with residential. She said that a park area less than an acre and a half would not be worth the effort to include in the project. She envisions more than a pocket park, although, pocket parks serve a great purpose — no discredit to them, however, they look like two lots that were planted with grass to make it look like a playground — they do serve a purpose for that immediate neighborhood, however, she does not see a pocket park being right for this kind of environment. Before the April meeting she visited a number of parks that she shared with Mr. Gubman and a number of them even had dog parks. When we talk about the social aspect of these park like areas, they were hugely populated, they were very nice environments that did bring those communities, e.g., elderly and young, together throughout the day. V/C Nolan said that she did not care for the park area being in the residential area. She wants to see this as something that can be used by the community at large. C/Shah said he thought it was a good presentation. If there is a park in one area it's a question of maintaining it and who is going to maintain it. If it becomes part of the public, then the property owner is going to say why am I paying for it. He always believes in rewarding designs. Frank Gehry is a famous architect known throughout the world. He has created these kind of spaces. He said that he has created at mass transit stations where it becomes a living and breathing space for the towns. He said that he sees that vision here that instead of identifying one area, the space should flow —there should be green, there should be areas where people can go and sit and in the commercial area that is best utilized for the people who are coming for shopping, who are visiting, going to MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 16 PLANNING COMMISSION the restaurant, etc. In the residential area where the other two areas are proposed maybe it can be combined with the water quality management areas and where the slopes are combined with it so it becomes a larger area where the local community — the people living there - can use it. Providing a park for the entire City is the City's responsibility, not this property owner's responsibility. He said that he would like to see that this property owner maintain a park for their own use and in the commercial let it split out throughout the commercial area. For residential, maybe we can identify a third of an acre in each lot and whatever way the designer designs it along with the other green spaces. In the commercial area maybe a third of an acre or whatever we decide which could be spread around and make it a nice architectural feature for the people who come to shop inthat area. It could be a mixture where we do not dictate a location or we dictate an area where the future designer designs and comes back to the Commission and at that time the Commission again reviews it and then see whether it fits into the environment in which it is designed because we don't know the current environment of the future design. We assume so many things. Why assume? Wait. Identify the need and wait for the design. C/Lee said he thinks the park is the main point of our discussion but mainly he'd like to give his comment regarding the Site D plan. First of all, we always encourage people to participate in the meeting and ask them to give us input but somehow after we finish extensive talking and discussions he does not see any reflection of the residents' ideas and input. Somehow that is not the recommended way to do the public meeting. Secondly, this site project is seeking a zone change from low density to the Specific Plan and the Specific Plan includes a density of 20 units per acre. When you see the surrounding area most houses are 6,000 to 12,000 square feet but compared to the numbers in this one that size asks us for about five times more high density zone change and he does not think that is appropriate. Also, there is an H -Mart shopping center across from Site D and a lot of business owners came to a higher rent rate before the renovation and now Site D project asks us to give approval for 150,000 square foot commercial area and there will be two major shopping centers that will compete with each other. He has visited the H -Mart shopping center and sees many small businesses that have closed and several ownerships have been changed. They are suffering from the economy and the higher rent and then we place another shopping center within distance and small business owners will suffer more and possibly we will see more empty spaces in the future. He said that this did not make sense at all. C/Lee said that if we must develop Site D then he believes that we need to develop single-family residences or combine the single-family and high density. The commercial site doesn't make sense at all to him. VC/Nolan said that adding a park to the commercial area does reflect the concerns of the community. They want to keep this space green. It doesn't look like to some extent that's not going to happen, but it does reflect that concern. She said that by reducing the commercial to a small extent does alleviate it being just this huge commercial lot. She does like the idea of the urban park -like setting for the use of the commercial, for the use of the residents in regard to restaurant and like outdoor seating. VC/Nolan exampled MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 17 PLANNING COMMISSION Downtown Brea Birch Street. But she does think this does serve the purpose for the neighborhood. Making the commercial area smaller, and incorporating a park into this area can tie in very well with the commercial use - building a path — making it a trail where it is marked off for size, for distance, for walking, for exercise, and incorporating that with the residential, with the commercial and with the park. Chair/Torng, in response to C/Lee's comments that we do not reflect the community's comments stated the Commission has gone through this process based on a legal process that staff explained during the last meeting with respect to working through the entire process overtime with public meetings, and public hearings. On April 27 staff responded to all of the questions from residents. After the Commissioners heard all of the input and staffs responses the Commission decided at the last meeting that it wanted more information regarding a park in the proposed project. All proper protocol has been followed and the Commission has considered the project on its merits in a legal manner. Chair/Torng thanked staff for their presentation that helped the Commission to better understand how a park of different sizes would impact the commercial and residential areas. He understands that parks are maintained by the City and that would mean additional costs to the City. He concurred with C/Shah that the "park" space be more integrated public space. He also liked Mr. Roger's suggestion of a trail from the residential area through the center of the commercial site to the corner of the Diamond Bar entrance and also at the corner of Cherrydale, if the Commission were decide to add one third of an acre, and take one third of an acre on to that corner. He said that he discussed with CDD/Gubman a third option. We may want o keep the options open for the B level plan by allowing that future developments must choose between the two options instead of force choosing one option at this time. At the plan level B the builder would have to come back to the Commission with a more detailed plan. At this time, the Planning Commission could consider the minimum acreage it would want to put into either a park or integrated space. That's something we might want to consider now. And if we cannot make a decision regarding a park or integrated space — option one and two, the Commission could consider the third option. He asked CDD/Gubman to confirm the third option. CDD/Gubman explained that staff provided two options in its report and the Commission could come up with a third option that is a synthesis of those two to be proposed at the B level. C/Shah said he felt Chair/Torng was on the right track. He wanted to make the point that the Commission may want to identify the commercial portion be designated as one third of an acre of a park and one-quarter of an acre for each residential lot based on level B so that in the future the builder can propose to develop the property in a certain wayand come back for the Commission's final determination and approval. At least if we give them the guidelines, they can interpret how to incorporate the space depending on how the design develops for both the commercial and residential. Chair/Torng said he was concerned about the residential because in the commercial area the public can use the area but in a residential area that may be restricted to the MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 18 PLANNING COMMISSION residential within the project. He said that he would prefer to set the limits in the commercial site for public space. C/Shah said his intention was to have a park for the residents of the project because the City should not be in the business of maintaining any of the park area. VC/Nolan agreed with Chair/Torng that this should stay in the commercial area. She said that the 202 homes are going to generate tax revenue. The community pays for parks with taxes that comes back to the City for all the parks. The project needs a park, and a park of this type. The Commission is in a role to recommend to the City Council our thoughts. At some point the City Council is going to vote on this matter. VC/Nolan questioned CDD/Gubman that if the recommendation of C/Shah gets to the point where it is an off number as far as the vote, as far as this going forward in passing the resolution, is this an all -or -nothing package? CDD/Gubman said the Commission will*take three actions on three separate resolutions. Just to clarify, it is not an all or nothing issue. But the reason staff suggested the Commission reconsider the passage of the first two resolutions at that last meeting is that these are all actions related to one project and there could be potential timing issues with expiration dates and other statutes of limitation if the Commission were to split the dates apart. So the only all or nothing aspect is to make all of the decisions at one meeting. Chair/Torng questioned whether the Commission should make a determination on the amount of park coverage for the residential site, or should the Commission focus on the commercial site. CDD/Gubman said his understanding was that the Commission was looking at either a dedicated park or some alternative public space. For the residential component, he believed the intent or expectation in the Specific Plan is that there will be private amenities for that residential community whether it is a clubhouse, pool, and other such features that they would maintain through association dues but it will be privately used. This park feature that the Commission has been discussing is really something that is in addition to whatever private open space amenities that would be incorporated into the residential community that is part of the Specific Plan. VC/Nolan. said that she believed this provides more reason why we don't need pocket parks in a residential area. They are going to have their own facilities or their own areas for those residents. She is not opposed to reducing the commercial area, it can be incorporated with the commercial, with the shopping, and with the restaurants. She visited the parks and anything short of an acre and a half doesn't make much sense. Chair/Torng said that at the last meeting he expressed his interested in a more integrated area (option 2). One of the comments from a resident is the desire to have an urban City center with a shopping center and some type of park space that all would be able to visit and at the same time enjoy shopping and dining. The space is important. We want to reserve a space for this use. He liked the trail path Mr. Rogers described in his presentation. MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 19 PLANNING COMMISSION VC/Nolan asked if the Commission will re -vote on the resolutions voted on at the last meeting. ACA/Wohlenberg said that there are three resolutions, two of which have been approved by a vote of 3-1 and the Commission reconsidered those and tabled those until this time for a revote and the reconsideration essentially removed the previous vote and now they are up for a vote again. The third resolution the Commission never reached consensus and so that will be up for a vote at this meeting. CDD/Gubman recommended that the Commission complete the discussion on Item 3 and see what, if any consensus can be reached. C/Shah recommended that the Commission reconsider the previous approved resolutions and consider Option 2 for a maximum of one acre. C/Shah said that VC/Nolan convinced him that the residential should manage their own common space. CDD/Gubman said that in Option 1 the residential development as envisioned would still have its community, its HOA amenities. To do Option 1 in the residential area would be to reduce the size of the residential area to put a park in that area. The idea of the park is undetermined at this time where on the 30 acres it would finally reside but if the Commission is going to recommend the park option it will reduce the acreage of either the residential or commercial side of the project. VC/Nolan asked how they should proceed. ACA/Wohlenberg said that all three actions are essentially taking place simultaneously so if the Commission wants to discuss 3 and vote on that item first because he believes it will be most difficult, that would be fine and then the Commission can move to Items 1 and 2. VC/Nolan moved to recommend that the City Council approve Specific Plan No. 2007-01 to establish land use and development standards to facilitate and govern the development of up to 202 residential dwelling units, up to 153,985 gross square feet of commercial floor area; and approximately 10. 15 acres of open space areas, easements and right-of-way, and Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes with the amendment to include 1.5 acres of dedicated park space within the commercial parcel. Mr. Rogers clarified that the water quality features are not a functioning part of a park. When he says "ambient". they may be adjacent and provide area for green space and planting, etc., but you do not recreate in them. We have calculated, for purposes of water quality, the area necessary to clean the water under the current standards and it is approximately about one third of an acre and two shallow basins less than three feet in depth. These areas collectively can be of benefit to, by virtue of their adjacency, creating a park environment and yet not have functioning uses within them. And it might result, if MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 20 PLANNING COMMISSION we so chose to modify the circulation, in a configuration that would allow those areas to be adjacent to a similar type of area the size of which would be at the Commission's discretion. C/Shah said that as long as the park is adjacent to the area it would be acceptable Chair/Torng asked VC/Nolan if the dedicated park area would be managed by the City or is that going to be managed by the commercial site. VC/Nolan responded that the park would have to be managed by the City. C/Sha,h said that the park has to be dedicated to the city for the community's use. CIDD/Gubman explained that Option 1 as presented in staffs report would be dedicated City Park as part of the City Park system. C/Shah said he liked the ided, of the park having to be dedicated to the City, because otherwise, if people are going to use it the private property owner can put up a fence not allowing entrance. If people want it to be used by the community and anybody can use it then it has to be dedicated to the City. CDD1Gubman said the way this would play out if it is to be a public park, is the developer would build it, dedicated it to the City. and then the City takes the keys and ongoing maintenance. C/Shah said then it has to be built to the City's standards. Chair/Torng asked if the park would be in one place or broken up? VC/Nolan felt it should all be in one place because it was too small of an area to divide it up. ACANVohlenberg said he believed the motion was still being formulated so staff could make sure it knows exactly what is being proposed. C/Shah said he thought if they were going to develop a City Park of o ' ne and one half acre including an adjacent water quality management area, whatever it calculates to be, that amenity has to be taken from the commercial lot. He said one and one-half acres is a good size. CIDD/Gubman said he heard the 1.5 acres and what he needs is clarification on how much usable park area is wanted. C/Lee said that if other fellow Commissioners want to put a size in now when eventually the adoption will be decided by the City Council members does not make sense. VC/Nolan disagreed. She suggested that one and one third acres of usable park space area be adjacent to the area off of Cherrydale, adjacent to the water use area. C/Lee asked VC/Nolan asked if there was any meaning or foundation for why she decided on 1.3 acre. VC/Nolan said yes. She said she walked a couple of parks and the ones that were under an acre were just a couple of small house. lot sizes. The Starshine Park was a nice sized park of usable space. She walked off parks counting off how many paces it takes and gone from park to park and saw what it felt like, what it looks like including the dog park spaces and they were comfortable area. If the space is too small it did not make any sense to 'include a park of that small size. She added that she MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 21 PLANNING COMMISSION understands that the park should not take so much away from the commercial that it hurts that portion of it but she thinks 1.3 acres is an appropriate minimum. C/Shah said that within the last year and a half he had been involved with the design of about one and one-quarter acres and he agreed with VC/Nolan. He said that he could visualize it and could see it being used. CIDD/Gubman said the more exact size of Starshine Park is one and two-thirds acres. VC/Nolan said it was a very comfortable setting, the design of it and the open space. She said she visualized an area where people can actually use it, not just open land for the sake of open land but park settings. An acre and two-thirds of space was doable for her. C/Shah said he was comfortable with moving forward with the motion for 1.3 acres and Option 2. But the word "usable" space for the park should be included. VC/Nolan asked C/Shah to confirm that it would be one space and not broken up. C/Shah concurred. ACAMohlenberg proposed the recommended resolution language for either option to be included within the staff report. He read the proposed language to the Commission, the original of which would be found on Page 4 of 15 in the staff report. This would be to add to the resolution Section B.5.a.4 to read: "At the time the development is formally submitted to the Planning Commission for consideration, the subsequent plan shall incorporate within its boundaries a neighborhood park of at least 1.3 acres usable area dedicated to the City within the commercial development adjacent to slope areas or waste water management areas and shall incorporate features such as but not limited to, a tot lot, picnic tables, seating areas, shade structures." And he would also include Section B.5.b.8 as originally stated on Page 5 of 15 of staffs report. C/Shah asked if the amended language could include that "the park be designed to the City's standards and when completed should be dedicated to the City if the City is willing to accept it." ACANVohlenberg responded that after where in his previous language he said "dedicated to the City" they could add "and designed and constructed to City standards." And, not waste water management areas but "water quality management areas." He was reminded those are two different things. Chair/Torng asked if there was any motion. C/Shah moved to General Plan amendment No. 2007-03, Zone Change No. 2007-04, Specific Plan No. 2007-01, Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 and Environmental Impact Report No. 2007-02, reconsider the previous passage of the two previous considerations and the third one to be added to that one with the language provided by the counsel. ACA/Wohlenberg clarified for the record that the CEQA action is taking place first and that staff's opinion and recommendation that this alteration is within the existing scope of the EIR. C/Shah concurred. VC/Nolan received confirmation that the acreage was 1.3. V/C Nolan Seconded the motion. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 22 PLANNING COMMISSION 1.1 10. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Shah, VC/Nolan, Chair/Torng NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson Chair/Torng addressed the audience and asked that anyone with questions or concerns should contact the City staff and attend the City Council hearings on this matter. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: C/Lee said he really appreciated his colleague's efforts and energy to make a better picture for Site D but to him the best scenario for the residents is that Site D should be developed for single residences and public parks. He believed that to be the best scenario. But WVUSD and the developer don't do that because they cannot generate income, he understood that. Hopefully, we made a better decision and then the result would be best for most people. C/Shah thanked staff and the consultant for doing an excellent job. Everyone stayed with the project and gave the Commission good insight and clarification. To the general public, our job and our intent is to see that we make a decision very seriously and to the benefit of the community, benefit of the City of Diamond Bar residents and to make sure that what the Commission does is legally applicable so the Commission is making a recommendation to the City Council and the City Council will make the final determination. VC/Nolan congratulated Chair/Torng for his dedication to Diamond Bar and for his Volunteer of the Year award at the Birthday Celebration. Chair/Torng thanked his colleagues. This is a difficult project and we did it and we did it together even when we have different opinions. That is why we have five Commissioners. All opinions count, and that is very important. He appreciated everyone's efforts and especially staff and the consultant. Thanks for the good job and keep up the good work. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 10.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects. CDD/Gubman reminded the Commission to adjourn tonight's meeting to the Special Meeting of May 13, 2010, at 6:30 p.m. 11. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As listed in tonight's agenda. MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 23 PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Chairman Torng adjourned the regular meeting at 9:47 p.m. to the Special Meeting of May 13, 2010, at 6:30 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 25th day of May, 2010. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, Greg Gubman Community Development Director - Torng, ChvAT-Th"" off, f Agenda No. 6.3 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION THE GOVERNMENT CENTER AUDITORIUM DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 APRIL 22, 2010 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Grundy called the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the SCAQMD/Government Center Hearing Board Room, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Herndon led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioner Lew Herndon, Dave Roberto, Vice Chairman Ted Owens and Chairman Dave Grundy. Absent: Commissioner Benny Liang was excused. Staff Present: Bob. Rose, Community Services Director; Anthony Jordan, Parks and Maintenance Superintendent; Christy Murphey, Recreation Supervisor; - Crystal Knox, Community Services Coordinator, and Marcy Hilario, Senior Administrative Assistant. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE: Alison Meyers, Community Services Coordinator, recognized outgoing DB 4 Youth in Action Board members and introduced 2010/2011 incoming Board Members. CALENDAR OF EVENTS: 1. CONSENT CALENDAR As presented in the agenda. 1.1 Approval of Minutes for March 25, 2010 Regular Meeting. C/Hemdon moved, C/Owens seconded, to approve the March 25, 2010 regular Meeting Minutes as amended. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS 2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS Herndon, Roberto, VC/Owens, Chair/Grundy None Liang 2.1 RECREATION PROGRAM UPDATE — RS/Murphey 2.1.1 PowerPoint Presentation — Day Camp and Tiny Tots Program and Volunteens — CSC/Meyers. APRIL 22, 2010 PAGE 2 P&R COMMISSION 2.2 Parks Report — PMS/Jordan 2.2.1 Power Point Presentation — Sycamore Canyon ADA Restroom/Office Project — PMS/Jordan 2.3 CIP Projects Update — CSD/Rose 2.3.1 Washington Street Mini Park — CSD/Rose reported that the consultant is about a month away from having the plans ready for plan check. Staff put the estimated costs of the construction of the park ($600,000) in the 2010/11 proposed budget for Council review. The tile wall will be coordinated with groundbreaking. If the budget item is approved, construction will likely commence by early fall and take about a year to complete. 2.3.2 Dedication Ceremony for Trail and Restroom Building at Sycamore Canyon Park — CSD/Rose stated that about 150 people attended the ceremony and walked the trail. 2.3.3 Sycamore Canyon Park Trail — Phase IV — CSD/Rose reported that staff is still working on the construction documents. During phase III there was an issue with the design of the retaining walls so staff is taking additional time to make certain the design is appropriate for this phase. Once final design is completed the project will move through the plan check process with construction commencing late summer to early fall and should be finished by Christmas. 2.3.4 Sycamore Canyon ADA — Restrdom and Office Project — CSD/Rose stated that staff conducted the final walk through about a week ago and the contractor is currently working on the punch list items. The flooring material has not cured c ' orrectly and the contractor is dealing with that issue so that the restrooms can be opened. 2.3.5 Silver Tip Mini -Park — CSD/Rose reported that the April 24 Neighborhood Meeting will kick-off the project design work. After staff receives comments from residents on the design concept the matter will come to the Commission and then be presented to the City Council. Funds for this project are also included in the proposed 2010/11 budget. There is $108,000 of CDGB funds in the proposed budget and staff plans to request additional funding that is not yet determined. Chair/Grundy asked about inclusion of a Dog Park in the Silver Tip Mini -Park. CSD/Rose responded 'that at Tuesday night's Council Meeting, Council Member Chang brought up the idea of including a dog park in the goals and objectives for Fiscal Year 2010/2011. The other Council Members were not quite ready to make it a goal but wanted to look at the possibility within the Parks Master Plan. APRIL 22, 2010 PAGE 3 P&R COMMISSION In response to Council's direction staff is checking to see if the neighborhood would be interested in having it located at Silver Tip Mini -Park. Staff is looking at several other possible sites but no site has yet been identified. C/Hemdon asked if it was possible to get grant money to assist with the Washington Street -Mini Park and CSD/Rose responded that the City applied for a grant in March and will not have the results until next fall. C/Owens asked if the closure of Lanterman would affect the sports park item in the Parks Master Plan and CSD/Rose responded no, because the recommendation refers to land and not necessarily the facility. Chair/Grundy asked that the Commission receive monthly updates regarding the Lanterman property. C/Hemdon asked if D.B. planned to make a bid on the property and CSD/Rose said there was no process for making a bid. If the state keeps the land D.B. cannot bid on it. If the state decides to dispose of the land D.B. would have to make an offer or join with Pomona to possibly make a joint offer. Lanterman is going to remain open for as many as two more years so the City will keep an eye on the situation. C/Hemdon asked if the City Hall purchase would happen and CSD/Rose responded that the City Council approved purchase of the new City Hall, the offer has been accepted and escrow should be open within the next week or two. C/Hemdon said that if the library did not go in on the first floor there were several items in the Master Plan that would require additional building space such as senior citizen's centers, teen centers, etc. Wouldn't this be a good time to look at that space and consider various Plan B items since the whole Master Plan is somewhat speculative anyway? CSD/Rose explained that these Plan B goals are already being considered by the City Council. The primary plan is to move City Hall services into the building, continue working with the library toward having the library as a first floor tenant and look at other options for the first floor in case the library decides not to move in. The library process could take up to two years. The Master Plan identifies the need for facilities and this is an opportunity to meet the facility needs. The number one need had to do with senior programming and that was the first alternative the Council discussed after the library. After determining how much of the first floor space would go toward senior programming staff would look at what other needs could be met in the remaining space. One Council Member wanted Council Chambers in that space which would take only a portion of the space. However, there is not sufficient room for both a library and a Council Chamber but if the APRIL 22, 2010 PAGE 4 P&R COMMISSION library goes away there may be an opportunity. C/Herndon said it . appears to him that in the Master Plan all of the needed facilities have a site plan included. Now that the City has this brand new facility that has some space he would really like to see a site plan for that space included in the Parks Master Plan. CSD/Rose said that there may be no space if the library may take the space. in 2000 the City developed a task force and developed a civic center priority list which included a community center (Diamond Bar Center) to house the senior program, the library and City Hall, with sports comples being the next priority. That is why the library is the first consideration and he does not believe any other funds would be expended on an additional study on space for the Master Plan until it is determined whether or not the library will occupy the space. C/Hemdon asked what the expectation was for the library occupying the space. *CSD/Rose said that Supervisor Knabe supports it and the head librarian for LA County supports it and the City Manager is meeting today with the County's architect LPA to look at the space. In fact, LPA was the architect that worked with D.B. on the civic center design and they were one of the five finalists for design of the Diamond Bar Center. CSD/Rose said he believes at this point there is a good chance the library will take the space. 3. OLD BUSINESS: R. 4. NEW BUSINESS: 4.1 Response to request for information about lighting the Skate Park. CSD/Rose presented staff's report. Nine out of ten facilities in other cities that are lighted are at a significant distance from residences. He recommended the Commission receive and file the report. C/Owens asked what kind of feedback staff got from the survey regarding use of the lighted facility. CSD/Rose responded that concerns include noise, music, boom boxes, cars with doors open and music playing, drinking alcohol and smoking pot were all mentioned. The only other concern mentioned was related to truancy issues. The biggest issue is safety equipment. All of the skate parks have the same issue that most people do not adhere to the requirement to wear safety equipment. Chair/Grundy asked if there was a higher occurrence of incidents during the evening hours and CSD/Rose responded not necessarily, except that there might be more unsavory behavior in the area when it's dark and the area is without lights. C/Hemdon asked if the facility would have to be staffed during late hours if it were lighted. CSD/Rose said that it would not have to be staffed but the City, has staff that works until 10-00 p.m. APRIL 22, 2010 PAGE 5 P&R COMMISSION CSD/Rose explained to Chair/Grundy that statt is recommenaing anis nem be received and filed because the City is already in its budget process and the item was listed in the CIP budget to see if monies would be allocated. To date, no funds have been allocated for lighting the skate park and he does not want to give an impression to the Commission that this has a chance to be funded at this time. C/Herndon moved, C/Owens seconded, to Receive and File staffs report. Without objection, the motion was so ordered. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/Roberto congratulated staff on recent City events he attended. The staff does a good job and he is very happy to be serving on the Commission. C/Owens congratulated staff on a job well done for the City Birthday Party. He felt there were many more attendees this year and the overall layout was well done. C/Herndon said he attended the dedication for the Sycamore Canyon Trail and ,he thought it was handled extremely well and he was encouraged by the amount of people that turned out and the enthusiasm that was shown. Good job, staff. Chair/Grundy expressed his appreciation for the good job staff did planning and executing the City Birthday Party. Fortunately, the weather cooperated as well. He too felt the layout worked out pretty well. Prior years it seemed to be more congested and concentrated. This year it seemed to flow a little bit better. He asked staff to place the following items on the next meeting agenda: 1) Revisit subcommittees; 2) park walk throughs. Chair/Grundy asked for the current status of the NFL Stadium and CSD/Rose responded that he visited the Majestic booth at the City Birthday Party and was told everything is still moving forward. However, nothing will be happening this year. It will be after next season before any announcements are expected. ADJOURNMENT: C/Owens moved and C/Roberto seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting. With no further business before the Parks & Recreation Commission, Chair/Grundy adjourned the meeting at 8:20 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this day of PiA 11V 1 12010. Respoc-ffully,-�bmitted, RETARY Agenda No. 6.4 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 11, 2010 Chairman Lin called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management/Government Center Hearing Board Room, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Pincher led the Pledge of Allegiance. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH OF OFFICE FOR COMMISSIONERS — Administered by Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk ROLL CALL: Commissioners Ted Carrera, Kenneth Mok, Liana Pincher, Vice - Chairman Kevin House and Chairman Jimmy Lin Also Present: David Liu, Public Works Director; Rick Yee, Senior Civil Engineer; Kimberly Molina, Associate Engineer; Christian Malpica-Perez, Associate Engineer, and Marcy Hilario, Senior Administrative Assistant. C/Pincher nominated C/House to serve as Chairman of the Traffic and Transportation Commission. C/Mok seconded the nomination. There were no other nominations offered. Roll Call vote: C/Carrera Yes C/Mok Yes C/Pincher Yes C/House Yes C/Lin Yes C/Lin nominated C/Pincher to serve as Vice -Chairman of the Traffic and Transportation Commission. C/Carrera seconded the motion. There were no other nominations offered. Roll Call vote: C/Carrera Yes C/Mok Yes C/Lin Yes C/Pincher Yes Chair/House Yes MARCH 11, 2010 PAGE 2 T&T COMMISSION FUMUMN A. Minutes of the January 14, 2010 regular meeting. C/Lin moved, C/Mok seconded, to approve -the January 14, 2010 minutes as corrected. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Mak, VC/Pincher, Chair/House NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Carrera ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None Ill. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered IV. ITEMS FROM STAFF: A. Received and Filed Traffic Enforcement Updates for: 1. Citations: December 2009, January and February 2010 2. Collisions: December 2009, January and February 2010 3. Street Sweeping: December 2009, January and February 2010 V. OLD BUSINESS: A. Sunset Crossing and Prospectors Road Traffic Calming Project Update SE/Yee gave a PowerPoint presentation and recommended that the Traffic and Transportation Commission receive and file the traffic data update on the Sunset Crossing Prospectors Road Traffic Calming Project. VC/Pincher asked if staff received concerns from the residents about seeing extra traffic. SE/Yee responded that most of the residents' concerns were received during construction and shortly thereafter. Staff received concerns about the areas along Prospectors Road and Sunset Crossing Road with respect to what was happening and how far the devices were cutting out into the street. Staff has heard nothing regarding concerns on the side streets. In fact, staff heard very positive comments shortly after the devices were installed. VC/Pincher said that Sunset Crossing now appears as a very nice gateway into the neighborhood and does not appear to attract cut -through traffic. C/Carrera said he understood emergency responder complaints about the cushions but asked what the residents' complaints were. SE/Yee responded that some concerns were a carryover from the residents not being able to accept the changes. Some residents were very critical about where curb extensions were located and how far out they extended out into the street. PWD/Liu gave a brief history of the project in response to C/Carrera's MARCH 11, 2010 PAGE 3 T&T COMMISSION concerns'about residents' complaints and concerns. C/Carrera said that the project speaks volumes about what the City did to benefit the neighborhood and he felt residents would benefit from this work. C/Lin asked during what hours the traffic volumes were recorded and SE/Yee responded that they were 24-hour volumes. C/Lin commented that the numbers seemed low for a 24-hour period. C/Lin asked what the size was of the sample survey and SE/Yee responded that he would have to consult the data sheet to determine the number of vehicles. However, the traffic data consultant the City used specializes in this type of data and the standard practice is appropriate in terms of sample sizes. VI. NEW BUSINESS: None VII. STATUS OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS: None VIII. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS: C/Carrera stated that he was honored and pleased to join the Commission. He introduced himself and presented his resume credentials. IX. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: A. Diamond BarTMS/Traffic Signal Interconnect Links — Phase 11 —AE/Malpica- Perez gave a brief description of the system and talked about how it will function. C/Lin asked for a tour of the system. SE/Yee said that staff plans to showcase this system to the Traffic and Transportation Commission and the City Council in the near future once the system is totally functional. Chair/House asked if the system was portable and, in the event that the City Hall moves to a new location, how much time, work and money will be required to move the equipment. PWD/Liu responded that the system can be extended/expanded and that it is a part of the cost benefit that staff is considering. More than $2 million has been spent on this interconnect project to date. If the City purchases the building across the street to relocate City Hall, it will cost about $120,000 to extend the system from the current location to the new location. Staff is holding off on some of the display items and other items until a decision is made about the move. B. Traffic Signal Battery Backup System Project — AE/Malpica-Perez reported that a pre -construction meeting was held on Tuesday, February 9 with the contractor, Freeway Electric, Inc. This project will provide back-up power service to continue operating the signals in the event of a power outage. The battery backup system will be installed at several intersections along Golden Springs Drive, Diamond Bar Blvd., and Brea Canyon Road. Construction is expected to start by mid-April and be completed by early May. C. Industry's Grand Avenue Bridge Widening/interchange Project — SE/Yee stated that this project consists of two phases. The first phase is the MARCH 11, 2010 PAGE 4 T&T COMMISSION westbound SR -60 on-ramp which is quickly moving forward with the environmental document due to be distributed by spring 2010 and construction to commence in late 2011. Phase two is a by-pass ramp that would go from the eastbound SR -60 directly onto the Grand Avenue off -ramp to provide better access to Grand Avenue and to prevent traffic from weaving. D. SR57/60 Feasibility Study — SENee stated that Metro (Metropolitan Transportation Authority) is awaiting comments from Caltrans in order to finalize the document. E. Lemon Avenue On/Off Ramps Project — AE/Molina reported this project has completed the 65 percent design which was submitted to Caltrans last summer and was put on hold when the phasing of the project was under discussion. The 65 percent review by Caltrans resumed and the project development team will be reviewing Caltrans comments with Caltrans on Thursday, March 18tH Once comments are received, the design consultant will amend theplansand submit the 95 percent submittal to Caltrans in May or June 2010. F. Residential/Area 6 Slurry Seal Project — AE/Molina stated that this maintenance project is in design with completion expected by early April. Staff will go out to bids by early May and award the construction contract by the end of June 2010. G. Arterial/ Zone 3/Zone 4 Slurry Seal Project (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) —AE/Molina reported the project will be completed in March or April. H. Chino Hills Parkway Street Rehabilitation Project — AE/Molina reported that this project has been designed and the City is awaiting word about a second authorization of federal stimulus funds which is being referred to as ARRA 11 Funds. I. Cleghorn/Gold Nugget and Maple Hill NTMP — AE/Molina shared that this project has gone out to bid (speed cushions on Cleghorn and Gold Nugget). Bids were opened today and staff received four bids. The lowest bid was $14,962 and the engineer's estimate was $21,000. Staff anticipates taking a contract to Council for award on April 6th with construction to commence shortly thereafter. Staff met with the Maple Hill residents on February 4th to present the concept which consisted of centerline striping and parking lane line striping. The next step is for the residents to obtain the necessary 67 percent in -favor petition signed for the project to move forward as Phase 11. Phase I of this project is to - install speed warning signs and send out informational flyers to remind residents that this is a neighborhood roadway and to respect the 25 mph speed limit. The flyers will also notify the residents that striping may be coming forward. C/Carrera asked where the striping was expected to be done. AE/Molina responded to C/Carrera that the striping is targeted to be done between MARCH 11, 2010 PAGE 5 T&T COMMISSION Mountain Laurel Way and Diamond Bar Boulevard. However, residents who attended the meeting requested that the informational flyer be sent out to all residents on Maple Hill. As a result, the flyer will be sent out to the entire neighborhood. VIII. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE CITY EVENTS: As stated in the agenda, with the addition of the April 8th Traffic and Transportation Commission regular meeting — 7:00 p.m., AQMD/Government Center Hearing Board Room, 21825 Copley Drive. Also mentioned was the confirmed schedule for the City Council/Commissioner AB 1234 Training, Thursday, April 15, 2010 from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. at the Diamond Bar Center. The meeting will be conducted by City Attorney Mike Jenkins and dinner will be served. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Traffic and Transportation Commission, Chair/House adjourned the meeting at 8:25 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this day of 2010. Respectfully, x a David G. Liu, Secretary Attest: CWairman Keft House Agenda 9 6-5 Meeting Date: May 15, 2010 01 roll 10, TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: James DeStefano, City Manager TITLE: Ratification of Check Register dated May 14, 2010 through June 8, 2010 totaling $1,312,182-17. RECOMMENDATION: Ratify. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Expenditure of $1,312,182.17 in City funds. BACKGROUND: The City has established the policy of issuing accounts payable checks on a weekly basis with City Council ratification at the next scheduled City Council meeting. DISCUSSION: The attached check register containing checks dated May 14, 2010 through June 8, 2010 for $1,312,182.17 is being presented for ratification. All payments have been made in compliance with the City's purchasing policies and procedures. Payments have been reviewed and approved by the appropriate departmental staff and the attached Affidavit affirms that the check register has been audited and deemed accurate by the Finance Director. Linda G. Magnuson Finance Director REVIEWED BY: Finance Director AssistaN-eTiy eager Attachments: Affidavit and Check Register — 05/14/10 through 06/08/10. The attached listings Ofdemands, invoices, and claims inthe form Of@check register including checks dated May 14'2010through June 8.2010 has been audited and i8 certified as accurate. Payments have been allowed from the following funds iDthese 8DOOUDlS: Description Amount General Fund $1,100,494.98 Community Organization Support I'd $150.00 PnopA-TranoitFund 22.109.39 Int. Waste Mgt Fund 7.4O542 Air Quality Management 2Q'474.58 CDBGFund 14.919.85 CopoFund-Pub|ioSafety 1,509.07 LLAD38Fund 7.753.14 LLAD3QFund 4.741.26 LLAU41Fund 8�8 .1O Capital Improvement Projects Fund 119.331.18 Computer Equipment Replacement Fund 3.315.20 Linda G.Magnuson City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 05/141/10 thru 06/08/10 1 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 5/27/2010 10 -PP 11 PAYROLL TRANSFER P/R TRANSFER-101PP 11 115 10200 2,164.75 $327,848.92 5/27/2010 89753 PAYROLL TRANSFER P/R TRANSFER-10/PP 11 125 10200 541.24 $500.00 5/27/2010 PAYROLL TRANSFER P/R TRANSFER-10/PP 11 125 10200 541.24 5/27/2010 89754 PAYROLL TRANSFER P/R TRANSFER-10/PP 11 001 10200 154,672.77 $148.00 5/27/2010 PAYROLL TRANSFER P/R TRANSFER-10/PP 11 112 10200 6,545.70 5/27/2010 PAYROLL TRANSFER P/R TRANSFER-10/PP 11 001 10200 154,672.77 5/2712010 PAYROLL TRANSFER P/R TRANSFER-10/PP 11 112 10200 6,545.70 5/27/2010 PAYROLL TRANSFER P/R TRANSFER-10/PP 11 115 10200 2,164.75 5/19/2010 1 89752 CITY OF GLENDORA CSMFO MTG-MAGNUSON/FULL 1 0014090 42325 1 70.00 $70.00 5/20/2010 JARAMARK WORK APPAREL & UNIFORM SVCS SUPPLIES -UNIFORM SHIRTS 0015310 41200 994.47 5/20/2010 1 89753 JA 1 CONCRETE REFUND -EN 2010-681 001 1 23012 1 500.00 $500.00 5/20/2010 1 89754 AARP MATURE DRIVING CLASS 0015350 1 45300 1 148.001 $148.00 5/20/2010 89755 ARAMARK WORK APPAREL & UNIFORM SVCS SUPPLIES -UNIFORM SHIRTS 0015310 41200 168.91 $1,163.38 5/20/2010 JARAMARK WORK APPAREL & UNIFORM SVCS SUPPLIES -UNIFORM SHIRTS 0015310 41200 994.47 5/20/2010 89756 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP INC DESIGN SVCS-SYC CYN 2505310 R46415 150.00 $365.95 5/20/2010 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP INC DESIGN SVCS -PARKS 2505310 46415 193.95 5/20/2010 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP INC DESIGN SVCS -PARKS 2505310 46415 22.00 5/20/2010 89757 SOLEDAD ARMENTA FACILITY CHARGES -DBC 001 36615 -151.00 $81.24 5/20/2010 SOLEDAD ARMENTA FACILITY CHARGES -DBC 001 36810 -267.76 5/20/2010 SOLEDAD ARMENTA FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 500.00 5/20/2010 1 89758 PAIWS BONGA REFUND -TEMP SIGNS 1 001 1 34430 1 100.00 $100.00 5/20/2010 89759 BOY SCOUT TROOP 730 PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 $645.20 5/20/2010 BOY SCOUT TROOP 730 PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 5/20/2010 89760 BOY SCOUT TROOP 777 PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 $645.20 5/20/2010 BOY SCOUT TROOP 777 PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 5/20/2010 1 89761 BRAVO SIGN AND DESIGN GRANITE PLAQUE-SYC CYN 1 2505310 1 46415 1 1,415.88 $1,415.88 Page 1 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 5/20/2010 5/20/2010 89762 KIM BYERRUM KIM BYERRUM FACILITY CHARGES-SYC CYN FACILITY CHARGES-SYC CYN 001 001 23002 36625 50.00 20.00 $70.00 5/20/2010 89763 CALIFORNIA COMMERCIAL LIGHTING SPPL SUPPLIES -DBC 0015333 41200 186.25 $707.37 5/20/2010 CALIFORNIA COMMERCIAL LIGHTING SPPL SUPPLIES -DBC 0015333 41200 18.25 5/20/2010 89770 CALIFORNIA COMMERCIAL LIGHTING SPPL SUPPLIES -DBC 0015333 41200 164.63 $39.00 5/2012010 CALIFORNIA COMMERCIAL LIGHTING SPPL SUPPLIES -DBC 0015333 41200 338.24 5/20!2010 89764 CAYETANO'S HOME FOR CHILDREN PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322:60 $645.20 5/20/2010 CAYETANO'S HOME FOR CHILDREN PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 5120/2010 89765 CHAPARRAL MIDDLE SCHOOL LEO CLUB PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 1 42353 322.60 $322.60 5!20/2010 89766 CHICAGO TITLE HIP PROG-897 ADNIANGROVE 1255215 44000 24.00 $89.00 5/20/2010 CHICAGO TITLE HIP PROG-2523 SUNBRIGHT 1255215 44000 65.00 5/20/2010 1 89767 ISONG CHONG FACILITY REFUND -HERITAGE 001 23002 1 50.00 $50.00 5/20/2010 89768 CHRISTIAN LIFE CENTER PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 $1,935.60 5/20/2010 CHRISTIAN LIFE CENTER PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 5120/2010 89770 CHRISTIAN LIFE CENTER PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 $39.00 5/20/2010 CHRISTIAN LIFE CENTER PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 5/20/2010 89771 CHRISTIAN LIFE CENTER PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 $245.00 5/20/2010 CHRISTIAN LIFE CENTER PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 5/20/2010 ' 1 89769 ICOMMUNITY SENIOR SERVICES -SSA MTG-L MEYERS 0015350 1 42315 1 25.001 $25.00 5/20/2010 CUB SCOUT PACK#737 PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 5/20!2010 89770 LOS ANGELES COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS LIGHT ASSESSMNT-SYC CYN 0015310 44000 39.00 $39.00 5120/20101 89771 JrA PARKS & REC SOC -DIS XIII JCPRS MTG-RECREATION 0015350 42325 245.00 $245.00 5/20/2010 89772 CUB SCOUT PACK #737 PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 $645.20 5/20/2010 CUB SCOUT PACK#737 PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 5/20!2010 89773 & J MUNICIPAL SERVICES INC BLDG & SFTY SVCS -APR 2010 0015220 45201 1 12,139.51 $12,499.51 5/20!2010 ID D & J MUNICIPAL SERVICES INC PROF.SVCS-FPL 2010-387 001 23010 90.00 Page 2 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 05/14/10 thru 06/08/10 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 5/20/2010 89773... D & J MUNICIPAL SERVICES INC ADMIN FEE -FPL 2010-387 001 34430 -16.20 $12,499.51 ... 5/20/2010 D & J MUNICIPAL SERVICES INC ADMIN FEE -FPL 2010-387 001 23010 16.20 $322.60 5/20/2010 D & J MUNICIPAL SERVICES INC PROF.SVCS-FPL 2010-385 001 23010 90.00 5/20/2010 D & J MUNICIPAL SERVICES INC ADMIN FEE -FPL 2010-385 001 23010 16.20 5/20/2010 D & J MUNICIPAL SERVICES INC ADMIN FEE -FPL 2010-385 001 34430 A6.20 5/20/2010 D & J MUNICIPAL SERVICES INC PROF.SVCS-FPL 2010-384 001 23010 90.00 5/20/2010 D & J MUNICIPAL SERVICES INC ADMIN FEE -FPL 2010-384 001 23010 16.20 5/20/2010 D & J MUNICIPAL SERVICES INC ADMIN FEE -FPL 2010-384 001 34430 -16.20 5/20/2010 D & J MUNICIPAL SERVICES INC PROF.SVCS-FPL 2009-375 001 23010 90.00 5/2012010 D & J MUNICIPAL SERVICES INC ADMIN FEE -FPL 2009-375 001 23010 16.20 5/20/2010 D & J MUNICIPAL SERVICES INC ADMIN FEE -FPL 2009-375 001 34430 -16.20 5/20/2010 89774 DAY & NITE COPY CENTER PRINT SVCS -GRAND AVE 2505510 46420 201.99 $237.11 5/20/2010 DAY & NITE COPY CENTER PRINT SVCS -MAY SR NEWSLTT 0015350 42110 1 35.12 5/20/2010 1 89775 CAROL DENNIS PROF.SVCS-PLNG COMM 1 0015210 1 44000 1 450.00 $450.00 5/20/2010 89776 DH MAINTENANCE ADDL MAINT-SYC CYN PK 0015340 1 45300 175.00 $300.00 5/20/2010 DH MAINTENANCE ADDL MAINT-DBC 0015333 45300 125.00 5/20/2010 1 89777 DIAMOND BAR AAUW PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 1 0015350 1 42353 1 322.60 $322.60 5/20/2010 DIAMOND BAR CHINESE AMERICAN ASSN MTG-COUNCIL 0014010 42325 100.00 5/20/2010 1 DIAMOND BAR BREAKFAST LIONS PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 1 42353 1 322.60 $322.60 5/20/2010 89779 DIAMOND BAR CHINESE AMERICAN ASSN MTG-COUNCIL 0014010 42325 100.00 $350.00 5/20/2010 DIAMOND BAR CHINESE AMERICAN ASSN MTG-COUNCIL 0014010 42325 100.00 5/20/2010 DIAMOND BAR CHINESE AMERICAN ASSN AD-ANNL GALA 0114010 42355 150.00 5/20/2010 1 89780 DIAMOND BAR COM. PRESCHOOL PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 1 0015350 1 42353 1 322.60 $322.60 5/20/2010 89781 DIAMOND BAR HIGH SCH LEO CLUB PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 $967.80 512012010 DIAMOND BAR HIGH SCH LEO CLUB PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 5/20/2010 DIAMOND BAR HIGH SCH LEO CLUB PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 5/20/2010 89782 DIAMOND BAR REPUBLICAN WOMEN PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 $322.60 Page 3 City of Diamond 'iCheckRegister0 thru 06/08/1T, Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 5/20/2010 89783 DIAMOND BAR UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 1 322.60 $322.60 5/20/2010 89784 DIAMOND BAR WOMANS CLUB PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 1 42353 1 322.60 $322.60 5/20/2010 JEXPRESS EXPRESS MAIL CORPORATE ACCOUNT EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL 0014090 42120 52.20 5/20/2010 89785 DIAMOND BARM/ALNUT YMCA CDBG-CHILD CARE 1255215 1 42355 1 6,512.00 $6,512.00 5/2012010 FIRST CLASS EVENTS FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 700.00 5/20/2010 1 89786 DIAMOND RANCH HIGH SCHOOL PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 1 42353 1 322.60 $322.60 5/20/2010 FIRST CLASS EVENTS FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 700.00 5/20/2010 1 89787 DIVERSIFIED PARATRANSIT INC SHUTTLE SVCS-B/DAY CELEB 1125350 1 45310 1 2,154.24 $2,154.24 5/20/2010 1 89788 JDMS CONSULTANTS CIVIL ENGINEERS INC MEDIAN PROD -PATHFINDER 2505510 R46420 1 1,200.00 $1,200.00 5/20/2010 1 89789 DOLPHIN RENTS INC JEQ RENTAL -CITY B/DAY CELE 0015350 42353 1 8,971.16 $8,971:16 5/20/2010 1 89790 NANCY DONAHUE RECREATION REFUND 1 001 1 34780 1 65,001 $65.00 5/20/2010 89791 EDUCATION TO GO CONTRACT CLASS -SPRING 0015350 1 45320 1 300.00 $300.00 5/20/2010 1 89792 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT UNEMPLOYMNT CHRGS-1ST QTR 0014090 1 40093 1 1,737.001 $1,737.00 5/2012010 89793 MAIL CORPORATE ACCOUNT EXPRESS MAIL -FPL 2009-360 001 23010 34.80 $87.00 5/20/2010 JEXPRESS EXPRESS MAIL CORPORATE ACCOUNT EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL 0014090 42120 52.20 5/2012010 1 89794 SONIA FERGUSON IRECREATION REFUND 1 001 1 34780 1 110.00 $110.00 5/20/2010 89795 FIRST CLASS EVENTS FACILITY CHARGES -DBC 001 36615 -150.00 $1,860.00 5/20/2010 FIRST CLASS EVENTS FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 700.00 5/20/2010 FIRST CLASS EVENTS - FACILITY CHARGES -DBC 001 36615 -36.00 5/2012010 FIRST CLASS EVENTS FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 700.00 5/20/2010 FIRST CLASS EVENTS FACILITY CHARGES -DBC 001 36615 -54.00 5/20/2010 FIRST CLASS EVENTS FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 700.00 5/20/2010 1 89796 IFOUR CORNERS TRANSPORTATION COALITI IMEMBERSHIP DUES -FY 10/11 1 0014090 1 42315 1 5,000.00 $5,000.00 5/20/2010 89797 GIRL SCOUT TROOP 495 PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 1 322.60 $357.10 5/20/2010 GIRL SCOUT TROOP 495 REIMB-FOOD VENDOR 0015350 1 42353 1 34.50 Page 4 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 05/14/10 thru 06/08/10 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 5/20/2010 89798 GRAFFITI CONTROL SYSTEMS GRAFFITI REMOVAL -MAR 10 0015230 45520 1 5,200.00 $5,200.00 5/20/2010 89799 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. PROF.SVCS-EASTGATE 0015510 1 44000 1,620.00 $6,420.00 5/20/2010 1 IHALL & FOREMAN, INC. PROF.SVCS-EASTGATE 1 0015510 1 45221 4,800.00 5/2012010 89800 HIRSCH PIPE AND SUPPLY INC SUPPLIES -PARKS 0015340 1 42210 42.35 $66.06 5/20/2010 IHIRSCH PIPE AND SUPPLY INC SUPPLIES -PARKS 0015340 42210 23.71 5/20/2010 89801 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN LEGAL AD -FPL 2009-345 001 23010 317.50 $1,963.75 5/20/2010 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN LEGAL AD -FPL 2010-379 001 23010 325.00 5/20/2010 89804 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN LEGAL AD -FPL 2007-250 001 23010 325.00 $322.60 5/20/2010 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN LEGAL AD -FPL 2010-381 001 23010 311.25 512012010 89805 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN LEGAL AD -FPL 2010-380 001 23010 347.50 $823.13 5120/2010 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN LEGAL AD -FPL 2010-384 001 23010 337.50 5!20/2010 89802 INTERCALL CONF CALL -SITE D 4/15 0014090 44000 188.58 $391.04 5/20/2010 INTERCALL CONF CALL -SITED 4/21 0014090 44000 202.46 5/2012010 1 89803 PETER ISKANDER IRECREATION REFUND 1 001 1 34780 1 60.00 $60.00 5!20!2010 89804 ITALIAN CATHOLIC FEDERATION PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 1 42353 322.60 $322.60 5/2012010 89805 ITERIS INC TRMGT-CAMERA 0015554 45507 823.13 $823.13 5!20!2010 89806 KEITH JOHNSON ENTERTAINMENT -SR DANCE 0015350 45300 350.00 $350.00 5/20/2010 89807 ANNA JUNG FACILITY REFUND-REAGAN 1001 23002 50.00 $50.00 5/2012010 89808 JUST TIRES REPAIR SVCS -COMM SVCS VEH 0015310 42310 13.23 $13.23 5/20/2010 89809 JKALA CONSTRUCTION INC RETENTION PAYABLE 125 20300 491.371 $491.37 5/20/2010 89810 PAUL KERNODLE RECREATION FUND 001 34730 19.00 $19.00 5/20/2010 89811 SCYCLING KIM RECREATION REFUND 001 34760 425.00 $425.00 Page 5 City ®f Diamond. Bar Check Register 05/14/10 t ru .06/08/10 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 5/20/2010 5/20/2010 89812 KRYSTAL SPINDLER KRYSTAL SPINDLER FACILITY REFUND-PANTERA FACILITY REFUND-PANTERA 001 001 23002 36625 50.00 20.00 $70.00 5/20/2010 89813 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ILEAGUE MTG-COUNCIL 1 0014010 4232.5 35.00 $35.00 5/20/2010 1 ILEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. IPROF.SVCS-EASTGATE PROF.SVCS-EASTGATE 0015554 1 44520 1 543.75 5/20/2010 89814 KWANG HO LEE PLNG COMM -4/27 0015210 44100 65.00 $65.00 5/20/2010 89815 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. FACILITY FEES -JAN -JUN 10 0015551 45224 1 3,206.75 $3,750.50 5/20/2010 1 ILEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. IPROF.SVCS-EASTGATE PROF.SVCS-EASTGATE 0015554 1 44520 1 543.75 5120!2010 89816 LOS ANGELES ROYAL VISTA GOLF COURSE FACILITY FEES -JAN -JUN 10 0015350 42140 688.00 $688.00 5120!2010 MAYER HOFFMAN MCCANN PC GASB TRNG-DOYLE 0014010 42340 85.00 5/20/2010 89817 MAURA MANONGDO RECREATION REFUND 001 34780 83.00 $83.00 5/20/2010 89818 MAYER HOFFMAN MCCANN PC GASB TR[G-MAGNUSON/FULL 0014050 1 42340 170.00 $255.00 5120!2010 MAYER HOFFMAN MCCANN PC GASB TRNG-DOYLE 0014010 42340 85.00 5/20/2010 1 89819 MINUTEMAN PRESS R & D BLUEPRINT PRINT SVCS-NTMP PROD 1 2505510 1 46412 87.05 $87.05 512012010 PERS HEALTH JUNE 2010 -HEALTH INS PREM 0014090 40086 525.00 5/2012010 89820 MOBILE RELAY ASSOCIATES INC REPEATER SVCS -MAY 2010 0014440 42130 78.75 $78.75 5!2012010 89821 STEVE G NELSON PLNG COMM -4/13 0015210 44100 65.00 $65.00 5/20/2010 89822 INEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS PH.SVCS-PNV,C/S,C/D 0014090 42130 582.20 $582.20 5/20/2010 89823 THANH NGUYEN REFUND -TEMP SIGNS 1 001 34430 100.001 $100.00 5/20/2010 89824 1KATHLEEN ERIN NOLAN PLNG COMM -4113 & 4127 1 0015210 1 44100 1 130.00 $130.00 5/20/2010 89825 PERIWINKLE ENTERTAINMENT PRODUCTION PETTING ZOO -CITY B/DAY 0015350 42353 1 800.00 $800.00 5120/2010 89826 PERS HEALTH JUNE 2010 -HEALTH INS PREM 001 21105 30,411.56 $31,084.22 512012010 PERS HEALTH JUNE 2010 -HEALTH INS PREM 0014090 40086 525.00 5/2012010 PERS HEALTH JUNE 2010 -HEALTH INS PREM 0014060 40093 147.66 5/20/2010 1 89827 1POSITIVE COACHING ALLIANCE SUPPLIES -RECREATION 0015350 41200 338.32 $338.32 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 05/14/10 thru 06/08/10 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct# Amount Total Check Amount 5/20/2010 5/20/201b 89828 POST 19 LA COUNTY FIRE EXPLORERS POST 19 LA COUNTY FIRE EXPLORERS REIMS -FOOD VENDOR REIMB-FOOD VENDOR 0015350 0015350 41200 42353 87.50 27.00 $114.50 5/20/2010 1 89829 LAURI POWELL FACILITY REFUND-PANTERA 001 1 23002 1 100.00 $100.00 5/2012 ISECTRAN SECURITY INC. COURIER SVCS -CITY B/DAY 0015350 42353 195.00 5/20/2010 1 89830 IQUINN RENTAL SERVICES SUPPLIES -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 1 329.30 $329.30 5/20/2010 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS -DIST 38 1385538 42126 42.22 5/20/2010 89831 R F DICKSON COMPANY INC DEBRIS COMPOSTING -APR 1155515 45500 1 1,777.41 $1,777.41 5/20/2010 1 89832 SHERRI SALDANA RECREATION REFUND 001 34730 15.00 $15.00 5/20/2010 1 89833 SILVA SANDOVAL RECREATION REFUND 001 34780 60.00 $60.00 5/20/2010 89834 SECTRAN SECURITY INC. COURIER SVCS -MAY 2010 0014090 44000 299.73 $494.73 5/2012 ISECTRAN SECURITY INC. COURIER SVCS -CITY B/DAY 0015350 42353 195.00 5/20/2010 1 89835 JJAGDISH SHAH PLNG COMM -4/13 & 4/27 0015210 144100 1 130.001 $130.00 5/20/2010 SILVER STATE COACH INC EXCURSION-TRANSPORTN 0015350 45310 278.60 5/20/2010 89836 ISIGN CONTRACTORS INC ARMED FORCES BANNERS 0015350 1 45300 1 17338.36 $1,338.36 5/20/2010 89837 SILVER STATE COACH INC EXCURSION-TRANSPORTN 1125350 45310 517.40 $796.00 5/20/2010 SILVER STATE COACH INC EXCURSION-TRANSPORTN 0015350 45310 278.60 5/20/2010 1 89838 SJC 3 CONSULTING PROF.SVCS-HIP PROG MAR 1255215 1 44000 1 2,700.00 $2,700.00 5/20/2010 89839 SOUTH POINT PERFORMING ARTS BOOSTER PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 $967.80 5/20/2010 SOUTH POINT PERFORMING ARTS BOOSTER PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 5/20/2010 SOUTH POINT PERFORMING ARTS BOOSTER PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 5/20/2010 89840 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS-TRFFC CONTROL 0015510 42126 574.42 $4,868.41 5/20/2010 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS-TRFFC CONTROL 0015510 42126 23.45 5/20/2010 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS -DBC 0015333 42126 4,228.32 5/20/2010 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS -DIST 38 1385538 42126 42.22 5/20/2010 1 89841 KRISTIN SPIVAK FACILITY REFUND -PETERSON 001 1 23002 1 50.001 $50.00 Page 7 Check Register s City of Diamond Bar - thru 06/08/10 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 5/20/2010 89842 DOLORES SPRADLING FACILITY REFUND-REAGAN 001 23002 50.00 $50.00 5/20/2010 89843 ST DENIS KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS REIMS -FOOD VENDOR 0015350 42353 298.00 $943.20 5/20/2010 ST DENIS KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 5/20/2010 89845 ST DENIS KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS PROCEEDS -CITY BIDAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 $200.00 5/20/2010 89844 NICK SUN REFUND -TEMP SIGNS 001 34430 170.00 $170.00 5/20/2010 THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY NEWSPAPER GR LEGAL AD -FPL 2010-381 001 23010 276.75 5/20/2010 89845 ANTHONY TANABE FACILITY REFUND -HERITAGE 001 23002 200.00 $200.00 5/20/2010 VERIZON CALIFORNIA PH.SVCS-HERITAGE PK 0015340 42125 78.49 89854 5/20/2010 89846 WANDA TANAKA REIMB-EASTER EGG HUNT 0015350 1 41200 100.001 $100.00 5/20/2010 89847 TELEPACIFIC COMMUNICATIONS IT1 INTERNET SVCS -MAY 0014070 1 44030 964.34 $964.34 5/20/2010 1 89848 TERRY'S TESTING INC JBACKFLOW MAINT-DBC 0015333 1 42210 180.001 $180.00 5/20/2010 89849 THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY NEWSPAPER GR LEGAL AD -FPL 2010-384 001 23010 296.75 $874.00 5/20/2010 THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY NEWSPAPER GR LEGAL AD -FPL 2010-381 001 23010 276.75 5/2012010 US POSTAL SERVICE (HASLER) THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY NEWSPAPER GR LEGAL AD -FPL 2010-380 001 23010 300.50 5/20/2010 1 5/20/2010 1 89850 THE SAUCE CREATIVE SERVICES JACKETS-MAINT STAFF 0015310 1 42130 1 1,270.91 $1,270.91 5/20/2010 89851 TIME WARNER MODEM SVCS -CITY HALL 0014070 1 44030 252.60 $393.46 5/20/2010 TIME WARNER CABLE SVCS -LT. 0014070 44030 140.86 5/20/2010 1 89852 TRI -CITIES POOL SERVICE & REPAIR IFOUNTAIN MAINT-DBC 0015333 1 45300 1 160.00 $160.00 5/20/2010 1 VERIZON CALIFORNIA PH.SVCS-GENERAL 0014090 42125 30.10 89853 US POSTAL SERVICE (HASLER) POSTAGE -MAIL SYSTEMS 0014090 1 42120 1 5,000.00 $5,000.00 5/20/2010 1 5/20/2010 VERIZON CALIFORNIA PH.SVCS-HERITAGE PK 0015340 42125 78.49 89854 VALLEY CREST LANDSCAPE MAINT INC EO RENTAL -CITY B/DAY 1 0015350 1 42353 1,012.501 $1,012.50 5/2012010 89855 VERIZON CALIFORNIA PH.SVCS-FAX LINE 0014030 42125 37.52 $1,156.81 5/20/2010 VERIZON CALIFORNIA PH.SVCS-GENERAL 0014090 42125 30.10 5/20/2010 VERIZON CALIFORNIA PH.SVCS-GENERAL 0014090 42125 797.27 5/20/2010 VERIZON CALIFORNIA PH.SVCS-HERITAGE PK 0015340 42125 78.49 5/2012010 VERIZON CALIFORNIA PH.SVCS-HERITAGE C/CTR 0015340 42125 37.57 City of Diamond B I: Check Register ,•.g.a. 05/14/10 i 4I'. .'. 06/08/10 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 5(20/2010 89855... VERIZON CALIFORNIA PH.SVCS-TELEWORKS ACIS 0014090 42125 175.86 $1,156.81 ... 5/20/2010 1 89856 1W.W. GRAINGER INC. SUPPLIES-SYC CYN PK 1 0015340 1 41200 1 322.60 $106.20 5/20/2 IWALNUT VALLEY ROTARY PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 5/20/2010 1 89857 WALNUT VALLEY KIWANIS CLUB REIMB-FOOD VENDOR 1 0015350 1 42353 1 121.00 $121.00 5/20/2010 89858 WALNUT VALLEY ROTARY PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 $645.20 5/20/2 IWALNUT VALLEY ROTARY PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 5/20/2010 89859 WALNUT VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST FACILITY RENTAL -JAN -APR 0015350 1 42140 8,421.00 $12,285.00 5/2012010 IWALNUT VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST FACILITY RENTAL -JAN -APR 0015350 42140 3,864.00 5/20/2010 89860 WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT WATER SVCS -PARKS 0015340 42126 11,045.96 $22,534.85 5/20/2010 WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT WATER SVCS -DIST 38 1385538 42126 6,583.72 5/20/2010 89864 WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT WATER SVCS -DIST 39 1395539 42126 3,927.07 $130.00 5/20/2010 WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT WATER SVCS -DIST 41 1415541 42126 978.10 5/20/2010 1 89861 WARREN SIECKE SPEED ZONE STUDY UPDATE 1 0015551 1 45222 1 $1,000.00 5/20/2010 89862 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC TREE MAI NT SVCS -APR 2010 0015558 45509 9,633.60 $10,184.50 5/2012010 IWEST COAST ARBORISTS INC WATERING SVCS -APR 2010 0015558 45510 550.90 5/20/2010 1 89863 GLORIA YBARRA IFACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 36615 400.001 $400.00 5/27/2010 ADVANTEC CONSULTING ENGINEERS INC MEDIAN MODIFICTN-GRAND 2505510 46420 11,800.00 5/20/2010 1 89864 JYI TONY TORNG PLNG COMM -4/13 & 4/27 0015210 44100 130.00 $130.00 5/20/2010 1 89865 JYMCA ADVENTURE PRINCESS PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 00153501 42353 1 322.60 $322.60 5/20/2010 1 89866 YMCA YS MEN PROCEEDS -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 322.60 $322.60 5/20/2010 1 89867 ILIMING ZOU REFUND -TEMP SIGNS 1 001 34430 100.00 $100.00 5/27/2010 89868 1ADVANCED APPLIED ENGINEERING INC DESIGN SVCS -AREA 6 APR 12505510 1 46411 1 6,699.001 $6,699.00 5/27/2010 89869 ADVANTEC CONSULTING ENGINEERS INC DESIGN SVCS -BATTERY B/UP 2505510R46412 4,500.00 $16,300.00 5/27/2010 ADVANTEC CONSULTING ENGINEERS INC MEDIAN MODIFICTN-GRAND 2505510 46420 11,800.00 Page 9 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 05/14/10 thru 8 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 5/27/2010 89870 ALBERTSONS SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS 0015350 41200 29.92 $67.70 5/27/2010 89872 ALBERTSONS SUPPLIES-DB4 YOUTH 0015350 41200 20.76 $722.01 5/27/2010 ALBERTSONS SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS 0015310 41200 17.02 5/27/2010 1 89871 JALL CITY MANAGEMENT SERVICES CROSSINGGUARD-APR/MAY 1 0014411 1 45410 1 6,519.701 $6,519.70 5/27/2010 ]CAROL CAROL DENNIS PROF.SVCS-T & T MTG 0015510 44000 100.00 5/27/2010 1 89872 BENESYST 15/14/1 O-P/R DEDUCTIONS 1 001 1 21105 1 722.01 $722.01 5/27/2010 1 89873 IRICKBETACOURT PROF.SVCS-EMERSAFETYPSA 0014095 44000 1 1,157.001 $1,157.00 5/27/2010 89874 JBSN SPORTS CORP SUPPLIES -PARKS 0015340 42210 1 945.221 $945.22 5/27/2010 1 89875 ICALIFORNIA COMMERCIAL LIGHTING SPPL SUPPLIES -DIST 38 1385538 42210 1 164.63 $164.63 5/27/2010 1 89876 ICECILIA ARELLANO REIMB-CAPIO CONF 0014095 42330 1 35.341 $35.34 5/27/2010 1 89877 CENTRAL POWDER COATING FAINT SVCS -PARKS 1 0015340 1 42210 1 152.44 $152.44 5/27/2010 1 89878 ICITY OF WEST COVINA FORENSIC SVCS -JAN -MAR 0014411 45401 1 915.00 $915.00 5!27/2010 89879 CONSTRUCTION HARDWARE ISUPPLIES -KEYS PARKS 1 0015340 41200 1 34.68 $34.68 512712010 89880 DAY & NITE COPY CENTER PRINT SVCS-PNVORKS 0015510 42110 57.07 $57.07 5/27/2010 89881 ERICK DE LA ROSA IFACILITY REFUND -DBC 1 001 36615 1 400.00 $400.00 5/27/2010 89882 DENNIS PROF.SVCS-P & R COMM 0015310 1 44000 150.00 $250.00 5/27/2010 ]CAROL CAROL DENNIS PROF.SVCS-T & T MTG 0015510 44000 100.00 5/27/2010 89883 DIAMOND BAR HAND CAR WASH CAR WASH -POOL VEH 0014090 42200 78.93 $130.30 5/27/2010 DIAMOND BAR HAND CAR WASH CAR WASH-PMORKS 0015554 42200 39.38 5/27/2010 89885 DIAMOND BAR HAND CAR WASH CAR WASH-NGHBRH IMP 0015230 42200 11.99 $6,719.00 5/27/2010 1 89884 DIANA CHO & ASSOCIATES CONSULTANT SVCS-CDBG APR 1255215 1 44000 1 17200.00 $1,200.00 5/27/2010 1 89885 DMS CONSULTANTS CIVIL ENGINEERS INC IST REHAB PROJ-ZONE 3 & 4 2505510 1 46411 6,719.00 $6,719.00 Page 10 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 05/14/10 thru 06/08/10 1 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 5/27/2010 89886 DOGGIE WALK BAGS INC SUPPLIES -PARKS 0015340 41200 1,695.511 $1,695.51 5/27/2010 89887 EXCEL LANDSCAPE ADDL MAINT-DIST 39 1395539 42210 231.10 $1,679.26 5/27/2010 1 EXCEL LANDSCAPE ADDL MAINT-DIST 39 1395539 42210 155.64 5/27/2010 89891 EXCEL LANDSCAPE ADDL MAINT-DIST 39 1395539 42210 427.45 $4,650.00 5/27/2010 EXCEL LANDSCAPE ADDL MAINT-DIST 38 1385538 42210 865.07 5/27/2010 89888 EXTERMINETICS OF SO CAL INC PEST CONTROL -DBC 0015333 45300 75.00 $235.00 5/27/2010 1 EXTERMINETICS OF SO CAL INC PEST CONTROL -DBC 0015333 45300 40.00 5/27/2010 89891 EXTERMINETICS OF SO CAL INC PEST CONTROL -PETERSON PK 0015340 42210 50.00 $4,650.00 5127/2010 EXTERMINETICS OF SO CAL INC PEST CONTROL -HERITAGE 0015340 42210 40.00 5/27/2010 89892 EXTERMINETICS OF SO CAL INC PEST CONTROL-PANTERA 0015340 42210 30.00 $3,990.00 5/27/2010 89889 FEDEX EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL 0014090 42120 157.32 $317.87 5/27/2010 1 FEDEX EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL 0014090 42120 122.20 5/27/2010 89891 FEDEX EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL 0014090 42120 38.35 $4,650.00 5/27/2010 1 89890 FIELDMA 1 ROLAPP & ASSOCIATES INC PROF.SVCS-NEW BLVD 1 0014090 1 44000 1 93,413.68 $8,387.11 5/27/2010 1 IHARDY & HARPER INC ST REHAB PROJ-ZONE 3 & 4 2505510 46411 -93,413.68 5/27/2010 1 89891 GO LIVE TECHNOLOGY INC PROF.SVCS-CITY VIEW 5/21 001 23005 4,650.00 $4,650.00 5/27/2010 1 89892 GOVIS LLC PROF.SVCS-TRANSIT SYS 1125553 46235 3,990.00 $3,990.00 5/27/2010 1 89893 GOVPARTNER I REQUEST PARTNER -MAY 10 0014070 44030 850.00 $850.00 5/27/2010 89894 HARDY & HARPER INC ST REHAB PROD -ZONE 3 & 4 2505510 46411 93,413.68 $0.00 5/27/2010 1 IHARDY & HARPER INC ST REHAB PROJ-ZONE 3 & 4 2505510 46411 -93,413.68 5/27/2010 1 89895 IHIRSCH PIPE AND SUPPLY INC SUPPLIES -PARKS 1 0015340 42210 1 353.42 $353.42 5/27/2010 1 JINLAND EMPIRE STAGES EXCURSION -TRANSPORTATION 1125350 45310 525.60 5/27/2010 1 89896 INLAND EMPIRE MAGAZINE AD -DBC JUNE 2010 0014095 42115 1 995.00 $995.00 5/27/2010 89897 INLAND EMPIRE STAGES EXCURSION-V/VIEW CASINO 0015350 45310 444.90 $970.50 5/27/2010 1 JINLAND EMPIRE STAGES EXCURSION -TRANSPORTATION 1125350 45310 525.60 5127/2010 89898 JINLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN LEGAL AD -GRAND PROJ 1 0015510 1 42110 1 151.251 $302.50 Page 11 1 �� ;..Register05/14/10 �� t 0�, D06/08/10 City of..�Check Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 5(2712010 89898... INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN LEGAL AD -GRAND PROD 0015510 42110 151.25 $302.50 ... 5(2712010 89899 INLAND VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY ANIMAL CARE SVCS -JUN 0014431 45403 8,750.00 $10,000.00 5/27/2010 89901 INLAND VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY FACILITY ASSESSMENT -JUN 0014431 45403...._[_1,250.00 3,000.00 $3,000.00 5/27/2010 AQQM MOHAMAD R IAHANVASH CONTRACT CLASS -SPRING 0015350 45320 1 432.001 $432.00 5127/2010 89901 JOE A. GONSALVES & SON INC. LEGISLATIVE SVCS -JUN 0014030 44000 3,000.00 $3,000.00 1 _j5/27/2010' 75.00 $75.00 89902 IJOHN L HUNTER & ASSOC. INC PROF.SVCS-NPDESISTRMWTR 0015510 44240 1,995.00 $1,995.00 5/27/2010 5/27/2010 89903 JUDICIAL DATA SYSTEMS CORPORATION PARKING CITE ADMIN -APR 10 0014411 1 45405 872.48 $872.48 $8,366.33 89904 K&V BLUEPRINT SERVICE INC PRINT SVCS -AERIAL MAPS 0014070 44000 2,498.46 $2,498.46 5/27/2010 $252.00 89905 LANTERMAN DEV CENTERICOMM INDUSTRIE PARKWAY MAINT-APR 10 0015558 45503 1,982.76 $1,982.76 5/27!2010 89906 LAUREL A MEYER REIMB-PARKING 0015350 42325 18.00 $18.00 5/27/2010 1 89907 LAUREN M HIDALGO REIMB-CAPIO CONF 0014095 42330 46.33 $46.33 5(27/2010 Fi��r�n� n RAAos DORA LONYAI CONTRACT CLASS -SPRING 0015350 I 45320 I 259.201 $259.20 160.16 $160.16 5127/2010 89912 MCCAIN 5! 27/2010 89909 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CLERKS OFFICE GRANT APPL-CEQA NEP 0015310 44000 75.00 $75.00 89913 IMCCOY MILLS FORD FORD FUSION HYBRID-C/HALL 1 1185098 46100 1 29,474.58 $29,474.58 89910 ILOWE'S BUSINESS ACCOUNT LOWE'S BUSINESS ACCOUNT SUPPLIES -DBC SUPPLIES -PARKS 0015333 1 0015340 41200 41200 35.07 190.70 $225.77 5/27/2010 5/27/2010 Page 12 89911 MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK JUNE 2010 -EAP PREMIUMS 1 001 1 21115 1 160.16 $160.16 5127/2010 89912 MCCAIN REPAIR SVCS -CONTROLLER 1 0015554 1 45507 373.63 $373.63 5/27/2010 89913 IMCCOY MILLS FORD FORD FUSION HYBRID-C/HALL 1 1185098 46100 1 29,474.58 $29,474.58 5/27/2010 89914 MCE CORPORATION VEGETATION CONTROL -APR 0015558 45508 81366.33 $8,366.33 5127!2010 89915 SURENDRA MEHTA CONTRACT CLASS -SPRING 0015350 45320 252.00 $252.00 5/27/2010 Page 12 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 05/14/10 thru 06/08/10 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name ( Transaction Description Fund/ Dept IAcct# I Amount I Totalec moun 5/27/2010 89916 MERCURY DISPOSAL SYSTEMS INC RECYCLING FEES -BATTERY 1 1155515 44000 1 713.67 $713.67 5/27/2010 89922 OPUS WEST CORPORATION REFUND -EN 98-229 001 23012 60.00 $89.10 5/27/2010 89917 NATIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH INS BURGLAR SIGNS -SHERIFF 1264411 41200 1,509.07 $1,509.07 512712010 89918 OPUS WEST CORPORATION REFUND -EN 98-223 001 23012 1,863.50 $10,261.35 5/27/2010 89922 OPUS WEST CORPORATION REFUND -EN 98-229 001 23012 60.00 $89.10 5/27/2010 OPUS WEST CORPORATION REFUND -EN 98-228 001 23012 1,010.00 5127/2010 89923 OPUS WEST CORPORATION REFUND -EN 98-246 001 23012 2,000.00 $122.00 5/27/2010 89924 OPUS WEST CORPORATION REFUND -FPL 98-057 001 23010 2,909.15 $6,150.00 5/27/2010 OPUS WEST CORPORATION REFUND -EN 98-237 001 23012 1,053.50 5/27/2010 89925 OPUS WEST CORPORATION REFUND -EN 99-257 001 23012 1,365.20 $1,000.00 5127/2010 89919 PERS RETIREMENT SURVIVOR BENEFIT 001 21109 8.00 $530.20 5/27/2010 89922 PERS RETIREMENT RETIRE CONTRIB-EE 001 21109 208.88 $89.10 5/27/2010 PERS RETIREMENT RETIRE CONTRIB-ER 001 21109 313.32 512712010 89920 PERS RETIREMENT FUND SURVIVOR BENEFIT 001 21109 47.43 $25,570.38 5/27/2010 89922 PERS RETIREMENT FUND RETIRE CONTRIB-EE 001 21109 10,209.21 $89.10 5/27/2010 PERS RETIREMENT FUND RETIRE CONTRIB-ER 001 21109 15,313.74 5/27/2010 89921 PRECISION DYNAMICS CORPORATION SUPPLIES -SUMMER DAY CAMP 0015350 1 41200 1 -h.641 $73.04 5/27/2010 89922 PRIORITY MAILING SYSTEMS INC SUPPLIES -GENERAL 0014090 41200 89.10 $89.10 5/27/2010 89923 PUBLIC STORAGE #23051 STORAGE RENTAL -UNIT #2303 1 0014090 1 42140 1 122.00 $122.00 5/27/2010 89924 PYRO SPECTACULARS INC FIREWORKS -4TH OF JULY 0015350 1 45300 1 6,150.001 $6,150.00 5/27/2010 89925 REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE SERVICE CONTRACT -JUN 2010 1 0014096 45000 1,000.00 $1,000.00 5!27/2010 89926 REINBERGER PRINTWERKS PRINT SVCS-BUSI CARDS 0014095 42110 305.11 $305.11 5127/2010. 89927 IREPUBLIC ELECTRIC TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINT-APR 0015554 45507 4,190.00 $4,190.00 5/27/2010 89928 S C SIGNS & SUPPLIES LLC SUPPLIES -ROAD MAINT 0015554 41250 143.55 $143.55 Page 13 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 05/14/10 thru 06/08/10 Check.Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 5/27/2010 89929 FRANCIS SABADO CONTRACT CLASS -SPRING 0015350 45320 1,140.00 $1,140.00 5/27/2010 89930 SCHORR METALS INC SUPPLIES -GENERAL 0014090 1 41300 25.51 $25.51 5/27/2010 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS TRFFC CONTROL 0015510 42126 139.69 5/27/, 89938 ISIGN CONTRACTORS INC SIGNS -COMM SVCS 0015350 45300 1 112.501 $112.50 5/27/2010 1 89932 JSJC 3 CONSULTING PROF.SVCS-HIP PROG APR 1 1255215 44000 1 2,249.001 $2,249.00 5/27/2010 1 89933 1SO COAST AIR QUALITY MGT DISTRICT LEASE -CITY HALL JUNE 1 0014090 42140 1 22,416.45 $22,416.45 5/27/2010 89934 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVGS-TRFFC CONTROL 0015510 42126 604.93 $912.84 5/27/2010 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS TRFFC CONTROL 0015510 42126 139.69 5/27/2010 89938 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS-TRFFC CONTROL 0015510 42126 168.22 $229.99 5/27/2010 89935 SPARKLETTS EQ RENTAL-SYC CYN PK 0015310 42130 12.00 $241.18' 5/27/2010 SPARKLETTS WATER SUPPLIES-C/HALL APR 0014090 41200 218.43 5127/2010 89938 SPARKLETTS EQ RENTAL -APR 2010 0014090 42130 10.75 $229.99 5/27/2010 89936 STANDARD INSURANCE OF OREGON JUNE 10 -LIFE INS PREMS 001 21106 1,181.63 $3,107.17 6127/2010 STANDARD INSURANCE OF OREGON JUNE 10-SUPP LIFE INS PRE 001 21106 131.00 5/2712010 89938 STANDARD INSURANCE OF OREGON JUINE 10-STD/LTD 001 21112 1,794.54 $229.99 5/27/2010 89937 STELLA MARQUEZ REIMS-NOE FILING 10015210 1 44220 1 -150.001$150.00 $30.00 5/27/2010 THREE VALLEYS MUNICIPAL WATER DIST MTG-CMGR 0014030 42325 15.00 5!27!2010 89938 ITAYLOR SECURITY & LOCK CO INC SUPPLIES -PARKS 0015340 41200 229.99 $229.99 5/27/2010I - 89939 ITHE SAUCE CREATIVE SERVICES BANNERS -4TH OF JULY 0015350 45300 1 873.13 $873.13 5/27!2010 89940 THREE VALLEYS MUNICIPAL WATER DIST MTG-COUNCIL 0014010 42325 15.00 $30.00 5/27/2010 THREE VALLEYS MUNICIPAL WATER DIST MTG-CMGR 0014030 42325 15.00 5127/2010 89941 TIME WARNER MODEM SVCS -COUNCIL 0014010 42130 48.99 $48.99 5/2712010 89942 VANTAGEPOINT TRNSFR AGNTS-303248 5/28/10-P/R DEDUCTIONS 1 001 21108 5,135.11 $5,135.11 5!2712010 89943 VISION SERVICE PLAN JUNE 2010 -VISION PREMIUMS 001 21107 1,200.70 $1,200.70 Page 14 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 05/14/10 thru 06/08/10 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 5/27/2010 89944 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY SUPPLIES -HERITAGE 0015340 41200 1 524.20 $524.20 5/27/2010 89945 JWELLDYNERX SHARPS SVCS -MAY 2010 1 1155515 1 44000 1 64.641 $64.64 5/28/2010 IHARDY & HARPER INC RETENTIONS PAYABLE 250 1 20300 -9,341.37 5/27/2010 1 89946 ITHERESA WINECKI CONTRACT CLASS -SPRING 10015350 1 45320 1 756.001 $756.00 5/27/2010 1 89947 ICEPHAS WONG RECREATION REFUND 1 001 34780 1 94.00 $94.00 5/27/2010 1 89948 IPAUL WRIGHT A/V SVCS-PLNG COMM 10014090 44000 1 400.001 $400.00 5/27/2010 1 89949 IYOUNG REMBRANDTS CORP ICONTRACT CLASS -SPRING 0015350 45320 1 534.601 $534.60 5/2812010 89950 HARDY & HARPER INC ST REHAB PROJ-ZONE 3 2505510 46411 93,413.68 $84,072.31 5/28/2010 IHARDY & HARPER INC RETENTIONS PAYABLE 250 1 20300 -9,341.37 6/1/2010 1 89951 ICHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY JESCROW DEP-21810 COPLEY 1 001 1 10403 1 350,000.00 $350,000.00 6/3/2010 STEPHANIE AGUAYO FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 350.00 6/3/2010 1 89952 AARP IMATURE DRIVING CLASS 1 0015350 1 45300 1 14.00 $14.00 6/3/2010 89953STEPHANIE AGUAYO FACILITY DEPOSIT -DBC 001 23002 200.00 $550.00 6/3/2010 STEPHANIE AGUAYO FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 350.00 6/3/2010 1 89954 JAMERICOMP GROUP INC SUPPLIES -TONERS 1 0014070 1 45000 4,428.26 $4,428.26 613/2010 89955 AT&T MOBILITY CELL CHARGES -POOL VEH 0014090 42125 11.30 $33.90 6/3/2010 AT&T MOBILITY CELL CHARGES -POOL VEH 0014090 42125 11.30 6/3/2010 89957 AT&T MOBILITY CELL CHARGES -POOL VEH 0014090 42125 11.30 $100.00 6/3/2010 1 89956 AT&T MOBILITY WIRELESS CHARGES-CMGR 1 0014030 1 42125 1 54.50 $54.50 6/3/2010 1 89957 SUNIL BADWE FACILITY REFUND-PANTERA 1 001 1 23002 1 100.00 $100.00 6/3/2010 1 89958 IMICHELE BARTHOLOMEW FACILITY REFUND -HERITAGE 1 001 36610 1 150.001 $150.00 6/312010 1 89959 IBEE REMOVERS IBEE REMOVED -21810 COPLEY 11385538 42210 1 97.50 $97.50 6/3/2010 1 89960 1JEFFREY BINNER CONTRACT CLASS -SPRING 1 0015350 45320741.00 $741.00 Page 15 Check Date l Check Number City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 05/14/10 thru 06/08110 Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept I Acct #' Amount I Total Check Amount 6/3/2010 89961 JBIOSENSE WEBSTER FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 350.00 $316.00 6!3!2010 1 JBIOSENSE WEBSTER FACILITY CHARGES -DBC 001 1 36615 -34.00 6/312010 89962 EVELYN CASAS I FACILITY REFUND-SYC CYN 1 001 1 23002 1 $50.00 6/3/2010 89963 CDW GOVERNMENT INC. SUPPLIES-I.T. 0014070 41200 212.37 $29,124.24 6/3/2010 1 CDW GOVERNMENT INC. PRINTER-I.T. 5304070 46230 3,315.20 6/3/2010 89965 CDW GOVERNMENT INC. COMP MAINT-I.T. 0014070 42205 270.00 $381.00 6/3/2010 CDW GOVERNMENT INC. COMP MAINT-I.T. 0014070 42205 24,788.89 6/3/2010 89966 CDW GOVERNMENT INC. SUPPLIES -LT, 0014070 41200 537.78 $200.00 6/3/2010 89964 CHRISTY CHAN FACILITY REFUND -DBC 1001 1 23002 A 100.001 $100.00 6!312010 1 JRUBINA RUBINA KADRI IFACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 36615 390.00 6/3/2010 89965 ICITY OF SANTA ANA EXCURSION—SANTA ANA ZOO 1 0015350 1 42410 38.1.001 $381.00 6/3/2010 89966 CRYSTIN COLINA FACILITY REFUND -HERITAGE 1 001 1 23002 1 200.001 $200.00 6/3/2010 89967 ICOLOR ME MINE TILES -WASHINGTON MINI PK 1 2505310 1 46415 1 $2,195.00 6/3/2010 89968 COMPUCOM ICOMP MAINT-I.T. 0014070 42205 5,223.47 $5,223.47 6/3/2010 89969 CONSTRUCTION HARDWARE MAINT-SYC CYN PK 10015340 1 42210 1 713.92 $713.92 6/3/2010 89970 JALVINO CORREA FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 1 500.00 $500.00 6/3/2010 89971 ROXANA CUBILLO FACILITY REFUND -HERITAGE 001 23002 200.00 $200.00 6/3/2010 89972 KADRI FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 100.00 $490.00 1 1 6!312010 1 JRUBINA RUBINA KADRI IFACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 36615 390.00 6!3!2010 89973 DAPEER ROSENBLIT & LITVAK LLP LEGAL SVCS -APR 2010 0014020 44023 3,750.29 $3,750.29 6/3/2010 1 JAMES DESTEFANO REIMS-ICSC CONF 0014030 42330 367.38 6/3/2010 89974 DAY & NITE COPY CENTER PRINT SVCS -COMM SVCS 1 0015350 1 42110 1 658.501 $658.50 6/3/2010 1 89975 JAMES DESTEFANO REIMS-CCCA CONF 0014030 1 42330 126.49 $493.87 6/3/2010 1 JAMES DESTEFANO REIMS-ICSC CONF 0014030 42330 367.38 Page 16 Check Date i Check Number City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 05/14/10 thru 06/08/10 Vendor Name 1"ransaction Description Fund( Dept ( Acct # I Amount ( Total Check Amount 6/312010 89976 DELTA DENTAL JUNE 10 -DENTAL PREMIUMS 001 121104 1 3,243.331 $3,243.33 6/3/2010 89977 CAROL DENNIS PROF.SVCS-SS/CC MTG 0014030 44000 250.00 $525.00 6/3/2010 CAROL DENNIS PROF.SVCS-SS/CC MTG 0014030 1 44000 275.00 6/3/2010 1 89978 DIAMOND BAR INTERNATIONAL DELI JMTG SUPPLIES -GENERAL 0014090 42325 1 158.001 $158.00 6(3/2010 IEVERGREEN INTERIORS PLANT SVCS -HERITAGE 0015340 42210 135.00 6/3/2010 89979 DIVERSIFIED WINDOW COVERINGS INC MAINT-DBC 0015333 42210 306.00 $306.00 6/3/2010 EXTERMINETICS OF SO CAL INC PEST CONTROL -PETERSON 0015340 42210 225.00 6/3/2010 89980 EL CAPITAN THEATRE EXCURSION -DAY CAMP 10015350 42410 1 1,482.00 $1,482.00 613/2010 89981 EVERGREEN INTERIORS PLANT SVCS -DBC 0015333 1 45300 177.00 $312.00 6(3/2010 IEVERGREEN INTERIORS PLANT SVCS -HERITAGE 0015340 42210 135.00 6/3/2010 89982 EXTERMINETICS OF SO CAL INC PEST CONTROL-PANTERA 0015340 42210 30.00 $460.00 6/3/2010 EXTERMINETICS OF SO CAL INC PEST CONTROL -DBC 0015333 45300 75.00 6/3/2010 89986 EXTERMINETICS OF SO CAL INC PEST CONTROL -PETERSON 0015340 42210 50.00 $50.00 6/3/2010 EXTERMINETICS OF SO CAL INC PEST CONTROL -PETERSON 0015340 42210 225.00 6/3/2010 89987 EXTERMINETICS OF SO CAL INC PEST CONTROL -HERITAGE 0015340 42210 40.00 $151.00 6/3/2010 EXTERMINETICS OF SO CAL INC PEST CONTROL -DBC 0015333 45300 40.00 6/3(2010 89983 ANNETTE FERNANDO FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 1 100.00 $100.00 6/3/2010 89984 FIRST CLASS EVENTS FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 900.00 $555.00 6/3/2010 FIRST CLASS EVENTS FACILITY CHARGES -DBC 001 36615 -345.00 6/3/2010 89985 BRIDGET GASTELUM FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 550.00 $550.00 613/2010 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. PROF.SVCS-PLAN CHECK 0015551 45223 92.41 6/3/2010 1 89986 IJESSICA GONZALES FACILITY REFUND -MAPLE HIL 001 123002 1 123.75 $50.00 6/3/2010 1 89987 IGREGORY S GUBMAN REIMB-ICSC CONF 0015210 42330 1 151.001 $151.00 6/3/2010 89988 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. PROF.SVCS-EROSION CONTRL 0015551 45223 127.50 $7,589.03 613/2010 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. PROF.SVCS-PLAN CHECK 0015551 45223 92.41 6/3/2010 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. PROF.SVCS-PLAN CHECK 0015551 45223 123.75 Page 17 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 05/14/10 thru 06/08/10 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 6/3/2010 89988... HALL &FOREMAN, INC. PROF.SVCS-PLAN CHECK 0015551 45223 309.33 $7,589.03 ... 6/312010 $50.00 HALL &FOREMAN, INC. PROF.SVCS-PLAN CHECK 0015551 R45223 1,465.33 6/3/2010 ADMIN FEE -EN 05-490 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. PRORSVCS-ST IMP REVIEW 0015551 45223 4,093.99 ADMIN FEE -EN 05-490 6!3/2010 34650 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. PROF.SVCS-PLAN CHECK 0015551 45223 477.97 6/3/2010 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. PROF.SVCS-EN 03-397 001 23012 498.75 6/3/2010 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. ADMIN FEE -EN 03-397 001 23012 124.69 6/3/2010 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. ADMIN FEE -EN 03-397 001 34650 -124.69 6/3/2010 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. PROF.SVCS-EN 10-682 001 23012 400.00 6/3/2010 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. ADMIN FEE -EN 10-682 001 23012 100.00 6/3/2010 HALL &FOREMAN, INC. ADMIN FEE -EN 10-682 001 34650 -100.00 613!2010 89991 HINDERLITER, DE LLAMAS & ASSOCIATES 6/3/2010 IHINDERLITER, DE LLAMAS & ASSOCIATES 6!3/2010 89992 t'ARC�I YN HANSEN - RECREATION REFUND 001 34780 I 60.00! $60.00' cr�ionan VI3 20 noan4 6/3/2010 89990 DIANA HERNANDEZ FACILITY REFUND-REAGAN 001 23002 50.00 $50.00 613!2010 89991 HINDERLITER, DE LLAMAS & ASSOCIATES 6/3/2010 IHINDERLITER, DE LLAMAS & ASSOCIATES 6!3/2010 89992 1125350 45310 613/201089993 $2,289.75 6/3/2010 EXCURSIONS TEMECULA 0015350 45310 6/3/2010 89994 6/3/2010 ADMIN FEE -EN 03-397 001 34650 6/3/2010 89995 6/3/2010 89996 6/3/2010 6/3/2010 6/3/2010 6/3/2010 6!3/2010 S HALF MOON INN & SUITES ;ACT SVCS -2ND QTR SVCS -SALES TAX 4TH CONF-I AZIZ 0014090 ( 44010 0014090 44010 0014070 ( 42330 900.001 $4,000.33 3,100.33 $508.00 INLAND EMPIRE STAGES TRANSPORTATION-EXCRSN 1125350 45310 945.75 $2,289.75 INLAND EMPIRE STAGES EXCURSIONS TEMECULA 0015350 45310 1,344.00 ISKANDER ISKANDER HAE LEE REFUND -DBC CHARGES -DBC REIMS -PUBLICATION 001 23002 1 001 23004 0015210 1 42320 ( 72.00 $16.68 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. PROF.SVCS-EN 03-397 001 23012 855.00 $1,310.73 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. ADMIN FEE -EN 03-397 001 23012 153.90 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. ADMIN FEE -EN 03-397 001 34650 -153.90 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. PROF.SVCS-EN 05-490 001 23012 455.73 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. ADMIN FEE -EN 05-490 001 23012 82.03 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. ADMIN FEE -EN 05-490 001 34650 -82.03 6/3/2010' 89997 LEWIS ENGRAVING INC. ENGRAVING SVCS -CITY TILE 0014090 42113 60.36 $60.36 Page 18 Check Date I Check Number City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 05/14/10 thru 06/08/10 Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept I Acct # I Amount rota) Check Amount 6/3/2010 89998 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CLERKS OFFICE CEAQ-SYC CYN PK 2505310 46415 75.00 $75.00 6/3!2010 6!3!2010 6/3/2010 89999 MING LUNA FACILITY REFUND-PANTERA 001 23002 50.00 $50.00 $50.00 6/3/2010 90012 ELIZABETH SAN MARTIN FACILITY REFUND-PANTERA 001 23002 70.00 6/3/2010 90000 IMENDY MIAO RECREATION REFUND 001 34760 215.00 $215.00 6/3!2010 90013 ISOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS-TRFFC CONTROL 0015510 42126 59.42 6!3/2010 90001 MINUTEMAN PRESS R & D BLUEPRINT PRINT SVCS-P/WORKS 001 23012 17.31 $17.31 6(3(2010 90014 ISOUTHWEST SALES INC SUPPLIES-D(CAMP T-SHIRTS 1 0015350 41200 1 2,184.241 6/3/2010 90002 IMOBILE INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INCORP SUPPLIES -DBC 0015350 42353 193.581 $193.58 6!3/2010 1 90015 ISUNSHINE SENIORS ASSOCIATION REIMB-CLUB INS 1255215 1 44000 1 596.001 6/3/2010 90003 ITONY NGUYEN IFACILITY REFUND-PANTERA 1 001 23002 100.00 $100.00 6/3/2010 90004 JPAETEC COMMUNICATIONS INC. LONG DIST CHRGS-MAY/JUN 0014090 42125 1 857.811 $857.81 6!3(2010 90005 HAROON PAREKH I FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 1 500.00 $500.00 6/3/2010 90006 PLEASE USE PUBLIC STORAGE STORAGE RENTAL-REC # 2145 0014090 1 42140 1 297.001 $297.00 6/3!2010 1 90007 POMONA JUDICIAL DISTRICT PARKING CITATION FEES -APR 0014090 42110 2,831.00 $2,831.00 6/3(2010 1 90008 PROTECTION ONE INC ALARM SVCS -DBC 0015333 42210 54.08 $54.08 Page 19 90009 JERRY RA JERRY RAMOS FACILITY REFUND -DBC T001 FACILITY CHRGS-DBC 001 23002 36615 500.00 -250.00 $250.00 6/3!2010 6!3!2010 Page 19 90010 ILDEFONSO RODRIGUEZ JR FACILITY REFUND-REAGAN 001 23002 50.00 $50.00 6/3/2010 6/3/2010 90011 SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVT TAC MTG-LIUNEE 6!7 0015510 42325 50.00 $50.00 6/3/2010 90012 ELIZABETH SAN MARTIN FACILITY REFUND-PANTERA 001 23002 70.00 $70.00 6/3!2010 90013 ISOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS-TRFFC CONTROL 0015510 42126 59.42 $59.42 6(3(2010 90014 ISOUTHWEST SALES INC SUPPLIES-D(CAMP T-SHIRTS 1 0015350 41200 1 2,184.241 $2,184.24 6!3/2010 1 90015 ISUNSHINE SENIORS ASSOCIATION REIMB-CLUB INS 1255215 1 44000 1 596.001 $596.00 Page 19 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 05/14/10 thru 06/08/10 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 6/3/2010 90016 THE COMDYN GROUP INC CONSULTING SVCS -GIS 4/30 1 0014070 44000 781.351 $781.35 6/3/2010 90017 THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY NEWSPAPER GR LEGAL AD -FPL 2009-360 001 23010 290.50 $290.50 6/3/2010 HAZEL TONIUTTI FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 100.00 6/3/2010 90018 ITIME WARNER MODEM SVCS -COUNCIL 0014010 1 42130 1 48.99 $48.99 6/3/2010US BANK PLNRS CONF-GUBMAN 0015210 42330 998.40 6/3/2010 90019 CONNIE TOM FACILITY REFUND-REAGAN 001 23002 50.00 $50.00 6/3/2010 90020 HAZEL TONIUTTI FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 1 $650.00 6/3/2010 HAZEL TONIUTTI FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 100.00 6/3/2010 90021 LOANNE TRAN REFUND -TEMP SIGN 001 34430 100.00 $100.00 6/3/2010 US BANK PLNRS CONF-GUBMAN 0015210 42330 492.61 6/3/2010 90022 TRG LAND INC PROF SVCS -SITE "D" PLAN 0014096 R44000 8,944.40 $8,944.40 6/3/2010 90024 US BANK PLNRS CONF-NOLAN 0015210 42330 387.22 $20,970.96 6/3/2010 US BANK PLNRS CONF-GUBMAN 0015210 42330 492.61 6/3/2010 US BANK MTG-COMM DEV 0015210 42325 14.38 6/3/2010US BANK PLNRS CONF-GUBMAN 0015210 42330 998.40 6/3/2010 US BANK PLNRS CONF-SHAH 0015210 42330 387.22 6/3/2010 US BANK TRNG-MALPICA 0015510 42340 143.00 6/3/2010 US BANK PROMO ITEMS -RECYCLED 1155516 41400 520.20 6/3/2010 US BANK FUEL -COMM SVCS 0015310 42310 375.00 6/3/2010 US BANK CAPIO CONF-HIDALGO 0014095 42330 561.56 6/3/2010 US BANK CAPIO CONF-ARELLANO 0014095 42330 550.18 6/3/2010 US BANK SUPPLIES-P/WKS 0015510 41200 156.67 6/3/2010 US BANK PHOTOGRAPHY-P/INFO 0014095 42112 267.70 6/3/2010 US BANK SUPPLIES-P/INFO 0014095 41200 73.73 6/3/2010 US BANK CAPIO CONF-ROA 0014095 42330 775.91 6/3/2010 US BANK MEMBERSHIP DUES-MCLEAN 0014030 42315 65.00 6/3/2010 US BANK MMASC CONF-MCLEAN 0014030 42330 280.00 6/3/2010 US BANK MMASC CONF-SANTOS 0014030 42330 280.00 6/3/2010 US BANK SUPPLIES -DBC 0015333 41200 26.68 6/3/2010 US BANK MEMBERSHIP DUES -COUNCIL 0014010 42315 50.00 6!312010 US BANK ICSC CONF-COUNCIL 0014010 42330 425.00 '� City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 05/14/10 thru 06/08/10 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 6/3/2010 90024... US BANK MTG SUPPLIES -GENERAL 0014090 42325 443.60 $20,970.96 ... 6/3/2010 US BANK SUPPLIES-CMGR 0014030 41200 38.36 6/3/2010 US BANK FUEL-NGHBRHD IMP 0015230 42310 65.94 6/3/2010 US BANK FUEL -COMM SVCS 0015310 42310 375.00 6/3/2010 US BANK FUEL -ROAD MAINT 0015554 42310 542.50 6/3/2010 US BANK FUEL-NGHBRHD IMP 0015230 42310 200.82 6/3/2010 US BANK SUPPLIES -GENERAL 0014090 41200 41.99 6/3/2010 US BANK FUEL -POOL VEH 0014090 42310 156.27 6/3/2010 US BANK FUEL -COMM SVCS 0015554 42310 47.01 6/3/2010 US BANK CCCA CONF-DOYLE 0014030 42330 864.76 6/3/2010 US BANK LEAGUE MTG-COUNCIL 0014010 42325 8.00 6/3/2010 US BANK FUEL -COMM SVCS 0015310 42310 282.16 6/3/2010 US BANK ICSC CONF-CMGR 0014030 42330 425.00 6/3/2010 US BANK SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS 0015350 41200 32.78 6/312010 US BANK MTG-DOYLE 0014030 42325 71.50 6/3/2010 US BANK NLC CONF-COUNCIL 0014010 42330 60.00 6/3/2010 US BANK MEMBERSHIP DUES -COUNCIL 0014010 42315 50.00 6/3/2010 US BANK ICSC CONF-COUNCIL 0015210 42330 425.00 6/3/2010 US BANK SUPPLIES -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 47.54 6/3/2010 US BANK SUPPLIES -DBC 0015333 41200 11.39 6/3/2010 US BANK PLNRS CONF-COUNCIL 0014010 42330 221.61 6/3/2010 US BANK MEMBERSHIP DUES-H/R 0014060 42315 247.50 6/3/2010 US BANK SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS 0015350 41200 553.15 6/3/2010 US BANK SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS 0015350 41200 33.67 6/3/2010 US BANK SUPPLIES -CITY B/DAY CELEB 0015350 42353 1,069.67 602010 US BANK EQ RENTAL -ETHICS TRNG 0014030 42325 68.00 6/3/2010 US BANK MTG SUPPLIES-C/CLERK 0014030 42325 354.47 6/3/2010 US BANK MTG-I.T. 0014070 42325 32.48 6/3/2010 US BANK MTG-COMM DEV 0015210 42325 90.27 6/3/2010 US BANK SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS 0015350 41200 2,722.11 6/3/2010 US BANK SUPPLIES -DIAL A RIDE 1125553 41200 885.00 6/3/2010 US BANK COMP MAINT-I.T. 0014070 42205 905.00 6/3/2010 US BANK SUPPLIES-I.T. 0014070 41200 27.76 6/3/2010 US BANK MISAC MTG-DESFORGES 0014070 42325 304.40 Page 21 City Diamond Check Register Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 6/3/2010 90024... US BANK COMP MAINT-I.T. 0014070 42205 114.00 $20,970.96 ... 6/3/2010 US BANK GTC WEST CONF-ESTEVEZ 0014070 42330 145.40 6/3/2010 US BANK FUEL -ROAD MAINT 0015554 42310 199.32 6/3/2010 US BANK EQ -ROAD MAINT 0015554 41300 105.92 6/3/2010 US BANK FUEL -COMM SVCS 0015310 42310 208.82 6/3/2010 US BANK FUEL -COMM SVCS 0015310 42310 422.43 6/3/2010 US BANK EQ MAINT-COMM SVCS 0015310 42200 1,195.46 6/3/2010 US BANK MAINT-COMM SVCS 0015340 42210 44.44 6/3/2010 1 90025 US HEALTHWORKS MEDICAL GROUP PC PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL 1 0014060 1 42345 1 336.00 $336.00 6/312010 90026 VERIZON WIRELESS CELL CHRGS-DESFORGES 0014070 42125 45.01 $321.38 6/3/2010 VERIZON WIRELESS CELL CHRGS-AZIZ 0014070 42125 45.01 6/3/2010 VERIZON WIRELESS CELL CHRGS-LASD MODEM 0014411 42125 45.01 6/3/2010 VERIZON WIRELESS CELL CHRGS-CMGR 0014030 42125 118.70 6/3/2010 VERIZON WIRELESS CELL CHRGS-EOC 0014440 42125 57.83 6/3/2010 VERIZON WIRELESS CELL CHRGS-EOC 0014090 42125 9.82 6/3/2010 90027 VISION INTERNET PROVIDERS INC COMP MAINT-I.T. 0014070 42205 1,045.00 $1,345.00 6/3/2010 VISION INTERNET PROVIDERS INC MONTHLY HOSTING -MAR 0014070 44030 150.00 613/2010 VISION INTERNET PROVIDERS INC MONTHLY HOSTING -FEB 0014070 44030 150.00 6/3/2010 90028 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY SUPPLIES-LORBEER 0015340 41200 328.92 $2,336.42 6/3/2010 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY SUPPLIES -DBC 0015333 41200 25.21 6/3/2010 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY SUPPLIES -DBC 0015333 41200 1,648.02 6/3/2010 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY SUPPLIES-LORBEER 0015340 41200 334.27 6/3/2010 90029 WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL PROF.SVCS-EN 10-682 001 23012 925.00 $1,295.00 6/3/2010 WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL ADMIN FEE -EN 10-682 001 23012 166.50 6/3/2010 WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL ADMIN FEE -EN 10-682 001 34650 -166.50 6/3/2010 WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL PROF.SVCS-EN 10-683 001 23012 370.00 61312010 WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL ADMIN FEE -EN 10-683 001 23012 66.60 6/3/2010 WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL ADMIN FEE -EN 10-683 001 34650 -66.60 6/3/2010 90030 STEPHANIE YANG RECREATION REFUND 1 001 1 34780 1 60.001 $60.00 Page 22 Check Date I Check Number City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 05/14/10 thru 06/08/10 Vendor Name rransaction Description Fund/ Dept I Acct # I Amount I Total Check Amount 5/27/2010 WIT 0130 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA, NA LEASE PAYMENT -DBC JUN 0014090 42140 27,534.56 $27,534.56 $1,312,182.17 Page 23 CITY COUNCIL TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Mang g -LP TITLE: Treasurer's Statement — April 201 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the April 2010 Treasurer's Statement. FINANCIAL IMPACT: No Fiscal Impact 57911�•� Agenda # 6.6 Meeting Date: Jun. 15, 2010 AGENDA REPORT Per City policy, the Finance Department presents the monthly Treasurer's Statement for t Council's review and approval. This statement shows the cash balances for the various funds, breakdown of bank account balances, investment account balances, and the effective yield from investments. This statement also includes a separate investment portfolio report which the activities of the investments. All investments have been made in accordance with the Investment Policy. Linda G. Magnuson, Finance Director �i�D�epap�ent Head Attachments: Treasurer's Statement, Investment Portfolio Report Assistant City Manager he City with a earned details City's CITY OF DIAMOND BAR TREASURER'S MONTHLY CASH STATEMENT April 30, 2010 SUMMARY OF CASH: DEMAND DEPOSITS INVESTMENTS: CASH WITH FISCAL AGENT: GENERALACCOUNT PAYROLL ACCOUNT CHANGE FUND PETTY CASH ACCOUNT TOTAL DEMAND DEPOSITS US TREASURY Money Market Acct. LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FD FED HOME LOAN BANK NOTES US TREASURY Money Market Account TOTAL INVESTMENTS TOTAL CASH ($397,701.12) 41,604.46 250.00 1,000.00 ($354,846.66) $1,000,044.89 33,115,764.61 4,000,000.00 271,135.65 $38,386,945.15 $38,032,098.49 Note: The City of Diamond Bar is invested in the State Treasurer's Local Agency Investment Fund. The account's funds are available for withdrawal within 24 hours. In addition, the City has started investing in longer term investments. These investments are detailed on the attached Investment Report. All investments are in compliance with the investment policy adopted by the City of Diamond Bar. The above summary provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet the next six month's esti a d p tures. James DeStefano, Treasurer GENERAL FUND $30,275,389.33 1,853,165.03 .$1,608,014.30 $362,417.30 $30,882,957.36 COMMUNITY ORG SUPPORT FD (6,225.00) 3,300.00 (9,525.00) MEASURE R LOCAL RETURN FD 237,329.54 58,380.61 295,710.15 GAS TAX FUND (100,354.05) 384,931.10 (356,213,22) (71,636.17) TRANSIT TX (PROP A) PD 279,930.74 132,460.24 302,100.48 110,290.50 TRANSIT TX (PROP C) FD 1,975,871.61 46,301.84 1,530.00 (85,526.86) 1,935,116.59 ISTEA Fund 680,386.91 1,318.29 (4,125.00) 677,580.20 INTEGRATED WASTE MGT Fl) 559,766.59 93,213.37 14,665.96 (75,766.43) 562,547.57 TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT FUND 316,337.22 613.25 8,460.04 (2,672.55) 305,817.88 AB2928-TR CONGESTION RELIEF FD (99,298.69) 148,569.89 49,271.20 AIR QUALITY IMPRVMNT FD 197,718.44 361.82 198,080.26 TRAILS & BIKEWAYS FID 0.00 0.00 Prop 16 Bond Fund 526,547.35 639.69 (33,337.00) 493,850.04 PARK FEES FD 318,841.12 731.55 (11,931.56) 307,641.11 PROP A - SAFE PARKS ACT FUND 21,673.80 41.99 21,715.79 PARK & FACILITIES DEVEL. FD 613,271.11 1,188.18 614,459.29 COM DEV BLOCK GRANT Fl) (9,306.22) 15,950.15 (21,732.00) (46,988.37) CITIZENS OPT -PUBLIC SAFETY FD 174,536.32 310.98 (34,976.02) 139,871.28 NARCOTICS ASSET SEIZURE FD 363,607.08 704.47 364,311.55 CA LAW ENFORCEMENT EQUIP PRG 56,409.71 109.29 56,519.00 E BYRNE JUSTICE ASSIST GRANT 49,756.19 16.07 49,772.26 LANDSCAPE DIST #38 Fl) (142,710.34) 80,445.76 17,073.52 (79,338.10) LANDSCAPE DIST #39 FID (183,407.93) 48,180.85 13,576.00 (148,803.08) LANDSCAPE DIST #41 FD (6,534.21) 36,040.82 5,151.36 24,355.25 CDBG - R Fund (136.05) 136.00 652.65 (4,968.00) (5,620.70) ENERGY EFF & CNSVTN BLK GRT (64,618.97) 16,274.30 (80,893.27) CAP IMPROVEMENT PRJ FD (673,590.29) 110,975.01 268,1831.34 (515,733.96) SELF INSURANCE FUND 994,756.44 1,927.28 996,683.72 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 248,127.33 480.73 248,608.06 COMPUTER REPLACEMENT FUND 383,599.24 743.19 384,342.43 PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY FUN 244,913.05 29,114.09 2,891.49 271,135.65 TOTALS $37,232,587.37 $2,920,126.38 $2,120,615.26 $0.00 $38,032,098.49 SUMMARY OF CASH: DEMAND DEPOSITS INVESTMENTS: CASH WITH FISCAL AGENT: GENERALACCOUNT PAYROLL ACCOUNT CHANGE FUND PETTY CASH ACCOUNT TOTAL DEMAND DEPOSITS US TREASURY Money Market Acct. LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FD FED HOME LOAN BANK NOTES US TREASURY Money Market Account TOTAL INVESTMENTS TOTAL CASH ($397,701.12) 41,604.46 250.00 1,000.00 ($354,846.66) $1,000,044.89 33,115,764.61 4,000,000.00 271,135.65 $38,386,945.15 $38,032,098.49 Note: The City of Diamond Bar is invested in the State Treasurer's Local Agency Investment Fund. The account's funds are available for withdrawal within 24 hours. In addition, the City has started investing in longer term investments. These investments are detailed on the attached Investment Report. All investments are in compliance with the investment policy adopted by the City of Diamond Bar. The above summary provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet the next six month's esti a d p tures. James DeStefano, Treasurer CITY OF DIAMOND BAR INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO REPORT for the Month of April 2010 Total Securities $ 4,000,000.00 4,000,000 $ 4,003,060.00 1.658% Local Agency Inv Fund AAA 33,115,764.61 33,154;943.57 0.588% US Treasury Money Market AAA $1,000,044.89 1,000,044.89 0.010% Total Liquidity $ 34,115,809.50 $ 34,154,988.46 Union Bank -(Fiscal Agent) AAA Total investments 2009-10 Budgeted Interest Income Actual Year -To -Date Interest Income Percent of Interest Received to Budget Allocation of Book Value of Investment by Type (By Percent) Federal Agency LAIF Fund Securities $ ti ? 86.27% 10.42% U.S Treasury Money Market 3.31% Total investment - S38.38 * Source of Fair Market Value: Wells Fargo Institutional Securities, LLC 271,135.65 271,135.65 0.010% $ 38,386,945.15 $ 38,429,184.11 $415,000.00 $264,574.74 63.753% TYPE OF INVESTMENTS: Federal Agency Security Federal Agency Securities are issued by direct U.S Government agencies or quasi -government agencies. Many of these issues are guaranteed directly or indirectly by the United States Government. The City Investment Policy places a 40% limit on this type of investment and the security investment is currently held in a custodial account by Wells Fargo Institutional Securities LLC for safe- keeping services. Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) !AIF is an investment pool for local agencies which is managed by the State Treasurer and regulated by the State law. The City Investment Policy places no limit on this type of investment. U.S. Treasury Money Market Fund Money Market Funds are comprised of short term government securities, certificates of deposit and highly rated commercial paper. The City Investment Policy places no limit on this type of investment. Purchase Maturity Amount Current Par / Fair Market Investment Type Rating Date Date Term At Cost Original Par Value * Rate Freddie Mac Unnt AAA 01/15/10 01/15/13 3.0 Yrs 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,002,120.00 2.000% Federal Home Loan Banks Bond AAA 04/12/10 04/12/13 3.0 Yrs 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,310.00 2.000% Federal Farm Credit Banks Bond AAA 03/16/10 12/16/13 3.5 Yrs 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000.00 2.240% Federal Home Loan Bond AAA 03/30/10 12/30/13 3.5 Yrs 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,630.00 2.050% Total Securities $ 4,000,000.00 4,000,000 $ 4,003,060.00 1.658% Local Agency Inv Fund AAA 33,115,764.61 33,154;943.57 0.588% US Treasury Money Market AAA $1,000,044.89 1,000,044.89 0.010% Total Liquidity $ 34,115,809.50 $ 34,154,988.46 Union Bank -(Fiscal Agent) AAA Total investments 2009-10 Budgeted Interest Income Actual Year -To -Date Interest Income Percent of Interest Received to Budget Allocation of Book Value of Investment by Type (By Percent) Federal Agency LAIF Fund Securities $ ti ? 86.27% 10.42% U.S Treasury Money Market 3.31% Total investment - S38.38 * Source of Fair Market Value: Wells Fargo Institutional Securities, LLC 271,135.65 271,135.65 0.010% $ 38,386,945.15 $ 38,429,184.11 $415,000.00 $264,574.74 63.753% TYPE OF INVESTMENTS: Federal Agency Security Federal Agency Securities are issued by direct U.S Government agencies or quasi -government agencies. Many of these issues are guaranteed directly or indirectly by the United States Government. The City Investment Policy places a 40% limit on this type of investment and the security investment is currently held in a custodial account by Wells Fargo Institutional Securities LLC for safe- keeping services. Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) !AIF is an investment pool for local agencies which is managed by the State Treasurer and regulated by the State law. The City Investment Policy places no limit on this type of investment. U.S. Treasury Money Market Fund Money Market Funds are comprised of short term government securities, certificates of deposit and highly rated commercial paper. The City Investment Policy places no limit on this type of investment. CITY COUNCIL Agenda # 6. 7 (a) Meeting Date: June ]5,2010 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Man gl'p TITLE: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 2 10 -XX DECLARING SUPPORT FOR AN ENERGY PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON AND THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the City for participation in this program. As a member, the City would be eligible for Southern California Edison incentives for implementing energy saving measures. The San Gabriel Valley Energy Wise Partnership (SGVEWP) is a joint venture between Southern California Edison (SCE), Southern California Association of Governments, along with thirty San Gabriel Valley cities and the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments. The partnership provides residents and businesses with vital energy efficiency information, and offers cities access to energy audits, technical assistance and specialized energy efficiency incentives. Although the SGVEWP is stand alone program separate from the Los Angeles County Energy Program, they are both designed to increase awareness of energy reduction strategies and decrease energy usage. The City would not incur additional costs from participating in the program, but upon adoption of the attached resolution, would be eligible for SGVEWP services and financial incentives. Prepar,eq by: Anthony Santo's Management Analyst Attachment: 1. Resolution 2010 -XX Reviewed Rya 4 qclean Assislafit to the City Manager RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -XX WHEREAS, the City Council supports "energy efficiency" initiatives, policies, and construction standards in order to ensure that the City of Diamond Bar follows and encourages sustainable policies and practices; and WHEREAS, demand for electricity has grown substantially, and it is expected that demand for electricity will continue to grow in the near future to support a growing population; and WHEREAS, it makes economic sense and good public policy to encourage energy efficiency where possible in the City of Diamond Bar; and WHEREAS, energy efficient programs enhance our environment by improving air quality, reducing pollution, and conserving natural resources; and WHEREAS, it is vital for our community to keep dollars local, encourage innovations, and incorporate energy efficiency into our everyday business and personal lives; and WHEREAS, there is movement within California communities and businesses to improve everyday practices and to create more sustainable and "greener" cities; and WHEREAS, the City seeks to promote innovative methods and state-of-the-art technologies used in the design and construction of new residential buildings within the City, in order to bring our energy and natural resource consumption in line with goals of sustainability; and WHEREAS, by partnering with the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments and Southern California Edison the City of Diamond Bar will become more competitive when it comes to applying for grant programs, rebates, and incentives. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Diamond Bar will monitor the work of the San Gabriel Valley Energy Wise Partnership as it furthers its goal to adopt formal guidelines that will encourage the exploration of and use of the energy efficiency incentives offered by the partnership. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: Section 1. That the City of Diamond Bar supports a commitment to sustainable practices through energy efficiency, and will provide leadership and guidance in promoting and facilitating such practices in the community. Section 2. That the City of Diamond Bar supports and endorses the Local Government Partnership as an effective method to help meet long-term community economic and environmental goals. Section 3. That the City of Diamond Bar will provide special recognition to City agencies and local non -profits that utilize any of the programs encompassed by SCE's Local Government Partnership. Section 4. The City Clerk shall attest and certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and it shall become effective immediately upon its approval. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 15th day of June, 2010. Carol Herrera, Mayor 1, Tommye A. Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2010 -XX was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, California, at its adjourned regular meeting held on the 15th day of June, 2010, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Resolution No. 2010 -XX -2- Resolution No. 2010-XX Tommye A. Cribbins, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar CITY COUNCIL TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Agenda . • Meeting Date: June 15, 2010 AGENDA REPORT VIA: James DeStefano, City Man g TITLE: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 10 -XX CONSENTING TO INCLUSION OF PROPERTIES WITHIN THE INCORPORATED AREA OF THE CITY IN THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY ENERGY PROGRAM TO FINANCE DISTRIBUTED GENERATION RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES AND ENERGY AND WATER EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS, APPROVING THE REPORT SETTING FORTH THE PARAMETERS OF THE REFERENCED PROGRAM AND CERTAIN MATTERS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the City for participation in this County administered program. BACKGROUND: On July 21, 2008, the State of California adopted Assembly Bill'811 (AB 811), which authorized local governments to provide financing to qualified property owners for the installation of energy and water efficiency improvements and renewable energy sources that are permanently fixed to their properties. The financing is attached to the property as a special assessment to fund repayment of the loan, and remains with the property should the owner transfer or sell it. Several cities have implemented their own AB 811 energy programs, most notably the City of Palm Desert. There are considerable costs to implementing an AB 811 program, including administration, public outreach, and bond financing. The County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors recently approved the creation of the County administered Los Angeles County Energy Program (LACEP) at its May 25, 2010 meeting. In addition to administering the program and providing energy efficiency financing options to unincorporated areas, the County of Los Angeles has extended participation in the program to all incorporated cities in the County if the respective legislative body adopts the attached resolution of participation by July 1, 2010. Participation in the LACEP provides Diamond Bar residents the option to enter into a contractual assessment with the County to finance energy efficiency improvements to their homes. Adoption of the attached resolution does not mandate resident participation and results in no fiscal impact to the City. Prepared by: Anthony Santos Management Analyst Reviewed PY: Rydn,WcLean Assistant to the City Manager Attachment: 1. Resolution 2010 -XX 2. Los Angeles County Energy Program (LACEP) Report. RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR CONSENTING TO INCLUSION OF PROPERTIES WITHIN THE INCORPORATED AREA OF THE CITY IN THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY ENERGY PROGRAM TO FINANCE DISTRIBUTED GENERATION RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES AND ENERGY AND WATER EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS, APPROVING THE REPORT SETTING FORTH THE PARAMETERS OF THE REFERENCED PROGRAM AND CERTAIN MATTERS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH WHEREAS, Chapter 29 of Part 3 of Division 7 of the California Streets and Highways Code (the "Act") authorizes cities and counties to assist free and willing property owners in financing the installation of distributed generation renewable energy sources and energy and water efficiency improvements (the "Improvements") that are permanently fixed to residential, commercial, industrial or other real property through a contractual assessment program; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors (the "Board of Supervisors") of the County of Los Angeles, a political subdivision of the State of California (the "County"), has established a contractual assessment program named the Los Angeles County Energy Program ("LACEP") pursuant to the Act; and WHEREAS, the parameters of LACEP are set forth in the Report attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Report") and such Report has been prepared by the Director of the Internal Services Department of the County, as Program Administrator (the "Program Administrator"), pursuant to Section 5898.22 of the Act and approved by the Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, the Act authorizes the County to enter into contractual assessments with property owners located within incorporated cities only subsequent to the approval of the legislative body of the related city to participate in LACEP; and WHEREAS, the City of Diamond Bar desires to participate with the County in LACEP, under terms and conditions agreed to by the City of Diamond Bar and the County as listed in this resolution and attached Report. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED by the Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: Section 1. The recitals set forth hereinabove are true and correct in all respects. Section 2. The City Council finds and declares that properties in the City's incorporated area will be benefited by participation in LACEP. Section 3. The City Council ratifies the resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors on April 6, 2010 declaring the Board of Supervisors' intention to order the implementation of a contractual assessment program to finance Improvements pursuant to the Act. Section 4. This City Council hereby approves the Report substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A and finds and determines that changes to the parameters of LACEP that are not material in nature do not require the approval of this Council. Section 5. This City Council hereby approves the inclusion in LACEP of all of the properties in the incorporated area within the City, as same may be amended through annexation from time to time, the acquisition, construction and installation within City limits of the Improvements set forth in the Report upon the request and agreement of the affected property owner, and the assumption of jurisdiction thereover by the County for the aforesaid purposes. The adoption of this Resolution by this City Council constitutes the approval'by the City to participate in the LACEP. This City Council further authorizes the County to set the terms of and implement LACEP and to take each and every action necessary or desirable for financing the Improvements, including the levying, collecting and enforcement of the contractual assessments to finance the Improvements and the issuance of bonds secured by such contractual assessments. Section 6. The City Clerk is directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County. Section 7. City staff is authorized and directed to coordinate with the County, including the Program Administrator and County staff, to facilitate operation of LACEP. City staff is also authorized and directed to do all acts and things which may be required by this Resolution, or which may be necessary or desirable in carrying out LACEP as described in the Report, as may be amended from time to time, and approved by this Resolution, and all matters incidental thereto. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 15th day of June, 2010. Carol Herrera, Mayor 1, Tommye A. Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2010 -XX was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, California, at its adjourned regular meeting held on the 15t" day of June, 2010, by the following vote, to wit: Resolution No. 2010 -XX AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Tommye A. Cribbins, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar Resolution No. 2010 -XX EXHIBIT A REPORT (See attached r.,� ; ._ ,� �� � ^ h � , �v 4 �. �,�� � '•=s !] Los Angeles County Energy Program Program Report Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................1 Background...............................................................................................................................................1 ProgramBenefits...................................................................................................................................... 2 ProgramAdministration............................................................................................................................ 3 ProgramDuration..................................................................................................................................... 3 11. PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS................................................................................................................. 3 Geographic Parameters and Participating City Requirements.................................................................3 Eligible Owners and Properties................................................................................................................4 EligibleImprovements.............................................................................................................................. 5 EligibleCosts............................................................................................................................................5 III. PROGRAM FINANCING......................................................................................................................... 5 Strategyto Raise Capital.......................................................................................................................... 5 TheEnergy Fund...................................................................................................................................... 6 Maximum Aggregate Contractual Assessment........................................................................................ 6 Administrative Costs/Application Fee.......................................................................................................6 Maximum Disbursement Amounts............................................................................................................7 Single and Multiple Disbursements..........................................................................................................7 AssessmentInterest Rate.........................................................................................................................7 Annual Administrative Assessment; Consultation with County Auditor -Controller ................................... 7 AssessmentTerm.....................................................................................................................................7 Assessment Collection and Default..........................................................................................................7 Rebatesand Incentives............................................................................................................................ 8 FinancingProcess................................................................................................................................... 8 Priorityof Funding.....................................................................................................................................9 Property Owner Financial Responsibilities...............................................................................................9 IV. CHANGES TO THE PROGRAM REPORT.............................................................................................9 Appendix A: Area Map Appendix B: Eligible Improvements Appendix C: Draft Assessment Contract iiIPage Los Angeles County Energy Program Program Report The Los Angeles County Energy Program ("LACEP^nr isintended hohelp property owners make capital investments in distributed generation renewable energy sources and energy efficiency and water efficiency improvements (collectively known as "Improvements") that will provide long-term benefits and reduced energy bills. The Program will provide a financing mechanism for the Improvements through an assessment contract (the "Assessment Contract") between the County of Los Angeles (the "County") and the property owner, pursuant to which the County will disburse a specified amount to the property owner. The property owner will pay contractual assessments levied against the property through annual installments onthe property tax bill. |fthe owner sells the subject property prior tofull repayment ofthe assessment, the repayment obligation remains olien onthe subject property. The County intends to finance the Program in part by issuing (or causing to be issued) bonds payable from contractual assessment revenues. Participation in the Program is completely voluntary and property taxes for non- participating property owners are unaffected by the Program. This Program Report ("isprepared pursuant toSection 58Q8.22ofChapter 2Qofthe California Streets and Highways Code ("Choptar3Q" inconnection the establishment ofLACEP. Kincludes the 1) Amap showing the boundaries ofthe Program -theterhtory within which contractual assessments are proposed tobooffered. See Appendix Aattached hereto. 2) Adraft Assessment Contract specifying the terms and conditions that would be applicable hmthe property owner and the County. See Appendix Cattached hereto. 3) A statement ofCounty policies concerning voluntary contractual ooaaaomenta, inc|udihg all ofthe following: " Identification of the types of facilities, distributed generation renewable energy sources, orenergy orwater efficiency improvements that may befinanced through the use ofcontractual assessments. " Identification of one or more County officials authorized to enter into voluntary contractual assessments onbehalf ofthe County. • Amaximumaggnegatedo||eramountofvo|untarycontnactue|aoneaementa. 4) A method for establishing priority order among the requests from property owners for financing through LACEP. 5) /\financing plan for raising capital. G) A report on the results of consultations with the County Auditor -Controller concerning the additional fees, if any, that will be charged for incorporating the proposed voluntary contractual assessments into the general taxes of the County on real property, and a plan for financing the payment ofthose fees. Background Widespread implementation of distributed generation renewable energy sources and energy efficiency and water efficiency measures in existing buildings within the County will help the State of California ("State") reach the greenhouse gas reduction goals set forth under State Assembly Bill 32 ("AB32^)and help the County and surrounding cities achieve their own targeted reductions. Participating property owners can help to achieve greenhouse gas reductions, reduce water and energy use, and save money byinvesting inthese measures. Chapter 29 authorizes various public agencies, including counties and cities, to designate areas within which free and willing property owners can enter into contractual assessments tnfinance the installation nfImprovements that are permanently fixed horesidential, commercial, industrial, agriculture orother real property. LACEP is the voluntary contractual assessment program developed by the County pursuant to 11Paga Los Angeles County Energy Program Program Report Chapter 29. Any assessments and liens under LACEPare levied only with the consent offree and willing owners ofthe property onwhich Improvements are tobomade. The Program will provide financing for qualifying property owners within the County to install Improvements pursuant to the terms and conditions ofthe Assessment Contracts. Property owners will pay contractual assessments levied against their property in installments ontheir property tax bills. Each contractual assessment iotied directly tothe applicable property and any unpaid amount at sale or other disposition of the property will remain on the property and become the responsibility ofthe subsequent owner. Projuam Bene LACBP isintended toprovide multiple benefits, indudingthepotanUa|fornsducedutilit bills for participating property owners. LACBPalso offers omeans offinancing Improvements with alower equity contribution than may be required in a conventional financing and establishes a loan obligation that is attached tothe property and not tothe individual borrower. The financing iuintended hnbecompetitive with conventional fixed-rate loans and provide for a streamlined financing and repayment process. All available State, utility orother energy effioienoy.water efficiency orrenewable energy rebates, incentives and all State and federal tax credits remain available to the property owner in connection with the Improvements (subject to applicable rules, restrictions, regulations and the current status of programs administered byother such andtieo).unless otherwise specified. Incorporated cities may participate inLACBP without incurring the costs offorming separate programs because LACEP's geographical boundary is coterminous with the County's boundaries and includes, subject to such cities'approval of participation in LACEP, all 88 incorporated cities. Having osingle program available to all residents of the County is anticipated to increase participation by eliminating confusion for residents in finding the appropriate program. Cities may join LACEP by adopting a resolution allowing property owners� in their respective jurisdictions to apply for financing and implement Improvements under LACEP. The Program seeks tomitigate long-term regional greenhouse gas production through the reduction of energy usage from traditional utility sources and help the County and participatingcities satisfy the State's greenhouse gas reduction goals under AB32. When itwas signed into law in20UG./\832 established statewide goals for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and may yet require counties and cities to adopt regional greenhouse gas emission limits similar to the statewide target of achieving 10QOlevels nfgreenhouse gas emissions by2O2O. Tothe extent permitted bylaw, the County will hold and retain any carbon credits, offsets, carbon cap allocations, or other benefits attributable to the Improvements financed byLACEP. |tiothe intention ofthe County hzapply any benefits resulting from such carbon credits tothe furtherance ofLACEP. LACEPhas the potential asignificant industry shift inthe region towards enenergy efficiency, water efficiency and renewable energy economy. LACEPaima to be a catalystinspurring anew ^gnaen^ economy inthe County bysupporting energy project inspection and installation jobs, job training and workforce development, local manufacturing and distribution, research and development, and marketing and outreach. For the first few years of the Program, American Recovery and Reinvestment Act ("ARRA")grants will be used topartially fund L/\CEP. Bythe end nfthe ARRA funding term in2U12.LACEPseeks tuachieve the following goals: 1. Retrofit 15,000 single-family homes with a 20% average energy reduction. 2. Create 1.80Uhome energy retrofit jobs and 1.OUUancillary jobs. 3. Reduce annual purchased energy consumption in retrofitted homes by an aggregate 150 billion British Thermal Units and $2million inutility charges per year. 4. Reduce the County's annual greenhouse gas emissions attributable to energy consumption in its existing housing stock by20.U0Otons ofcarbon dioxide. � Los Angeles County Energy Program Program Report The benefits to both the regional economy and the environment are expected bincrease once individual cities join LACEP.emthe above forecasts are quantified solely for unincorporated areas ofthe County. The Program will be governed by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles, which will approve the Program parameters, approve the issuance of bonds, and delegate authority to authorized officers hoadminister the Program. The Director ofthe County's Internal Services Department will serve aathe Program Administrator and will provide day-to-day management of the Program, including design, implementation, and administration. The authority to approve and enter into individual Assessment Contracts will be delegated bythe Board nfSupervisors bothe Program Administrator. The County Office of Sustainability ("COS"), within the Internal Services Department, and the Program Administrator will manage all Program activities, including, but not limited to, the following: • Marketing and community outreach; " Energy surveys and technical support for individual projects; " Customer service, including question and answer support to interested Program participants; = Assisting hnproject development; = Processing Program applications; = Managing and tracking funds available for financing Improvements; ° Managing and tracking progress of the Improvements and financing therefor; = Tracking individual and collective energy and greenhouse gas benefits; " Integrating LACEP with other County, State, utility and regional rebate/incentive programs; ° Working and coordinating with participating cities and other jurisdictions; " Providing information on local and regional environmental programs; and = Reporting progress and expenditures according to mandated reporting methods applicable to appropriated funds, including amounts received pursuant toARRA. These activities are intended to provide quality Program design, administration and implementation for qualifying property owners who may otherwise be unable to finance and install the Improvements. fto,oriwn? Duration Unless otherwise directed by the Board of Supervisors, the Program will continue as long as there is sufficient demand and funding for the Improvements. LACEP is available in the unincorporated areas of the County immediately upon establishment of the Program bythe Board ofSupervisors. Cities within the County may join LACEPand make assessment financing available to qualifying property owners located within their city's boundaries. Anytime after the County's establishment of the Program, a city's legislative body may adopt a resolution requesting inclusion in the County Program. Pursuant to such resolution to participate in the Program, the city will find and declare that the properties in the city's incorporated area will benefit from participation. Further, the city's resolution will authorize the County to set the terms of LACEP, implement the Program, and take action necessary for financing the Improvements. 3 1 P a g e Los Angeles County Energy Program Program Report Participation in LACEP offers cities and their property owners the following advantages: ® An opportunity to save money through energy and water efficiency improvements; ® The ability to take advantage of substantial financial incentives and rebates from multiple sources; ® A financing mechanism that establishes an obligation that remains attached to the property; and ■ Job creation and stimulation of the economy. Cities may elect to withdraw from participation in LACEP by adopting a resolution terminating their involvement. If a participating city elects to withdraw from LACEP, no future assessment financing will be made in that city, but assessment obligations made previous to the city's termination will remain in effect. A map showing the Proposed Program boundaries is attached in Appendix A. Eligible Owners and Properties All owners of improved real property within participating areas are eligible to submit an application for LACEP. Qualifying property owners may be individuals, associations, business entities, cooperatives and any owner who pays real property taxes. At this time, financing through LACEP is not available for properties that are not subject to property taxes, such as governmental entities and certain non-profit corporations. To protect the Program from defaults and to improve access to the capital markets, property owners must meet the following minimum requirements to qualify for financing: ■ Property is located within Los Angeles County, and if within the boundaries of a city, the city has adopted a resolution to join the Program; ■ Applicant is the legal owner of the property; ■ All legal owners of the property agree to participate in the Program; ■ The property is not subject to involuntary liens as set forth in the Assessment Contract or any other Program document; • Property taxes and assessments are current on the property and have not been delinquent for a period up to 5 years (or since the date of the most recent transfer if less than 5 years); • Property owner certifies that he/she is not in bankruptcy and the property is not an asset in a bankruptcy proceeding; ■ Property owner certifies that he/she has not declared bankruptcy within the last 10 years; ■ Property owner certifies and demonstrates that he/she is current on his/her mortgage, has not defaulted on the deed(s) of trust and can legally enter into the Program; • Improvement costs are reasonable to property value. Property must meet a minimum value -to - lien ratio; • Property must meet a positive equity test and not exceed a maximum loan-to-value2 ratio; and • Property is subject to the appropriate jurisdiction's (County, city, or town) permitting and inspections and all other applicable federal, State, and local codes and regulations. Property owners may submit more than one application for funding under the Program if additional Improvements are desired by the owner. However, all existing criteria must be met at the time of each new application. Valuation of the property will reflect either the assessed value or the market value as determined by using established industry approved methodologies. Costs for the scope of work will be based on contractor estimates, quotes provided by the property owner, and general industry standards. Additional due diligence or underwriting criteria may be required for the financing of large projects. Value of the property divided by the amount of the contractual assessment. s A re ate total of all liens secured by real. estate..mortgag es_ on the proper..y_jivided by the value _of theproperty......................................„__,.,_,,.. 99 9......... 4 1 P a g e Los Angeles County Energy Program Program Report The Program Administrator may exercise discretion in determining eligibility and any additionalcriteria required for financing Improvements. Furthermore, the minimum eligibility requirements provided in this Report are subject to change pursuant to the future financing needs of the Program. Eligible Iniprovements The Program provides property owners the opportunity to take advantage of a wide range of Improvements, subject tothe following provisions: * The Program will only finance distributed generation renewable energy sources and energy efficiency and water efficiency measures that are permanently fixed to the property. ° Property owners who elect to engage in broader retrofit projects (such as residential or nonresidential remodeling) will only be provided financing for costs, associated with Improvements available under the Program. " The Program is intended to finance the replacement of working, inefficient equipment and building materials and the installation of new equipment and building materials that reduce energy consumption (beyond that required by existing, applicable building codes), produce renewable anergy, orreduce energy inconnection with water usage. The Program will also make financing available for purchasers of residential, commercial or industrial properties who wish to add Improvements after transfer oftitle incomplete. � Property owners are responsible for the Improvements installed on their property. Property owners must address performance and other system -related issues directly with the installer in accordance with the terms of their contract with the installer. Property owners are responsible for maintenance and repair ofthe Improvements. Examples of Improvements available for financing under LACEP are provided in Appendix B. M�qible Costs Eligible costs ofthe Improvements include the cost ofsurveys and audits, permito»and inspections, equipment installation from licensed, approved professionals, and follow-up inspections. Installation costs may include, but are not limited to, energy audit consultations, labor, design, drafting, engineering, permit fees, and inspection charges. Aqualified contractor ofthe property owner's choice can be selected hocomplete installation of Improvements. For each property, the Program Administrator will determine whether the estimated equipment and installation costs are reasonable. The Program Administrator will evaluate market conditions and may require the property owner to provide additional bids to determine whether costs are reasonable. While the property owner will be able to choose the contractor of his/her choice, the amount eligible for the LACEP financing may be limited to the amount deemed reasonable by the Program Administrator. Projects that exceed a certain size and dollar amount may be subject to additional review. Stratozy to Raise Capita The County intends toraise capital for the Program through one mmore nfthe following financing arrangements: " Issuing or causing the issuance of bonds pursuant to Section 5898.28 of the Streets and Highways Code, the principal and interest nfwhich will borepaid from contractual assessments; 3 All Improvements that require permits will be required to obtain such a permit from the local jurisdiction. Final inspection will ensure that the Improvements were ��'��� 51Page Los Angeles County Energy Program Program Report • Advancement of certain County funds or funds held by the County Treasurer and Tax Collector, which will be repaid through contractual assessments or reimbursed from proceeds of a debt issuance; • Application of funds received pursuant to federal and State programs and available for LACEP financing purposes; ■ Issuing debt or entering into loan arrangements to fund the Improvements; and ® Private or owner -arranged financing. To the extent that the County issues debt, it is expected to include a debt service reserve fund in the amount sufficient to enhance the marketability of the debt. The proceeds of the debt issuance will be applied to cover the costs of Improvements, fund the debt service reserve fund, and pay costs of issuance of the debt. The County may also pursue other financing options not listed above should such options benefit the ongoing viability of the Program. The Energy Fund The County will create a special fund, the Energy Fund ("Fund"), which will hold contractual assessments revenues received pursuant to the Assessment Contracts. Moneys in the Fund shall be used to make payments on debt issued by or on behalf of the County, fund certain administrative costs of the Program, replenish the debt service reserve fund, if required, and repay funds advanced by the County. Amounts in the Fund may also be used to finance additional Improvements secured by contractual assessments and any other reasonable activity needed to advance the Program. Payment of the contractual assessments will be made pursuant to Assessment Contracts between the property owner and the County. Maximum Aggregate Contractual Assessment The County is authorized to enter into up to $1.0 billion in aggregate dollar amount of voluntary contractual assessments. The County will coordinate the timing and issuance of debt with the goal of providing the lowest possible interest rate to qualifying property owners and maintaining the long-term financial viability of the Program. Administrative Costs/Application Fee The County will offer the Program as an additional County service that will help property owners achieve reductions on their energy bills and other environmental goals, while helping the County achieve its own environmental goals. The County will be responsible for: • Development and operation of LACEP; ® Acquisition of LACEP financing; ■ Overall reporting of Program status and goals, including reports to financing agencies, regulators, and stakeholders; ■ Overall structure and enforcement of Program governance; and • Management and administration of LACEP consultants needed to perform services under the Program. Certain administrative costs are anticipated in connection with the aforementioned responsibilities. All or a portion of such administrative costs may be financed through the interest component of the contractual assessment. The Program may also assign direct fees or charges to property owners for certain services provided during the process of securing an Assessment Contract. The County will recover a portion of these initial administrative costs through a one-time application fee. 6 1 P a g e Los Angeles County Energy Program Program Report Maxin2unl Disbursement Ainounts The County will set a maximum disbursement amount for individual properties under the Assessment Contract. Where possible, the actual amount disbursed to a participating property owner pursuant to an Assessment Contract will equal the actual cost of Improvements. In the event that the final cost of Improvements exceeds the agreed upon maximum disbursement amount, the property owner will be solely responsible for the payment of excess costs incurred to complete the Improvements. Single and Multiple Disbursenients Most disbursements will be delivered to property owners in a single payment upon completion of the Improvements. However, upon Program Administrator approval, some projects may qualify for multiple disbursements, which will allow for one or more payments to be made prior to project completion. Assessment Interest Rate The County will set a maximum interest rate for individual properties under the Assessment Contract. The final interest rate will be determined such that the total amount of contractual assessment payments (principal and interest) will be sufficient to repay the debt issued to finance the Improvements, pay the financing costs of such debt issuance, finance a debt service reserve fund with respect to such debt and fund eligible administrative costs so that the Program remains financially viable. The County Treasurer and Tax Collector, in conjunction with the Program Administrator, will determine individual contractual assessment interest rates. Under no circumstances will the interest rate exceed the maximum rate allowed by law. Annual Administrative Assessment; Consultation with County Auditor -Controller• LACEP reserves the right to charge an Annual Administrative Assessment to cover costs incurred by the County for the ordinary and necessary costs of administering the levy and collection of the contractual assessments and all other administrative costs and incidental expenses related to the debt to be issued. Separate from any application fee or administrative cost recovered through amounts paid on the contractual assessment interest rate, the Annual Administrative Assessment will be collected in the same manner as the contractual assessment and may be adjusted annually to reflect changes in costs. The County Auditor -Controller has been consulted regarding any fees resulting from the incorporation of the contractual assessments into the general taxes of the County on real property. It has been determined that any such fees shall be collected pursuant to the Annual Administrative Assessment. Assessmeiit Term The term of the contractual assessments will be no greater than the expected useful life of the Improvements for each individual Assessment Contract. In no event will the term of any contractual assessment exceed the maximum term allowed by law. The term of each contractual assessment will be set under the Assessment Contract. Assessment Collectioii aiid Default The contractual assessments will be collected in the same manner and at the same time as the general property taxes of the County. The contractual assessments are subject to the same penalties, remedies, and lien priorities in the event of delinquency and default. If any contractual assessment becomes delinquent and property taxes remain unpaid, the County shall have the right to initiate foreclosure proceedings on the subject property. The LACEP foreclosure policy will be developed in connection with future financing arrangements and will take into consideration any required covenants associated with a bond issuance. 7 1 P a g e Los Angeles County Energy Program Program Report Rebates and Incentives Financing through the Program may coincide with current and future distributed generation renewable energy, energy efficiency and water efficiency financial incentives available from utility providersas well aalocal, State, federal, and other agencies. The value ofexpected rebates and incentives will ba factored into the financing available tothe property owner. The Program will advise, and may require that, participants apply for any and all applicable rebates and incentives available at the time of financing. References to rebates and financial incentives in this Report do not include income tax rebates. The process for property owners to receive financing through LACBzisdesigned tobehelpful, transparent, and straightforward. Presented below are the general procedures for the application, " Education. Property owners may access mvariety ofresources tolearn about the Program, the financing terms, and other details. These resources may include aProgram website, service = Application. Property owners may apply for afunding reservation from LACEPand pay anon- refundable opp|iuotionfae.App|icotionamuotindudeopropuuedpnoject(ouopeofwork) and " Review and Approval. The Program Administrator will approve an application only after confirming that the applicant and proposed project satisfy the underwriting criteria and other Program requirements. � Reservation ofFunds. Once the application isapproved, the Program Administnabz and the property owner will enter into the Assessment Contract. At this point in time, amaximum .disburaementamount, loan term, and maximum interest rate will beset. The property owner will also agree to the terms and conditions of the Assessment Contract. The Program Administrator will provide assessment information to the County and an assessment lien will be filed with the County Registrar -Recorder. Installation. The property owner will receive a notice to proceed with the Improvements. A qualified installer must complete the installation of authorized Improvements on the property within the required timeframe after receiving the notice. In some cases, the Program Administrator in his/her sole discretion may grant a time extension. " Evidence of Compliance/ Disbursement of Funds. The County is not obligated to disburse funds unless and until each ofthe requirements set forth under the Assessment Contract are satisfied brwaived bythe Program Adminiotratoc Upon satisfaction ofthe above, the Program Administrator will release funds to the property owner in the amount of the actual costof Improvements, but not exceeding the maximum disbursement amount set forth in the Assessment Contact. At this time, the Program Administrator will notify the property owner of the actual interest rate and amount ofthe contractual assessment. ° Repayment. After the release of funds, the County will place the assessment on the property tax roll for the tax year immediately following the disbursement date. The property owner will be expected to pay the contractual assessment installments in the amounts and at the times specified inthe Assessment Contract. Prepayment nfthe contractual assessment will be permitted, however, penalties may apply. Any applicable penalties resulting from prepayment will baset forth inthe Assessment Contract. Los Angeles County Energy Program Program Report Applications from property owners for financing will be given priority based on the date on which the application kaapproved. Ifarequest from aproperty owner for financing would cause LACEPhoexceed the maximum amount of contractual assessments for the Program, then that application will be ineligible for financing. The Program Administrator shall retain the authority to grant exceptions to the priority status ofindividual applications. Property Owner Finaticial Responsibilities The following types ofcosts are examples ofthose that will bethe responsibility ofthe property owner and will not be financed through the Program: ° Application fee; " If applicable, title insurance and property insurance costs; ° Late payment fees; = Kapplicable, costs associated with compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act; and • Costs associated with repairs and maintenance of the Improvements. The Program Administrator may make changes tothis Report that he/she reasonably determines are necessary toclarify its provisions. Any changes made tothis Report that materially modify the LACEP shall only be made after approval by the Board of Supervisors. The Program Administrator may modify the schedule of eligible Improvements attached as Appendix B and the draft Assessment Contract attached aoAppendix Caodeemed necessary ordesirable tn effectuate the intent ofthe Program. 9 PaQe Appendix A: Area 111ap KCRUCCUNlY -:0Ijm INICASIER I.... X, rRt 11,4LMDAU sArimcmim Los Angeles County Energy Plan Program Report wm ISIANDS `401111 MUE U)"AII011. REV VW LC I Ali EIX F;t��'t rM TAT M. o b, Laxa NOW SCALE IN MILES INCORPORATED AREAS Pacific Ocean 4-1 v ij UNINCORPORATED AREAS ".A SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT SOUNDAFIIES� W "LES SQUARE MILES Pacific Ocean A wm ISIANDS `401111 MUE U)"AII011. REV VW LC Appendix A I A 1 rM TAT M. o b, Laxa Cit It SCALE IN MILES INCORPORATED AREAS Pacific Ocean ij UNINCORPORATED AREAS SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT SOUNDAFIIES� 4,084 SQUARE MILES Appendix A I A 1 ` . Los Angeles County Energy Program Program Report Appendix B: Eligible Improvements Eligible improvements will include, but are not limited to, the following types of Improvements,eubjactto approval by the Program Administrator: Energy Efficiency Improvements = Air sealing " Duct sealing and weather stripping ° Attic, duct, floor, roof and wall insulation = Hot water system insulation = Fans (8athroom.ceiling, whole house) � Energy efficient pool pumps = HVAC systems " Programmable thermostats and energy management systems Lighth>dureo " Energy Star cool roof " Radiant barriers " V0ndmmo, douno. skylights � Window film Water Efficiency Improvements " Hot water heater ° On -demand water recirculation control pump = High -efficiency toilets and urinals " Showerbeedaand aerators " Smart irrigation/ Water efficient landscaping " Rainwater harvesting system ° Grey water system Distributed Generation Renewable Energy Improvements " Solar hot water heating systems " Solar thermal installation • Solar space heating ° Photovoltaic systems " Wind energy systems ° Fuel cell power systems Los Angeles County Energy Program Program Report Appendix C: Draft Assessment Contract (See attached.) Appendix C I C-1 HD&W LLP — 5/10/10 Draft LOS ANGELES COUNTY ENERGY PROGRAM ASSESSMENT CONTRACT This Assessment Contract (this "Contract") is made and entered into as of this day of , 20_, by and between the COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, a political subdivision of the State of California (the "County"), and and (collectively, the "Owner"). WHEREAS, the County has established the Los Angeles County Energy Program ("LACEP") pursuant to Chapter 29 of Part 3 of Division 7 of the California Streets and Highways Code (the "Act"), in connection with which the County may levy assessments against developed properties in the County, with the free and willing consent of the owners of the properties, to finance the acquisition and construction on and installation in the assessed properties of certain qualifying renewable energy systems and energy and water efficiency improvements. WHEREAS, the Owner has reviewed the Program participant handbook attached as Exhibit A hereto (the "Participant Handbook") and submitted an application to participate in LACEP (the "Application"; together with Participant Handbook and this Contract, the "Contract Documents") to finance the acquisition, construction and installation of the renewable energy systems, energy efficient improvements and/or water efficiency improvements described in Exhibit B attached hereto (the "Improvements") on that certain real property of the Owner described in Exhibit C attached hereto (the "Property") and the County has approved such Application. WHEREAS, the County may fund LACEP through a number of financing mechanisms, including with proceeds of bonds to be issued by the County, with proceeds of loans derived from bonds issued by the Los Angeles County Public Works Financing Authority (the "Authority") and from amounts to be advanced through available funds of the County. WHEREAS, the County wishes to provide for the terms and conditions pursuant to which the Owner will participate in LACEP and pay assessments to finance the Improvements hereunder. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and other valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: Financing Terms (a) Disbursement Amount; Maximum Disbursement Amount. Subject to the conditions set forth herein, the County agrees to disburse moneys to the Owner in the amount of the actual cost of the Improvements (the "Disbursement Amount"); provided the Disbursement Amount shall not exceed the maximum amount set forth in Exhibit B hereto (the "Maximum Disbursement"). LACEP Program Administrator (the "Program Administrator") shall determine the Disbursement Amount on the basis of the best available written evidence of the actual cost of the Improvements and in the exercise of the Program Administrator's reasonable judgment. The Owner agrees to complete the Improvements. The Owner agrees to pay for and shall be solely responsible for the payment of all costs to complete the Improvements described in the Application which exceed the Maximum Disbursement. (b) RepUment by Owner. (i) Assessment. In consideration of the disbursement of the Disbursement Amount, the Owner shall pay to the County an amount equal to the Disbursement Amount, certain financing costs, including any capitalized LACEP administrative expenses, and the interest accrued thereon. Such amounts shall be repaid by the Owner to the County by the payment of an aggregate assessment levied against the Property pursuant to Section 5898.30 of the Streets and Highway Code of the State of California (the "Assessment") without deduction or offset for any amounts the Owner may claim due to it by the County, all as set forth in Exhibit attached hereto. (ii) Interest on Assessment. Interest shall be payable in installments, computed on the basis of a 360 -day year, and shall accrue on the unpaid Assessment from [the date of this contractl][the date any portion of the Disbursement Amount is disbursed to the Owner] at the rate determined by the Program Administrator in his/her sole discretion at the time of disbursement or final disbursement, as applicable, of the Disbursement Amount. The maximum interest rate applicable to the unpaid Assessment and the interest installments therefor are set forth in Exhibit B hereto. The Program Administrator will give notice to the Owner of the interest rate applicable to the unpaid Assessment and the related interest installments as soon as practicable after its determination, which notice will be substantially in the form attached as Exhibit D hereto (the "Notice of Interest Rate and Payment Schedule"). (iii) Annual Administrative Assessment. The Owner shall pay to the County, without deduction or offset, an annual assessment levied against the Property to pay costs incurred by the County in connection with the administration and collection of the Assessment, the administration or registration of any associated bonds, securities or other financing arrangements, and the administration of any reserve fund or other related funds (the "Annual Administrative Assessment"). The Annual Administrative Assessment shall not exceed the amount set forth in Exhibit B hereto and may be changed from time to time by the Program Administrator, in his sole discretion, subject to the maximum Annual Administrative Assessment. (iv) Financing Costs in the Event of Noncompletion. If the Owner fails to install the Improvements in compliance with LACEP requirements following execution of this Assessment Contract, the Owner shall pay for all expenses incurred by the County, 1 In the case of a County financing with accrued interest. or any of its agents in connection with levying or removing the assessments hereunder and financing the Improvements, including costs relating to the redemption of bonds issued to finance the Improveiments. (c) Prepayment. The Owner may prepay the Assessment in whole and in part by paying all or a part of the principal amount owing on the Assessment, plus the applicable prepayment premium set forth in Exhibit B hereto, and accrued interest. Interest on the Assessment may accrue until the next available redemption date for any bonds or other evidences of indebtedness, or other financial arrangements entered into by the County pursuant to LACEP which financed the Assessment in whole or in part. Such redemption date shall not exceed _ (__) days from the date of prepayment of the Assessment. The Owner shall notify the Program Administrator in writing of the Owner's determination to prepay the Assessment at least _ U business days prior to the date the Owner intends to prepay the Assessment. (d) Term of Contract. The term of this Contract shall be as set forth in Exhibit B hereto, commencing upon the execution hereof and ending on the date the Assessment and any applicable penalties, costs, fees, and charges have been paid in full; provided, however, the estimated payment schedule may be adjusted as provided in this Section 1. The initial amount of each Assessment and Annual Administrative Assessment installment that will be levied is set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto. The amount of each Assessment and Annual Administrative Assessment installment that will be levied each year, as adjusted to reflect the applicable interest rate determined by the Program Administrator but excluding any penalties that may accrue, is set forth in Exhibit D attached hereto. 2. Lien of Assessment and Annual Administrative Assessment; Special Benefit. (a) Lien Against Property. The execution of this Contract by the parties constitutes the levy of the Assessment and the Amlual Administrative Assessment by the Board of Supervisors against the Property without any further action required by the parties. The Owner consents to the levy of the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment, including each installment thereof and any interest and penalties that accrue with respect thereto, on and recordation of a lien against the Property and agrees that, upon the execution of this Contract by the parties, the Property shall be subject to the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment in accordance with and pursuant to this Contract, the Act and applicable law. (b) Notice of Assessment; Notice of Pgy ment of Contractual Assessment Required. Upon execution of this Contract, the County will execute and cause to be recorded in the Office of the Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk a notice of assessment substantially in the form attached as Exhibit E hereto (the "Notice of Assessment") and a document entitled "Payment of Contractual Assessment Required" substantially in the form attached as Exhibit F hereto (the "Notice of Payment of Contractual Assessment Required"). Upon recordation of the Notice of Assessment in the Office of the Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk, the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment, including each installment thereof and any interest and penalties that accrue with respect to the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment, shall constitute a lien upon the Property until paid. The Notice of Assessment and Notice of Payment of Contractual Assessment Required, as recorded, shall initially reflect the Assessment as set forth in Exhibit B. Following the County's final disbursement of the Disbursement -3- Amount pursuant to Section 6 hereof, the Assessment shall equal the amount set forth in Exhibit D and the Notice of Assessment and Notice of Payment of Contractual Assessment Required will be supplemented accordingly. (c) Priority of Lien. The lien of the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment shall be coequal to and independent of the lien for general taxes and prior and superior to all liens, claims and encumbrances on or against the Property except (i) the lien for general taxes or ad valorem assessments in the nature of and collected as taxes levied by the State of California or any county, city, special district or other local agency, (ii) the lien of any special assessment or assessments the lien date of which is prior in time to the lien date of the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment, (iii) easements constituting servitudes upon or burdens to the Property, (iv) water rights, the record title to which is held separately from the title to the Property and (v) restrictions of record. (d) Special Benefit to Property. (i) Acknowledgement. The Owner expressly acknowledges that the Improvements confer a special benefit to the Property in an amount at least equal to the Assessment. (ii) Waiver of Provisions Other Than Those of the Act. The Owner expressly waives to the fullest extent permitted by law the notice, protest and hearing procedures and provisions of any applicable law other than the Act with respect to the levy and collection of the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment, as described in Section 2 and Section 3, respectively, hereof. Collection of Amounts Due; Failure to Pay. (a) Collection through Property Tax Bill. Annual installments of the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment shall be collected on the property tax bill pertaining to the Property. The annual proportion of the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment coming due in any year shall be payable in the same manner, at the same time and in the same installments as the general taxes of the County on real property are payable, and the assessment installments shall be payable and become delinquent at the same times and the same proportionate amounts and shall bear the same penalties and interest after delinquency, and be subject to the same provisions for redemption and sale, as the general taxes on real property of the County. (b) Failure to Pay. Failure to pay any installment of the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment, including interest and penalties with respect thereto, shall result in the accrual of penalties and interest on the amounts due and may result in the foreclosure of the lien of the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment, as described in Section 13(e) hereof and provided by law. Except as provided in Government Code Section 53936, the liens of the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment are not subject to extinguishment by judicial foreclosure or the sale of the Property on account of the nonpayment of any taxes. -4- 4. Commencement and Completion of Improvements. (a) Consent and Authorization. Upon the availability of funding under LACEP, the Program Administrator will give to the Owner a notice to proceed in the form of Exhibit G hereto (the "Notice to Proceed"), which notice shall constitute consent and authorization pursuant to Section 5898.21 of the Act for the Owner to purchase directly the related equipment and materials for the Improvements and to contract directly for the construction on and/or installation in the Property of the Improvements. The Owner bears the risk of any costs of the Improvements incurred prior to receipt of the Notice to Proceed. The Owner may perform the construction and/or installation on the Property provided that the Owner is deemed a qualified installer by the Program Administrator in his/her sole discretion in accordance with the Participant Handbook. (b) Date of Completion of the Improvements. Subject to Section 13(g) hereof, the Owner agrees to complete installation of the Improvements no later than _ days after the date of the Notice to Proceed of this Contract. The Owner and the Program Administrator may agree to an extension of this completion date for good cause shown, but in no event shall the completion date be more than one year from the date of the Notice to Proceed. 5. Use of Proceeds. The Owner shall use the Disbursement Amount for the sole purpose of paying for the reasonable costs and expenses of the Improvements on the Property, and in connection therewith the Owner shall comply with all requirements set forth in the Contract Documents. 6. Conditions Precedent to Disbursement of Funds (a) Conditions Precedent to Disbursement of Funds. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, the County shall have no obligation to disburse funds to the Owner unless and until each of the requirements set forth under " " of the Participant Handbook and the following conditions are satisfied, or any such requirement or condition is expressly waived by the Program Administrator: (i) With respect to the initial disbursement: (A) The Program Administrator shall have received a written request to disburse the Disbursement Amount. (B) The Owner has executed and delivered to the Program Administrator the Contract Documents and such other declarations, certifications, documents or instruments pertaining to the Disbursement Amount or the Improvements as the Program Administrator may require. (C) The Owner will, within (_) days of presentation by the Program Administrator, execute any and all documents or instruments required by the Contract Documents in connection with the disbursement of funds to the Owner. -5- (D) If the Property is a commercial property, the Owner shall have provided all applicable lenders the Notice of Proposed Contractual Assessment set forth as Exhibit H to this Contract and received an executed copy of the Certificate of Lender set forth as Exhibit I to this contract. In addition, the Owner shall have received from the Program Administrator, at the expense of the Owner, a determination that the Improvements to be financed hereunder (a) are within one or more classes of projects exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (commencing with Section 21000 et seq. of the California Public Resources Code, "CEQA") pursuant to Sections 15301, 15302 or 15303 of the California Public Resources Code, (b) are the appropriate subject of a negative declaration pursuant to CEQA, in which case a negative declaration to that effect will be adopted pursuant to Section 21080 et seq. of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15070 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations, or (c), is the appropriate subject of an environmental impact report pursuant to CEQA, in which case an environmental impact report shall be prepared and certified and amounts hereunder shall be disbursed only if the Improvements are subsequently approved in accordance with CEQA. (ii) With respect to the second and final disbursement: (A) The Program Administrator shall have received a copy of a finalized permit issued by the building inspection department of the jurisdiction within which the Property is located, if applicable. (B) The Program Administrator shall have received a written certification from the Owner and the contractor(s) that installed or constructed the Improvements, if any, stating that the Improvements for which disbursement is requested is complete and setting forth the actual cost of the Improvements (exclusive of any cost attributable to labor performed by the Owner pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Contract and the other Contract Documents). Such certification shall be in form and substance acceptable to the Program Administrator. (C) If an inspection is required, an inspection of the Improvements and a determination by the applicable agency, authority or entity that the Improvements have been completed in full compliance with the requirements of applicable law or that any noncompliance has been waived. (D) No stop payment or mechanic's lien notices pertaining to the Improvements has been filed and remain in effect as of the date of disbursement of the Disbursement Amount. (E) [If the Property is a commercial property, the Program Administrator shall have received a title insurance policy in form and substance acceptable to the Program Administrator in the Disbursement Amount and insuring the lien of the Assessment.] (iii) With respect to each of disbursement: (A) As of the date of disbursement of the Disbursement Amount the representations of the Owner contained in the Contract Documents are true and correct, and no Default (as defined in Section 13(a) below) shall have occurred and be continuing. (B) The Program Administrator shall have received such other documents and instruments as the Program Administrator may require, including but not limited to, if applicable, the sworn statements of contractor(s) or the Owner, if construction and/or installation is performed by the Owner in his/her capacity as a qualified installer pursuant to the Contract Documents, and releases or waivers of lien, all in compliance with the requirements of applicable law. (iv) If there shall be a single disbursement under this Assessment Contract, all conditions under (i) through (iii) shall be satisfied by the Owner or waived by the Program Administrator prior to disbursement. (b) Disbursement by County. Upon satisfaction or waiver of the conditions described in paragraph (a), above, the County will disburse funds to the Owner [as soon as practicable.] The Owner expressly waives the 30 -day payment period provided by Section 10403 of the Streets and Highways Code. 7. Representations and Warranties of the Owner. For purposes of entering into this Contract, the County has relied upon the declarations, warranties and covenants of the Owner in this Contract and in the Application, which are incorporated into this Contract as if fully set forth herein. The Owner promises that each representation and warranty set forth herein is true, accurate and complete as of the date of this Contract. By accepting the disbursement, the Owner shall be deemed to have reaffirmed each and every representation and warranty made by the Owner in this Contract and in the Application as of the date of disbursement. If the Owner is cornprised 'of the trustees of a trust, the following representations shall also pertain to the trustor(s) of the trust. (a) Formation; Authority. If the Owner is anything other than a natural person, it has complied with all laws and regulations concerning its organization, its existence and the transaction of its business, and is in good standing in each State in which it conducts its business. The Owner is the owner of the Property and is authorized to execute, deliver and perform its obligations under the Contract Documents, and all other documents and instruments delivered by the Owner to the County in connection therewith. The Contract Documents have been duly executed and delivered by the Owner and are valid and binding upon and enforceable against the -7- Owner in accordance with their terms, and no consent or approval of any third party, which has not been previously obtained by the Owner is required for the Owner's execution thereof or the performance of its obligations contained therein. (b) Compliance with Law. Neither the Owner nor the Property is in violation of, and the terms and provisions of the Contract Documents do not conflict with, any regulation or ordinance, any order of any court or governmental entity, or any building restrictions or governmental requirements affecting the Owner or the Property. (c) No Violation. The terms and provisions of the Contract Documents, the execution and delivery of the Contract Documents by the Owner, and the performance by the Owner of its obligations contained in the Contract, will not and do not conflict with or result in a breach of or a default under any of the terms or provisions of any other agreement, contract, covenant or security instrument by which the Owner or the Property is bound. (d) Other Information. All reports, documents, instruments, information and forms of evidence which have been delivered to the County in connection with the Owner's application for LACEP funding are accurate, correct and sufficiently complete to give the County true and accurate knowledge of their subject matter. (e) Liti ation. There is no litigation, tax claims, actions, proceedings, investigations or other disputes pending or threatened against the Owner or the Property which may impair the Owner's ability to perform its obligations hereunder, or which may impair the County's ability to levy and collect the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment. (f) No Event of Default. There is no event which is, or with notice or lapse of time or both would be, a Default under this Contract. 8: Covenants of the Owner. The Owner agrees and covenants to each of the following; (a) Installation and Maintenance of Improvements. The Owner shall, or shall cause its contractor(s) to, promptly commence the Improvements and diligently continue to completion in a good and workmanlike manner and in accordance with sound construction and installation practices. The Owner shall maintain the Improvements in good condition and repair. (b) Reports. If the Disbursement Amount is disbursed in more than one installment, the Owner agrees, upon the request of the Program Administrator, to promptly deliver or cause to be promptly delivered to the Program Administrator a written status report of the Improvements, including the acquisition and installation thereof. (c) Compliance with Law and Agreements. The Owner shall complete all Improvements, or cause the Improvements to be completed, in conformity with all applicable laws, including all applicable federal, state, and local occupation, safety and health laws, rules, regulations, standards, and recorded instruments, covenants or agreements affecting the Property. The Owner shall comply with and keep in effect all permits, licenses, and approvals required to complete installation of the Improvements. -8- (d) Completion of Work. If the Disbursement Amount is disbursed in more than one installment, subject to any acceptable excuse for failure to complete the Improvements pursuant to Section 13(g) hereof, the Owner shall complete the Improvements within [time period] of the initial disbursement of the Disbursement Amount. (e) Site Visits; Utility Records; Surveys. For purposes of examining the workmanship of the Improvements, observing the quality of the Improvements and otherwise evaluating LACEP, the Owner grants the County, its agents and representatives, including without limitation the Program Administrator, the right to enter and visit the Property at any reasonable time, after giving reasonable notice to the Owner. For purposes of examining savings derived from the Improvements and other satisfying the requirements relating to grant moneys used to fund LACEP, the Owner shall also allow the County to examine and copy records and other documents of the Owner which relate to the Improvements, including utility records of the Owner and execute any consents, waivers or similar documents required by utility providers in connection .therewith through the term of this Contract. The Owner also agrees to participate in any and all surveys conducted in connection with LACEP. The County is under no duty to visit the Property, observe any aspects of the Improvements or examine any records, and the County shall not incur any obligation or liability by reason of not making any such visit or examination. Any site visit, observation or examination by the County shall be solely for the purposes of protecting the County's rights under the Contract Documents. (f) Protection Against Lien Claims. The Owner shall promptly pay or otherwise discharge any claims and liens for labor done and materials and services furnished to the Property in connection with the Improvements. The Owner shall have the right to contest in good faith any claim or lien, provided that it does so diligently and without delay in completing the Improvements. (g) Notice to Successors in Interest. The Owner agrees to provide written notice to any subsequent purchaser of the Property that the Property is subject to an LACEP assessment lien, and to provide any subsequent purchaser a copy of this Contract. (h) Insurance. [If the Maximum Disbursement exceeds $ ,] the Owner shall provide, maintain and keep in force at all times until the Improvements are completed, builder's all risk property damage insurance on the Property, with a policy limit equal to the amount of the Maximum Disbursement. (i) Notices. The Owner shall promptly notify the County in writing of any Default under this Contract, or any event which, with notice or lapse of time or both, would constitute a Default hereunder. 9. Mechanic's Lien and Stop Notices. In the event of the filing of a stop notice or the recording of a mechanic's lien pursuant to applicable law of the State of California and relating to the Improvements, the Program Administrator may refuse to disburse any funds to the Owner, and, in the event the Owner fails to furnish the Program Administrator a bond causing such notice or lien to be released within _ (__) days of notice from the Program Administrator to do so, such failure shall at the option of M the County constitute a default under the terms of this Contract. The Owner shall promptly deliver to the Program Administrator copies of all such notices or liens. 10. Responsibilities of the Owner; Indemnification. (a) Financing by County; No Responsibility for Improvements. The Owner acknowledges that the County has established LACEP solely for the purpose of assisting the owners of property in the County with the financing of the acquisition, construction, and installation of qualifying renewable energy systems and energy and water efficiency improvements. LACEP is a financing program only. None of the County, the Authority (if bonds are issued by the Authority), their officials, agents, employees, attorneys and representatives, the Program Administrator, or LACEP staff is responsible for selection, management or supervision of the Improvements or of the Improvements' performance. (b) Indemnification. The Owner shall indemnify, defend, protect, and hold harmless the County, the Authority (if bonds are issued by the Authority) and any and all officials, agents, employees, attorneys and representatives of the County and the Authority (collectively, the "Indemnified Parties") and, if the Property is located in an incorporated area, such incorporated city and any and all officials, agents, employees, attorneys and representatives of such city,(the "City Parties"), from and against all losses, liabilities, claims, damages (including consequential damages), penalties, fines, forfeitures, costs and expenses (including all reasonable out-of-pocket litigation costs and reasonable attorneys' fees) and any demands of any nature whatsoever related directly or indirectly to, or arising out of or in connection with, (i) the Contract Documents, (ii) disbursement of the Disbursement Amount, (iii) the Improvements, (iv) any breach or Default by the Owner under the Contract Documents, (v) the levy and collection of the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment, (vi) the imposition of the lien of the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment, (vii) any breach or failure of the Owner or its contractor(s) or agents to comply with all applicable laws, including all applicable federal, state and local occupation, safety and health laws, rules, regulations and standards, in connection with the acquisition, installation or completion of the Improvements, and (viii) any other fact, circumstance or event related to the County's payment of the Disbursement Amount to the Owner or the Owner's performance of its obligations under the Contract Documents (collectively, the "Liabilities"), regardless of whether such Liabilities shall accrue or are discovered before or after the Disbursement. (c) Survival of Indemnification. The indemnity obligations described in Section 10(b) shall survive the disbursement of funds to the Owner, the payment of the Assessment in full, the transfer or sale of the Property by the Owner and the termination of this Contract. 11. Waiver of Claims. For and in consideration of the County's execution and delivery of this Contract, the Owner, for itself and for its successors -in -interest to the Property and for any one claiming by, through, or under the Owner, hereby waives the right to recover from and fully and irrevocably releases the Indemnified Parties and, if the Property is located in an incorporated area, the City Parties, from any and all claims, obligations, liabilities, causes of action, or damages, including attorneys' fees and court costs, that the Owner may now have or hereafter acquire against any of -10- the Indemnified Parties and the City Parties and accruing from or related to (i) the Contract Documents, (ii) the disbursement of any of the Disbursement Amount, including any amounts advanced hereunder, (iii) the levy and collection of the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment, (iv) the imposition of the lien of the Assessment, (v) the issuance and sale of any bonds or other evidences of indebtedness, or other financial arrangements entered into by the County pursuant to LACEP, (vi) the performance of the Improvements, (vii) the Improvements, (viii) any damage to or diminution in value of the Property that may result from construction or installation of the Improvements, (ix) any personal injury or death that may result from the construction or installation of the Improvements, (x) the selection of manufacturer(s), dealer(s), supplier(s), contractor(s) and/or installer(s), and their action or inaction with respect to the Improvements, (xi) the merchantability and fitness for any particular purpose, use or application of the Improvements, (xii) the amount of energy savings resulting from the Improvements, (xiii) the workmanship of any third parties, and (xiv) any other matter with respect to LACEP. This release includes claims, obligations, liabilities, causes of action, and damages of which the Owner is not presently aware or which the Owner does not suspect to exist which, if known by the Owner, would materially affect the Owner's release of the Indemnified Parties and the City Parties. OWNER HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IT HAS READ AND IS FAMILIAR WITH THE PROVISIONS OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE SECTION 1542 ("SECTION 1542"), WHICH IS SET FORTH BELOW: "A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH THE CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE, WHICH KNOWN BY HIM OR HER MUST HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR." BY INITIALING BELOW, OWNER HEREBY WAIVES THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 1542 SOLELY IN CONNECTION WITH THE MATTERS WHICH ARE THE SUBJECT OF THE FOREGOING WAIVERS AND RELEASES. Owner's Initials: The waivers and releases by the Owner contained in this Section 11 shall survive the disbursement of the Disbursement Amount, the payment of the Assessment in full, the transfer or sale of the Property by the Owner, and the termination of this Contract. 12. Further Assurances. The Owner shall execute any further documents or instruments consistent with the terms of this Contract, including documents and instruments in recordable form, as the County shall from time to time find necessary or appropriate to effectuate its purposes in entering into this Contract and disbursing funds to the Owner. -11- 13. Events of Default. (a) Default. Subject to the further provisions of this Section 13, the failure of any of the Owner's representations or warranties to be correct in all material respects, or the failure or delay by the Owner to perform any of its obligations under the terms or provisions of the Contract Documents, shall constitute a default hereunder ("Default"). (b) Notice of Default. Upon the occurrence of a Default, prior to exercising any remedies under the Contract Documents or the Act, the County shall give written notice of default to the Owner. Delay in giving such notice shall not constitute a waiver of any Default. The Owner must immediately commence to cure, correct, or remedy such failure or delay and shall complete such cure, correction or remedy with reasonable diligence, but in any event, within the time set forth herein. (c) Cure Period for Monetary Default. If the Owner fails to timely pay any installment of the Assessment or the Annual Administrative Assessment, the Owner shall have a period of (_) days after notice is given pursuant to paragraph (b) above within which to cure such default. Following such U day period, the County in its sole discretion may exercise any and all of its available remedies, includingits right to foreclose the lien of the Assessment or the Annual Administrative Assessment pursuant to applicable law. (d) Cure Period for Non -Monetary Default. If a non -monetary Default occurs and such Default is reasonably capable of being cured within (_—) days, the Owner shall have such period to effect a cure prior to exercise of remedies by the County under the Contract Documents or the Act. If the Default is such that it is reasonably capable of being cured but not within such (__) day period and the Owner (i) initiates corrective action within such U day period, and (ii) diligently, continually, and in good faith works to effect a cure as soon as possible, then the County in its sole discretion may elect to grant the Owner such additional time as is reasonably necessary to cure the Default prior to exercise of any remedies by the County. The foregoing notwithstanding, in no event shall the County be precluded from exercising any of its remedies if the Default is reasonably expected to result in the foreclosure or forfeiture of the Property, or if the Default is not cured within days after the first notice of Default is given. (e) Remedies Upon Default. Subject to the provisions of paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) above, if any Default occurs the County may exercise any or all of the rights and remedies available to it under applicable law, at equity, or as otherwise provided herein. If no disbursement has occurred hereunder, the County may elect to terminate this Contract and, except as otherwise expressly provided herein, the parties have no further obligations or rights hereunder. If the Disbursement Amount has been disbursed in whole or in part, the County may terminate its obligations to make any further disbursement of the Disbursement Amount and exercise any or all of the rights and remedies available to it under this Contract and applicable law. As a cumulative remedy, if any installment of the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment, together with any penalties, costs, fees, and other charges, accruing under applicable taxation provisions are not paid when due, the Board of Supervisors or its designee may order that the same be collected by an action brought in a court of competent jurisdiction to foreclose the lien of the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment to -12 the extent permitted, and in the manner provided by, applicable law. Any and all costs and expenses incurred by the County in pursuing its remedies hereunder shall be additional indebtedness of the Owner to the County. (f) Remedies Cumulative. Except as otherwise expressly stated in this Contract or as otherwise provided by applicable law, the rights and remedies of the County are cumulative, and the exercise of one or more of such rights or remedies shall not preclude the exercise by the County, at the same time or different tunes, of any other rights or remedies for the same Default or any other Default. No failure or delay by the County in asserting any of its rights and remedies as to any Default shall operate as a waiver of any Default or of any such rights or remedies, or deprive the County of its rights to institute and maintain any actions or proceedings which it may deem necessary to protect, assert or enforce any such rights or remedies. (g) Force Majeure. Performance of the covenants and conditions imposed upon the Owner hereunder with respect to the commencement and completion of the Improvements shall be excused while and to the extent that, the Owner, through no fault or negligence of its own, is prevented from complying therewith by war, riots, strikes, lockouts, action of the elements, accidents, or acts of God beyond the reasonable control of the Owner; provided, however, that as soon as the cause or event preventing compliance is removed or ceases to exist the obligations shall be restored to full force and effect and the Owner shall immediately resume installation of the Improvements. 14. Severability. Each and every provision of this Contract is, and shall be construed to be, a separate and independent covenant and agreement. If any term or provision of this Contract or the application thereof shall to any extent be held to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Contract, or the application of such term or provision to circumstances other than those to which it is invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby, and each term and provision of this Contract shall, be valid and shall be enforced to the extent permitted by law. 15. Notices. All notices and demands shall be given in writing by first class mail, postage prepaid, or by personal delivery (by recognized courier service). Notices shall be considered given upon the earlier of (a) personal delivery or (b) _ (_) business days following deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid. Notices shall be addressed as provided below for the respective party; provided that if any party gives notice in writing of a change of name or address, notices to such party shall thereafter be given as demanded in that notice: To the County: Attention: Program Administrator To the Owner: -13- Attention: Notwithstanding anything set forth above, after disbursement of funds to the Owner, all notices regarding the assessment shall be sent only as provided by the laws of the State of California. 16. No Waiver. No disbursement of the Disbursement Amount based upon inadequate or incorrect information shall constitute a waiver of the right of the County to receive a refund thereof from the Owner. No disbursement of any portion of the Disbursement Amount shall constitute a waiver of any conditions to the County's obligation to make further disbursements. No waiver by the County of any failure by the Owner to comply with any provision of this Contract shall in any. way preclude the County from thereafter declaring such failure by the Owner a Default hereunder or be deemed a waiver of any other or subsequent Default. 17. Governing Law. This Contract shall be construed and governed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 18. Assignment by the County. The County, at its option, may (i) assign any or all of its rights and obligations under this Contract, and (ii) pledge and assign its right to receive the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment, and any other payments due to the County hereunder, without obtaining the consent of the Owner. 19. Assignment by Owner Prohibited. The Owner may sell, transfer, rent or otherwise dispose of all or a portion of its interests in the Property so long as the Assessment and the Annual Administrative Assessment, including each installment thereof and the interest and penalties thereon, shall constitute a lien against the Property until the same is paid in full. All other dispositions of all or a portion of the Owner's rights and obligations under this Contract are subject to the prior express written consent of the County, which consent may be granted or withheld in the sole and absolute discretion of the County. 20. Carbon Credits. The Owner agrees that any carbon credits attributable to the Improvements shall be held on behalf of LACEP by the County. 21. Entire Agreement; Amendment. This Contract, together with the other Contract Documents, is the entire agreement between the parties. Any other agreement related to the Improvements, and any amendment to this Contract, must be signed in writing by both parties. 22. Natural Persons. If the Owner of the Property consists of more than one natural person, the obligations hereunder of all the owners shall be joint and several. 23. Counterparts. This Contract may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of such counterparts together shall constitute one and the same instrument. 24. Special Termination. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, this Contract shall terminate and be of no further force or effect if the Owner has submitted to the Program Administrator a notice of its decision to cancel this transaction in the form of the Notice of Cancellation attached as Exhibit J hereto, which notice shall be delivered to the County pursuant to Section 15 hereof no less than (_) days prior to the disbursement of the Disbursement Amount. 25. No Third Party Beneficiary Rights. This Contract is entered into for the sole benefit of the Owner and the County and, subject to the provisions of Sections 10, 11, 12 and 19, no other parties are intended to be direct or incidental beneficiaries of this Contract and no third party shall have any right in, under or to this Contract. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Owner and the County have entered into this Contract as of the date and year first above written. THE OWNER: THE COUNTY: COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA. Date of Execution by the Owner: Name: 20 Title: -15- ACKNOWLEDGEMENT(S) STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss.. COUNTY OF On , before me, a notary public, personally appeared who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature COUNTY OF On ss.. before me, (This area for official notarial seal) a notary public, personally appeared who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (This area for official notarial seal) EXHIBIT A PARTICIPANT HANDBOOK [To Come] CERTAIN FINANCING TERMS Maximum Disbursement Amount: Contract Term: Maximum Interest Rate: _ Percent (_21o) per annum. Financing Costs in the Event of Noncompletion: Annual Administrative Assessment('): Prepayment Premium:From to , a prepayment premium of _ percent (_%) From to , a prepayment premium of _ percent (_%) After , a prepayment premium of _ percent (_%) Improvements: Estimated Payment Schedule: Assessment Disbursement Financing Year(') Amount(') Costs (4) Interest Maximum Annual Administrative Assessment(5) Total Based on the Maximum Annual Administrative Assessment established for LACEP, which amount may be adjusted from time to time by the Program Administrator, provided that the adjusted amount does not exceed the Maximum Annual Administrative Assessment. (Z) If funds are disbursed to the. Owner before , the assessment will appear on the property tax bill for the same tax year. If funds are disbursed after , the assessment will appear on the property tax bill for the following tax year. (3) Based on Maximum Disbursement. Subject to revision by the Program Administrator following the disbursement of the Disbursement Amount, if necessary, pursuant to the Contract to reflect the Disbursement Amount. (4) Includes capitalized LACEP administrative expenses. (5) Based on the Maximum Annual Administrative Assessment established for LACEP, which amount may be adjusted from time to time by the Program Administrator, provided that the adjusted amount does not exceed the Maximum Annual Administrative Assessment. EXHIBIT C DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY C-1 EXIHBIT D LOS ANGELES COUNTY ENERGY PROGRAM NOTICE OF INTEREST AND PAYMENT SCHEDULE Owner: (the "Owner") Address: (the "Property") Assessor's Parcel Number: LACEP Loan Number: Pursuant to Section l (b)(ii) of that certain Assessment Contract (the "Assessment Contract") executed by and between you, as Owner of the Property, and the County in connection with the Los Angeles County Energy Program, you are hereby notified that the interest rate applicable to the unpaid Assessment (as defined in the Assessment Contract) is %. The schedule of Assessment Installments, interest thereon and the Maximum Annual Administrative Assessment with respect to the referenced property is set forth below: Assessment Disbursement Financing Year(') Amount Costs (2) Interest Maximum Annual Administrative Assessment(3) Total If funds are disbursed to the Owner before, the assessment will appear on the property tax bill for the same tax year. If funds are disbursed , the assessment will appear on the property tax bill for the following tax year. (z) Includes capitalized LACEP administrative expenses. (3) Based on the Maximum Annual Administrative Assessment established for LACEP, which amount may be adjusted from time to time by the Program Administrator, provided that the adjusted amount does not exceed the Maximum Annual Administrative Assessment. The Notice of Assessment of record with the Office of the Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk of the County of Los Angeles will be amended to reflect the foregoing payment schedule. Program Administrator, Los Angeles County Energy Program IM NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT County of Los Angeles Treasurer and Tax Collector Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration 500 West Temple Street, Room 437 Los Angeles, California 90012 Attention: Los Angeles County Energy Program — Program Administrator NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT Pursuant to the requirements of Section 5898.32 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, the undersigned Clerk of the Board of Supervisors (the "Board of Supervisors") of the County of Los Angeles, a political subdivision of the State of California (the "County"), hereby gives notice that contractual assessments relating to that certain real property described in Appendix A hereto (the "Property"), in the amounts set forth in Appendix B hereto, were recorded in the Office of the Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk of the County, as provided for in said Section 5898.32. Pursuant to that certain Assessment Contract (the "Assessment Contract") by and between the County and the owner of the Property named herein in connection with the Los Angeles County Energy Program, the several assessments assessed on the Property set forth in Appendix B hereto became a lien upon the Property and the Property became subject to the assessment in accordance pursuant to the Assessment Contract, the Act and applicable law upon the execution of such Assessment Contract. In addition to the assessment to pay the costs and expenses of the improvements to be acquired, the Property is subject to a separate and additional assessment, as set forth in Appendix B hereto, to be levied annually to pay for costs not otherwise reimbursed which will result from the administration and collection of assessments or from the administration or registration of any associated bonds and reserve or related funds. Reference is made to the Assessment Contract for the amount of any final and adjusted assessments, including any annual assessment as levied for administrative costs or maintenance, as applicable. E-1 Included in Appendix A hereto is the name(s) of the owner of record of the Property, which is also the assessed owner of the Property as it appears on the latest secured assessment roll, all as required pursuant to Section 27288.1 of the Government Code of the State of California. Dated: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles By: Deputy E-2 Appendix A to Notice of Assessment DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY E-3 Appendix B to the Notice of Assessment Name(s) of Owner of the Property: Assessment Amount: Annual Administrative Assessment Amount: Payment ,of Contractual Assessment Required Pursuant to the requirements of Section 5898.24(d) of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, the Board of Supervisors (the "Board of Supervisors") of the County of Los Angeles, a political subdivision of the State of California (the "County"), hereby gives notice that the real property described in Appendix A hereto (the "Property") is subject to a contractual assessment that is required to be paid in accordance with that certain Assessment Contract (the "Assessment Contract") by and between the owner of the Property and the County in connection with the Los Angeles County Energy Program. Certain information regarding the contractual assessment assessed on the Property is set forth below. (1) The naives of all current owners of the real property subject to the contractual assessment: (2) Legal description of the Property: See Exhibit Appendix A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. (3) Assessor's parcel number for the Property: (4) The annual amount of the contractual assessment: (5) The contractual assessment referenced (4) above expires on the date such contractual assessment and any applicable penalties, costs, fees, and charges, including the Annual Administrative Assessment (as defined in the Assessment Contract), have been paid in full. (6) Funds from the contractual assessment were used to finance the acquisition and construction on and installation in the Property of certain qualifying renewable energy systems and energy and water efficiency improvements, as further described in the Assessment Contract. (7) Funds from the contractual assessment should be paid to the following: [Name of entity to which contractual assessments should be paid] [Address of entity] [Contact person]2 2 Section 5898.24(d)(2)(E) of the Act requires the document to include "the entity to which funds from the contractual assessment will be paid and specific contact information for that entity". F-1 Date: Treasurer and Tax Collector of the County of Los Angeles [or Entity to which Contractual Assessments will be paid] By:_ Name: Title: 3 Section 5898.24(d)(2)(F) of the Act requires the document to include "the signature of the authorized representative of the legislative body to which funds from the contractual assessment will be paid." F-2 Appendix A to Notice of Payment of Contractual Assessment Required DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY F-3 EXHIBIT G LOS ANGELES COUNTY ENERGY PROGRAM NOTICE TO PROCEED Date: Owner: (the "Owner") Address: (the "Property") Assessor's Parcel Number: LACEP Loan Number: Pursuant to Section 4(a) of that certain Assessment Contract (the "Assessment Contract") executed by and between you, as Owner of the Property, and the County in connection with the Los Angeles County Energy Program, you are hereby given notice to proceed (this "Notice to Proceed") with acquisition, construction and installation of the Improvements and, upon completion of the Improvements, submit a request for funding to LACEP. This Notice to Proceed constitutes consent and authorization pursuant to Section 5898.21 of the Act for the Owner to purchase directly the related equipment and materials for the Improvements and to contract directly for the construction on and/or installation in the Property of the Improvements. The Owner must complete installation of the Improvements no later than days after the date of this Notice to Proceed, provided that the Owner and the Program Administrator may agree to an extension of this completion date for good cause shown pursuant to Section 4(b) and Section 13(g) of the Assessment Contract, but in no event shall the completion date be more than one year from the date of this Notice to Proceed. Disbursement of any amounts pursuant to the Assessment Contract is subject to satisfaction of the terms and conditions thereof. Program Administrator, Los Angeles County Energy Program G-1 10 ,14,911 NOTICE OF PROPOSED CONTRACTUAL ASSESSMENT (Commercial Property Owner) Notice Date: Lender Address: Property/Loan Information: Owner: Address: APN: Loan Number(s To Whom It May Concern: The undersigned (the "Owner") is the owner of a certain real property located at the above -referenced address (the "P, ropes"). You are the lender (the "Lender") with respect to the above -referenced (the "Loan") that is secured by a lien on the Property. The Owner is sending this Notice of Proposed Contractual Assessment to Lender to (i) provide notice of the Owner's proposed participation in the Los Angeles County Energy Program ("LACEP"), (ii) request confirmation from the Lender that the levy of the contractual assessment pursuant to the herein described Assessment Contract will not trigger an event of default or the exercise of any remedies under the Loan documents, and (iii) provide notice that the contractual assessment (including any penalties and interest) will be secured by a statutory lien on the Property that is senior to the lien securing the Loan. Background. The County of Los Angeles, a political subdivision of the State of California (the "County") has established LACEP to help finance the acquisition and construction on and installation in the assessed properties, including the Property, of certain qualifying renewable energy systems and energy and water efficiency improvements (the "Improvements") pursuant to Chapter 29 of Part 3 of Division 7 of the Streets & Highways Code of the State of California ("Contractual Assessment Law"). In accordance with Contractual Assessment Law, the County will levy a contractual assessment to finance the installation of the Improvements on certain property with the agreement of the applicable property owner pursuant to the terms of an assessment contract (the "Assessment Contract") between such property owner and the County. Pursuant to Section 5898.30 of Contractual Assessment Law, the contractual assessment (including any penalties and interest) is collected on the property tax bill and is secured by a lien on the applicable property H-1 that is (i) senior to all private liens, including private liens that existed prior to levy of the contractual assessment and (ii) cannot be subordinated to the private liens. Information regarding the purpose and method of administration of the assessments under LACEP can be found at [website]. Participation in LACEP. The Owner has applied to participate in LACED and intends to finance installation on the Property of the Improvements set forth on Exhibit A hereto. The contractual assessment to be levied on the Property (the "Contractual Assessment") pursuant to the Assessment Contract and the related payment terms are proposed to consist of the following: Principal amount: $ Estimated interest rate: % Term of repayment period: Annual administrative component: $ Total estimated annual installment: $ Lender Approval. Please acknowledge that participation of the Property in LACEP is acceptable to the Lender by executing the attached Certificate of Lender and returning it to the undersigned at your earliest convenience. Very truly yours, BY: (Signature) OWNER NAME: MAILING ADDRESS (if different than Property address): M M -14 -IC �lil CERTIFICATE OF LENDER (Commercial Property Owner) Property/Loan Information Owner: Address: APN: Loan: In connection with the above -referenced loan (the "Loan") relating to the above - referenced property (the "Property") by the herein referenced lender (the "Lender"), the undersigned hereby certifies, acknowledges, confirms and agrees as follows: (1) He/she is duly authorized to execute this Certificate on behalf of the Lender. (2) The Lender is in receipt of written notice (the "Notice") from the owner of the Property (the "Owner") that Owner intends to finance installation on the Property of certain renewable energy, energy efficiency and/or water efficiency improvements that will be permanently fixed to the Property (the "Improvements") by participating in the Los Angeles County Energy Program sponsored by the County of Los Angeles, a political subdivision of the State of California (the "Coup "). (3) As a result of an Assessment Contract between the County and the Owner (the "Assessment Contract") and pursuant to Chapter 29 of Part 3 of Division 7 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, the Contractual Assessment described in the Notice will be levied on the Property and the Contractual Assessment (including any penalties and interest) will be secured by a statutory lien that is senior to the lien securing the Loan. (4) The Lender consents to the levy of the Contractual Assessment pursuant to the Assessment Contract. (5) The Lender agrees that the levy of the Contractual Assessment will not constitute an event of default or the exercise of any remedies under the documents relating to the Loan. 1-1 The Lender further acknowledges that the Owner and the County will rely on this Certificate in connection with the disposition and administration of the Assessment Contract and the Los Angeles County Energy Program. [LENDER] By: Name: Title: Date: Ilt LOS ANGELES COUNTY ENERGY PROGRAM NOTICE OF CANCELLATION [and ] are the owner[s] of record ([collectively,] the "Owner") of that certain real property located at located in the County of Los Angeles, California. The Owner previously executed that certain Assessment Contract (the "Assessment Contract") with the County of Los Angeles (the "County") in connection with the Los Angeles County Energy Program ("LACEP"). Pursuant to the Assessment Contract, Owner hereby notifies the LACEP Program Administrator in accordance with Sections 15 and 24 of the Assessment Contract no less than days prior to the disbursement of the Disbursement Amount that the Owner has determined to cancel the transaction described in the Assessment Contract. Accordingly, the Contract shall tenninate and be of no further force or effect, except that the Owner agrees to pay amounts due, if any, pursuant to Section 1(b)(iv) of the Assessment Contract relating to financing costs in the event of the improvements are not completed. Dated: IM Name: Name: J-1 Agenda #6.7c Meeting Date: June 15, 2010 CITY COUNCIL TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Manae TITLE: APPROVAL OF CONTRACT AME DMENT WITH FIELDMAN/ROLAPP & ASSOCIATES RECOMMENDATION: Approve and appropriate funds. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Approval will appropriate a not -to -exceed total of $15,000, bringing the overall cost of professional services to $40,000. The funds will be encumbered in the FY 09-10 budget. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Under the City Manager's spending authority, the City secured the services of Fieldman, Rolapp & Associates (F&R) to provide a complete financial analysis of the purchase of the new City Hall/Library facility. F&R's services included a review of the City's current financial stability, credit outlook, cost/benefit analysis, and financing options related to the purchase. The results of this analysis were presented to the Council as the building's purchase was considered. Further work by F&R will be required as the City Council considers potential financing options (public bonds/private placement/all-cash purchase). It is anticipated that these additional services will push the total cost of services beyond the City Manager's spending authority of $25,000. Therefore, staff requests that the Council approve an amendment to the existing agreement for an additional not -to -exceed amount of $15,000, bringing the City's total expenditure with F&R to $40,000. Prepare by: RyyI Lean Ass ant ss, to the City Manager Attachments: 1. Amendment No. 1 COUNCIL TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Agenda #6.7 Meeting Date: June 15, 2010 AGENDA REPORT n VIA: James DeStefano, City ManV; TITLE: APPROVAL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR'S PARTICIPATION IN THE 2010 EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG) PROGRAM RECOMMENDATION: Approve. FISCAL IMPACT: If successful, the City could be eligible for up to $11,800 in federal grant funds for specific law enforcement enhancements and programs. BACKGROUND I DISCUSSION: The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has authorized funding for the 2010 Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program. Per the grant's requirements, the grant application must be reviewed by the agency's governing body (the City Council) and made available to the public. By placing the item on tonight's City Council agenda, both requirements are met. The City of Diamond Bar is eligible to apply directly for its $11,800 award through DOJ's Grants Management System, unlike through the City of Los Angeles as in the 2009 grant cycle. The City's application proposes to use its award on overtime personnel costs for law enforcement programs including but not limited to specialized Traffic Patrols, Home Burglary Prevention, Driving Under the Influence (DUI) Saturation Patrols, and School Traffic Safety Patrols. Upon approval, staff will be authorized to complete and submit all required grant documents prior to the June 30, 2010 deadline. Anthony Santos Management Analyst Attachment: 1. Program Narrative. Reviewed by: Ryan L ean Assist t to the City Manager City Diamond Bar Program Narrative The City of Diamond Bar proposes to use $11,800 in 2010 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Funds on overtime personnel costs for law enforcement programs including but not limited to specialized Traffic Patrols, Home Burglary Prevention, Driving Under the Influence (DUI) Saturation Patrols, and School Traffic Safety Patrols. To best serve our community and enhance overall public safety, the City has identified the following law enforcement program to be funded with JAG funds: 1. Traffic Safety Patrols Traffic and vehicle safety continue to be a priority in the City of Diamond Bar. The City's public safety team will utilize traffic safety patrols to increase visibility in the community and improve driver and pedestrian safety. 2. Home Burglary Prevention — Special Patrols & Task Force The City of Diamond Bar has experienced a spike in residential burglaries, perhaps spurred by the recent economic downturn. These crimes threaten the security and safety of our residents and have resulted in significant economic and personal loss. The City's public safety team, le ' d by the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department, is in the process of creating a multi -jurisdictional burglary prevention task force to focus on the successful arrest and prosecution of those responsible. The City plans to utilize a portion of its JAG award to fund additional specialized patrols and prevention efforts coordinated by the Sheriff's Department, FBI, ATF, and neighboring law enforcement authorities. 3. DUI Saturation Patrols A top priority of the Diamond Bar City Council is traffic safety, and a key component to this effort is keeping drunk drivers off our streets. Utilizing JAG funds to conduct DUI saturation patrols and checkpoints at high -impact locations in the City during the period from 1 Opm-2am will target drunk drivers, increase law enforcement presence, and improve driver, passenger, and pedestrian safety. 4. School Traffic Safety Patrols To increase overall traffic safety around the City's schools, JAG funds will be used to provide extra patrols and law enforcement presence near schools during peak traffic times. This effort is designed to reduce accidents and prevent traffic -related student injuries. City of Diamond Bar Program Narrative CITY COUNCIL TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Manager Agenda # 6. 7 (e) Meeting Date: June 15, 2010 TITLE: - Approve Cost of Living Increase to the Hourly Rates for City Attorney RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve a 2.4% cost of living adjustment (COLA) to the hourly rates for City Attorney services for FY 2010-11 and authorize an annual increase thereafter to be commensurate with the annual employee COLA. There are sufficient funds available in the FY 2010-11 budget to accommodate this expense. The approval of the 2.4% COLA for FY 2010-11 would increase the hourly rate from $178.00 to $182.27. DISCUSSION: City Attorney Mike Jenkins has provided service to the City since 1995. At that time, he was with the law firm of Richards, Watson and Gersohn (RWG). In March 2001, Mr. Jenkins left RWG to start the firm of Jenkins and Hogin, LLP. At that time, the City Council retained the services of Mr. Jenkins as City Attorney through the firm of Jenkins and Hogin, LLP. Since that time, the City Council and City staff have been very satisfied with the services provided by Mr. Jenkins. Each year the City reviews the CPI index for the greater Los Angeles area and compares March of the previous year to March of the current year to establish the CPI -based COLA for employees. Last year there was no COLA increase. This year Council approved a 2.4% increase for City employees. City staff recommends that the City Attorney contract be adjusted annually, effective July 1st of each year, to be commensurate with the City employee COLA. City Attorney services are considered professional services and, as such, are exempt from any formal bid process. While the City did not solicit bids from other attorney firms, it should be noted that the proposed hourly rate of approximately $183 per h ur is nificantly lower than the hourly rates of other attorneys engaged by the City. Dave Doyle Assistant City Manager Agenda 9' 6. 8 (a) Meeting Date: June 15, 2009 CITY COUNCIL TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Ma TITLE: Approve Amendment No. 4 Mto he Consulting Services Agreement with Diana Cho and Associates for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Labor and Contract Compliance services ($3,000) for FY 2009-10 2EM vlffjf��NRTWAI These services are paid for by Community Development Block Grant funds and there are sufficient funds allocated in the FY 2009-10 budget for this expenditure. The additional expenditure of $3,000 for total authorization not to exceed $25,000 for FY 2009-10 is within the 10% spending cap for the CDBG administrative costs. Each year the City receives Community Development Block Grant funds. These funds are disbursed by the Federal Housing and Urban Development Department through the Los Angeles County Community Development Commission. The City uses these funds for a variety of programs and capital projects. Due to the significant restrictions on the use of these funds and the numerous regulations governing the spending and accounting of these funds, it is prudent to utilize the expertise of a CDBG specialist to monitor the expenditures and complete the reporting requirements. The Federal government recognizes this and as such authorizes a portion of the funds to be used for these services. DISCUSSION In July 2007 the City entered into a one-year contract with Diana Cho and Associates to provide CDBG contract compliance and monitoring services to ensure the funds are spent appropriately. The contract provides for two, one-year extensions for a maximum contract period of 3 years. In May 2008 Amendment No. 1 in the amount of $4,000 was approved by the City Manager to cover additional costs in the first year of the contract. The original contract and Amendment No. 1 were within the purchasing authority of the City Manager. In FY 2008-09 staff recommended the Council approve Amendment No. 2, extending the contract for services until June 30, 2009. By extending the contract for a second year, the City Council authorized a total contract amount of $43,308. In July 2009 the City Council approved Amendment No. 3 extending the current contract with Diana Cho and Associates for a third year, from July 1, 2009 to June 30, 2010 increasing the total expenditure $64,908. If Amendment No. 4 for the additional $3,000 expenditure is approved by Council, the final contract amount would be a not to exceed amount of $67,908. David Doyle, Asst. City-IVIanager Attachment: AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO THE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH DIANA CHO AND ASSOCIATES RELATED TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT LABOR AND CONTRACT COMPLIANCE SERVICES This Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement is made and entered into this 15th day of June 2010, between the CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, a Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") and DIANA CHO AND ASSOCIATES (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT".) A. Recitals: (i) The CITY has heretofore entered into an agreement, dated July 1, 2007, with CONSULTANT to provide planning consulting services (hereinafter referred to as the "AGREEMENT"). (ii) In July 2008, the City extended the existing agreement for 12 months from July 1, 2008 to June 30, 2009. (iii) In. July 2009 the City Council approved extension of the existing agreement for an additional 12 months effective July 1, 2009 for a not -to -exceed amount of $21,600. (iv) As a result of additional work related to the administration of the City's CDBG program, the Consultant is requesting an additional $3,000 for services rendered in the current fiscal year. (v) It is in the City's best interest to approve the additional expenditure NOW THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between CITY and CONSULTANT: Section 1: Paragraph No. 3 of the AGREEMENT is hereby amended to read as follows: "3. Compensation and Method of Payment City agrees to compensate Consultant, and Consultant agrees to accept in full satisfaction for the services provided for hereunder, fees on a time and material basis at the rates set forth in the original Consulting Services Agreement, but in no event to exceed SIXTY SEVEN THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED EIGHT DOLLARS ($67, 908.00), which fees include all labor, materials, printing and other costs incurred in connection with the project. " Section 2: Each party to this Amendment acknowledges that no representation by any party, which is not embodied herein, or any other agreement, statement, or promise not contained in this Amendment shall be valid and binding. Any modification of this Amendment shall be effective only if it is in writing signed by the parties, Section 3: All other terms and conditions of the AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 3 as of the day and year first set forth above: 'City Of Diamond Bar Diana Cho And Associates BY: James DeStefano, City Manager City Manager Approved As To Form: City Clerk FRI MIT, rel • = � City Attorney Agenda # 6. 8 (b) Meeting Date: June 15, 2009 CITY COUNCIL /r' AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Manager TITLE: Approval of Three -Year Contract to Diana Cho and Associates for CDBG Contract Administration Services for a Not -to -Exceed Amount of $25,000 for FY 2010-11 RECOMMENDATION: Approve and authorize City Manager to sign agreement. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: These services are paid for by Community Development Block Grant funds and there are sufficient funds allocated in the FY 2010-11 budget for this expenditure. The expenditure authorization of $25,000 for FY 2010-11 is within the 10% spending cap for the CDBG administrative costs. Each year the City receives Community Development Block Grant funds. These funds are disbursed by the Federal Housing and Urban Development Department through the Los Angeles County Community Development Commission. The City uses these funds for a variety of programs and capital projects. Due to the significant restrictions on the use of these funds and the numerous regulations governing the spending and accounting of these funds, it is prudent to utilize the expertise of a CDBG specialist to monitor the expenditures and complete the reporting requirements. The Federal government recognizes this and as such authorizes a portion of the funds to be used for these services. DISCUSSION In May 2010 the City issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for CDBG contract administration to the following vendors: Diana Cho and Associates SJC 3 Consulting Willdan Engineering Tina Gall The City received three (3) responses to the RFP from the following: Wildan Engineering Tina Gall Diana Cho and Associates City staff evaluated the proposals based on experience, number of hours dedicated to the program and the associated cost. Based on this evaluation, City staff recommends the City Council award a three year agreement to Diana Cho and Associates in the amount of $25,000 for FY 2010-11. The City will have the option of two, one-year extensions to the agreement for a maximum three (3) year agreement. Attachment: Contract with Diana Cho and Associates CITY COUNCIL _:71iii TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council 10% VIA: James DeStefano, City Ma*V Agenda # 6. 8 (c) Meeting Date: June 15, 2010 TITLE: APPROVE 'AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE CITY'S AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES IN CONJUCTION WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT WITH DAPEER, ROSENBLIT, & LITVAK, LLP. UpTalm FISCAL IMPACT: The requested contract amendment would go into effect upon approval. The CPI escalator would not commence until the beginning of the FY 2011-12 budget year. It is anticipated that future year budget allocations will be increased by the CPI escalator included in the contract amendment. On December 8, 2002, the City entered into an Agreement with Dapeer, Rosenblit & Litvak, LLP ("Dapeer") to provide the City with "as -needed" legal assistance for code enforcement cases. The contract has been re -approved several times, including the addition of an "evergreen" provision in 2010 that formally named Dapeer as Diamond Bar's provider of City Prosecutor services. Although the City has on occasion increased the City Prosecutor budget due to increases in code enforcement cases, the rate for these services has remained at $135 an hour since 2002. The Amendment includes an adjustment in the hourly rate structure to $175 for general legal services, and an hourly rate of $200 for administrative proceedings and litigation cases. The Amendment also includes an annual Consumer Price Index (CPI) escalator tied to employee CPI adjustments that will take effect every July 1 with the adoption of the new annual budget, and will mitigate the need to bring the contract to Council every year. The adjusted hourly rate approximates the actual change had the annual CPI escalator been factored into the original 2002 contract. It is recommended that Council approve Contract Amendment No. 1 with Dapeer, Rosenblit & Litvak, which would go into effect immediately upon approval. Prepare by. Anthony Santos Management Analyst Attachment: 1. Amendment No. 1. 2. Proposal dated June 1, 2010. Reviewed by: Greg Gubman, ACP Community Development Director AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE CITY'S AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES IN CONJUNCTION WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT This Supplemental Agreement No. 1 to the City's Agreement is made and entered into this 15th day of June 2010, between the City Of Diamond Bar, a Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City") and Dapeer, Rosenblit & Litvak, LLP, a California limited liability partnership (hereinafter referred to as the "Firm.") A. Recitals: (i) The City has heretofore entered into an Agreement, dated July 1, 2008, with the Firm to provide legal services for code enforcement (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement'). (ii) It is in the City's best interest to amend the Agreement rather than request bids for the services in order to ensure consistency and continuity of the services already being provided by the Firm. NOW THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between City and the Firm: 1. Section 7 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: "Fees and Costs. City shall pay general code enforcement legal fees to the Firm at the hourly rate of $175, and specialized legal services at the hourly rate of $200. Payment for services shall be made within thirty (30) days following receipt of a monthly statement from the Firm and its approval by the City. The hourly rates will go into effect on July 1, 2010, with a Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustment commencing on July 1, 2011 that will be based on the CPI adjustment provided to City staff upon adoption of the City's annual budget. City agrees to reimburse the Firm for the following costs: ® Attorney service charges, as incurred, for service of arraignment notices and subpenas, procurement of documents from courts and other entities, document certification fees, and for other related services. ® Any court reporter fees, as incurred, for the procurement of a transcript of a court proceeding. ® Any charges, as incurred, to prepare, duplicate or enlarge exhibits for any proceeding. ® $15.00 for each use of commercial database providers (including Infotek, Dataquick or Courthouse Data) for investigational or background purposes in a matter. This charge is exclusive of any attorney time in reviewing this information (to be billed hourly), or other charges to the Firm by said information providers (which shall also be billed to the City). ® Copier charges — 20 cents a page; Faxes — 25 cents a page. • Any extraordinary costs with prior City approval." 2. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Supplemental Agreement No. 1 as of the day and year first set forth above: Dapeer, Rosenblit & Litvak, LLP Approved As To Form: Michael Jenkins, City Attorney 2 City of Diamond Bar Carol Herrera, Mayor Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk DAPEER ROSENBLIT LITVAK LLP L A W Y E R 5 STEVEN H. ROSENBLIT KENNETH 8 OAPEFR WILLIAM LrFVAK JAMES ECKART ANTRA ZUCKERMAN PA -)RIGA H. FITZGERALD NORMA COPADO WELLS CAROLINE K. CASTILLO JOCELYN CORBETT MEHRNOOSH ZAHIRI CHARLENE J. WYNDER OLNIA J. PALMIERI June 1, 2010 City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PLEASE DIRECT MAIL TOt DRL MAIL CENTER POST OFFICE BOX 2007 HUNTINCFTON PARK. CA 90255-3009 Attn: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director Re: Proposal far ;e Dear Mr. Gubman: mEmopourAN CITIES OFFICE: 2770 E SLAUSON AVENUE HUNTINGTON PARK. CA 90255*3099 TELEPHONE 13231 587-52E I FACSIMILE (323) 587.4190 WEST LOS ANGELES OFFICE: I I Soo W OLYMPIC BLVD.. SUITE 550 LOS ANGELES. CA 90084-1524 TELEPHONE (31 O) 477*5575 FACSIMILE (310) 4777090 SAN DIEGO OFFICE-. I 2555 HIGH BLUFF DR.. SUITE 2 15 SAN DIEGO CA 92 130"2058 TELEPHONE (858)250.1 1 go FACSIMILE (8581 259-0099 Our firm takes great pride . in providing excellent legal services to our clients in the most economical manner possible. To that end, we have sought to keep our rates extremely competitive. Due to circumstances beyond our control, we find that the rates we have charged your city for our services are no longer sufficient to meet our operating expenses. During the past few years we have seen our costs for staffing, both professional and administrative, including ancillary expenses such as health insurance, increase exponentially. When added to increased costs for supervision and training, we find that our ability to maintain the level of service you have come to expect requires us to increase our hourly rate. We have under -taken substantial cost reduction efforts to minimize the impact on our clients, however, we find ourselves unable to further reduce costs without impacting the services provided. Our current compensation rate and structure ($135.00 an hour for all matters) have remained the same from December 2002 to the present. We propose, effective July 1, 2010, a change in our compensation as follows (which still reflects a discount as a result of our lengthy relationship with the City): 0 General code enforcement / criminal services: $175.00 per hour; City of Diamond Bar Attn: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director Re: Proposal for Compensation Increase June 1, 2010 Page Two ® Administrative proceedings and code drafting, as well as civil litigation cases and appeals: $200-00 per hour. The higher rate for non -criminal work reflects a greater level of support services and the increased supervision and training required to maintain the quality of our work. If this request is approved, Section 7 (concerning legal fees) of our July 1, 2008 Agreement would be revised accordingly. We deeply appreciate the City's patronage over these many years. if you require any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Steven Rosenbli Our firm takes, great pride in providing excellent legal services to our clients in the most economical manner possible. To that 'end, we . have sought to keep our rates extremely competitive. Due to circumstances beyond our control, we find that the rates we have charged your city for. our services are no longer sufficient to meet our operating expenses. During the past few years we have seen our costs for staffing, both professional and administrative, including ancillary expenses such as health insurance, increase exponentially. When added to increased costs for supervision and training, we find that our ability to maintain the level of service you have come to expect requires us to increase our hourly rate. We have undertaken substantial cost reduction efforts to minimize the impact on our clients, however, we find ourselves unable to further reduce costs without impacting the services provided. Our current compensation rate and structure ($135.00 an hour for all matters) have remained the same from December 2002 to the present. We propose, effective July 1, 2010, a change in our compensation as follows (which still' reflects a discount as a result of our lengthy relationship with the City): ® General code enforcement / criminal services: $175.00 per hour; )o DAPEER RoSENBLIT LITVAK LLP L A W Y E R 5 PLEASE DIRECT MAIL TO: METROPOUFAN CITIES OFFICE: STEVEN H. ROSENBLIT KENNETH S. DAPEER DRL MAIL CENTER 2770 E. SLAUSON AVENUE HUIITINGTON PARK, CA 90255-3096 WILLIAM'LnVAK POST OFFICE BOX 2067 JAMES ECKART HUNTINGTON PARK, CA 90255-3099 TELEPHONE (323) 587-5221 FACSIMILE (323) 587-4190 ANITA ZUCKERMAN PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD WEST LOS ANGELES OFFICE: NORMA COPADO WELLS CAROLINE K. CASTILLO 1 1 500 W. OLYMPIC BLVD., SUITE 550 LOS ANGELES, CA 900154-1524 JOCELYN CORBETT MEHRNOOSH ZAHIRI TELEPHONE (31 0) 477-5575 FACSIMILE (310) 477-7090 CHARLENE J. WYNDER OLIV14 J. PALMIERI SAN DIEGO OFFICE: 1 2555 HIGH BLUFF DR., SUITE 21 5 SAN DIEGO CA 92 130-2056 TELEPHONE (858) 259-1 199 FACSIMILE (85B) 259-0099 June 1, 2010 C-;> o -M City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 C:>C-- 0 Attn: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director q? Re: Proposal for Compensation LIncrease Dear Mr. Gubman: Our firm takes, great pride in providing excellent legal services to our clients in the most economical manner possible. To that 'end, we . have sought to keep our rates extremely competitive. Due to circumstances beyond our control, we find that the rates we have charged your city for. our services are no longer sufficient to meet our operating expenses. During the past few years we have seen our costs for staffing, both professional and administrative, including ancillary expenses such as health insurance, increase exponentially. When added to increased costs for supervision and training, we find that our ability to maintain the level of service you have come to expect requires us to increase our hourly rate. We have undertaken substantial cost reduction efforts to minimize the impact on our clients, however, we find ourselves unable to further reduce costs without impacting the services provided. Our current compensation rate and structure ($135.00 an hour for all matters) have remained the same from December 2002 to the present. We propose, effective July 1, 2010, a change in our compensation as follows (which still' reflects a discount as a result of our lengthy relationship with the City): ® General code enforcement / criminal services: $175.00 per hour; City of Diamond Bar Attn: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director Re: Proposal for Compensation Increase June 1, 2010 Page Two -Administrative proceedings and code drafting, as well as civil litigation cases and appeals: $200-00 per hour. The higher rate for non -criminal work reflects a greater level of support services and the increased supervision and training required to maintain the quality of our work. If this request is approved, Section 7 (concerning legal fees) of our July 1, 2008 Agreement would be revised accordingly. We deeply appreciate the City's patronage over these many years. If you require.any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Steven teven Ro Aare___— This Agreement is made and entered into this 1st day of July, 2008, by and be the City of Diamond Bar, hereafter referred to as ,City", and Dapeer, Rose nblit & Litvak, LLP, a California limited liability partnership, hereafter referred to as the "Firm". Witne.sseth ovide legal services as hereafter Whereas, City desires to engage the Firm to pr described; and, Whereas, the members of the Firm are attorneys duly I licensed under the laws of erienced in the field of code enforcement and general the State of 'California and exp litigation. Now, Therefore, the parties hereto agree as follows: A I 2999qpi�tion of Work. City engages the Firm as follows: A) To provide code enforcement services, which shall include, without the review . . of alleged municipal code violations, limitation, the training of staftpersons, the exercise of the city's administrative, civil or criminal remedies in connection therewith, and the review and analysis of municipal ordinances , Furnished to the Firm. All information, data, reports, and records as 2. Data Furnished s—n e—u— —Lu— the Firm. ' ' existinand in the possession of City, and necessary for carrying out the work shall are g be furnished to the Firm without charge by City, and city I shall cooperate in every reasonable way in the carrying out of the work without delay. 3. _Term. This Agreement shall continue in full force and effect unless terminated pursuant to Paragraph Eight (8) herein. The Firm may, at the discretion of the City, complete any work in progress or matter pending on the date this Agreement expires. 4. _Pe_rsonnel. A. The Firm represents that it employs, or will employ at its own expense, all personnel ersonnel required to perform the services required under this Agreement. Such personnel shall not be employees of, or have any contractual relationship with, City. B. All the services required hereunder will be performed by the Firm, and all personnel engaged in the work shall be fully qualified and shall be authorized or permitted by law to perform such services. 5. t,--m,znr-,nmPnt anggfflpd :)Ietion of Work. The execution of the _ Agreement by the parties hereto does not constitute an authorization to proceed. The services of the Firm in connection with any action are to commence only when a City official shall have assigned a matter to the Firm. 6. City -Representative. The Firm shall work closely and cooperate fully with the City and its designated representatives. 7. Fees and Costs. City shall pay legal fees to the Firm at the hourly rate of $135.00. Payment for services shall be made within thirty (30) days following receipt of a monthly statement from the Firm and its approval by the City. City agrees to reimburse the Firm for the following costs: 0 Attorney service charges, as incurred, for service of arraignment notices and subpenas, procurement of documents from courts and other entities, document certification fees, and for other related services. • Any court reporter fees, as incurred, for the procurement of a transcript of a court proceeding. 9 Any charges, as incurred, to prepare, duplicate or enlarge exhibits for any proceeding. 0 $15.00 for each use of commercial database providers (including Infotek, Data . quick or Courthouse Data) for investigational or background purposes in a matter. This charge is exclusive of any attorney time in reviewing this information (to be billed hourly), or other charges to the Firm by said information providers (which shall also be billed to the City). • Copier charges — 20 cents a page; Faxes — 25 cents a page. Any extraordinary costs with prior City approval. 8. Termination for convenience. The City may terminate this Agreement at _L_ any time without cause by thirty (30) days advance written notice to the Firm of such termination. In this event, all finished or unfinished documents and other materials shall, at the option of City, become its property. If this Agreement is terminated by City as provided in this section, the Firm will be paid for all services rendered by it up to the date of termination. The Firm may terminate this Agreement at any time without cause by giving thirty (30) days written notice to city of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof. 9. Transfer of Files. In the event of termination, City and the Firm shall cooperate in the orderly transfer of pending matters and cases to City, or to another attorney as designated by City. 10.Contract Changes. No change in the character, extent, or duration of the Firm's services shall be made except upon approval by the City Manager and execution 3 0 . 0 of a supplemental agreement in writing between City and the Firm. The supplemental agreement shall set forth the changes of work, the extensions of time and any adjustments in fees to be paid by City to the Firm. 11. Responsible_ Attorneys. The individuals responsible for the Firm's performance under this Agreement are Steven H. Rosenblit, Kenneth B. Dapeer and William Litvak. 12. Insurance. The Firm shall procure and maintain in force a legal malpractice (errors and omissions) policy in an amount of not less than $1,000,000.00 per claim and worker's compensation insurance in accordance with Section 3700 of the Labor Code. The Firm shall also procure and maintain automobile liability insurance covering all automobiles utilized by attorneys and its employees in providing the services hereunder in an amount of not less than $300,000.00 aggregate limit. 13. Independent Contractor. The Firm - shall be independent contractors and shall not incur, nor have the power to incur, any debt, obligation or liability whatever for or against City. 14. Interests of the -Firm. The Firm affirms that it presently has no interest and shall not have any interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner with the performance of the services contemplated by this Agreement. No person having . such interest shall be employed by or associated with the Firm. 15. Compliance with State Law, The Firm shall comply with all state, and local laws and ordinances applicable to the work and shall perform the work in a manner consistent with the highest level of professional care and ethical responsibility as required by applicable professional standards and rules of conduct. .19 16. Compliance with Federal Law.If applicable, the Firm shall comply with all requirements of a. federally funded contractor, including those laws and regulations pertaining to the HUD CDBG Program. 17. Nondiscrimination. The Firm shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, sex, creed, color or national origin. The Firm shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, sex, creed, color or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment; upgrading; demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoffs or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The Firm agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. 18. Findings Confidential. All of the reports, information, data, or other documents prepared or assembled by the Firm under this Agreement are confidential and the Firm agrees that it shall not make same available to any individual or organization without the prior written approval of City. 19. Assignability. No interest in this Agreement may be assigned to another person without the prior written consent of both parties hereto. Claims for Money due or to become due the Firm from City under this Agreement may be assigned to a bank, trust company or other financial institution without such approval. �*Vlce o f any ouch assignment or transfer shall be furnished promptly to City. 20. Notice. Any notice or notices required or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement may be personally served on the other party by the party giving such 5 notice, or may be served by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the following addresses: Dapeer, Rosenblit & Litvak, LLP Post Office Box 2067 Huntington Park, CA 90255-3099 City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 21. Oral Modification. This Agreement supersedes all prior proposals and understandings between the parties and may not be changed or terminated orally, and no change, termination, or attempted waiver of any of the provisions hereof shall be binding, unless in writing and signed by the party against whom the same is sought to be enforced. In Witness Whereof, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date first hereinabove written. VIEVAiTIM11PR Attest: City ;L 'k aerlik Apprqve¢ a� to Form: ', City A Dapeer, PoesQblit & Litvak, LLP By: Steven H. Ro-blit 2 CITY COUNCIL Agenda # 6. 9 (a) Meeting Date: June 15, 2010 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City M*Ne TITLE: APPROVE CONTRACT WITH REPUBLIC ITS FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINTENANCE SEVICES FOR THREE FISCAL YEARS (FY 2010-2011, FY 2011-2012 AND FY 2012-2013) Approve and award. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The Fiscal Year 2010-2011 budget includes an appropriation of $250,000 for both routine and extraordinary traffic signal maintenance services throughout the City. Routine maintenance services will be provided on 64 intersections (including shared traffic signals with Caltrans, LA County, and City of Pomona), 6 underpass lights, and one flashing beacon. The current routine monthly maintenance costs will decrease from $60 to 58$ per intersection, while the $45 rate for the underpass light maintenance will increase to $50. All other service costs will be based upon labor and materials on an as needed basis at the rates prescribed in the attachment. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: On April 20, 2010, the Public Works Department issued the Request for Proposals (RFP) for a new contract for traffic signal maintenance service to three service providers: Computer Services Company (CSC), Team Econolite and Republic ITS. Proposals from Team Econolite and Republic ITS were submitted on May 10, 2010. Staff has evaluated both firms and their proposals and determined that Republic ITS represents the best -qualified firm for a cost effective and reliable traffic signal maintenance program. Staff evaluated the proposals using the following criteria: company's conformance to RFP; company's approach to work; reference checks scrutinizing quality service; qualifications of company's staff members regarding technical knowledge and experience; review of each company's facilities/labs, and cost considerations. Staff has chosen Republic ITS as the most qualified vendor over Team Econolite based on the above review criteria. Republic ITS (formerly Signal Maintenance Inc.) has been providing traffic signal maintenance services to the City of Diamond Bar for the past 10 years. The original contract with Republic was for a five (5) yea -r term which began in 2000 and was subsequently extended in June 2006 for an additional two years and in June 2008 for another additional two years. Republic has been meeting our needs through the use of experienced and qualified personnel. Republic also has personnel on staff that can create plans and specifications to address signal impairments that may require this. level of detail within a short time frame. Republic has agreed to the new contract and language that allows for contractor performance to be assessed on an annual basis; the language permits City staff to conduct annual audits and corresponding deductions to contractor invoices if routine maintenance activities are not properly addressed. Staff will be meeting with Republic on a regular basis to review performance and ensure that contract items are being addressed as.specified. During the past 10 years, Republic's performance has been satisfactory and in accordance with the City's specifications. Staff has determined that the rates are fair and reasonable. Christian Malpica, Associate Engineer Date Prepared: June 8, 2010 REVIEWED BY: 2 Davi. Lin,Ifirector of Public Works Attachment: Proposal - Republic ITS Contract Agreement TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made as of by and between the City of Diamond Bar, a municipal corporation ("City") and Republic ITS, (CONTRACTOR). RECITALS A. City desires to utilize the services of CONTRACTOR as an independent CONTRACTOR to provide Traffic Signal Maintenance Services to City as set forth in Exhibit "A" — CONTRACTOR'S Proposal dated May 10, 2010, including all its appendices. B. CONTRACTOR represents that it is fully qualified to perform such Traffic Signal Maintenance services by virtue of its experience, licensing and the training, education and expertise of its principals and employees. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of performance by the parties of the covenants and conditions herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. CONTRACTOR'S Services. A. Scope of Services. The nature and scope of the specific services to be performed by CONTRACTOR are as described in Exhibit "A"— City's Scope of Work, Exhibit "A-V CONTRACTOR'S Proposal dated May 10, 2010, Exhibit "B" Contract Unit Prices, and Exhibit "C" Traffic Signal Inventory List. CONTRACTOR shall submit its work to the City for its review after completing each phase of the project as described in Exhibit "A", or when otherwise requested by the City. CONTRACTOR shall at its own cost make any revisions of its own work as required by the City and re -do, at its own cost, any work which the City finds unsatisfactory due the CONTRACTOR'S or Subcontractor's error or omissions. CONTRACTOR represents and warrants that if has the qualifications, experience, and facilities to properly perform said services in a thorough, competent, and professional manner and shall, at all times during the term of this agreement, have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law. CONTRACTOR shall begin its services under this Agreement on July 1, 2010. B. Level of Services/Time of Performance. The level of and time of the specific services to be performed by CONTRACTOR are as set forth in Exhibits "A" a n d "A-1 ". C Additional or Other Services. Any proposed changes in the work to be Performed under this Agreement shall be made only by written amendment to this Agreement. CONTRACTOR is not authorized to undertake any work which would result in costs, expenses, or fees in excess of the costs contained in Exhibit "B" without the express written 3 approval of the City Manager. Should the City require the CONTRACTOR to provide additional services beyond the Scope of Work described in Exhibits "A" and "A-1", for services not specifically described therein, the rates and quantities shall be negotiated between the City and CONTRACTOR. 2. Term of Agreement. This CONTRACT shall take effect'July 1,, 2010, and shall continue until June 30, 2013, with the option, at the City's sole discretion, to award multiple years upon successful demonstration of exemplary CONTRACT performance, unless earlier terminated pursuant to the provisions herein. However, this CONTRACT will be subject to annual reviews prior to. commencement of work for the following year. This review will evaluate work performed and level of service provided. Renewal is at the City's discretion. 3. Compensation. City agrees to compensate CONTRACTOR for each service which CONTRACTOR performs to the satisfaction of City in compliance with the schedules set forth in Exhibit "B". 4. General Terms and Conditions. In the event of any inconsistency between the provisions of this Agreement and CONTRACTOR'S proposal, the provisions of this Agreement shall control. a.) Time is of the Essence- CONTRACTOR agrees to perform the services and deliver the work products provided for herein in strict accordance with any schedules set forth by the City. b.) License: Standard of Care — CONTRACTOR represents and agrees that all personnel engaged by the CONTRACTOR in performing the services are and shall be fully qualified. and are authorized or permitted under Federal, State, and local law to perform such services. CONTRACTOR represents and warrants to the City that is has all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals required to provide the services and work required to be performed by this Agreement. (i) CONTRACTOR further represents and warrants that it shall keep in effect all such licenses, permits, and other approvals during the term of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, CONTRACTOR shall have in full force and effect on or before July 1, 2010 and maintain in effect during the term of this Agreement, the license from the State of California. CONTRACTOR shall perform the services under this Agreement in a skillful and competent manner and in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the work in which CONTRACTOR is engaged. (ii) Services provided to the City pursuant to this provided in, a first class and workmanlike manner standards of quality normally provided in the field. shall be responsible to the City for any errors 4 Agreement shall be conforming to the The CONTRACTOR or omissions in the performance of work pursuant to this Agreement. Should any errors caused by the CONTRACTOR be found in such services or products, CONTRACTOR shall correct the errors at no additional charge to the City by redoing the work and/or revising the work products(s) called for in the Scope of Work to eliminate the errors. c.) Subcontracting Subject to Approval — CONTRACTOR may not subcontract any portion of the work to other persons or CONTRACTORS unless expressed written approval from the City is received. d.) Administration — This Agreement will be administered by the City Manager of his designee. The City Manager or his designee shall be considered the Project Administrator and shall have the authority to act for the City under this Agreement. The City Manager or his designee shall represent the City in all matters pertaining to the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement. e.) Progress — CONTRACTOR is responsible to keep the City Manager and/or his duly authorized designee informed on a regular basis regarding the status and progress of the work, activities performed and planned, and any meetings that have been scheduled or are desired. f.) The City's Rights to Employ Other CONTRACTORS — The City reserves the right to employ other CONTRACTORS in connection with the subject matter of the Scope of Work. It is understood by the City that the rights reserved by this paragraph pertain to the City aggregating various traffic signal maintenance, such as new traffic signals, into one project and separately bidding and awarding a CONTRACT for that project. g.) CONTRACTOR'S Records — CONTRACTOR shall keep records and invoices in connection with its work to be performed under this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to the costs incurred under this Agreement. All such records shall be clearly identifiable. CONTRACTOR shall allow a representative of the City during normal business hours to examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of such records. CONTRACTOR shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to the Agreement, for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment under this Agreement. 5. Addresses. City Manager City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 6. Status as Independent CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR: Republic ITS 1266 N. La Loma Circle Anaheim, CA 92806 A. CONTRACTOR is, and shall at all times remain as to City, a wholly independent CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR shall have no power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of City or otherwise act on behalf of City as an agent. Neither City not any of its agents shall have control over the conduct of CONTRACTOR or any of CONTRACTOR'S employees, except as set forth in this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall not, at any time, or in any manner, represent that it or any of its agents or employees are in any manner agents or employees of the City. Except as specified in writing by the City, CONTRACTOR shall have no authority, expressed or implied, to act on behalf of the City, and CONTRACTOR shall have no authority, expressed or implied, to incur any obligation or liability against the City. B. CONTRACTOR agrees to pay all required taxes on amounts paid to CONTRACTOR under this Agreement, and to indemnify and hold City harmless from any and all taxes, assessments, penalties, and interest asserted against City by reason of the independent CONTRACTOR relationship created by this Agreement. In the event that City is audited by any Federal or State agency regarding the independent CONTRACTOR status of CONTRACTOR and the audit in any way fails to sustain the validity of a wholly independent CONTRACTOR relationship between City and CONTRACTOR, then CONTRACTOR agrees to reimburse City for all costs, including accounting and attorney's fees, arising out of such audit and any appeals relating thereto. C. CONTRACTOR shall fully comply with the workers' compensation law Regarding CONTRACTOR and CONTRACTOR'S employees. CONTRACTOR further agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless from any failure of CONTRACTOR to comply with applicable worker's compensation laws. City shall have the right to offset against the amount of any fees due to CONTRACTOR under this Agreement any amount due to City from CONTRACTOR as a result of CONTRACTOR'S failure to promptly pay to -City any reimbursement or indemnification arising under this Section 6. 7. Contract Performance. "The City shall prepare and implement an ANNUAL AUDIT PROGRAM to be used to insure performance of CONTRACT requirements. The program may be modified at the discretion of the City. The CONTRACTOR agrees to be so evaluated by said program and bound by the ratings and/or deductions. from payments. To avoid deductions from payment, CONTRACTOR must have either corrected or identified and reported all deficiencies based on the monthly routine maintenance checklist set forth in Exhibit "A". If, in the judgment of the City, CONTRACTOR is deemed to be non-compliant with the terms and obligations of the CONTRACT, the City, may deduct 10% of the monthly maintenance cost for each corresponding deficiency found at each traffic signal that is not corrected or identified in the course of ordinary monthly maintenance (as prescribed 6 in Exhibit "A"). Notification of the amount to be withheld or deducted from payments to CONTRACTOR will be forwarded to the CONTRACTOR by the City in a written notice describing the reasons for said action. The action above shall not be constructed as a penalty but as adjustment of payment to CONTRACTOR to recover cost or loss due to the failure of the CONTRACTOR to complete or comply with the provisions of this CONTRACT. 8. Indemnification. CONTRACTOR shall indemnify, defend with counsel approved by CITY, and hold harmless CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against all liability, loss, damage, expense, cost (including without limitation reasonable attorneys fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation) of every nature arising out of or in connection with CONTRACTOR'S performance of work hereunder or its failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in this AGREEMENT, regardless of CITY'S passive negligence, but 'excepting such loss or damage which is caused by the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of the CITY. Should CITY in its sole discretion find CONTRACTOR'S legal counsel unacceptable, then CONTRACTOR shall reimburse the CITY its costs of defense, including without limitation reasonable attorneys fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation. The CONTRACTOR shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the CITY (and its officers, officials, employees and volunteers) covered by this indemnity obligation. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions are intended to be as broad and inclusive as is permitted by the law of the State of California and will survive termination of this Agreement. 9. Insurance. CONTRACTOR shall at all times during the term of this Agreement carry, maintain, and keep in full force and effect, with an insurance company admitted to do business in California and approved by the City (1) a policy or policies of broad-f6rm comprehensive general liability insurance with minimum limits of $1,000,000.00 combines single limit coverage against any injury, death, loss or damage as a result of wrongful or negligent acts by CONTRACTOR, its officers, employees, agents, and independent CONTRACTORs in performance of services under this Agreement; (2) property damage insurance with a minimum limit of $1,000,000.00; (3) automotive liability insurance, with minimum combined single limits coverage of $1,000,000.00; (4) worker's compensation insurance with a minimum limit of $1,000,000.00 or the amount required by law, whichever is greater. City, its officers, employees, attorneys, and volunteers shall be named as additional insureds on the policy(ies) as to comprehensive general liability, property damage, and automotive liability. The policy(ies) as to comprehensive general liability, property damage, automobile liability, and professional liability shall provide that they are primary, and that any insurance maintained by the City shall be excess insurance only. A. All insurance policies shall provide that the insurance coverage shall not be non -renewed, canceled, reduced, or otherwise modified (except through the addition of additional insureds to the policy) by the insurance carrier without the insurance carrier giving City thirty (30) day's prior written notice thereof. CONTRACTOR agrees that it will not cancel, reduce or otherwise modify the insurance coverage. B. CONTRACTOR agrees that if it does not keep the insurance in full force and effect, and such insurance is available at a reasonable cost, City may take out the necessary insurance and pay the premium thereon, and the repayment thereof shall be deemed an obligation of CONTRACTOR and the cost of such insurance may be deducted. At the option of City, from payments due CONTRACTOR. C. CONTRACTOR shall submit to City (1) insurance certificates indicating compliance with the minimum worker's compensation insurance requirements above, and (2) insurance policy endorsements indicating compliance with all other minimum -insurance requirements above, not less than one (1) day prior to beginning of performance under this Agreement. Endorsements shall be executed on City's appropriate standard forms entitled "Additional Insured Endorsement". D. CONTRACTOR shall furnish a CONTRACT Performance Bond in the amount of one hundred percent (100%) of the aggregate amount of the CONTRACT; and a Labor and Materials Bond in the amount of one hundred percent (100%) of the CONTRACT. 10. Confidentiality. CONTRACTOR in the course of its duties may have access to confidential data of City, private individuals, or employees of the City. CONTRACTOR covenants that all data, documents, discussion, or other information developed or received by CONTRACTOR or provided for performance of this Agreement are deemed confidential and shall not be disclosed by CONTRACTOR without written authorization by City. City shall grant such authorization if disclosure is required by law. Ail City data shall be returned to City upon the termination of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR'S covenant under this section shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 11. Ownership of Materials. All materials provided by CONTRACTOR in the performance of this Agreement shall be and remain the property of City without restriction or limitation upon its use or dissemination by City. 12. Conflict of Interest. A. CONTRACTOR covenants that it presently has no interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, which may be affected by the services to be performed by CONTRACTOR under this Agreement, or which would conflict in any manner with the performance of its services hereunder. CONTRACTOR further covenants that, in performance of this Agreement, no person having any such interest shall be employed by it. Furthermore, CONTRACTOR shall, avoid the appearance of having any interest which would conflict in any manner with the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement. Further, the CONTRACTOR or its employees may be subject to the provisions of the California Political Reform Act of 1974 (the "Act"), which (1) requires such persons to disclose financial interest that may foreseeable be materially affected by the work performed under this Agreement, and (2) prohibits such persons from making, or participating in, making, decisions that will foreseeable financially affect such interest. If subject to the Act, the CONTRACTOR shall conform to all requirements of the Act. Failure to do so constitutes a material breach and is grounds for termination of this Agreement by the City. B. CONTRACTOR covenants not to give or receive any compensation, monetary or otherwise, to or from the ultimate vendor(s) of hardware or software to City as a result of the performance of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR'S covenant under, this section shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 13. Termination. City may terminate this Agreement with or without cause upon thirty (30) days written notice to CONTRACTOR. The effective date of termination shall be upon the date specified in the notice of termination, or, in the event no date is specified, upon the fifteenth (15th) day following delivery of the notice. In the event of such termination, City agrees to pay CONTRACTOR for services satisfactorily completed and approved prior to the effective date of termination. Immediately upon receiving written notice of termination, CONTRACTOR shall discontinue performing service. CONTRACTOR may terminate this Agreement, or any program or service provided hereunder, at least ninety (90) days in advance of such termination. If this Agreement is terminated by the CONTRACTOR, the CONTRACTOR shall be compensated for services satisfactorily completed and approved prior to the effective date of termination. A. Breach of Agreement — If the CONTRACTOR defaults in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall have ten (10) days after service upon it of written notice of such default in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the CONTRACTOR fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled by law, in equity, or under this Agreement. The failure of the City to object to any default in the performance of the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of either that term or condition or any other term or condition of this Agreement. B. Mediation — Any dispute or controversy arising under this Agreement, or in connection with any of the terms and conditions hereof, shall be referred by the parties hereto for mediation. A third party, neutral mediation 9 services shall be selected, as agreed upon by the parties and the costs and expenses thereof shall be borne equally by the parties hereto. In the event the parties are unable to mutually agree upon the mediator to be selected hereunder, the City Council shall select such a neutral, third party mediation service and the City Council's decision shall be final. The parties agree to utilize their good faith efforts to resolve any such dispute or controversy so submitted to mediation. It is specifically understood and agreed by the parties hereto that referral of any such dispute or controversy, and mutual good faith efforts to resolve the same thereby, shall be conditions precedent to the institution of any action or proceeding, whether at law or in equity with respect to any such dispute or controversy. 14. Provision of Personnel, Instruments and Office Space. CONTRACTOR represents that it has, or will secure at its own expense, all personnel required to perform the services under this Agreement. All of the services required under this Agreement will be performed by CONTRACTOR or under its supervision, and all personnel engaged in the work shall be qualified to perform such services. CONTRACTOR reserves the right to determine the assignment of its own employees to the performance of CONTRACTOR'S services under this Agreement, but City reserves the right, for good cause, to require CONTRACTOR to exclude any employee from performing services on City's premises. CONTRACTOR shall make every reasonable effort to maintain the stability and continuity of their staff assigned to perform the services required by this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall maintain a constant supply of the required materials and tools to perform the services under this Agreement. 15. Financial Condition. Prior to entering into this Agreement, CONTRACTOR has submitted documentation acceptable to the City Manager, establishing that it is financially solvent, such that it can reasonably be expected to perform the services required by this Agreement. Within thirty (30) days of the first anniversary of the effective date of this Agreement, and each year thereafter throughout the term of this Agreement, CONTRACTOR shall submit such financial information as may be appropriate to establish to the satisfaction of the City Manager that CONTRACTOR is in at least as sound a financial position as was the case prior to entering into this Agreement. Financial information submitted to the City Manager shall be returned to CONTRACTOR after review and shall not be retained by City. 16. Non -Discrimination and Equal Employment Opportunity. A. CONTRACTOR shall not discriminate as to race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental handicap, medical condition, or sexual orientation, in the performance of its services and duties pursuant to this Agreement, and will comply with all rules and regulations of City relating thereto. Such nondiscrimination shall include but not be limited to the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, transfers, recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or 10 termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training including apprenticeship. B. CONTRACTOR will, in all RFPs or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of CONTRACTOR state either that it is an equal opportunity employer or that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental condition, or sexual orientation. C. CONTRACTOR will cause the foregoing provisions to be inserted in all Subcontracts for any work covered by this Agreement except CONTRACTS or Subcontracts for standard commercial supplies or raw materials. 17. Assignment. CONTRACTOR shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONTRACTOR'S obligations hereunder, without the prior written consent of City, and any attempt by CONTRACTOR to so assign this Agreement or any rights, or obligations arising hereunder shall be void and of no effect. 18. Performance Evaluation. This CONTRACT shall take effect July 1, 2010, and shall continue until June 30, 2013 with the possibility of merit renewals, unless earlier terminated pursuant to the provisions herein. However, this CONTRACT will be subject to annual reviews prior to commencement of work for the following year. This review will evaluate work performed and level of service provided. The work product required by this Agreement shall be utilized as the basis for review, and any comments or complaints received by City during the review period, either orally or in writing, shall be considered. City shall meet with CONTRACTOR prior to preparing the written report. If any noncompliance with the Agreement is found, City may direct CONTRACTOR to correct the inadequacies, or in the alternative, may terminate this Agreement as provided herein. 19. Compliance with Laws. CONTRACTOR shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, codes and regulations of the federal, state, and local governments. CONTRACTOR shall keep itself informed of all State and Federal laws and regulations which any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement. The CONTRACTOR shall, at all times, observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity by reason of the failure of the CONTRACTOR to comply with this paragraph. A. To the extent that any or all of the services described in Exhibit "A" are or may be funded by other governmental entities, CONTRACTOR shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations to which the City is bound with the agencies providing the funding. 11 B. Prevailing Wages: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the CONTRACTOR is required to pay not less than the general prevailing rate of per them wages for work of a similar character in the locality in which the public works is performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of per them wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has determined such general prevailing rates of per them wages. Copies of such prevailing rates of per them wages are on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California, and are available to any interested party on request. City also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the job site. The CONTRACTOR shall forfeit, as penalty to City, not more than twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages hereinbefore stipulated for any work done under this Agreement, by him or by any subcontractor under him. 20. Non -Waiver of Terms, Rights and Remedies. Waiver by either party of any one or more of the conditions of performance under this Agreement shall not be a waiver of any other condition of performance under this Agreement. In no event shall the making by City of any payment to CONTRACTOR constitute or be construed as a waiver by City of any breach of covenant, or any default which may then exist on the part of CONTRACTOR, and the making of any such payment by City shall in no way impair or prejudice any right or remedy available to City with regard to such breach or default. k 21. Attorney's Fees. In the event that either party to this Agreement shall commence any legal or equitable action or proceeding to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such action or proceeding shall be entitled to recover its costs of suite, including reasonable attorney's fees and costs, including costs of expert witnesses and CONTRACTOR. 22. Notices. Any notices, bills, invoices, or reports required by this Agreement shall be deemed received on (a) the day of delivery, if delivered by hand during regular business hours or by facsimile before or during regular business hours; or (b) on the third business day following deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, certified, to the addresses heretofore set forth in the Agreement, or to such other addresses as the parties may, from time to time, designate in writing pursuant to the provisions of this section. 23. Governing Law. This CONTRACT shall be interpreted, construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Los Angeles County shall be the venue for any legal proceedings, including mediation, arbitration, or court actions that are initiated regarding this Agreement. 12 . 24. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be the original, and all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. 25. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, and any other documents incorporated herein by specific reference, represents the entire and integrated agreement between CONTRACTOR and City. This Agreement supersedes all prior oral and written negotiations, representations or agreements. This Agreement may not be amended, nor any provision or breach hereof waived, except in writing signed by the parties which expressly refers to, this Agreement. Amendments on behalf of the City will only be valid if signed by the City Manager or the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk. 26. Exhibits. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement are incorporated herein by this reference. 27. Severability. If any provision in this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will nevertheless continue in full force without being 'impaired or invalidated in any way. 13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement with all the formalities required by law on the respective dates set forth opposite their signatures. State of California "CONTRACTOR'S" License No. 647154 Republic ITS 1266 N. La Loma Circle Anaheim, CA 92806 0 Date TITLE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA By: Date UNUMIN By: TOMMYE CRIBBINS, CITY CLERK Date CONTRACTOR'S Business Phone (714) 535-0550 Emergency Phone at which CONTRACTOR can be reached at any time APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY Date 14 SCOPE OFSERVICE 1. CONTRACT PERIOD The contract shall commence July 1, 2010 and shall expire on June 30, 2013. City may, in its sole discretion, extend the terms to award multiple years upon successful demonstration of exemplary contract performance. 2. GENERAL The Contractor will be required to provide the City with certified personnel, vehicles and equipment, and materials as necessary to maintain the City's traffic signals and related equipment. The Contractor must have the resources and abilities to install various traffic signal poles, controller cabinets, and other associated equipment. The scope of services may include, but will not be limited to the following: 3. TECHNICAL SERVICES AND MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL The Contractor will be required to have available and readily accessible all required vehicles, tools, equipment, apparatus, facilities, and materials to perform all work necessary to maintain the traffic signals and related equipment as listed in this RFP in compliance with current Caltrans standards and specifications. The Contractor will be required to perform routine traffic signal maintenance services at an established flat rate fee per intersection, with additional non -routine maintenance services compensated at rates established pursuant to an agreed fee schedule. The Contractor will be required to provide regular field preventive maintenance, installation, and repair of existing controller assemblies and cabinets by qualified personnel that meet or exceed the following qualifications: One Level Three technician with certification by the International Municipal Signal Association (IMSA) with at least three (3) years experience in traffic signal repairs; One Level Two technician with certification by the International Municipal Signal Association (IMSA) with at least three (3) years experience in traffic signal repairs; Familiarity with programming and repair of all traffic signal controllers; * Proficient in programming of conflict monitors (CMU) and malfunction management units (MMU); ® Familiarity with basic traffic signal timing principals; ® Proficient with all types of detection systems; video, loops and wireless. 15 • Familiarity with hardwire and wireless communications technology including troubleshooting, installations and adjustment of external and internal modems; ® Familiarity with various battery backup systems to include installation, programming and testing procedures, and maintenance; ® Ability to perform cabinet modifications and up -grades as required by the City; a Technician(s) shall be available by phone 24 -hours a day The Contractor will be required to assign adequate traffic signal technicians to the City as maybe necessary to provide routine "Preventive Maintenance" to each traffic signal (once every month), as described in this RFP. An inability to provide routine maintenance to each traffic signal may cause the Contractor to be subject to adjustment of payment to Contractor. The Contractor will be required to provide a 24-hour service for knock -downs and emergencies. The Contractor will be required to have a complete traffic signal laboratory located in Southern California, or will be required to include the use of a certified traffic signal laboratory as part of its services (the name and location of the laboratory shall be listed in the Contractor's proposal). The Contractor will be required to maintain a stock of common replacement parts. The equipment may include, but is not limited to the following: Model 170E traffic signal controllers and a minimum of two (2) spare LACO IV controllers assigned to our City, 24VDC Power Supply, MMUs/CMU's, flash transfer relays, load switches, detectors, LED red/yellow/green lamps, LED pedestrian signals, and pedestrian activation buttons. The Contractor may offer alternatives to existing equipment to meet the changing demand as it occurs, when directed by City. The Contractor will be required to perform installations of knockdown replacement signal equipment including traffic signal poles ranging from Type 1A to Type 60, and to install traffic signal controller assemblies, cabinets, electric services, and to install inductive loop detectors. The Contractor will be required to assist the City with the calibrating of traffic signal timing and progression; timing of traffic signals shall only be changed under the approved general direction of the City. The Contractor will be required to cooperate with the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department, LA County Fire Department, the City Manager and responsible City department heads in cases of emergency. The Contractor will be required to refer all questions from the public to the City. 16 The Contractor will be required to provide preventive maintenance for the traffic signal equipment as listed in this RFP. The Contractor will be required to provide one electronic copy of the maintenance checklist to the City following each inspection, to maintain a copy of the maintenance checklist in the traffic signal controller cabinet, and to maintain a copy of the maintenance checklist at the Contractor's office of records. The Contractor will be required to maintenance designed to eliminate complaints, and extend the useful life not be restricted to, the following: Monthly Routine Maintenance follow a program of continuing comprehensive or reduce the incidence of malfunctions, reduce of the equipment. The program will include, but Preventive Maintenance (PM) checklist Form: Maintain a copy of the Preventive Maintenance Checklist Form approved by the City at each traffic signal. The PM Checklist Form will be completely filled out during each maintenance inspection and during any time repairs are made to the traffic signal controller or any related equipment in the controller cabinet or the signal equipment at the intersection (detector loops, pedestrian heads, signal heads, lenses, lamps and signal poles, etc.). ® Controller Cabinet Mounting: Check the snugness of the nuts on the traffic signal cabinet anchor bolts, tighten, if necessary, being sure not to distort the cabinet door opening by over tightening. * Controller Cabinet Foundation Seal: If standing water or evidence of water is present inside the bottom of the cabinet, check the seal between the bottom of the foundation for deterioration, and to report the need to reseal the cabinet foundation as necessary. ® Door Gaskets: Check all door gaskets on the controller cabinet, service cabinet and any other enclosures of evidence of moisture or deterioration. Report the need to completely replace any gaskets showing signs of leaking or deterioration. Cabinet Vents: Check the vents in both the cabinet door and above the door, or at the top of the cabinet to ensure that they are free of any foreign material. Air Filter: Vacuum, wash, replace or knock out any dust accumulated in air filters. Take appropriate action based on the condition of the filter. ® Cabinet Fan: Verify that cabinet fans(s) operate properly with a minimum of noise. ® Thermostat: Verify that the cabinet fan thermostat is set at 96 degrees. ® Interior Light: Verify the proper operation of the cabinet's interior light. Door Panel Harnesses: Check the harnesses leading from the main panel and auxiliary panels on the cabinet door to ensure they are not being pinched and do not bind against the cabinet door. Adjust, if necessary. 17 Hinges and Locks: Check the free movement of all doors, latching assemblies and locks on the controller cabinet, service cabinet and any other enclosures. Use a minimum of oil or spray lubricant and remove any excess. Vacuum Cabinet: Blow or brush off shelves, terminal blocks and components and thoroughly vacuum the interior of the cabinet. Insect or Rodent Infestation: Check for signs of ants, wasps or other insects or rodents within the cabinet. Use appropriate insect traps or powders if any positive findings are discovered. More serious problems shall be reported to the City. ® Cabinet Grounding: Using appropriate equipment, check annually the resistance between AC and ground. ® Service Connections: Verify the neutral, ground and power connections are secure in the controller and service cabinets. ® Plug -In Components: Check that each plug-in component (rack mount detectors, relays, load switches, etc.) fits tightly and securely. ® Ground Fault Receptacle: Verify the proper operation of the "Test" and "Reset" buttons on GFC1 type outlets. ® Intersection Records: Ensure that all intersection cabinet wiring diagrams are present and up to date. Controller Operation: Manually place vehicle and pedestrian calls on each phase through the cabinet test switches or the controller keypad, to verify controller servicing of each active phase. Check controller logs for any faults that have occurred and make note for the file. Verify signal timing is current with timing sheet in cabinet. Confirm controller time and dates are correct. (Especially after day light savings time change). ® Conflict Monitor/Malfunction Management Unit: Verify time and dates are correct in any CMU/MMU with an internal clock. ® Detector Operation (inductive loops): Verify the detection zones for each detector by observing the turn -on of the appropriate detection indicator as a vehicle passes over the detector loop(s). Check also that a call is placed on the correct controller phase. * Detector Operation (video detection): Verify camera operation by monitoring the vehicle call on the video controller unit. Also, verify the calls going to the detector call page in the controller. ® Equipment Displays and Indicators: Verify that all LED and LCD displays and indications on all cabinet equipment are working properly. * Pre-Emption Devices: Test any pre-emption devices for proper operation. System Telemetry: Check the operation of telemetry on controller display and phone modem, if equipped, located in the cabinet. Report any malfunction immediately. Battery Back -Up System: Check battery backup display for AC IN, UPS 18 OUTPUT, and INVERTER indications. All should be on when utility power is supplied to the cabinet. Also, check battery level and load level displays. Test batteries quarterly. Make note if either is out of range. Keep records of events recorded and total battery run time between maintenance checks to help indicate problem intersections. ® Check all battery connections to ensure they are clean and secure. Safety Lighting (Night Check): Institute a routine night time check of safety lights and illuminated street name signs at all signalized intersections every month and submit a report and an estimate for any repairs necessary to the City for approval. intersection Walk -Around (included as a part of Monthly Routine Maintenance): ® General: Remove any easily removable, unauthorized signs, stickers and posters and note any graffiti existing on signal poles or equipment. Notify City of any graffiti observed on traffic signal equipment. ® Signal Heads: Verify that all vehicle and pedestrian heads properly display all indications and he signals are not damaged. Verify the alignment of all heads to the intended direction. Verify that all back plates, visors and doors are visibly secure. Report any landscaping that restricts the view of signal heads to the City (Signal heads should be Visible from 250 feet). Labor and material costs to replace malfunctioning displays with Caltrans approved LED units will be paid in addition to the established flat rate fee per intersection. ® Pedestrian Equipment: Check all pedestrian push buttons (and bicycle push buttons where provided) and signals by hand to ensure that they are securely mounted and operating properly. Replace damaged or malfunctioning buttons with larger size ADA type buttons as necessary. ® Internally illuminated street name signs (IISNS): Verify that the IISNS is adequately connected to frame, clamp and brackets, and no panel is broken or missing. Miscellaneous: Check all detector loops for sealant'deterioration, exposed wire, etc. Quarterly Maintenance: ® Traffic Signal Systems: Provide a quarterly (i.e. every three months) systems check to ensure traffic signal systems function in accordance with the timing plans. Investigate and determine causes for any performance issues (i.e. faulty pedestrian bush buttons, faulty vehicle detection, faulty communication, etc.), and recommend appropriate repairs necessary for system operation in accordance with the timing plan. Repairs necessary to improve the function of traffic signal systems shall be compensated as "Extra Work". [M Maintenance of the traffic signal systems is a critical component of the City's desired services. The Contractor will be required to have qualified traffic signal technicians that have demonstrated experience in maintaining traffic signal systems, with a proven ability to troubleshoot and diagnose problems with the efficient operation of these systems. Semi -Annual Maintenance (In conjunction with monthly maintenance): ® Uninterrupted Power Supply (Back -Up) System (see Exhibit "C" for locations): a. Load test all batteries and record on paper and with silver marking pen on each battery the date and load test results. b. Perform 15 minute test. c. Verify bypass switch is operating property. d. Verify unit is set for 80% fully operational and 20% red flash. e. Inspect and test battery charging system. ® Video Detection System Where Applicable: Insure proper operation, clean video detection camera lens as needed. ® Signal Lenses and Signs: Clean and polish all signal lenses and reflectors, align all signal heads and adjust all mast arm mounted street name signs. ® Terminal Connections: Test, semi-annually or following any wiring repair, each terminal screw by backing off slightly then retightening to confirm that it is secure. ® Check: All pull boxes for structural defects, insect or rodent infestations, and properly secured lids. ® Verify timing charts to controllers. If thby are not correct contact City staff to verify differences. • Report significant areas of rust on cabinet exterior and signal poles to City staff. ® CCTV Cameras Where Applicable: Insure proper operation, clean camera lens as needed. ® Check ground rod clamp and wire. ® Check operation of ground fault receptacle. m Measure voltage at service inputs in cabinet and record. Annual Maintenance: e Annual Painting List: Field checks the paint condition of the pedestrian. heads, vehicle signal heads, push buttons and pedestrian heads. Provide an annual painting list for ten (10) locations per year. 20 Records: Intersection Records (a) Inventory List: Maintain an inventory list of the equipment in the controller cabinet at each location. The inventory list shall include the model, manufacture, serial number and quantity of each piece of equipment and installation date. The inventory list shall be continually updated and a copy shall be furnished to the City every six months. (b) Preventive Maintenance (PM) Checklist Form: Maintain a copy of the Preventive Maintenance Checklist Form approved by the City at each intersection. The PM checklist form shall be completely filled out during each *routine maintenance inspection an * d during any time repairs are made to the controller or any related equipment in the controller cabinet or the signal equipment at the' intersection (detector loops, pedestrian heads, signal heads, lenses, lamps and signal poles, etc.). Monthly Activity Report Provide a computerized monthly activity report to the City by the fifteenth working day of each month for the previous month and/or provide internet customer account access. The report shall be provided both as a printout and as a Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet compatible computer file transmitted by e-mail and shall include the following: (a) Time the service calls were received, time arrived at the intersection, the response time, the number of hours spent for each repair, materials used, and a special listing of intersections with three or more calls in one month. (b) A complete record of all work that was performed on the traffic signal equipment during the previous month including the make, model, and serial number of any major components or other equipment that was newly installed at each intersection (c) Time and date the PM work was performed. Pending Repair List Provide a monthly report of all pending repair work needed at each intersection. Compensation for all routine "Preventive Maintenance" work identified above will be paid at an established flat rate fee per intersection for those intersections maintained in any given month, in accordance with the Cost Proposal, Exhibit "B", included in this RFP and completed and returned by the Contractor in its Proposal. (For clarification, each intersection will be billed to the City no more than once every month for routine preventive maintenance work). No additional or separate payment will be made for labor and materials, vehicles, equipment, or for daily travel time from the Contractor's base of operations to the City. The flat rate fee per intersection represents total compensation 21 for all routine preventive maintenance work as described herein, unless additional or separate payment for repairs or unscheduled/emergency work is otherwise authorized. The Contractor will be required to assign a traffic signal technician to the City as may be necessary to provide routine "Preventive Maintenance" to each traffic signal, as described in this RFP. The City expects traffic signal technicians to be regularly assigned to the City as necessary to provide routine preventive maintenance, and to respond to unscheduled/emergency work ("Extra Work") during regular working hours (8:30 AM to 5:30 PM, Monday through Friday). An inability to provide maintenance to each traffic signal every month may cause the Contractor to be subject to adjustment of payment to Contractor. 5. UNSCHEDULED MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONTROL EQUIPMENT Unscheduled/emergency work includes, but is not limited to the following: Downed signal heads, poles, damaged controller and cabinet, damaged internally illuminated street name signs, damaged inductive loops, sensing elements, pedestrian push buttons, pedestrian signal heads, wiring, and other operational equipment related issues. Assisting the City for special events or for City construction projects, as necessary to implement revised traffic signal timing and phasing for changed traffic conditions. Repair, replace or otherwise render in good working order any and all defective parts of the traffic signal equipment with like make and model parts for temporary and permanent replacements, except as individually agreed upon by the City. The Contractor shall provide materials for permanent repairs, uses in the repair or replacement of City equipment. The City shall reimburse the Contractor for materials used for permanent repairs, in an amount equal to the cost of the materials including an agreed mark-up price. No permanent change of control mechanisms shall be done without prior approval of the City. Whenever equipment is removed from the controller cabinet, the City shall be notified by phone within 24 working hours, except weekends and holidays. Notify the City in advance of any traffic signal de -activations that may be required to provide the required services. Traffic signal de -activations shall not be scheduled without the approval of an authorized representative of the City. All traffic signal controller equipment shall be maintained as recommended by the manufacturer. The Contractor shall cover the cost for replacing any parts to the controller mechanisms under the provisions of the preventive, maintenance program. When entire controller mechanisms become obsolete or are deteriorated beyond repair, report such conditions to the City and provide satisfactory evidence that replacement is necessary. Prepare estimates showing the cost breakdown of material and labor for replacement of such 22 controller mechanisms and submit this information to the City. Replacement of an entire controller mechanism, if ordered by City, shall be paid for as "Extra Work". "Extra Work" includes, but is not limited to the following: ® Traffic Signal and Pedestrian Signal Indications: Replace or repair standard traffic signals (red, yellow and green) and pedestrian signal display units as they malfunction upon authorization from the City. All traffic signal and pedestrian indications shall be Caltrans approved LED units only. ® Unscheduled Maintenance: Respond within two (1) hour after City's notice of the following events: (1) Any signal controller malfunction; (2) Burned out red or green ball or arrow display; (3) Other situations that are potentially hazardous to public safety The replacement of burned -out lamps need provided that there are at least two (2) SL direction of travel. Such replacements will I Notify the City within twenty-four (24) hou not be on an afterhours "emergency" basis -h signal indication still operative for each ,e completed within twenty-four (24) hours. s of any change in traffic signal operation caused by controller replacement, timing changes, and loss of master control or traffic collisions. Maintenance activities that require periodic replacement of minor parts will not require City approval. Replacement of controllers, cameras, and battery backup systems will require approval of City staff prior to replacement. Serial number of unit removed will be recorded and the unit delivered to the City Yard. Emergencies The Contractor shall contact the City Engineer or his representative regarding any extraordinary maintenance work and seek his prior approval before the work is scheduled. The Contractor shall notify the City Engineer by telephone at least four (4) hours in advance before any work is commenced, except in emergencies where injury or property damage may result without prompt response. For the emergency repair of a signal that is totally blacked out, the following procedure of traffic control shall apply: (1) The Contractor shall dispatch qualified personnel and equipment to reach the site within one (1) hour under normal conditions. (2) If no Sheriff personnel are present and temporary stop signs have been set up when the Contractor arrives at the site, the Contractor shall set up more traffic warning and control devices, if deemed necessary, and proceed to repair the 23 signal. After the signal is back in operation, the Contractor shall remove all of the temporary traffic control devices and return those devices owned by the City. (3) If Sheriff personnel are still at the site when the Contractor arrives, the Contractor shall quickly, examine the signal, evaluate the situation, and discuss it with the Sheriff. If the repair will take only a few minutes, the officer may stay to continue to direct traffic while the Contractor repairs the signal. If the repair will take longer than the officer can wait, the Contractor shall immediately set up temporary stop signs and all other necessary warning devices and relieve the officer. The Contractor shall notify the City's representative at any time traffic control measures are put into effect. Emergency calls that require replacement of equipment will not require approval from City before such replacements are commenced. Additional staffing shall be provided where- responding technician cannot handle emergency work alone (knockdowns, wire pulls, etc.). Maintain a single local telephone where an on-call traffic signal technician can be reached at all times, twenty-four (24) hours per day. This telephone number will be made available to all persons designated by the City. Monitoring Emergency Calls: At the time the on-call traffic signal technician is notified of an emergency by the City, he will call the designated City representative. If the designated representative is not available, the following numbers are available to verify that the on-call traffic signal technician has received the call: TIME TELEPHONE NO. 7:30 AM - 5:30 PM (909) 839-7040, Public Works Department 5:30 PM - 7:30 AM After hour telephone numbers will be provided in accordance with an established Traffic Signal Service Call Procedure Upon completion of emergency work, contact the above telephone numbers and inform the City that the emergency work has been completed. Compensation for unscheduled maintenance work identified above will be paid at the hourly labor rates, and vehicle and equipment rates, in accordance with the Cost Proposal, Exhibit "B", included in this RFP and completed and returned by the Contractor in its Proposal. Compensation for travel time shall be included in the payment for unscheduled or emergency work for those calls originating between 5:30 PIVI to 7:30 AM, for the actual travel time to the City, up to a two (2) hours maximum. The Contractor will be required to maintain any additional traffic signals and appurtenant devices as they are installed, or become a part of the maintenance requirements of the City. .24 Upgrade work may include but is not limited to the following: ® Replacement of existing non-operative equipment as needed; ® Enhancing equipment as needed or warranted; ® Installation of new controller equipment, signal cabinets, signals heads, new and related wiring; ® When requested by the City, install' modify or upgrade traffic signals or electrical or mechanical traffic control or traffic safety devices; No upgrade work shall be commenced or undertaken unless authorized by the City. Said authorization is a condition precedent to receiving any reimbursement for upgrade work. Work shall be performed in accordance with the Standard Plans (current) and Section 86 of the Standard Specifications (current) for the State of California Department of Transportation and the City of Diamond Bar special provisions. This work shall be performed within a time limit established by the City and for a mutually agreed upon price. City will retain the right to perform any additional work by use of City forces or, in the alternative, to advertise such work for bids. 7. NEW TRAFFIC SIGNALS The Contractor shall be required to coordinate with the City's designated representative on any new traffic signals installed by another Contractor under contract with the City ("City Installed Traffic Signal"), or by another Contractor under contract with a private party ("Developer Installed Traffic Signal"). The City shall assume all responsibility for coordinating construction inspection of new traffic signals, whether a City Installed Traffic Signal or a Developer Installed Traffic Signal, up to, but prior to, final acceptance of work and traffic signal activation. When requested by the City, the Contractor shall coordinate with the City's designated representative when notified that a new traffic signal is to be activated. The Contractor shall participate in a walk-through of the new traffic signal improvements with the City's designated representative to determine that the new traffic signal improvements will function as designed. When scheduled, the Contractor shall attend the traffic signal activation, and shall participate in confirming that all components of the new traffic signal improvements are operational with the City's designated representative and the installing Contractor. The Contractor will be responsible for assuming maintenance responsibilities for all new traffic signals following activation. Compensation for reviewing new traffic signals as identified above will be paid at the hourly labor rates, and vehicle and equipment rates, in accordance with the Cost Proposal, Exhibit "B" included in this RFP and completed and returned by the Contractor in its Proposal. 25 gji '� OMIYMXM The Contractor shall maintain, at the same unit price, additional traffic signals and appurtenant devices as they are installed, or become a part of the maintenance requirements of the City. In the event that notification is made of a new installation at other than the beginning of a monthly period, the unit cost of routine maintenance will be prorated from the day the Contractor is notified. S91 1 FRIT -11 i a �* � z I I ITO The Contractor shall provide safe and continuous passage for pedestrian and vehicular traffic at all times. The Contractor shall obtain a no -fee encroachment permit from the City prior to any lane closures or construction activity within the City right-of-way. All warning lights, signs, flares, barricades, delineators, detours, and other facilities for the sole convenience and direction of public traffic shall be furnished and maintained by the Contractor. All traffic control shall conform to, and be placed in accordance with, the current Work Area Traffic Control (WATCH) Handbook. Flashing arrow board shall be furnished and maintained as directed by the City. During working hours, a minimum of one (1) 12 -foot wide travel lane in each direction and all existing left -turn pockets whenever feasible shall be maintained. No lane closures will be permitted between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. or 3:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., unless an emergency situation exist and such a closure is necessary to safeguard the traveling public. Separation between travel lanes, channelization, and delineation of the maintenance area shall be accomplished by the use of delineators and/or cones placed at a maximum of fifteen (15) feet on center. Each vehicle used to placed and remove components of a traffic control system on multi -lane highways shall be equipped with a flashing arrow board that shall be in operation when the vehicle is being used for placing, maintaining or removing said components. The flashing arrow board shall be in place before lane closure(s) requiring its use in implemented. When maintenance is completed, all traffic control signs, barricades, delineators, etc., shall be removed from the site. 10. WARRANTY SERVICES During the period of warranty, the Contractor will be required to coordinate all communication between manufacturer, installing Contractor and the City regarding any warranty service; and to notify the City of any undue delays in response by the manufacturer or installing Contractor and details of each incident. No additional, or separate, compensation shall be paid for warranty service work, which shall be considered as included in the compensation paid for services provided in relation to "Upgrade Work" or "Traffic Signal Inspection". 26 11. MEETINGS The assigned traffic signal technician shall be available to meet with the City's designated representative on a monthly basis or as needed .at a mutually agreed upon time and place in the City to review each month's maintenance activities. The assigned traffic signal maintenance supervisor shall be similarly available to meet with the City's designated, representative on a monthly basis. No additional, or separate, compensation shall be paid for attending meetings, which shall be considered as included in the compensation paid for all the various services provided hereunder. 12. METHOD OF PAYMENT "City agrees to compensate Contractor for each service which Contractor performs to the satisfaction of City in compliance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit "B". For cost accounting purposes, said written verification shall be provided to the City as a computerized (hard copy) printout. Payment will be made only after submission of proper invoices in the form specified by City. 27 May 10, 2010 Mr. David G.Liu Director ofPublic Works City ofDiamond Bar Public Works Department Z1825Copley Drive Diamond Bar CA917G6 RE: Proposal for Traffic Signal Maintenance EXHIBIT K-1 Republic Intelligent Transportation Services Inc. welcomes the opportunity to submit this proposal for Traffic Signal Maintenance for your review. The prices and terms stated will remain in effect for 9O calendar days from the date of submission, May 10, 2010. Republic ITS currently provides traffic signal maintenance repair services to the City of Diamond Bar and has done sosince 2OO4. Through the years we've worked for the City, Republic ITS and City staff have developed apositive, professional relationship and we look forward to the chance to continue to provide the best possible service to the City ofDiamond Bar. Republic ITS is an electrical contracting, transportation engineering, civil engineering, and electrical engineering firm which was founded in 1991. We are a California licensed and bonded Class A, C-10, C-31 and C -51/D-31 contractor ([A License #647154). Durcompany specializes in construction and maintenance of traffic signals, streetlights and associated equipment. Republic ITS's national staff of more than 285 employees includes an array ofprof�ssiono} engineers and technicians with International Brotherhood ofElectrical Workers ABEVV\, IMSA and numerous industry manufacturer and systems ce'rtification.s. Republic ITS takes pride in providing complete solutions to all traffic signal maintenance projects. Knovvedgeab|e and qualified personnel, fast response times, an extensive inventory of traffic signal and streetlight equipment and innovation in the traffic signal and streetlight business are priorities of our organization. This is highlighted by our broad experience, outstanding field staff, and our commitment to providing exceptional customer service. We look forward to continuing our relationship with the City of Diamond Bar. (_J2 4,Wagner, p£ Vice President of Engineering (415) 884-3000 ^ (415) 884-488O ^ 12660. LA LoMACIRCLE, ANAHEIM, CA9oBo6-1uo1 1. BACKGROUND AND APPROACH............................................................................................................1 APPROACH.......................................................................................................................................................1 SAFETYAND TRAINING................................................................................................................................4 EMERGENCYSERVICE...................................................................................................................................5 INVENTORY.....................................................................................................................................................5 INFORMATIONTECHNOLOGY......................................................................................................................6 2. METHODOLOGY AND SCOPE OF WORK.............................................................................................9 TRAFFICSIGNAL EQUIPMENT......................................................................................................................9 LOOPDETECTOR REPLACEMENT................................................................................................................9 EXTRAWORK..................................................................................................................................................9 UNDERGROUNDSERVICE ALERTS............................................................................................................10 RECORD KEEPING AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS.........................................................................................10 3. COMPANY PROFILE AND ORGANIZATION.......................................................................................11 OFFICELOCATIONS...................................................................................................................................... I 1 FINANCIALSTATUS.....................................................................................................................................12 4. ORGANIZATION AND PROJECT TEAM..............................................................................................13 5. SCHEDULE AND TRANSITION PERIOD..............................................................................................17 6. REFERENCES............................................................................................................................................19 7. ACCEPTANCE OF CONDITIONS AND AGREEMENT........................................................................24 INSURANCE...................................................................................................................................................24 8. OTHER INFORMATION..........................................................................................................................26 SAFETY& TRAINING....................................................................................................................................26 9. COMPENSATION SCHEDULE................................................................................................................27 REPUBLIC ITSConfidential &c PROPRIETARY Proposal toProvide Th!ffic Signal Maintenance for the City nfDiamond Bar Page Republic ITS has been maintaining the City of Diamond Bar's traffic signals since 2004. In that time vve feel that we have built a strong working relationship with the City staff and continue to provide excellent services for your transportation needs. We understand that the city has 64 signals that require routine preventive maintenance, emergency repair and nonemergency maintenance and upgrades. The city also has one flashing beacon, five (5)underpass State bridges with soffit lights and twelve (1Z)locations equipped with Battery Back-up System Units. The city also has 170E controllers with LACO |V software and o«oriety of detections systems including video detection systems and' vehicle loop detectors. We understand that the city wishes to standardize the equipment for all future traffic signals and replace older equipment. Republic ITS' core business istraffic signal and streetlight maintenance and professional traffic engineering services.Our firm currently services over 7 00 traffic signalized intersections and 380,000 streetlights under long-term maintenance agreements nationwide. VVeare dedicated tnmeeting and exceeding the challenging public safety requirements associated with our industry. We currently: m Maintain traffic signals inover 200 communities across Northern/Southern California m Maintain streetlights in over 100 'oon\munitieo across Arizona, California, Texas and Massachusetts • Provide engineering services for over 30 public agencies and'private companies nationwide • Have completed over half a million LED traffic signal retrofits across the country As the leader in the private traffic signal ond streetlight maintenance industry in the United States, ITS lighting related projects. .— |tisalways the goal ofRepublic ITS to bone bur service around acity's needs. VVeunderstand that throughout the term of contract of this type, those needs may change. We approach all of our contracts with the same vision; build a partnership with the city's staff and work towards achieving common goals set forth through that partnership. We. realize that this is an ever evolving process and that is why we believe that the only successful route is through establishing these common goals. Republic ITS Project Management as well as field staff work closely with the City in order to make sure that all of the your concerns are being addressed. We make every effort to ensure that the city's engineering staff is always aware of issues that are in need of attention. REPUBLIC ITS - Confidential apnop,mmn Proposal to Provide Traffic Signal Mohntenonceƒbrthe City ofDiamond Bar Page The City of Diamond Bar will require routine preventive maintenance, emergency repairs and non emergency maintenance and upgrades. The City will also require standardization of equipment and the replacement ofolder equipment as the budget allows. Republic ITS will meet and exceed the City's expectations thanks tothe following capabilities. Equipment Republic ITS owns and operates approximately 150 service vehicles of various types and sizes throughout California. Tohelp ensure safety, Republic ITS uses hydraulic °bucket trucks with aerial lifts which are Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) approved, inspected and certified as required by law. Alldrivers are trained through the Sentry Program for Insulated Devices. Republic ITS employees working for the City will be equipped with the pecessary communications devices in order to correspond with the City and other employees with ease. Our crews assigned tothe City of Diamond Bar will possess a two way radio, as well as a cellular phone with vibration alert. Republic [TS'stechnicians will also have handheld PDA devices to access, send, and receive real-time Year ce Make Model Equip. Type 2007 CH EVY COLORADO Body 2002 DODGE DAKOTA Pickup 2003 CHEVY 2500 LB Pickup 2006 CHEVY SILVERADO Pickup 2000 CHEVY Dump Truck Dump Truck 2000 CHEVY Van Van 2000 FORD F150 Pickup 2000 FORD 1150 Pickup 2000 FORD F150 Pickup 2001 CHEVY 3500 HD Flatbed 1999 FORD F450 Bucket 1997 FORD F350 Bucket 2000 FORD F450 Bucket 2000 FORD F450 Bucket 2000 FORD F450 Bucket 2000 FORD F 1 _S -0 Pickup 2002 CHEVY 3500FLATBED Flatbed 1995 FORD F800 Bucket 1999 GIVIC Sierra Bucket 2005, FORD F450 SUPER DUTY Flatbed REPUBLIC ITS - Confidential &Proprietary Proposal to Provide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City of Diamond Bar Page 3 Year Make Model Equip. Type 2004 FORD F-450 Service/Utility Body 2002 GMC C6500 Dump Truck 2006 FORD F550 Flatbed 2004 FORD F450 Bucket 1999 FORD E350 ECONOLINE Van 1999 FORD F550 Bucket 2000 FORD F450 Bucket 2004 FORD F450 Bucket 2006 FORD F450 Bucket 2004 FORD F450. Bucket 2006 FORD F450 Bucket 2006 FORD F450 Bucket 2006 FORD F450 Bucket 2006 FORD F450 Bucket 2007 FORD F550 Bucket 2007 1 FORD F550 Bucket 2007 FORD F550 Bucket 2008 FORD F450 Bucket 2007 Carrier Trailer Trailer 2000 FORD F450 Bucket 2008 FORD F450 Bucket 2008 CHEVROLET COLORADO Pickup 1984 INTERNATIONAL DUMP TRUCK Dump Truck 1991 1 GMC C3500 Bucket 2007 FORD F550 Bucket 2009 CHEVY COLORADO Pickup 2004 Ford F450 Dump Truck 2008 FORD F550 Bucket 2006 FORD F350 Bucket 2008 FORD F450 Bucket 2006 Ford F450 Bucket 2007 FORD F550 Bucket 2004 MLBLT Trailer 2008 STERLING BULLET Bucket 2004 FORD F-750 Crane 2006 FORD Bucket 2008 FORD F-150 Pickup 2009 FORD F550 Bucket REPUBLIC ITS - Confidential & Proprietary Proposal to Provide Traffic Signal Maintenance far the City of Diamond Bar Page 4 Year Make Model Equip. Type 2009 FORD F550 Bucket 2009 FORD F550 Bucket 2008 FORD F550 Bucket 2006 FORD F350 Bucket 2010 FORD Escape Hybrid SUV 2008 Ford Bucket 2008 DITCH WITCH T18B Trailer 2008 DITCH WITCH ZT9S Trailer 2008 FORD/CUMMINS STERLING Bucket 2008 Ford F450 Bucket 2008 CHEVY 3500 Flatbed 2008 FORD F450 Bucket 2006 FORD Bucket 2000 FORD F550 Bucket 2007 FORD F450 Bucket 2006 FORD F450 Bucket 2006 FORD F350 Bucket 2006 FORD F450 2006 FORD F450 Bucket 2006 FORD F450 Bucket 2008 FORD F550 Bucket 2008 FORD F550 Bucket 2008 FORD F550 Bucket 2004 GMC C6500 Bucket 2007 FORD F650 Bucket 2008 FORD F550 Bucket SAFETY AND TRAINING Republic ITS administers a comprehensive company -wide safety program to ensure that safety on all job sites is the top priority. Our employees are required to read and understand "Safety Rules for the Outside Electrical Industry" by the National Electrical Contractor's Association (NECA). Republic ITS has a zero tolerance policy on all safety violations. Republic ITS will provide copies of any safety history documentation upon request. Republic ITS employees are trained using a variety of resources and methods. The IBEW provides professional competence and safety training to our field staff. Our employees are trained in basic safety including proper lifting techniques. They have weekly tailgate meetings that address items such as electrical safety and current industry safety practices. Republic ITS is a proponent of formal training as well, Our electricians and technicians are also IMSA and IBEW trained. Prior to being sent out to work REPUBLIC ITS - Confidential & Proprietaiy Proposal toProvide Traffic Signal Maintenanceƒbrthe City oƒDiamond Bar Page on their own, each electrician spends time with o number of uen|or staff members to learn the procedures and protocols we follow and must pass a series of tests before the area superintendents permit them towork independently. Republic ITS employees are given CPR and First Aid training to provide treatment in the event ofan emergency. We believe it is critical that members of our field staff are properly trained and enabled to help both themselves and others \nthe event otonemergency. With offices located across the country, Republic ITS is the largest employer of IMSA level \, U and U| employees, and we are expanding to provide more job opportunities nationwide. Republic ITS has the only federally approved Traffic Signal Maintenance Journeyman Apprenticeship program in the Unites States, which is open to all employees. EMERGENCY SERVICE ..r..._ITS -—ill —r--,--— .requests ' /2 hours) during regular business hours, non- working hours, weekends and holidays. Emergency repairs shall i h U cn nsdtute work made necessary to return a traffic signal to proper operation following a device malfunction, failure, loss of indication, accident damage, construction damage, orany other emergency situation. Reports of traffic signal or Streetlight problems can be initiated bvcalling our %4hour number any time, day ornight: 1,88O-NGHTS-O0. Republic ITS will provide temporary emergency replacements of an acceptable type to the City in the event ofaknockdown, until permanent repairs can bemade. Permanent replacement ofequipment will not be made until written approval from the City of Diamond Bar is received by Republic ITS. All emergency service calls will be recorded onto the inspection \o8 located in each traffic signal controller cabinet indicating all emergency work performed. Republic ITS technicians responding tothe report ofoblack-out will beequipped with the traffic control equipment such ostraffic cones, arrow boards and warning signs necessary to make the intersection safe until signal repairs can bemade. INVENTORY Republic ITS maintains an extensive inventory of traffic signal and streetlight equipment includingcontrollers, cabinets, load switches, signal heads, poles, LED lamps, luminaries, service cabinets and other miscellaneous parts. This extensive inventory combined with our vast experience and testing facilities enable Republic ITS to repair or replace damaged equipment expeditiously and professionally. xsroxucoS-cmfidentia/&nzpriemn Proposal toProvide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City ofDiamond Bar Page Republic ITS carries a substantial supply of traffic signal and streetlight poles in various sizes and configurations. Most standard size traffic signal and streetlight pole knockdowns can be replaced the same or next day. Republic ITS employees will beequipoedvv�hthe spare pa�snecessary toplace os�na\system back in opera�onfor ordinary trouble oaU N enn 1chan8eufoontroUernoechanionswjUbeoomp|ated vv�hgVtprioropproxg(�of�theCity. vvU\�ob -�heCity+hatthe equi'm�nt��asrem ovadand replaced with spare equipment and to discuss the available options to complete permanent repair. Inventory- levels -are maintained inorder to'ccom~6d�te ebth'iodivkjua\Agency's needs. Republic ITS continually monitors and modifies inventory levels as required by current activity. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY Republic ITS recognizes that speed, efficiency, and comprehensive service are the keys to customer satisfaction inour industry With this Vv inmind,eonecondon�ways service delivery. Republic ITS is proud to present a. detailed- description of PLATO and VViRE MLireless Repybljqb_pql..�omp uterzed t[pffic_5i8ya|mahltenance and inv��ntorV/U�r=c�ding n�innlentxystenl. -��-se�woapp|icahonsre�reo�ntvvhatvvebe|ievetobathef��efrontof�ustbhheraccouhfmana8ernent and maintenance tracking in our industry. Both V0RE and PLATO have been developed to match the daily needs of both Republic ITS and our » PLATO is Republic OS's primary maintenance tracking and account management application, comprised of a detailed and flexible database system. It handles detailed project management, contractual information, and scheduling ofboth service requests and scheduled maintenance. 1t is the information backbone of Republic ITS and our investment in providing the best possible service to our customers. m VNREis our field access to PLATO, allowing our service crews to access real-time information and scheduling using Microsoft Pocket PC devices. Service response information is transmitted in real-time back to PLATO, allowing monitoring of service status and inventory information. REPUBLIC ITS ' Confidential aProprietary , Proposal to Provide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City ofDiamond Bar Page PLATO was developed toprovide rapid access toservice requests, maintenance scheduling, and detailed work histories for intersections. Based on MicnosofCsvveb application framework, PLATO is available to any workstation with access to Republic |TS's intranet. This provides nnaxinnunn flexibility in Plato's deployment, making iLavailable toany internal computer with abrowser. The information handled -by PLATO includes: m Service Request Management and Scheduling, including time stamping and dispatching. n Scheduled Maintenance Management and Scheduling. ^ Intersection Details, including inventories of equipment, maps, CAD drawing, timing sheets, etc. • Detailed Service Descriptions, allowing us to tailor the service rendered in the field to the precise specifications ofthe City. • Agency Information Management, including contacts, billing information, etc. « Contractual Information, including frequencies of scheduled maintenance, contract periods, "Not toExceed" limits, etc. m internal communications, such aspertinent notes, etc n Report Generation, including invoices, materials use, etc. • Inventory control, including real-time tracking of available and installed equipment. information available to view or download through the Customer Extranet includes: 0 Real-time status ofScheduled Maintenance and Service Request calls. m Real-time Intersection Inventories. e Real-time Equipment Inventories. w Intersection maintenance histories, maps, CAD drawings, digital photographs. a Account information, such ascontacts and billing. In addition, the information available to City staff can be tailored to meet the City's needs. Republic ITS will work with the City to make sure you get the information you need to successfully serve your customers. __ ------`--r��---- Electronic Service Request xspoBLIonz-Cowxdenxmarnop,ieton Proposal toProvide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City ofDiamond Bar . Page WiRE ' VNREallows our technicians inthe field access toanarray ofusefu|data. Maintenance histories for the intersection, inventory bor+zodingQi scanning, downloading 1hninQ sheets and uploading them to a controller, digital photographic documentation: all contribute to a quicker, more successful visit from a Republic ITS signal technician. In addition, our scheduled maintenance activities and responses to service requests are documented on-site utilizing our hand-held devices, as well as documentation noting any other needed repair work. VViRE also functions as a dispatching tool; once a service request is dispatched to a technician, relevant information concerning the nature of the call and the intersection is immediately available. 7m�161-40$ 1:12:00m NO! M701 Typical Screen Shots 'f the WiRE Interface FLEXIBILITY The most important aspect of theapplications described above is the flexible nature of their use and their .ootential for future develoDment.Dublic ITS. can work with the City's staff to customize the applications to maximize their usefulness and provide the level of service the City desires. This flexibility includes the ability to modify types of information collected, downloading of information, visual representation, means of access, or other conveniences the City wishes. In summary, we believe that our exclusive PLATO and VViREsoftvvane technology will not only increase our productivity and accuracy inthe field, but itwill also be a valuable source of information for your staff. aEruoLIcITS - Confidential &*vpmmq Proposal toProvide Traffic Signal Maintenonceƒbrthe City ofDiamond Bar Page Republic ITS proposes to provide comprehensive preventative and routine maintenance for the City of Diamond Bar's 64traffic signals with associated safety lighting and supplemental traffic control devices. Our maintenance program is designed to eliminate or reduce incidences of malfunctions, complaints, and extend the useful life of the City's traffic signal equipment. The program includes periodic inspection, testing, recording keeping, cleaning, repair, and replacement of equipment. Republic ITS fully understands the Scope nfWork set forth inthe RFP and intends tomeet all of the requirements. Republic ITS will peMbnn additional maintenance tasks at the request of the City of DianVohd Bor. Republic ITS will also respond to emergency requests for signal repairs. Non -emergency requests for traffic signal repairs will be responded to within twenty-four (24) hours of Republic ITS having received notification. Any new traffic signal devices, safety lighting, flashing beacons orother devices will be added tothe maintenance schedule upon the City's request. TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPMENT Republic ITS will repair, replace or otherwise render in good working condition defective ports of the traffic signal control equipment with like make and model parts for temporary and permanent replacements, except osindividually agreed upon bythe City staff. Defective or malfunctioning controller cabinet equipment will be reported to the City of for approval to make the necessary changes. Republic ITS will notify the City within twenty-four (24) hours, or the next working day whenever traffic signal equipment is replaced/removed/modified. Changes made will be recorded on the maintenance or repair log within the traffic signal controller cabinet. No permanent chanQetooVntro|noechanismsvvi|}bemodevvithouttheCity'spriorapprova|. Republic ITS agrees tonotify the City inadvance tofacilitate the approval for any planned orscheduled traffic signal turn-offs/turn-ons necessitated by our operations. Republic will not perform turn -ons or turn-offs without a police officer's presence unless permission to do so is granted by the City. If controller becomes obsolete or deteriorated to the point of being beyond repair, Republic ITS will report such conditions to, the City and provide evidence that replacement is necessary. VVewill provide an estimate indicating the costs for replacement ofthe controller and submit this information to the City. Permanent replacement of the traffic signal controller will not be completed without approval of City staff. Republic will not remove equipment from a controller cabinet without notifying the City within Z4hours orbythe next working day. LOOP DETECTOR REPLACEMENT Republic ITS is the best positioned maintenance contractor in Los Angeles County to rapidly respond to detection failures. We have an in-house loop crew that replaces detector loops even/ day. When necessary, republic's loop crew will respond within ten (lO) working days of having received'a request and we frequently respond more rapidly when detection has failed in critical locations. EXTRA WORK Republic ITS will install, modify or upgrade traffic signal equipment at the request of the City of Diamond Dar. Republic ITS will not commence with any Extra Work without the prior consent ofthe City. REPUBLIC ITS ' Confidential uprop,mmn Proposal toProvide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City nfDiamond Bar Page 10 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERTS Republic ITS will provide Underground Service Alert (USA) markings upon request by the City of Diamond Bar. RECORD KEEPING AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS Republic ITS intends to meet the record keeping requirements set forth in the RFP. Republic ITS will maintain a permanent service record and an equipment inventory list o1each intersection. This record will document all ongoing work, operations, hardware malfunctions, repair and configuration work. Republic ITS will also maintain o copy of the Preventative Maintenance Checklist Form at each intersection and will keep another copy of the Checklist in our office file. Service records will reflect the date and nature of all routine and extraordinary maintenance services performed at each location. ' Republic ITS will provide the City ofDiamond | rvvithamunthk/activiheaneportasvveUasasurnnnary report at the end of each year. In addition, the City will have access at all times to view current and completed work orders through Republic |TS's online Traffic Signal Database, which is described in detail in the Information Technology section. The Monthly Activity report will follow the guidelines stated in the RFP and will include: • Time service calls were received, time technician arrived at intersection, response time and number ofhours spent working dteach location m Record ofall work pe�ormedonCity tTafMcsignal equipment during the given time period m ��ake,nnode|and yeria|number ofeach major equipmentoonnponpntinstaUedateach|ooation ° Time and dates ofPreventative Maintenance visits G ' List ofall pending repair work Meetings . Republic [FSs staff will be available to meet with representatives from the City of Diamond Bar on a monthly basis osdesired bvstaff. Warranty--__. Republic ITS will be responsible for making contact between equipment manufactures and the City's ` staff when service is needed during the warranty period. Republic ITS will remain in contact with the ` City toensure their satisfaction. Republic ITS will warrant all work performed and materials installed for a1Zmonth period inaddition tnthe manufacturer's warranty. aEroaLICnz-Confidenxu&mvnri^mty Proposal toProvide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City ofDiamond Bar Page 11 Republic ITS is 8 national traffic signal, streetlight and electrical maintenance provider with a long history ofproviding rn8iOteDaOoe's8nvi[8stonumerous rnUOicjpalagencies throughout the state. Our firm also offers p[Ofess\OO8\ traffic engineering 8D� oDD5UltiOg services. Republic ITS was incorporated in 199I and currently has over 285 employees nationwide. The following are the corporate principals: 0 Wade L. White, President — 26 Years of experience in electrical construction management and estimating. a Jeffrey L. Asch, VP, Secretary and Treasurer — 16 years experience in construction management. a Dennis LWalther, VPField Operations —27Years experience inelectrical construction supervision. » James A. Wagner, VP Engineering — 20 years experience in engineering and design fields. a Jerry Parker, VP Finance- 25 years experience in construction management. Rep, [i[DS' Corporate Headquarters are located in Novato, California with additional California offioesinAnaheim, Riverside, El Cajon, Ventura, Fremont and Sacramento. Wealso have offices in Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Texas. In this case our Anaheim office will be responsible for this contract. Anaheim is Republic ITS's Southern California regional headquarters office and is located at 1266 N. La Loma Circle, Anaheim, California. -this facility houses all materials and equipment necessary to maintain traffic signals, streetlights and related projects for all of Southern California. our Anaheim facility also houses our Southern California laboratory facility.The laboratory provides in- house electrical testing and repair services which aUnvvs Republic OB to benefit from immediate test results obtained independently from manufacturers. it is centrally located between Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. - The City may contact Republic ITS twenty-four /2Nhours oday, seven (7) days a week by calling 1-800- 229-6090. All Republic ITS employees are issued cellular telephones with paging, E-mail and voicemail capabilities. All field personnel are issued home fax machines tnallow them todirectly send and receive - documents direct|yfromtheagendestheyoervice` Novato, CA:. .-The Cbrpbr8te Headquarters for Republic ITS are located at 371 Be( Mahn Keys Blvd, Novato, California approximately 30 minutes North of San Francisco. The corporate staff supports all field offices and operations including training, safety, purchasing, and accounting. In addition to housing REPUBLIC ITS -onnfidenfla/&prop/elun - Proposal toProvide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City ofDiamond Bar Page 12 the corporate functions, the Novato site is also a base of operations to service the Northern California area from North ofSan Francisco Bay tothe Oregon border. Fremont, CA: Republic ITS Fremont office islocated at376SYale Way inFremont. The facility includes a sufficient stock of spare, parts and signal equipment needed to make all necessary repairs to our customers in the East and South Bay. With over 1O,OOOsquare feet of both office and yard space, the Fremont yard provides storage for all possible materials required to 'maintain and build any traffic signal project from the ground up. Riverside, CA. In addition to the Anaheim office, Republic OB has an office location at 2240 Business Way in the City of Riverside, California. B Cajon, CA: Republic [T3'sSan Diego office is located at 1820 John Towers Avenue in 8 Cajun, California. This facility houses all materials and equipment necessary to maintain electrical systems, traffic signals, streetlights and perform related projects fortheSanDiegoarea. Boston, MA: Republic [FSS New England operations are located at 8 Progress Road in Billerica, Dallas, TX: Republic [TSSTexas operation is located at 2725 114~ m Street in Grand Prairie, Texas, in the greater Dallas area. Mesa, AZ: Republic [TS'sArizona base of operations islocated at 2609 N. Ogden Road, Mesa, Arizona Miami, BL Republic ITS has avvarehouse location in Miami-DadeCounty Florida, located at 6126 NW 74"'Avenue, Miami, Florida. FINANCIAL STATUS The Company has been inbusiness for 20 years and has experienced tremendous growth over its history. The [ODOp8ny has 8 long established Relationship with o major west coast bank that L// provides 8 working capital UD8 of credit as well as financing for our equipment needs. The bank has been providing such 32nj[85 and lO8D capability for over lO years. The [ODlpaOV has resources to fiO3D[e today's level of business as well as grow the business for the foreseeable future. The Company provides audited financial statements toour bank and can provide acopy toyou upon request. REPUBLIC ITS -oovfiuwnxalaProprietary Proposal to Provide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City of Diamond Bar Page 13 Ji, -Am' REPUBLIC ITS - Confidential & Propriefaty Proposal to Provide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City of Diamond Bar Page 14 Steven Teal, Southern California Regional Manager m IMSA Level I, H & III Certified Trak Signal Technician ® Operations manager responsible for approximately 70 long term traffic signal maintenance contracts for the last five years. ® Worked with Signal Maintenance Inc. as a traffic signal technician, engineering technician and traffic signal maintenance operations manager. o Certified on Type 170 controllers • Certified on Econolite TS -1 & TS -2 NEMA controllers o Over 12 years experience in video detection, telemetry, communications and all other aspects of streetlight and traffic signal maintenance and troubleshooting. a Extensive experience wiring battery back-up systems and traffic signal controller cabinets ® Proficient with BI -Trans software: 233, 200CA and 21 OFM v Proficient with Los Angeles County software: LACO 1, LACO 1R and LACO 3 ® Lives in the City of Ontario Shenoa Petersen, Project Manager 0 Over 5 years experience in the traffic signal and streetlight maintenance industry o Expertise in customer service and support ® Considerable personal knowledge of the City of Diamond Bar Mike Ortega, Traffic Signal Technician a Over 5 years experience in the traffic signal repair and maintenance industry © IMSA Level I, II & III Certified a NEC Certified © Installation and wiring battery back-up systems and traffic signal controller cabinets m Personal experience with the City of Diamond Bar's Traffic system Gerardo Anguiano, Traffic Signal Technician o Over 5 years experience as a traffic signal technician o IMSA Level I, II & III Certified Traffic Signal Technician © IMSA Work Zone Safety Certified ® NEC Certified © Skilled with all aspects of traffic signal and streetlight maintenance and troubleshooting. © Degree in Applied Science from ITT Technical Institute and graduated with honors. © Proficient with Bi -Trans software: 233, 200CA, LACO 1R, and Caltrans C-8 Erni Cervantes, Traffic Signal Technician m Over 5 years experience in the traffic signal and lighting industry ® IMSA Level I, lI and III Certified Traffic Signal Technician ® IMSA Work Zone Safety Certified ® NEC Certified Skilled with all aspects of streetlight maintenance and troubleshooting Alberto Ramirez, Apprentice Traffic Signal Technician Currently in the process of completing the IBEW Traffic Signal and Streetlight Maintenance Apprenticeship Program REPUBLIC ITS - Confidential & Proprietag Proposal to Provide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City of Diamond Bar Page 15 m IMSA Work Zone Safety Certified • NEC Certified Son Le, Traffic Signal and Street .dight Maintenance Technician ® Over 15 years experience in the traffic signal and lighting industry ® IMSA Level I, II and III Certified Traffic Signal Technician ® IMSA Work Zone Safety Certified ® NEC Certified 0 Skilled with all aspects of streetlight maintenance and troubleshooting Additional Human Resources Available to -the City ofMarnond Bar: Mike Hutchens, Senior Project Manager o Over 15 years experience in the traffic signal and streetlight maintenance industry © IMSA Level I, II & III Certified © IMSA Work Zone Safety Certified a Extensive experience in both the technical and construction -related aspects of the traffic signal and streetlight maintenance industry a Served as technical support for US Trak Corp. o' Experience working with a variety of US Trak Corp products ® Expertise in the delivery of fast-track traffic signal improvement/modification projects. o Lives in the City of Chino Minh Tran, Traffic Signal ,engineering Technician ® Over 18 years experience in the traffic signal maintenance industry. ® IMSA Level I,11 & III Certified a IMSA Work Zone Safety Certified o IMSA Traffic Signal Inspector Certified m NEC Certified o Certified on Econolite TS -1 & TS -2 NEMA controllers © Certified on Type 170 controllers o Certified in Iteris ITS Video Detection o Extremely knowledgeable with all ATMS equipment © Extensive experience in the installation, diagnosis, and repair of CMS and CCTV Andy Pham, Test Engineer 0 Bachelors of Science degree in Electrical Engineering from Cal State Fullerton © Over 14 years experience in the traffic signal test and repair field © IMSA Inspection Certified © IMSA Work Zone Safety Certified © Completed several LA County traffic signal equipment training courses on topics including NEMA and Econolite controllers, Bitrans software and traffic signal communications systems Paul Martin, Traffic Signal Technician Training Coordinator © Responsible for managing and overseeing our apprentice training program which takes electronics technicians and turns them into experienced traffic signal technicians. REPUBLIC ITS - Confidential & Proprietary Proposal to Provide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City of Diamond Bar Page 16 0 Over 22 years experience in traffic signal and streetlight maintenance and operations ® Former City of Toledo traffic signal shop supervisor m IMSA Level I, II, & III Certified • NEC Certified Henry Graves, Construction Maintenance Superintendent o Over 20 years experience in traffic signal repair and construction m Skilled with all aspects of traffic signal and streetlight maintenance, repair and construction Cecil Terry, Traffic Signal Construction Forman 0 Over 20 years experience in the traffic signal repair and construction 0 IMSA Work Zone Safety Certified 0 NEC Certified Pete Yanez, Traffic Signal Construction Format /Crane Operator 0 Over 15 years experience in the traffic signal repair and construction James Wagner, P.E., Vice President of Engineering 0 Responsible for all engineering services, construction and project management, estimating and quality control at Republic ITS. © 20 years experience in professional engineering in both public and private sectors 0 Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Idaho 0 Registered Civil Engineer in the State of California 0 Oversees all Regional Managers in California and Arizona 0 Expertise in fast track design build traffic signal construction and modifications Steve M. Fitzsimons, P.E., T.E., Senior Traffic Engineer 25 years of experience as a project manager or project engineer includes traffic engineering design, streetlight design and studies, signal timing, traffic and parking impact analyses, accident studies, and highway corridor studies. Bachelor of Science and Masters of Science in Civil Engineering from UC Berkeley. ® Has provided contract Traffic Engineering services to agencies including Milpitas, Livermore, Emeryville, Half Moon Bay, Sacramento, and Elk Grove. ® Designed traffic signals or signal -interconnect, including safety lighting for more than 1,500 locations. Designs have addressed citywide traffic signal systems, signal preemption systems, transit priority. Completed accident analyses as part of many projects, ranging from area -wide studies to spot locations. Troy Blakely, IT Specialist ® Develops and maintains new and existing Republic ITS proprietary software for the web, pc and pocket pc that support our business and our clients' needs • Maintains Republic ITS' network and database hardware and software infrastructure 0 Provides technical support to our employees o Manages all technology resources at Republic ITS o Ensures that Republic ITS remains at the forefront of technological innovation REPUBLIC ITS - Confidential & Proprietary Proposal toProvide Traffic Signal AVointenonoyfbrthe City nfDiamond Bar Page 17 �S���c����a�cn�n�maintenance service provider �r�eC�'ofDb�mod Bar Republic if selected, there will teoo. ruptiomioserviceoroeed for a transition period. Our team will provide ongoing and routine preventive maintenance and repair of traffic signal equipment, associated lighting, and other pertinent devices. Shenoa Petersen will be the Project Manager serving the City of Diamond Bar. She will be responsible for maintaining communication with the City regarding daily operation and maintenance of all traffic signal equipment. Republic ITS intends to meet all requirements set forth in the City of Diamond Bar's RFP. Traffic Signal Preventative Maintenance Republic ITS will perform the Monthly, Quarterly, Semi-annual and Annual maintenance inspections at each signalized intersection. During each visit a Republic ITS traffic signal technician will inspect the cabinet controller, pedestrian components and other hardware or apparatuses present at the intersection. The technician will perform each of the tasks included in the City of Diamond Bar's Traffic Signal Maintenance Monthly inspection Checklist, and will note the results of the inspection in the controller cabinet log. Republic ITS will also maintain and replace safety lights for the City. The Republic ITS technician will perform each of the following tasks as part of our Preventative Maintenance program: Traffic Signal and Flash Beacon Monthly Maintenance w Inspect controller and cabinet (detectors operational, plug -ins secure, etc.) • Observe vehicular signals fdrproper operation m Observe & replace vehicular signal indicator outages * Observe pedestrian signals and pushbuttons for proper operation v Observe and replace pedestrian signal indicator outages m Check and replace non-functioning pedestrian push buttons e Check push button plates for proper alignment and visibility, and repair as necessary v Check load switches and relays m inspect backp|atesand visors p Checkforbroken ormissing hand hole covers and pull box lids n Check for broken or missing emergency vehicle detectors p Inspect conduits and duct seals for cuts and damage • Check and reset asnecessary communication equipment u Check internally illuminated street name signs and Safety Lighting for outages ^ Check operation offan and set thermostat o Inspect loop detectors and test detector amplifiers (set and Clear) w Check operation ofintegral cabinet service light m Check and vacuum controller cabinet ifnecessary ° Read electronic error history from conflict monitor/malfunction unit • Check detector extensions • All other maintenance procedures as outlined in the City's request for Proposals REPUBLIC nm' Confidential &ooOriemry Proposal toProvide Traffic Signal Mointenonceƒbrthe City ofDiamond Bar ' Page 18 Traffic Signal Quarterly Maintenance (}n Conjunction with Monthly Maintenance) w Check signal system function isinaccordance with the timing plans o Investigate and determine causes for any performance issues and recommend appropriate repairs necessary for system operation. m Load test Battery Back -Up Batteries Traffic Signal Semi -Annual Maintenance (in Conjunction with Monthly Maintenance) • Lubricate attached and integral locks, hinges, and any moving parts ofcabinets w Check ground rod clamp, wire, and GRreceptacle * Measure voltage atservice inputs in cabinet and record n Visually checkfurwear and function ofelectromechanical components v Clean and/or polish all signal lenses and reflectors, asnecessary m Clean Video Detection Cameras ifnecessary w Clean CCTV Cameras ifnecessary * Battery Back -Up Maintenance (15 Minute Test) Traffic Signal Annual Maintenance (in Conjunction with Monthly and Semi Annual Maintenance) m Inspect /d service` controller cabinet and contents and replace cabinet filter o Check connectors and indicator lamps * Field check the paint condition and generate an Annual Painting list of 10 intersections Traffic Signal Unscheduled Maintenance m Provide Z4-houremergency support for all traffic signal system needs m Respond tomalfunction/damage report within 1hour ^ Repair orreplace parts/components asnecessary tocorrect malfunction m Rewire asnecessary tocorrect fault '~ • Mork Underground Service Alert (U3A)tickets for all traffic signal related requests REPUBLIC ITS ' Confidential &rnop,mmly Proposal to Provide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City of Diamond Bar Page 19 Republic ITS has been extremely successful in retaining traffic signal, streetlight, and engineering customers due to our desire to offer the best possible customer service. Republic ITS has an exemplary customer service track -record highlighted by our well qualified field personnel, knowledgeable customer service representatives, and proprietary detailed monthly reports. We understand what is required to maintain a community's electrical infrastructure and exceed our customer's expectations. The following is a list of some of Republic ITS's current traffic signal and streetlight maintenance customers. We welcome and encourage you to contact the agencies below to learn more about our company. Client/Agency Type of Work Agency Contact Person Telephone plumber City of Alhambra On -Call Traffic Signal Stan Hertel, (626) 570-5074 68 South First Street Maintenance Traffic Signal Supervisor Alhambra, CA 91801 City of Anaheim 200 South Anaheim Blvd On -Call Traffic Signal Christopher Dahl (714) 765-6908 Maintenance Anaheim, CA 92805 Town of Apple Valley 14955 Dale Evans Pkwy. Traffic Signal Maintenance Lance Miller, Public Works Supervisor (760) 240-7000 ext. 7544 Apple Valley, CA 92307 City of Arcadia 11800 Goldring Road(626)Maintenance On -Call Traffic Signal David Thompson, Street Superintendent 256-6676 Arcadia, CA 91066 City of Artesia 18747 Clarkdale Ave.(714) Traffic Signal Maintenance C Hui Lai, Traffic Engineer 974-7863 Artesia, CA 90701 City of Azusa 213 E. Foothills Blvd. Traffic Signal Maintenance Carl Hassel, City Engineer (626) 812-5064 Azusa, CA 91702 City of Baldwin Park Traffic Signal David Lopez (626) 960-4011 ext. 458 14403 E. Pacific Avenue Maintenance Public Works Baldwin Park, CA 91706 City of Banning 99 Ramsey Street, Traffic Signal Kahono Oei, Assistant Director of Public (951) 922-3130 Banning, CA 92220 Maintenance Works City of Bell Traffic Signal Luis Ramirez (323) 588-6211 6330 Pine Ave. Maintenance City Engineer Bell, CA 90201 City of Calimesa Traffic Signal Bob French, (909) 795-9801 ext. 235 908 Park Avenue Maintenance Director of Public Works Calimesa, CA 92320 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Traffic Signal & Heidi Heisterman (760) 434-_937 Streetlight Maintenance Carlsbad, CA 92008 City of Cathedral City Traffic Signal Bob Mohler, (760) 770-03490 68700 Avenida Lato Guerrero Maintenance Traffic Engineer Cathedral City, CA REPUBLIC ITS - Confidential & Proprielaq Proposal to Provide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City of Diamond Bar Paae20 Client/Agency Type of WorkAgenc y Contact Person Telephone Number City of Cerritos 18125 Bloomfield Ave. Traffic Signal Maintenance 1 Hal Arbogast, City Engineer (562) 916-1219 Cerritos, CA 90703 City of Chino Hills 2001 Grand Ave. Traffic Signal Sean O'Conner, (909) 364-2759 Maintenance Operations Manager Chino Hills, CA 91709 City of Claremont 207 Harvard Ave. Traffic Signal Craig Bradshaw, (909) 399-5474 Maintenance City.Engineer Claremont CA 91711 City of Colton 650 No La Cadena Drive Traffic Signal Maintenance Victor Ortiz, Engineering Supervisor .(909) 370-5065 Colton, CA 92324 City of Commerce 2535 Commerce Way Traffic Signal Maintenance Victor San Lucas, City Engineer (323) 722-4805 - Ext 2206. Commerce, CA 90040 City of Corona 400 South Vicentia Ave. On -Call Traffic Signal Maintenance Gabriel Hernandez, Traffic Signal Specialist (951) 903-9286 Corona, CA 92882 City of Cudahy 5220 Santa Anna Street Traffic Signal Maintenance Carlos Alvarado, City Engineer (323) 773-5143 Cudahy, CA 90201 City of Cypress 5275 Orange Ave. Traffic Signal Maintenance Keith Carter, Engineer (714) 229-6750 Cypress, CA 90630 City of Dana Point 33282 Golden Lantern Traffic Signal Maintenance Matt Sinacori, City Engineer (949) 248-3574 Dana Point CA 92629 City of Diamond Bar 21825 E. Copley Drive Traffic Signal Maintenance David Liu, Director Public Works (909) 839-7041 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 City of Duarte 1600 Huntington Drive, Traffic Signal Maintenance Troy Wittenbrock, Field Services Manager (626) 357-7931 Duarte, CA 91010 City of El Cajon 200 East Main St. Traffic Signal & Ed Krulikowski (619) 441-1651 Streetlight Maintenance El Cajon, CA 92020 City of El Monte 11333 Valley Boulevard On -Call Traffic Signal Ken Ballinger (626) 945-7434 El Monte, CA. 91731-3293 Maintenance City of Fountain Valley Traffic Signal Temo (Cuauht6moc) Galvez, (714) 593-4517 10200 Slater Ave.. Maintenance City Engineer Fountain Valley, CA 92708 City of Glendale 633 East Broadway, Room 300 Traffic Signal Maintenance Wayne C. Ko, Senior Traffic Engineer (818) 548-3960 ext. 8365 Glendale, CA 91206 City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Traffic Signal Steve Barry, (909) 824-6621 Maintenance Asst. City Manager Grand Terrace, CA 92324 1 1 REPUBLIC ITS - Confidential & Proprietai)) Proposal to Provide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City of Diamond Bar Page 21 Client/Agency Type of Work Agency Contact Person Telephone Number City of Hesperia 15776 Main Street Traffic Signal Scott Smith, (760) 947-1814 Maintenance Traffic Maint Crew Sup. Hesperia, CA 92345 City of Highland 27215 Base Line Traffic Signal Dennis Barton, Engineering (909) 864-6861 x 251 Maintenance Manager Highland, CA 92346 City of Irvine 6427 Oak Canyon, #3 Traffic Signal Dave Flanagan, Supervising Traffic Systems (949) 724-7684 Irvine, CA 92618 Maintenance Specialist City of La Mesa 8130 Allison Ave. Traffic Signal. & Kathy Feilen (619) 667-1144 La Mesa, CA 91941 Streetlight Maintenance City of La Verne 3660 D Street Traffic Signal Anthony Ciotti, (909) 596-8741 Maintenance Public Works La Verne, CA 91750 City of Lemon Grove 3232 Main St. Traffic Signal & Majid Al-Ghafry (619) 825-3810 Lemon Grove, CA 91945 Streetlight Maintenance City Loma Linda 25541 Barton Rd.(909) Traffic Signal Eleazar Rubalcava, 799-4440 Loma Linda, CA 92354 Maintenance Field Supervisor City of Lomita 24300 Narbonne Traffic & Streetlight Gregory McPherron, (310) 325-7110 Maintenance Grants Director Lomita, CA 90717 City of Maywood 4319 East Slauson Avenue Traffic Signal Maintenance Ed Ahrens, City Manager (323) 562-5024 Maywood, CA 90270 City of Malibu 23815 Stuart Ranch Road Traffic Signal Maintenance Richard Calvin Public Works (310) 456-2489 Malibu, CA 90265 Mission Viejo 200 Civic Center(949) Traffic Signal Maintenance Brett Candey, Traffic Engineer 470-3039 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 City of Montebello 1600 West Beverly Blvd. Traffic Signal Maintenance Ted Spaseff, Director Public Works (323) 887-1462 Montebello, CA 90640 City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Ave. Traffic Signal Michael Nazito, (805) 529-6864 Maintenance Public Works Supervisor Moorpark, CA 93021 City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Traffic Signal George Bernard, (949) 644-3348 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Maintenance Traffic Engineer City of Norco 1281 Fifth Street. Traffic Signal Maintenance William Thompson, Director of Public Works (951) 270-.5601 Norco, CA 92860 City of Ontario 303 E. B Street(909) Traffic Signal Maintenance Bruce Smith, .Senior Associate Engineer 395-2151 Ontario, CA 91764 REPUBLIC ITS - Confidential & Proprietary Proposal to Provide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City of Diamond Bar Page 22 Client/Agency Typ2 of Work Agency Contact Person 'Telephone Number City of Ontario 303 E. B Street Streetlight Maintenance Patrick Malloy, Public Works Supervisor (909) 395-2600 Ontario, CA 91764 City of Palm Desert Traffic Signal Robert Becerra, (760) 346-0611 73510 Fred Waring Drive Maintenance Traffic Signal Specialist Palm Desert, CA 92260 City of Palm Springs Traffic Signal Marcus L. Fuller, P.E., Assistant (760) 323-8253 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Maintenance Director o f Public Works Palm Springs, Ca. 92263-2743 City of Perris Traffic Signal Daryl Hartwill, (951) 657-3280 1015 S. G Street Maintenance Public Works Manager Perris, CA 92570 City of Port Hueneme Traffic Signal Rita Turbyville, (805) 986-6507 746 Industrial Ave. Maintenance Public Works Port Hueneme, CA 93041 City of Poway Traffic Signal & Zoubir Ouadah (858) 668-4640 P.O. Box 789 Streetlight Maintenance Poway, CA 92074 City of Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Signal Pat Gallagher, (909} 477-2700 10500 Civic Center. Dr. Maintenance Field Supervisor Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 City of Rancho Mirage Traffic Signal Bill Harrison (760) 770-3224 69-825 Highway 111 Maintenance Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 City of Rancho Palos Verdes Traffic Signal Dean Allison; (310) 544-5253 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Maintenance Dir. Public Works Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90274 City of Redlands Traffic Signal Rick Cross, (909) 798-7655 35 Cajon Street Suite 222 Maintenance Operations Manager Redlands, CA 92373 City of Rolling Hills Estates Traffic Signal Samuel Wise, (310) 377-1577 4045 Palos Verdes Drive North Maintenance City Manager Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 City of Rosemead Traffic Signal Ken Rukavina (626) 288-6671 8838 E. Valley Blvd. Maintenance City Engineer Rosemead, CA 91770 City of San Bernardino Traffic Signal Randy ICuettle, (909) 384-5020 300 N. "D" Street, 4th Floor Maintenance Maintenance Supervisor San Bernardino, CA 92418 San Bernardino County Traffic Signal Jacob Babico, (909) 387-8186 825 E. Third Street Room ] 1 S Maintenance Traffic Division Chief San Bernardino, CA 92514 San Bernardino Waste Traffic Signal Brooks Webb, (909) 386-8915 222 West Hospitality Maintenance Landfill Op. Inspector San Bernardino, CA 92415 City of San Marcos Traffic Signal & Randy Smith (760) 752-7550 201 Mata Way Streetlight Maintenance San Marcos, CA 92069 REPUBLIC ITS - Confidential & Proprietary Proposal to Provide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City of Diamond Bar Pape 23 Client/Agency Type of Work Agency Contact Person Telephone Number City of San Marino 2200 Huntington Drive Traffic Signal Carlos Alvarado, (626) 960-1889 San Marino, CA 91108 Maintenance Traffic Engineer City of Santa Paula Clifford Finley, 970 Ventura St Traffic Signal City Engineer & (805) 933-4298 PO Box 569 Maintenance Director Public Works Santa Paula, CA 93060 City of Santee 10601 Magnolia Ave. Traffic Signal & Streetlight Maintenance Dennis Barnes (619) 258-4100 x189 Santee, CA 92071 City of Seal Beacb 211 Eighth Street Traffic Signal Bill Moran, (562) 493-8660 Seal Beach, CA 90740 Maintenance Supervisor City of Simi Valley Traffic Signal Dave Medina, 2929 Tapo Canyon Road Maintenance Asst. Engineer for Traffic Dept (805) 583-6700 Simi Valley, CA 93063 Public Works City of South Pasadena 825 Mission Street Traffic Signal Steve Moronez, ' (626) 403-7379 South Pasadena, CA 91030 Maintenance Public Works City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive On -Call Traffic Signal Richard Uribe (951) 308-6382 Temecula, CA 92590 Maintenance Sr. Signal Technician City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Traffic Signal Maintenance Terry Lutz, Principal Engineer (714) 573-3263 Tustin, CA 92780 City of Vernon 4305 Santa Fe Ave. Traffic Signal Woody Natsuhara, (323) 583-8811 Vernon, CA 90058 Maintenance Director Community Services City of Vista 1165 E. Taylor Street Traffic Signal & Streetlight Maintenance Dennis Dudek (760) 726-1340 x1631 Vista, CA 92084 City of Wildomar 23873 Clinton Keith Road, Suite Traffic Signal Jon Crawford (951) 990-3600 201 Wildomar, CA 92595 Maintenance Supervising Engineer City of Yorba Linda 4845 Casa Loma Ave. Traffic Signal Armando Jaime, (714) 961-7100 Yorba Linda, CA 92885 Maintenance Traffic Engineer REPUBLIC ITS - Confidential & Proprietary . Proposal toProvide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City ofDiamond Bar Page 24 Republic ITS accepts all of the conditions listed in this RFP and has attached o statement from our insurance offering acceptance of all the conditions for insurance and showing that we mat all requirements. INSURANCE Republic ITS carries '$1,000,000 occurrence/$2,000,000 coverage for General Liability$1,000,000 insurance, /nce Automobile Liability, $1,o00,000 occurrence Contractor's Pollution Legal Liability and $ Errors and Omissions insurance. We carry a $10/0],}00 umbrella policy as well. Our carrier, Old Republic General Insurance Corporation, has a rating of A+ IX. REPUBLIC ITS Cmfium*m/anoprmm)Y S & VV Y E R Q David G. Lie, P.E. Director ofPublic Works C 0 p4 P& N Ypub|icWorks Department City ofDiamond Bar Z1825Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CAQ1765 Ra: Traffic Signal Maintenance Bernices—RFP Our Insured: Republic ITS To Whom ltMay Concern: Woodruff -Sawyer& Co. is the insurance broker for Republic Intelligent Transportation Services, Inc. and Iamwriting toyou inthis capacity. We have reviewed the insurance requirements in the above referenced RFP document and can attest that Republic ITS' current insurance program meets and/or exceeds the requirements listed. If you have any other questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to contact one. .���. . Bonnie Gibson Senior Account Manager 415-878-2477 direct 415-878-4916 fax insurance Services Pisk Management Employee Benefits T 415.8782*60 " 415.878.4916 88 Rowland Suite loU Novato, [As4e4 [ALicense O]nB98 AN^onmsGLOBAL uomPARTNER ' Proposal toProvide Traffic Signal Maintenance for the City ofDiamond Bar Page 26 SAFETY &TRAINING Republic ITS administers a comprehensive company wide safety program to ensure that safety on all job sites isthe top priority. Our employees one required to read and understand Rules for the outside Electrical Industry" bythe National Electrical Contractor's Association (NECA). Republic ITS has o zero tolerance policyall safety violations. With a focus'on safety and a reputation for quality, on Republic ITS has achieved anexemplary low modification rotin8onour Workers Compensation Policy. Republic �Sen�pkoveesare �ainedu�nQ h o varietyof resources and methods. The iBEVV provides professional competence and safety training to our field staff. Our employees are trained in basic safety, including proper |ifbnQ techniques, bucket use and rescue, CPR and first aid. They have weekly tailgate topic* that address items such as traffic control, working in live traffic conditions, electrical safety and current practioes. Republic ITS is e strong proponent of dte hnidansorea\so\K8SAand|BE\�trained Prior tobeing fornoo|train|n��yvxe(\ OurBectdc|ansan c . set out ontheir ovvn, 'ache\ectridanspendyt|mexxithanunnberofxeniorstoffnnembemto\eernthe - procedures and protocols we followand must pass a series of steps and tests before the area superintendents permit them tnwork independently. Republic ITS employees are givenCPR and First Aid training to provide treatment in the event of an emergency. Vebelieve that '`iscr�ica\that nembeoofour 5eid�afwho are exposed toUvetraffic and the traveling public, are properly trained and enabled to help both themselves and others inthe event of an emergency. axPooucITS ' Confidential ap,wn/eluq April 20, 2010 Traffic Signal Maintenance Services — RFP Page 22 CONTRACT UNIT PRICE SCHEDULE OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINTENANCE ITEMS 1. Routine Maintenance: Qtv. Unit Cost TOTAL Each signalized intersection,OD per month $ Each pole mounted flashing q 00 Beacon, per month $ $ Underpass Bridge Light $ 00 $ Maintenance, per month 2. Semi -Annual Maintenance: a. Video Detection System maintenance Where applicable, clean video detection camera lens as needed $ b. Signal Lenses and Signs maintenance c. CCTV Cameras where applicable, clean camera lens -.00 6 as needed $ — d. BatteryBack-Up System Maintenance $ 00 e. Replace controller cabinet filter $ C)o 3. Annual Maintenance: (field check paint condition and prepare an annual painting list of ten (10) Locations/year) a. Painting of pedestrian heads and signal heads ' 1) Signal Head$ I -A I Including frameworks per signalized intersection, 2) Ped Head 3) POB $ CIO $ �CL excluding controller and electric service cabinets April 20, 2010 Traffic Signal Maintenance Services — RFP Page 23 Unschedul.ed/Emergency Work ("Extra Work") 4. Extraordinary Maintenance: a. Replacement of standard 6' x 6' or circular detector Loops including sawcut lead-in and cable splicing b. Installation of completed new pedestrian head with Walkman/Hand indication and solid state transformer c. Completed testing of traffic signal controller cabinets,'including all internal equipment and written certification d. Painting of traffic signal controller cabinet and Type. III electric service cabinet per signalized Intersection (if needed) e. Replace existing signal lights assembly with LED unit f. Installation of three -section traffic signal heads . With 12 -inch glass lenses, backplates, and frameworks g. Material and Parts: Supplier's invoice amount plus 15% markup Regular Time . Per Hour Traffic Signal Maintenance Supervisor 6w - 0Q Tr . affic Signal . Technician I $ -10.00 Traffic Signal Technician 11 $ -1ro Traffic Signal Laborer $ 1000 LK Traffic Signal Apprentice $ .00 $_ P0 $ Lh5-00 $ q 5o,0Q $ Overtime Per Hour ,,, -l'o-.06 17, -11. 00 Trainer Other Other j. Equipment: Pickup Truck Service Truck Service/Ladder Truck Boom/Ladder Truck Water Truck Concrete Saw and Truck Air Compressor with Tools Crane Bucket Truck Other Other April 20, 2010 Traffic Signal Maintenance Services — RFP Page 24 00 00 $ Rate Per Hour EXHIBIT 49clo CITY []FDIAMOND BAR TRAFFIC SIGNAL LIST City of.,Diamond Bar Traffic Signa 1 Brea Canyon Road & Diamond Bar Blvd. Z Brea Canyon Road & Diamond Crest Lane 3 Brea Canyon Road &G\enbrookDrive 4 Brea Canyon Road & Golden Springs Drive S Brea Canyon Road &LyoonoingStreet 6 Brea Canyon Road & Pathfinder (at Ferhol|oxv)E.Side of57FVVY 7 Brea Canyon Road & Pomona FVVYVV/B 8 Brea Canyon Road & Silver Bullet Drive 8 Brea Canyon Roa'd8'Washington Street lU Brea Canyon Cut -Off & Oak Crest Drive 11 Brea Canyon Cut -Off Q'Fallow Field Drive 12 BridgegateDrive at144O8ridQeQateDrive 13 Chino Hills PKWY 0'Chino Ave. 14 Diamond Bar Blvd. & Clear Creek Canyon Road 15 Diamond Bar Blvd. Q'Cold Springs Lane 16 Diamond Bar Blvd. & Fountain Springs Road 17 Diamond Bar Blvd. N/B57FVVYOn-Ramp lO Diamond Bar Blvd. & Gentle Springs Lane/Palomino Drive 19 Diamond Bar Blvd. & Gold Rush Drive 20 Diamond Bar Blvd. 8'Golden Springs Drive 21 Diamond Bar Blvd. / North ofGolden Springs Drive atK-K4ort 22 Diamond Bar Blvd. & Grand Avenue 23 Diamond Bar Blvd. & Highland Valley Road 24 Diamond Bar Blvd. &KiovvaCrest Drive 25 Diamond Bar Blvd. &N1ontehnoAvenue 26 Diamond Bar Blvd. &K4ountain Laurel Way 27 Diamond Bar Blvd. & Maple Hill Road ZO DionnondBar Blvd. 8'Pathfinder Road 29 Diamond Bar Blvd. & Quail Summit Drive 30 Diamond Bar Blvd. / Silver Hawk Drive 31 Diamond Bar Blvd. & Shadow Canyon Drive 32 Diamond Bar Blvd. & Sugar Pine Drive 33 Diamond Bar Blvd. & Sunset Crossing Road 34 Diamond Bar Blvd. &Tenop|e/Mission 35 Diamond Bar Blvd. &Tin Drive/Crestview Drive 36 Gateway Center Drive/Valley Vista Drive 37 Golden Springs Drive &Adel 38 Golden Springs Drive & Racquet Club 39 Golden Springs Drive &BaUeno 40 Golden Springs Drive &Ca|bUurneDrive .I Golden Springs Drive & Carpio Drive 42 Golden Springs Drive & Copley Drive 43 Golden Springs Drive & Gateway Center Drive 44 Golden Springs Drive 0'Golden PradosDrive 45 Golden Springs Drive & Grand Ave. 46 Golden Springs Drive &Lavender 47 Golden Springs Drive & High Knob 48 Golden Springs Drive &Lemon Avenue 49 Golden Springs Drive & Pomona FVVYF/B 50 Golden Springs Drive & Prospectors Road 51 Golden Springs Drive &RapidvievvDrive 52 Golden Springs Drive & Sunset Crossing Road 53 Golden Springs Drive & Sylvan Glen 54 Grand Avenue & Longview Drive' 55 Grand Avenue 8'K4ontefinoAvenue SG Grand Avenue 6kRolling Knoll Drive 57 Grand Avenue & Shotgun Lane, the Country/Diamond Bar Center SD Grand Avenue &Sumnnitrid8eDrive 59 Grand Avenue &Lavender GU Lemon Avenue &Lyconning Street 61 Pathfinder Road & Brahma Blvd G% Pathfinder Road & Brea Canyon Road West ofS7FVVY G] Pathfinder Road & Evergreen Springs Drive . 64 Pathfinder Road & Peaceful Hills Road Current "Flashing Beacon" Brea Canyon Cut -Off & Oak Crest Dr BafterV Back -Up System Locations ` 1. Brea Canyon Road & Pathfinder Road 2. [)i80OOd Bar Boulevard & Brea Canyon Road 3. Diamond Bar Boulevard & Golden Springs Drive 4. Diamond Bar Boulevard & Mountain Laurel Way 5. Grand Avenue & Golden Springs Drive 6. Grand Avenue & Lavender Drive 7. Grand Avenue & Diamond Bar Boulevard 8. Golden Springs Drive & Lavender Drive Q. Golden Springs Drive & Brea Canyon RO8U 10.Golden Springs Drive & Lemon Avenue ` 11.Golden Springs Drive &F]8ll8O8Drive ' Underpass Bridge Lights 1. Cold Spring Ln (between Brea Canyon & Fallow Field) under SR -57 Fwy 2. Diamond Bar Blvd (between Brea Canyon & Fallow Field) under SR -57 Fwy 3. Brea Canyon Rd (between Golden Springs and Lycoming) under SR -60 Fwy 4. Diamond Bar Blvd (between Palomino and Sunset Crossing) under SR -60 Fwy 5. Sunset Crossing Rd (between Diamond Bar Blvd and Old Trail) under SR- 57 Fwy 6. Golden Springs Dr (between Carpio and Sylvan Glen) under Sr -60 Fwy Perform monthly night survey and inspection of bridge soffit lights and issue a written report of outages. All repairs are done on a time and material basis. CITY COUNCIL Agenda # 6'. 9 (b) Meeting Date: June 15, 2010 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Mana eY�—\,o TITLE: APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AWARD. THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE AREA 6 (NORTH OF SIR 60 FWY AND EAST OF DIAMOND BAR BLVD.) RESIDENTIAL ROAD MAINTENANCE PROJECT TO RJ NOBLE COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT OF $908,712; AND AUTHORIZE A CONTINGENCY AMOUNT OF $91,000 FOR CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS TO BE APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER, FOR A TOTAL AUTHORIZATION AMOUNT OF $999,712. RECOMMENDATION: Approve and award. FISCAL IMPACT: As part of the FY 2009-10 Capital Improvement Program, $310,858 of Measure R Local Return Funds, $543,483 of Prop 42 Congestion Relief Funds and $245,659 of Prop 113 Funds were budgeted for the Area 6 Residential Road Maintenance Project for a total budget of $1,100.000. To date $79,492.00 has been encumbered for design and construction administration services with a contingency amount of $8,000.00 reserved from the Area 6 budget. There is $1,012,508 remaining in the current Area 6 CIP budget. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Area 6 Residential Road Maintenance Project, with an approximate residential centerline mileage of 12 miles, is the sixth year of the residential seven-year slurry seal program. A map of Area 6 is attached for your information. A few roadways within Residential Area 6 were identified to be in very poor pavement conditions. Due to these poor pavement conditions, a slurry seal will not be an effective pavement maintenance treatment. Therefore, in addition to the normal slurry seal treatment to the roadway, fifteen (15) residential roadway segments have been selected to receive an edge grind and 1.5" overlay and nine (9) roadway segments have been identified to receive a traditional cape seal treatment which is a chip seal with slurry seal over it. These two types of treatments will extend the life of the roadway from anywhere between seven (7) to ten (10) years. All remaining roadways will receive a slurry seal since their current roadway condition is still fairly good. With the completion of the plans and specifications, the project was advertised for bids on May 6, 2010 with a bid opening of May 27, 2010. Seven (7) bids were received and opened publicly by the City Clerk at 2:00pm on May 27, 2010. The engineer's estimate was $999,000. The bids received were as follows: Company Bid Amount 1. RJ Noble Company $908,712.00 2. Hardy & Harper, Inc. $919,000.00 3. Sully Miller Contracting $921,957.00 4. ICE Engineering $925,510.00 5. All American Asphalt $942,555.00 6. Silvia Construction $946,798.00 7. Premier Paving $999,992.00 Staff has verified the contractor state license and found it to be valid. References were checked for similar work completed and RJ Noble Company has satisfactorily completed many similar projects in other Los Angeles County Cities. The project schedule is tentatively set as follows: Award of Contract Start of Construction Completion of Construction PREPARED BY: Kimberly Molina, Associate Engineer -4 V,&O qr. I -- David G. Liu, P.E. Director of Public Works June 15, 2010 July 12, 2010 August 26, 2010 DATE PREPARED - June 7, 2010 ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A & 13 -Residential Area Map CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT LEGEND: SLURRY SEAL P�fJTfllTii CAPE SEAL'':m''::: EDGE GRIND AND OVERLAY CITY LIMIT - - a • • ___.�.,viii.GSGEiEi!i!_!���.•..f..�ii��`� ��� - •'i i/////• G� 2 RENO RIDGE DRRIDGE .j 3 MOONLIGHT SUMMIT DR LN o 4 CLOUDS REST DR CANYON 5 ELKS RAPID LN 6 HIGHLAND VALLEY RD RD R,D�, TTrr,` CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RESIDENTIAL AREA 6 ROAD MAINTENANCE i / ��� • ,,, /'/����I ���•f - • iii � � � fir / fI Mfr • f�." / i y/ II 1•I A�Iff • / �•fr .�, �� f•�f••f CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RESIDENTIAL AREA 6 ROAD MAINTENANCE i CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RESIDENTIAL AREA 6 ROAD MAINTENANCE PL LEGEND: SLURRY SEAL QTTTlTT%� CAPE SEAL EDGE GRIND AND OVERLAY CITY LIMIT - ® F. S. '�Rpp ARMITOS 60 �N o CI IAMOND BA, Alm CITY OF DIAMOND BAR B_8 RESIDENTIAL AREA 6 ROAD MAINTENANCE INCORPORATED AGREEMENT The following agreement is made and entered into, in duplicate, as of the date executed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk, by and between RJ Noble Company hereinafter referred to as the "CONTRACTOR" and the City of Diamond Bar, California, hereinafter referred to as "CITY." WHEREAS, pursuant to Notice Inviting Sealed Bids, bids were received, publicly opened, and declared on the date specified in the notice; and WHEREAS, City did accept the bid of CONTRACTOR RJ Noble Company and; WHEREAS, City has authorized the Mayor to execute a written contract with CONTRACTOR for furnishing labor, equipment and material for the Area 6 Road Maintenance Proiect in the City of Diamond Bar. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, it is agreed: 1. GENERAL SCOPE OF WORK: CONTRACTOR shall furnish all necessary labor, tools, materials, appliances, and equipment for and do the work for the Area 6 Road Maintenance Project in the City of Diamond Bar. The work to be performed in accordance with the plans and specifications, dated April 2010 (The Plans and Specifications) on file in the office of the City Cleric and in accordance with bid prices hereinafter mentioned and in accordance with the instructions of the City Engineer. 2. INC;URYUKAl V Dkik.UNMI14 1 J 1 V 1.)J_> vt�v�Liwi COMPLEMENTARY: The Plans and Specifications are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof with like force and effect as if set forth in full herein. The Plans and Specifications, CONTRACTOR'S Bid dated May 27, 2010, together with this written agreement, shall constitute the contract between the parties. This contract is intended to require a complete and finished piece of work and anything necessary to complete the work properly and in accordance with the law and lawful governmental regulations shall be performed by the CONTRACTOR whether set out specifically in the contract or not. Should it be ascertained that any inconsistency exists between the aforesaid documents and this written agreement, the provisions of this written agreement shall control. 3. TERMS OF CONTRACT: Since this is a Federally assisted construction project, Davis -Bacon will be enforced. If Federal and State wage rates are applicable, then the higher of the two will prevail. The Federal Labor Standards Provisions (Form HUD -4010) and the Federal Wage Determination are attached and made part of this agreement, and compliance will be enforced. The CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work within Forty-five (45) calendar days from the date of the notice to proceed. The CONTRACTOR agrees further to the assessment of liquidated damages in the amount of five hundred ($500.00) dollars for each calendar day the work remains incomplete beyond the expiration of the completion date. City may deduct the amount thereof from any monies due or that may become due the CONTRACTOR under this agreement. Progress payments made after the scheduled date of completion shall not constitute a waiver of liquidated damages. 4. INSURANCE: The CONTRACTOR shall not commence work under this contract until he has obtained all insurance required hereunder in a company or companies acceptable to City nor shall the CONTRACTOR allow any subcontractor to commence work on his subcontract until all insurance required of the subcontractor has been obtained. The CONTRACTOR shall take out and maintain at all times during the life of this contract the following policies of insurance: a. Workers' Compensation Insurance: Before beginning work, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish to the City a certificate of insurance as proof that he has taken out full workers' compensation insurance for all persons whom he may employ directly or through subcontractors in carrying out the work specified herein, in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Such insurance shall be maintained in full force and effect during the period covered by this contract. In accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code, every CONTRACTOR shall secure the payment of compensation to his employees. The CONTRACTOR, prior to commencing work, shall sign and file with the City a certification as follows: "I ' am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of work of this contract." b. For all operations of the CONTRACTOR or any sub -contractor in performing the work provided for herein, insurance with the following minimuin limits and coverage: 1) Public Liability - Bodily Injury (not auto) $500,000 each person; $1,000,000 each accident. 2) Public Liability - Property Damage (not auto) $250,000 each person; $500,000 aggregate. 3) CONTRACTOR'S Protective - Bodily Injury $500,000 each person; $1,000,000 each accident. 4) CONTRACTOR'S Protective - Property Damage $250,000 each accident; $500,000 aggregate. 5) Automobile - Bodily Injury $500,000 each person; $1,000,000 each accident. 6) Automobile - Property Damage $250,000 each accident. C. Each such policy of insurance provided for in paragraph b. shall: 1) Be issued by an insurance company approved in writing by City, which is admitted to do business in the State of California. 2) Name as additional insured the City of Diamond Bar, its officers, agents and employees, and any other parties specified in the bid documents to be so included; 2 3) Specify it acts as primary insurance and that no insurance held or owned by the designated additional insured shall be called upon to cover a loss under the policy; 4) Contain a clause substantially in the following words: "It is hereby understood and agreed that this policy may not be canceled nor the amount of the 'coverage thereof reduced until thirty (30) days after receipt by City of a written notice of such cancellation or reduction of coverage as evidenced by receipt of a registered letter." 5) Otherwise be in form satisfactory to the City. d. The policy of insurance provided for in subparagraph a. shall contain an endorsement which: 1) Waives all right of subrogation against all persons and entities specified in subparagraph 4.c.(2) hereof to be listed as additional insured in the policy of insurance provided for in paragraph b. by reason of any claim arising out of or connected with the operations of CONTRACTOR or any subcontractor in performing the work provided for herein; 2) Provides it shall not be canceled or altered without thirty (30) days' written notice thereof given to City by registered mail. e. The CONTRACTOR shall, within ten (10) days from the date of the notice of award of the Contract, deliver to the City Manager or his designee the original policies of insurance required in paragraphs a. and b. hereof, or deliver to the City Manager or his designee a certificate of the insurance company, showing the issuance of such insurance, and the additional insured and other provisions required herein. 5. PREVAILING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the CONTRACTOR is required to pay not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character in the locality in which the public works is performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has determined such general prevailing rates of per diem wages. Copies of such prevailing rates of per diem wages are on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California, and are available to any interested party on request. City also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the job site. The CONTRACTOR shall forfeit, as penalty to City, not more than twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages hereinbefore stipulated for any work done under this Agreement, by him or by any subcontractor under him. 6. APPRENTICESHIP EMPLOYMENT: In accordance with the provisions of Section 1777.5 of the Labor Code, and in accordance with the regulations of the California Apprenticeship Council, properly indentured apprentices may be employed in the performance of the work. The CONTRACTOR is required to make contribution to funds established for the administrative of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any apprenticeship trade on such contracts and if other CONTRACTOR'S on the public works site are making such contributions. The CONTRACTOR and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex -officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. 7. LEGAL HOURS OF WORK: Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract, and the CONTRACTOR and any sub -contractor under him shall comply with and be governed by the laws of the State of California having to do with working hours set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of California as amended. The CONTRACTOR shall forfeit, as a penalty to City, twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by him or any sub- CONTRACTOR under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each calendar day during which the laborer, workman or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of the Labor Code. 8. TRAVEL AND SUBSISTENCE PAY: CONTRACTOR agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargaining agreements filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 1773.8. 9. CONTRACTOR'S LIABILITY: The City of Diamond Bar and its officers, agents and employees ("Indemnitees") shall not be answerable or accountable in any manner for any loss or damage that may happen to the work or any part thereof; or for any of the materials or other things used or employed in performing the work; or for injury or damage to any person or persons, either workers or employees of CONTRACTOR, of its subcontractors or the public, or for damage to adjoining or other property from any cause whatsoever arising out of or in connection with the performance of the work. CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for any damage or injury to any person or property resulting from defects or obstructions or from any cause whatsoever. CONTRACTOR will indemnify Indemnities against and will hold and save Indemnitees harmless from any and all actions, claims, damages to persons or property, penalties, obligations or liabilities that may be asserted or claimed by any person, firm, entity, corporation, political subdivision, or other organization arising out of or in connection with the work, operation, or activities of CONTRACTOR, its agents, employees, subcontractors or invitees provided for herein, whether or not there is concurrent passive, negligence on the part of City. In connection therewith: 4 a. CONTRACTOR will defend any action or actions filed in connection with any such claims, damages, penalties, obligations or liabilities and will pay all costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees, expert fees and costs incurred in connection therewith. b. CONTRACTOR will promptly pay any judgment rendered against CONTRACTOR or Indemnitees covering such claims, damages, penalties, obligations and liabilities arising out of or in connection with such work, operations or activities of CONTRACTOR hereunder, and CONTRACTOR agrees to save and hold the Indemnitees harmless therefrom. c. In the event Indemnitees are made a party to any action or proceeding filed or prosecuted against CONTRACTOR for damages or other claims arising out of or in connection with the work, operation or activities hereunder, CONTRACTOR agrees to pay to Indemnitees and any all costs and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in such action or proceeding together with reasonable attorneys' fees. Contractor's obligations under this section apply regardless of whether or not such claim, charge, damage, demand, action, proceeding, loss, stop notice, cost, expense, judgment, civil fine or penalty, or liability was caused in part or contributed to by an Indemnitee. However, without affecting the rights of City under any provision of this agreement, Contractor shall not be required to indemnify and hold harmless City for liability attributable to the active negligence of City, provided such active negligence is determined by agreement between the parties or by the findings of a court of competent jurisdiction. In instances where City is shown to have been actively negligent and where City active negligence accounts for only a percentage of the liability involved, the obligation of Contractor will be for that entire portion or percentage of liability not attributable to the active negligence of City. So much of the money due to CONTRACTOR under and by virtue of the contract as shall be considered necessary by City may be retained by City until disposition has been made of such actions or claims for damages as aforesaid. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions are intended to be as broad and inclusive as is permitted by the law of the State of California. This indemnity provision shall survive the termination of the Agreement and is in addition to any other rights or remedies which Indemnitees may have under the law. This indemnity is effective without reference to the existence or applicability of any insurance coverage which may have been required under this Agreement or any additional insured endorsements which may extend to Indemnitees. CONTRACTOR, on behalf of itself and all parties claiming under or through it, hereby waives all rights of subrogation and contribution against the Indemnitees, while acting within the scope of their duties, from all claims, losses and liabilities arising out of or incident to activities or operations performed by or on behalf of the CONTRACTOR regardless of any prior, concurrent, or subsequent passive negligence by the Indemnitees. 5 10. NON-DISCRIMINATION: Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1735, no discrimination shall be made in the employment of persons in the work contemplated by this Agreement because of the race, color or religion of such person. A violation of this section exposes the CONTRACTOR to the penalties provided for in Labor Code Section 1735. 11. CONTRACT PRICE AND PAYMENT- City shall pay to the CONTRACTOR for furnishing all material and doing the prescribed work the unit prices set forth in the Price Schedule in accordance with CONTRACTOR'S Proposal dated May 27, 2010. 12. TERMINATION: This agreement may be terminated by the City, without cause, upon the giving of a written "Notice of Termination" to CONTRACTOR at least thirty (30) days prior to the date of termination specified in the notice. In the event of such termination, CONTRACTOR shall only be paid for services rendered and expenses necessarily incurred prior to the effective date of termination. rol IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement with all the formalities required by law on the respective dates set forth opposite their signatures. State of California "CONTRACTOR'S" License No. 782908 Class A RJ Noble Company 15505 E. Lincoln Avenue Oranj4e, CA 92865 By: Date TITLE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA By: CAROL HERRERA, MAYOR Date ATTEST: By: CITY CLERK Date CONTRACTOR'S Business Phone 714-637-1550 Emergency Phone at which CONTRACTOR can be reached at any time APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY Date 7 BIDDER'S PROPOSAL FOR RESIDENTIAL AREA 6 ROAD MAINTENANCE FY 2009-2010 PROGRAM PROJECT No. 01410 Date MAY 27 20 10 To the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar: The Undersigned hereby declares: (a) That the only persons or parties interested in this proposal as principals are the following: MICHAEL J. CARVER, PRESIDENT; CRAIG PORTER, VICE PRESIDENT; STEVE MENDOZA, SECRETARY; JAMES N. DUCOTE, TREASURER R.J. NOBLE COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION (If the bidder is a corporation, give the name of the corporation and the name of its president, secretary, treasurer, and manager. If a co -partnership, give -the name under which the co -partnership does business, and the names and addresses of all co-partners. If an individual, state the name under which the contract is to be drawn.) (b) That this proposal is made without collusion with any person, firm or corporation. (c) That he has carefully examined the location of the proposed work and has familiarized himself with all of the physical and climatic conditions, and makes this bid solely upon his own knowledge. (d) That by submitting this Bidder's Proposal, he acknowledges receipt and knowledge of the contents of those communications sent by the City of Diamond Bar to him at the address furnished by him to the City of Diamond Bar when this proposal form was obtained. (e) That he has carefully examined the specifications, both general and detail, and the drawings attached hereto, and communications sent to him as aforesaid, and makes this proposal in accordance therewith. (f) That, if this bid, is accepted he will enter into a written contract for the performance of the proposed work with the City of Diamond Bar - 9 (g) That he proposes to enter into such Contract and to accept in full payment for the work actually done thereunder the prices shown in the attached schedule. It is understood and agreed that the quantities set forth are estimates, and that the unit prices will apply to the actual quantities whatever they may be. Accompanying this proposal is a certified or cashier's check or bidder's bond, payable to the order of the City of Diamond Bar in the sum of 10% BID BOND DOLLARS ($ ---------------). Said bidder's bond has been duly executed by the undersigned bidder and by a financially sound surety company authorized to transact business in this state. It is understood and agreed that should the bidder fail within ten (10) days after award of contract to enter into the contract and furnish acceptable surety bonds, then the proceeds of said check, or bidder's bond, shall become the property of the City of Diamond Bar; but if this Contract is entered into and said bonds are furnished, or if the bid is not accepted then said check shall be returned to the undersigned, or the bidder will be released from the bidder's -bond. 15505 E. LINCOLN AVE. Address of Bidder (7 14) 637 -1550 Telephone of Bidder ORANGE, CA 92865 X cff�/1111 City Zip Code Signare61t Bidder STEVE MENDOZA, SECRETARY El BID SCHEDULE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND SPECIFICATIONS RESIDENTIAL AREA 6 ROAD MAINTENANCE FY 2009-2010 PROGRAM PROJECT No. 01410 ITEM EST. UNIT EXTENDED NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY- PRICE PROJECT MOBILIZATION &LS 1 —AMOUNT 00 DEMOBILIZATION TRAFFIC CONTROL & PUBLIC 2 SAFETY LS. I 4,800.00 4,800.00 3 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION LS 1 6,500.00 6,500.00 4 APPLICATION OF CRACK SEAL LS 1 44,000.00 44,000.00 APPLICATION OF CAPE SEAL 4.28 591492.00 5 (5/16" X#8) WITH PMCRS.2 SY 13, 900 INCLUDING PAVEMENT PREPARATION APPLICATION OF TYPE II 6 SLURRY SEAL WITH 20 LATEX ELT 9.80 195.00 191,100.00 ,INCLUDING PAVEMENT -PREP .REMOVE AND REPLACE AC (3- 7 INCH SKIN PATCH) SF 25,000 1.95 - 48,750.00 8 AC COLD MILL (0"-1.5"') SF 305,000 0.15 45,750.00 9 AC OVERLAY (1.5") TON 695:0 60.00 417,000.00 ADJUST MAN -HOLE COVER TO 280.00 33,600.00 10 EA 120 GRADE ADJUSET WATER VALVE COVER TO 11 GRAD RA 220 77.00 16,940.00 12 INDUCTIVE TRAFFIC LOOP EA 20 DETECTOR (TYPE E) 189.00 3,780.00 TRAFFIC STRIPING, MARKINGS 13 & LEGENDS PER EXISTING LS 1 , (RESIDENTIAL AREA 6) 1 /I - TOTAL AMOUNT FOR BASE BID IN FIGURES $ 10 e) . -11 L.Co TOTAL AMOUNT FOR BASE BID IN WORDS MAJ6 14MID94ab eir:04-r THOUSA00 Sevem 140AfbkjeN -rvieu(s linte5Dollars ,The contract will be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder on the basis of the Base Bid. The City reserves the right to add the alternate bid items to the Base Bid contract upon award of contract to the lowest responsible bidder of the base bid. ALTERNATE BID PROPOSAL I (A) PROJECT MOBILIZATION & LS 1 DEMOBILIZATION 12,000.00 12,000.00 2(A) TRAFFIC CONTROL & PUBLIC LS I SAFETY 4,000.)0 4,000.00 3(A) PUBLIC NOTIFICATION LS, 1 3,000.100 3,000.00 4(A) AC AND ROADWAY REMOVAL (4 SF 44,000 1.07 47,080.00 5(A) AC Pavement (411) TON 1090 97.00 105,730.00 6(A) ADJUST MANHOLE COVER TO EA 3 285.00 855.00 GRADE TOTAL AMOUNT FOR ALTERNATE BID IN FIGURES $ 172,665.00 TOTAL AMOUNT FOR ALTERNATE BID IN WORDS one hundred seventy two thousand six hundred sixty five Dollars TOTAL AMOUNT FOR BASE AND ALTERNATE BID IN FIGURES . TOTAL AMOUNT FOR BASE AND ALTERNATE BID IN WORDS 0015 M11-t-foi-3 M().SApjN bkA. 7e j/v�bgt�,�b Dollars I The contract will be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder on the basis of the Base Bid. The City reserves the right to add the alternate bid items to the Base Bid contract upon award of contract to the lowest responsible bidder of the base bid._ 12 NOTE: The estimated quantities listed in the Proposal Did Sheets are approximate and are to be used only as comparison of bids. Payment for quantities will be made for actual materials used on the job. Quantities may be adjusted higher or lower by deleting or adding street segments. Upon completion of the construction, if the actual quantities show either an increase or decrease from the quantities given in the Proposal Bid Sheet, the Contract Unit Prices will prevail. Increases or decreases in quantities shall not be subject to Section 3-2 of the Standard Specification's. Full compensation will be paid at, the contract price for the actual work completed, and no additional compensation will be allowed therefore. Payment will not be made for materials wasted or disposed of in a manner not called. for under the Contract: this includes rejected material not unloaded from vehicles and material rejected after it has been placed. No compensation will be allowed for disposing of rejected or excess material. Accompanying this proposal is 10% BID BOND (Insert 11$ -------------------------------------------- . --:: cash", "cashier's check", "certified check", or "bidder's bond" as the case may be) in the amount equal to at least ten percent (10%) of the total bid. The undersigned further agrees that in case of default in executing the required contract, with necessary bond, within ten (10) days, not including Sundays and legal holidays, after having received notice that the Contract has been awarded and ready for signature, the proceeds of the security accompanying his bid shall become the property of the City of Diamond Bar, and this proposal and the acceptance thereof may be considered null and void. R.J. NOBLE COMPANY NAME OF BIDDER (PRINT) 15505 E. LINCOLN AVE. ADDRESS ORANGE, CA 92865 CITY X SI, STEVE MAY 27, 2010 URE c-' DATE DOZA, SECRETARY (714) 637-1550 ZIP CODE TELEPHONE A-782908; A STATE CONTRACTOR LICENSE NO. AND CLASSIFICATION 13 LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS * BID OPENING DATE MAY 27, 2010 PROJECT RESIDENTIAL AREA 6 ROAD MAINTENANCE PROJECT NO. 01410 LOCATION DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 CLIENT CITY OF DIAMOND BAR CONTRACTOR R.J. NOBLE COMPANY Name Under Which Subcontractor is Licensed License No. Address of Office, Mail, or Shop Percent of Total Contract Specific Description of Subcontract Q5 UM4TI16-S -Aq-52.-q8 13W E. % 7. 81(10sr 67e. 100 CL 91 D4--n+q AIL- eo?- Ito 5 2. Any subcontractor aosng worK in excess or one-nait (1/2) of one percent (10) of the total bid or ten thousand ($10, 000 - 00) , whichever is greater, shall be designated on this form. 14 DECLARATION OF ELIGIBILITY TO CONTRACT [Labor Code Section 1777.1; Public Contract Code Section 6109] The undersigned, a duly authorized representative of the contractor, certifies and declares that: 1. The contractor is aware of Sections 1777.1 and 1777.7 of the California Labor Code, which prohibit a contractor or subcontractor who has been found by the Labor Commissioner or the Director of Industrial Relations to be in violation of certain provisions of the Labor Code, from bidding on, being awarded, or performing work as a subcontractor on a public works project for specified periods of time. 2. The contractor is not ineligible to bid on, be awarded or perform work as a subcontractor on a public works project by virtue of the foregoing provisions of Sections 1777.1 or 1777.7 of the California Labor Code or any other provision of law. 3. The contractor is aware of California Public Contract Code Section 6109, which states: (a) A public entity, as defined in Section 1100 [of the Public Contract Code], may not permit a contractor or subcontractor who is ineligible to bid or work on, or be awarded, a public works project pursuant to Section 1777.1 - or 1777..7 of the Labor Code to bid on, be awarded, or perform work as a subcontractor on, a public works project. Every public works project shall contain a provision prohibiting a contractor from performing work on a public works project with a subcontractor who is ineligible to perform work on the public works project pursuant to Section 1777.1 or 1777.7 of the Labor Code. (b) Any contract on a public works project entered into between a contractor and a debarred subcontractor is void as a matter of law. A debarred subcontractor may not receive any public money for performing work as a subcontractor on a public works contract, and any public money that may have been paid to a debarred subcontractor by a contractor on the project shall be returned to the awarding body. The contractor shall be responsible for the payment of wages to workers of a debarred subcontractor who has been allowed to work on the project. 4. The contractor has investigated the eligibility of each and every subcontractor the contractor intends to use on this public works project, and determined that none of them is ineligible to perform work ork as a I subcontractor on a public works project by virtue of the foregoing provisions of the Public Contract Code 15 Sections 1777.1 or 1777.7 of the Labor Code, or any other provision of law. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this day of MAY 27 f 2010, at 15505 E. LINCOLN AVE., ORANGE (place of execution). X NA&== Signaturl/ C/ Name: STEVE MENDOZA Title: SECRETARY Name of Company: R.J. NOBLE COMPANY 16 BIDDER'S VIOLATION OF LAW/SAFETY QUESTIONNAIRE In accordance with Government Code Section 14310.5, the Bidder shall complete, under penalty of perjury, the following questionnaire: QUESTIONNAIRE Has the Bidder, any officer, principal or employee of 'the Bidder who has a proprietary interest in the business of the Bidder, ever been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented from bidding on or completing a federal, state or local government project because of violation of law or a safety regulation? YES NO If the answer is yes, explain the circumstances in the following space: N/A NOTE: This questionnaire constitutes a part of the Proposal and signature on the signature portion of this Proposal shall constitute signature of this questionnaire. 17 CONTRACTOR'S INDUSTRIAL SAFETY RECORD Project Identification RESIDENTIAL AREA 6 ROAD MAINTENANCE PROD. 401410 Bid Date MAY 27, 2010 This information must include all construction work undertaken in the State of California by the bidder and any partnership, joint venture or corporation that any principal of the bidder participated in as a principal or owner for the last five calendar years and the current calendar year prior- to the date of bid submittal. Separate information shall be submitted for each particular partnership, joint venture, corporation or individual bidder. The bidder may attach any additional information or explanation of data which he would like taken into consideration in evaluating the safety record. An explanation must be attached of the circumstances surrounding any and all fatalities. 5 Calendar Years Prior *to Current Year ZUUb ZUUb ZUU/- /-UUO /-UU7 JUII'Uj k-UL-cnEAII'J- 1. No. of contracts 42 53 54 44 82 290 15 2010 2. Total dollar amount of contracts (in 1000's) 32 51 57 70 65 289 14 MILLIONS 3. No. of fatalities NONE--------- --------------------------------- 4. No. of lost workday cases --------- NONE-------------------------------- 5. No. of lost work day cases involving permanent transfer to another job or termination of employment -------------- NONE----------------------------- 6. ONE6. * No. of lost workdays NONE *The information required for this item is the same as required for columns 3 to 6, Code 10, occupational Injuries, Summary - occupational Injuries and Illnesses, OSHA No. 102. The above information was compiled from the records that are available to me at this time and I declare under penalty of perjury that the information is true and accurate within the limitations of these records. R.J. NOBLE COMPANY Name of Bidder (Print) 15505 E. LINCOLN AVE. Address ORANGE, CA 92865 City Zip Code 19 X Signatu/e STL?'VE MENDOZA, SECRETARY A-782908; A State Contractors'Lic.No. & Class (714) 637-1550 Telephone AFFIDAVIT FOR CO -PARTNERSHIP FIRM I STATE OF CALIFORNIA )SS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES r being first duly sworn, deposes and says: That he is a member of the co -partnership firm designated as which is the party making the foregoing proposal or bid; that such bid is genuine and not collusive or a sham; that said bidder has not colluded, conspired, connived or agreed, directly or indirectly, with any other bidder or person to put in a sham bid or that such other person shall refrain from bidding; and has not in any manner sought by collusion to secure any advantage against the City of Diamond Bar or any person interested in the proposed contract, for himself or for any other person. That he has been and is duly vested with authority to make and sign instruments for the co -partnership by who constitute the other members of the co -partnership. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of Signature 1 20 Signature of Officer Administering Oath (Notary Public) 1Vj AFFIDAVIT FOR CORPORATION BIDDER STATE OF CALIFORNIA )SS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES STEVE MENDOZA being first duly sworn, deposes and says: M That he is SECRETARY R.J. NOBLE COMPANY a corporation which is the party making the foregoing proposal or bid; that such bid is genuine and not collusive or sham; that said bidder has not colluded, conspired, connived or agreed, directly or indirectly, with any other bidder or person to put in a sham bid or that such other person shall refrain from bidding; and has not in any manner sought by collusion to secure any advantage against the City of Diamond Bar or any person interested in the proposed contract, for himself or for any other person. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 27 day of MAY JERWFER DC 1CMIGIT C 01 1771186 Notary Public - California z Orange County f,,(jyComm. Expres Oct 28,2011 v-k—wX X Signatu e 4 al'S VE MENDOZA, SECRETARY Officer Administering oath (Notary Public) JENNIFER DE IONGH 20 AFFIDAVIT FOR I'MIVIDUAL BIDDER STATE OF CALIFORNIA )SS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES r being first duly sworn, deposes and says: That he is the party making the foregoing proposal or bid; that such bid is genuine and not collusive or sham; that said bidder has not colluded, conspired, connived or agreed, directly or indirectly, with any other bidder or person to put in a sham bid or that such other person shall refrain from bidding; and has not in any manner sought by collusion to secure any advantage against the City of Diamond Bar or any person interested in the proposed contract, for himself or for any other person. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of Signature , 20 Signature of Officer Administering Oath (Notary Public) 21 AFFIDAVIT FOR JOINT VENTURE STATE OF CALIFORNIA )SS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES duly sworn, deposes and says: That he of, . being first one of the parties -submitting the foregoing bid as a joint venture and that he has been and is duly vested with the authority to make and sign instruments for and on behalf of the parties making said bid who are: that such bid is genuine and not collusive or sham; that said bidder has not colluded, conspired, connived or agreed, directly or indirectly, with any other bidder or person to put in a sham bid or that such other person shall refrain from bidding; and has not in any manner sought by collusion to secure any advantage against the City of Diamond Bar or any person interested in the proposed contract, for himself or for any other person. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of Signature MW01 Signature of Officer Administering oath (Notary Public) LL I KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS that: WHEREAS the CITY OF DIAMOND BAR BOND No. N/A ("Public Agency"), has issued and invitation for bids for the work described as follows: AREA 6 MAINTENANCE PROJECT WHEREAS R.J. NOBLE COMPANY 15505 E. LINCOLN AVENUE, ORANGE, CA 92865 (Name and address of Bidder) ("Principal"), desires to submit a bid to Public Agency for the work. WHEREAS, bidders are required under the provisions of the California Public Contract Code to furnish a form of bidder's security with their bid. NOW, THEREFORE, we, the undersigned Principal, and TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA 21688 GATEWAY CENTER DR DIAMOND BAR CA 91765 (Name and address of Surety) ("Surety") a duly admitted surety insurer under the laws of the State of California, as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto Public Agency in the penal sum of TEN PERCENT OF THE AMT. BID Dollars ($ 10% OF BID AMT. ) , being not less than ten percent (10%) of the total base -bid price, in lawful money 'of the United.States of America, for the payment of which sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH THAT, if the hereby bounded Principal is awarded a contract for the work by Public Agency and within the time and in the manner required by the bidding specifications, entered into the written form of contract included with bidding specifications, furnishes the required bonds, one to guarantee faithful performance and the other to guarantee payment for labor and materials, and furnishes the required insurance coverages, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise, it shall be and remain in full force and effect. In case suit is brought upon this bond, Surety further agrees to pay all court costs incurred by Public Agency in the suit and reasonable attorneys' fees in an amount fixed by the court. Surety hereby waives the provisions of California Civil Code § 2845. 27 TN WTTNESS WHEREOF, two (2) identical counterparts of this instrument, each of which shall for all purposes be deemed an original hereof, have been duly executed by Principal and Surety, on the date set forth below, the name of each corporate party being hereto affixed and these presents duly signed by its undersigned representative (s) 'pursuant to authority of its governing body. Dated: MAY 19, 2010 "Principal" R.J. NOBLE COMPANY "Surety" TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA By: X By: b� MI s AT FACT ItSC4IP,AIGP ER, VICE PRESIDENT MICHAEL D� STONG, TORNEY By: X By Its ST YVE MEWOZA, SECRETARY : Its Note: All signatures must be notarized, and evidence of the authority of any person signing as attorney-in-fact must be attached. (Seal) 28 (Seal) CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of ORANGE On 05/21/2010 Date before me, JENNIFER DE IONGH, NOTARY PUBLIC Here Insert Name and Title of the unicar personally appeared STEVE MENDOZA Name(s) of Signer(s) JENNIFER DE I'70=GH Commission # 1771186 Z > Notary Public - California �7 Orange County P (Comm. Expires Oct 28,2011 who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(4 Whose nameS4 is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/sho4ey executed the same in his/4,effteir authorized capacity(jp4, and that by his/baUthair signatureA on the instrument the person(K, or the entity upon behalf of which the personW acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Place Notary Seal Above Signat e "I al tGre of T otary Public OPTIONA Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying o6 the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: C1 Individual i Corporate Officer — Tit] e (s): — Partner — 0 Limited 0 General Attorney in Fact Trustee Guardian or Conservator Other: Signer Is Representing �IRIGHT YTHUMBRRIN V. OF, SIGN EWF, 5� il L Number of Pages: Signer's Name: 0 Individual 0 Corporate Officer — Title(s): 0 Partner — 0 Limited 0 General 0 Attorney in Fact 0 Trustee 0 Guardian or Conservator 0 Other: Signer Is Representing: Top of thumb here 17 92007!National Notary Association - 9350 De Soto Ave., P.C. Box 2402 - Chatsworth, CA 91313-2402- wvvw.NalloiialNotary.org Item 95907 Reorder: Call Toll -Free 1-800-876-6827 „.. S. ,..., 5MQU.nl+s..'aS„c)S.y]Srcz,S� 51.C�t.�G.. �S.y2Sl.•]A... vnA.. c�S..ca �Cf a��c���aS•. c:.C.eiS.. _ .va. ca m caS... cTS.. -0 -0 1c� State of California County of ORANGE On 05/21/2010 before me, JENNIFER DE IONGH, NOTARY PUBLIC Here Insert Name and Title of the Officer Date personally appeared CRAIG PORTER Nameis) of signer(o JENNIFER DE IONH Commission # 1771166 Notary PLtbliC - California a T; ac&, . �a v Orange County MY Comm. Expires Oct 26, 2011 who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persono whose name( is/axe subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/shall ay executed the same in his/heFAhelr authorized capacity(iesf , and that by his/4e4heir signature/) on the instrument the personA, or the entity upon behalf of which the personp) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. signat(r/” �/�11/ Place Notary Seal Above \ Signature of Notary Public ®pnoNAL l Though the d could prevent fraudulenttremo al and reattachment of this form to anotherrove valuable to perso document. ing on the document document Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: ❑ Individual Corporate Officer — Title(s): -_ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ General Attorney in Fact Trustee Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: :RIGHT SP t. I F5IGNERtt rTop of IhLTMb here Number of Pages: Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer — Title(s): — ❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: RIGHTTHUMBP.RIt1T ©2007 National Notary Association • 9350 De Soto Ave., P.O. Box 2402 •Chatsworth, CA 91313-2402 • www.NallonalNotaryorg Item 65907 Reorder: Call Toll -Free i-800-876-6827 CALIFORNIA 1 1 -PRPOi CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of RIVERSIDE On j / 01 j _ before me, R. NAPPI "NOTARY PUBLIC" (Here insert name and title of the officer) personally appeared MICHAEL D. STONG who proved to me on the basis.of satisfactory evidence to be the person.Wwhose name(aris/ere- subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/sheft4tey executed the same in his/kl,&rA+ieir authorized capacityg>a4 and that by llis/lwxAh4o�k signature(.8'fon the instrument the personWr or the entity upon behalf of which the persongacted, executed the instrument. i certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. O.kc� R. 1VMI'.1`..71 WITNESS my hand and official seal. COMM. #1796916 1 �4���� s° NOTARY PUBLIC -CALIFORNIA (Notary Seal) RIVERSIl7ECOUNTY My Comm. Expires June 7, 2012 Signature of Notary Public ADDITIONAL OPTIONAL INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT (Title or description of attached document) (Title or description of attached document continued) Number of Pages Document Date (Additional information) CAPACITY CLAIMED BY THE SIGNER ❑ Individual (s) ❑ Corporate Officer (Title) ❑ Partner(s) ❑ Attomey-in-Fact ❑ Trustee(s) O Other 2008 Version CAPA 1,12.10.07 800-873-986.5 w%vw,.NotatyClasses.eom INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THIS FORM Any ac67iomledgrnent completed in California nntst contain rerbiage exactly as appears above in the notao, section or a separate acfanou-ledgme t form must be properly completed and attached to that document. The ontp exception is if a document is to be recorded outside of California. In such instances, a0y alternative acknmrledgtneut verbiage as may be printed on such a docmnent so long as the verbiage does not require the notary to do something that is illegal for a notarl, in California (i.e. certi),ing the owhori=ed capach), of the signer). Please check the document carefrt!lrfor proper notarial wording and attach this form if required • State and County information must be the State and County where the document signer(s) personally appeared before the notary public for acknowledgment. • Date of notarization must be the date that the signer(s) personally appeared which must also be the some date the acknowledgment is completed. • The notary public must print his or her name as it appears within his or her commission followed by a comma and then your title (notary public). • Print the name(s) of document signcr(s) who personally appear at the time of notarization. a " indicate the correct singular or plural forms by crossing off incorrect forms (i.e he/sheidwt r is fare) or circling the correct forms. Failure to correctly indicate this information may lead to rejection of document recording. The notary seal impression must be clear and photographically reproducible. Impression must not cover text or lines. If seal impression smudges, re -seal if a sufficient arca permits, otherwise complete a different acknowledgment form. Signature of the notary public must match the signature on rile with the office of the county clerk. Additional information is not required but could help to ensure this acknowledgment is not misused or attached to a different document. Indicate title or type of attached document, number of pages and date. Indicate the capacity claimed by the signer. If the claimed capacity is a corporate officer, indicate the title (i.e. CEO, CFO, Secretary). Securely attach this document to the signed document " WARNING: THIS POWER OF ATTORNEY IS INVALID Agm�l POWER OF AXTORNEY TRANS E L E R S J Farmington Casualty Company St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company Travelers Casualty and Surety Company Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company St. Paul Guardian Insurance Company Certificate No. 003471347 Attorney -In Fact No. 222079 I{NOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, St. Paul Guardian Insurance Company and St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company are corporations duly organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, that Farmington Casualty Company, Travelers Casualty and Surety Company, and Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America are corporations duly organized under the laws of the State of Connecticut, that United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Maryland, that Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Iowa, and that Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc., is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Wisconsin (herein collectively called the "Companies"), and that the Companies do hereby make, constitute and appoint Michael D. Stong, Rosemary Nappi, and Jeremy Pendergast the City of State of each , their true and lawful Attorneys) -in -Fact, each in their separate capacity if more than one is Warned above, to sign, execute, seal and acknowledge any and all bonds, recognizances, conditional undertakings and other writings obligatory in the nature thereof on behalf of the Companies in their business of guaranteeing the fidelity of persons, guaranteeing the performance of contracts and executing or guaranteeing bonds and undertakings required or permitted in any actions or proceedings allowed by law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Companies have caused this instrument to be signed and their corporate seals to be hereto affixed, this 1St day of February Farmington Casualty Company Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company, Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company St. Paul Guardian Insurance Company St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company Travelers Casualty and Surety Company Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company �,aouvuimnbe _.r" j ^ �iNSU�s�t P�'cY AIyO ,,,p 5ugrjN ��61SYYAtfpC, jYW A�,PRE4 w '�F�-.HSp� .•'p1.........gq OyJ SG .Cl/y- C k G._ � SQA.. Z awl f.m i W:00 f�, i � S�trhRTFd \i y� 4 INC y AT' Z i F � pPOgAT' P+n �irtU O o •�,+, o INCOHgppRATED � W. ti co ; "' f : I t ..•�.� : o = ¢ RA -0F NRD� � C 1896 �r982�'i 1977 �. 1951 �m SE �l�SEA1.i0"i .A.L,!3': 4'6.Y'r+EC�1D �/.t� i•�L ! / 11 4�U L State of Connecticut City of Hartford ss. By: — - �— Georg Thompson, enior Ice President February 2010 , before me personally appeared George W. Thompson, who acknowledged On this the 1St day of rY himself to be the Senior Vice President of Farmington Casualty Company, Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company, Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc., St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, St. Paul Guardian Insurance Company, St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company, Travelers Casualty and Surety Company, Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America, and United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, and that he, as such, being authorized so to do, ein contained by signing on behalf of the corporations by himself as a duly authorized officer. executed the foregoing instrument for the purposes ther 4%gM ' In Witness Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and official seal. UR My Commission expires the 30th day of June, 2011. Marie C. Tetr cult, Notary Public 58440-4-05 Printed in U.S.A. _ _..._ �-rrr, ,av is mrvAi in \AIiTHniff THE RED BORDER CERTIFICATION OF NON-DISCRIMINATION AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION As suppliers of goods or services to the City of Diamond Bar, the firm listed below certifies that it does not discriminate in its employment with regards to race, religion, sex, or national origin; that it is in compliance with all federal, state, and local directives and executive orders regarding non-discrimination in employment; and that it will pursue an affirmative course of action as required by the affirmative action guidelines. We agree specifically: 1. To establish or observe employment policies which affirmatively promote opportunities portunities for minority persons at all job levels. 2. To communicate this policy to all persons concerned including all company employees, outside recruiting services, especially those serving minority communities, and to the minority communities at large. 3. To take affirmative steps to hire minority employees within the company. FIRM R. J. NOBLE COMPANY TITLE OF OFFICER SIGNING STEVE MENDOZA, SECRETARY SIGNATURE X DATE MAY 27, 2010 Please include any additional inform * ation available regarding equal opportunity employment programs now in effect within your company: 29 CERTIFICATION WITH REGARD TO THE PERFORMANCE OF PREVIOUS CONTRACTS OR SUBCONTRACTS SUBJECT TO THE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY CLAUSE AND THE FILING OF REQUIRED REPORTS The bidder x proposed subcontractor . hereby certifies that or he has x has not participated in a previous contract by subcontract subject to the Equal opportunity Clause, as required Executive Orders 10925, 11114, or 11246, and that he has X . has not . filed with the Joint Reporting Committee, the B -1 --rector of the Office of Federal Contract Compliance, a Federal Government contracting or administering agency, or the former President's Committee on Equal Employment opportunity, all reports due under the applicable filing requirements. MAY 27 R.J. NOBLE COMPANY (COMPANY) BY: STEVE MENDOZA, SECRETARY (TITLE) r 20 10 NOTE: The above certification is required by the Equal Employment Opportunity Regulations of the Secretary of Labor (41 CFR 60-1.7 (b) (1) , and must be submitted by bidders and proposed subcontractors only in connection with contracts and subcontracts which are subject to the Equal opportunity Clause. Contracts and subcontracts which are exempt from the Equal opportunity Clause are set forth in 41 CFR 60-1.5. (Generally only contracts or subcontracts of $10,000 or under are exempt). Currently, Standard Form 100 (EEO -1) is the only report required by the Executive Orders or their implementing regulations. Proposed prime contractors and subcontractors who have participated in a previous contract or subcontract subject to the Executive orders and have not filed the required reports should note that 41 CFR 60-1.7 (b) (1) prevents the award of contracts and subcontracts unless such contractor submits a report covering the delinquent period of such other period specified by the Federal Highway Administration or by the Director, office of Federal Contract Compliance, U.S. Department of Labor. M NON -COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT TO: THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR: STATE OF CALIFORNIA Ss COUNTY OF ORANGE STEVE MENDOZA —, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he or she is SECRETARY of R.J. NOBLE COMPANY , the party making the foregoing bid, that the bid is not made in the interest of or on behalf of, any undisclosed person, partnership, company association, organization, or corporation; that the bid is genuine and not collusive or sham; that the bidder has not directly or indirectly induced or solicited another bidder to put in a false or sham bid, and has not directly or indirectly colluded, conspired, connived, or agreed with any bidder or anyone else to put in a sham bid, or that anyone shall refrain from bidding; that the bidder has not in any manner, directly or indirectly, sought by agreement, communication, or conference with anyone to fix the bid price of the bidder or any other bidder, or to fix any overhead, profit, or cost element of the bid price, or of that of any other bidder, or to secure any advantage against the public body awarding the contact or anyone interested, in the proposed contract; that all statements contained in the bid are true; and further, that the bidder has not, directly or indirectly, submitted his or her bid price or any breakdown thereof, or the contents thereof, or divulged information or data relative thereto, or paid, and will not pay, any fee to any corporation, partnership, company association, organization, bid depository, or to any member or agent thereof to effectuate a collusive or sham bid. X a4A&== Signatuo of Bidder STEVE MENDOZA, SECRETARY STATE OF CALIFORNIA )SS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Subscribed and sworn.to before me this 27 day of MAY 20 10 A Jennifer De longh y'-5plic in and for the County of State of California JENNIFER DF IONGH Commission # 1771186 Notary Public - Californiaz 31 Orange County L, mycomm.ExplresOct28,20711 CITY COUNCIL Agenda # 6. 9 (c) Meeting Date: June 15, 2010 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Man�g�' TITLE: NOTICE OF COMPLETION F, R THE PREVENTATIVE STREET MAINTENANCE PROGRAM (ZONE 3 & ZONE 4 ARTERIAL STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT) FEDERAL PROJECT# ESPL-5455(013). RECOMMENDATION: File a Notice of Completion. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: This project was federally funded and the City was allocated $1,770,000 in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds for construction management and construction contracts. The City Council awarded a construction contract to Hardy and Harper, Inc. on August 18, 2009 in an amount not to exceed $1,476,000 with a contingency amount of $147,600 for a total authorization amount of $1,623,600. The City authorized the Notice to Proceed for the construction project on September 23, 2009. Hardy & Harper, Inc. has completed all work required as part of this project in accordance with the specifications approved by the City. This project included rehabilitation of the following roadways: Zone 3: ® Pathfinder from Diamond Bar Blvd. to Peaceful Hills Diamond Bar Blvd. from Pathfinder to Brea Canyon Cut -Off Brea Canyon Cut -Off (East Side only) from Diamond Bar Blvd. to City Limit Zone 4: Golden Springs from Brea Canyon Road to west City Limit Brea Canyon Road from North City Limit to Pathfinder ® Lemon from North City Limit to Golden Springs The final construction cost of the project is $1,615,000 which includes $139,000 in change orders for additional sidewalk removal and replacement, and grinding and replacement asphalt throughout the project area. The project was completed $8,000 under the overall authorized project budget and was funded entirely by ARRA funds. PREPARED BY: DATE PREPARED: Kimberly Molina, Associate Engineer June.8, 2010 REVIEWED BY: D id G. Liu, Director of Public Works Attachments: Notice of Completion 4 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 21825 E. COPLEY DRIVE DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA 91765 ATTENTION: CITY CLERK NOTICE OF COMPLETION Notice pursuant to Civil Code Section 3093, must be filed within 10 days after completion. Notice is hereby given that: 1. The undersigned is the owner or corporate officer of the owner of the interest or estate stated below in the property hereinafter described: 2. The full name of the owner is City of Diamond Bar 3. The full address ofthe owner is 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar CA 91765 4. The nature of the interest or estate of the owner is; "In fee" (If other than fee, strike "In fee" and insert, for example, "purchaser under contract of purchase," or "lessee 5. The full names and full addresses of all persons, if any, who hold title with the undersigned as joint tenants or as tenants in common are: NAMES ADDRESSES 6. A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was completed on June 7.2010. The work done was: Preventive Street Maintenance Project Zone 3 & 4 Arterial Street Rehabilitation Proiect) Federal Proj # ESPL-5455(013) - various locations 7. The name of the contractor, if any, for such work of improvement was Hardy & Harper. Inc. September 1. 2009 (If no contractor for work of improvement as a whole, insert "none") (Date of Contract) 8. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, State of California, and is described as follows: Preventive Street Maintenance Project (Zone 3 & 4 Arterial Street Rehabilitation Proiect) Federal Proi 4 ESPL-5455(013) - various locations The street address of said property is Dated: verification for Individual Owner (If no street address has been officially assigned, insert "none'D CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Signature of owner or corporate officer of owner named in paragraph 2 or his agent VERIFICATION I, the undersigned, say: I am the Director of Public Virorks the declarant of the foregoing ("resident of', "Manager of" "A partner of," "Owner oi;" etc.) notice of completion; I have read said notice of completion and know the contests thereof, the same is true of my own Imowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on 20 at Diamond Bar California. (Date of signature) (City where signed) (Personal signature of the individual who is nearing that the contents of die notice of completion are We) Agenda # 6. 9 (d) Meeting Date: June ]5,2010 CITY COUNCIL .��AG�EN�DA�P,,,-E�POP�*-T� TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council James DeStefano, VIA: City Maner, /1 C9 -..>'� TITLE: APPROVE PLANS AND PECIFICATIONS AND AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE PATHFINDER MEDIAN PROJECT BETWEEN THE NORTHBOUND STATE ROUTE 57 ON/OFF RAMPS AND FERN HOLLOW DRIVE IN THE AMOUNT OF $89,937.50 TO KASA CONSTRUCTION AND AUTHORIZE A CONTINGENCY AMOUNT OF $18,000.00 FOR CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS TO BE APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER, FOR A TOTAL AUTHORIZATION AMOUNT OF $107,937.50. RECOMMENDATION: FINANCIAL IMPACT: For Fiscal Year 2009-2010, a budget amount of $125,000 of Prop C funds and $125,000 from Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funds have been allocated and approved by the City Council for the design and construction of the subject improvements. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The proposed center median project will consist of removing the existing texas dots, and replacing it with a raised landscaped median island. The median has been proposed. to provide enhanced channelization and to deter motorists form making illegal left turns from driveways located on the south side of Pathfinder Road. The project was advertised for bids on April 8, 2010 and bids were opened on April 29, 2010. - Since the project is funded in part by Federal HSIP funds, it was necessary to issue an addendum to meet the Federal Wage Decision modification that occurred after the project was advertised. A total of eleven (11) bids were received for the project. The engineer's estimate was $134,400.00. The results of the bids were as follows: Company Bid Amount 1. Kasa Construction $ 89,937.50 2. Yakar General Contractors $ 92,561.00 3. Aramexx Construction $ 96,395.00 4. Freeway Electric $ 104,401.00 5. Ace Construction $ 107,007.10 6. Belaire-West Landscape $ 108,000.00 7. American West Landscape $ 117,109.57 8. Kormx, Inc. $ 117,285.00 9. Elite Companies $ 128,385.00 10. All American Asphalt $ 129,000.00 11. Hardy & Harper $ 135,420.00 Key aspects of requirements placed upon the contractor include: ® Completion of all work within thirty (30) calendar days • Liquidated damages of $500.00 per day for non-conformance ® Compliance with Federal Requirements ® Labor compliance with Davis -Bacon Act ® Working hours from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. The Public Works Department has checked the contractor's license of Kasa Construction with the Contractor State License Board and found it to be valid. Staff also checked the contractor and its subcontractors for debarment from receiving federal money from the Excluded Parties List System (EPLS) website and they were all found to be excluded from the list. The contractor also met the Underutilized Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (UDBE) Goal of 2.23% as required for this contract. A total of five (5) references for the contractor and owner were verified by staff. The references, which include our staff from the Community Services Department, gave positive feedback. There was one reference that expressed concern with Kasa Construction's experience in the preparation of labor compliance documents; this has been noted by staff and will be closely monitored. The project schedule is tentatively set as follows: Award of Contract June 15, 2010 Notice to Proceed June 28, 2010 Start of Construction July 5, 2010 Completion of Construction August 3, 2010 PREPARED BY: Erwin Ching, Assistant Engineer Date Prepared: June 8, 2010 ATTACHMENTS: Contract Agreement AGREEMENT The following agreement is made and entered into, in duplicate, as of the date executed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk, by and between Kasa Construction, Inc. hereinafter referred to as the "CONTRACTOR" and the City of Diamond Bar, California, hereinafter referred to as "CITY." WHEREAS, pursuant to Notice Inviting Sealed Bids or Proposals, bids were received, publicly opened, and declared on the date specified in the notice; and WHEREAS, City did accept the bid of CONTRACTOR Kasa Construction, Inc. and; WHEREAS, City has authorized the Mayor to execute a written contract with CONTRACTOR for furnishing labor, equipment and material for the Pathfinder Median Project in the City of Diamond Bar. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, it is agreed: 1. GENERAL SCOPE OF WORK: CONTRACTOR shall furnish all necessary labor, tools, materials, appliances, and equipment for and do the work for the Pathfinder Median Project in the City of Diamond Bar. The work to be performed in accordance with the plans and specifications dated April 6, 2010 (The Plans and Specifications) on file in the office of the City Clerk and in accordance with bid prices hereinafter mentioned and in accordance with the instructions of the City Engineer. 2. INCORPORATED DOCUMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED COMPLE- MENTARY: The Plans and Specifications are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof with like force and effect as if set forth in full herein. The Plans and Specifications, CONTRACTOR'S Bid dated April 29, 2010, together with this written agreement, shall constitute the contract between the parties. This contract is intended to require a complete and finished piece of work. and anything necessary to complete the work properly and in accordance with the law and lawful governmental regulations shall be performed by the CONTRACTOR whether set out specifically in the contract or not. Should it be ascertained that any inconsistency exists between the aforesaid documents and this written agreement, the provisions of this written agreement shall control. 3. TERMS OF CONTRACT The CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work within thirtV (30) calendar days from the date of the notice to proceed. The CONTRACTOR agrees further to the assessment of liquidated damages in the amount of five hundred ($500.00) dollars for each calendar day the work remains incomplete beyond the expiration of the completion date. City may deduct the amount thereof from any monies due or that may become due the CONTRACTOR under this agreement. Progress payments made after the scheduled date of completion shall not constitute a waiver of liquidated damages. 4. INSURANCE: The CONTRACTOR shall not commence work under this contract until he has obtained all insurance required. hereunder in a company or companies acceptable to City nor shall the CONTRACTOR allow any subcontractor to M commence work on his subcontract until all insurance required of the subcontractor has been obtained. The CONTRACTOR shall take out and maintain at all times during the life of this contract the following policies of insurance: a. , Workers' Compensation Insurance: Before beginning work, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish to the City a certificate of insurance as proof that he has taken out full workers' compensation insurance for all persons whom he may employ directly or through subcontractors in carrying out the work specified herein, in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Such insurance shall be maintained in full force and effect during the period covered by this contract. In accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code, every CONTRACTOR shall secure the payment of compensation to his employees. The CONTRACTOR, prior to commencing work, shall sign and file with the City a certification as follows: "I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of work of this contract." b. For all operations of the CONTRACTOR or any sub -contractor in performing the work provided for herein, insurance with the following minimum limits and coverage: 1) Public Liability - Bodily Injury (not auto) $500,000 each person; $1,000,000 each accident. 2) Public Liability - Property Damage (not auto) $250,000 each person; $500,000 aggregate. 3) CONTRACTOR'S -Protective - Bodily Injury $500,000 each person; $1,000,000 each accident. 4) CONTRACTOR'S Protective - Property Damage $250,000 each accident; $500,000 aggregate. 5) Automobile - Bodily Injury $500,000 each person; $1,000,000 each accident. 6) Automobile - Property Damage $250,000 each accident. C. Each such policy of insurance provided for in paragraph b. shall: 1) Be issued by an insurance companyapproved in writing by City, which is admitted to do business in the State of California. 2) Name as additional insured the City of Diamond Bar, its officers, agents and 'employees, and any other parties specified in the bid documents to be so included; 5 3) Specify it acts as primary insurance and that no insurance held or owned by the designated additional insured shall be called upon to cover a loss under the policy; 4) Contain a clause substantially in the following words: "It is hereby understood and agreed that this policy may not be canceled nor the amount of the coverage thereof reduced until thirty (30) days after receipt by City of a written notice of such cancellation or reduction of coverage as evidenced by receipt of a registered letter." 5) Otherwise be in form satisfactory to the City. d. The policy of insurance provided for in subparagraph a. shall contain an endorsement which: Waives all right of subrogation against all persons and entities specified in subparagraph 4.c.(2) hereof to be listed as additional insureds in the policy of insurance provided for in paragraph b. by reason of any claim arising out of or connected with the operations of CONTRACTOR or any subcontractor in performing the work provided for herein; 2) Provides it shall not be canceled or altered without thirty (30) days' written notice thereof given to City by registered mail. e. The CONTRACTOR shall, within ten (10) days from the date of the notice of award of the Contract, deliver to the City Manager or his designee the original policies of insurance required in paragraphs a. and b. hereof, or deliver to the City Manager or his designee a certificate of the insurance company, showing the issuance of such insurance, and the additional insured and other provisions required herein. 5. PREVAILING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the CONTRACTOR is required to pay not less than the general prevailing rate of per them wages for work of a similar character in the locality in which the public works is performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of per them wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has determined such general prevailing rates of per them wages. Copies of such prevailing rates of per them wages are on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California, and are available to any interested party on request. City also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the job site. The CONTRACTOR shall forfeit, as penalty to City, not more than twenty- five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages hereinbefore stipulated for any work done under this Agreement, by him or by any subcontractor under him. 6. APPRENTICESHIP EMPLOYMENT: In accordance with the provisions of Section 1777.5 of the Labor Code, and in accordance with the regulations of the 0 California Apprenticeship Council, properly indentured apprentices may be employed in the performance of the work. The CONTRACTOR is required to make contribution to funds established for the administrative of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any apprenticeable 'trade on such contracts and if other CONTRACTOR'S on the public works site are making such contributions. The CONTRACTOR and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules and other requirements may be obtained, from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex -officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. 7. LEGAL HOURS OF WORK Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract, and the CONTRACTOR and any sub -contractor under him shall comply with and be governed by the laws of the State of California having to do with working hours set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of California as amended. The CONTRACTOR shall forfeit, as a penalty to City, twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by him or any sub- CONTRACTOR under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each calendar day during which the laborer, workman or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of the Labor Code. 8. TRAVEL AND SUBSISTENCE PAY: CONTRACTOR agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargaining agreements filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 1773.8. 9. CONTRACTOR'S LIABILITY: The City of Diamond Bar and its officers, agents and employees ("Idemnitees") shall not be answerable or accountable in any manner for any loss or damage that may happen to the work or any part thereof, or for any of the materials or other things used or employed in performing the work; or for injury or damage to any person or persons, either workmen or employees of the CONTRACTOR, of his subcontractor's or the public, or for damage to adjoining or other property from any cause whatsoever arising out of or in connection with the performance of the work. The CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for any damage or injury to any person or property resulting from defects or obstructions or from any cause whatsoever. The CONTRACTOR will indemnify Indemnitees against and will hold and save Indemnitees harmless from any and all actions, claims, damages to persons or property, penalties, obligations or liabilities that may be asserted or claimed by any person, firm, entity, corporation, political subdivision, or other organization arising out of or in connection with the work, operation, or activities of the CONTRACTOR, his agents, employees, subcontractors or invitees provided for herein, whether or not there is concurrent passive or active negligence on the part of City. In connection therewith: a. The CONTRACTOR will defend any action or actions filed in connection with any such claims, damages, penalties, obligations or liabilities and will pay all costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees incurred in connection therewith. b. The CONTRACTOR will promptly pay any judgment rendered against the CONTRACTOR or Indemnitees covering such claims, damages, penalties, obligations and liabilities arising out of or in connection with such work, operations or activities of the CONTRACTOR hereunder, and the CONTRACTOR agrees to save and hold the Indemnitees harmless therefrom. C. In the event Indemnitees are made a party to any action or proceeding filed or prosecuted against the CONTRACTOR for damages or other claims arising out of or in connection with the work, operation or activities hereunder, the CONTRACTOR agrees to pay to Indemnitees and any all costs and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in such action or proceeding together with reasonable attorneys' fees. So much of the money due to the CONTRACTOR under and by virtue of the contract as shall be considered necessary by City may be retained by City until disposition has been made of such actions or claims for damages as aforesaid. This indemnity provision shall survive the termination of the Agreement and is in addition to any other rights or remedies which Indemnitees may have under the law. This indemnity is effective without reference to the existence or applicability of any insurance coverages which may have been required under this Agreement or any additional insured endorsements which may extend to Indemnitees. CONTRACTOR, on behalf of itself and all parties claiming under or through it, hereby waives all rights of subrogation and contribution against the Indemnitees, while acting within the scope of their duties, from all claims, losses and liabilities arising our of or incident to activities or operations performed by or on behalf of the Indemnitor regardless of any prior, concurrent, or subsequent active or passive negligence by the Indemnitees. 10. NON-DISCRIMINATION: Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1735, no discrimination shall be made in the employment of persons in the work contemplated by this Agreement because of the race, color or religion of such person. A violation of this section exposes the CONTRACTOR to the penalties provided for in Labor Code Section 1735. 11. CONTRACT PRICE AND PAYMENT: City shall pay to the CONTRACTOR for furnishing all material and doing the prescribed work the unit prices set forth in the Price Schedule in accordance with CONTRACTOR'S Bid dated April 29, 2010. 12. TERMINATION: This agreement may be terminated by the City, without cause, upon the giving of a written "Notice of Termination" to CONTRACTOR at least thirty (30) days prior to the date of termination specified in the notice. In the event of such termination, CONTRACTOR shall only be paid for services rendered and expenses necessarily incurred prior to the effective date of termination. M IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theparties hereto have executed this Agreement with all the formalities required by law on the respective dates set forth opposite their signatures. State of California "CONTRACTOR'S" License No. 927544 Kasa Construction Inc. 316 N. Corona Avenue Ontario, CA 91764 By: TITLE AM: - CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA By: CAROL HERRERA, MAYOR Date ATTEST: By: TOMMYE CRIBBINS, CITY CLERK Date CONTRACTOR'S Business Phone (909) 457-8260 Emergency Phone at which CONTRACTOR can be reached at any time APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY Date CITY COUNCIL Agenda # 6. 9 (e) Meeting Date: June 15, 2010 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council. VIA: James DeStefano, City Man ge TITLE: APPROVE PLANS ANDYVPECIFICATIONS AND AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD RAISED MEDIAN MODIFICATION PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $54,843.50 TO ELITE COMPANIES US, INC. AND AUTHORIZE A CONTINGENCY AMOUNT OF $5,500.00 FOR CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS TO BE APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER, FOR A TOTAL AUTHORIZATION AMOUNT OF $60,343.50. Approve and award. FINANCIAL IMPACT: As part of the Fiscal Year 2009/2010 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), $100,000.00 of General Funds is budgeted for the Diamond Bar Boulevard Raised Median Modification Project. Design services were completed during Fiscal Year 2009/2010 in the amount of $11,800. DISCUSSION: The project is located along Diamond Bar Boulevard between Grand Avenue and Montefino Avenue in front of the US Post Office. The project consists of the reconstruction of portions of the raised median. The median width will be narrowed which allows the left turn pockets to shift and the line of sight to improve for northbound and southbound vehicles making left turn movements from Diamond Bar Boulevard into the Post Office driveway and the Allegros condominiums just north of Montefino Avenue. The project was advertised for bids during the month of May 2010. The engineering estimate was $66,900. On June 3, 2010, the City received the following eight (8) bid proposals: • •, 1. Elite Companies US, Inc. 2. Freeway Electric 3. HYM Engineering 4. Black Rock Construction 5. ACE CD Inc. 6. Hardy & Harper 7. ICE Engineering Inc. 8. SJ Grigolla Const. Company Inc $54,843.50 $58,058.00 $58,450.00 $59,755.00 $59,964.00 $62,717.00 $75,635.00 $80,480.00 The lowest responsive and responsible bid was received from Elite Companies US, Inc. in the amount of $54,843.50. Staff reviewed their bid, and verified their, State Contractor's License. Staff received favorable reviews for Elite Companies US, Inc from the City of Anaheim and San Diego Gas & Electric. The project schedule is tentatively set as follows: Award of Contract Start Construction Construction Complete Christian Malpica, Associate Engineer Davrd G. ffiu, Director of Public Works Attachment: Contract Agreement June 15, 2010 July 19, 2010 August 19, 2010 Date Prepared: June 8, 2010 AGREEMENT The following agreement is made and entered into, in duplicate, as of the date executed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk, by and between Elite Companies US, Inc. hereinafter referred to as the "CONTRACTOR" and the City of Diamond Bar, California, hereinafter referred to as "CITY." WHEREAS, pursuant to Notice Inviting Scaled Bids, bids were received, publicly opened, and declared on the date specified in the notice; and WHEREAS, City did accept the bid of CONTRACTOR Elite Companies US, Inc. and; WHEREAS, City has authorized the Mayor to execute a written contract with CONTRACTOR for famishing labor, equipment and material for DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD RAISED MEDIAN MODIFICATION BETWEEN MONTEFINO AVENUE AND GRAND AVENUE in the City of Diamond Bar. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, it is agreed: 1. GENERAL SCOPE OF WORK: CONTRACTOR shall furnish all necessary labor, tools, materials, appliances, and equipment for and do the work for the construction of the DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD RAISED MEDIAN MODIFICATION BETWEEN MONTEFINO AVENUE AND GRAND AVENUE in the City of Diamond Bar. The work to be performed in accordance with the plans and specifications, dated May 11, 2010 on file in the office of the City Clerk and in accordance with bid prices hereinafter mentioned and in accordance with the instructions of the City Engineer. 2. INCORPORATED DOCUMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED COMPLEMENTARY: The Plans and Specifications are incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof with like force and effect as if set forth in full herein. The Plans and Specifications, CONTRACTOR'S Proposal dated June 2, 2010, together with this written agreement, shall constitute the contract between the parties. This contract is intended to require a complete and finished piece of work and anything necessary to complete the work properly and in accordance with the law and lawful governmental regulations shall be performed by the CONTRACTOR whether set out specifically in the contract or not. Should it be ascertained that any inconsistency exists between the aforesaid documents and this written agreement, the provisions of this written agreement shall control. 3. TERMS OF CONTRACT: The CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work within thirty (30) calendar days from the date of the notice to proceed. The CONTRACTOR agrees further to the assessment of liquidated damages in the amount of five hundred ($500.00) dollars for each calendar day the work remains incomplete beyond the expiration of the completion date. City may deduct the amount thereof from any monies due or that may become due the CONTRACTOR under this agreement. Progress payments made after the scheduled date of completion shall not constitute a waiver of liquidated damages. 4. INSURANCE: The CONTRACTOR shall not commence work under this contract until he has obtained all insurance required hereunder in a company or companies acceptable to City nor shall the CONTRACTOR allow any subcontractor to commence work on his subcontract until all insurance required of the subcontractor has been obtained. The CONTRACTOR shall take out and maintain at all times during the life of this contract the following policies of insurance: a. Workers' Compensation Insurance: Before beginning work, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish to the City a certificate of insurance as proof that he has taken out fall workers' compensation insurance for all persons whom he may employ directly or through subcontractors in carrying out the work specified herein, in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Such insurance shall be maintained in full force and effect during the period covered by this contract. In accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code, every CONTRACTOR shall secure the payment of compensation to his employees. The CONTRACTOR, prior to commencing work, shall sign and file with the City a certification as follows: "I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of work of this contract." b. For all operations of the CONTRACTOR or any sub -contractor in performing the work provided for herein, insurance with the following minimum limits and coverage: 1) Public Liability - Bodily Injury (not auto) $500,000 each person; $1,000,000 each accident. 2) Public Liability - Property Damage (not auto) $250,000 each person; 500,000 aggregate. 3) CONTRACTOR'S Protective - Bodily Injury $500,000 each person $1,000,000 each accident. 4) CONTRACTOR'S Protective - Property Damage $250,000 each accident; $500,000 aggregate. 5) Automobile -Bodily Injury $500,000 each person; $1,000,000 each accident. 6) Automobile - Property Damage $250,000 each accident. 4 c. Each such policy of insurance provided for in paragraph b. shall: 1) Be issued by an insurance company approved in writing by City, which is admitted to do business in the State of California. 2) Name as additional insured the City of Diamond Bar, its officers, agents and employees, and any other parties specified in the bid documents to be so included; 3) Specify it acts as primary insurance and that no insurance held or owned by the designated additional insured shall be called upon to cover a loss under the policy; 4) Contain a clause substantially in the following words: "It is hereby understood and agreed that this policy may not be canceled nor the amount of the coverage thereof reduced until thirty (30) days after receipt by City of a written notice of such cancellation or reduction of coverage as evidenced by receipt of a registered letter." 5) Otherwise be in form satisfactory to the City. d. The policy of insurance provided for in subparagraph a. shall contain an endorsement which: 1) Waives all right of subrogation against all persons and entities specified in subparagraph 4.c. (2) hereof to be listed as additional insureds in the policy of insurance provided for in paragraph b. by reason of any claim arising out of or connected with the operations of CONTRACTOR or any subcontractor in performing the work provided for herein; 2) Provides it shall not be canceled or altered without thirty (30) days' written notice thereof given to City by registered mail. e. The CONTRACTOR shall, within ten (10) days from the date of the notice of award of the Contract, deliver to the City Manager or his designee the original policies of insurance required in paragraphs a. and b. hereof, or deliver to the City Manager or his designee a certificate of the insurance company, showing the issuance of such insurance, and the additional insured and other provisions required herein. 5. PREVAILING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the CONTRACTOR is required to pay not less than the general prevailing rate of per them wages for work of a similar character in the locality in which the public works is performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of per them wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has determined such general prevailing rates of per them wages. Copies of such prevailing rates of per them wages are on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California, and are available to any interested party on request. City also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the job site. The CONTRACTOR shall forfeit, as penalty to City, not more than twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages hereinbefore stipulated for any work done under this Agreement, by him or by any subcontractor under him. 6. APPRENTICESHIP EMPLOYMENT: In accordance with the provisions of Section 1777.5 of the Labor Code, and in accordance with the regulations of the California Apprenticeship Council, properly indentured apprentices may be employed in the performance of the work. The CONTRACTOR is required to make contribution to funds established for the administrative of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any apprenticeable trade on such contracts and if other CONTRACTORIS on the public works site are making such contributions. The CONTRACTOR and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex -officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. 7. LEGAL HOURS OF WORK: Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract, and the. CONTRACTOR and any sub -contractor under him shall comply with and be governed by the laws of the State of California having to do with working hours set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of California as amended. The CONTRACTOR shall forfeit, as a penalty to City, twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by him or any sub- CONTRACTOR under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each calendar day during which the laborer, workman or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of the Labor Code. 8. TRAVEL AND SUBSISTENCE PAY: CONTRACTOR agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargaining agreements filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 1773.8. 9. CONTRACTOR'S LIABILITY: The City of Diamond Bar and its officers, agents and employees ("Idemnitees") shall not be answerable or accountable in any manner for any loss or damage that may happen to the work or. any part thereof, or for any of the materials or other things used or employed in performing the work, or for injury or damage to any person or 6 persons, either workmen or employees of the CONTRACTOR, of his subcontractor's or the public, or for damage to adjoining or other property from any cause, whatsoever arising out of or in connection with the performance of the work. The CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for any damage or injury to any person or property resulting from defects or obstructions or from any cause whatsoever. The CONTRACTOR will indemnify Indemnitees against and will hold and save Indemnitees harmless from any and all actions, claims, damages to persons or property, penalties, obligations or liabilities that may be asserted or claimed by any person, firm, entity, corporation, political subdivision, or other organization arising out of or in connection with the work, operation, or activities of the CONTRACTOR, his agents, employees, subcontractors or invitees provided for herein, whether or not there is concurrent passive or active negligence on the part of City. In connection therewith: a. The CONTRACTOR will defend any action or actions filed in connection with any such claims, damages, penalties, obligations or liabilities and will pay all costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees incurred in connection therewith. b. The CONTRACTOR will promptly pay any judgment rendered against the CONTRACTOR or Indemnities covering such claims, damages, penalties, obligations and liabilities arising out of or in connection with such work, operations or activities of the CONTRACTOR hereunder, and the CONTRACTOR agrees to save and hold the Indemnities harmless therefrom. C. In the event Indemnities are made a party to any action or proceeding filed or prosecuted against the CONTRACTOR for damages or other claims arising out of or in connection with the work, operation or activities hereunder, the CONTRACTOR agrees to pay to Indemnities and any all costs and expenses incurred by Indemnities in such action or proceeding together with reasonable attorneys' fees. So much of the money due to the CONTRACTOR under and by virtue of the contract as shall be considered necessary by City may be retained by City until disposition has been made of such actions or claims for damages as aforesaid. This indemnity provision shall survive the termination of the Agreement and is in addition to any other rights or remedies which Indemnities may have under the law. This indemnity is effective without reference to the existence or applicability of any insurance coverages which may have been required under this Agreement or any additional insured endorsements which may extend to Indemnities. CONTRACTOR, on behalf of itself and all parties claiming under or through it, hereby waives all rights of subrogation and contribution against the Indermzities, while acting within the scope of their duties, from all claims, losses and liabilities arising our of or incident to activities or operations performed by or on behalf of the Indemnitor regardless of any prior, concurrent, or subsequent active or passive negligence by the Indemnities. 7 10. NON-DISCRIMINATION: Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1735, no discrimination shall be made in the employment of persons in the work contemplated by this Agreement because of the race, color or religion of such person. A violation of this section exposes the CONTRACTOR to the penalties provided for in Labor Code Section 1735. 11. CONTRACT PRICE AND PAYMENT: City shall pay to the CONTRACTOR for furnishing all material and doing the prescribed work the unit prices set forth in the Price Schedule in accordance with CONTRACTOR'S Bid dated 12. TERMINATION: This agreement may be terminated by the City, without cause, upon the giving of a written "Notice of Termination" to CONTRACTOR at least thirty (30). days prior to the date of termination specified in the notice. In the event of such termination, CONTRACTOR shall only be paid for services rendered and expenses necessarily incurred prior to the effective date of termination. 8 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement with all the formalities required by law on the respective dates set forth opposite their signatures. State of California "CONTRACTOR'S" License No. - 939087 0 Date M Date M-0 Date Elite Companies US, Inc. 15321 La Salle Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92647 TITLE JSYAJI . f U MOINIUMAM41-911-3 0.1 02=41 I CONTRACTOR'S Business Phone (714) 716-6196 Emergency Phone at which CONTRACTOR can be reached at any three CITY ATTORNEY Date 0 BID FOR CONSTIWCTIGN OF DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD RAISED MEDIAN MODIFICATION BETWEEN MONTEFINO*AVENUE AND GRAND AVENUE �d Date 2010 To the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar: The Undersigned hereby declares: (a) That the only persons or parties interested in this bid as principals are the following: .,(If'the-'bidder is a corporation, give the:name of the corporation and the name of its president, secretary, ;treasurer, 'and manager. If a co -partnership,, give -the name, under which the co- pa0arship does business, and the names and addresses of all co-partners. If an individual; state the name under which the contract is to be drawn) (b)'. That this bid. is made without collusion with, any person, firm or corporation. (c) That he has carefully examined the location of the proposed work and has familiarized himself with all of the physical and climatic conditions, and makes this bid solely upon his own knowledge. (d) That by submitting this bid, he acknowledgesreceipt and knowledge of the contents. of those communications sent.by the City of Diamond Bar. to him at the address fiuuished by hint to the City of Diamond Bar when this. bid form was obtained. (e) That he has carefully exa.t med the specifications, both general and detail and the drawings attached hereto, and communications sent to him as aforesaid, and makes this bid in accordance therewith. (f) That,. if this bid is'accepted he, will enter into a written contract for the performance of the proposed work with the City of Diamond Bar. . (g) -That he proposes to enter into such Contract and to accept'in full payment for the work actually done thereunder the prices shown in the attached schedule. It is understood and agreed that the quantities set ..forth. are estimates and that the unit prices will apply to the actual quantities .whatever they may be. Accompanying this bid is a certified or cashier's check or bid, bond, payable to the order of the City of Diamond Bar in the sum of i�l UT LCSS Tl'r�c I ) %< Qi Iii 1 �� DOLLARS ($ Said bidder's bond has been duly executed by the undersigned bidder and by a financially sound surety company authorized to transact business in this state. Itis understood and agreed that should the bidder fail within ten days after award of contract to enter into the contract and furnish acceptable surety bonds, then the proceeds of said check, or ..bidder's bond, .shall become the properly- of the City of Diamond Bar, but if this. Contract is entered into and said bonds are furnished, or if the bid is not accepted then said check shall be returned to the undersigned, or the bidder will. be released from the bid bond. Address .of Bidder Telephone of Bidder City Zip Code Si ature of Bidder BID SCHEDULE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION ®P DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD RAISED MEDIAN MODIFICATION BETWEEN MONTEFINQ AVENUE AND GLAND AVENUE (Working Hours — See Section' 6, Prosecuiion, Progress and Acceptance of Work)' In accordance with specifications therefore approved by the City Council of the City. of Diamond Bar the undersigned bidder is herewith: submitting the following.bid prices for the performance of the entire , work as described in these. specifications and. attached drawings subject to this furnishing all materials. i.iS.nF,.'." Unat ITnit'rxcez, t Anzoun 3� .1 :.. Traffic'Control and Public Notification 1. LSbej(�: ppp. 2.. Mobilization 1 LS I. DOC) .D 3 .. Clearing; ;Grubbing,. Miscellaneous.. , 1 LS � ppj 2. pp Removals and Disposals 4 . Sawcut and' Remove Existing AC* and 1,800 SF •p C St { D. Base 5 New AC Pavement 130 TN p (p 3- , l? b P510, Sawcut and .Removal of Existing LF 3 2bILI SC Median Curb 7 PCC Median'Curb and Concrete Mow LF Strip480 2.3 D S?DLI 8 Cobblestone Paving 340. SF 1b.00 3 4D Q 9 Slurry Seal' 5,500 SF 1 • I .D.. C�(�—� Remove Existing and Install New 1. LS '7" 2-5 q Pavement Markings and Striping' 11 Relocate. of Signs in Median 4 EA 2,0 gp 12 Relocate of Tree in Median 1 EA 3 pD p 3 c9o'D Restore Landscape and Irrigation 1 LS 13 System 3 epc7 Bid price indicated refers to all items illustrated on plans and details, and delineated Within specifications installed and completely in place in accordance ordance with all applicable portions'of the construction documents and include all costs connected with such items including, but not necessarily limited to, materials, transportation, taxes, insurance, labor, overhead, and profit, for General Contractor and Subcontractors. All work called for on the construction documents are to provide a completed project with all systemsoperating properly and ready for use. The undersigned'fiirthei ag*re.e's that in case of default in executing the required contract, with necessary bond, within. ten (10) days, not including Sundays and legal holidays, after having received notice that the contract has been awarded and is ready for signature, the proceeds of the security accompanying his bid shall become the, property of the City of Diamond Bar, and this bid and the acceptance thereof may be considered null and void. NAME OF BIDDER (PRINT) SICYRATUREComDATE S A ADDRESS 4 in 0 T I rJ fTQ 14 P, -(,.Ii b" Li 7 CITY ZIP CODE TELEPHONE q 3,,10 3 -7. A 31 - 7,0 1. STATE CONTRACTOR LICENSE NO. - CLASSIFICATION EXPIRATION DATE I declare under penalty of Perjury of the laws of the State of California that the representations made herein are.true and correct in accordance with the requirements of California Business, and Professional Code Section 7028.15. CONTCTOR SIGNATURE OR AUTHORIZED OFFICER 12 LIST OF SUBCON'T'RACTORS= BID OPENING DATE PROJECT LOCATION CLIENT CONTRACTOR .Name Under License No: Address of Office, Percent ' :Specific Description of V1Mch*Subcontra6tor Mail, or. Shop of Total. Bid Item is' Licensed Contract :1 DECLARATION OF ELIGIBILITY TO CONTRACT [Labor Code Section 1777.1: Public Contract Code Section 61091 The undersigned, a duly authorized representative of the contractor, certifies and declares that: 1. The contractor is aware of Sections 1771.1 and 1777.7 of the California Labor Code, which prohibit a contractor or subcontractor who has been found by the Labor Commissioner or the Director of lfidustrial Relations to be .in violation of certain provisions of the Labor Code :from bidding on, being awarded, or performing work as a.subcontractor on a public works. project for specified peribds of time. 2. The contractor is not ineligible to .bid on, be awarded or perform work as a subcontractor on public works 'project by virtue of the forego ' mg provisions of Sections 1771:1 .4 or 1777.7. of the California Labor -Code or any other provision of law. 3. The contractor is aware of California Public Contract Code Section 61.0% which states: A. public. entity, as deftedlin Section 1100 [ofthe Public. Contract Code], May not permit a contractor or subcontractor who is ineligible to bid or work on, or be awarded, a -public-w0.*rks project pursuant to Section 1771.1 or 1777.7 of theLabor Code to bid on; be awarded. or perform work as a subcontractor on a public Works project. Every public 'works project shall contain a provision* prohibiting a contractor from performing work. on a public works project with 'a subcontractor who. is ineligible to perform work on the public works'project pursuant to Section 1771.1 or 1777.7 of the Labor Code. (b) Any contract. on a public works; project entered into between 'a contractor and a debarred subcontractor is void as a matter of law. A- debarred subcontractor may, not receive any public- money for perf6rmi ' work as a� subcontractor 'on a public' Ag I works contract, 'arid any public money that may have. been paid to a` debarred - subcontractor by a contractor on the project shall be returned to the awarding body. The contractorshall be. responsible for the payment of wages to workers of a debarred subcontractor who has been allowed to work on the project. 4. The contractor has investigated the eligibility of each and every subcontractor the contractor intends to use on this public works project, and determined thatnoneof them is ineligible to perform work as a subcontractor on a public works ' project by virtue of the foregoing provisions of the Public Contract Code Sections 1771.1 or 1777.7 of the Labor Code,- or any other provision of law. 14 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of. California. that the foregoing is true and. correct.' Executed this day of;, ,,� . , �,' % , 2010, at . CA : q I -V-4 -1 (place of execution). Sign/cure Name: ) OSM* 14 Title: .. FSRdlll'JG1L:.9 S VIOLATION OF. LAW/SAFETY Q lJ E` STIOl V t,,gRE . In accordance with. Government Code Section 14310.5, the Bidder shall complete, under penalty of perjury, the following questionnaire: LIJUMMS_klk Has the .Bidder, any officer, .principal or employee of the Bidder who has a proprietary interest in the business of the Bidder,'ever been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented from bidding on or completing a federal, state or local government project because of violation of law or a safety regulation? YES NO If the answer is yes, explain the circumstances in the following space: NOTE:. This questionnaire constitutes apart of the ' Bid and signature on. the signature portion of this Bid shall Constitute Signature of this questionnaire. CONTRACTOR'S MUSTRIAL SAFETY RECORD Project Identification: DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD RAISED MEDIAN MODIFICATION BETWEEN MONTEFINO AVENUE AND GRAND AVENUE PROJECT Bid. Date: JL/,p6 J This information must include all construction work undertaken in the State of California bythe bidder and any partnership, joint venture or corporation that any principal of the bidder participated in as a principal' or owner for the last five calendar years and.the. current calendar' year prior to the. date of bid :submittal.. Separate information shall be submitted; for each particular partnership, joint venture, corporation or individual bidder. The bidder may attach any additional .information or explanation of data which he would like taken into consideration in evaluating the safety record: An explanation must be attached of the circumstances surrounding any and all fatalities: ITEM .5 CALENDAR YEARS- PRIOR TO.CURIZENT YEAR CURRENT . . YEAR 2005, 2006 2007 2008 •2009. TOTAL . No. of Contracts: Total dollar amount of contracts (in 1,000's) �s�iz 2S� ILl�- No. of Fatalities . D 0 No. of.lost workday cases v 0 No. of•lost work daycases Involving permanent transfer to another j ob or termination of'employment D D . *No. of lost workdays *The information required for these items is the sane as required for columns 3 to 6, Code J0, Occupational Injuries, Summary Occupational Injuries and Illnesses, OSEA No. 102. The above information was complied from the records that are available to me at this time and I declare under penalty of perjury that the information is true and accurate within the limitations of these records. M P PN t I=S Name of Bidder (Print)�6ature Address State.Contractors' License Number & Class. q•Z:6W ,7 City Zip Code Telephone 17 .AFFEDAVIT FOR CO-PARTNERSIUP. FIRM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )SS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) i�l;- iZti� Z_ being first duly sworn, deposes and says: That he is a member of the co -partnership firm designated as whichis the party making the -foregoing bid, or bid;:that such bid is genuine and not collusive or sham; that . said bidder ' has not colluded, -'conspired, connived or agreed, directly_ or indirectly, with any: other bidder or person to put in- sham bid -or that such oilier person shall refrain from . bidding;, and .has' not in any manner. sought by collusion to secure any advantage- against the City. of Diamond Bar or any person interested in, the proposed. contract; for himself or for any. other . person.. That he has been and is duly vested with authority to make and sign instruments for the co -partnership by yvho` constitute the other members of the co -partnership. Signature Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 2010. Signature of Officer Administering oath (Notary Public) 18 AFFIDAVIT FOR CORPORATION BEDBER STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )SS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) �S �% 1`i' 1kw•�jz hla �JcZ being first duly sworn, deposes and says: That he is C—i7 hof, la s r a a, corporation which is the party making the foiego bid; that such bid is genuine and not collusive or sham;. that said bidder has .not colluded, conspired, connived or agreed, directly or indirectly, .with -any other bidder 'or person to 'put in. a .sham:. bid or that such other person, shall refrain- from. bidding; -and has not m. any manner. sought by -,collusion to secure any. advantage ..again tthe City 'of Diamond Bar or any person interested in the proposed contract;. for himself or for any other person. S3�gnat-ur Subscribed and sworn' to before me this day of , 2010 Signature of Officer Administering oath (Notary Public) State of California ) ss. County of Orange Subscribed and sworn to before me on this a, day of -T - -er b - -�f L"A'�- by �5os - 14 e r)i a), d proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the personN who appeared before me. , Optional G. M. FIL*nm Commission# 1686M z Notary Pubilc - CaliforiNa ©rause County 2010 fly Comm. Expliec Aug 10, Further Description of Any Attached Document Title or Type of Document: 'Ut T�bk- Cer i eof�7,0,1 Idde Document Date: 6,x, 10 Number of Pages Signer(s) Other Than. Named Above: being. first duly sworn, deposes and says: That he is' the party making the foregoing bid or bid; that such -bid is genuine, and not collusive -or sham; that said bidder has not colluded, conspired, connived or agreed, directly or indirectly, with arty other bidder or person to put in a sham bid or that such other person shall refrain from bidding; and has not in any manner. sought by .collusion'to secure any advantage against the City of. Diamond Bar or any person interested in the proposed contract, for himself or for any, other person. ; STATE OF CALIFORNIA - )SS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES being first duly sworn, deposes and says: That he is of, one of th6 parties 'submitting the foregoing bid as a j pint'venitire and thai he has been and is duly vested With the. authority. to -make and sign iiistruinQnts for and on behalf of the: parties making Said bid who are:, that such bid is genuine and not collusive or sham; that said bidder has not colluded, conspired, connived or agreed, directly or indirectly, with any other bidder or person to put. in a sham bid or that such other person shall refrain from bidding; and has not in any manner sought by collusion - to secure any advantage against the City of Diam'ond Bar or any person interested in the proposed contract, for himself or for any other. per son. Signature FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE .BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT- WE hereinafter referred to as "Contractor" as PRINCIPAL, and as -SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto the CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA hereinafter referred to as the "City", in the sum of Dollars ($ ) lawful money of the United States of America, for the payment of which sum, will and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, jointly and several firmly by these presents. THE CONDITIONS OF THIS OBLIGATION ARE SUCH, that whereas, said contract has been . awarded and is about to enter into the annexed contract with said .City for consideration of the ...work -under the specification entitled DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD RAISED MEDIAN MODIFICATION BETWEEN MONTEFINO AVENUE AND GRAND AVENUE and is required by said.City to give this bond in connection withthe execution of said contract. NOW, THEREFORE, if said Contractor shall well and truly do 'arid perform, all the, covenants. 'and. obligations . of ` said contract . on his partto be done and performed at the time and in the manner..specified herein; this, obligation shall be null and void; otherwise it shall be in full force and effect; . PROVIDED; that any alterations in the work to be done, or. the materials to be furnished, which may be made pursuant to the terms of said Contract shall not in any way release said Contractor or.. the Surety thereunder nor' shall any extension of item granted under the provisions of said Contract release either said Contractor or said Surety and notice of such alterations or extensions of the Contract is hereby waived by such, Surety: In the event suit is brought upon this Bond by .the obligee and judgment is recovered, said Surety shall pay all costs incurred by the City in such suit, including a reasonable attorney's fees to be fixed by the Court: IN. WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seals this . day of , 2010. SURETY (SEAL) LABOR AMID MATERIAL BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT WE hereinafter referred to as "Contractor" as PRINCIPAL, and as .SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto the CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA hereinafter referred to as. the "City", in the ' suln of .DOLLARS ($ ) lawful money of the United States of America, for the payment of which sum, well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, jointly and several firmly by these presents. THE CONDITIONS OF THIS OBLIGATION ARE SUCH, that whereas, said Contract has been awarded and is 'about to "enter into the annexed Contract with said City for construction. of the work under City's specification. entitled DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD RAISED MEDIAN MODIFICATION. BETWEEN MONTEFINO. AVENUE AND GRAND AVENUE. and is required by said City to give this bond inconnection. with the. execution of said Contract;. NOW, THEREFORE,. if. said, Contractor in said Contract, or subcontractor; fails to. pay for any ' materials, provisions, provender or ' other supplies,: or for the use .of implements or machinery, used in, upon, for or about the performance of the work contracted to be done, or for any work or labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with. respect to such work or labor, said Surety will pay for the same ,in an amount hot exceeding the sum specified above, and also in case suit is brought upon this bond, a reasonable attorney's fee, to be fined by the court: This bond shall immure to the benefit of any and all persons entitled to file claims under Section 1192.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the State of California. PROVIDED, that any alterations in the work to be done, or the material to be furnished,, which may be made pursuant to the terms of said: Contract; shall not in any way release either said Contractor or .said. Surety thereunder not shall. any extensions 'of : time granted under .the provisions of said .Contract release either said Contractor or said Surety; and notice of such alterations or extensions of the Contract is. hereby waived by said Surety. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seals this Of 2010. BY: (SEAL) 23 SURETY (SEAL) day KNOW ALL MEN By THESE PRESENTS, THAT WE ELITE COMPANIES US INC as Principal, and DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Diamond Bar in the sura. to tell percent (I OO/D) of the total amount. of the bid of the Principalabovenamed, to be paid to the said City or its certain attorney, its successors and assigns; for which payment will and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and administrators, successors or assigns,. jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. In. no case shall the liability of the suret), hereunder exceed the sum of TEN THOUSAND, DOLLARS THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS STJCH.,'- that whereas. th.0 Principal has submitted the above mentioned bid to the City of Diai.noad Bar for certain. construction specifically described as follows. for .-,vbirh bids are to be opened at Diamond. Bar City' Hall on JUNF, 33 for the Dl�m BOULEVARD RAISED' MEDIAN DLA -N MODIFICATION 2010 f OND -BAR BETWEEN MONTEFINO AVENUE AND GRAND AVENUE. NOW, THEREFORE, if the aforesaid Principal is awarded the Contract, and witbin. the time and manner. required -under the specifications, after the prescribed forms are -presented to hi in for signature, enters into a written contract, in the prescribed forin in accordance with the bid, and. files the two bonds with the City of Diamond Bar, one, to guarantee. faithfd perf6rrAdnQd and other to guarantee payments for labor and materials,. as required by law, then this obligation Shalt be null and void; otherwise'ft shall remain in full force and effect. 'In the event suit is brought upon tbis bond by the obligbe and judgment is, -recovered, the Surety shall pay all costs incurred by the. City in such suit- including a reasonable attorney's fees to be fixed. by the Court. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seats on this 2ND day of JUNE 2010. U TE,COMPANIES US INC _(SEAL) IPA S�TRAT%1� D TITLE F -- DEVELOPERS SUREY AND INDEMNITY.COMPANY(SEAL) SURETY . I A TU R E �AN AUI�L D�=2-' 5. SMITH BOWMAN, ATTORNEY IN FACT NOTE: Siguiatures of those executing for the Surety rimst be properly iiclaio�yledged. 24 CALIFORNIA ALL-PUR-POSE- ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of SAN DIEGOU On JUNE 3, 2010 before me, A. WATT, NOTARY PUBLIC Date Here Insert Name and Title of the Officer personally appeared who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(k.) is/ayd subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that We/sheftbey A. WATT executed the same in h&/her/tbbir authorized capacity(ies), Commission # 1818935 and that by 4�. eir signature(g) on the instrument the Z Notary Public - California z person, or the entity upon behalf of which the persono San Diego County 1� My Comm. acted, Zecutedthe instrument. Expires Oct 21, 2012 | certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State ofCalifornia that the foregoing paragraph iotrue and correct. Signature � Place Notary Seal Above Signature mNotary Public aW* / ~ � ^—~ OPTIONAL Though the information below is not requiredbylaw, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form toanother document. Description ofAttached Document Title orType ofDocument: Document Date: Number ofPages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capecity(ee)Claimed bySiynar(s) Signer's Name: LJ Individual OCorporate Officer --Titla(s):_ O Partner — O Limited O General [] Attorney in Fac [] Trustee [] Guardian orConservator El Other: Signer Is Representing: Signer's Name: LJ Individual [] Corporate Officer --Title(a):_ [] Partner --[] Limited []General [] Attorney in Fact [] Trustee [] Guardian or Conservator Signer IsRepresenting: Top of thumb here �u00/National Notary Association ^o35oo°Soto Av" poBox mn ^m"*°ort*c^momemc' Ite"#5907 Reorder: Call Toll -Free ,*o0 -o76 -6o27 POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA PO Box 19725, IRVINE, CA 92623 (949) 263-3300 KNOW ALL BY 1'I1C$E PRESENTS that except as exp)essfy limited, DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY and INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, do each hereby make, constitute and appoint *** Steven Ft. Bonilla, S. Smith -Bowman, A. Watt, Leslie Hahn, Ted Collins, jointly or severally *** as their true and lawful Attorney(sHn-Fact, to make, execute, deliver and acknowledge, for and on behalf of said corporations, as sureties, bonds, undertakings and contracts of surety, ship giving and granting unto said Attornoy(s)-in-Fact full power and authority to do and to perform ovary act necessary, requisite or proper to be done in connection therewith as cacti of said corporations could do, but reserving to each of said corporations full power at substitution and revocation, and all of the acts of said Aftorney(o)•in•Fact, pursuant to these presents, are hereby ratified and confirmed. This Power of Attorney is granted and is signed by facsimile under and by auMority of the following resolutions adopted by the respective Boards of Directors of DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY and INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, effective as of January ist, 2008, RESOLVED, that a combination of any two of tho Chairman of the Board, the President, Executive Vioe-Ptegident, Senior Vice -President or any Vice President of the corporations be, and that each of them hereby is, authorized to execute this Power of Attorney, qualifying the oftomey(s) named In Iha Power of Attorney to execute, on behalf of the corporations, bonds, undertakings and contracts of suretyship: and that the Secretary or any Assistant Secretary of either of the corporations be, and each of them hereby is, authorized to attest the exeoudon of any such Power of Aftomey; RESOLVED, FURTHER, that the signatures of such officers may be affixed to any such Power of Ahomey or to any certificate relating thereto by facsimile, and any such Powor of Atlomey or certificate beefing such facsimile signatures shall be valid and binding upon the corporations when so affixed and in the future with respect to any bond, undertaking or contract of suretyship to which it Is attached. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANY and INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA have severally caused these presents to be Mynod by their respoctve officers and attested by their respective Secretary or Assistant secretary this January 1st, 2008. This Certificate isexecutedin the City of Irvine, Caldernla, this 2ND day oto U N E 2010 . rerjg Okur , is.. tant Secretary ID•1380(Rev.iil00} By. f,,��y AND Jry"A, �Y}PAMYpr Daniel Young, Vice President ,� aQ yzP ORgrfiG , Fr Qp P0,9,1 dry w,£ eta. er.s m 19$7 0 Stephen T. Pule, Senior Vice -President , t4Wa,,,41o xa z+ State of California County of Orange On „ _ August 13th, 2008 before me, _ Jenny TT Nguyen, Notes Public Date Here insert Name and Tie of the Officer personally appeared __ ___. Daniel Young ,and Stephan T. Pale Names) of Signer(s) who proved to me on the basis of salistaciory evidence to be the parsons) whose names) is(are subscribed to the within Instrument and acknowledged to me that helsh lthoy executed the some in hisfhedtheir authorized capacityfies), and that by hislherllheir signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of CAPAA # 1791640which the person(s) acted, executed the Instrument NOTARY PUMC ©RANDS COUM I cortify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under hie taws of the State of California that The foregoing paragraph is true and correct. txxrtm, expires .1�,; WITNESS my hand and official Place Notary Seal Above ignature _._ .. Signature—.—� Pubtiq CERTIFICATE GERTII'ICATE The undersigned, as SacrelaryorA0istanl Secretaryof DEVELOPERS SURETYAND IN05MNITY COMPANY or INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, docs hetaby, certify that the foregoing Power of Attomey remains in full force and has not been ravakod and, furthermore, that the provisions of the resolutions of the respective Boards of Director of said corporations set forth in the Power of Attorney are In fares a8 of 1110 date of this Certificate. This Certificate isexecutedin the City of Irvine, Caldernla, this 2ND day oto U N E 2010 . rerjg Okur , is.. tant Secretary ID•1380(Rev.iil00} CERTIFICATION OF NON-DISCREMNATION AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION As suppliers of goods or services to the City of Diamond Bar, the firm listed below certifies that it does not discriminate in its employment with regards to race, religion, sex, or national origin;. that it is in compliance with all federal, state, and local directives and executive orders regarding non-discrimination in employment; and that it will pursue an affirmative course of action as required by the affirmative, action guidelines. We agree specifically: 1. To establish or observe � employment policies which affmnatively 'promote opportunities for minority persons at all job levels. 2. To. communicate this policy to all . persons concerned including all company employees, outside recruiting services, especially those serving minority communities, bud to the minority communities at large: 3. To, take affirmative steps to hire minority employees within the company. FIRM 9L t.M .. C0`,M P a i j I Nc� TITLE OF OFFICER. SIGNCNG G 0_0 SIGNATURE -� _ DATE Z - Za .4 CD Please include any' additional information available regarding equal opportunity employment programs now in effect within your company: -� �4crl V 2 I'LeZrZvi r _71 worzr % /N15i 25 CERTIFICATION WITH REGARD TO THE PERFORMANCE OF PREVIOUS CONTRACTS OR SUBCONTRACTS SUBJECT TO THE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY CLAUSE AND THE FILING OF REQUIRED REPORTS The bidder t Cp vvk Palo c c,s U,S 1?-,, C proposed subcontractor hereby certifies that he has V_ , has not , participated in a previous contract or subcontract subject to the Equal Opportunity Clause, as required by Executive Orders 10925, 11114, or 11246, and that he has v— , has not ; filed with the Joint Reporting Committee, the Director of the Office of Federal Contract Compliance, aTederal Government contracting. or administering agency, or the former President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity, all reports due under the applicable filing requirements. (COMPI ANY) BY: �— (TITLE) DATE: J�.ti� 1 �� , 2010. NOTE:The above certification is required by the Equal Employment opportunity Regulations`of the. Secretary of Labor (41 CFR 60-1.7 (b) (1), and must be submitted. by bidders and. proposed 'subcontractors only in connection with contracts and subcontracts which are subject to the Equal 'Opportunity Clause. Contracts and subcontracts which are. exempt from- the Equal Opportunity Clause are set forth in 41 CFR 601.5. (Generally only, contracts or subcontracts of $10,000 or under are exempt). Currently, Standard Form 100 (EEO -1) is the only report required by the Executive Orders or their implementing regulations. Proposed prime contractors and subcontractors who have participated in a previous contract or. subcontract subject to the Executive Orders and have not filed the required reports should note that 41 CFR 60-1.7 (b) (1) prevents the award of contracts and subcontracts unless such contractor submits a report covering the delinquent period of such other period specified by the Federal Highway Administration or by the Director, Office of Federal Contract Compliance, U.S. Department of Labor. • _ .. 26 NON -COLLUSION A-FFIDAVIT TO: THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) SS COUNTY OF } being first duly sworn; . deposes and says that he or she is Gt r t� of ' g L � ��.. �,�, vwt Pis c k�:� theparty malting the foregoing bid; that the bid is not made in the interest of or on behalf of, any undisclosed person, partnership, company association; organization, or corporation; that the bid is genuine and 'not collusive or sham; that .the bidder has not directly or indirectly induced or solicited and other bidder to put. in a false or . sham bid, . and has not. directly or indirectly colluded; .conspired; connived; or agreed with any bidder or anyone else to put in a sham bid, or that anyone shall refraisi' from bidding; that the bidder has not in any manner, directly or: indirectly, sought by agreement, communication,or conference with: anyone to fix the bid :price of the bidder or any other bidder;, or: to fix any. overhead, profit; or.'cost'element of.the'bid price, or of that of any, other bidder, or to secure any . advantage ..against the public body awarding the contact of anyone. interested in:: the proposed contract; .that all' statements contained in the bid are.true;. and, further, that the bidder has' not, directly, 'or indirectly, submitted' his or her bid price . or any breakdown thereof, or the contents thereof,, or divulged information or data relative thereto, or paid, and will not pay, any fee to any corporation, partnership, company association, organization, bid depository, or to any member or agent thereof to effectuate a collusive or sham bid. Sriaiure ofdrier STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) SS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) Subscribed and sworn to .before me this day of Notary Public in and for the County of 27 State of California State of California ss. County of Orange Subscribed and sworn to before me .on this day of by proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s who appeared before me. ou Commission i# 1686188 'Y , NozarV PLbflc - Cafifornia orange County My Comm. Dxpi,es Aug 10, 2.010 Optional Further Description of Any Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Co U -S i 07" 1 d, QV Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: —)jq74,e, CITY COUNCIL Agenda # 6. 9 (f) Meeting Date: June 15, 2010 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Mana(el V 11 TITLE: NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL BATTERY BACK- UP SYSTEM PROJECT. RECOMMENDATION: File a Notice of Completion. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The City Council awarded a construction contract to Freeway Electric, Inc. on January 19, 2010 in an amount not to exceed $54,540.00 with a contingency amount of $5,500.00 for a total authorization amount of $60,040.00. The City authorized the Notice to Proceed for the construction project on March 26, 2010. Freeway Electric, Inc. has completed all work required as part of this project in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the City. The final construction cost of the project is $57,009.25 which is $3,030.75 under budget. One (1) contract change order was issued for additional miscellaneous material/equipment as warranted by field conditions. PREPARED BY: Christian Ma-Ilpic-a- Associate Engineer REVIE D BY: Davi G Liu, Director of Public Works Attachments: Notice of Completion Date Prepared: June 7, 2010 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 21825 COPLEY DRIVE DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA 91765 ATTENTION: CITY CLERK NOTICE OF COMPLETION Notice pursuant to Civil Code Section 3093, must be filed within 10 days after completion. Notice is hereby given that: 1. The undersigned is the owner or corporate officer of the owner of the interest or estate stated below in the property hereinafter described: 2. The full name of the owner is Citi! of Diamond Bar 3. The full address of the owner is 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar CA 91765 4. The nature of the interest or estate of the owner is; "In fee" (If other than fee, strike "In fee' and insort, for example, "purchaser under contract of purchase," or "lessee') 5. The full names and full addresses of all persons, if any, who hold tide with the undersigned as joint tenants or as tenants in common are: NAMES ADDRESSES 6. A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was completed on April 09, 2010. The work done was: Installation of Traffic Signal Battery Back -Up Systems at Golden Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard Golden Springs Drive and Brea Canyon Road Golden Springs Drive and Ballena Drive, Diamond Bar Boulevard and Mountain Laurel Way, and Diamond Bar Boulevard and Pathfinder Road. 7. The name of the contractor, if any, for such work of improvement was Freeway Electric Inc. January 19 2010 (if no contractor for work of improvement as a whole, insert "none') (Date of Contact) 8. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, State of California, and is described as follows at Golden Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard Golden Springs Drive and Brea Canyon Road Golden Springs Drive and Baliena Drive, Diamond Bar Boulevard and Mountain Laurel Way, and Diamond Bar Boulevard and Pathfinder Road. 9. The street address of said property is "none" (If no street address has been officially assigned, insert "none") CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Dated: Verification for Individual Owner Signature of owner or corporate officer of owner named in pamgaph 2 or his agent VERIFICATION I, the undersigned, say: I am the Director of Public Works the declarant of the foregoing ("resident of', "Manager of," "A partner of" "Owner of," etc.) notice of completion; I have read said notice of completion and know the contests thereof; the same is true of my own knowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on 20 at Diamond Bar California. (Date ofsignaturc) (City where signed) (Personal signature of the individual who is swearing that the contents of Ute notice ofcompletion aro we) CITY COUNCIL Agenda 4 6. 10. (a) Meeting Date: 6115110 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: James DeStefano, City Managk TITLE: APPROVAL OF INCREASE IN CONTRACT AMOUNT FOR MEGA WAY ENTERPRISES IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,731 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SYCAMORE CANYON TRAIL PROJECT — PHASE 111. RECOMMENDATION: Approve. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The City Council appropriated $311,210 for the construction of Sycamore Canyon Trail Project — Phase Ill. Total cost to complete construction, including this contract increase, is $309,760.24. BACKGROUND: The City Council authorized a total of $218,769.50 for Mega Way Enterprises to construct the Phase III Trail improvements at Sycamore Canyon Park. Total cost of construction by Mega Way Enterprises is actually $222,500.36, or $3,731 more than City Council authorization. Staff is seeking City Council approval to increase the contract amount with Mega Way Enterprises by $3,731. The primary reason for the additional cost of this project is the unexpected soils conditions encountered during the excavation for the retaining walls that support the trail. These conditions required the over -excavation of the native soil for the footings of the wall, hauling away the excavated native soil, hauling in replacement non -expansive soil, and the compaction of the replacement non - expansive soil. DISCUSSION: Total cost to complete the construction of the Sycamore Canyon Trail Project — Phase Ill is $309,760.24. Total authorized budget is $311,210. There are sufficient funds already appropriated for this project to cover the cost of this contract increase. Mega Way Enterprises completed the construction of the trail improvements in March 2010 and the trail has been in use since its completion. Approval of this contract increase will authorize staff to make the final payment due Mega Way Enterprises for construction of this project. V -r-// ----------------- - Director • • Services CITY COUNCIL Agenda 4 6 . 10 (h) Meeting Date: June 15, 2010 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Man�la!',i- IP TITLE: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 201, -XX APPROVING SUBMITTAL OF A GRANT APPLICATION FOR FUNDING TO CONSTRUCT FREESTANDING OUTDOOR INTERPRETIVE EXHIBITS ALONG SYCAMORE CANYON PARK TRAIL THROUGH THE NATURE EDUCATION FACILITY PROGRAM OF THE SAFE DRINKING WATER, WATER QUALITYAND SUPPLY, FLOOD CONTROL., RIVER AND COASTAL PROTECTION BOND ACT OF 2006 (Proposition 84). RECOMMENDATION: Adopt. BACKGROUND: Proposition 84, which was approved by California voters in 2006, is now accepting grant applications for funding through its Nature Education Facilities Program. Staff has reviewed the grant requirements and the needs of the City of Diamond Bar and has determined that the best potential project for funding through this grant opportunity is construction of educational/interpretive kiosks/exhibits, benches and trash receptacles along the Sycamore Canyon Trail. DISCUSSION: The freestanding outdoor interpretive exhibits will describe the flora and fauna found in Sycamore Canyon, the history of the area and points of interest and views available along the trail. The exhibits would be presented as a self directed educational walk/hike that would start at the trail head in Sycamore Canyon Park, cross the street at Clear Creek Canyon, re-enter the trail system at Steep Canyon Trailhead and continue along the trail to the Diamond Bar Center via the Ridge Route. Staff is now preparing the application for this grant, which is due on July 1, 2010. The attached resolution is a requirement of the grant application. If this competitive grant is awarded to Diamond Bar, there are no matching funds required from the City. Attachment: Resolution No: 2010 -XX Director of Community Services Resolution No: 2010 -XX RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR NATURE EDUCATION FACILITY PROGRAM FUNDS SAFE DRINKING WATER, WATER QUALITY AND SUPPLY, FLOOD CONTROL, RIVER AND COASTAL PROTECTION BOND ACT OF 2006 WHEREAS, the State Department of Parks and Recreation has been delegated the responsibility by the Legislature of the State of California for the administration of the Nature Education Facilities Program, setting up necessary procedures governing the Application; and WHEREAS, said procedures established by the State Department of Parks and Recreation require the applicant to certify by resolution the approval of application(s) before submission of said application(s) to the State; and WHEREAS, the applicant will enter into a contract with the State of California to complete the PROJECT; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby: Approves the filing of an application for the Sycamore, Canyon Park Trail Outdoor Freestanding Interpretive Exhibits, and 1. Certifies that said applicant has or will have available, prior to commencement of any work on the project included in this application, the sufficient funds to complete the project should this grant be awarded; and 2. Certifies that the applicant has or will have sufficient funds to operate and maintain the project; and 3. Certifies that the applicant has reviewed, understands, and agrees to the General Provisions contained in the contract shown in the Grant Administration Guide; and 4. Certifies that this project is consistent with the applicable city or county, or appropriate planning document, as the case may be; and 5. Delegates the authority to the City Manager to conduct all negotiations, sign and submit all documents, including, but not limited to applications, agreements, amendments, and payment requests, which may be necessary for the completion of the project; and 6. Agrees to comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and guidelines. Approved and adopted the 15th day of June, 2010 Carol Herrera, Mayor CITY COUNCIL Agenda # 6.1 (a) Meeting Date: June 15, 2010 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Mana V TITLE: Authorize the City Manager to exec to a Five Year "Microsoft Enterprise Agreement" with Microsoft through CompuCom in an amount not to exceed $105, 651.65 ($21,130.33 annually) Recommendation: ME= This purchase exceeds the City Manager's spending authority and requires Council authorization. Budget/Financial Impact: There are sufficient funds in the proposed FY1 0-11 budget for this expenditure. The City will be required to budget these funds every year through FY 2015. Discussion: As part of its technology procurement practices, the City typically upgrades and deploys core City software on a timescale that keeps City software versions at, or near, current commercial release versions. This practice is necessary to ensure critical City software is kept current with security - related and product feature improvements For the past (5) years, the City of Diamond Bar (City) has had an Enterprise Agreement for Microsoft software products. This agreement has saved the City money through volume purchasing and greatly simplified licensing by only requiring a single transaction to acquire licenses for the City. This agreement has allowed us the legal rights to the current version of their products, such as Windows 2003 Server & Windows 2008 Server as well as SQL 2005 Server and SQL 2008 Server, etc. The City's Microsoft inventory includes 25 Windows-based servers including 15 operating Microsoft based SQL server databases, and 85 individual workstations running Microsoft Windows Vista and Microsoft Office 2007 operating systems. The Microsoft Enterprise Agreement ("EK) offers two options: three (3) year and five (5) year terms. By opting for the (5) year term, we are locking our price in to today's price (price -protection) for the products on our EA over the next 5 years. If Microsoft increases the licensing costs for any of these products over the next five years, it will not affect us. The City's membership in the Municipal Information Association of California (MISAC) allows the purchase of the licensing agreement using the lowest cost purchasing vehicle known as the CCISDA EA Agreement. Typically Microsoft offers government EA customers volume discounts in four tiers A- D. Tier D is reserved for VERY LARGE enterprises such as the Federal Government, which have over 150,000 workstations. Under the CCISDA EA Agreement we will receive pricing that is 7.5% LOWER than Tier "D' pricing which represents a significant savings of over $85,000 from what a City of our size is normally charged. It is recommended that the City Council authorize these expenditures and allow the City Manager to execute any needed contract documents. Prepare y: Ken Desforges, Directdr InKormation Systems Reviewed by:nq David Doyle, Assistant City Manager • Meeting Date: June15,2010 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Ma r TITLE: Authorize City Manager to purcha eHewIett Packard Servers, Cisco Networking equipment and additional hardware from CDWG, throughout the FY 10-11 for an amount not to exceed $181,000. Recommendation: Approve. This purchase exceeds the City Manager's spending authority and requires Council authorization. Budget/Financial Impact: There are sufficient funds in the proposed FY1 0-11 budget for these purchases: Discussion: City staff relies heavily on the use of computers, specialized networks, and associated hardware and software to create, process, and store digital information to serve our constituents. In addition, the City relies on these same systems to promote and maintain communication with our residents, businesses, City Council and City staff. There are several existing pieces of equipment including network servers, network switch gear and associated components that have outlived their useful live and have a high likelihood of failure in the next 6 to 12 months. In addition, there are 2 specialized workstations and three departmental printers that require replacement in the upcoming fiscal year due to their age and operating system limitations. Staff recommends the City Council authorize the City Manager to purchase the necessary replacement equipment from Cisco, Hewlett Packard (HP), and other equipment manufacturers through a State -negotiated and approved bulk purchasing contracts. This process provides for a significantly reduced cost to the City without the formal bid process. If approved by Council, the City will begin the replacement of these various pieces of equipment in July 2010 and conclude prior to the end of the fiscal year. It is recommended that the City Council authorize these expenditures and approve the disposal of the existing surplus property per City policy. Prepared by: Ken Desforges, Directorforattion Systems Reviewed by: David Doyle, Aslis7_tauk City Manager CITY COUNCIL Agenda # 6 _ 12 () Meeting Date.- June 15, 2010 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Ma' r TITLE: Approve the 2010-2011 Fiscal Ye Appropriation Limit using the growth factor of 'c I In e over change in the City population cha e over the prior year and the change in the California per capita income over the prior year as the annual adjustment growth factor. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the use of the growth factor of change in the City population change over the prior year and the change in the California per capita income over the prior year as the annual adjustment growth factor for use in calculating the Fiscal Year 2010-2011 Appropriations Limit. Approve Resolution 2010 -XXX. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Since the City's 2010-2011 appropriations subject to the Gann Limit fall well below $33,408,743, there is no financial impact. Per City Policy, the Finance Department presents the Appropriation Limit for the City Council's review and approval. Pursuant to Article XIIIB of the California Constitution (known as the Gann Limit), the City must compute an annual appropriations limit. This appropriations limit will place a ceiling on the City's total amount of tax revenues and the total amount of appropriations. The appropriation limit can be calculated by the use of one of the following factors: Based on the growth factor of County population change over the prior year and the change in the California per capita income over the prior year. Based on the growth factor of City population change over the prior year and the change in the California per capita income over the prior year. Based on the growth factor of change in the City's non residential new construction valuation and the change in the County or City population. DISCUSSION: The recommended factor to compute the appropriation limit is the growth factor of change in the City population change over the prior year and the change in the California per capita income over the prior year. By using this factor the City will have an appropriation limit of $33,408,743 for Fiscal Year 2010-2011. Linda G. Magnuson, Finance Director REVIEWED BY: Finance Director Assistant City Manager Attachments: Resolution Appropriation Limit Worksheets for fiscal year 2010-2011 RESOLUTION NO. 2010 - XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SETTING THE PROPOSITION 4 (GANN) APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010- 2011 FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 9 OF TITLE 1 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE WHEREAS, Article XIII B of the Constitution of the State of California (enacted with the passage of Proposition 4 in 1979 and modified with the passage of Proposition 111 in 1990), provides that the total annual appropriations limit of such entity for the prior year be adjusted for changes in the non-residential assessed valuation or the percentage change in the California Per Capita Income and population except as otherwise specifically provided for in said Article; and WHEREAS, Section 7910 of the Government Code provides that each year the governing body of each local jurisdiction shall, by resolution, establish its appropriations limit for the following fiscal year pursuant to Article XIII B at a regularly scheduled meeting or a noticed special meeting. Prior to such meeting, documentation used in the determination of the appropriation limit shall be available to the public-, and WHEREAS, Proposition 111 as approved by the voters of the State of California, revised the method for calculating the Gann Spending Limit, it also requires a recorded voice vote of the City Council regarding which of the annual adjustment factors have been selected each year; and WHEREAS, Section 7902 (a) and 7902.6 of the Government Code sets forth the method for determining the appropriations limit for each local jurisdiction for the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar wishes to establish the appropriation limit for fiscal year 2009-2010 for the City of Diamond Bar. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, California, as follows: Section 1. That it is hereby found and determined that the documentation used in the determination of the appropriations limit for the City of Diamond Bar for fiscal year 2010-2011 was available to the public in City offices of said City at least fifteen days prior to this date. Section 2. That the County of Los Angeles LAFCO, established the original appropriation limit for the newly incorporated City. Section 3. That the factor selected is the growth factor of Los Angeles County population change over the prior year and the change in California per capita personal income as the annual adjustment growth factor for use in calculating the Fiscal Year 2010-2011 Appropriations Limit, Section 4. That the Appropriation Limit for the City of Diamond Bar as established in accordance with Section 7902(a) and Section 7902.6 of the California Government Code is $33,408,743 for fiscal year 2010-2011. Section 5. That the Mayor of the City of Diamond Bar shall sign and the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution No. 201 O-XXXX . PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this Carol Herrera, Mayor 1, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, and approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: 1 2010, by the following vote: Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT WORK SHEET 2010-2011 California Per Capita Income -2.54% % Change over Prior Year Population Change 1.33% % Change over Prior Year (City) Per Capita converted toaRatio 0.9748 Population converted toGRatio 1.0139 Calculation of Growth Factor 0.9881 2009-2010 Appropriations Limit 33,809,489 2010-2011 Appropriations Limit (New Appropriations Limit = Prior Year Appropriations Limit x Growth Factor) CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ' APPROPRIATIONS UKO[TWORK SHEET 2O1O-2O11 California Per Capita Income -2.5496 % Change over Prior Year Population Change 0.8396 96Change over Prior Year (CoUntv) Per Capita converted tooRatio 0.9746 Population converted toaRatio 1.0083 Calculation ofGrowth Factor 0.9827 (Growth Factor = Per Capita Ratio xPopulation Ratio) 2OOS-2O1OAppropriations Limit 33.809.489 2OOS-3O1UAppropriations Limit (New Appropriations Limit = Prior Year Appropriations Limit x Growth Factor) APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT WORK SHEET 2010-2011 % Change Non Residential New Construction (City) Population Change % Change over Prior Year (City) Nonresidential converted toeRatio Population Converted toaRatio Calculation of Growth Factor 2OO9-2O1OAppropriations Limit 2010-2011 Appropriations Limit -2.04Y6 1.39% 0.9736 1.0139 0,9871 33,809,489 (New Appropriations Limit = Prior Year Appropriations Limit xGrowth Factor) CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT WORK SHEET CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 96Change Non Residential -2.64Y6 New Construction ([|itv) Population Change 0.8396 % Change over Prior Year /CoUntv\ Nonresidential converted toaRatio 0.9736 Population Converted toaRatio 1.0083 Ca|ou|adOO ofGrowth Factor 0.9817 2OO9-2U10Appropriations Limit 33.808.489 2010-2011 Appropriations Limit (New Appropriations Limit = Prior Year Appropriations Limit xGrowth Factor) ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT EXHIBIT "A" 2010-2011 1989-90 Base Year 9,882,416 1990-91 Adjusted Base 10,785,669 1991-92 Adjusted Base 11,585,192 1992-93 Adjusted Base 11,762,247 1993-94 Adjusted Base 12,275,495 1994-95 Adjusted Base 13,169,824 1995-96 Adjusted Base 14,005,207 1996-97 Adjusted Base 14,729,615 1997-98 Adjusted Base 15,608,665 1998-99 Adjusted Base 16,482,389 1999-00 Adjusted Base 17,561,562 2000-01 Adjusted Base 18,772,045 2001-02 Adjusted Base 20,576,003 2002-03 Adjusted Base 22,364,058 2003-04 Adjusted Base 24,723,466 2004-05 Adjusted Base (revision) 25,886,770 2005-06 Adjusted Base (revision) 27,569,946 2006-07 Adjusted Base 28,885,277 2007-08 Adjusted Base 30,379,173 2008-09 Adjusted Base 31,954,909 2009-10 Adjusted Base 33,809,489 2010-11 Adjusted Base 33,408,743 INVESTMENT POLICY - FY 2010-2011 1:1116OULON-i This Statement is intended to provide guidelines for the prudent investment of the City's temporarily idle cash and to outline the policies for maximizing the efficiency of the City's cash management system. The ultimate goal is to enhance the economic status of the City while protecting its accumulated cash. It is the policy of the City Council to review, update and adopt the City's Investment Policy on an annual basis. INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE The investment of funds of the City of Diamond Bar is directed to the goals of safety, liquidity and yield. The authority governing investments for municipal governments is set forth in the Government Code, Sections 53601, et. seq. 1. Safety. Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. Investments shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. The objective will be to mitigate credit risk and interest rate risk. The City will operate only in those investments that are considered very safe. A. Credit Risk is the risk of loss due to the failure of the security issuer or backer. Credit risk will be mitigated by: Limiting investments to the safest types of securities; Pre -qualifying the broker-dealers with which the City will do business. This will be done via a review of experience and qualifications, and the response on a questionnaire (Appendix A) submitted by the prospective institution. In addition broker-dealers should be primary, registered investment securities dealers; Diversifying the investment portfolio in order that potential losses on individual securities do not exceed the income generated from the remainder of the portfolio. B. Interest Rate Risk is the risk that the market value of portfolio securities will fall due to a change in general interest rates. Interest rate risk will be mitigated by: Structuring the investment portfolio so that securities mature to meet cash requirements for ongoing operations, thereby avoiding the need to sell securities on the open market prior to their maturation to meet specific operational needs; Operating funds will be invested primarily in shorter term securities 1 2. Liquidity. The investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to meet all operating requirements which might be reasonably anticipated. This is accomplished by structuring the portfolio so that securities mature at the same time as cash is needed to meet anticipated demands. Additionally, since all possible cash demands cannot be anticipated, the portfolio will consist largely of securities with active secondary or resale markets. 3. Yield. Yield is the potential dollar earnings an investment can provide and sometimes is described as the rate of return. The primary objective of the investment policy of the City of Diamond Bar is SAFETY. Investments shall be undertaken to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. The investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the investment risk constraints and cash flow characteristics of the portfolio. Return on investment is of least importance compared to the safety and liquidity objectives described above. Investments are limited to relatively low risk securities in anticipation of earning a fair return relative to the risk being assumed. Securities shall not be sold prior to maturity unless one of the following conditions exists: 1) a declining credit security could be sold early to minimize loss of principal; 2) a security swap would improve the quality of yield in the portfolio; or 3) liquidity needs of the portfolio require that a security be sold. POLICY As a General Law city, Diamond Bar operates its accumulated idle cash investments under the prudent man rule. This insures that "...investment shall be made with the exercise of that degree of judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation but for investment considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived." (CC #2261) This affords the City a broad spectrum of investment opportunities, so long as the investment is deemed prudent and is allowable under current law of the State of California and the regulations of the City of Diamond Bar. The City of Diamond Bar strives to maintain the level of investment of all funds as near 100% as possible, through daily and projected cash flow determinations. Cash management and investment transactions are the responsibility of the Treasurer but are administered by the Finance Director under the authority of the Treasurer. Investments are allowed in the following media: United States treasury bills, bonds, notes or any other obligations or securities issued by the United States treasury or any other obligation guaranteed as to principal and interest by the United States. 2. Federal agency or United States government-sponsored enterprise obligations, participations or other instruments, including those issued by or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by federal agencies or United States government- sponsored enterprises. 3. Local Agency Investment Fund (state pool) — Demand Deposits. A more I descriptive definition of LAIF is attached as Appendix B 2 4. Certificates of Deposit (or Time Deposits), placed with commercial banks and/or savings banks. 5. Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 6. Bankers Acceptances 7. Commercial Paper 8. Medium Term Corporate Notes 9. Passbook Savings Accounts 10. Active Deposits 11. Money Market Funds comprised of investments rated in the highest category by Moody's Investors Services Inc. or by Standard & Poor's Corporation. A more detailed description of each of the City's investment instruments is attached in Appendix C Repurchase Agreements Prohibited investments include securities not listed above(unless authorized pursuant to section 53601), as well as inverse floaters, range notes, interest only strips derived from a pool of mortgages (Collateralized Mortgage Obligations), and any security that could result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity, as specified in Section 53601.6. (Zero interest accrual means the security has the potential to realize zero interest depending upon the structure of the security. Zero coupon bonds and similar investments that start at a level below the face value are legal because their value does increase.) Government and agency paper are the highest quality investments available in terms of safety and liquidity. Certificates of deposit and savings accounts must be insured or collateralized. Only commercial paper, with A-1 Moody's and P-1 Standard & Poor's ratings, is authorized for purchase. Most investments are highly liquid, with the exception of collateralized and insured certificates of deposit held by banks and savings banks. Maturities are selected to anticipate cash needs, thereby eliminating the need for forced liquidation. Effective January 1, 1989 the Government Code, Section 53601 states..."no investment shall be made in any security, other than a security underlying a repurchase or reverse repurchase agreement authorized by this section, which at the time of the investment has a term remaining to maturity in excess of five years, unless the legislative. body has granted express authority to make that investment either specifically or as a part of an investment program approved no less than three months prior to the investment." Therefore longer-term investments (over one year) are limited to maturities of five years or less unless specifically approved by the City Council. Diamond Bar attempts to obtain the highest yield possible when selecting investments, provided that the criteria for safety and liquidity are met. Ordinarily, through a positive yield curve, (i.e., longer term investment rates are higher than those of shorter term maturities), the City attempts to ladder its maturities to meet anticipated cash needs in such a way that longer term investments carry a higher rate than is available in the extremely short term market of 30 days or less. The City is authorized to invest in the Local Agency Investment Fund based upon periodic reviews of the book to market value of the investment pool and an annual review of the goals and strategies of the investment board. If there are changes in the management of the Local Agency Investment Fund, and there, is a conflict with the City's investment goals, the City may elect to discontinue investment in LAIF. It should be noted that, per LAIF's investment policy, no more than 10% of its portfolio may be invested in Reverse Repurchase Agreements. Since these types of investments are extremely sophisticated, the City of Diamond Bar chooses not to individually invest in these types of securities but will participate in LAIF's investment pool as long as the percentage of the portfolio remains at 10% or less. POLICY CONSTRAINTS The City operates its investment pool with many State and self-imposed constraints. The City does not purchase or sell securities on margin. The City does not buy stocks or deal in futures or options. The City does not use Reverse Repurchase Agreements for the investment of funds. The City does not invest in Guaranteed Small Business Administration (SBA) Notes. SAFEKEEPING OF SECURITIES The City of Diamond Bar will adopt the operational practice of having all purchased securities delivered, versus payment to a safekeeping account at the City's depository bank. It is recognized this will be to a third party independent custodian under contractual agreement made with the Security Services Division of the chosen bank. Investment transactions will be authorized by the City Treasurer and executed by either the Finance Director or the Assistant City Manager. The transactions will be verified via monthly reconciliations by the Senior Accountant. REPORTING A monthly report of investments will be provided to the City Manager. The required elements of this report are as follows: Type of investment Institution Date of Maturity Amount of deposit or cost of security Current market value of securities with maturity in, excess of twelve months Statement relating the report to the Statement of Investment Policy Rate of interest 4 h) Statement that there are sufficient funds to meet the next six months' obligations The basic premise underlying the City of Diamond Bar's investment philosophy is to insure that money is always available when needed. Attachments: Appendix A - Broker Dealer Questionnaire Appendix B - Description of Investments Appendix C - Local Agency Investment Fund Description BROKER/DEALER QUESTIONNAIRE AND CERTIFICATION 1. Name of Firm: 2. Address: 3. Telephone:( ) 4. Broker's Representative to the City (attach resume): Name: Title: Telephone: 5. Manager/Partner-in-Charge (attach resume) Name: Title: Telephone: 6, List all personnel who will be trading with or quoting securities to City employees (attach resume) Title: Telephone:( ) 7. Which of the above personnel have read the City's investment policy? 8. Is your firm a primary dealer in United States Government Securities? Yes No 6 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Broker/Dealer Questionnaire and Certification Name of Firm: Page Two 9. List the total volume of United States Government and Agency Securities for the last calendar year. Firm -wide $ No. of Transactions Your local office $ No. of Transactions 10. Which instruments are offered regularly by your local office? Treasury Bills CMO's Treasury Notes/Bonds Bank CD's BA's (domestic) S & L CD's BA's (foreign) Repos Commercial Paper Reverse Repos Agencies (specify): Other (specify): 11. References -- Please identify your most directly comparable public sector clients in our geographical area. Entity Contact Telephone Client Since 12. Have any of your clients ever sustained a loss on a securities transaction arising from a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the risk characteristics of the instrument? If so, explain. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Broker/Dealer Questionnaire and Certification Name of Firm: Page Three 13. Has your local office ever subject to a regulatory or state/federal agency investigation for alleged improper, fraudulent, disreputable or unfair activities related to the sale of securities? Have any of your employees been so investigated? If so explain: 14. Has a client ever claimed in writing that your firm was responsible for investment losses? If so, explain. 15. Explain your normal custody and delivery process. Who audits these fiduciary systems? Can you meet safekeeping requirements? 16. How many and what percentage of your transactions failed Last month? Last year? 17. Describe the capital line and trading limits of the office that would conduct business with the City of Diamond Bar. 18, Does your firm participate in the S.I.P.C. insurance program if not, explain. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Broker/Dealer Questionnaire and Certification Name of Firm: Page Four 19. What portfolio information, if any, do you require from your clients? 20. What reports, transactions, confirmations and paper trail will the City receive? 21. Does your firm offer investment training to your clients? Yes No 22. Please enclose the following: Latest audited financial statements. Samples of reports, transactions, and confirmations the City will receive. Samples of research reports and/or publications that your firm regularly provides to clients. Complete schedule of fees and charges for various transactions. E CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Broker/Dealer Questionnaire and Certification Name of Firm: Page Five `CERTIFICATION` I hereby certify that I have personally read the Statement of Investment Policy of the City of Diamond Bar, and have implemented reasonable procedures and a system of controls designed to preclude imprudent investment activities arising out of transactions conducted between our firm and the City of Diamond Bar. All sales personnel will be routinely informed of the City's investment objectives, horizons, outlooks, strategies and risk constraints whenever we are so advised by the City. We pledge to exercise due diligence in informing the City of Diamond Bar of all foreseeable risks associated with financial transactions conducted with our firm. Under penalties of perjury, the responses to this questionnaire are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Title Countersignature* Title Date Date Company president or person in charge of government securities operations. 10 RETOPORMW Description of Investments U.S. Treasury Issues are direct obligations of the United States Government. These issues are called bills, notes and bonds. The maturity range of new issues is from 30 days (T -Bills) to 30 years (T -Bonds). These are highly liquid and are considered the safest investment security. Federal Agency Securities are issued by direct U.S. Government agencies or quasi - government agencies. Many of these issues are guaranteed directly or indirectly by the United States Government. Examples of these securities are Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) notes, Federal National Mortgage Associations (FNMA) notes, Federal Farm Credit Bank (FFCB) notes, Small Business Administration (SBA) notes, Government National Bank (GNMA) notes, an d Federal Home Loan. Mortgage Credit (FHLMC) notes. Investment in these types of securities is limited to 40% of the portfolio. Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) is a special fund in the State Treasury which local agencies may use to deposit funds for investment. There is no minimum investment period and the minimum transaction is $5,000, in multiples of $1,000 above that, with a maximum of $40 million for any agency. It offers high liquidity because deposits can be converted to cash in twenty-four hours and no interest is lost. All interest is distributed to those agencies participating on a proportionate share determined by the amounts deposited and the length of time they are deposited. Interest is paid quarterly via direct deposit into the agency's LAW account. The State keeps an amount for reasonable costs of making the investments, not to exceed one-quarter of one percent of the earnings. Certificates of Deposit are investments for inactive funds issued by banks, savings and loans and credit unions. Investments of $250,000 are insured respectively by Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC) and the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund (NCUSIF). Certificates of Deposit can be issued from 14 days to several years in maturity allowing the City of Diamond Bar's investment of funds to be matched to cash flow needs. For deposits exceeding $250,000 the financial institution is required to collateralize with 110% government securities collateral. City of Diamond Bar does not accept 150% Collateral (First Trust Deeds) or 105% Letters of Credit (L.C.). Section 53635.2 of, the Government Code prohibits investments in certificates of deposits of state or federal credit unions if any member of the city's governing or managing officers (Council, City manager, Fiscal officers) serves on the credit union board or key committee positions. Negotiable Certificates of Deposit are unsecured obligations of the financial institution. These securities are generally issued in bearer form and pay interest at maturity. Although negotiable, a strong secondary market exists only in the NCD's issued by the largest United -States banks. Examples of large banks include Bank of America, Citibank, Chase Manhattan, Manufacturers Hanover, etc. These securities 11 generally trade with minimum amounts of $1 million per trade with the average trade in the secondary market of $5 million. Investment in Negotiable Certificates of Deposit is limited to 30% of the investment portfolio per Government Code Section 53601. Bankers Acceptances are short-term credit arrangements to enable businesses to obtain funds to finance commercial transactions. They are time drafts drawn on a bank by an exporter or importer to obtain funds to pay for specific merchandise. By its acceptance, the bank becomes primarily liable for the payment of the draft at maturity. An acceptance is a high grade negotiable instrument. Acceptances are purchased in various denominations for 30 to 180 days but no longer than 180 days. The interest is calculated on a 360 day discount basis similar to Treasury Bills. Investment in Banker's Acceptances is limited to 40% of the investment portfolio per Government Code Section 53601. Commercial Paper is a short term unsecured promissory note issued by a corporation to raise working capital. These negotiable instruments may be purchased at a discount to par value or interest bearing. Commercial paper is issued by corporations such as General Motors Acceptance Corporation (GMAC), Shearson American Express, Bank of America, Wells Fargo Bank, etc. Local agencies are permitted by state law to invest in commercial paper of "prime" quality of the highest ranking or of the highest letter and numerical rating as provided by Moody's Investor's Service, Inc. or Standard & Poors Corporation. Purchases of eligible commercial paper may not exceed 270 days maturity nor exceed twenty five percent of the local agency's total investments. Investment in Commercial Paper is limited to 25% of the total investment portfolio and 10% of the issuing corporation per Government Code Section 53601. Medium Term Corporate Notes are unsecured promissory notes issued by a corporation organized and operating in the United States. These are negotiable instruments and are traded in the secondary market. Medium Term Notes (MTN) can be defined as extended maturity commercial paper. Corporations use these MTN's to raise capital. Examples of MTN issuers are General Electric, GMAC, Citibank, Wells Fargo Bank, etc. Investment in Medium Term Corporate Notes is limited to 30% of the investment portfolio per Government Code 53601. Notes must be rated "A" or better. Passbook Savings Account is a certificate of deposit issued in any amount for a non specified amount of time. Interest rate is much lower than CD's but the savings account allows flexibility. Funds can be deposited and withdrawn according to daily needs. Mutual Funds are referred to in the Government Code, Section 53601, K, as "shares of beneficial interest issued by diversified management companies". The Mutual Fund must be restricted by its by-laws to the same investments as the local agency by the Government Code. These investments are Treasury issues, Federal Agency issues, 12 State of California and City (within California) debt obligations, Certificates of Deposit, Repurchase Agreements, Reverse Repurchase Agreements, Financial Futures and Financial Options and Medium Term Corporate Notes. The quality rating and percentage restrictions in each investment category, which are applicable to the local agency also, apply to the Mutual Fund. Additional limitations apply to such management companies or their investment advisors. The City may not invest in a mutual fund, which invests in derivative types of products. The purchase price of shares of mutual funds shall not include any sales commission. Investments in mutual funds shall not exceed fifteen percent of the local agency's investment portfolio. Active Deposits are demand or checking accounts which receive revenues and pay disbursements. Money Market Funds are comprised of short term government securities, certificates of deposit and highly rated commercial paper. Average length of maturity is twenty to fifty days. Money Market Funds are 100% liquid at any time. Repurchase Agreements and Reverse Repurchase Agreements are short term investment transactions. Banks buy temporarily idle funds from a customer by selling him U.S. Government or other securities with a contractual agreement to repurchase the same securities on a future date. Repurchase agreements are typically one to ten days in maturity. The customer receives interest from the bank. The interest rate reflects both the prevailing demand for Federal Funds and the maturity of the REPO. Some banks will execute repurchase agreements for a minimum of $100,000, but most banks have a minimum of $500,000. A reverse -repurchase agreement (reverse -repo) is exactly what the name implies. The City of Diamond Bar does NOT invest in Reverse Repurchase Agreements. Financial Futures and Financial Options are forward contracts for securities. The government code states that a local agency may incur future contracts/options in any of the investment securities enumerated in Section 53601 A -N. Due to the volatility of trading in financial futures the City of Diamond Bar does NOT invest in financial futures of financial options. Derivative Products are structured products, which limits, through imbedded options, the flow of principal and or interest to the note holder. This limitation could be on how fast payments are received, how much principal is returned or how high or low a coupon can move. Derivative is also a broad term referring to any security which derives its value from another underlying asset. The City of Diamond Bar does NOT invest in derivative products. 13 Appendix C Local Agency Investment Fund Program Description The Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), is a voluntary program created by statute in 1977 as an investment alternative for California's local governments and special districts and it continues today under Treasurer Bill Lockyer's administration. The enabling legislation for the LAIF is Section 16429.1 et seq. of the California Government Code. This program offers local agencies the opportunity to participate in a major portfolio which invests hundreds of millions of dollars, using the investment expertise of the Treasurer's Office investment staff at no additional cost to the taxpayer. This in-house management team is comprised of civil servants who have each worked for the State Treasurer's Office for an average of 20 years. The LAIF is part of the Pooled Money Investment Account (PIMA). The PMIA began in 1955 and oversight is provided by the Pooled Money Investment Board (PMIB) and an in-house Investment Committee. The PMIB members are the State Treasurer, Director of Finance and State Controller. The Local Investment Advisory Board (LIAR) provides oversight for LAIF. The Board consists of five members as designated by statute. The Chairman is the State Treasurer or his designated representative. Two members qualified by training and experience in the field of investment or finance, and the State Treasurer appoints two members who are treasurers, finance or fiscal officers or business managers employed by any county, city or local district or municipal corporation of this state. The term of each appointment is two years or at the pleasure of the appointing authority. All securities are purchased under the authority of Government Code Section 16430 and 16480.4. The State Treasurer's Office takes delivery of all securities purchased on a delivery versus payment basis using a third party custodian. All investments are purchased at market and a market valuation is conducted monthly. Additionally, the PMIA has Policies, Goals, and Objectives for the portfolio to make certain that our goals of Safety, Liquidity and Yield are not jeopardized and that prudent management prevails. These policies are formulated by investment staff and reviewed by both the PMIB and the LIAB on an annual basis. The State Treasurer's Office is audited by the Bureau of State Audits on an annual basis and the resulting opinion is posted to the STO website following its publication. The Bureau of State Audits also has a continuing audit process throughout the year. All investments and LAIF claims are audited on a daily basis by the State Controller's Office as well as an in-house audit process involving three separate divisions. Under Federal Law, the State of California cannot declare bankruptcy, thereby allowing the Government Code Section 16429.3 to stand. This Section states that "moneys placed with the Treasurer for deposit in the LAIF by cities, counties, special districts, 14 nonprofit corporations, or qualified quasi -governmental agencies shall not be subject to either of the following: (a) transfer or loan pursuant to Sections 16310, 16312, or 16313, or (b) impoundment or seizure by any state official or state agency." During the 2002 legislative session, California Government Code Section 16429.4 was added to the LAIF's enabling legislation. The Section states that "right of a city, county, city and county, special district, nonprofit corporation, or qualified quasi -governmental agency to withdraw its deposited moneys from the LAIF, upon demand, may not be altered, impaired, or denied in any way, by any state official or state agency based upon the state's failure to adopt a State Budget by July 1 of each new fiscal year." The LAIF has grown from 293 participants and $468 million in 1977 to 2779 participants and $23.7 at the end of April 2010. State Treasurer's Office Local Agency Investment Fund P.O. Box 942809 Sacramento, CA 94209-0001 (916)653-3001 http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/pmia-laif 15 CITY COUNCIL Agenda 4 6.12 (b) Meeting Date: June 15, 2010 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council r VIA: James DeStefano, City Ma &P TITLE: Review and approve Resolution N : 2010 -XX which adopts the FY 2010- 2011 Investment Policy. RECOMMENDATION: Approve. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None DISCUSSION: Submitted for Council's review and approval is the FY 2010-2011 Investment Policy and its accompanying resolution. The proposed investment policy states the goals of the City's investment activities, the types of investments in which the City will invest funds and the monthly reporting requirements. The FY 2010-2011 Investment Policy is the same as the City's prior year's investment policy with one minor change. Paragraph 1A under the Investment Objective section has been changed. The previous policy indicated that broker-dealers are pre -qualified via a competitive bid and response on the broker-dealer questionnaire. This has been changed to pre -qualification via a review of experience & qualifications and response on the broker-dealer questionnaire. A bid process doesn't work for this type of service since broker-dealers receive no direct compensation from the City and securities are purchased based on the terms of the security offered. The policy was drafted in accordance with the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) investment policy outline and model. All investments allowed by the investment policy are authorized by Government Code Section 53601. The City, as part of its investment policy, requires all broker/dealers to complete a questionnaire and provide information on their portfolios and investment policies. It should be noted that the City continues to invest a large portion of its funds in the State Treasurer's Local Agency Investment Fund. The investment goals and practices of LAIF are in concurrence with the City's investment goals and objectives. Attached, as Appendix C, is a description of the LAIF program which is contained on the State Treasurer's website. The proposed investment policy has been reviewed and approved by the City's auditors. PREPARED BY: Linda G. Magnuson, Finance Director REVIEWED BY: Finance Director Attachments: Resolution No: 2010 -XX Investment Policy Assistant City Manager RESOLUTION NO: 2010- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT WHEREAS, it is the City's policy to annually adopt the City investment policy, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR HEREBY RESOLVES, that the attached Statement of Investment Policy (Exhibit A) be adopted as presented herein. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED THIS day of 12010 Carol Herrera, Mayor 1, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved and adopted at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of 2010, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST: Tommye Cribbins City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar RESOLUTION NO: 2010- A RESOLUTION OF THE ,CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT WHEREAS, it is the City's policy to annually adopt the City investment policy, and . NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR HEREBY RESOLVES, that the attached Statement of Investment Policy (Exhibit A) be adopted as presented herein. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED THIS day of 2010 Carol Herrera, Mayor 1, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved and adopted at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the -day of 2010, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST: Tommye Cribbins City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar INVESTMENT POLICY - FY 2010-2011 This Statement is intended to provide guidelines for the prudent investment of the City's temporarily idle cash and to outline the policies for maximizing the efficiency of the City's cash management system. The ultimate goal is to enhance the economic status of the City while protecting its accumulated cash. It is the policy of the City Council to review, update and adopt the City's Investment Policy on an annual basis. INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE The investment of funds of the City of Diamond Bar is directed to the goals of safety, liquidity and yield. The authority governing investments for municipal governments is set forth in the Government Code, Sections 53601, et. seq. 1. Safety. Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. Investments shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. The objective will be to mitigate credit risk and interest rate risk. The City will operate only in those investments that are considered very safe. A. Credit Risk is the risk of loss due to the failure of the security issuer or backer. Credit risk will be mitigated by: Limiting investments to the safest types of securities; Pre -qualifying the broker-dealers with which the City -will do business. This will be done via a review of experience and qualifications, and the response on a questionnaire (Appendix A) submitted by the prospective institution. In addition broker-dealers should be primary, registered investment securities dealers; Diversifying the investment portfolio in order that potential losses on individual securities do not exceed the income generated from the remainder of the portfolio, B. Interest Rate Risk is the risk that the market value of portfolio securities will fall due to a change in general interest rates. Interest rate risk will be mitigated by: Structuring the investment portfolio so that securities mature to meet cash requirements for ongoing operations, thereby avoiding the need to sell securities on the open market prior to their maturation to meet specific operational needs; Operating funds will be invested primarily in shorter term securities 2. Liquidity. The investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to meet all operating requirements which might be reasonably anticipated. This is accomplished by structuring the portfolio so that securities mature at the same time as cash is needed to meet anticipated demands. Additionally, since all possible cash demands cannot be anticipated, the portfolio will consist largely of securities with active secondary or resale markets. 3. Yield. Yield is the potential dollar earnings an investment can provide and sometimes is described as the rate of return. The primary objective of the investment policy of the City of Diamond Bar is SAFETY. Investments shall be undertaken to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. The investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, taking into, account the investment risk constraints and cash flow characteristics of the portfolio. Return on investment is of least importance compared to the safety and liquidity objectives described above. Investments are limited to relatively low risk securities in anticipation of earning a fair return relative to the risk being assumed. Securities shall not be sold prior to maturity unless one of the following conditions exists: 1) a declining credit security could be sold early to minimize loss of principal; 2) a security swap would improve the quality of yield in the portfolio; or 3) liquidity needs of the portfolio require that a security be sold. POLICY As a General Law city, Diamond Bar operates its accumulated idle cash investments under the prudent man rule. This insures that "...investment shall be made with the exercise of that degree of judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation but for investment considering the probable safety of their capital.as well as the probable income to be derived." (CC #2261) This affords the City a broad spectrum of investment opportunities, so long as the investment is deemed prudent and is allowable under current law of the State of California and the regulations of the City of Diamond Bar. The City of Diamond Bar strives to maintain the level of investment of all funds as near 100% as possible, through daily and projected cash flow determinations. Cash management and investment transactions are the responsibility of the Treasurer but are administered by the Finance Director under the authority of the Treasurer. Investments are allowed in the following media: 1. United States treasury bills, bonds, notes or any other obligations or securities issued by the United States treasury or any other obligation guaranteed as to principal and interest by the United States. 2. Federal agency or United States government-sponsored enterprise obligations, participations or other instruments, including those issued by or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by federal agencies or United States government- sponsored enterprises. 3. Local Agency Investment Fund (state pool) — Demand Deposits. A more descriptive definition of LAIF is attached as Appendix B 2 4. Certificates of Deposit (or Time Deposits), placed with commercial banks and/or savings banks. 5. Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 6. Bankers Acceptances 7. Commercial Paper 8. Medium Term Corporate Notes 9. Passbook Savings Accounts 10. Active Deposits 11. Money Market Funds comprised of investments rated in the highest category by Moody's Investors Services Inc. or by Standard & Poor's Corporation. A more detailed description of each of the City's investment instruments is attached in Appendix C Repurchase Agreements Prohibited investments include securities not listed above(unless authorized pursuant to section 53601), as well as inverse floaters, range notes, interest only strips derived from a pool of mortgages (Collateralized Mortgage Obligations), and any security that could result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity, as specified in Section 53601.6. (Zero interest accrual means the security has the potential to realize zero interest depending upon the structure of the security. Zero coupon bonds and similar investments that start at a level below the face value are legal because their value does increase.) Government and agency paper are the highest quality investments available in terms of safety and liquidity. Certificates of deposit and savings accounts must be insured or collateralized. Only commercial paper, with A-1 Moody's and P-1 Standard & Poor's ratings, is authorized for purchase. Most investments are highly liquid, with the exception of collateralized and insured certificates of deposit held by banks and savings banks. Maturities are selected to anticipate cash needs, thereby eliminating the need for forced liquidation. Effective January 1, 1989 the Government Code, Section 53601 states..."no investment shall be made in any security, other than a security underlying a repurchase or reverse repurchase agreement authorized by this section, which at the time of the investment has a term remaining to maturity in excess of five years, unless the legislative body has granted express authority to make that investment either specifically or as a part of an investment program approved no less than three months prior to the investment." Therefore longer-term investments (over one year) are limited to maturities of five years or less unless specifically approved by the City Council. Diamond Bar attempts to obtain the highest yield possible when selecting investments, provided that the criteria for safety and liquidity are met. Ordinarily, through a positive yield curve, (i.e., longer term investment rates are higher than those of shorter term maturities), the City attempts to ladder its maturities to meet anticipated cash needs in such a way that longer term investments carry a higher rate than is available in the extremely short term market of 30 days or less. The City is authorized to invest in the Local Agency Investment Fund based upon periodic reviews of the book to market value of the investment pool and an annual review of the goals and strategies of the investment board. If there are changes in the management of the Local Agency Investment Fund, and there is a conflict with the City's investment goals, the City may elect to discontinue investment in LAIF. It should be noted that, per LAIF's investment policy, no more than 10% of its portfolio may be invested in Reverse Repurchase Agreements. Since these types of investments are extremely sophisticated, the City of Diamond Bar chooses not to individually invest in these types of securities but will participate in LAIF's investment pool as long as the percentage of the portfolio remains at 10% or less. POLICY CONSTRAINTS The City operates its investment pool with many State and self-imposed constraints, The City does not purchase or sell securities on margin. The City does not buy stocks or deal in futures or options. The City does not use Reverse Repurchase Agreements for the investment of funds. The City does not invest in Guaranteed Small Business Administration (SBA) Notes. SAFEKEEPING OF SECURITIES The City of Diamond Bar will adopt the operational practice of having all purchased securities delivered, versus payment to a safekeeping account at the City's depository bank. It is recognized this will be to a third party independent custodian under contractual agreement made with the Security Services Division of the chosen bank. Investment transactions will be authorized by the City Treasurer and executed by either the Finance Director or the Assistant City Manager. The transactions will be verified via monthly reconciliations by the Senior Accountant. WANEM A monthly report of investments will be provided to the City Manager. The required elements of this report are as follows: a) Type of investment b) Institution c) Date of Maturity d) Amount of deposit or cost of security e) Current market value of securities with maturity in excess of twelve months f) Statement relating the report to the Statement of Investment Policy g) Rate of interest 4 h) Statement that there are sufficient funds to meet the next six months' obligations. The basic premise underlying the City of Diamond Bar's investment philosophy is to insure that money is always available when needed. Attachments: Appendix A - Broker Dealer Questionnaire Appendix B - Description of Investments Appendix C - Local Agency Investment Fund Description APPENDIX A CITY OF DIAMOND BAR BROKER/DEALER QUESTIONNAIRE AND CERTIFICATION 1. Name of Firm: 2. Address: 3. Telephone: 4. Broker's Representative to the City (attach resume): Name: Title: Telephone:( 5. Manager/Partner-in-Charge (attach resume) Name: Title: Telephone:( 6. List all personnel who will be trading with or quoting securities to City employees (attach resume) Name: Title: Telephone:( 7. Which of the above personnel have read the City's investment policy? 8. Is your firm a primary dealer in United States Government Securities? Yes No 6 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Broker/Dealer Questionnaire and Certification Name of Firm: Page Two 9. List the total volume of United States Government and Agency Securities for the last calendar year. Firm -wide $ Your local office $ No. of Transactions No. of Transactions 10. Which instruments are offered regularly by your local office? Treasury Bills Treasury Notes/Bonds BA's (domestic) BA's (foreign) Commercial Paper Agencies (specify): CMO's Bank CD's S & L CD's Repos Reverse Repos Other (specify): 11. References -- Please identify your most directly comparable public sector clients in our geographical area. Entity _ Contact Telephone Client Since 12. Have any of your clients ever sustained a loss on a securities transaction arising from a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the risk characteristics of the instrument? If so, explain. 7 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Broker/Dealer Questionnaire and Certification Name of Firm: Page Three 13. Has your local office ever subject to a regulatory or state/federal agency investigation for alleged improper, fraudulent, disreputable or unfair activities related to the sale of securities? Have any of your employees been so investigated? If so explain: 14. Has a client ever claimed in writing that your firm was responsible for investment losses? If so, explain. 15. Explain your normal custody and delivery process. Who audits these fiduciary systems? Can you meet safekeeping requirements? 16. How many and what percentage of your transactions failed Last month? Last year? 17. Describe the capital line and trading limits of the office that would conduct business with the City of Diamond Bar. 18. Does your firm participate in the S.I.P.C. insurance program if not, explain. M CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Broker/Dealer Questionnaire and Certification Name of Firm: Page Four 19. What portfolio information, if any, do you require from your clients? 20. What reports, transactions, confirmations and paper trail will the City receive? 21. Does your firm offer investment training to your clients? Yes No 22. Please enclose the following: Latest audited financial statements. Samples of reports, transactions, and confirmations the City will receive. Samples of research reports and/or publications that your firm regularly provides to clients. Complete schedule of fees and charges for various transactions. 0 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Broker/Dealer Questionnaire and Certification Name of Firm: Page Five ***CERTIFICATION*** I hereby certify that I have personally read the Statement of Investment Policy of the City of Diamond Bar, and have implemented reasonable procedures and a system of controls designed to preclude imprudent investment activities arising out of transactions conducted between our firm and the City of Diamond Bar. All sales personnel will be routinely informed of the City's investment objectives, horizons, outlooks, strategies and risk constraints whenever we are so advised by the City. We pledge to exercise due diligence in informing the City of Diamond Bar of all foreseeable risks associated with financial transactions conducted with our firm. Under penalties of perjury, the responses to this questionnaire are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Signed Title Date Countersignature* Date Title Company president or person in charge of government securities operations. 10 UOTIOMMM Description of Investments U.S. Treasury Issues are direct obligations of the United States Government. These issues are called bills, notes and bonds. The maturity range of new issues is from 30 days (T -Bills) to 30 years (T -Bonds). These are highly liquid and are considered the safest investment security. Federal Agency Securities are issued by direct U.S. Government agencies or quasi - government agencies. Many of these issues are guaranteed directly or indirectly by the United States Government. Examples of these securities are Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) notes, Federal National Mortgage Associations (FNMA) notes, Federal Farm Credit Bank (FFCB) notes, Small Business Administration (SBA) notes, Government National Bank (GNMA) notes, an d Federal Home Loan Mortgage Credit (FHLMC) notes. Investment in these types of securities is limited to 40% of the portfolio. Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) is a special fund in the State Treasury which local agencies may use to deposit funds for investment. There is no minimum investment period and the minimum transaction is $5,000, in multiples of $1,000 above that, with a maximum of $40 million for any agency. It offers high liquidity because deposits can be converted to cash in twenty-four hours and no interest is lost. All interest is distributed to those agencies participating on a proportionate share determined by the amounts deposited and the length of time they are deposited. Interest is paid quarterly via direct deposit into the agency's LAIF account. The State keeps an amount for reasonable costs of making the investments, not to exceed one-quarter of one percent of the earnings. Certificates of Deposit are investments for inactive funds issued by banks, savings and loans and credit unions. Investments of $250,000 are insured respectively by Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC) and the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund (NCUSIF). Certificates of Deposit can be issued from 14 days to several years in maturity allowing the City of Diamond Bar's investment of funds to be matched to cash flow needs. For deposits exceeding $250,000 the financial institution is required to collateralize with 110% government securities collateral. City of Diamond Bar does not accept 150% Collateral (First Trust Deeds) or 105% Letters of Credit (L.C.). Section 53635.2 of, the Government Code prohibits investments in certificates of deposits of state or federal credit unions if any member of the city's governing or managing officers (Council, City manager, Fiscal officers) serves on the credit union board or key committee positions. Negotiable Certificates of Deposit are unsecured obligations of the financial institution. These securities are generally issued in bearer form and pay interest at maturity. Although negotiable, a strong secondary market exists only in the NCD's issued by the largest United States banks. Examples of large banks include Bank of America, Citibank, Chase Manhattan, Manufacturers Hanover, etc. These securities 11 generally trade with minimum amounts of $1 million per trade with the average trade in the secondary market of $5 million. Investment in Negotiable Certificates of Deposit is limited to 30% of the investment portfolio per Government Code Section 53601. Bankers Acceptances are short-term credit arrangements to enable businesses to obtain funds to finance commercial transactions. They are time drafts drawn on a bank by an exporter or importer to obtain funds to pay for specific merchandise. By its acceptance, the bank becomes primarily liable for the payment of the draft at maturity. An acceptance is a high grade negotiable instrument. Acceptances are purchased in various denominations for 30 to 180 days but no longer than 180 days. The interest is calculated on'a 360 day discount basis similar to Treasury Bills. Investment in Banker's Acceptances is limited to 40% of the investment portfolio per Government Code Section 53601. Commercial Paper is a short term unsecured promissory note issued by a corporation to raise working capital. These negotiable instruments may be purchased at a discount to par value or interest bearing. Commercial paper is issued by corporations such as General Motors Acceptance Corporation (GMAC), Shearson American Express, Bank of America, Wells Fargo Bank, etc. Local agencies are permitted by state law to invest in commercial paper of "prime" quality of the highest ranking or of the highest letter and numerical rating as provided by Moody's Investor's Service, Inc. or Standard & Poors Corporation. Purchases of eligible commercial paper may not exceed 270 days maturity nor exceed twenty five percent of the local agency's total investments. Investment in Commercial Paper is limited to 25% of the total investment portfolio and 10% of the issuing corporation per Government Code Section 53601. Medium Term Corporate Notes are unsecured promissory notes issued by a corporation organized and operating in the United States. These are negotiable instruments and are traded in the secondary market. Medium Term Notes (MTN) can be defined as extended maturity commercial paper. Corporations use these MTNis to raise capital. Examples of MTN issuers are General Electric, GMAC, Citibank, Wells Fargo Bank, etc. Investment in Medium Term Corporate Notes is limited to 30% of the investment portfolio per Government Code 53601. Notes must be rated "A" or better. Passbook Savings Account is a certificate of deposit issued in any amount for a non specified amount of time. Interest rate is much lower than CD's but the savings account allows flexibility. Funds can be deposited and withdrawn according to daily needs. Mutual Funds are referred to in the Government Code, Section 53601, K, as "shares of beneficial interest issued by diversified management companies". The Mutual Fund must be restricted by its by-laws to the same investments as the local agency by the Government Code. These investments are Treasury issues, Federal Agency issues, 12 State of California and City (within California) debt obligations, Certificates of Deposit, Repurchase Agreements, Reverse Repurchase Agreements, Financial Futures and Financial Options and Medium Term Corporate Notes. The quality rating and percentage restrictions in each investment category, which are applicable to the local agency also, apply to the Mutual Fund. Additional limitations apply to such management companies or their investment advisors. The City may not invest in a mutual fund, which invests in derivative types of products. The purchase price of shares of mutual funds shall not include any sales commission. Investments in mutual funds shall not exceed fifteen percent of the local agency's investment portfolio. Active Deposits are demand or checking accounts which receive revenues and pay disbursements. Money Market Funds are comprised of short term government securities, certificates of deposit and highly rated commercial paper. Average length of maturity is twenty to fifty days. Money Market Funds are 100% liquid at any time. Repurchase Agreements and Reverse Repurchase Agreements are short term investment transactions. Banks buy temporarily idle funds from a customer'by selling him U.S. Government or other securities with a contractual agreement to repurchase the same securities on a future date. Repurchase agreements are typically one to ten days in maturity. The customer receives interest from the bank. The interest rate reflects both the prevailing demand for Federal Funds and the maturity of the REPO. Some banks will execute repurchase agreements for a minimum of $100,000, but most banks have a minimum of $500,000. A reverse -repurchase agreement (reverse -repo) is exactly what the name implies. The City of Diamond Bar does NOT invest in Reverse Repurchase Agreements. Financial Futures and Financial Options are forward contracts for securities. The government code states that a local agency may incur future contracts/options in any of the investment securities enumerated in Section 53601 A -N. Due to the volatility of trading in financial futures the City of Diamond Bar does NOT invest in financial futures of financial options. Derivative Products are structured products, which limits, through imbedded options, the flow of principal and or interest to the note holder. This limitation could be on how fast payments are received, how much principal is returned or how high or low a coupon can move. Derivative is also a broad term referring to any security which derives its value from another underlying asset. The City of Diamond Bar does NOT invest in derivative products. 13 Appendix C Local Agency Investment Fund Program Description The Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), is a voluntary program created by statute in 1977 as an investment alternative for California's local governments and special districts and it continues today under Treasurer Bill Lockyer's administration. The enabling legislation for the LAIF is Section 16429.1 et seq. of the California Government Code. This program offers local agencies the opportunity to participate in a major portfolio which invests hundreds of millions of dollars, using the investment expertise of the Treasurer's Office investment staff at no additional cost to the taxpayer. This in-house management team is comprised of civil servants who have each worked for the State Treasurer's Office for an average of 20 years. The LAIF is part of the Pooled Money Investment Account (PIMA). The PMIA began in 1955 and oversight is provided by the Pooled Money Investment Board (PMIB) and an in-house Investment Committee. The PMIB members are the State Treasurer, Director of Finance and State Controller. The Local Investment Advisory Board (LIAB) provides oversight for LAIF. The Board consists of five members as designated by statute. The Chairman is the State Treasurer or his designated representative. Two members qualified by training and experience in the field of investment or finance, and the State Treasurer appoints two members who are treasurers, finance or fiscal officers or business managers employed by any county, city or local district or municipal corporation of this state. The term of each appointment is two years or at the pleasure of the appointing authority. All securities are purchased under the authority of Government Code Section 16430 and 16480.4. The State Treasurer's Office takes delivery of all securities purchased on a delivery versus payment basis using a third party custodian. All investments are purchased at market and a market valuation is conducted monthly. Additionally, the PMIA has Policies, Goals, and Objectives for the portfolio to make certain that our goals of Safety, Liquidity and Yield are not jeopardized and that prudent management prevails. These policies are formulated by investment staff and reviewed by both the PMIB and the LIAB on an annual basis. The State Treasurer's Office is audited by the Bureau of State Audits on an annual basis and the resulting opinion is posted to the STO website following its publication. The Bureau of State Audits also has a continuing audit process throughout the year. All investments and LAW claims are audited on a daily basis by the State Controller's Office as well as an in-house audit process involving three separate divisions. Under Federal Law, the State of California cannot declare bankruptcy, thereby allowing the Government Code Section 16429.3 to stand. This Section states that "moneys placed with the Treasurer for deposit in the LAIF by cities, counties, special districts, 14 nonprofit corporations, or qualified quasi -governmental agencies shall not be subject to either of the following: (a) transfer or loan pursuant to Sections 16310, 16312, or 16313, or (b) impoundment or seizure by any state official or state agency." During the 2002 legislative session, California Government Code Section 16429.4 was added to the LAIF's enabling legislation. The Section states that "right of a city, county, city and county, special district, nonprofit corporation, or qualified quasi -governmental agency to withdraw its deposited moneys from the LAIF, upon demand, may not be altered, impaired, or denied in any way, by any state official or state agency based upon the state's failure to adopt a State Budget by July 1 of each new fiscal year." The LAIF has. grown from 293 participants and $468 million in 1977 to 2779 participants and $23.7 at the end of April 2010. State Treasurer's Office Local Agency Investment Fund P.O. Box 942809 Sacramento, CA 94209-0001 (916)653-3001 http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/pmia-laif 15 CITY COUNCIL TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Mana er.. TITLE: RESOLUTION LEVYING AN ASSE. SMENT ON BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRIG FISCAL YEAR 2010-2011. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: Agenda # 7. 1 (a) Meeting Date: June ]5,2010 AGENDA REPORT WMA 0 1 i i 1 0 111 SIS9=W1, Wil Le -MI -2 2,01 The District 38 levy rate of $15.00 per parcel will generate $267,750 in assessment revenue. The assessment rate remains the same as the rate applied at the date of Diamond Bar's incorporation. There are not sufficient funds collected to maintain and improve the District without utilizing the General Fund., For FY 2010-11, $14,867 of the General Fund is proposed to pay for the operation and maintenance costs in District 38. The assessment revenues shall be deposited in Special Revenue Landscape Fund 138 and shall apply toward the 2010-11 operation and maintenance budget. The total annual budget of the District is $282,617. The itemized budget for District 38 is included in the attached Engineer's Report, Financial Analysis, Page 4. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The landscaping improvements to be maintained by District 38 are the parkways along the northerly side of Grand Avenue (between Diamond Bar Boulevard and Summitridge Drive), the southerly side of Temple Avenue (between Diamond Bar Boulevard and Golden Springs Drive), along Golden Springs Drive (between Torito Lane and Temple Avenue); the streetscape improvements along Brea Canyon Road (between Pathfinder Road and the Southerly City Limit); and the medians throughout the City. The maintenance areas are further detailed in Exhibit "B-1" of the Engineer's Report. The maintenance and servicing of public landscaping improvements installed and constructed in public places in the City provides a special benefit which is received by each and every lot or parcel within the District, tending to enhance their value. The estimated number of parcels within the District is 17,850 parcels. The amount assessed upon the lands within District No. 38 for Fiscal Year 2009-10 was $15.00 per parcel. This proposed assessment has been determined to be exempt from the provisions of Proposition 218 as set forth in Section 5(a): Any assessment imposed exclusively to finance the capital costs or maintenance and operation expenses for sidewalks, streets, sewers, water, flood control drainage systems or vector control. Prepared By: Patrick Gallegos, Management Analyst REVIEWED B - b -Add. fflu Director of Public Works Date Prepared: June 7, 2010 Attachments: Resolution No. 2010 -XX Engineer's Report 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -XX A RESOLUTION LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT ON CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2010-2011 A. RECITALS. (i) By its Resolution No. 2010-14, this Council approved a report of the City Engineer related to City of Diamond Bar Assessment District No. 38 prepared pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Section 22623, described the improvements thereon and gave notice of and fixed the time and place of the hearing on the question of assessment thereon for fiscal year 2010-2011. A diagram of the area encompassed by said assessment district is attached hereto as Exhibit "A-1." Said hearing was duly and properly noticed, commenced at the South Coast Air Quality Management/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California on June 15, 2010, and was concluded prior to the adoption of this Resolution. (iii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. RESOLUTION. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby find, determine and order as follows: 1. The Recitals, as set forth in Part A of this Resolution, are in all respects true and correct. 2. This Council hereby expressly overrules any and all protests filed objecting to the proposed improvements specified herein or the assessment levied therefore. 3. Based upon its review of the report of the City Engineer referred to hereinabove, and other reports and information, the City Council hereby finds that (i) the 3 land within the said District will be benefited by the improvements specified in said report,. (ii) said District includes all of the lands so benefited, and (iii) the net amount to be assessed upon the lands within said District for the 2010-11 fiscal year, in accordance with said report, is apportioned by a formula and method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements 4. The improvements specified in the report hereinabove referred to which is on file with the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar are hereby ordered to be completed. 5. The assessment diagram contained in the report referred to hereinabove and the assessment of $15.00 for each assessable lot located within said District are hereby adopted and confirmed and said assessment hereby is levied for the 2010-11 fiscal year. 6. The assessment is in compliance with the provisions of the Act, and the City Council has complied with all laws pertaining to the levy of an annual assessment pursuant to the Act. The assessment is levied for the purpose of paying the costs and expenses of the improvements described in the report referred to hereinabove for fiscal year 2010-11. 7. The City Treasurer shall deposit all moneys representing assessments collected by the County to the credit of a special fund for use in City of Diamond Bar Assessment District No. 38. 8. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file the diagram and assessment with the County Auditor, together with a certified copy of this Resolution upon its adoption. 9. A certified copy of the assessment and diagram shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk and open for public inspection. 10. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 15th day of June, 2010. Carol Herrera, Mayor 1, TOMMYE CRIBBINS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved and adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 15th day of June, 2010, by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST: Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar 6�1 ADDITIONAL AREAS TO BE MAINTAINED 21mW+s: G0.CEn PAC0AG aL • GAOPs SFµrtuS pil Tp MPSST. w+pa>ac EL*cpm+: iT�iowoc+�auio w. PAMMAYSS LEGEND --- ASSESSMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARY •�•••••• MEDIANS PARKWAYS =::si TURF AREAS AREAS TO BE MAINTAINED MEDIANS: A. DIAMOND BAR BLVD. 8. GRAND AVE. C. GOLDEN SPRINGS RD. 157 FWY OVERCROSSING TO WEST CITY LIMITS PARKWAYS: D DIAMOND BAR BLVD NORTH SIDE E TEMPLE - DIAMOND BAR BLVD. TO GOLDEN SPRINGS RD. SOUTH SIDE TOTAL AREA TURF 5.4 ACRES GROUND COVER 0.83'ACRES EXHIBIT "B-1" ASSESSMENT DISTRICT -NO. 38 FISCAL YEAR 20-10-1: 1 forthe CITY 4F DIAMOND BAR GaaOSL ST.•AAvct wrs. FAMwst CIfY SWrtS,eaTµ avF% prUA GcµTaN np.• At* aF FAMvar Sirt6R Gµa33vF-svG FctL3 aM1 Ta OUPP•�•• CR NRF AREAS: G.2yyt� peµ pLvq. cl GaAcuss: p0. i cri;•FRLEI)TTIT l l ENGINEER'S REPORT Update of ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38 Fiscal Year 2010-11 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Preliminary: May 18, 2010 Prepared by: GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC. 6529 Riverside Avenue, Suite 230 Riverside, CA 92506 (951) 781-0811 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 BOUNDARIES OF DISTRICT 2 IMPROVEMENTS 3 Landscaping FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 4 Revenue Appropriations METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT 6 ASSESSMENT 7 ASSESSMENT ROLL 8 EXHIBITS Exhibit "A-1" - Assessment Diagram Exhibit "B-1" - Improvement Map INTRODUCTION Pursuant to the order of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, this report is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. This report presents the engineering analysis for the 2010-11 Fiscal Year for the district known as: (Hereinafter referred to as "District"). This District, by special benefit assessments, provides funding for the maintenance of landscaped areas owned by the City of Diamond Bar which are located in public rights-of-way within the City of Diamond Bar. Section 22573, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, requires assessments to be levied according to benefit rather than according to assessed value. The section states: "The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated special benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements. The determination of whether or not a lot or parcel will benefit from the improvements shall be made pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911 (Division.7 (commencing with Section 5000)) [of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California] . " As the assessments are levied on the basis of benefit, they are considered a user's fee, not a tax, and, therefore, are not governed by Article XIIIA of the California Constitution. Properties owned by public agencies, such as a city, county, state or the federal government, are not assessable under pre -Prop 218 law. Assessment District No. 38 1 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 The boundary of the District is completely within the City limits of the City of Diamond Bar and is shown on the Assessment Diagram (on file in the office of the City Clerk at the City Hall of Diamond Bar as Exhibit "A-1"). All parcels of real property included within the District are described in detail on maps on file in the Los Angeles County Assessor's office. Assessment District No. 38 2 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 The facilities and items of servicing and maintenance included within the District are as follows: Jf ,andscaping Servicing means the furnishing of water for the irrigation of any landscaping, the operation of any fountains, or the maintenance of any other improvements. Maintenance means the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation and servicing of any improvement, including: 1. Repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any landscape improvement. 2. Providing for the life, growth, health and beauty of landscaping, including without limitation, cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing, or treating for disease or injury. 3. The removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid waste. Improvements to be serviced and maintained include, but are not limited to, median island and parkway landscaping on major streets and thoroughfares in the City of Diamond Bar. Exhibit "B-1," attached hereto, shows the location and extent of the landscaping improvements to be maintained by the proceeds from this assessment district. Assessment District No. 38 3 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS The estimated ftu-iding for maintenance and servicing of landscaping for the update of Assessment District No. 38 for the 2010-11 Fiscal Year is as follows: 2010-11 Recommended Budget Revenue: Appropriation Fund Balance (from FY 2009-10) $ 1 0 Property Tax - Special Assessments 267,750 Interest Revenue 0 Transfer in - General Fund 14,86 TOTAL 282,617 Appropriations: Personnel Services 0 Salaries 0 City Paid Benefits 0 Retirement 0 Worker's Compensation Expense 0 Short/Long Tenn Disability 0 Medicare Expense 0 Cafeteria Benefits 0 Operating Expenses Advertising 3,000 Utilities 105000 Maintenance -Grounds / Bldgs 29,000 Professional Services 4,000 Contract Services 141,617 Capital Outlay Capital Improvements 0 Reserve for Future Cap Imp 0 TOTAL 282,617 Contract Services this Fiscal Year. Contract Maintenance (Excel) $ 139,297 Extra Gopher Control Contract at S. Brea Canyon Road/Along 57 Freeway $ 1,000 Maint. Of New Areas: Pathfinder at Brea Canyon Road $ 1,320 -4- Assessment District No. 38 Engineers Report — FY 2010-2011 Plans and Specifications Plans and specifications showing the general nature, location and extent of the proposed improvements are on file in the office of the City Clerk and available for public inspection. Assessment District No. 38 5 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT The net amount to be assessed upon lands within the District in accordance with this report is apportioned by a formula and method which fairly distributes the amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each lot or parcel from the improvements, namely the maintenance and servicing of public landscaping improvements within such District. The maintenance and servicing of public landscaping improvements installed and constructed in public places in the City of Diamond Bar provides a special benefit which is received by each and every lot or parcel within the District, tending to enhance their value. The primary benefits of landscaping are as set forth below: 1. Beautification of the streets which are used by all of the residents in Diamond Bar. 2. A sense of community pride resulting from well-maintained green spaces. 3. The enhancement of the value of property which results from the foregoing benefits. Existing land use information indicates that well over 90 percent of the parcels within the City of Diamond Bar are residences. Because the special benefits derived apply equally to all residents and parcels, it has been determined that all assessable parcels would receive the same net assessment. Assessment District No. 38 6 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 ASSESSMENT The amount to be assessed upon the lots and parcels within the District and the amount apportioned to each assessable parcel within the District is shown in the table below. Estimated Assessment Requirements: $267,750 Estimated Number of Parcels: 17,850 Estimated Assessment Per Parcel: $ 15.00 2010-11 Assessment Per Parcel: $ 15.00 2009-10 Assessment Per Parcel: $ 15.00 Difference: $ 0.00 Assessment District No. 38 7 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 ASSESSMENT ROLL The individual 2010-11 assessments, tabulated by Assessor's parcel number, are shown on an Assessment Roll on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar as Exhibit " C " and are made a part of this report by reference. (The Assessment Roll is not included in this report due to its volume.) Dated: --MaZ2- —7 2010 Rle Mi. 27EGI C10. OF CNV�- Assessment District No. 38 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 9 GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC. ANA. tEE CH EXHIBITS . msF W+taln[fiv ' TIF C(IYAFOut14DCRfi ' 2000 2. " •,�' `.. — �1r `' LEGEND ASSESSMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARY • MEDIANS — PARKWAYS w caa TURF AREAS AREAS TO BE MAINTAINED MEDIANS: y I�- .,.�: .1�°0 '••'..':.'t'i;'i✓ �\A. DIAMOND BAR BLVD. 'B.GRAND ;t••' 1t i�t.;'1"" "�jir•,. C. GOLDEN SPRINGS RD. (57 FWY OVERCROSSING ' \';}.?,%• ` r � TO WEST CITY LIMITS 4 ✓'' ti_, r, r..' - . PARKWAYS: F•`°_,}„ , J/ r� `y �,�: `t l� �� ^; �l D. GRAND AVE - BL RIDGE TO DIAMOND BAR BLVD, N NORTH SIDE ' �y'c�"•:;.�I- `.'_•' ; . _• t E. TEMPLE - DIAMOND BAR BLVD. TO / GOLDEN SPRINGS RD, SOUTH SIDE t -'4,-'/ i •f. TOTAL AREA., / yL�f' �,iiv q•-., "'' TURF 5.4 ACRES GROUND COVER 0.83ACRES ?� EXHIBIT "13-9" ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENT ®•STRI CT NO. 38 AREAS TO BE MAINTAINED camiswA�Fs.cnnn. vna+c: wtmnewss. FISCAL YEAR 2010--4 for the """""ARKW" CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ]rNIGi n0..Out[+tt m.ro F1+0 Or MAFAK LOtffJ� SihLMGS pt- El t)tyn NiTn RJ.TW DA . H1n0� YAFTS m.-RtA7+FRi P11n EtD OF niAFfaC ama esx Fiw.-sowsas+�unFtxsrrosunF wu.im. rmrrsnw Rn- EVFn:SFt+i mnwcs n¢ m on or auc•zse BFFA uxrp,P0.. GEPonu. X.Sii G7CFUI. ST, -Q AA6 FVE ' osFs cs,rsax aA.- �.* ae rar�anFRnnro nr attsams, amn segs sucFr rncsswc-mc r,•,. oR ro w.vr.ru m. :. NAF AREAS: ` p2f1O°"0L'0•-°' �n41i 0'� I GFti•FRI£UI CHI • I & dSSOG. IAC CITY COUNCIL Agenda # 7. 1 (b) Meeting Date: June 15, 2010 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Managle r TITLE: RESOLUTION LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT ON CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING- ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 39 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2010-2011. RECOMMENDATION: WM FINANCIAL SUMMARY: The District 39 levy rate of $130.00 per parcel will generate $164,190 in assessment revenue. The assessment rate remains the same as the rate applied at the date of Diamond Bar's incorporation. There are not sufficient funds collected to maintain and improve the District without utilizing the General Fund. For FY 2010-11, $57,042 of the General Fund is proposed to pay for the operation and maintenance costs in District 39. The assessment revenues shall be deposited in Special Revenue Landscape Fund 139 and shall apply toward the 2010-11 operation and maintenance budget. The District budget totals $221,232. The itemized budget for District 39 is included in the attached Engineer's Report, Financial Analysis, page 4. The landscaping improvements to be maintained by District 39 are the mini parks, slopes, and open space areas within the Assessment diagram as reflected in Exhibit "B- 2" of the Engineer's Report. This reflects a total maintenance area of 60.67 acres. The maintenance and servicing of public landscaping improvements installed and constructed in public places in the City provides a special benefit which is received by each and every lot or parcel within the District, tending to enhance their value. The estimated number of parcels within the District is 1,263 parcels. The amount assessed upon the lands within District No. 39 for Fiscal Year 2009-10 was $130.00 per parcel. This proposed assessment has been determined to be exempt from the provisions of Proposition 218 as set forth in Section 5(b): Any assessment imposed pursuant to a petition signed by the persons owning all of the parcels subject to the assessment at the time the assessment is initially imposed. Prepared By: Date Prepared: June 7, 2010 Patrick Gallegos, Management Analyst NIMMAMMUM Did Glu Director of Public Works Attachments: Resolution No. 2010 -XX Engineer's Report 2 A RESOLUTION LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT ON CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 39 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2010-2011. A. RECITALS. By its Resolution No. 2010-15, this Council approved a report of the City Engineer related to City of Diamond Bar Landscaping Assessment District No. 39 prepared pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Section 22623, described the improvements thereon and gave notice of and fixed the time and place of the hearing on the question of assessment thereon for fiscal year 2010-11. A diagram of the area encompassed by said assessment district is attached hereto as Exhibit "A-2." (ii) Said hearing was duly and properly noticed, commenced at the South Coast Air Quality Management/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California on June 15, 2010 and was concluded prior to the adoption of this Resolution. (iii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. RESOLUTION. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby find, determine and order as follows: 1. The Recitals, as set forth in Part A of this Resolution, are in all respects true and correct. 2. This Council hereby expressly overrules any and all protests filed objecting to the proposed improvements specified herein or the assessment levied therefore. 3. Based upon its review of the report of the City Engineer referred to hereinabove, and other reports and information, the City Council hereby finds that (i) the land within the said District will be benefited by the improvements specified in said report, (ii) said District includes all of the lands so benefited, and (iii) the net amount to be assessed upon the lands within said. District for the 2010-11 fiscal year, in accordance with said report, is apportioned by a formula and method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements 4. The improvements specified in the report hereinabove referred to which is on file with the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar are hereby ordered to be completed 5. The assessment diagram contained in the report referred to hereinabove and the assessment of $130.00 for each assessable lot located within said District are hereby adopted and confirmed and said assessment hereby is levied for the 2010-11 fiscal year. 6. The assessment is in compliance with the provisions of the Act, and the City Council has complied with all laws pertaining to the levy of an annual assessment pursuant to the Act. The assessment is levied for the purpose of paying the costs and expenses of the improvements described in the report referred to hereinabove for fiscal year 2010-11. 7. The City Treasurer shall deposit all moneys representing assessments collected by the County to the credit of a special fund for use in City of Diamond Bar Assessment District No. 39. 8. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file the diagram and assessment with the County Auditor, together with a certified copy of this Resolution upon its adoption. 1 9. A certified copy of the assessment and diagram shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk and open for public inspection. 10. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 15th day of June, 2010. Carol Herrera, Mayor 1, TOMMYE CRIBBINS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved and adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 15th day of June, 2010, by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST: Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar Skil 1601SkEkt' nlc crrT aF olnuwro em o eDo loco - noG - ISC. T NUMBER FOR EACH LOT CA PARCEL WITHIN THE ASSESSOR'S PARCCI INMGCA AS ASSIGNED BY THE ANGELES ASSESSOR'S OFFICE. IMENSIDNS FOR EACH LOT OR PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN E SIIDWN ON THE ASSESSOR'S PARCEL MAPS BII FILE IN it LOS ANGELES COUNTY ASSESBDA. :E OF THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY Of DIAMOND .OS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, THIS _ 2O_. CITY CLERK OF THE CRY OF DIAMOND BAR CE OF THE COUNTY AUOTFOR. COUNTY OF LOS IF CgUFORNIA, THIS DAY OF —20— C TY .20_• CITY CLERK OFTHE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR OFB FRiEDRICId— I 4 . &' SSOC. INC. 'VASE IIAP GWAfEST of TIE CRYV DIANDM9 VAP ' 900 loot/ 1500 3G6D SHEET -1 OF 1 SHEET LEGEND ® ASSESSMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARY ,,,•{:; BRUSH 38.73 AWES PARKS 695 AWES c SLOPES IA.67 AOU TURF aD ADnE's 05 . 1 G5 Ac Ac 9WEm '.V Ac DINER G-rRIEDRI.CH & ASSCIC. INC. ENGINEER'S REPORT Update of ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 39 Fiscal Year 2010-11 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Preliminary: May 18, 2010 Prepared by: GFB-FRIE,DRICH & ASSOC., INC. 6529 Riverside Avenue, Suite 230 Riverside, CA 92506 (951) 781-0811 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION BOUNDARIES OF DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS Landscaping FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Revenue Appropriations METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT ROLL EXHIBITS Exhibit "A-2" - Assessment Diagram Exhibit "B-2" - Improvement Map Page 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 Pursuant to the order of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, this report is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. This report presents the engineering analysis for the 2010-11 Fiscal Year for the district known as: ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 39 (Hereinafter referred to as "District"). This District, by special benefit assessments, provides funding for the maintenance of landscaped areas owned by the City of Diamond Bar which are located in public rights-of-way within the City of Diamond Bar. Section 22573, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, requires assessments to be levied according to benefit rather than according to assessed value. The section states: "The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated special benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements. The determination of whether or not a lot or parcel will benefit from the improvements shall be made pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911 (Division 7 (commencing with Section 5000)) [of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California]." As the assessments are levied on the basis of benefit, they are considered a user's fee, not a tax, and, therefore, are not governed by Article XIIIA of the California Constitution. Properties owned by public agencies, such as a city, county, state or the federal government, are not assessable under pre -Prop 218 law. Assessment District No. 39 Engineer's Report— FY 2010-2011 1 BOUNDARIES OF DISTRICT The boundary of the District is shown on the Assessment Diagram (on file in the office of the City Clerk at the City Hall of Diamond Bar as Exhibit "A-2"). All parcels of real property included within the District are described in detail on maps on file in the Los Angeles County Assessor's office. Assessment District No. 39 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 IMPROVEMENTS The facilities and items of servicing and maintenance included within the District are as follows: 1Landseaping Servicing means the furnishing of water for the irrigation of any landscaping, the operation of any fountains, or the maintenance of any other improvements. Maintenance means the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation and servicing of any improvement, including: 1. Repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any landscape improvement. 2. Providing for the life, growth, health and beauty of landscaping, including without limitation, cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing, or treating for disease or injury. 3. The removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid waste. The purpose of Assessment District No. 39 is for the maintenance and servicing of mini -parks, slopes and open spaces within the District. Exhibit "13-2, " attached hereto, shows the location and extent of the landscaping improvements to be maintained by the proceeds from this assessment district. Assessment District No. 39 3 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS The estimated funding for maintenance and servicing of landscaping for the update of Assessment District No. 39 for the 2010-11 Fiscal Year is as follows: Revenue: Appropriation Fund Balance (from FY 2009-10) Property Tax and Assessments Interest Revenue Transfer in - General Fund • Appropriations: Personal Services Salaries City Paid Benefits Retirement Worker's Compensation Expense Short/Long Term Disability Medicare Expense Cafeteria Benefits Operating Expenses Advertising Utilities Water & Edison Maintenance -Grounds & Bldg. Professional Services Contract Services Contract Services (Excel Landscape Maint) Weed/Pest Abatement (L.A. County Ag) Capital Outlays Miscellaneous Equipment Reserve for Future Capital Improvements TOTAL W Assessment District No. 39 Engineers Report— FY 2010-2011 2010-11 Recommended Budget 0 164,190 0 57,042 221,232 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,500 52,000 5,000 4,500 139,332 17,900 221,232 Plans and Specifications Plans and specifications showing the general nature, location and extent of any proposed improvements are on file in the office of the City Clerk and available for public inspection. Assessment District No. 39 5 Engineer's Report - FY 2010-2011 METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT The net amount to be assessed upon lands within the District in accordance with this report is apportioned by a formula and method which fairly distributes the amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each lot or parcel from the improvements, namely the maintenance and servicing of public landscaping improvements within such District. The maintenance and servicing of public landscaping improvements installed and constructed in public places in the City of Diamond Bar provides a special benefit which is received by each and every lot or parcel within the District, tending to enhance their value. The primary benefits of landscaping are as set forth below: 1. Beautification of the streets which are used by all of the residents in Diamond Bar. 2. Public parks which can be utilized and enjoyed by all residents within the District. 3. A sense of community pride resulting from well-maintained green spaces. 4. The enhancement of the value of property which results from the foregoing benefits. Existing land use information indicates that all of the parcels within the District are residences. Because the special benefits derived apply equally to all residents and parcels, it has been determined that all assessable parcels would receive the same net assessment. Assessment District No. 39 6 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 ASSESSMENT The amount to be assessed upon the lots and parcels within the District and the amount apportioned to each assessable parcel within the District is shown in the table below. Estimated Assessment Requirements: Estimated Number of Parcels: Estimated Assessment Per Parcel: 2010-11 Assessment Per Parcel: 2009-10 Assessment Per Parcel: Difference: Assessment District No. 39 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 7 $164,190 1,263 $ 130.00 $ 130.00 $ 130.00 $ 0.00 ASSESSMENT ROLL The individual 2010-11 assessments, tabulated by Assessor's parcel number; are shown on an Assessment Roll on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar as Exhibit "C" and are made a part of this report by reference. (The Assessment Roll is not included in this report due to its volume.) Dated: IVW I Z— , 2010 pFESS/CSA No. 27861 Civil.OF CAO' .Q GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC. Assessment District No. 39 8 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 EXHIBITS EXHIBIT ri: TIIEa OFOIOAIMN din 0 00o Woo DOS 2000 SHEET 10F 1 S IF WMAER FON EACH LOT On PARCEL WITHIN TH SSE ASSEOR'S PARCEL 1RHAOEA AS ASGIGIIED III TIE ANGELES ASSESSOP6 OFFICE iIMENSIONS Fon EACH LOT OR PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN E SHOWN ON THE ASSESSOR'S PARCEL MAPS ON FILE IN NE LOG ANGELES COUNTY ASGESSOn. CE OF THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. THIS 20_. CITYCLERK OF THE CFI, OF DIAMOND PAR ICE OF THE COUNTY AUDITOR. COUNTY OF LOS OF CgUFOnNIA, TIUS DAY OF _. 2O_. CITY CUM OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND OAR , GP[3-FRFEDRICF] � & ASSOC. INC. o7, ........... SHEET -10F 1 SHEET LEGEND — ASSESSMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARY i:; - BRUSH 3IL73ACM *—W PARKS 695 ACRES ;FFIll SLOPES HAI AUE6 TURF 016 ACV'S lXS AM 5 A TWF ft !RE 1 A. M CITY COUNCIL Agenda: # 7. 1 (c) - Meeting Date: June 15, 2010 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Manage''(, TITLE: RESOLUTION LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT ON CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2010-2011. FAMne FINANCIAL SUMMARY: The requested District 41 levy rate of $220.50 per parcel will generate $122,157 in assessment revenue. The assessment rate remains the same as the rate applied at the date of incorporation of the City of Diamond Bar. There are not sufficient funds collected to maintain and improve the District without utilizing the General Fund. For FY 2010-11, $20,000 of Prop A Safe Parks Funds are proposed to pay for the operation and maintenance costs in District 41. The assessment revenues shall be deposited in Special Revenue Landscape Fund 141 and shall apply toward the 2010-11 operation and maintenance budget. The District budget totals $183,368. The itemized budget for District 41 is included in the attached Engineer's Report, Financial Analysis, page 4. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The landscaping improvements to be maintained by District 41 are the slopes, and open space areas within the Assessment diagrams as reflected in Exhibit "B-3" of the Engineer's Report. This reflects a total maintenance area of 15.6 acres. The maintenance and servicing of public landscaping improvements installed and constructed in public places in the City provides a special benefit which is received by each and every lot or parcel within the District, tending to enhance their value. The estimated number of parcels within the District is 554 parcels. The amount assessed upon the lands within District No. 41 for Fiscal Year 2009-10 was $220.50 per parcel. This proposed assessment has been determined to be exempt from the provisions of Proposition 218 as set forth in Section 5(b): Any assessment imposed pursuant to a petition signed by the persons owning all of the parcels subject to the assessment at the time the assessment is initially imposed. Prepared By: Patrick Gallegos, Management Analyst REVIEWEDBY-:— Dagid G. Liu Director of Public Works Attachments: Resolution No. 2010 -XX Engineer's Report Date Prepared: June 7, 2010 RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -XX RESOLUTION LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT ON CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2010-2011. A. RECITALS. (i) By its Resolution No. 2010-16, this Council approved a report of the City Engineer related to City of Diamond Bar Landscaping Assessment District No. 41 prepared pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Section 22623, described the improvements thereon and gave notice of and fixed the time and place of the hearing on the question of assessment thereon for fiscal year 2010-11. A diagram of the area encompassed by said assessment district is attached hereto as Exhibit "A-3." Said hearing was duly and properly noticed, commenced at the South Coast Air Quality Management Auditorium/Government Center, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California on June 15, 2010, and was concluded prior to the adoption of this Resolution. (iii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. ENEW9291DIZA NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby find, determine and order as follows: 1. The Recitals, as set forth in Part A of this Resolution, are in all respects true and correct. 2. - This Council hereby expressly overrules any and all protests filed objecting to the proposed improvements specified herein or the assessment levied therefore. 3. Based upon its review of the report of the City Engineer referred to hereinabove, and other reports and information, the City Council hereby finds that (i) the land within the said District will be benefited by the improvements specified in said report, (ii) said District includes all of the lands so benefited, and (iii) the net amount to be assessed upon the lands within said District for the 2010-11 fiscal year, in accordance with said report, is apportioned by a formula and method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements 4. The improvements specified in the report hereinabove referred to which is on file with the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar are hereby ordered to be completed. 5. The assessment diagram contained in the report referred to hereinabove and the assessment of $220.50 for each assessable lot located within said District are hereby adopted and confirmed and said assessment hereby is levied for the 2010-11 fiscal year. 6.. The assessment is in compliance with the provisions of the Act, and the City Council has complied with all laws pertaining to the levy of an annual assessment pursuant to the Act. The assessment is levied for the purpose of paying the costs and expenses of the improvements described in the report referred to hereinabove for fiscal year 2010-11. 7. The City Treasurer shall deposit all moneys representing assessments collected by the County to the credit of a special fund for use in City of Diamond Bar Assessment District No. 41. 8. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file the diagram and assessment with the County Auditor, together with a certified copy of this Resolution upon its adoption. 9. A certified copy of the assessment and diagram shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk and open for public inspection. 10. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 15th day of June, 2010. Carol Herrera, Mayor 1, TOMMYE CRIBBINS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved and adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 15th day of June, 2010, by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST: Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar SHEET 9 OF 9 SHEET N GEdP= BCA( fsv aza�v of ne att of cv& w W nm wort emw�szanra e -m icn x ma am maw MEIs+Siaat A'K'a. AUGm tr( 7NiSmmlRltYd Seim NDM7=NC1faa ME ne ias� mewma , elai im oa aria. m nm m m ev ix 4171.1 r� wrta nuc ON ws a � arcc or me iaz m�Lp1a ra aiicc a: nE art amu of na arc of awao n cmm_w of Nmta maE a wtveas< nn._ om a• . W'at�'i�'fi""o arc W+dOin CW Raw 6F8—FF.tiBDHICH It AMOC.. INC. axnu.iva na. vawmu ro aaact ws�ac uo Pm> t¢isn !tea SHEET1OFISHEET EXHIBIT "134" ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 FISCAL YEAR for the CITY OF DIAMOND BAR a���CIZIiIl•'-������r;� ® F'� �T•7�i 4 �E:f wst• w_ ¢_ � :x tiF " li. �T11 �I i i1 i'P ♦ r a r' z '.::.li Y:•'' R SCALE F . SOP ♦ tr 1�t : tr f (4 LEGEND Y7! ( y ASSESSMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARY BRUSH A.PO ACRES SLOPES IE.O6 ACRES TURF 17.6. 6F, J O GFB•rftIEDRiCH •EASE MDP COUiESY OF TRE COY OF WAMOM DIR 9SO 1— ENGINEER°S REPORT Update of ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 Fiscal Year 2010-11 CITE' OF DIAMOND BAR Preliminary: May 18, 2010 Prepared by: GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC. 6529 Riverside Avenue, Suite 230 Riverside, CA 92506 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION BOUNDARIES OF DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS Landscaping FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Revenue Appropriations METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT ROLL EXHIBITS Exhibit "A-3" - Assessment Diagram Exhibit "B-3" - Improvement Map Page 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 INTRODUCTION Pursuant to the order of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, this report is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. This report presents the engineering analysis for the 2010-11 Fiscal Year for the district known as: ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. NO. 41 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR (Hereinafter referred to as "District"). This District, by special benefit assessments, provides funding for the maintenance of landscaped areas owned by the City of Diamond Bar which are located in public rights-of-way within the City of Diamond Bar. Section 22573, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, requires assessments to be levied according to benefit rather than according to assessed value. The section states: "The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated special benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements. The determination of whether or not a lot or parcel will benefit from the improvements shall be made pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911 (Division 7 (commencing with Section 5000)) [of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California], " As the assessments are levied on the basis of benefit, they are considered a user's fee, not a tax, and, therefore, are not governed by Article XIIIA of the California Constitution. Properties owned by public agencies, such as a city, county, state or the federal government, are not assessable under pre -Prop 218 law. Assessment District No. 41 1 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 BOUNDARIES OF DISTRICT The boundary of the District is shown on the Assessment Diagram (on file in the office of the City Clerk at the City Hall of Diamond Bar as Exhibit "A-3 "). All parcels of real property included within the District are described in detail on maps on file in the Los Angeles County Assessor's office. Assessment District No. 41 2 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 IMPROVEMENTS The facilities and items of servicing and maintenance included within the District are as follows: Landscaping Servicing means the furnishing of water for the irrigation of any landscaping, the operation of any fountains, or the maintenance of any other improvements. Maintenance means the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation and servicing of any improvement, including: 1. Repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any landscape improvement. 2. Providing for the life, growth, health and beauty of landscaping, including without limitation, cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing, or treating for disease or injury. 3. The removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid waste. The purpose of Assessment District No. 41 is for the maintenance and servicing of mini -parks, slopes and open spaces within the District. Exhibit 93-3," attached hereto, shows the location and extent of the landscaping improvements to be maintained by the proceeds from this assessment district. Assessment District No. 41 Engineer's Report— FY 2010-2011 3 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS The estimated finiding for maintenance and servicing of landscaping for the update of Assessment District No. 41 for the 2010-11 Fiscal Year is as follows: 2010-11 Recommended Budget Revenue: Appropriation Fund Balance (from FY 2009-10) $ 40,911 Property Tax and Assessments 122,157 Interest Revenue 300 Transfer In - General Fund 0 Transfer in -Prop A SP 20,000 TOTAL 183,368 AWMriations: Personal Services 0 Salaries 0 City Paid Benefits 0 Retirement 0 Worker's Compensation Expense 0 Short/Long Tenn Disability 0 Medicare Expense 0 Cafeteria Benefits 0 Operating Expenses Advertising 2,500 Utilities 35,000 Maintenance of Grounds / Bldgs 9,000 Professional Services 4,500 Contract Services Contract Services (Excel Landscape Maint.) 49,730 Weed/Pest Abatement 60,600 Capital Outlays Miscellaneous Equipment 0 Capital h-nprovements ** 0 Reserve for Future Capital Improvements 22,038 TOTAL 183,368 ** No Capital Improvements this Fiscal Year. U Assessment District No. 41 Engineers Report — FY 2010-2011 Plans and Specifications Plans and specifications showing the general nature, location and extent of the proposed improvements are on file in the office of the City Clerk and available for public inspection. Assessment District No. 41 5 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT The net amount to be assessed upon lands within the District in accordance with this report is apportioned by a formula and method which fairly distributes the amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each lot or parcel from the improvements, namely the maintenance and servicing of public landscaping improvements within such District. The maintenance and servicing of public landscaping improvements installed and constructed in public places in the City of Diamond Bar provides a special' benefit which is received by each and every lot or parcel within the District, tending to enhance their value. The primary benefits of landscaping are as set forth below: Beautification of the streets which are used by all of the residents in Diamond Bar. 2. Public parks which can be utilized and enjoyed by all residents within the District. 3. A sense of community pride resulting from well-maintained green spaces. 4. The enhancement of the value of property which results from the foregoing benefits. Existing land use information indicates that all of the parcels within the District are residences. Because the special benefits derived apply equally to all residents and parcels, it has been determined that all assessable parcels would receive the same net assessment. Assessment District No. 41 6 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 ASSESSMENT The amount to be assessed upon the lots and parcels within the District and the amount apportioned to each assessable parcel within the District is shown in the table below. Estimated Assessment Requirements: $122,157 Estimated Number of Parcels: 554 Estimated Assessment Per Parcel: $ 220.50 2010-11 Assessment Per Parcel: $ 220.50 2009-10 Assessment Per Parcel: $ 220.50 Difference: $ 0.00 Assessment District No. 41 7 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 ASSESSMENT ROLL The individual 2010-11 assessments, tabulated by Assessor's parcel number, are shown on an Assessment Roll on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar as Exhibit "C" and are made a part of this report by reference. (The Assessment Roll is not included in this report due to its volume.) Dated: Ma k ��- , 2010 ESSio,yq FR IVo. 278&1 CIVIC- OF CA��F�i�� Assessment District No. 41 8 Engineer's Report — FY 2010-2011 GFB-FRIEDRICH & ASSOC., INC. A. XD EXHIBITS GRAF= ROAM t we Ma vat LW wfrdrw or n¢ cm w rmmmv wa niesaxa fwtm.® wpm e& w fao THE tiD"M nE u® Na oaenno n mt vat tar a+ FMM of fam mre+ ne osnmr wn°aao rcau>;a nwm. mann at Rc w n¢ me or ns fns GREET 9 OF 1 GHEE`i m�a Tfit and or nm My aaa or W arc a oswxa two CCtW a' Nwn, amt[ or ntronet na_ ar av . trL. arr on av+ao t+'a �¢ or na o nm' � mw OR LM ism= aws or —on fan oa fsa+am A aas-nmraca & essoc., uic. anrsun+o frre. nfweus m t�waoae�m. ra TASE MAP COURTESY W THE C" OF IRAWA) BAR EXHIBIT ("B-31" i ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 FISCAL YEAR 2010?41,x.* forthe CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SHEET 1011 SHEET I L, LEGEND ASSESSMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARY BRUSH 1-ACIA 3 SLOPES IZOGACRES TURF 17.600 -F. & ASSOC INC Agenda # 7 Meeting Date: June I5, 2010 CITY COUNCIL �� AGENDA REPORT �OItP(IR� X44 ��98q TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Manager TITLE: General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03, Zone Change No. 2007-04, Specific Plan No. 2007-01 ("Site D Specific Plan"), Tentative Tract Map No. 70687, and Environmental Impact Report 2007-02 (SCH No. 2008021014). PROJECT APPLICANT: Walnut Valley Unified School District and City of Diamond Bar LEAD AGENCY: City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department PROJECT LOCATION: Site D is comprised of approximately 30.36 acres located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Numbers 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-903 and 8714-015-001). SUMMARY: The Site D Specific Plan (SDSP) was prepared to facilitate the processing and approval of future development proposals and associated discretionary and administrative approvals on a 30.36 -acre property referred to as Site D. The City and the Walnut Valley Unified School District agreed to collaborate in the planning efforts for the property so that each may advance its respective objectives for the disposition of the property. Key objectives of the Specific Plan are as follows: ➢ Allow for a maximum of 202 residential dwelling units; ➢ Allow for a maximum of 153,985 gross square feet of commercial use; ➢ Provide approximately 10 acres of open space areas, easements and rights-of-way; ➢ Establish an "A -Level" development framework that provides details for the backbone vehicular circulation system, the creation of master development pads to organize land uses on site, and the infrastructure plan; ➢ Establish architectural guidelines to promote unifying design elements; ➢ Prescribe the architectural, landscape and streetscape design criteria to create a visual continuity throughout Site D property; and ➢ Deliver a "green" and sustainable community through the use of energy efficiency, healthy indoor air quality, waste reduction, water efficiency, pedestrian and bicycle links to reduce vehicle trips, use of renewable and recyclable materials for building construction, water -efficient landscaping featuring indigenous, non-invasive and climate appropriate plant types, etc. The required energy standards for the project exceed those currently mandated by State Title 24. The Specific Plan is a detailed policy document, which replaces the land use designation and zoning of the underlying properties with more detailed criteria and performance standards. It is not a development plan to construct the residential and commercial buildings. Future developers will be required to submit project -specific development plans in accordance with the criteria set forth in the Specific Plan, which will be subject to review and approval by the City. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Certify Environmental Impact Report 2007-02; 2. Adopt Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Site D Specific Plan based on findings that the Specific Plan would result in identified economic and social benefits that will accrue to the City, the School District, and the region, and important public policy objectives will result from the implementation of the proposed Specific Plan, which override the significant environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated to less -than -significant levels; 3. Adopt General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C) to Specific Plan (SP); 4. Adopt Zone Change No. 2007-04 to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential (RL), Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM), and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan; ' A 5. Adopt Specific Plan No. 2007-01 for Site D Specific Plan, establishing the land use and development standards to facilitate the construction of up to 202 residential dwelling units; up to 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commeraal floor area; and a minimum of 10.16 acres of open space areas, easements and rights-of-way; and 6. Approve Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes. GPA No. 2007-03, ZC No. 2007-04, SP No. 2007-01, TTM No. 70687, EIR No. 2007-02 Page 2 BACKGROUND: The Site D Specific Plan project area consists of 30.36 acres, comprised of the following properties: ® The Walnut Valley Unified School District owns 28.71 acres. As early as the 1970s, the District has found the property unnecessary for future school use and declared it surplus property; a A 0.98 -acre strip of land along Brea Canyon Road owned by the City; and ® A 0.67 -acre segment of a flood control channel, owned and maintained by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, separates the City and School District properties. Under the proposed Specific Plan, the channel will be covered and used for parking, non -habitable structures, and landscape and circulation elements, which would be allowed under a lease agreement with the Flood Control District. Prior Development Proposals In 1990, the School District prepared a tentative tract map to subdivide Site D into 87 lots for the purpose of developing single-family detached residences. This effort prompted the City to study the feasibility of purchasing the land from the District for the purpose of developing a community park, which was supported by a School Board appointed advisory committee (the 7-11 Committee"). In 1991, the City pursued park development grants for Site D and the Pantera Park site, but received grant monies for Pantera Park only. In the years following this endeavor, the City completed upgrades to nearby Heritage Park, and the School District upgraded the recreational facilities at Castlerock Elementary School (the City and School District have joint -use agreements for the recreational facilities at all of the schools located in Diamond Bar). The City and School have since agreed to work cooperatively in the planning efforts for Site D so that each may advance its respective objectives for the disposition of the property. ANALYSIS: The Planning Commission staff reports in Attachment 6 provide a detailed analysis of the project objectives, surrounding land uses, site characteristics, key elements of the Specific Plan, development standards, circulation and traffic improvements, and the EIR process. Graphic exhibits are included in Attachment 16. GPA No. 2007-03, ZC No. 2007-04, SP No. 2007-01, TTM No. 70687, EIR No. 2007-02 Page 3 Framework of Site D Specific Plan/Project Objectives: The Walnut Valley Unified School District desires the disposition of the property to yield the maximum return to the District for the benefit of its constituents and its educational mission. The City believes that it is in the community's best interest to establish a comprehensive, enforceable planning strategy for Site D, and to do so prior to putting the property on the market. To further this goal, staff determined that a Specific Plan would be the most appropriate planning tool to better ensure a predictable outcome for the eventual build -out of Site D. On July 1, 2007, the City and the Walnut Valley Unified School District executed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) whereby the parties agreed to collaborate in the planning of the future land use for the project site—through the creation of a Specific Plan—so that both parties may each advance their respective objectives for the disposition of the property. The MOU further stipulates that "(o)f the usable acreage, on Site D, a minimum of fifty percent (50%) will be designated for residential development, and fifty percent (50%) will be designated for commercial use, exclusive of necessary infrastructure." A copy of the MOU is provided as Attachment 4. The land use parameters set forth in the MOU establish the following additional project objectives: ® Pursue the establishment of site-specific land use policies that allow, in reasonable comparable acreage, the development of both commercial and residential uses of the property, accommodating the provision of additional housing opportunities and the introduction of revenue -generating uses; and m Establish a specific plan as the guiding land -use policy mechanism to define the nature and intensity of future development, and to establish design and development parameters for the project site, so as to allow conveyance of the subject property to one or more developers and/or master builders, and provide to the purchasers reasonable assurance as to the uses that would be authorized on the project site and the nature of those exactions required for those uses. The District and the City are currently not partnered with or in formal discussions with any developers. The focus at this time is solely to adopt a prescriptive land use plan while the public entities, as the property owners, are in a position to exert maximum control/influence over the outcome of subsequent development. Fulfillment of Goals and Objectives in City's General Plan California Government Code states that a Specific Plan shall include a statement of the relationship of the Specific Plan to the General Plan, and further, that it may not be adopted or amended unless found to be consistent with the General Plan. GPA No. 2007-03, ZC No. 2007-04, SP No. 2007-01, TTM No. 70687, EIR No. 2007-02 Page 4 Consistency with the General Plan is achieved when the various land uses within the Specific Plan are compatible with the objectives, policies, general pattern of land uses and programs contained in the General Plan. While there is tension among several General Plan policies — such as meeting regional housing needs, preserving open space, promoting economic development, and reducing traffic congestion — the role of the City's decision makers is to determine which goals and policies should be furthered, given the objectives, context, and opportunities associated with each decision under consideration, and thus balance that tension given all the factors in play. The Site D Specific Plan implements the vision of the City's General Plan as follows: ® Contributes to the diversity of the City's housing stock in order to provide attractive housing which accommodates people of all ages, cultures, occupations and levels of financial status; ® Promotes viable commercial activity. While Diamond Bar has established local control by incorporating into a City, attendant to that is the responsibility for planning for the economic well being of the City through opportunities for generation of sales tax revenue. Moreover, the proposed commercial component of the Specific Plan provides the opportunity to better serve the southern part of the City by enhancing the range of conveniently -located neighborhood retail uses; and ® Creates a community environment which nurtures social and recreational opportunities for its residents. As recommended by the Planning Commission, a neighborhood public park space of 1.3 net acres is to be incorporated into the commercial development. The Specific Plan further meets the goals and objectives as listed in the Draft Specific Plan and Finding of Fact attached to the Draft Resolution in Attachment 1. Specific Plan/Project Benefits The proposed Specific Plan would result in a number of identifiable community benefits, some of which include: ® Defines the types of permitted and conditionally permitted land uses that will be appropriate for the project site and for the project setting, defines reasonable limits to the type, intensity, and density of those uses, and establishes the design and development standards for those uses; • Serves as a valuable regulatory tool for the systematic implementation of the City's General Plan; ® Imposes reasonable development controls and standards designed to ensure the integrated development of the project site; GPA No. 2007-03, ZC No. 2007-04, SP No. 2007-01, TTM No. 70687, EIR No. 2007-02 Page 5 ® Facilitates the School District's efforts to sell the surplus property by providing a subsequent purchaser reasonable certainty as to the type, intensity, and general configuration of allowable on-site land uses; ® Optimizes the benefits of the School District sale of surplus property of the benefit of its constituents and its educational mission; ® Results in the production of 202 new housing units within the City, thus helping the City to respond to the identified housing demand outlined in the current Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). This project would represent about 18.5 percent of the projected housing needs for the period between 2005-2014; • Increases the diversity of housing types in the City; • Presents homebuyers with additional purchase options and price variations allowing homebuyers to better match housing choices with household needs and demands through construction and sale of attached residential condominium units; ® Creates a mixed-use development that will promote the attainment or regional jobs - to -housing ratio objectives established by regional governmental entities and produce corresponding environmental benefits, consistent with Southern California Association of Governments Policies; ® Implements Senate Bill 375 which drives land use development to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by: ➢ Promoting a mixed-use development by providing both residential and commercial uses on the same site which serve to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and corresponding air quality benefits; ➢ Promoting alternative modes of transportation by providing bike and pedestrian trails and bus stops located adjacent to Site D and facilitate alternative modes of transportation. Transit is expected to be provided by the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA), Foothill Transit, and the City's fixed -route transportation system; and ➢ Integrating green building strategies into its design through energy efficiency; water -efficient land use and development using drought -tolerant landscaping and use of low -flow toilets, showerheads, and other fixtures; use of renewable and recyclable materials for building construction, solar panels, and low energy lighting, etc. ® Allows for the productive use of an underutilized property in the City's General Plan, converting a tax-exempt property to a private use, and introduces a land use that will generate sales and other taxes for the benefit of the City and its constituents; GPA No. 2007-03, ZC No. 2007-04, SP No. 2007-01, TTM No. 70687, EIR No. 2007-02 Page 6 ® Provides traffic improvements to the Diamond Bar Boulevard/Brea Canyon Road intersection which will improve traffic flow in and through that intersection; and Facilitates the ability of the City and other agencies to undertake improvements to specific public facilities through payment of school impact, park, and traffic impact fees and other exactions. Environmental Impact Report In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the Site D Specific Plan. The EIR provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the Specific Plan area, identifies mitigation measures to lessen those impacts, and analyzes a range of project alternatives. Outreach efforts to solicit citizen and public agency input throughout the EIR process included the following actions: Notice of Preparation: The City circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to public agencies, special districts, and members of the public requesting such notice for a 30 - day period commencing February 1, 2008 and ending March 5, 2008. Scoping Meeting: During the NOP period, the City advertised a public scoping meeting on February 21, 2008 held at the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center, Room CC -6. The meeting was intended to facilitate public input. Approximately 20 residents attended the meeting with the majority from the Ambushers Street neighborhood. Several issues raised at this meeting include impacts of view from Cherrydale, noise, traffic, buffer from commercial development, need for green space at entryway, preference to see residential development with less commercial, and to consider senior housing development. Notice of Completion/Availability: The Draft EIR was prepared by the City's environmental consultant, Environmental Impact Sciences on June 2009. A Notice of Completion and Availability was filed with the Office of Planning and Research on June 22, 2009. The 45 -day public review period was from June 25, 2009 through August 10, 2009. Neighborhood Meeting: On August 3, 2009, a neighborhood forum was held at the Heritage Park Community Center to provide the public with an additional opportunity to ask questions and comment on the Draft EIR, prior to the close of the 45 -day public review period. All written and verbal public testimony was taken, and written responses to the comments and issues raised are provided in the Response to Comments on the Draft EIR. The Response to Comments includes all comments received during the 45 - day public review period. CEQA requires that the City evaluate comments on environmental issues received from persons or agencies who prepared a written response. GPA No. 2007-03, ZC No. 2007-04, SP No. 2007-01, TTM No. 70687, EIR No. 2007-02 Page 7 Findinas of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Prior to approving the proposed Specific Plan, the City Council must first certify that the Final EIR has been completed in accordance with CEQA; that the Final EIR was presented, reviewed and considered by the City Council; and that the Final EIR reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis. The Council is required to adopt findings in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 when significant effects have been identified in the Draft EIR which cannot feasibly be mitigated to less -than -significant levels. As documented in the Draft EIR, all potential impacts associated with the proposed Specific Plan can be mitigated to less -than -significant levels, except air quality impacts. Specifically, it was determined that construction and operational air quality impacts would exceed daily emissions thresholds established by the Air Quality Management District (AQMD). No alternatives (excluding the "No Project" alternative) or mitigation measures were identified which could reduce air quality impacts below a level of significance; this is largely attributable to the fact that the South Coast Air Basin is already subject to unhealthful air quality levels. Even though a review of environmental impacts shows that an environmentally superior alternative exists, the City can still approve the proposed project. According to Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, CEQA requires that the City balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of the proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable." In order to do this, the public agency must adopt a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" — a document that states the reasons for why the project should be approved even though there are environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated. The Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations are attached as Exhibit A to the draft resolution certifying the EIR and adopting the mitigation reporting and monitoring program (Attachment 1). The Findings of Fact identify economic and social benefits that will accrue to the City, to the School District, and to the region, as well as important public policy objectives that will result from the implementation of the proposed project. Therefore, the City Council may find that the proposed project's identified benefits override the project's air quality impacts. Comment Letters Received Correspondence received to date is included in the Draft EIR, Response to Comments on'the Draft EIR and Planning Commission Staff Reports. Correspondences not published in these documents are included in Attachments 10 through 14. On May 23, 2010, a letter from Andy Salas, Chairman of the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians is included as Attachment 14. The letter contends that the City failed to GPA No. 2007-03, ZC No. 2007-04, SP No. 2007-01, TTM No. 70687, EIR No. 2007-02 Page 8 perform adequate outreach to the Native American tribes that may have a cultural connection to the area. In accordance with the State's "Tribal Consultation Guidelines" (April 15, 2005), the City has fully complied with all applicable noticing requirements with regards to outreach efforts, including sending a "Local Government Tribal Consultation List Request" to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on February 1, 2008 and sending copies of the Notice of Preparation to the NAHC, the Gabrieleno/Tongva Tribal Council, the Gabrielino Tongva Nation, and the Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians. The mailing list was obtained from the NAHC website (accessed in late January 2008) which lists the names/contact information for tribal organizations throughout the state. In addition, a Phase I cultural and paleontological resource assessment was prepared as a technical appendix to the EIR. The assessment included direct consultation with the NAHC. The NAHC performed a Sacred Lands File (SLF) record search, which failed to indicate the presence of Native American cultural resources in the immediate project area. Moreover, the NAHC provided the consulting archaeologists with Native American contact list, and letters were sent to each of the contacts via certified mail, and no responses were received. Still, as indicated in the Draft EIR, Mitigation Measure 11-1 requires that a qualified archaeologist shall monitor initial vegetation removal activities in the event that cultural resources, Native American or otherwise, are encountered. A letter from the City's environmental consultant, Environmental Impact Sciences, is included as Attachment 15. Specific Plan Amendments Among the public comments received, it was noted that Section 6.5 of the Specific Plan may grant the Community Development Director overly broad authority to approve revisions to the Specific Plan. To address this concern, staff drafted modified language to more clearly define the limits to the Director's authority. The proposed revised Section 6.5 is provided as Attachment 9, and will be incorporated into the document if the Specific Plan is approved. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: On April 11, 2010, the Commission opened the public hearing to take public testimony from the public regarding the Draft Environmental Impact Report and all land use entitlements, closed the public hearing, and continued the matter to the April 27, 2010 meeting. Eleven members of the public spoke, and voiced opposition to some or all aspects of the proposed Specific Plan. Concerns revolved largely around the following issues: ® Traffic impacts; ® Visual and aesthetic impacts; ® Opposition to commercial development; GPA No. 2007-03, ZC No. 2007-04, SP No. 2007-01, TTM No. 70687, EIR No. 2007-02 Page 9 ® Conservation of existing open space and preservation of existing trees on-site; and ® Air quality and construction impacts. A detailed summary of the public testimony is provided in the minutes, which are included in Attachment 7 of this report. At the conclusion of deliberations during the April 27 meeting, three of the four Commissioners expressed intent to recommend certification of the Environmental Impact Report, and adoption of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. The same three Commissioners also expressed support for the Specific Plan with the addition of a recommendation to incorporate a neighborhood park feature into the plan and directed staff to prepare a revised resolution that reflects the majority's recommendation, and continued the matter to the May 11, 2010 meeting. At the May 11, 2010 meeting, staff presented an analysis of park alternatives to assist the Commission in determining the size and type of public space to recommend to the City Council. By a 3-1 vote, the Commission recommended certification of the EIR and Statement of Overriding Considerations, adoption of the General Plan Amendment/Zone Change, and approval of the Specific Plan with the added recommendation to incorporate a 1.3 net acre usable neighborhood public park within the area of the project site designated for commercial development, adjacent to slope areas or water quality management areas, and which shall incorporate features such as, but not limited to, a tot lot, picnic tables, seating areas and shade structures. The Commission stated that the park shall be constructed to City standards, and then dedicated to the City. The staff reports, minutes and resolutions adopted at these meetings are attached as Attachments 6-8. Neighborhood Park Recommendation: In addition to making the above recommendations, the Planning Commission recommended incorporating a 1.3 net acre usable neighborhood public park within the commercial component, adjacent to the slope areas or water quality management areas. The recommendation to include a neighborhood park is solely that of the Planning Commission. Should the City Council support the concept, it may also wish to consider the area adjacent to the terminus of Posado Drive as an alternative site. Although not within the commercial subarea of the land use plan, it does have a more direct linkage and access point to the existing neighborhood adjacent to Site D. ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS In addition to the staffs recommendation on Page 2, the following alternative actions available to the Council have been identified: GPA No. 2007-03, ZC No. 2007-04, SP No. 2007-01, TTM No. 70687, EIR No. 2007-02 Page 10 Alternative Environmental Actions: 1. Certify the Final Environmental Impact Report, but determine that the Findings of Fact do not warrant the adoption of the Statement of Overriding Considerations, continue the matter and direct staff to prepare the necessary resolution; OR 2. Identify the reasons why the Final EIR should not be certified, specifying the deficiencies in the environmental analysis and/or conclusions, and recommend that the City Council direct staff to revise the environmental analysis accordingly, continue the matter and direct staff to prepare the necessary resolution; OR 3. Continue the item for additional information or revisions to the environmental documents. Alternative Project Actions: 1. Approve the proposed project as recommended by the Planning Commission (which includes a public park amendment) and adopt the resolutions and ordinances included as Attachments 1 through 5 with or without amendments; OR 2. Approve the proposed project and adopt the resolutions and ordinances with additional modifications and amendments as determined by the City Council; OR 3. Deny the proposed project and direct staff to prepare the neces$ary resolutions OR 4. Remand the proposed project to the Planning Commission with specific direction from the City Council. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site on June 4, 2010, and the notice was published in the Inland Valley Daily Tribune and San Gabriel Valley Tribune newspapers. The project site was posted with a notice display board, and a copy of the public notice was posted at the City's three designated community posting sites. The draft Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report were also posted on the City's website, and hard copies are available for review at City Hall and the Diamond Bar Branch of the Los Angeles County Library. RECOMMENDATION FOR THE JUNE 15, 2010 MEETING: Open the public hearing to take public testimony from the public regarding the Draft Environmental Impact Report and all land use entitlements, and continue the matter to a date specified by the City Council. GPA No. 2007-03, ZC No. 2007-04, SP No. 2007-01, TTM No. 70687, EIR No. 2007-02 Page 11 Prepared by: Reviewed by: /_"N —,10,4w — Grace S. Lee Greg Gubman, AICP Senior Planner Community Development Director Reviewed by: David Doyle Assistant City Manager Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution No. 2010 -XX (Certification of the FEIR and Adoption of the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program and Statement of Overriding Considerations) 2. Draft Resolution No. 2010 -XX (Approval of GPA) 3. Draft Resolution No. 2010 -XX (Approval of TTM) 4. Draft Ordinance No. XX (2010) (Approval of ZC) 5. Draft Ordinance No. XX (2010) (Approval of SP) 6. PC Staff Reports dated April 13 & 27, May 11, 2010 7. PC Minutes of April 13 & 27, May 11, 2010 8. PC Resolution Nos. 2010-12,13,14 9. Revised Section 6.5 of the Specific Plan RE Amendments 10. E-mail from David R. Busse dated May 10, 2010 11. Letter from Mary E. Rodriguez dated May 7, 2010 12. Letter from James Eng dated May 13, 2010 13. Letter from Lindsay Maine dated May 16, 2010 14. Letter from Andy Salas, Chairman of the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians dated May 23, 2010 15. Letter from Environmental Impact Sciences Regarding Tribal Consultation dated June 9, 2010 16. Aerial Photo, Land Use Plan, Landscape Concept Plan, Site Sections and Tentative Tract Map GPA No. 2007-03, ZC No. 2007-04; SP No. 2007-01; TTM No. 70687, EIR No. 2007-02 Page 12 Attachment 1 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO.2008021014) AND APPROVING THE MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM AND ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE SITE D SPECIFIC PLAN AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 70687 FOR A SITE COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 30.36 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BREA CANYON ROAD AND DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBERS 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-903 and 8714-015-001). A. RECITALS On July 1, 2007, the property owner/co-applicant, Walnut Valley School District, and property owner/co-applicant/lead agency, City of Diamond Bar, executed a Memorandum of Understanding whereby the parties agreed to collaborate in the planning of the future land use for the approximately 30.36 - acre parcel property located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, California, so that both parties may each advance their respective objectives for the disposition of the property. The following approvals are requested of the City Council [Items (a) through (d) below are collectively referred to as the "Project']: (a) General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C) to Specific Plan (SP); (b) Zone Change No. 2007-04 to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential (RL), Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM), and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan (c) Specific Plan No. 2007-01 to adopt the Site D Specific Plan for the approximately 30.36 acre site to facilitate the development of a maximum of 202 residential dwelling units; a maximum of 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial floor area; and approximately, 10.16 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights-of-way; (d) Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes; and (e) Environmental Impact Report 2007-02 to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report, which provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the Specific Plan area. The Final EIR includes mitigation measures for the project, addresses project alternatives, identifies the environmentally superior project alternative, and adopts a statement of overriding considerations; 3. Notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on June 4, 2010. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the Project site and public notices were posted at the City's designated community posting sites. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the project site was posted with a display board and the notice was posted at three other locations within the project vicinity; and 4. On April 13, 2010, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all interested individuals, closed the public hearing, and continued the matter to May 11, 2010. 5. On April 27 and May 11, 2010, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar continued and concluded the deliberations. At that time, the Planning Commission recommended that City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2008021014) and approve the Mitigation Monitoring Program and adopt Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project. 6. On June 15, 2010, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the project. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct; The City Council hereby finds that the project identified above in this Resolution required an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). EIR (SCH No. 2008021014) has been prepared according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. The 45 -day public review period for the EIR began June 25, 2009, and ended August 10, 2009. Furthermore, the Planning Commission has reviewed the EIR and related documents in reference to the Project; The City Council based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, hereby finds and determines that conditions have been incorporated into the Project, which mitigate or avoid significant adverse environmental impacts identified in Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2008021014) except as 2 EIR 2007-02 — CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX to those effects which are identified and made the subject of a Statement of Overriding Considerations which this City Council finds are clearly outweighed by the economic, social, and other benefits of the proposed project, as more fully set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. The City Council hereby certifies the Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2008021014) to be complete and adequate; and adopts the Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program attached herein as Exhibits A and B and hereby incorporated by reference. The City Council shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to: Walnut Valley Unified School District, 880 South Lemon Avenue, Walnut, CA 91789. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS XXt" DAY OF XXXX 2010, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. By: Carol Herrera, Mayor I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the XXth day of XXXX, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Council Member: NOES: Council Member: ABSENT: Council Member: ABSTAIN: Council Member: ATTEST: Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk, City of Diamond Bar EIR 2007-02—CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX Exhibit A FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT — "SITE D" SPECIFIC PLAN STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2008021014 Section 21081 and 21081.5, California Public Resources Code Sections 15091, 15092, and 15083, Title 14, Chapter 3, California Code of Regulations 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.1 Project Location The approximately 30.36 -acre project site is located within the corporate boundaries of the City Diamond Bar (City or Lead Agency), an incorporated community situated along the western edge of Los Angeles County (County). The project site is located in the southwestern portion of the City on the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard. The project site is bordered on the north by Diamond Bar Boulevard; on the west by Brea Canyon Road, and on the south, east, and southwest by existing single-family detached dwelling units. Existing engineered slope areas, including v -ditch drainage features, separate the project site from existing homes on the south and west. Commercial and office professional uses are located to the north of Diamond Bar Boulevard and west of Brea Canyon Road. The project site is generally located east of State Route 57 (SR -57 Freeway) and Brea Canyon Road and southeast of the intersection of the SR -57 Freeway, Diamond Bar Boulevard, and Brea Canyon Cutoff. The project site is located to the north of the terminus of Castle Rock Road and Pasado Drive. 1.2 Project Description The City of Diamond Bar (City or Lead Agency) and the Walnut Valley Unified School District (WVUSD or District) own separate properties within the corporate boundaries of the City, separated by an open flood control channel (Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel) operated by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LADFCD or County), a division of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW). The WVUSD's governing body has determined that the District's approximately 28.71 -acre property (Site D or District Property) is" unnecessary for future school use and has declared it to "surplus property." The City's 0.98 - acre property (City Property) was acquired so that City would have access to property to address future traffic impacts as well as the existing traffic issues in this area. The Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel (Brea Canyon Channel), which runs generally parallel to Brea Canyon Road, separates the District Property from the City Property. The LACFCD's approximately 0.67 -acre facility (County Property) is presently an open box culvert. In accordance with the LACFCD's "Guidelines for Overbuilding and Air Rights," in combination with such other standards and procedures as may be established by the County, leasehold interests in the "air rights" above the channel could be conveyed to a non -County entity, thus allowing the channel to be covered and the lands situated above that facility used for other purposes. On July 1, 2007 the City and the WVUSD executed a "Memorandum of Understanding" (MOU) whereby the parties agreed to a collaborative planning process for the District Property and the City Property whereby both entities could advance their respective objectives for the disposition of those land holdings. Under the terms of the MOU, as authorized under the provisions of Sections 65450-65457 of the California Government Code (CGC), the City agreed to prepare and process a "specific plan" for the combined properties for the purpose of establishing design and development parameters for the use of those properties. The proposed "'Site D' Specific Plan" (SDSP) project encompasses approximately 30.36 -acres and contains a number of related elements, including both specific actions and activities which are presently before the City of Diamond Bar (City or Lead Agency) and later activities which can be reasonably anticipated as a result of those actions presently under review. From a planning perspective, the Lead Agency is considering the possible adoption of a proposed specific plan (Specific Plan No. 2007-01) authorizing the development of 202 dwelling units and 153,985 gross leaseable square feet of commercial use within the 30.36 -acre specific plan boundaries. From a project perspective, it is assumed that the project site would be developed to accommodate those permitted and conditionally permitted land uses authorized under the specific plan and developed to the maximum intensity allowable thereunder. Based on the site's existing "City of Diamond Bar General Plan" (General Plan) and zoning designations, the proposed project includes a General Plan amendment (GPA No. 2007-03) from "Public Facility (PF)" and "General Commercial (C)" to "Specific Plan" (SP)," with a corresponding zone change (ZC) from "Low Density Residential (R-1 10,000)," "Low/Medium Density Residential (R-1 7,500)", and "Neighborhood Commercial (C-1)" to "Specific Plan (SP)." Also proposed is the approval of a tentative subdivision map (Tentative Tract Map No. 70687) establishing separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels and creating an internal circulation system and establishing easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes. Following the adoption of the specific plan, the City and the Walnut Valley Unified School District (WVUSD or District) may enter into a transferable development agreement for the purpose of facilitating the implementation of the specific plan and the development of the project site. In addition, the District and the City will cooperate in the sale of the District's holdings (District Property) and the City's holdings (City Property) to one or more developers, master builders, end users, or other parties. 1.3 Project Objectives As more thoroughly described in the FEIR, both the City and the District have established specific objectives concerning the proposed project and/or the project site. It is the objective of the City to promote and facilitate the attainment of those goals, objectives, plans, and policies as contained in the General Plan. Specifically, those objectives include, but are not limited to, the following excerpts from the General Plan: (1) Require that new development be compatible with surrounding land uses (Strategy 2.2.1, Land Use Element); and (2) Balance the retention of the natural environment with its conversion to urban form (Strategy 3.3.1, Land Use Element). The City has elected to prepare and process a specific plan for the proposed project for the purpose of defining the types of permitted and conditionally permitted land uses that the City believes to be appropriate for the project site and the project setting, to define reasonable limits to the intensity and density of those uses, and to establish the design and development standards for those uses. The following additional broad project objective can be derived from Section 22.60.020 (Applicability) and Section 22.60.060 (Adoption of Specific Plan) in Chapter 22.60 (Specific Plans) of the Municipal Code: Prepare a specific plan which provides for flexibility, encourages the innovative use of land, provides for the development of a variety of housing and other development types, assists in the comprehensive master planning of the project site, and is consistent with the General Plan and other adopted goals and policies of the City. Since the MOU between the City and the District constitute a declaration of the intent of both parties, that document contains information that can be utilized in the formulation of project objectives. The following additional objectives can be derived from that document: (1) District. desires the disposition of the School Property to yield the maximum return to the District for the benefit of its constituents and its educational mission; and (2) City desires that the School Property and the City Property be developed in a manner as to assure compatibility with and to meet the needs of the surrounding area and to provide a desirable level of sales tax revenues to the City. As further indicated in the MOU, of the usable acreage, it is explicitly specified that a minimum of 50 percent of the property will be designated for residential development and 50 percent will be designated for commercial use, exclusive of necessary infrastructure. Based on those actions, the following additional objectives can be established: (1) With regards to the project site, pursue the establishment of site-specific land -use policies that allow, in reasonably comparable acreage, the development of both commercial and residential uses of the property, accommodating the provision of additional housing opportunities and the introduction of revenue -generating uses; and (2) Establish a specific plan as the guiding land -use policy mechanism to define the nature and intensity of future development and to establish design and development parameters for the project site, so as to allow conveyance of the subject property to one or more developers and/or master builders and provide to the purchasers reasonable assurance as to the uses that would be authorized on the project site and the nature of those exactions required for those uses. 1.3.1 Future Growth Needs It is a further objective of the City of Diamond Bar to meet its fair share of the region's housing needs. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is a key tool for local governments to plan for anticipated growth. The RHNA quantifies the anticipated need for housing within each jurisdiction for the 8'/z -year period from January 2006 to July 2014. Communities then determine how they will address this need through the process of updating the Housing Elements of their General Plans. The current RHNA was adopted by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) in July 2007. The future need for housing is determined primarily by the forecasted growth in households in a community. Each new household'created by a child moving out of a parent's home or by a family moving to a community for employment creates the need for a housing unit. The housing need for new households is then adjusted to maintain a desirable level of vacancy to promote housing choice and mobility. An adjustment is also made to account for units expected to be lost due to demolition, natural disaster, or conversion to non -housing uses. The sum of these factors — household growth, vacancy need, and replacement need — determines the construction need for a community. Total housing need is then distributed among four income categories on the basis of the county's income distribution, with adjustments to avoid an over -concentration of lower-income households in any community. In July 2007 SCAG, adopted the final RHNA growth needs for each of the county's cities plus the unincorporated area. The total housing growth need for the City of Diamond Bar during the 2006-2014 planning period is 1,090 units. Site D is one of the very few available sites in the City that can significantly contribute toward meeting Diamond Bar's RHNA obligation. 1.3.2 Senate Bill 375 SB 375 (Steinberg) is California state legislation that became law effective January 1, 2009. It prompts California regions to work together to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from cars and light trucks. This new law would achieve this objective by requiring integration of planning processes for transportation, land -use and housing. The plans emerging from this process will lead to more efficient communities that provide residents with alternatives to using single occupant vehicles. SB 375 requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop regional reduction targets for automobiles and light trucks GHG emissions. The regions, in turn, are tasked with creating "sustainable communities strategy," (SCS) which combine transportation and land -use elements in order to achieve the emissions reduction target, if feasible. SB 375 also offers local governments regulatory and other incentives to encourage more compact new development and transportation alternatives. In order to achieve the greenhouse gas reduction goals set out 'in California Assembly Bill 32: The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32), SB 375 focuses on reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and urban sprawl. AB 32 was the nation's first law to limit greenhouse gas emissions and SB 375 was enacted thereafter to more specifically address the transportation and land use components of greenhouse gas emissions. Through the implementation of regional SCS plans by 2020, the goal of SB 375 is to see a significant decrease in greenhouse gas emissions for the environment and an increase in quality of life for residents. There are two mutually important facets to the SB 375 legislation: reducing VMT and encouraging more compact, complete, and efficient communities for the future.' SCAG and the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments—the subregional planning organization of which Diamond Bar is a member—are in the process establishing the parameters for an SCS for the subregions comprising the SCAG region. Although the SCS is not yet adopted, many local jurisdictions are making efforts to encourage developments that reduce VMT. The Site D Specific Plan furthers the objectives of SB 375 by facilitating horizontal mixed use with pedestrian connections between the residential and commercial components. In the absence of transit infrastructure (other than bus routes), mixed use developments can play a significant role in local efforts to reduce VMT. 2.0 INTRODUCTION TO FINDINGS 2.1 Format of Findings These Findings have been divided into a number of sections. Those sections and the information presented therein are briefly outlined below. Section 1.0 (Project Description). This section provides an overview of the proposed project, describes its location, and identifies the project's stated objectives. Section 2.0 (Introduction to Findings). This section provides an introduction to these Findings, and describes their purpose and statutory and regulatory basis. Section 3.0 (General Findings). In addition to the specific findings presented herein, this section identifies the general CEQA findings of the Lead Agency 1 Excerpts from Senate Bill 375 Factsheet published by SCAG (2010) Section 4.0 (Findings Regarding the Significant or Potentially Significant Environmental Effects of the Proposed Project which cannot Feasibly be Mitigated to Below a Level of Significance). This section sets forth findings regarding the significant or potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project which cannot feasibly be mitigated to a less -than -significant level based on the threshold of significance criteria presented in the FEIR and which will or may result from the approval, construction, habitation, and/or use of the project and/or the project site. Section 5.0 (Findings Regarding the Significant or Potentially Significant Environmental Effects of the Proposed Project which can Feasibly be Mitigated to Below a Level of Significance). This section sets forth findings regarding the significant or potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project which either do not manifest at a level of significance based on the threshold of significance criteria presented in the FEIR or which can feasibly be mitigated to a less -than -significant level through the imposition of standard conditions of approval and/or those mitigation measures included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the project's "Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program" (MRMP). Section 6.0 (Findings Regarding the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program). This section contains findings with regards to the MRMP. Section 7.0 (Findings Regarding Alternatives not Selected for Implementation). This section provides findings regarding those alternatives to the proposed project which were examined in the FEIR and which were considered by the advisory and decision-making bodies of the Lead Agency as part of their deliberations concerning the proposed project but which were not selected by the City Council for implementation following those deliberations. Section 8.0 (Project Benefits). This section presents a number of identifiable community benefits attributable to the proposed project. Section 9.0 (Statement of Overriding Considerations). This section contains the Lead Agency's "Statement of Overriding Considerations" (SOC) setting forth the City's reasons and rationale for finding that specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other considerations associated with or attributable to the proposed project outweigh the project's significant or potentially significant unavoidable adverse environmental effects. As applicable for each of the above referenced sections, the significant or potentially significant environmental effects identified in the FEIR have been referenced therein. Following each referenced environmental effect, the Lead Agency has' identified the findings and facts that constitute the bases for the .Lead Agency's actions. The findings set forth in each of the following sections are supported by facts in the administrative record of the proposed project. The referenced findings and facts presented herein may have relevancy both in the context of the specific environmental effect for which those findings and facts are indicated and for other environmental effects identified in the FEIR and in these Findings. For the purpose of brevity, those findings and facts presented herein are not duplicated under multiple topical issues but should be assumed to collectively constitute the factual basis utilized by the decision-making body of the Lead Agency in making these Findings. Except as otherwise noted in the FEIR, the threshold of significance criteria utilized by the Lead Agency to assess the significance of project -related and cumulative impacts are based on those criterion contained in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines and constitute criterion which have been used by both the Lead Agency with regards to CEQA documentation prepared by the Lead Agency for other projects within the City and by other jurisdictions throughout California. 2.2 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations The following statement of facts and findings (Findings) has been prepared by the Lead Agency in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as codified in Section 21000 et seq. of the California Public Resources Code (PRC), and the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (State CEQA Guidelines), as codified in Section 15000 et seq., in Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), for the SDSP project and for any and all discretionary actions reasonably associated therewith. For planning purposes, the Lead Agency, the Governor's Office of Planning and Research - State Clearinghouse (SCH), and/or other responsible agencies have or may assign case or file numbers to certain, actions now contemplated by the City, by the SCH, and/or by those responsible agencies. Those case or file numbers (and the assigning agency) include, but may not be limited to: (1) SCH No 2008021014 (SCH); (2) Environmental Impact Report 2007-02 (City); (3) General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 (City); (4) Zone Change No. 2007-04 (City); (5) Specific Plan No. 2007-01 (City); and (6) Tentative Map No. 70687. Reference to the SDSP herein is intended to be inclusive of: (1) each of the above referenced discretionary actions; (2) such additional discretionary and ministerial actions as may be required for or associated with the construction, habitation, occupancy, use, and maintenance of the SDSP and the real property thereupon for the residential, non-residential, and infrastructure - related uses proposed within the geographic area examined in the "Final Environmental Impact Report -'Site D' Specific Plan, SCH No. 2008021014" (FEIR), whether or not included within the geographic area encompassed by the SDSP; and (4) those standard conditions, mitigation measures, and other conditions of approval as may be imposed thereupon by the City's decision-making bodies and the decision-making bodies of those responsible agencies with jurisdiction thereupon. The State CEQA Guidelines provide that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report (EIR) has been completed which identifies one or more significant environmental effects on the environment that would occur if the proposed project is approved or carried out unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects. This document presents the findings of fact and substantial evidence that must be made by the City of Diamond Bar City Council (City Council), acting in that body's capacity as the Lead Agency's decision-making body, prior to determining whether to certify the FEIR and approve or conditionally approve the SDSP. The possible findings specified in Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, which shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record, include: (1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the final EIR. [This finding shall be referred to herein as "Finding (1)"] (2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the findings. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. [This finding shall be referred to herein as "Finding (2)'] (3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. [This finding shall be referred to herein as "Finding (3)"] With respect to those significant effects that are subject to Finding (1), the agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or lessen significant environmental effects. With respect to those significant effects that are subject to Finding (2), the findings shall not be made if the agency making the findings has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. With respect to those significant effects that are subject to Finding (3), the findings shall describe the specific reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and alternatives. In accordance with Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City Council makes the following findings for each significant or potentially significant environmental effect identified in the FEIR. Those impacts are categorized under the corresponding topical headings presented in the FEIR. Reference to mitigation measure numbers herein are as presented in the FEIR and may differ from those numbers or notations that may be subsequently assigned should the City Council elect to approve or conditionally approve the SDSP. As indicated in Section 4.0 (Significant or Potentially Significant Environmental Effects which Cannot Feasibly be Mitigated to Below a Level of Significance) herein, a number of significant environmental effects are identified in the FEIR which cannot be avoided or substantially lessened. In recognition of the continuing existence of significant unavoidable adverse environmental effects, a statement of overriding considerations (SOC), supported by substantial evidence in the record, is, therefore, required in order for the Cityto approve the SDSP. The SOC for the SDSP is presented in Section 9.0 (Statement of Overriding Considerations) herein and presents the rationale for the City's approval or conditional approval of the proposed project despite the continuing existence of those unavoidable adverse environmental effects. 2.3 Record of Proceedings For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, at a minimum, the record of proceedings for the FEIR consists of the following documents and other evidence. All references to the FEIR herein shall be assumed to be inclusive of each of the following documents and such other accompanying evidence as may be identified by the City Council: (1) "Initial Study," including all documents expressly cited therein; (2) "Notice of Preparation" (NOP), "Notice of Completion" (NOC), "Notice of Availability" (NOA), "Notice of Determination" (NOD), and all other public notices issued by the Lead Agency in conjunction with this CEQA process; (3) "Draft Environmental Impact Report—'Site D" Specific Plan, SCH No. 2008021014" and "Technical Appendix - Draft Environmental Impact Report —'Site D' Specific Plan, SCH No. 2008021014" (DEIR), including all documents incorporated by reference therein and all written comments submitted by public agencies and other stakeholders during the public review periods established by the NOP and NOA; (4) Other site-specific and/or project -specific technical studies and exhibits not included in the FEIR but explicitly referenced therein; (5) "Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report — 'Site D' Specific Plan, SCH No. 2008021014," including all written comments submitted by public agencies and other stakeholders during the public review period established by the NOC; (6) "Minutes of the City of Diamond Bar Neighborhood Forum of Site "D" Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report, Heritage Park Community Center, 2900 S. Brea Canyon Road, Diamond Bar, August 3, 2009," as prepared by the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department (Department); (7) All written and verbal public testimony presented during noticed scoping meetings and public hearings for the proposed project at which public testimony was taken; (8) "Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program" (MRMP), as presented in the DEIR and as subsequently adopted by the City Council; (9) All agendas, staff reports, and approved minutes of the City's Planning Commission and City Council relating to the proposed project; (10) All maps, exhibits, figure, and text comprising the "'Site D' Specific Plan'; (11) Matters of common knowledge to the City including, but not limited to, federal, State, and local laws, rule, regulations, and standards; (12) These Findings and all documents expressly cited in these Findings; and (13) Such other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings under Section 21167.6(e) of CEQA. 2.4 Custodian and Location of Records The following information is provided in compliance with Section 21081.6(a)(2) of CEQA and Section 15091(e) of the State CEQA Guidelines. The documents and other materials constituting the administrative record for the City Council's actions related to the FEIR are located at the City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765-4178. The Community Development Director is the custodian of the administrative record for the proposed project. During the regular business hours of the City, copies of the documents constituting the FEIR's and the SDSP's record of proceedings are available upon request at the offices of the Community Development Department. 3.0 GENERAL FINDINGS In addition to the specific findings identified herein, the City Council hereby finds that: (1) Under CEQA, the City of Diamond Bar is the appropriate "Lead Agency" for the proposed project and during the project's CEQA proceedings no other agency asserted or contested the City's "Lead Agency" status; (2) As part of the CEQA process, in compliance with the provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 18 and the Governor's Office of Planning and Research's (OPR) "Supplement to General Plan Guidelines — Tribal Consultation Guidelines" (2005), the Lead Agency notified the appropriate California Native American tribe of the opportunity to conduct consultation for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural places, referred the proposed action to those tribes that are on the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) contact list that have traditional lands within the agency's jurisdiction, and send notice to tribes that have filed a written request for such notice; (3) In recognition of the fact that the real property examined in the FEIR includes separate properties owned by the City, the District, and the County, the Lead Agency conducted extensive consultation with those agencies, in combination with other agencies identified by the Lead Agency in the FEIR, are identified as "Responsible Agencies" under CEQA; (4) Copies of the Initial Study, NOP, DEIR, and NOC were provided to those Responsible Agencies identified in the FEIR and each such agency was provided a specified review period to submit comments thereupon; (5) In compliance with Section 21092.5(a) of CEQA, at least 10 days prior to the certification of the FEIR, the Lead Agency provided its written proposed response to those public agencies that submitted comments to the Lead Agency on the DEIR; (6) The FEIR and all environmental notices associated therewith were prepared in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines and in accordance with the City's local guidelines and procedures; (7) The City Council has independently reviewed and analyzed the FEIR and the FEIR reflects the independent judgment of the City Council; (8) A MRMP has been prepared for the proposed project, identifying those feasible mitigation measures that the City Council has adopted or will likely adopt in order to reduce the potential environmental effects of the proposed project to the maximum extent feasible; (9) The mitigation measures adopted or likely to be adopted by the City Council will be fully implemented in accordance with the MRMP, verification of compliance will be documented, and each measure can reasonably be expected to have the efficacy and produce the post -mitigated consequences assumed in the FEIR; (10) Each of the issues to be resolved, as identified in the FEIR and/or subsequently raised in comments received by the City during the deliberation of the City's advisory and decision-making bodies, have been resolved to the satisfaction of the City Council; (11) The potential environmental impacts of the proposed project have been analyzed to the extent feasible at the time of certification of the FEIR; (12) The City Council reviewed the comments received on the FEIR, including, but not limited to, those comments received following the dissemination of the DEIR and RTC, and the responses thereto and has determined that neither the comments received nor the responses thereto add significant new information under Section 15088.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines; (13) The City Council has not made any decisions that would constitute an irretrievable commitment of resources toward the proposed project prior to the certification of the FEIR nor has the City Council previously committed to a definite course of action with respect to the proposed project; (14) Copies of all the documents incorporated by reference in the FEIR are and have been available for review during the regular business hours of the City at the office of the Community Development Department from the custodian of records for such documents; (15) These Findings incorporate by reference such other findings as may be required under Sections 65454, 65455, 66474, 66474.4, 65853, and 65860 of the California Government Code and those corresponding finding required under the "City of Diamond Bar Municipal Code" (Municipal Code); and (16) Having received, reviewed, and considered all information and documents in the record, the City Council has or will impose conditions, mitigation measures, and take other reasonable actions to reduce the environmental effects of the proposed project to the maximum extend feasible and finds as stated in these Findings. 4.0 FINDINGS REGARDING THE SIGNIFICANT OR POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WHICH CANNOT FEASIBLY BE MITIGATED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE The City Council has determined that existing statutes, regulations, conditions of approval, uniform codes, project design features, and/or feasible mitigation measures included in the go FEIR and adopted by or likely to be adopted by the City Council will result in a substantial reduction of most but not all of those environmental effects identified in the FEIR. Notwithstanding the existence of those statutes and regulations and the adoption of those conditions and measures, the City Council finds that the following significant or potentially significant environmental effects will continue to exist. 4.1 Air Quality 4.1.1 Environmental Effect: Construction of the proposed project has the potential to violate or add to a violation of air quality standards (Air Quality Impact 7-2). Findings: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated herein by reference. (b) The air quality analysis was conducted in accordance with the methodology presented in the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) "CEQA Air Quality Handbook" (SCAQMD, April 1993), "Localized Significance Threshold Methodology" (SCAQMD, June 2005), and updates included on the SCAQMD Internet web site. The analysis makes use of the URBEMIS2007 urban emissions model (Version 9.4.2) for the determination of daily construction and operational emissions, the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) SCEEN3 Dispersion model for localized construction impacts, the provisions of the California Department of Transportation's (Caltrans) "Transportation Project -Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol," and CALINE4 computer model of on -road carbon monoxide (CO) dispersion modeling. (c) Air quality impacts will occur during site preparation and construction activities. Major sources of emissions during construction include exhaust emissions, fugitive dust generated as a result of soil and material disturbance during grading activities, and the emission of reactive organic gases (ROGs) during site paving and the painting of the structures. (d) The terms "reactive organic gases" (ROGs), "reactive organic compounds" (ROCs), and "volatile organic compounds" (VOCs) are used interchangeable in the DEIR. (e) Based on the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, URBEMIS computer model results indicate that ROG emissions associated with the application of paints and coatings could result in a potentially significant short-term air quality impact. Because the construction phase could create ROG emissions is exceedance of the SCAQMD's recommended significance threshold, the Lead Agency has formulated a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 7- 1 and 7-2) to reduce that impact to the extent feasible. (f) In addition to those mitigation measures identified by the Lead. Agency, all projects constructed in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) are subject to standard conditions and uniform codes. Compliance with these provisions is mandatory and, as such, does not constitute mitigation under CEQA. Those conditions mandated by the SCAQMD include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) Rule 403 requires the use of Best Available Control Technologies (BACT) during construction and sets requirements for dust control associated with construction 10 activities; (2) Rules 431.1 and 431.2 require the use of low sulfur fuel for stationary construction equipment; (3) Rule 1108 sets limitations on ROG content in asphalt; and (4) Rule 1113 sets limitations on ROG content in architectural coatings. (g) Notwithstanding the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures and the project's adherence to applicable standard conditions, uniform codes, and SCAQMD rules and regulations, other than through a substantial reduction in the size of the proposed project and/or reduction in the daily concentration of asphalt and architectural coatings applied, projected construction -term ROG emissions would remain at levels in excess of the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria. 4.1.2 Environmental Effect: Operation of the proposed project has the potential to violate or add to a violation of air quality standards (Air Quality Impact 7.3). Findings: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated herein by reference. (b) The major source of long-term air quality impacts is that associated with the emissions produced from project -generated vehicle trips. With regards to mobile source emissions, based on the findings of the traffic analysis, the proposed project is estimated to produce 9,276 average daily vehicle trips (ADT). (c) Emissions associated with project -related trips are based on the URBEMIS2007 computer model and assumed site occupancy in 2009. Since emissions per vehicle are reduced annually due to tightening emissions restrictions and replacement of older vehicles, the use of 2009 emission factors presents a worst- case analysis with regards to operational air quality impacts. (d) Operational ROG, nitrogen oxides (NOx), and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions are projected to exceed the SCAQMD recommended threshold of significance values and the impact is potentially significant. Because project occupancy is projected to create ROG, NOx, and CO emissions in excess of the SCAQMD suggested daily criteria, the Lead Agency has formulated a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 7-3 through 7-7) to reduce that impact to the extent as feasible. (e) Implementation of those measures would not be expected to reduce ROG, NOx, and CO emission levels to a less -than -significant level. There are no reasonably available mitigation measures than can reduce projected operational ROG, NOx, and CO emissions to less -than -significant levels. 4.1.3 Environmental Effect: The proposed project, in combination with other related projects, has the potential to result in a cumulatively considerable increase in criteria pollutants (Air Quality Impact 7-6). Findings: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: 11 (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated herein by reference. (b) Since ROG emissions associated with the application of asphalt, paints, and coatings and ROG, NOx, and CO mobile source emissions are expected to remain significant, the project will add incrementally to the cumulative air quality impact produced by other related projects. (c) ROG and NOx are criteria pollutant precursors and go on to form secondary criteria pollutants through chemical and photochemical reaction in the atmosphere. (d) The SCAB is classified by. the State as "extreme non -attainment" for ozone. Ozone is one of a number of substances (photochemical oxidants) that are formed when ROCs and NOx react with sunlight. (e) Mitigation for the cumulative impact is as specified for construction and operational impacts. However, even with the adoption of the recommended measures, air quality impacts will remain cumulatively significant. No mitigation measures, formulated specifically to address the project's potential incremental contribution to cumulative air quality impacts, are deemed to be reasonably feasible. 5.0 FINDINGS REGARDING THE SIGNIFICANT OR POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WHICH CAN FEASIBLY BE MITIGATED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE The City Council has determined that existing statutes, regulations, standard conditions, uniform codes, project design features, in combination with those conditions of approval and feasible mitigation measures included in the FEIR and adopted by or likely to be adopted by the City Council, will result in a substantial reduction of the following environmental effects and that each of the following environmental effects will either occur at or can be effectively reduced to below a level of significance. 5.1 Land Use 5.1.1 Environmental Effect: New residential and recreational land uses could introduce land use compatibility issues between the proposed uses and those existing and reasonably foreseeable future land uses that now and which may exist in close proximity to those uses (Land Use Impact 1-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative land -use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1 (Land Use) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Although no commercial site plan has been presented for the Lead Agency's consideration, once development plans are formulated, those plans are subject to the City's development review process and must conform to applicable property development and use standards. (c) Chapter 22.48 (Development Review) in Title 22 (Development Code) of the Municipal Code establishes procedures for reviewing residential, commercial industrial, and institutional development to facilitate review in a timely and 12 efficient manner, and to ensure that development projects comply with all applicable design guidelines, standards, and minimize adverse effects on surrounding properties and the environment. Section 22.16.080 (Screening and Buffering) in Chapter 22.6 (General Property Development and Use Standards) therein presents the City's minimum standards for the screening and buffering of adjoining land uses, equipment and outdoor storage areas, and surface parking areas with respect to both multi -family and non-residential land uses. (d) Single-family attached and/or multi -family residential development is proposed adjacent and in close proximity to existing single-family detached residential areas located to the north, south, and east of the project site. Although residential densities between the two housing product types may vary, both existing and proposed residential uses would be expected to possess similar operational characteristics and use expectations. (e) The proposed residential, recreational, and open spaces uses are compatible with existing and proposed development within the general project area. (f) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 1- 1 and 1-2) designed to promote land -use consistency and compatibility. (g) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.1.2 Environmental Effect: The proposed mixed-use project, including the land uses, densities, and development standards now under consideration, could conflict with the adopted plans and policies of the City (Land Use Impact 1-2). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative land -use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1 (Land Use) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The proposed project is generally consistent with the policies of the "City of Diamond Bar Genera Plan" (General Plan). (c) In addition to General Plan consistency, the project is subject to compliance with applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, including those contained in Chapter 22.22 (Hillside Management) of the Development Code. In, accordance with the provisions of Section 22.22.040 (Density) in Title 22 (Development Code) of the Municipal Code, a total of 524 dwelling units could be developed on the site, which is substantially greater than the 202 dwelling units proposed. (d) Although a General Plan amendment (GPA) and/or zone change (ZC) would be required to accommodate the proposed residential use, the proposed densities are allowable in the City. Subject to a GPA and/or ZC, the residential portion of the project would be deemed consistent with the "City of Diamond Bar General Plan" (General Plan). (e) Based on existing zoning and assuming a lot -line adjustment to better equate the existing zoning with the site's development potential, as specified in Section 22.10.020 (Purpose of Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts) in Chapter 22.10 (Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts) in Title 22 (Development Code) of the Municipal Code, the allowable floor -area -ratio (FAR) for non-residential development in the "Neighborhood Commercial (C-1)" zoning district shall be 13 from 0.25 to 1.00. In accordance therewith, a range of between 109,880 and 439,520 square feet of commercial use could be developed on the project site. The 153,985 square feet of commercial use now being proposed falls near the lower end (0.35 FAR) of the allowable FAR range and would, therefore, be consistent with the City's land -use policies. (f) The proposed project is generally consistent with the applicable core policies of the Southern California Association of Government's (SCAG) 2008 "Regional Comprehensive Plan — Helping Communities Achieve a Sustainable Future" (2008 RCP). (g) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 1-3) designed to provide notification to SCAG of projected growth within the City, so as to allow SCAG to more effectively update regional plans. (h) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.1.3 Environmental Effect: Project implementation requires a General Plan amendment, adoption of a specific plan, zone change, subdivision of the project site, and other discretionary actions to accommodate the proposed land uses. Each of those actions is subject to specific findings by the City Council and/or by other responsible agencies (Land Use Impact 1-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative land -use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1 (Land Use) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) A specific plan is a regulatory tool, authorized under the provisions of Sections 65450-65457 of the CGC, which is intended to guide the development of a localized area and serve as a tool for the systematic implementation of the general plan. A specific plan document establishes a link between the implementing policies contained in an agency's general plan and the individual development proposal in a defined area. No specific plan may be adopted or amended unless the proposed plan or amendment is consistent with the agency's general plan. No public works project, no tentative map, and no zoning ordinance may be approved, adopted, or amended within the area covered by a specific plan unless consistent with the adopted specific plan. (c) As indicated in Section 66474, a legislative body of a city or county shall deny approval of a subdivision map if finds that: (a) the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans; (b) the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans; (c) the site is not physically suitable for the type of development; (d) the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development; (e) the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; (f) the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems; and/or (g) the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at 14 large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. Section 66473.5 restricts local agencies from approving a final subdivision map for any land use project unless the legislative body finds that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the general plan or any specific plan. A proposed subdivision shall be consistent with a general plan or a specific plan only if the local agency has officially adopted such a plan and the proposed subdivision or land use is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified therein. (d) Pursuant to the General Plan, it is the policy of the City to "[e]ncourage the innovative use of land resources and development of a variety of housing and other development types, provide a means to coordinate the public and private provisions of services and facilities, and address the unique needs of certain lands by recognizing Specific Plan (SP) overlay designations: (a) for large scale development areas in which residential, commercial, recreational, public facilities, and other land uses may be permitted; and (b) large acreage property(ies) in excess of ten acres that are proposed to be annexed into the City" (Strategy 1.1.9, Land Use Element). (e) The information presented in the FEIR may be used, in whole or in part, by the City and by other responsible agencies to support specific findings as mandated by State law and by agency requirements and procedures, both as may be required under CEQA and as may be required in support of other actions that may be taken by the City and by other agencies with regards to the proposed project or any aspect thereof. In the event that the City and/or other responsible agencies are unable to make requisite findings, those discretionary approvals associated with those findings cannot be issued. In the absence of the issuance of requisite permits and approvals, no physical changes to the project site would be anticipated to occur and no environmental impacts would result therefrom. (f) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 1-4) designed to ensure an appropriate nexus between the project's environmental review and any resulting land -use entitlements. (g) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.1.4 Environmental Effect: Cumulative residential development within the City and the population increase associated with the introduction of new dwelling units could exceed the 2005-2010 population growth forecasts presented in the "Regional Transportation Plan — Destination 2030" (SCAG, 2004) and which serves as a basis for regional transportation planning (Land Use Impact 1-4). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1) Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding (a) Project -related and cumulative land -use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1 (Land Use) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Implementation of the proposed project in combination with those other related projects will result in the further urbanization of the general project area, including the conversion of vacant or under -developed properties to higher -intensity uses. 15 None of the land uses that are identified, however, constitute uses or activities that are not currently present within the City or the region. (c) Anticipated residential development in the City exceeds the population growth estimates formulated by SCAG. SCAG's projections are used as the basis for establishing regional transportation plans. By under -estimating interim local demands, regional plans may not be as effective in responding to areawide interim transportation needs. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 1-3) designed to apprise SCAG of projected growth within the City, so as to allow SCAG to more effectively update regional plans. (e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2 Population and Housing 5.2.1 Environmental Effect: Project construction will increase the local labor force and, through job creation and the possibility of worker relocation, has the potential to induce population growth in the general project area (Population and Housing Impact 2-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) During construction, an estimated 73 workers would be associated with the project's 202 multi -family housing units and an additional estimated 49 workers would be associated with the project's 153,985 square feet of commercial use. (c) The workforce required for the project's construction, operation, and maintenance can be reasonably drawn from the available regional labor pool. (d) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2.2 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will result in the addition of up to 202 dwelling units to the City's existing housing stock and will increase the City's population by approximately 662 individuals, based on the California Department of Finance's existing (January 2008) Citywide vacancy rates and average household size (3.335 persons/unit) and vacancy rate (1.71 percent) (Population and Housing Impact 2-2). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. 16 (b) As indicated in California Department of Finance estimates, in January 2008, the City's population was estimated to be 60,360 individuals. The total number of dwelling units was estimated to be 18,380 units. (c) Total number of dwelling units now proposed (202 units) is less than the adopted SCAG 2006-2014 RHNA for new construction for "above moderate" income households (440 units) and only slightly more than SCAG's identified new construction need for "moderate" income households (188 units). The project represents about 18.5 percent of the projected housing needs for the period 2006-2014. Since the projected increase appears generally consistent with regional projections, the project will further the attainment of SCAG's regional housing needs assessment. (d) Since none .of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2.3 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will result in the construction of 153,985 square feet of commercial use, directly creating about 462 new permanent jobs (Population and Housing Impact 2-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the FEIR and, that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Based on the projected number of direct new jobs (462 jobs) and the number of housing units associated with the proposed project (202 dwelling units), the project's projected on-site jobs -to -housing ratio is about 2.3, indicating the project is 'jobs rich." The relatively small number of jobs and housing units, however, is not significant in the broader regional context. (c) The inclusion of both residential and commercial uses on the same site serve to further attainment of the primary intent of jobs -housing balance, namely the reduction of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and the corresponding air quality benefits. (c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2.4 Environmental Effect: Absent a corresponding and proportional increase in long-term employment opportunities, projects that increase the City's housing stock would contribute to the perpetuation of the existing Citywide jobs -housing imbalance (Population and Housing Impact 2-4). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: . (a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. 17 (b) Between 2010 and 2030, the jobs -housing ratio for the City will decrease from only 0.86 to 0.82. As a result, the City will remain "housing rich" and "jobs poor." (c) Based on the projected number of direct new jobs attributable to the proposed project (462 jobs) and the number of housing units (202 units), the project's projected on-site jobs -to -housing ratio is about 2.3 and the proposed project would be categorized as being "jobs rich." As a result, the proposed project promotes the attainment of SCAG's jobs -housing policies and would not incrementally contribute to the existing imbalance. (d) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and, no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.3 Geotechnical Hazards 4.3.1 Environmental Effect: Conversion of the project site from a vacant property to an urban use will expose site occupants to regional seismic hazards and localized geologic and geotechnical conditions. Should development occur in the absence of an understanding of those regional and local conditions, site occupants may be subjected to unacceptable geotechnical hazards (Geotechnical Hazards Impact 3-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative geotechnical hazards impacts are addressed in Section 4.3 (Geotechnical Hazards) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and soils setting, including specific design and development recommendations formulated in response thereto, are presented in "Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report: Site D -Mass Grading, Walnut Valley Unified School District, Diamond Bar, California" (KFM GeoScience, January 15 2008). (c) The proposed project is feasible from a geotechnical perspective, provided that the recommendations presented in the project's geotechnical investigations are incorporated into the project's design and construction. Since the Applicant has committed to the incorporation of those recommendations, they are part of the proposed project and the project's design, construction, and operation will occur in conformity and compliance therewith. (d) Design and development activities will occur in conformance with applicable Uniform Building Code (UBC) and California Building Standards Code (CBSC) standards and requirements. (e) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 3-1) to ensure that each of the recommendations presented in the geotechnical investigation are incorporated into the design, development, and operation of the proposed project. (f) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 18 5.3.2 Environmental Effect: During the life of the project, structures and other improvements constructed on the property will be subject to periodic ground shaking resulting from seismic events along earthquake faults located throughout the region (Geotechnical Hazards Impact 3-2). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative geotechnical hazards impacts are addressed in Section 4.3 (Geotechnical Hazards) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and soils setting, including specific design and development recommendations formulated in response thereto, are presented in "Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report: Site D -Mass Grading, Walnut Valley Unified School District, Diamond Bar, California" (KFM GeoScience, January 15 2008). (c) The proposed project is feasible from a geotechnical perspective, provided that the recommendations presented in the project's geotechnical investigations are incorporated into the project's design and construction. Since the Applicant has committed to the incorporation of those recommendations, they are part of the proposed project and the project's design, construction, and operation will occur in conformity and compliance therewith. (d) Design and development activities will occur in conformance with applicable UBC and CBSC standards and requirements. (e) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 1-3) to ensure that each of the recommendations presented in the geotechnical investigation are incorporated into the design, development, and operation of the proposed project. (f) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.3.3 Environmental Effect: Los Angeles County is located within a seismically active region. Since earthquakes have historically occurred throughout the region and can be expected to occur in the future, development activities that occur throughout the region, including their occupants and users, will remain subject to seismic forces (Geotechnical Hazards Impact 3-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative geotechnical hazards impacts are addressed in Section 4.3 (Geotechnical Hazards) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Adequate control measures have been formulated to ensure that all public and private structures are constructed and maintained in recognition of site-specific, area -specific, and regional geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and soils conditions. (c) Compliance with applicable UBC and CSBC standards and associated permit - 19 agency requirements will mitigate any potential cumulative impacts to below a level of significance. (d) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.4 Hydrology and Water Quality 5.4.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities may increase sediment discharge and/or result in the introduction of hazardous materials, petroleum products, or other waste discharges that could impact the quality of the area's surface and ground water resources if discharged to those waters (Hydrology and Water Quality Impact 4-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing hydrologic and water quality setting, including specific design and development recommendations formulated in response thereto, are presented in "Preliminary Drainage Report for Site 'D' Improvements at Intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road, Diamond Bar, California" (PENCO Engineering, Inc., February 7, 2008, revised April 6, 2009). (c) Water quality protection is ensured through preparation and implementation of the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), as required under the State Water Resources Control Board's (SWRCB) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit), through Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed to ensure that grading and construction operations involving the transport, storage, use, and disposal of a variety of construction materials complies with certain storage, handling, and transport requirements. (c) Pursuant to the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region's (LARWQCB) fourth -term General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit (NPDES No. CAS004001) for discharges to the municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) in County, a standard urban stormwater mitigation plan (SUSMP) shall be required, including appropriate BMPs and guidelines to reduce pollutants in storm water to the maximum extent possible (MEP). (d) The Construction General Permit and compliance with SWPPP and MS4 permit requirements constitute mandatory project measures. Compliance ensures that project -induced water -borne erosion does not significantly impact downstream drainage systems. (e) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 4-2) requiring the City Engineer's approval of a SUSMP conforming to the requirements of Section 8.12.1695 of the Municipal Code. 20 (f) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.4.2 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will result in the introduction of impervious surfaces onto the project site and, as a result of the impedance of opportunities for absorption and infiltration of those waters, has the potential to increase the quantity, velocity, and duration of storm waters discharged from the tract map area (Hydrology and Water Quality Impact 4-2). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) According to the recorded plans for the Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel (Private Drain No. 395), a 25 -year discharge of 2,285 cubic feet per second (cfs) is shown at the downstream side of the Diamond Bar Boulevard culvert. The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) stipulated that the existing County -operated and maintained drainage system accommodate a 50 - year storm event of 2,602 cfs. (c) A 50 -year storm creates approximately 68.38 cfs of runoff from the western portion of the project site and an existing 33 -inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe located to the south of the project site currently carries off-site discharge of 83.94 cfs. When combined with existing off-site discharge, the 50 -year storm runoff totals 174.80 cfs at the Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel. The summation of 50 -year flows (2,602 + 174.80 = 2,776.8) from the project site and from the channel total approximately 2,777 cfs at this reach. (d) Drainage improvements are proposed to accommodate projected flows. As proposed, at this reach, the existing Brea Canyon Channel will be replaced with reinforced concrete box (RCB). An existing tributary open channel east of the project site will be replaced with RCB, as well as the proposed entrance to the site. To convey the 50 -year discharge, the proposed channel section will be double cells 9 -foot -wide by 8 -foot -high RCB with an average 20 feet of cover. Approximately 50 feet of transition box will be constructed from the proposed RCB section to the existing culvert section under Diamond Bar Boulevard. A transition structure downstream of the proposed RCB will be construed to join the existing trapezoidal channel. (e) The Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 4-1) requiring receipt of all requisite permits and approvals from the LACDPW allowing for the overbuilding of the Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel. (f) To ensure that drainage improvements are consistent with applicable design and development standards and that post -project drainage flows do not result in any adverse public safety or other impacts, a mitigation measure (Condition of Approval 4-1) has been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP specifying that all drainage facilities and improvements are subject to final design and engineering review and approval by the City Engineer and, for those storm drain facilities under County jurisdiction, by the LACDPW. 21 Implementation of that measure will reduce identified impacts to below a level of significance. 5.4.3 Environmental Effect: Continuing urbanization of the general project area will collectively contribute to surface flows within the Diamond Bar Creek watershed will result in the introduction of additional urban pollutants that could affect the beneficial uses of existing surface and ground water resources (Hydrology and Water Quality Impact 4-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Conversion of the project site to a mixed-use development will generate additional urban runoff that would be discharged into Diamond Bar Creek. Project -generated runoff could contribute to potentially significant cumulative water quality impacts generated by existing and future land uses within the tributary watershed area. (c) The proposed project and other related projects will be required to implement BMPs and fully comply with all applicable State water quality laws and regulations. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 4- 1 and 4-2) requiring receipt of all requisite permits and approvals from the LACDPW allowing for the overbuilding of the Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel and the City Engineer's approval of a SUSMP conforming to the requirements of Section 8.12.1695 of the Municipal Code. (e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5 Biological Resources 5.5.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities and fuel -modification requirements will result in direct impacts from vegetation removal of about 30.4 acres located within the tract map area. Fuel modification requirements imposed by the Los Angeles County Fire Department could directly impact additional vegetation (Biological Resources Impact 5- 1). Findings: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing biological resource, arboreal, and jurisdictional setting, including an assessment of project -related impacts, are rx presented in the following studies: (1) "Biological Resources Assessment — Site D, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (PCR Services Corporation, June 24, 2008); (2) "Tree Survey Report — Site D, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (PCR Services Corporation, December 18, 2007); (3) "Results of Sensitive Plant Surveys Conducted for the Site D Project Site, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (PCR Services Corporation, December 18, 2007); and (4) "Investigation of Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters of the U.S., Site D, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (PCR Services Corporation, June 24, 2008). (c) During grading operations, impacts will occur to approximately 20.4 acre of disturbed/ruderal, 3.6 acre of eucalyptus stand/disturbed, 2.8 acres of mule fat scrub, 2.1 acres of California walnut woodlands, 0.9 acre of rude ral/go[den bush scrub, and 0.3 acres of southern willow scrub. With the exception of southern willow scrub, none of these plant communities are considered rare or of high priority for inventory by the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). (d) Rare natural communities are those communities that are of highly limited distribution. The most current version of the California Department of Fish and Game's "The Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program — List of California Terrestrial Natural Communities Recognized by the California Natural Diversity Database" (CDFG, 2003) serves as a guide to each community's status. (e) California walnut woodlands and southern willow scrub are considered high- priority for inventory under the CNDDB because they are experiencing decline throughout its range. These habitats are marginal in its value because they are fragmented (i.e., not contiguous with similar habitats) and not expected to support sensitive species. Focused sensitive plant surveys were negative and habitat assessments for sensitive wildlife species (e.g., the least Bell's vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher) determined that these habitats are not suitable to support these species. (f) Although California walnut woodlands and southern willow scrub are associated with United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the loss, removal, and destruction of these plant communities on the project site would neither eliminate nor substantially diminish the functions and values of the on-site drainages as a regional biological resource. (g) The project would cause the direct mortality of some common wildlife species and the displacement of more mobile species to suitable habitat areas nearby. These impacts, by themselves, would not be expected to reduce general wildlife populations below self-sustaining levels within the region. (h) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.2 Environmental Effect: The project will permanently impact approximately 2,125 linear feet of streambed, including approximately 0.20 acres of United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) jurisdictional waters and approximately 4.10 acres of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdictional streambed and associated riparian habitat (Biological Resources Impact 5-2). Findings: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2). 23 Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Project implementation will result in direct impacts to approximately 2,125 linear feet of streambed. A total of approximately 0.20 acre of ACOE/RWQCB jurisdictional waters of the United States (WoUS) and approximately 4.10 acres of CDFG jurisdictional streambed and associated riparian habitat would be impacted by the proposed development. No direct impacts to jurisdictional waters are anticipated beyond the project boundaries. (c) The project will require a nationwide Section 404 (CWA) permit from the ACOE, a Section 401 (CWA) water quality certification from the RWQCB, and a Section 1602 (CFGC) streambed alteration agreement. from the CDFG. . Impacts to jurisdictional features will be subject to the regulations set forth by the ACOS, RWQCB, and CDFG and will require mitigation or result in the imposition of other conditions for the identified impacts to jurisdictional waters. (d) In recognition of the presence of jurisdictional waters, a mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure 5-1) has been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP specifying that, unless a greater ratio is required by permitting agencies: (1) the on-site and/or off-site replacement of ACOE/RWQCB jurisdictional waters and wetlands occur at a 2:1 ratio; (2) the on-site and/or off- site replacement of CDFG jurisdictional streambed and associated riparian habitat occur at a 2:1 ratio; and (3) the incorporation of design features into the proposed project's design and development. Implementation of that measure will reduce identified impacts to below a level of significance. 5.5.3 Environmental Effect: Proposed grading and grubbing activities will result in the removal of 83 protected ordinance -size trees, including 75 California black walnut, six willow, and two coast live oak trees, which now exist on the project site (Biological Resources Impact 5-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) A total of 75 California black walnut, six willow, and two coast live oak trees will be impacted by the proposed project. Each of these species is protected trees under Chapter 22.38 of the Municipal Code. The Oaks and Willows, however, do not meet the size criteria in the tree ordinance to be classified as protected trees. As required therein, the City may require a tree maintenance agreement prior to removal of any protected tree or commencement of construction activities that may adversely affect the health and survival of trees to be preserved. (c) The project is subject to compliance with the provision of Chapter 22.38 (Tree Preservation and Protection) of the Municipal Code. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 5- 24 2 through 5-4) requiring the preparation of an arborist -prepared tree study and specified replacement requirements for qualifying trees and California walnut woodlands, and promoting vegetation removal activities outside the nesting bird season. (e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.4 Environmental Effect: Construction activities initiated during the nesting season, typically extending from February 15 to August 15 of each year, could impact nesting birds and raptors in violation of the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (Biological Resources Impact 5-4). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) One sensitive bird species (Cooper's hawk) was observed within the project area and three additional species (white-tailed kite, sharp -shinned hawk, and loggerhead shrike) have the potential to occur within the study area due to the presence of suitable habitat. Since these species are not protected by federal or State listings as threatened or endangered and since the loss of individuals would not threaten the regional populations. (c) Based on the presence of suitable vegetation, the removal of vegetation during the breeding season (typically extending between February 15 and August 15) could constitute a potentially significant impact. (d) Disturbing or destroying active nests is a violation of the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and nests and eggs are protected under Section 3503 and 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code. (e) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 5-4) promoting vegetation removal activities outside the nesting bird season. (f) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.5 Environmental Effect: Project implementation has the potential to impede existing wildlife movement patterns across the project site (Biological Resources Impact 5-5). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The project site is located to the north of the area identified by the Conservation Biological Institute as part of the "Puente -Chino Hills wildlife corridor." 25 (c) Although wildlife movement corridors exist in the general project area, the project site does not serve any connectivity or linkage role with regards to regional wildlife movement. (d) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.6 Environmental Effect: If improperly designed and maintained, the proposed on-site flood control facilities and structural and treatment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) could potentially provide a habitat for the propagation of mosquitoes and other vectors (Biological Resources Impact 5-6). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Urban stormwater runoff regulations now mandate the construction and maintenance of structural BMPs for both volume reduction and pollution management. Those BMPs can create additional sources of standing water and sources for mosquito propagation. (c) In the general project area, vector control is performed by the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District (GLACVCD), a County special district funded by ad valorum property and benefit assessment taxes. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 5-5) requiring that. BMP devices shall be designed in consultation with the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District and shall be of a type which minimizes the potential for vector (public nuisance) problems. (e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.7 Environmental Effect: Implementation of the proposed project, in combination with other reasonably foreseeable future projects, will contribute incrementally to the continuing reduction in open space areas in the general project area and contribute to the general decline in species diversity throughout the region (Biological Resources Impact 5-7). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Implementation of the proposed project and other reasonably foreseeable future projects will contribute incrementally to the continuing urbanization of the region. (c) The proposed project will impact approximately 2.1 acres of California walnut woodland and 0.3 acres of southern willow scrub habitat. As a result, the project RTT will add incrementally to the regional loss of plant communities considered high- priority for inventory under the CNDDB. (d) Although California walnut woodlands and southern willow scrub are considered high-priority for inventory under the CNDDB, these on-site habitats are marginal in its value because they are fragmented and not expected to support sensitive species. As a result, the incremental reduction in these habitats would not be cumulatively significant. (e) Under Section 22.38.030 of the Municipal Code, protected trees, including "native oak, walnut, sycamore and willow trees with a DBH [diameter at breast height] of eight inches or greater" shall be replaced at a minimum ratio of 3:1. (f) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.6 Traffic and Circulation 5.6.1 Environmental Effect: Construction vehicles will transport workers, construction equipment, building materials, and construction debris along local and collector streets and along arterial highways within and adjacent to established residential areas and other sensitive receptors (Traffic and Circulation Impact 6-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing traffic and circulation setting, including an assessment of project -related impacts, is presented in "Traffic Impact Analysis Report, WVUSD Site D Mixed -Use Development, Diamond Bar, California" (Linscott, Law & Greenspan Engineers, April 23, 2009). (c) Construction traffic, including vehicles associated with the transport of heavy equipment and building materials to and from the project site and construction workers commuting to and from work, will increase traffic volumes along Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road and, because site access can be obtained from Castle Rock Road and Pasado Drive, construction workers may elect to park along and construction vehicles could stage at those roadways. (d) Existing (2007) daily traffic volumes along project area roadway segments include: (1) Brea Canyon Road (north of Diamond Bar Boulevard) — 4,896 average daily trips (ADT); (2) Brea Canyon Road (south of Diamond Bar Boulevard) — 12,696 ADT; (3) Diamond Bar Boulevard (north of Cherrydale Drive) — 20,512 ADT; and, (4) Brea Canyon Cutoff (west of Fallow Field -Diamond Canyon) — 11,003 ADT. Since the projected 854 construction trips would be substantially less than those existing capacity figures and would primarily occur during off-peak periods, construction -related traffic would not adversely affect the existing levels of service (LOS) along those roadways. (e) Compliance with and enforcement of speed laws and other provisions of the California Vehicle Code (CVC) and the safe use and operation of vehicles by their drivers would be expected to keep public safety issues at a less -than - significant level. 27 (f) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Condition of Approvals 6- 1 through 6-4) requiring the preparation of a construction workers' parking and equipment staging plan, construction traffic mitigation plan, and traffic control plan, and restricting construction -term access from and along Castle Rock Road and Pasado Drive. (g) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.6.2 Environmental Effect: The project is forecast to generate approximately 9,276 daily two- way vehicle trips, including 272 trips during the AM and 650 trips during the PM peak hours, and would increase traffic congestion on local and regional roadways (Traffic and Circulation Impact 6-2). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The project's traffic impact analysis was conducted in accordance with the City's "Guidelines for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Analysis Report' and, for each of the 20 study area intersections, included an assessment of the following nine scenarios were examined: (1) 2007 existing traffic conditions; (2) 2007 existing - plus -project traffic conditions; (3) 2007 existing -plus -project traffic conditions, with Improvements; (4) 2010 cumulative -base conditions (existing, ambient growth, and related projects); (5) 2010 cumulative -base -plus project traffic conditions; (6) 2010 cumulative -base -plus project conditions, with Improvements; (7) 2030 cumulative -base conditions (existing, ambient growth, and related projects); (8) 2030 cumulative -base -plus -project traffic conditions; (9) 2030 cumulative -base - plus -project traffic conditions, with Improvements. (c) In accordance with City traffic impact analysis (TIA) requirements, the project's construction of or payment of a "fair share" contribution toward the construction costs of identified areawide street improvements serves to fully and effectively reduce the project's traffic and circulation impacts to a less -than -significant level. (c) Prior to implementation of any recommended traffic improvements, on a cumulative -plus -project bases, traffic associated with the proposed project will significantly impact nine intersections in the long-term (2030) and contribute to the adverse service levels at three additional intersections forecast to operate at an unsatisfactory LOS in 2030. Those locations projected to operate at an adverse service level in 2030 include: (1) Brea Canyon Road (W) at Pathfinder Road; (2) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Pathfinder Road; (3) Brea Canyon Road at Cold Springs Lane; (4) Cold Springs Lane at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (5) Pathfinder Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (6) SR -57 SB Ramps at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (7) SR -57 NB Ramps at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (8) Brea Canyon Road at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (9) Cherrydale Drive at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (10) Brea Canyon Road at Silver Bullet Drive; (11) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Grand Avenue; and (12) Colima Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff. 28 (d) Since twelve intersections which are forecast to operate at a poor level of service (LOS) under 2030 cumulative -plus -project traffic conditions, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 6-1 and 6-2) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP identifying associated street improvements and the proposed project's obligations toward those improvements and specifying that the final site plan shall include and accommodate those traffic measures, improvements, and such other pertinent factors and/or facilities as may be identified by the City Engineer for the purpose of ensuring the safe and efficient movement of project -related traffic. Implementation of the recommended improvements and "fair -share" contribution will reduce identified traffic and circulation impacts to below a level of significance. 5.6.3 Environmental Effect: The implementation of the proposed project, in combination with other related projects, will collectively contribute to existing traffic congestion in the general project area and exacerbate the need for localized areawide traffic improvements (Traffic and Circulation Impact 6-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Prior to implementation of any recommended traffic improvements, the following twelve intersections are projected to operate at an adverse LOS in 2030: (1) Brea Canyon Road (W) at Pathfinder Road; (2) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Pathfinder Road; (3) Brea Canyon Road at Cold Springs Lane; (4) Cold Springs Lane at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (5) Pathfinder Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (6) SR -57 SB Ramps at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (7) SR -57 NB Ramps at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (8) Brea Canyon Road at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (9) Cherrydale Drive at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (10) Brea Canyon Road at Silver Bullet Drive; (11) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Grand Avenue; (12) Colima Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff. (c) Since twelve intersections which are forecast to operate at a poor level of service (LOS) under 2030 cumulative -plus -project traffic conditions, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 6-1 and 6-2) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP identifying associated street improvements and the proposed project's obligations toward those improvements and specifying that the final site plan shall include and accommodate those traffic measures, improvements, and such other pertinent factors and/or facilities as may be identified by the City Engineer for the purpose of ensuring :the safe and efficient movement of project -related traffic. Implementation of the recommended improvements and "fair -share" contribution will reduce identified traffic and circulation impacts to below a level of significance. 29 5.7 Air Quality 5.7.1 Environmental Effect: Because the project involves a General Plan amendment and zone change, it has the potential to be inconsistent with the applicable air quality management plan (Air Quality Impact 7-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) CEQA requires that projects be consistent with the "Air Quality Management Plan" (AQMP). A consistency determination plays an essential role in local agency project review by linking local planning and unique individual projects to the AQMP in the following ways: (1) it fulfills the CEQA goal of fully informing local agency decision -makers of the environmental costs of the project under consideration at a stage early enough to ensure that air quality concerns are fully addressed; and (2) it provides the local agency with ongoing information assuring local decision -makers that they are making real contributions to clean air goals contained in the AQMP. (c) Only new or amended general plan elements, specific plans, and regionally significant projects need to undergo a consistency review. This is because the AQMP strategy is based on projections from local general plans. Projects that are consistent with the local general plan are, therefore, considered consistent with the air quality management plan. (d) As indicated in the analysis presented in the FEIR, the proposed project is consistent with the goals of 2007 AQMP and, in that respect, does not present a significant air quality impact. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.7.2 Environmental Effect: The proposed project has the potential to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations (Air Quality Impact 7-4). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) All construction emissions concentrations for carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NOZ), particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM10), and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5) are within their respective threshold values and are, therefore, less than significant. (c) Based on a CO micro -scale hot -spot analysis, predicted CO values are below the State's 1 -and 8 -hour standards and any potential impact is less than significant. (c) Mandatory adherence to the SCAQMD rules would ensure that any construction or operational impact from toxic air contaminants (TAC) associated with the operation of the project remains less than significant. 30 (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 7-1) requiring that future residential purchasers be notified of the presence or potential presence of proximal commercial uses on the subject property. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.7.3 Environmental Effect: The proposed project has the potential to create objectionable odors (Air Quality Impact 7-5). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Project construction would involve the use of heavy equipment creating exhaust pollutants from on-site earth movement and from equipment transporting materials to and from the site. In addition, some odors would be produced from the application of asphalt, paints, and coatings. With regards to nuisance odors, any air quality impacts will be confined to the immediate vicinity of the odor source and would be of short-term duration. Such brief exposure to nuisance odors constitutes an adverse but less -than -significant air quality impact. (c) Operational odors could be produced from on-site food preparation and from diesel -fueled vehicles operating on the project site. These odors are common in the environment and subject to compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402 (Nuisance). (d) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.7.4 Environmental Effect: The construction and operation of the proposed project will contribute to the generation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. GHG have been linked to climate change (Air Quality Impact 7-7). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) At this time, greenhouse gases (primarily CO2) are not regulated as a criteria pollutant and there are no significance criteria for these emissions. The current AQMP does not set CEQA targets that can be used to determine any potential threshold values. (c) Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the most common greenhouse gas. Construction activities would consume fuel and result in the generation of GHG emissions. Construction CO2 emissions were projected using the URBEMIS2007 computer model. In accordance with the projected URBEMIS construction schedule, approximately 1,347,095.44 pounds (673.55 tons) of CO2 would be produced over the approximate 299 days of active construction. 31 (d) In the case of site operations, the majority of GHG emissions, and specifically CO2, are due to vehicle travel and energy consumption. Results of the URBEMIS2007 model indicate that, on average, 87,066.64 pounds (43.53 tons) Of CO2 would be produced daily or about 31,779,323.60 pounds (15,889.66 tons) per year. (e) In accordance with the current AQMP, the emission levels in California are estimated to be 473 million metric tons (521.4 million short tons) CO2 equivalent for 2000 and 532 million metric tons (568.4 short tons) CO2 equivalent for 2010. Year 2009 (the worst-case scenario year that the emissions are based on) is than extrapolated to 526.1 million metric tons (579.9 short tons). At approximately 15,889.66 tons per year, the proposed project's operations represent less than 0.003 percent of this State's annual CO2 emissions' budget. (f) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.8 Noise 5.8.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities could result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project (Noise Impact 8-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative noise impacts are addressed in Section 4.8 (Noise) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Noise levels associated with construction activities would be higher than the existing ambient noise levels in the project area but would subside once construction of the project is completed. (c) The most proximate residential structures include the existing single-family homes located to the immediate south and east of the project site. The nearest of these homes could be on the order of 50 feet from on-site construction activities. At that distance, the equivalent noise level (Leq).noise levels would be projected to be as high as 89 A -weighted decibel scale (dBA). (d) Construction noise is regulated in the City under the provisions of the Municipal Code. The Municipal Code limits the hours of heavy equipment operations. Notwithstanding those provisions, construction noise may continue to be a short- term nuisance to proximal noise -sensitive receptors. (e) In recognition of the presence of construction noise and the proximity of existing residential receptors, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 8-1 through 8-6) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP which are designed to reduce short-term noise impacts to the maximum extend feasible. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures would reduce construction noise impacts to a less -than -significant level. 5.8.2 Environmental Effect: Project implementation may result in an exceedance of noise standards established in the General Plan and/or Municipal Code or applicable standards formulated by other agencies (Noise Impact 8-2). 32 Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative noise impacts are addressed in Section 4.8 (Noise) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The Municipal Code sets a goal level of 55 dBA for mobile -source noise intrusion on sensitive, multi -family land uses. The General Plan (Noise Element) allows for a conditionally acceptable exterior noise level of up to 65 dBA community noise equivalent level (CNEL) for residential uses as long as the dwelling units are fitted with forced air ventilation or air conditioning. Assuming the inclusion of forced air ventilation, commercial uses have an exterior goal of 65 dBA CNEL and a conditionally acceptable level of 70 dBA CNEL. (c) Based on projected traffic volumes, the 65 dBA CNEL along Diamond Bar Boulevard would fall at a distance of about 130 feet from the centerline of the road. The placement of any residential units within this distance could then expose future residents to excessive noise levels and result in a potentially significant impact. Since any commercial structures that would lie between the residential units and Diamond Bar Boulevard could serve as an effective sound wall if they were to shield the residents from a view of the road traffic, the 130 - foot distance is considered as conservative. (d) The 65 dBA CNEL deemed suitable for residential development, equipped with forced air ventilation, would fall at a distance of about 830 feet from the freeway. (e) The 70 dBA CNEL would fall at distances of about 60 feet from the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard. (f) The Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 8-1), as required under Title 24 standards, requiring forced air ventilation in the proposed residential development, thus allowing site occupants to leave windows closed and reducing interior levels by in excess of 20 dBA. (e) Based on the potential presence of significant noise impacts, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 8-7 and 8-8) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP specifying that no residential units shall be located within 830 feet of the SR -57 Freeway's nearest travel lane unless additional sound attention is provided and no commercial units shall be located within 60 feet of the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures would reduce construction noise impacts to a less -than -significant level. 5.8.3 Environmental Effect: Project implementation may result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project (Noise Impact 8-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding (a) Project -related and cumulative noise impacts are addressed in Section 4.8 (Noise) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) As traffic volumes in the general project area increase, those areas located in proximity to the area's arterial highway system will experience increased traffic 33 noise. (c) The TIA indicates that the project would add 9,276 ADT to the roadway network. Modeling indicates that the noise increase along all access roads would not exceed 0.7 dBA CNEL. The project's contribution to ambient noise levels would, therefore, be less than significant. (d) The dominant sources of noise through the project area are from freeway traffic and traffic along Diamond Bar Boulevard. Noise attenuates with distance and intervening objects and obstacles serve to further impede the transmittal of sound energy. The structures associated with the proposed development would serve as a partial sound wall reducing this noise at the existing residential location. The introduction of intervening structures could benefit adjacent residents by further reducing line -of -sight propagation of mobile source noise along adjoining roadways. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.8.4 Environmental Effect: Short-term construction and long-term operational noise associated with the proposed project, in combination with other related projects, will contribute to both a localized and an areawide increase in ambient noise levels in proximity to those projects and along those roadways utilized by project -related traffic (Noise Impact 8-4). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of. Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative noise impacts are addressed in Section 4.8 (Noise) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Construction noise impacts are generally localized and limited to each related project site and those areas proximal to those construction operations. Cumulative construction noise impacts will be generally localized to each such project and the roadway network along which construction traffic travels. (c) As traffic volumes in the general project area increase over time, those areas located in proximity to the area's arterial highway system will experience increased traffic noise. Existing roadway volumes would, however, need to double in order to produce a perceptible noise increase. (d) Large-scale projects that contribute substantially to traffic volumes along the area's arterial highway system are subject to CEQA compliance. Similarly, the noise element of each agency's general plan specifies those roadways that are subject to excessive noise levels. As deemed appropriate, beyond those requirements already imposed by each agency s noise ordinance, land -use entities have the ability to impose additional mitigation measures and/or conditions of approval on each project in order to reduce potential short-term and long-term traffic noise impacts. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9 Public. Services and Facilities 34 5.9.1 Environmental Effect: During construction, heavy equipment, materials, and other items of value will be brought to the project site. As buildings are erected, prior to site occupancy, structures may remain unsecured and susceptible to unauthorized entry. The presence of an unsecured site and items of value could result in theft and vandalism that could increase demands upon law enforcement agencies (Public Services Impact 9- 1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Since the project site is presently vacant and since no public use is authorized thereupon, the property presently places little, if any, demand upon existing police protection services. An increased demand for police service will occur during the construction phases. (c) Provision of such services would not require construction of any new Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LACSD) or California Highway Patrol (CHP) facilities or necessitate the physical alteration of any existing facilities. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 9- 1 and 9-2) requiring the preparation of a construction security plan outlining the activities that will be instituted to secure the construction site from potential criminal incidents and providing the LACSD the opportunity to review and comment upon building plans and the configuration of the development. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.2 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will result in the introduction of equipment, materials, and manpower into a County -designated fire hazard area prior to the provision of water system improvements designated to respond to on-site and near -site fire hazards (Public Services Impact 9-2). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The proposed project must fully comply with all applicable provisions of the "Uniform Building Code" (UBC) and "Uniform Fire Code" (UFC), as modified, and other applicable provisions of the "Los Angeles County Code" (County Code) established to address fire protection and public safety. (c) The project is subject to compliance with the Los Angeles County Fire Department's (LACFD) "Fuel Modification Plan Guidelines for Projects Located in Fire Zone 4 or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone requirements. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has 35 identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 9- 3 through 9-5) requiring the Los Angeles County Fire Department's (LACFD) approval of fire protection program and workplace standards for fire safety, a fuel modification, landscape, and irrigation plan, a final water improvement plans, and associated building plans. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.3 Environmental Effect: The public school located closest to the project site is Castle Rock Elementary School (2975 Castle Rock Road). Construction activities could constitute an attractive nuisance to children located near or passing by the project site and construction traffic could impose a safety hazard to children and/or become disruptive to school activities and operations (Public Services Impact 9-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Since no substantial increase in the number of new households within the general project area would be anticipated in order to accommodate the project's construction, no direct construction -related impacts on WVUSD facilities have been identified. (d) Construction traffic accessing the site from Cold Springs Road will cross Castle Rock Road in the vicinity of Castle Rock Elementary School. Construction vehicles will transport equipment, building materials, and could discharge construction debris along streets adjacent to established residential areas, including the school, where children would be present. (e) Construction activities may present an attractive nuisance, defined as any condition which is unsafe or unprotected and, thereby, dangerous to children and which may reasonably be expected to attract children to the property and risk injury by playing with, in, or on it. (f) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 6- 2, 6-3, 6-4, and 9-6) restricting construction traffic along Castle Rock Road and Pasado Drive, requiring the preparation of a construction traffic safety plan and a traffic control plan, and requiring the fencing and signage of the construction site. (g) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.4 Environmental Effect: With a resident population of approximately 662 persons and an existing LACSD staffing ratio of one sworn officer for each 1,082 residents, in order to maintain existing staffing levels, the LACSD would need an additional 0.61 sworn deputies (Public Services Impact 9-4). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). 36 Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Actual police protection personnel needs will be determined over time, based on that department's experience with the project's residential and commercial components, areawide incident trends, and other factors, and not derived purely through a projection of the number of on-site residents. (c) There is no formal basis to quantify project -related law enforcement impacts, no established nexus allowing for the collection of developer impact fees for police protection services, and no direct linkage between approved development and the expansion of police resources, the purchase and new or the replacement of existing equipment, and the hiring of new sworn and non -sworn personnel. (e) Neither the LACSD nor the CHP have not established a functional mechanism for the collection of LACSD or CHP impact fees and there exists no formal basis to quantify project -related impacts upon police protection services. (f) Because funding for LACSD personnel, equipment, and facilities is derived through ad valorum taxation and based on yearly allocations by the County, the County has the ability to effectively respond to LACSD resource demands. (g) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 9-2) specifying that, prior to the issuance of building permits, the LACSD review and comment upon building plans and the configuration of the development. (h) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.5 Environmental Effect: The introduction of 202 new residential dwellings and 153,985 square feet of new commercial use will increase existing demands on LACFD facilities, equipment, and personnel, predicating an incremental need for facility expansion, the purchase of new and/or replacement equipment, and contributing to the need for addition LACFD personnel (Public Services Impact 9-5). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Water service to the project site will be provided by the Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD), via existing water mains. The LACFD requires a minimum fire flow of 1,250 gallons per minute (gpm) at 20 pounds per square inch (psi) for a two-hour duration. Existing water mains are capable of delivering those minimum flows to the project site. (c) With regards to commercial projects, the LACFD stipulates that the minimum fire flow and fire hydrant requirements shall be determined by the fire chief or fire marshal. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 9-5) specifying 37 that, prior to the issuance of building permits, the LACFD review and approve final water improvement plans and building plans. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.6 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will increase enrollment within the Walnut Valley Unified School District by an estimated 31 new students, including approximately 11 new elementary school students (Grades K-6), 8 new junior high school students (Grades 7-9), and 12 new high school students (Grades 9-12) (Public Services Impact 9- 6). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) For the 2009-2010 school year, Castle Rock Elementary, Evergreen Elementary Schools, and South Pointe Middle School have the available capacity to accommodate 103, 117, and 62 additional students, respectively. Although no available capacity has been identified at Diamond Bar High School (a shortfall of 80 students is projected), any excess pupil enrollment at that facility will be temporarily housed in leased portable classrooms (in space made available by reducing existing programs and in space reconstructed on existing sites) until more permanent measures can be taken. (c) As indicated in the WVUSD's current fee justification study, based on the application of the State -approved cohort survival method, it is estimated that student enrollment within the WVUSD will decrease from 15,485 Grade K-12 students in the fall of the 2008 school year to 15,414 students in the 2011 school year, representing an increase of 75 Grade K-6 students and a decrease of 79 Grade 7-12 students. Alternatively, based on the application of the pupil per dwelling . unit multiplier method, it is estimated that student enrollment will increase from 15,485 Grade K-12 students in the fall of the 2008 school year to 15,599 students in the 2016 school year, representing an increase of 49 Grade K-6 students and an increase of 50 Grade 7-12 students. (d) The WVUSD's current fee justification study concluded that no new school sites would need to be acquired and no new school facilities would need to be constructed to accommodate projected student population projections through at least 2023. (e) Payment of applicable fees to the WVUSD or, alternatively, execution of an Assembly Bill (AB) 2926 mitigation agreement acceptable to the WVUSD constitutes full and complete mitigation of project -related impacts on the provision of school facilities from the proposed residential development. (f) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 9-7) specifying that, prior to the issuance of building permits, the City be provided with a certificate of compliance or other documentation demonstrating complied with the District's School Board resolutions governing the payment of school impact fees 38 or has entered into an AB 2926 authorized school fee mitigation agreement or is not subject to the school impact fee exaction. (g) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.7 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will increase the resident population of the City, including the number of school-age children, incremental increasing existing spatial and resource demands placed on the Diamond Bar Public Library (Public Services Impact 9-7). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The Diamond Bar Library is 9,935 gross square feet in size and houses a collection consisting of 89,446 books and other library materials. (c) The County Library's current service level guidelines for planning purposes are a minimum of 0.50 gross square foot of library facility space per capita and 2.75 items (books and other library materials) per capita. Based on an estimated service area population of 56,233 persons, as derived from United States Census data, the Diamond Bar Library would need a 28,115 square foot facility and 154,640 items in order to meet that standard. (d) The proposed project is projected to add about 662 new residents to the City. That population increase would create additional demand for library service and would further affect the County Library's ability to adequately serve'the existing and future residents of the Diamond Bar Library's service area. Based on the County Library's service level guidelines, based on project -related demand, the Diamond Bar Library would require an additional 331 gross square feet of facility space and an additional 1,820 new items (books and other library materials). (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.8 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will increase the resident population of the City of Diamond Bar and generate a projected need for 2.12 acres (approximately 92,390 square feet) of additional parkland within the City (Public Services Impact 9-8). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Section 21.32.040 (Park Land Dedications and Fees) in Chapter 21.32 (Subdivisions) of the Municipal Code provides for the dedication of real property and/or the payment of in -lieu fees to the City for park and recreational purposes. 39 In accordance therewith, the proposed 202 dwelling units (assuming the classification of those units as multi -family dwellings) would generate a need for 2.12 acres (approximately 92,390 square feet) of additional parkland within the City. (c) As specified in Section 21.32.040(e)(2), only the payment of fees shall be required in subdivisions of 50 parcels or less, except that when a condominium project, stock cooperative, or community apartment project exceeds 50 dwelling units, dedication of land may be required even though the number of actual parcels may be less than 50. Although the proposed development. plan does not include a public recreational component, the City is authorized to require real property dedication rather or in addition to the payment of park fees. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 9-8) specifying that, prior to the approval of the final subdivision map, pursuant to Section 21.32.040 (Park Land Dedications and Fees) in Chapter 21.32 (Subdivisions) of the Municipal Code, in -lieu park fees shall be paid to the City in the manner and in the amount authorized thereunder. (e)' Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.9 Environmental Effect: The approval of other reasonably foreseeable future development projects within the general project area will increase existing demands on the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department and on the Los Angeles County Fire Department, increase the number of school -aged children served by the Walnut Valley Unified School District, and increase the demand for park and recreational facilities within the City (Public Services Impact 9-9). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Based on a Statewide, regional, areawide, or local assessment of need, public agencies have the ability to construct new facilities, purchase new equipment, and add personnel in response to identified demand. Local agencies have the ability to deny or condition individual development applications based on their assessment of potential project -related impacts upon law enforcement and fire protection agencies, facilities, and personnel. Public agencies have the ability to respond to those changes through increases or decreases in annual budgetary allocations provided to police and fire protection agencies, including the LACSD and LACFD. (c) As indicated in the WVUSD's current fee justification study, based on the application of the State -approved cohort survival method, it is estimated that student enrollment within the WVUSD will decrease from 15,485 Grade K-12 students in the fall of the 2008 school year to 15,414 students in the 2011 school year, representing an increase of 75 Grade K-6 students and a decrease of 79 Grade 7-12 students. Alternatively, based on the application of the pupil per dwelling unit multiplier method, it is estimated that student enrollment will 40 increase from 15,485 Grade K-12 students in the fall of the 2008 school year to 15,599 students in the 2016 school year, representing an increase of 49 Grade K-6 students and an increase of 50 Grade 7-12 students. (d) The WVUSD's current fee justification study concluded that no new school sites would need to be acquired and no new school facilities would need to be constructed to accommodate projected student population projections through at least 2023. (e) All qualifying residential and non-residential development projects located within the WVUSD's district boundaries are required to pay school impact fees. Notwithstanding the findings of the WVUSD's fee justification analysis, the payment of applicable school impact fees or the execution of an AB 2926 mitigation agreement constitutes full and complete mitigation for project -related impacts on WVUSD facilities. (f) In November 2007, the area's voters approved General Obligation Bond Measure S ($64.6 million Academic Facilities Measure) and Measure Y ($15.2 million Physical Education Facilities Measure). As a result of those ballot measures, WVUSD schools will receive needed repairs and upgrades. (g) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.10 Utilities and Service Systems 5.10.1 Environmental Effect: Wastewater collection facilities do not presently exist on the project site and will not be available until the infrastructure improvements required to accommodate the proposed land uses are constructed (Utilities and Service Systems Impact 10-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative utilities and service systems impacts are addressed in Section 4.10 (Utilities and Service Systems) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The provision of potable water and toilet facilities is required under United States Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (29 CFR 1926.51) and California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Industrial Safety (Cal/OSHA) (Section 1524-1526, CCR) standards. (c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.10.2 Environmental Effect: The project's residential and commercial components are projected to generate approximately 89,435 gallons of wastewater per day (0.09 mgd). Applying a peaking factor of 2.7, the peaked flow rate would be about 241,475 gallons of wastewater per day (0.25 mgd) (Utilities and Service Systems Impact 10-2). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following.facts are presented in support of this finding: 41 (a) Project -related and cumulative utilities and service systems impacts are addressed in Section 4.10 (Utilities and Service Systems) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (CSDLAC or Districts) has formulated average wastewater generation rates for a variety of land uses. The CSDLAC projects that for "condominium" units, each unit will generate approximately 195, gallons of wastewater per day (gpd). Based on that generation rate, the project's 202 dwelling units are projected to generate approximately 39,390 gpd of wastewater or 0.04 million gallons per day (mgd). (c) For the purpose of this analysis, a "shopping center" has been assumed. The CSDLAC's sewage generation rate for a "shopping center' is estimated to be 325 gallons/day/1,000 square feet (fl?). Based on shopping center containing 153,985 gross leasable square feet, an estimated 50,045 gpd (0.05 mgd) of wastewater would be generated daily. When projected residential and commercial wastewater estimates are combined, approximately 89,435 gpd (0.09 mgd) of wastewater would be generated daily. (d) Peak daily flow rates are higher than daily rates and serve as the basis for facility planning. Applying a peaking factor of 2.7, the peak flow rate would be about 241,475 gpd (0.25 mgd). (e) The project generally gravity flows sewage toward the west portion of the property. The wastewater flow originating from the proposed project will discharge to a local sewer line, which is not maintained by the CSDLAC, for conveyance to the Districts No. 21 Outfall Trunk Sewer, located in Brea Canyon Road at Via Sorella. This 18 -inch diameter trunk sewer has a design capacity of 12.3 mgd and conveyed a peak flow of 4.9 mgd when last measured in 2005. Assuming that peak flow rates have not changed substantially since 2005, even with the proposed project's projected contribution (0.25 mgd), sufficient capacity exists in the Districts No. 21 Outfall Truck Sewer to readily accommodate the proposed development. (f) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 10-1) specifying that, prior to the issuance of any grading permits, a sewer area study, prepared by a licensed civil engineer registered in the State of California, be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer and the County. (g) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.10.3 Environmental Effect: Implementation of the proposed project and other related projects would impose cumulative impacts on those sewage collection and disposal facilities located in the general project area (Utility and Service Systems Impact 10-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative utilities and service systems impacts are addressed in Section 4.10 (Utilities and Service Systems) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) At the project -specific level, local agencies require project proponents to assess 42 the impacts of proposed projects on existing sewer facilities, on an as -needed basis. Those analyses are conducted to identify any site-specific or project - specific improvements that may be required to the local and/or CSDLAC's sewer systems that may be needed to handle increased sewage flows attributable to each project. As required, all related projects must construct any requisite local wastewater improvements needed to handle their respective flows. (c) CSDLAC facilities are sized and improvements phased to serve population and economic development in accordance with forecasts adopted by SCAG. Projects that are consistent with SCAG growth forecasts can be adequately served by existing and planned CSDLAC facilities. (d) In order to fund planned improvements, each new project within the County is required to pay connection fees to the CSDLAC. These fees are used to finance future expansions and upgrades to the regional trunk sewer system and wastewater treatment facilities. (e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.11 Cultural Resources 5.11.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities can result in the irretrievable loss or damage to any prehistoric, historic, or paleontological resources that may exist within the area of proposed disturbance (Cultural Resources Impact 11-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative cultural resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.11 (Cultural Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing cultural resources setting, including an assessment of project -related impacts, is presented in "Phase I Cultural and Paleontological Resource Assessment of the Proposed Site D Development, Los Angeles County, California" (PCR Services Corporation, January 24, 2008). (c) No prehistoric archaeological resources have been previously recorded within one mile of the project site and no prehistoric resources were identified on the subject property during the pedestrian survey. (d) Results of the historic aerial photograph and topographic map review revealed that a structure (HS -1) was once located within the boundaries of the project site that was associated with the historic Diamond Bar Ranch Headquarters Compound. The Compound included the residence of Frederick E. Lewis, who owned and operated the Diamond Bar Ranch. There is a moderate potential for the site to retain buried domestic or ranch maintenance components such as trash pits, privy holes, and similar features. (e) Results of the pedestrian survey revealed the identification of a historical archaeological site, consisting of more than 15 non-native eucalyptus trees and concrete debris concentration likely associated with the former location of HS -1. The significance of that site with respect to CEQA is considered to be undetermined. 43 (f) Based on the potential presence of significant cultural resources impacts, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 11-1 through 11-3) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP requiring that, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified archaeologist be retained to monitor all vegetation removal and ground disturbance to a depth of three feet within specified areas. If cultural resources are identified during monitoring of the ground disturbing activities, the archaeologist shall temporarily divert or redirect grading or excavation activities in the vicinity of those resources in order to make an evaluation of the find and determine appropriate treatment. If human remains are encountered unexpectedly during construction excavation and grading activities, Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code (HSC) requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Section 5097.98 of the PRC. Implementation of those measures will reduce identified impacts to below a level of significance. 5.11.2 Environmental Effect: Ground disturbance activities could result in impacts to on-site paleontological resources, including fossil remains, from the Puente Formation (Cultural Resources Impact 11-2). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative cultural resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.11 (Cultural Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Results of the paleontological resources records search revealed that the study area is underlain by the Puente Formation (also known as the Monterey Formation in the region), which is a formation known to contain diverse and well- preserved marine vertebrate fossils. The results of the pedestrian survey confirmed the exposure of the Puente Formation on the project site identified four fossil localities in backdirt piles from geotechnical core sampling. The project site is considered to be highly sensitive for paleontological resources. (c) Based on the potential presence of significant cultural resources impacts, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 11-4 through 11-8) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP requiring that, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified paleontologist meeting the qualifications established by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontologists be retained to develop and implement a paleontological monitoring plan. A paleontological monitor, supervised by the paleontologist, shall monitor all excavations in the Puente Formation or excavations anticipated to extend into the Puente Formation. The paleontologist shall prepare a final report on the monitoring. If fossils were identified, the report shall contain an appropriate description of the fossils, treatment, and curation. A copy of the report shall be filed with the City and the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County and shall accompany any curated fossils. Implementation of those measures will reduce identified impacts to below a level of significance. 5.11.3 Environmental Effect: Grading activities conducted on other sites located within the general project area could result in impacts to any historic or prehistoric resources that 44 may be located thereupon. In addition, earth -moving activities conducted on other undisturbed sites containing the Puente Formation could result in the loss of recoverable paleontological resources (Cultural Resources Impact 11-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative cultural resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.11 (Cultural Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) All cumulative project activities remain subject to site-specific environmental review and must fully conform to and comply with all applicable local, State, and federal requirements. Compliance with those requirements will ensure that all related project -specific and cumulative impacts upon prehistoric, historic, and paleontological resources are mitigated to a less -than -significance level. (c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.12 Aesthetics 5.12.1 Environmental Effect: Excluding those areas that will be retained as open space, the project site will take on a distinctively urban physiographic character as existing vegetation is removed, construction equipment introduced onto the site, hillside areas recontoured, new uses are introduced, and other physical modifications occur (Aesthetic Impact 12-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12 (Aesthetics) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The proposed development will consist of three mass -graded "super pads," including one proposed commercial pad (with an area of about 10.09 acres) and two proposed residential pads (ranging in area from about 4.02 to 6.05 acres). The pads will be developed by balanced cut and fill grading. Cuts will range from less than five feet to about 40 feet high. Fill slopes will range in height from a few feet to approximately 60 feet down-slope from the upper residential pad to Diamond Bar Boulevard. (c) City policies encourage the use of contour grading and landform grading techniques in order to create more naturalized engineered slope areas. Proposed grading activities seek to apply these contour grading principals to the proposed engineered slope areas, creating, where practical, curvilinear features that produce a visual transition between engineered and natural open space areas. (d) Although construction is short-term in duration, it serves as precursors to the long-term visual changes that will occur as a result of those activities. During development, construction activities may appear disharmonious with the current perception of the existing property as an open -space area. At the end of the 45 construction term, the site will take on a distinctively urban character and shall generally be perceived as an urban use. (e) Based on the City's interpretation and general application of the visual resource assessment methodology outlined in the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) "Visual Resource Management Program" (BLM, 1986), construction -induced changes would be considered adverse but less than significant. (f) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.12.2 Environmental Effect: The project's implementation will alter the site's existing topography and necessitate the construction of numerous retaining walls (Aesthetic Impact 12-2). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12 (Aesthetics) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Variable height Loffel (Loffelstein) retaining walls, ranging from several feet to about 23 feet high, are proposed near the mid -slope of the 2:1 fill slopes between each of the super pads. Although the proposed retaining walls exceeds the height limitations specified in Sections 22.20.040, 22.22.080(b) -(c), and 22.52.020 of the Municipal Code, the proposed walls would be authorized under the provisions of the proposed specific plan. (c) Large retaining walls; absent integrated landscaping and irrigation, can become dominant visual elements that produce a sharp contrast between retained natural features and introduced cultural modifications. All walls over eight feet in height are cribwalls designed to incorporate landscaping as an integral design element. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 12-1) specifying that the specific plan include design details, acceptable to both the City Engineer and to the Community Development Director, for all proposed retaining walls. Retaining wall plans shall include landscape and irrigation details sufficient to ensure that each of those elements are, as appropriate, integrated into wall design and that the interrelationship between those elements are considered from structural integrity and aesthetic viewpoints. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.12.3 Environmental Effect: The introduction of new residential and commercial uses will add new sources of artificial lighting to the project site and could result in light trespass extending beyond the project boundaries (Aesthetic Impact 12-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: 46 (d) Project implementation will, therefore, not result in the removal of economic, physical, and/or political constraints affecting either the project site or other near - site properties. (e) With the exception of off-site traffic improvements, the project does not include the expansion of any infrastructure systems that would accommodate additional off-site.development. The traffic improvements identified as mitigation measures herein serve to accommodate the proposed project, ambient growth, and other related projects. (f) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 6.0 FINDINGS REGARDING MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM The City Council has adopted or will likely adopt the MRMP set forth in the FEIR. The City Council hereby finds that the MRMP meets the requirements of Section 21081.6 of CEQA and Sections 15097 and 15126.4 of the State CEQA Guidelines. 7.0 FINDINGS REGARDING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES NOT SELECTED FOR IMPLEMENTATION The City Council recognizes that the SDSP will result in significant unavoidable environmental impacts that cannot be feasibly reduced to below a level of significance. The City Council finds that: (1) due to specified economic, legal, social, technological, and other considerations, each of the project alternatives examined in the FEIR are infeasible; (2) each of the project alternatives examined in the FEIR will not fulfill the identified project's stated objectives; and/or (3) each of the project alternatives examined in the FEIR will not feasibly result in the avoidance of any of the unmitigable significant or potentially significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. 7.1 Alternative No. 1 ("No Project" Alternative) Alternative Prosect Description: Under this alternative no physical changes to the project site would occur, the property would be remain in its present condition, and no new development activities or other public improvements would occur thereupon. No grading or other landform modifications would occur. Maintenance activities, including weed abatement, would routinely be performed and the existing level of use would continue generally in the manner now experienced. In keeping with the general intent of this alternative, one possible variation would involve the use of a sufficient portion of the City Property to allow for the development of street improvements to the Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard intersection. Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Project: The City Council finds that the "No Project" alternative" is "environmentally superior to the proposed project since it would, at least in the short term, result in the avoidance of those significant construction, operational, and cumulative air quality impacts associated with the proposed project. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding 49 (a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0 (Alternatives Analysis) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Under this alternative, no new housing units and no new commercial square footage would be constructed on the project site. (c) The "no project" alternative generally reflects the conditions and associated environmental impacts that would predictably occur should the Lead Agency elect to either deny the proposed project or fail to take affirmative action on the proposed application, resulting in, at least, the short-term retention of the site in its existing condition. The denial of the current development application or the cessation of current process would, however, neither preclude the submission of a subsequent development application either by the current project proponent or another party nor ensure the site's retention as an open space area. (d) With regards to construction air quality impacts, under the proposed project, combined emissions or reactive organic gases (ROG) were estimated at 136.02 pounds/day. Since that value exceeds the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, construction impacts would be deemed to be significant. Since, under the "no project" alternative, no development would occur on the site, construction emissions would be eliminated and short-term air quality impacts would be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (e) With regards to operational air quality impacts, the proposed project is projected to create ROG, oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and carbon dioxide (CO) emissions in excess of SCAQMD's suggested daily threshold criteria. Since, under the "no project' alternative, no development would occur on the project site, operational emissions would be eliminated and long-term air quality impacts would be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (f) With regards to cumulative air quality impacts, independent of the Lead Agency's actions concerning the project site, related project activities will continue to incrementally contribute to regional air emissions within the SCAB. However, since site-specific contributions will not add to those conditions, cumulative air quality impacts would be deemed to be less than significant. Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives: The City Council finds that the "No Project" alternative would not substantially meet the stated project objectives. Feasibility: Although a substantial portion of the project site is owned by the District, the District has declared the District Property surplus and seeks to dispose of their real property holdings in order to raise funds for other eligible expenditures. As stipulated in the MOU between the City and the District, upon the approval of the specific plan for the development of Site D (if such approval were to occur), the "District agrees to use its best efforts to sell the School Property as entitled by the City for the fair market value, in accordance with the provisions of California Education Code commencing with Section 17455. City agrees to use its best efforts to sell the City Property for the fair market value. The parties agree to cooperatively work with each other to coordinate the sale of Site D." In the absence of public and/or private purchase of the project site for the purpose of open space preservation, there exists no mechanism to ensure the long-term preservation of the project site in an undeveloped condition. As a result, absent that participation, the "No Project" alternative is deemed to be infeasible. 50 7.2 Alternative No. 2 ("Public Facilities" Alternative) Alternative Project Description: The District Propertyis presently designed "Public Facilities (PF)" in the General Plan. Although there exists no corresponding zoning designation which relates exclusively to public facilities, this alternative is predicated upon the geographic expansion of that General Plan designation across the entire project Site and the development of the property in accordance with the declared intent of that General Plan designation. For the purpose of this alternatives analysis, under this alternative, it is assumed that the estimated developable area of the project site (20.2 acres) is developed at a floor -area -ratio of 0.25. Under this alternative, a total of 220,000 square feet of public facilities use would be developed on the project site. For the purpose of CEQA compliance, the FEIR assumed the sale of the project site to a private entity, such as a religious organization or operator of a parochial school. Under this alternative, the project site would be developed to include a 73,000 square foot (500 -student) private school and a 147,000 square foot (2,500 -seat) church. A fellowship area would be developed within the sanctuary building which would be made available for public use as a banquet facility. Improvements would include a parochial school campus, including classrooms, library, and approximately 12,000 square foot (1,000 -seat capacity) multi-purpose auditorium, outdoor recreational facilities, offices and administrative facilities, maintenance area, and caretaker's residence. The gymnasium would serve the private school and be available for the community for use after school hours, including after school programs administered by the Boys and Girls Club or similar organization. In addition, once operational, other on-site activities are assumed to include non-residential child-care services, family -care services, activities and uses catering to youth groups, music and drama ministries, counseling, prayer meetings, bible study, nutrition programs, homeless outreach and assistance programs, and other associated educational, job training, and community services activities. The campus would also contain 6,000 square feet of retail uses (book store). Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Prosect: The City Council finds that the `Public Facilities" alternative is "environmentally superior" to the proposed project since it would result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of those significant operational. air. quality impacts associated with the proposed project. Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0 (Alternatives Analysis) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Implementation of this alternative will result in the generation of approximately 2,478 daily vehicle trips during a typical weekday, including 336 AM peak -hour trips. In comparison, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 9,276 daily two-way vehicle trips, including 272 trips during the weekday AM and 650 trips during the PM peak hours. (c) Based on the nature of this alternative, trip generation characteristics would differ between weekdays and on Sunday. Based on the Sunday operation, this alternative would generate approximately 5,508 daily (Sunday) vehicle trips, including 1,412 AM peak -hour trips. In comparison, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 9,276 daily two-way vehicle trips, including 272 trips during the weekday AM and 650 trips during the PM peak hours. 51 (d) With regards to construction air quality impacts, under the proposed project, combined emissions or ROG were estimated at 136.02 pounds/day. Since this value exceeds the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, construction impacts would be deemed to be significant. Although, under this alternative, on- site development activities may be reduced (220,000 square feet of public facility use as compared to 153,985 square feet of neighborhood -serving commercial use and 202 dwelling units), maximum daily construction activities would be anticipated to be similar. As a result, construction air quality impacts would be assumed to be similar to those associated with the proposed project and would remain significant. (e) With regards to operational air quality impacts, the proposed project is projected to create ROG, NOx, and CO emissions in excess of the SCAQMD suggested daily threshold criteria. Implementation of this alternative would result in the generation of approximately 2,478 daily vehicle trips during a typical weekday (compared to 9,278 daily two-way vehicle trips associated with the proposed project), including 336 AM peak -hour trips (compared to 650 PM peak -hour trips associated with the proposed project). As a result, under this alternative, mobile source emissions would be substantially reduced. For the purpose of this alternatives analysis, it is assumed that operational air quality impacts would be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (f) With regards to cumulative air quality impacts, related project activities, in combination with this alternative's construction and operation, would incrementally contribute to regional air emissions within the SCAB. Under the SCAQMD's recommended methodology, development activities that generate significant air quality impacts are also assumed to generate significant cumulative air quality impacts. Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives: The City Council finds that the "Public Facilities" alternative would not substantially meet the stated project objectives to facilitate residential development on a minimum of 50 percent of the usable acreage, and commercial development on 50 percent of the usable acreage. Moreover, insofar as public facilities are owned and run by tax exempt entities, development pursuant to the "Public Facilities" alternatives would not only fail to provide a desirable level of sales tax revenue, but may also cause the property to be removed from the property tax rolls. Feasibilitv: Excluding economic considerations which were not addressed in the FEIR, the City Council finds that the "Public Facilities" alternative is feasible. 7.3 Alternative No. 3 ("Community Commercial" Alternative) Alternative Project Description: Under this alternative, the project site would be developed for commercial use in accordance with the "Neighborhood Commercial (C-1)" standards outlined in Chapter 22.10 (Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts) of the Municipal Code. As specified in Section 22.10.020 (Purpose of Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts) therein, the C-1 zoning district is applied to areas appropriate for a wide range of retail shopping and service uses, primarily intended to serve the needs of City residents. The allowable floor -area -ratio (FAR) for non-residential development shall be from 0.25 to 1.00 (Section 21.10.040). Based on a FAR of 0.35 applied to the estimated net acreage (20.2 net acres), a total of 307,969 square feet of commercial use would be developed on the project site. The site would be developed as a multi -tenant center including one or more "big -box" uses and a number of out -pads. Except as provided in 52 the Municipal Coe, building heights would not exceed 35 feet. On-site parking would be provided at a ratio of one space for each 300 square feet of gross floor area plus one space for each 1,000 square feet of outdoor display area (Section 22.30.030). The alternative -specific grading plan could closely replicate that associated with the SDSP. Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Proiect: The City Council finds that the "Community Commercial" alternative is not "environmentally superior" to the proposed project since it would not result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of those significant construction, operational, and cumulative air quality impacts associated with the proposed project. Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0 (Alternatives Analysis) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) With regards to construction air quality impacts, under the proposed project, combined emissions or ROG were estimated at 136.02 pounds/day. Since this value exceeds the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, construction impacts would be deemed to be significant. Under this alternative, on-site development activities may be increased (307,969 square feet of neighborhood - serving commercial use as compared to 153,985 square feet of comparable commercial use and 202 dwelling units). However, because mass grading of the project site would be required to create building pads and an on-site circulation system, maximum daily construction activities would be anticipated to be similar. As a result, construction air quality impacts would be assumed to be similar to those associated with the proposed project and would remain significant. (c) With regards to operational air quality impacts, the proposed project is projected to create ROG, NOx, and CO emissions in excess of the SCAQMD suggested daily threshold criteria. Under this alternative, the resulting retail shopping center is projected to generate substantially greater volumes of peak hour and daily vehicle trips that the proposed residential and commercial development. Notwithstanding the elimination of 202 dwelling units, the doubling of the square footage of on-site commercial uses would result in a net increase in the number of peak hour and daily vehicle trips generated under this alternative. Based on that increase in alternative -related. traffic, operational air quality impacts would be projected to remain significant. (d) With regards to cumulative air quality impacts, related project activities, in combination with this alternative's construction and operation, would incrementally contribute to regional air emissions within the SCAB. Under the SCAQMD's recommended methodology, development activities that generate significant air quality impacts are also assumed to generate significant cumulative air quality impacts. Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives: The City Council finds that the "Community Commercial" alternative would not substantially meet the stated project objectives in that it would not provide for the requisite percentage of residential development. Feasibility: Excluding economic considerations which are not addressed in the FEIR, the City Council finds that the "Community Commercial" alternative is feasible. 53 7.4 Alternative No. 4 ("Low -Density Residential" Alternative) Project Description: The eastern portion of the project site is zoned "Low Density Residential (R-1-7,500)" on the City's Official Zoning Map. This alternative is predicated upon the geographic expansion of the "Low Density Residential (RL)" zoning designation within the estimated developable area of the project site (20.2 net acres) at a density of 3 dwelling units per acre. Under this alternative, a total of about 60 single-family detached and/or single-family attached units would be developed on the project site. Under this alternative, the alternative -specific grading plan could closely replicate that associated with the SDSP. Comp_ arison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Project: The City Council finds that the "Low -Density Residential" alternative is "environmentally superior" to the proposed project since it would result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of those significant operational air quality impacts associated with the proposed project. Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0 (Alternatives Analysis) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) With regards to construction air quality impacts, under the proposed project, combined emissions or ROG were estimated at 136.02 pounds/day. Since this value exceeds the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, construction impacts would be deemed to be significant. Under this alternative, on-site development activities may be substantially decreased (60 dwelling units compared to 153,985 square feet of commercial use and 202 dwelling units). However, because mass grading of the project site would be required to create building pads and an on-site circulation system, maximum daily construction activities would be anticipated to be similar. As a result, construction air quality impacts would be assumed to be similar to those associated with the proposed project and would, therefore, remain significant. (c) With regards to operational air quality impacts, the proposed project is projected to create ROG, NOx, and CO emissions in excess of the SCAQMD suggested daily threshold criteria. Residential projects generate substantially lower volumes of peak hour and daily vehicle trips that comparably sized retail shopping center projects. Similarly, although some differences exist based on the type of residential development proposed, projects with fewer dwelling units can be assumed to generate a lesser number of peak hour and daily vehicle trips that projects with a greater number of dwelling units. As a result, under this alternative, mobile source emissions would be substantially reduced. For the purpose of this alternatives analysis, it is assumed that operational air quality impacts would be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (d) With regards to cumulative air quality impacts, related project activities, in combination with this alternative's construction and operation would incrementally contribute to regional air emissions within the SCAB. Under the SCAQMD's recommended methodology, development activities that generate significant air quality impacts are also assumed to generate significant cumulative air quality impacts. 54 Effectiveness in Meeting Project Obiectives: The City Council finds that the "Low - Density Residential" alternative would not substantially meet the stated project objectives in that it would not provide for the requisite percentage of commercial development. Moreover, as a result of Diamond Bar's very limited land inventory, a low density alternative would not only cause the City to lose substantial ground in fulfilling its housing growth need on a site properly suited for higher density housing, but it would increase the burden on other available and potentially available (i.e. those which need to be rezoned during the current Housing Element period) sites to reach the City's RHNA targets. Feasibility: Excluding economic considerations which are not addressed in the FEIR, the City Council finds that the "Low -Density Residential" alternative is feasible. 7.5 Alternative No. 5 ("High -Density Residential" Alternative) Proiect Description: Under this alternative, the project site would be developed for residential use in accordance with the "High Density Residential" (RH)" standards outlined in Chapter 22.08 (Residential Zoning Districts) of the Municipal Code. As specified, the maximum allowable density in this district is 20 dwelling units per acre. Based on the estimated net acreage (20.2 net acres), a total of approximately 404 dwelling units could be constructed on the property. Under this alternative, the alternative -specific grading plan could.closely replicate that associated with the SDSP. Comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Project: The City Council finds that the "High -Density Residential" alternative is "environmentally superior" to the proposed project since it would result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of those significant operational air quality impacts associated with the proposed project. Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0 (Alternatives Analysis) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) As stipulated in Section 22.22.040 (Density) of the Municipal Code, the maximum number of units that may be allowed on a given parcel subject to the hillside management ordinance is calculated in compliance with specified requirements. In accordance with the City's hillside management ordinance, a maximum of 524 dwelling units can be constructed within the project area. The number of dwelling units that would be constructed under this alternative (404 units) is less than the number allowable under the City's hillside management ordinance. (c) Implementation of this alternative will result in the generation of approximately 2,368 daily vehicle trips during a typical weekday,. including 178 AM peak -hour trips and 210 PM peak -hour trips. In comparison, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 9,276 daily two-way vehicle trips, including 272 trips during the weekday AM and 650 trips during the PM peak hours. (d) With regards to construction air quality impacts, under the proposed project, combined emissions or ROG were estimated at 136.02 pounds/day. Since this value exceeds the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, construction impacts would be deemed to be significant. Under this alternative,, on-site development activities would consist of 404 attached dwelling units, compared to 55 153,985 square feet of neighborhood -serving commercial use and 202 dwelling units. Because mass grading of the project site would be required to create building pads and an on-site circulation system, maximum daily construction activities would be anticipated to be similar. As a result, construction -term air . quality impacts would be assumed to be similar to those associated with the proposed project and would, therefore, remain significant. (e) With regards to operational air quality impacts, the proposed project is projected to create ROG, NOx, and CO emissions in excess of the SCAQMD suggested daily threshold criteria. Because this alternative would generate substantially lower volumes of peak hour and daily vehicle trips that associated with the proposed project, mobile source emissions would be substantially reduced. For the purpose of this alternatives analysis, it is assumed that operational air quality impacts would be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (f) With regards to cumulative air quality impacts, related project activities, in combination with this alternative's construction and operation would incrementally contribute to regional air emissions within the SCAB. Under the SCAQMD's recommended methodology, development activities that generate significant air quality impacts are also assumed to generate significant cumulative air quality impacts. Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives: ' The City Council finds that the "High - Density Residential" alternative would not substantially meet the stated project objectives in that it would not provide for the requisite percentage of commercial development. Feasibility: Excluding economic considerations which are not addressed in the FEIR, the City Council finds that the "High -Density Residential" alternative is feasible. 8.0 PROJECT BENEFITS The City Council finds the proposed project would result in a number of identifiable community benefits. Those benefits include, but may not be limited to: (1) Adoption of the proposed SDSP will serve to define the types of permitted and conditionally permitted land uses that the City Council believes to be appropriate for the project site and for the project setting, define reasonable limits to the type, intensity, and density of those uses, and establish the design and development standards for those uses. (2) Adoption of the proposed SDSP will serve as a valuable regulatory tool for the systematic implementation of the City's General Plan. (3) Adoption of the proposed SDSP will impose reasonable development controls and standards designed to ensure the integrated development of the project site. (4) The proposed project will facilitate the District's efforts to sell surplus District Property by providing a subsequent purchaser reasonable certainty as to the type, intensity, and general configuration of allowable on-site land uses. (5) Adoption of the proposed SDSP will optimize the benefits of the District sale of surplus District property for the benefit of its constituents and its educational mission. (6) The proposed project will result in the production of 202 new housing units within the City, thus helping the City respond to the identified housing demand outlined in the current "Regional Housing Needs Assessment" (RHNA). 56 (7) The construction and sale of attached residential condominium units present future homebuyers with additional purchase options and price variations allowing homebuyers to better match housing choices with household needs and demands. (8) The creation of a mixed-use development will promote the attainment or regional jobs -to - housing ratio objectives established by regional governmental entities and produce corresponding environmental benefits. (9) Project approval will allow for the productive use of an underutilized property in the City's General Plan, convert a tax-exempt property to a private use, and introduce a land use that will generate sales and other taxes for the benefit of the City and its constituents. (10) Improvements to the Diamond. Bar Boulevard/Brea Canyon Road intersection will improve traffic flow in and through that intersection. (11) Payment of school impact, park, and traffic impact fees and other exactions will facilitate the ability of the City and other agencies to undertake improvements to specific public facilities. (12) Adoption of the SDSP will further the intent of SB 375 by facilitating horizontal mixed use with pedestrian connections between the residential and commercial components. Without transit infrastructure (other than bus routes), mixed use developments can play a greater role in local efforts to reduce VMT. 9.0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS As described above, the proposed project would produce significant unavoidable adverse impact in the following three topical areas: (1) Air Quality (Construction Impact); (2) Air Quality (Operational Impact): and (3) Air Quality (Cumulative Impact). Each of those identified significant environmental effects will continue to manifest as significant impacts notwithstanding the City Council's adoption or likely adoption of those mitigation measures identified in the FEIR. In order to determine whether the proposed project's potential environmental impacts are .acceptably overridden by the project's anticipated benefits, Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires the City to balance the potential benefits of the proposed project against the project's potential unavoidable significant environmental impacts. The City Council finds that the previously stated benefits outweigh the significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project. Each of the separate and distinct benefits of the proposed project is determined to be, in themselves and independently of any other identified benefit, a basis for overriding all unavoidable environmental impacts, as identified in these Findings. The City Council has identified economic and social benefits and important public policy objectives that will result from implementation of the proposed project. The City Council has sought to balance these substantial economic and social benefits against the significant unavoidable adverse environmental effects of the proposed project. Given the substantial social and economic benefits that will accrue to the City, to the District, and to the region from the implementation of the proposed project, the City Council finds that the proposed project's identified benefits override the project's identified significant environmental impacts. 57 "Site W Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 r,r­_ A Atm nnn NllTnl7imez. PRCIGRAM June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES -16 Executive Summary M UKAF I IVII 1 ItaH I [VIM r%"F-w- uvv r..... . • - -- - , Mitigation Measure.' al Resources tional Features. In order to reduce impacts to United States Army Corps of Engineers and Regional FWateruality Control Board (ACOE/RWQCB) and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdictional =: Compliance: Verification Lmit! gation Milestone . No waters, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the discretionary and approval as may be required from the Community Issuance of 5-1 Community Development Director, receipt of any permits ACOE, RWQCB, and CDFG and commit to the provision of compensatory jurisdictional resources meeting or Development Director Grading Permits exceeding the following minimal standards: (1) the on-site and/or off-site replacement of ACOEIRWQCB off-site replacement of CDFG jurisdictional jurisdictional waters and wetlands at a 2:1 ratio; (2) the on-site and/or streambed and associated riparian habitat at a 2:1 ratio; and (3) the incorporation of design features into the proposed project's design and development. Traffic and Circulation Prior to the recordation of the final tract map, the Applicant shall provide, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, impact analysis or provide a "fair -share" contribution toward the intersection improvements identified in the traffic the cost of the improvements to the following intersections: (1) Brea Canyon Road (W) at Pathfinder Road; (2) Ci FJ 6 1 Diamond Bar Boulevard at Pathfinder Road; (3) Brea Canyon Road at Cold Spring Lane; (4) Diamond Bar Brea Canyon Cutoff (6) SR -57 SB Ramps at BreaCanyon Engineer Boulevard at Cold Spring Lane; (5) Pathfinder Road at Cutoff Road; (7) SR -57 NS Ramps at Brea Canyon Cutoff/Diamond Bar Boulevard; (8) Brea Canyon Colima Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff. Road at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (9) Cherrydale Drive at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (10) Brea Canyon Road atSilver Bullet Drive; (11) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Grand Avenue; and (12) The final site plan shall include and accommodate those traffic measures, improvements, and such other be identified by the City Engineer to ensure the safe and efficient City Engineer Approval 6-2 pertinent factors and/or facilities as may movement of project -related traffic. Air Quality All non-residential paints shall contain no more than 0.22 pound/gallon (100 gram/liter) of volafile organic Community Building Permit Issuance 7 1 compound (VOC). The Applicant shall abide by any other air pollution reduction measures as may be approved by the City of Development Director Building Permit Issuance 7 2 Diamond Bar and/or by the South Coast Air Quality Management District Traffic lane improvements and signalization, as outlined in the traffic study, shall be implemented and will created in the project area. City Building Permit Issuance 7 3 Building Permit Issuance generally improve local traffic flow, thereby reducing emissions Engineer To encourage the use of mass transportation, the Applicant shall place bus stop shelters at any bus stops 7 4 situated or to be situated along any site frontage routes if not already so equipped. June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES -16 Executive Summary M "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 (Continued) SPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM L) KAt- I IV] TIGA I ION R No. Mitigation Measure ._ ": - Compliance •.-Verifcat ion, f�litigation. Milestone F7-5 Air Quality (Continued) To encourage the use of localized commercial facilities and reduce the need for vehicle travel, the Applicant shall include both bike lanes (where feasible) and bike paths between the residential and commercial development areas. Additionally, the Applicant shall provide sidewalks and walking paths to the proposed commercial areas. The Applicant shall specify the installation of energy efficient lighting, air conditioning, water heaters, and ' appliances for all residential and commercial uses. Cid, Engineer CRY Engineer Final Tract Map Recordation Building Permit Issuance 7-6 7-7 The Applicant shall specify the installation of energy efficient street lighting. Noise In accordance with the Development Code, construction shall be restricted to between the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM on weekdays and Saturdays. No construction shall occur at any time on Sundays or on federal holidays. These days and hours shall also apply any servicing of equipment and to the delivery of materials to or from the site. All construction equipment shall be properly maintained and tuned to minimize noise emissions. All equipment shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers, air intake silencers, and engine shrouds no less effective than originally equipped. The construction contractor shall place temporary noise barriers along the site perimeter when doing any work within 100 feet of any residential units: Such barriers shall attempt to block the line of sight between the residents and construction equipment. . The construction contractor shall specify the use of electric stationary equipment (e.g., compressors) that can operate off the power grid where feasible. Where infeasible, stationary noise sources (e.g., generators and compressors) shall be located as far from residential receptor locations as is feasible. Construction shall be subject to any and all provisions set forth by the City of Diamond Bar Planning Department. No residential units shall be located within 830 feet of the SR -57 Freeway's nearest travel lane unless additional sound attention is provided to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Building 9 inspector Construction Term 8 1 Building Inspector Construction Term B-2 IBsilding ConfterucUon rm 8-3 Building Inspector Construction Term 8-4 City Engineer Planning Manager Building Permit Issuance Building Permit Issuance 8-5 8-6 Community Development Director Final Tract Map Recordation 8-7 Building Permit Issuance 8-B No commercial units shall be located within 60 feet of the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard. June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES -17 Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES-2 (Continued) DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM Compliance: ` Mitigation:Measure Verification Noise (Continued) Community No residential units shall be located within 130 feet of the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard unless additional' Development ;lMlItigation stone No Final Tract Map Recordation 8-9 sound attention is provided to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Director Cultural Resources Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the Applicant and Community by the City to monitor all vegetation removal and ground disturbance to a depth of three feet within the Development Issuance of approved following portions of the study area: (1) the boundary of SD-Cultural-1; (2) the open valley floor adjacent to SD- Director Cultural-1; (3) the riparian areas that were not previously surveyed due to dense vegetation cover. The and Grading Permits 11-1 and archaeologist will determine if additional monitoring below the depth of three feet is warranted based on soil and City of archaeological materials. No archaeological monitoring is required Engineer bedrock conditions and presencelabsence for ground disturbing activities outside of these monitor areas. If cultural resources are identified during monitoring of the ground disturbing activities, the archaeologist shall be in the vicinity of those resources in order allowed to temporarily divert or redirect grading or excavation activities to make an evaluation of the find and determine appropriate treatment. Treatment will include the goals of historic and archaeological resources. All cultural preservation where practicable and public interpretation of will be documented on California Department of Parks and Recreation Site Forms to be filed resources recovered with the CHRIS-SCCIC. The archaeologist shall prepare a final report about the monitoring to be filed with the System South Central Coastal Information Applicant, the City, and the California Historical Resources Information ilector Center the California State University Fullerton (CHRIS-SCCIC), as required by the California Office of Historic Ins Construction Term 11-2 at Preservation. The report shall include documentation and interpretation resources recovered, if any. P SD-Cultural-1 with respect to the California Register of Interpretation will include full evaluation of the eligibility of Historic Places and CEQA. The report shall also include all specialists' reports as appendices. The City shall are identified designate repositories in the event that significant resources are recovered. If cultural resources during disturbing activities that occur outside the designated monitoring area, ground disturbing activities by the ground shall be temporarily redirected away from the vicinity of the find until the retained archaeologist is notified to the immediate treatment of the find until a Applicant. The archaeologist shall coordinate with the Applicant as proper site visit and evaluation is made by the archaeologist. If human remains are encountered unexpectedly during construction excavation and grading activities, Health disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Building Construction 11-3 made Code. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the County Coroner has 24 hours to Inspector The NAHC will then identify the person(s) Term notify the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). thought to be the Most Likely Descendent of the deceased Native American, who will then help determine what course of action should be taken in dealing with the remains. June 2009 Draft Environmental impact Report Page ES-18 Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Pian City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 (Continued) �oncr nnrrer_-n Tinny oC0nRT1A1rA AND MONITORING PROGRAM Draft Environmental Impact Report June 2009 Page ES -19 Executive Summary ompliance =Mitigation No, .Mitigation Measure:. Verification. Milestone. Cultural Resources (Continued) Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified paleontologist meeting the qualifications established by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontologists shall be retained by the Applicant and approved by the City to develop and Community Issuance of 11-4 implement a paleontological monitoring plan. Development of the monitoring plan shall include a site visit by the Development Grading Permits paleontologist prior to initiation of project development in order to determine or delineate sensitive areas. The Director paleontologist may also perform collections of fossils from the surface and near -surface. The paleontologist shall attend a pre -grade meeting in order to become familiar with the proposed depths and City Issuance of Grading 11-5 patterns of grading of the study area... Engineer Permits The paleontologist shall establish a curation agreement with an accredited facility prior to grading permit City Issuance of Grading 11-6 issuance. Engineer En Permits A paleontological monitor, supervised by the paleontologist, shall monitor all excavations in the Puente Formation to into the Puente Formation. If fossils are found during ground -disturbing Building Construction 11-7. or excavations anticipated extend activities, the paleontological monitor shall be empowered to halt the ground -disturbing activities within 25 feet of Inspector Term the find in order to allow evaluation of the find and determination of appropriate treatment. The paleontologist shall prepare a final report on the monitoring. If fossils were identified, the report shall contain Community Grading 11-8 an appropriate description of the fossils, treatment, and curation. A copy of the report shall be filed with the City Development Sign -Off and the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County and shall accompany any curated fossils. Director Aesthetics Pole -mounted orwall-mounted luminaires installed for the purpose of illuminating commercial areas, parking lots, Community Building Permit 12-1 roadways, and driveways shall conform to appropriate lighting standards and demonstrate that light trespass not foot measured at the project boundaries abutting any existing residential use. Development Issuance exceed 0.5 horizontal candle, as These standards shall'not be applied to any adjoining public streets or other non -light-sensitive land uses. Director Draft Environmental Impact Report June 2009 Page ES -19 Executive Summary CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIA MOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007-03 AND ZONE CHANGE NO. 2007-04 FOR PROPERY COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 30.36 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BREA CANYON ROAD AND DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBERS 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002 -902, 8714- 002-903 and 8714-015-001). A. RECITALS On July 1, 2007, the property owner/co-applica nt, Walnut Valley School District, and property owner/co-applica nt/lead agency, City of Diamond Bar, executed a Memorandum of Understanding whereby the parties agreed to collaborate in the planning of the future land use for the approximately 30.36 -acre parcel property located atth esoutheast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard, City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, California so that both parties may each advance their respective objectives forthe disposition ofthe property; The following approvals are requested of the City Council: (a) General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C) to Specific Plan (SP); (b) Zone Change No. 2007-04 to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential (RL), Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM), and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan; (c) Specific Plan No. 2007-01 to adopt the Site D Speci fic Plan for the approximately 30.36 acre site to facilitate the development of a maximum of 202 residential; 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial; and approximately 10.16 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights-of-way; (d) Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes; and (e) Environmental Impact Report 2007-02 to certify the Final EIR, which provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the Specific Plan area. In accordance to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15168 et seq., an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the project which found that the proposed project may have remaining significant impacts that requires adoption of"Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations." Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15090, the EIR is being reviewed concu rrently with the approval of the General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 and Zone Change No. 2007-04 and must be certified by the City Council before project approval; In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15090 through 15093, a resolution certifying the EIR, adopting of a mitigation reporting and monitoring program, and adopting "Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations" for the project is being reviewed by the City Council concurrently with this resolution; The approval of Specific Plan No. 2007-01 (Site D Specific Plan) that is being reviewed concurrently with this project, includes a land use plan that divides the property into three sub -planning areas (Residential, Commercial, and Open Space/Circulatio n) and includes standards and guidelines for future development of the specific plan site; Notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the SaIL Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on June 4, 2010. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site and public notices were posted at the City's designated community posting sites. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the project site was posted with a display board and the notice was posted at three other locatio ns within the project vicinity; On April 13, 2010, the Planning Commission ofthe City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all interested individuals, closed the public hearing, and continued the matter to May 11, 2010; On April 27 and May 11, 2010, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar continued and concluded the deliberations . At that time, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 and Zone Change No. 2007-04 for property comprised of approximately 30.36 acre located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar, California. 2 GPA No. 2007-03 and ZC No. 2007-04— CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX 9. On June 15, 2010, the City Council ofthe City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the project. 10. The City Council has determined that the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change represents a consistent, logical, appropriate and rational land use designation and implementing tool that furthers the goals and objectives of the City General Plan; and 11. The documents and materials constituting the administrative record ofthe proceedings upon which the City's decision is based are located at the City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, Planning Division, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA91765. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct; 2. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the City Council hereby finds as follows: a. Approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 for the Site D Specific Plan based on the following finding, as required by Section 22.70.050 of the Municipal Code and in conformance with California Government Code Section 65358: The amendment to the General Plan is internally consistent with the adopted goals and policies of the City and is in the public interest. General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 will permit residential and commercial, rather than public facility, in an area adjacent to an existing residential and commercial development. The General Plan Amendment promotes the following: • Land Use Element Vision Statement states: It is the overall goal of the land use element to ensure that the land uses an d development decisions of Diamond Bar maintain and enh ance the quality of life for its residents. Goal 1 states: Consistent with the Vision Statement, maintain a mix of land uses which enhance the quality of life of Diamond Bar residents, providing a balance of development and preservation of significant open space areas to assure both economic viability and retention of distinctive natural features of the community. The Site D Specific Plan is a mixed use development that provides quality higher -density residential housing within 3 GPA No. 2007-03 and ZC No. 2007-04— CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX proximity to a neighborhood -ret ail center, and open space. The Site D Specific Plan also incorporates physical design elements that reflect the unique topographical characteristics of Diamond Bar through the creation of a landform grading design that emulates natural topographic contours and undulations, and incorporates native woodland species indigenous to the site. Land Use Element — Goal 2 states: Manage land use with respect to the location, density and intensity, and quality of development. Maintain consistency with the capabilities of the City and special districts to provide essential services which achieve sustainable use of environment and manmade resources. The Site D Specific Plan project is located at the corner of a major and a secondary arterial in the Diamond Bar area identified by the City's General Plan as a prime location for mixed-use development. This Specific Plan document will guide the build -out of Site Din a manner which isconsisten twith City and State policies and standards and assures that the project is developed in a coordinated manner. • Land Use Element - Goal 3 states: Maintain recogniti on within Diamond Bar and the surrounding regions as being a community with a well planned and aesthetically pleasing physical environment. The Site D Specific Plan is consistent with the needs of the Diamond Bar community by offering housing and employment opportunities in an integrated, aesthetically pleasing, mixed-use development. Additionally, the commercial -retail facilities will provide service to both residents of the City of Diamo nd Bar and surrounding regions. • Land Use Element — Goal 4 states: Encourage long -ter m and regional perspectives in local land use decisions, but not at the expense ofthe quality oflife for Diamond Barresidents. The Site D Specific Plan sets the precedent for a new and vibrant mixed-use development in the City of Diamond Bar. Interweaving higher -density residential housing with a centrally located commercial-retai I center, and open space, will al low Site D to be a quality mixed-use development that will positively contribute to the City of Diamond Bar. Housing Element Vision Statement states: It is the overall goal of the housing plan that there is adequate housing in the City, 4 GPA No. 2007-03 and ZC No. 2007-04— CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX both in quality and quantity, to provide appropriate shelter for all without discrimination. Goal 1 states: Consistent with the Vision Statement, preserve and conserve the existing housing stock and maintain property values and residents' quality of life. The residential component of the Site DSpecific Plan proposes up to 202 high-quality residential units to help fulfill Diamond Bar's portion of the region's housing needs. The criteria for residential development incorporate an internal circulation system that is not reliant on those of the surrounding residential neighborhoods, and ensure that new residential community will coexist harmoniously with the adjoining, established neighborhoods. Housing Element — Goal 2 states: Provide opportunities for development of suitable housing to meet the diverse needs of existing and future residents. The higher -density residential housing of Site D project area meets the fiscal and culturally diverse needs of both future and existing City of Diamond Bar residents by offering an alternative to the predominantly detached single-family residential market largely found in the City of Diamond Bar. Housing Element — Goal 5 states: Encourage equal and fair housing opportunities for all economic segment of the community. The Site D Specific Plan will provide higher -density residential uses in the form of attached housing, which can accommodate various economic segments ofthe Diamond Bar community and its residents by supporting the variation in character of the Diamond Bar housing stock. Resource Management Element Vision Statement states: It is the overall goal of the resource management element to provide and maintain adequate open spaces in the City to serve the diverse recreational needs of its residents, while fostering the wise use of limited natural resources. Goal 1 states: Create and maintain an open space system which will preserve scenic beauty, protect important biological resources, provide open space for outdoor recreation and the enjoyment of nature, conserve natural resources, and protect public health and safety. The Site D Specific Plan preserves approximately 8.0 acres of 30.36 acres as open space, which includes vegetated slopes, 5 GPA No. 2007-03 and ZC No. 2007-04— CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX residential amenities, and pedestrian pathways Public Health and Safety Element Vision Statement states: It is the overall goal of the plan to provide a safe and healthy environment for the residents of Diamond Bar. Goal 1 states: Create a secure public environment which minimizes potential loss of life and property damage, as well as social, econ omic, or environmental disruption resulting from natural and manmade disasters. The Site D Specific Plan will provide a safe and secure environment for City residents by promoting the policies and ideals particular to the City of Diamond Bar. Specific standards are included in the Site D Specific Plan regulating development within the project area, which will minimize potentia I loss of life and property damage. Additionally, each stage ofdevelo pment permitted by this Specific Plan will adequately provide vehicular access, public facilities, and infrastructure for public health and safety. Circulation Element Vision Statement states: It is the overall goal of the plan to provide a safe, adequate and environmentally sensitive transportation system to meet the circulation need s of the citizens of Diamond Bar. Goal 1 states: Enhance the environment of the City's street network. Work toward improving the problems presented by intrusion of regionally oriented commuter traffic through the City and into residential neighborhoods. Consider programs to reinforce the regional transportation and circulation system to adequately accommodate regional needs. The Site D Specific Plan's improvement of interior roadways and circulation will ensure safe, direct, and convenient vehicular and pedestrian access to and through the project's various land uses. Because the site is bordered by existing and improved roadways (Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road), no major exterior roadway modifications will be developed by this Specific Plan. To the extent possible, existing lane configurations and right-of-way improvements on exterior project roadways will be retained. However, minor landscape and parkway improvements shall be provided along these roadways as well as additional strategically placed entrances, which will make Site Dproject area an easily accessible location for residents of the City of Diamond Bar. 6 GPA No. 2007-03 and ZC No. 2007-04— CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX • Circulation Element — Goal 2 states: Provide a balanced transportation system for the safe and efficient movement of people, goods, and services through the City. The Site D Specific Plan will contain a strong internal circulation network that will serve to provide direct and efficient access to the site. While the automobile will bethe predomin ant form of travel, the Site D Specific Plan recognizes the importance of alternative modes of transportation. A convenient and easily accessible transit system becomes an essential element of a mixed-use development such as Site D. Bus stops are located adjacent to Site D and facilitate alternative modes of transportation. Transit is expected to be provided by the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA), Foothill Transit, and the City's fixed -route transportation system. • Circulation Element — Goal 3 states: Maintain an ad equate level of service on area roadways. The Environmental Impact Report associated with the development of the Site DSpecific Plan includes an an alysis of project area roadways and existing and build -out levels of service. Appropriate mitigation measures shall be provided if area roadways are found to be operating under the required level of service as a result of the Site D development. • Circulation Element — Goal 4 states: Provide or regulate the provision of the supply of parking to meeting the needs for both residents and commercial businesses. The Site D Specific Plan mixed-use development will be consistent with Chapter 22.30, Off -Street Parking of th e Diamond Bar Municipal Code. • Public Services and Facilities Element Vision Statemen tstates: It is the overall goal of the plan that the City acquire and maintain adequate resources to meet the needs of its resident. Goal 1 states: Provide adequate infrastructure facilities and public services to support development and planned growth. Public services and utilities, including water, sewer, g s, electricity, telephone, and cable will be extended into the Specific Plan area to support the Site D development. • Public Services and Facilities Element — Goal 2 states: Achieve a fiscally solvent, financially stable community. 7 GPA No. 2007-03 and ZC No. 2007-04— CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX The Site D Specific Plan area will contain a high -qua lity, mixed- use development, composed of commercial-retai I, higher - density residential, and open space land uses. The provision of residential uses on-site creates an immediate market for retail and service uses, thereby enhancing the potential for establishing a successful mixed-use master planned development. Additionally, Site D Specific Plan will provide housing and job opportunities to the City of Diamond Bar residents, which will generate property and sales taxes that can beused for improvement ofpublic services and facilities. Due to the project's convenient location and site planning, Site D presents an economically viable plan that is good for the City of Diamond Bar and its residents. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with all of these goals. Therefore, the General Plan Amendment is consistent with City policies and is in the public interest ; Approval of Zone Change No. 2007-04 for the Site D Specific Plan based on the following finding, as required by Section 22.70.050 of the Municipal Code and in conformance with California Government Code Sections 65853 and 65860: The amendment to the Zoning Map is internally consisten twith the General Plan and the adopted goals and policies of the City. The Zoning Map does not presently reflect the General Plan designation for the property. Zone Change No. 2007-04 will place the City's Zoning Map in conformance with the General Plan by designating the Property as SP (Specific Plan), with sub -areas corresp onding to those in the Site D Specific Plan. The existing approx imate 30.36 acres located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard (Assessors Parcel Numbers 8714-002- 900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-903, and 8714-015- 001) shall have a zoning designation of SP —Specific Plan. The City Council shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resoluti on, by certified mail, to: Walnut Valley Unified School District, 880 South Lemon Avenue, Walnut, CA 91789. 8 GPA No. 2007-03 and ZC No. 2007-04— CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS XX" DAY OF XXXX 2010, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. By: Carol Herrera, Mayor I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, ata regular meeting of the City Council held on the XXth day of XXXX, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Council Member: NOES: Council Member: ABSENT: Council Member: ABSTAIN: Council Member: Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar 9 GPA No. 2007-03 and ZC No. 2007-04— CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX Attachment 3 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 70687 FOR SUBDIVISION OF 30.36 ACRES SITE FOR RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PURPOSES WITH 202 -UNIT RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 153,985 GROSS SQ. FT. OF COMMERCIAL USE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BREA CANYON ROAD AND DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA (APN 8714- 002-900, 8714-002-903, and 8714-045-001). A. RECITALS On July 1, 2007, the property owner/co-applicant, Walnut Valley School District, and property owner/co-applicant/lead agency, City of Diamond Bar, executed a Memorandum of Understanding whereby the parties agreed to collaborate in the planning of the future land use for the approximately 30.36 -acre parcel property located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, California so that both parties may each advance their respective objectives for the disposition of the property; 2. The Project is being reviewed by the City Council concurrently with General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03, Zone Change No. 2007-04, and Environmental Impact Report No. 2007-02 (SCH No. 2008021014); 3. In accordance to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15168 et seq., an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the project which found that the proposed project may have remaining significant impacts that requires adoption of "Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations." Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15090, the EIR is being reviewed concurrently with the approval of the General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 and Zone Change No. 2007-04 and must be certified by the City Council before project approval; 4. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15090 through 15093, a resolution certifying the EIR, adopting a mitigation reporting and monitoring program, and adopting "Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations" for the project is being reviewed by the City Council concurrently with this resolution; 5. The following approvals are requested of the City Council: (a) General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C) to Specific Plan (SP); (b) Zone Change No. 2007-04 to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential (RL), Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM), and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan; (c) Specific Plan No. 2007-01 to adopt the Site D Specific Plan for the approximately 30.36 acre site to facilitate the development of a maximum of 202 residential; 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial; and approximately 10.16 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights- of-way; (d) Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other right-of-way for utility and other purposes; and (e) Environmental Impact Report 2007-02 to certify the Final EIR, which provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the Specific Plan area. 6. Notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on June 4, 2010. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 - foot radius of the project site and public notices were posted at the City's designated community posting sites. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the project site was posted with a display board and the notice was posted at three other locations within the project vicinity; 7. On April 13, 2010, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all interested individuals, closed the public hearing, and continued the matter to May 11, 2010; and 8. On April 27 and May 11, 2010, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar continued and concluded the deliberations. At that time, the Planning Commission recommended that City Council approve Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 and Specific Plan No. 2007-01 for Subdivision of 30.36 acre site for residential and commercial purposes and adopt the Site D Specific Plan for development of the site with 202 residential units and 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial use. 9. On June 15, 2010, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the project. 10. The documents and materials constituting the administrative record of the proceedings upon which the City's decision is based are located at the City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, Planning Division, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 2 TTM No. 70687—CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct; In accordance to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15168 et seq., an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the project which found that the proposed project may have remaining significant impacts that requires adoption of "Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations." Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15090, the EIR is being reviewed concurrently with the approval of the General Plan Amendment No, 2007-03 and Zone Change No. 2007-04 and must be certified by the City Council before project approval; 3. The City Council hereby specifically finds and determines that, having considered the record as a whole including the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the application, there is no evidence before this City Council that the project proposed herein will have the potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, this City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5(d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations;. 4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the City Council hereby finds as follows: a. The project is to allow vacant land comprised of approximately 30.36 acres. located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard (Assessors Parcel Number 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-903 and 8714-015-001) with 202 residential dwelling units; 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial use; and approximately 10.16 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights-of-way; b. The current General Plan land use designations for the site include Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C). General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 being considered concurrently with this application proposes to change the land use designation for the site to Specific Plan. With approval of the General Plan Amendment, the Application will be consistent with the General Plan land use designation; C. The project site is within the Low Density Residential (RL), Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM), and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1). Zone Change No. 2007-04 is being reviewed concurrently with the Application that requests that the City Council approve the zone change from the current zoning to Specific Plan for General Plan compliance; d. The project site is generally surrounded by single-family homes to the north, south, and west, and a gas station and professional office buildings to the east. The site is bordered on the north by Diamond Bar TTM No. 70687—CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX Boulevard, and Brea Canyon Road to the west. The Brea Canyon Flood Control Channel runs roughly parallel to Brea Canyon Road and cuts through the western portion of the property. e. The application involves a request for the following: Subdivision of an approximately 30.36 acre property for development of the site with 202 residential dwelling units; 153,985 gross sq, ft. of commercial use; and approximately 10.16 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights- of-way. Tentative Map Findings: Pursuant to Subdivision Code Section 21.20.080 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance, the City Council makes the following findings: The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan; The proposed project involves the subdivision of the site with 202 residential units; 153,985 gross sq. ft, of commercial use; and approximately 10. 16 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights - of -ways. The General Plan land use designations for the site include Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C). General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 being considered concurrently with this application proposes to change the land use designation for the site to Specific Plan. With approval of the General Plan Amendment, the Application will be consistent with the General Plan land use designation. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the concurrently proposed Site D Specific Plan document, as conditioned. g. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development; The proposed subdivision will be consistent with the amended General Plan land use designation that is being considered concurrently with the application. The proposed land use designation will be Specific Plan that will allow for the development of 202 residential dwelling units; 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial use; and approximately 10. 16 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights-of-way. The buildings will have minimum setbacks requiring 15 feet from Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road, 85 feet from the southerly property line (which abut residential), and 30 feet from the easterly edge. Visual analysis was performed to understand how the building massing of both commercial and residential would look from the street. This analysis led the City to expand some of the building setbacks. Additionally, the EIR prepared for TTM No. 70687 reviewed the map's suitability for the project site, access, circulation, grading, aesthetics, land use, etc. The review concluded that the proposed subdivision would not have a significant effect on the environment and/or with the 4 TTM No. 70687— CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX incorporation of mitigation measures would be reduced to a level of less than significant. h. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15165 et seq., and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the application and found that the proposed project may have remaining significant impact that requires the adoption of `Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations." Per CEQA Guidelines Sections 15090, the EIR is being reviewed concurrently with the Application and will be certified by the City Council before Application approval. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not cause serious public health or safety problems; The proposed subdivision will create three elevated building pads (one commercial and two residential). The grading will be constructed, operated, and maintained in accordance with the recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation to assure that geotechnical stability is maintained or increased. Detailed drainage and hydrology studies will be completed, including the potential for debris flows, and the proposed conditions and mitigation measures will likely prevent any significant increases in erosion and flood hazards. The development will also have traffic improvements to mitigate existing plus project traffic conditions and cumulative traffic impacts. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. The site does not have any access easements on-site. There is a flood control channel right-of-way, which may be utilized as part of the project's development plan. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the future developer shall obtain all requisite permits and approvals from the L.A. County Department of Public Works — Flood Control District allowing for the overbuilding of the Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel and shall provide the City Engineer with documentation, acceptable to the City Engineer, demonstrating County approval and authorization, including a complete list of all permit requirements that may be associated therewith. k. The discharge of sewage from the proposed subdivision into the community sewer system would not result in violation of existing requirements prescribed by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board; TTM No. 70667—CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX The proposed subdivision has been analyzed under the Environmental Impact Report and was not found to violate any requirement of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. To reduce water quality impacts to a level less than significant, the proposed subdivision is required to comply with mitigation measures that include compliance with the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Federal Clean Water Act, and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program, implementing construction -related Best Management Practices (BMP's) and Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) criteria. With project design features related to the storm drain system, conditions of approval and mitigation measures, potentially significant water quality impacts would be reduced to a levels less than significant. A preliminary soils report or geologic hazard report does not indicate adverse soil or geologic conditions; and The grading will be constructed, operated, and maintained in accordance with the recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation to assure that geotechnical stability is maintained or increased. M. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable provisions of the City's subdivision ordinance, the development code, and the subdivision map act. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the concurrently proposed Site D Specific Plan and will be required to comply with the City's subdivision ordinance, subdivision map act, and applicable development code. 5. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the City Council hereby finds and approves Tentative Tract Map No. 70687, subject to the following conditions, the attached Conditions of Approval and the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program attached herein as Exhibits A and B and hereby incorporated by reference: a. GENERAL This approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 shall be null and void and of no effect unless the EIR (SCH #2008021014) is certified, the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program, Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations are adopted, and General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 and Zone Change No. 2007-04 are approved; 2. The development shall comply with the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program for EIR (SCH #2008021014). A copy is attached hereto and referenced herein as Exhibits A and B; and TTM No. 70687— CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX 3. The development shall comply with the Conditions of Approval/Performance Standards in the Site D Specific Plan. A copy is attached hereto and referenced herein. At the time that a development plan is formally submitted for Planning Commission consideration, the subsequent plan shall incorporate within its boundaries a neighborhood park of at least 1.3 acres usable area, accessible from a public roadway, dedicated to the City, constructed to City standards, within the area designated for commercial development, adjacent to slope areas or water quality management areas, and which shall incorporate features such as, but not limited to, a tot lot, picnic tables, seating areas and shade structures. TENTATIVE TRACT CONDITIONS 1. The Final Map shall provide parcels, easements or rights-of-way for streets, fire roads and firebreaks, water supply and distribution systems, sewage disposal systems, storm drainage facilities, solid waste disposal and public utilities providing electric, gas and communications services; 2. The Final Map shall be modified, where applicable, to incorporate mitigation measures identified through the environmental review process, except where a statement of overriding considerations has been adopted in compliance with CEQA; 3. The Final Map shall carry out the specific requirements of Chapter 21.30 (Subdivision Design and Improvement Requirements) and Chapter 21.34 (Improvement Plans and Agreements) of the Subdivision Ordinance; 4. The Final Map shall secure compliance with the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance and the General Plan; 5. Any designated remainder parcels shall not be subsequently sold or further subdivided unless a certificate or conditional certificate of compliance (Chapter 21.28) is obtained in compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance; 6. The Final Map shall dedicate additional land for access rights, bicycle and pedestrian paths, and local transit facilities (including bus turnouts, benches, shelters, etc.), in compliance with Subdivision Map Act Chapter 4, Article 3, where required by the General Plan; TTM No. 70687—CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX 7. The Tentative Tract Map shall be modified to be consistent with the General Plan land use designation adopted as part of the Specific Plan; 8. The Final Map shall include a lot delineating the boundaries of the park as prescribed under Subsection B5.a.4 of this Resolution, dedicated to the City, accessible from a public roadway and constructed to City standards. Final configuration and location shall necessitate a revised Tentative Tract Map, subject to review of the Planning Commission and City Council. Such determination shall be made by the Community Development and Public Works Directors; 9. A title report/guarantee showing all fee owners, interest holders, and nature of interest shall be submitted for Final Map plan check. An updated title report/guarantee and subdivision guarantee shall be submitted ten (10) business days prior to final map approval; 10. Prior to Final Map approval, if any public or private improvements required as part of this map have not been completed by the future developer and accepted by the City, the future developer shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the City and shall post the appropriate security; 11. Easements, satisfactory to the City Engineer and the utility companies, for public utility and public services purposes shall be offered and shown on the Final Map for dedication to the City; . 12. After the Final Map records, the future developer shall submit to the Public Works/Engineering Department, at no cost to the City, .a full size reproducible copy of the recorded map. Final approval of the public improvements shall not be given until the copy of the recorded map is received by the Public Works/Engineering Department; 13. Any and all public street light improvements associated with this Tract Map shall be annexed into the L.A. County Lighting Maintenance District 10006 and L.A. County Light District LLA -1 Diamond Bar Zone, as determined by the City Engineer. 14. All newly created lots and parcels shall be incorporated into the Citywide Lighting and Landscape Assessment District #38. 15. The Final Map shall be in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Tract Map; and 16. In accordance with Government Code Section 66474.9(b) (1), the future developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, and its officers, agents and employees, from any claim, 8 TTM No. 70687— CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX action, or proceeding to attack, set-aside, void or annul the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 brought within the time period provided by Government Code Section 66499.37. In the event the city and/or its officers, agents and employees are made a party of any such action: (a) The future developer shall provide a defense to the City defendants or at the City's option reimburse the City its costs of defense, including reasonable attorneys fees, incurred in defense of such claims. (b) The future developer shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the City defendants. The City shall promptly notify the future developer of any claim, action of proceeding, and shall cooperate fully in the defense thereof. The City Council shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to: Walnut Valley Unified School District, 880 South Lemon Avenue, Walnut, CA 91789. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS XXth DAY OF XXXX 2010, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. By: Carol Herrera, Mayor I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the XXth day of XXXX, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Council Member: NOES: Council Member: ABSENT: Council Member: ABSTAIN: Council Member: TTM No. 70687—CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX ATTEST: Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar 10 TTM No. 70687— CC Resolution No. 2010 -XX "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -3 ocr nnnnncnmGn CnNnIT1(-1Mq nG PRfLIFCT APPRCIVAI No.. Condition of Approval` Land Use Unless effective sound mitigation can be demonstrated once the project is operational or other controls imposed on.delivery and related activities, no 1-1 delivery activities shall occur between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM. The Applicant shall include as part of the real estate disclosure documentation, as required by the California Department of Real Estate for purchasers of 1-2 those residential units to be constructed on the project site, the disclosure that commercial activities are proposed on the adjacent property and that the operational characteristics of those activities may include trucking, delivery, and maintenance operations by diesel -fueled and non -diesel -fueled vehicles. Fallowing the approval of the specific plan and/or any associated amendments to the City's General Plan, the Lead Agency shall provide notification of that action to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), requesting that any subsequent amendments to SCAG's "Regional 1-3 Transportation Plan" (RTP) and other regional planning forecasts reflect a greater level of population and housing growth within the City during the 2005- 2010 time period. Total new residential and non-residential development constructed on the project site shall not exceed 202 dwelling units and 153,985 gross Ieaseable square feet, respectively, unless a subsequent traffic study, addressing the traffic -related impacts associated with any such increase, is prepared by or 1-4 submitted to and deemed acceptable by the City or unless such increase can be determined by the City to not result in any substantial increase in project- rojectrelated relatedtraffic impacts. Should additional traffic impacts be identified, the City, at its sole discretion, may initiate additional environmental review and/or impose additional conditions or other measures in response to those impacts. Geotechnical Hazards Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits, the Applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, that each of the recommendations contained in the project's preliminary geotechnical investigation and in any supplemental reports as may be prepared by the Applicant's 3-1 Geotechnical Engineer or by others have been incorporated into the project's design, development, and operation. The project shall be constructed, operated, and maintained in accordance with those recommendations and with such additional geologic, geoteohnical, seismic, and soils recommendations as may result from further analyses that may be presented to, imposed, or adopted by the City. Hydrology and Water Quality If the flood control channel right-of-way is to be utilized as part of the project's development plan, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall obtain all requisite permits and approvals from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works — Flood Control District allowing for the 4-1 overbuilding of the Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel and shall provide the City Engineer with documentation, acceptable to the City Engineer, demonstrating County approval and authorization, including a complete list of all permit requirements that may be associated therewith. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall prepare and, when acceptable, the City Engineer shall approve a standard urban stormwater 4-2 mitigation plan (SUSMP) conforming to the requirements of Section 8.12.1695 (Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan Requirements for New Development and Redevelopment Projects) of the Municipal Code. Draft Environmental Impact Report June 2009 Executive Summary M X 0 "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -3 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF PRO.IECT APPROVAI No. Condition of Approval ` Biological Resources (Continued) In order to demonstrate compliance with applicable State and federal resource protection policies designed to protect or compensate for the loss of biological resources, prior to the approval of a grading permit, were applicable, the Applicant shall provide the Director with documentation of receipt of the 5-1 following permits: (1) Section 401 (Federal Clean Water Act) water quality certification or waiver of waste discharge requirements from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region; (2) nationwide Section 404 (Federal Clean Water Act) permit from the United States Army Corps of Engineers; and (3) Section 1602 (California Fish and Game Code) streambed alteration agreement from the California Department of Fish and Game. The Applicant shall comply with all associated permit requirements. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit to the Community Development Director and, when acceptable, the Director shall accept for subsequent processing an arborist -prepared tree survey, specifying: (1) the precise number and type of protected trees that will be directly or 5-2 indirectly impacted by the proposed project; (2) the number (ratio), type, size, and source of trees that will be planted in compensation thereof (3) the location of all replacement trees; (4) planting notes and irrigation requirements; (4) performance standards for the survivability of replacement trees; (5) a maintenance agreement stipulating the Applicant's obligations for a minimum 3 -year period, including the annual reporting; and (6) the amount and derivation of the security deposit required under the City's tree preservation ordinance. California Walnut Woodland. Measures to mitigate impacts to California walnut woodland will be orchestrated in concert with the replanting of trees protected by the City's tree preservation and protection ordinance. To the extent possible, southern California black walnut trees will be planted on 5-3 manufactured slopes within the development. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Director and, when acceptable, the Director shall approve a plan describing the number, size, and location of walnut trees to be planted and outline success criteria and adaptive management procedures to ensure that the mitigation plan is successful. As determined feasible by the Community Development Director, initial vegetation removal activities shall be conducted outside the nesting season (February 15 -August 15) to avoid impacts upon nesting birds. If initial vegetation removal activities occur during the nesting season, prior to the 5-4 commencement of any grading or grubbing activities, all suitable habitat shall first be thoroughly surveyed by a qualified biologist for the presence of nesting birds. If any active nests are detected, a buffer of at least 300 feet (500 feet for raptors) shall be delineated, flagged, and vegetation removal activities avoided therein until the nesting cycle is complete, as determined by the surveying biologist or a qualified biological monitor. BMP devices shall be designed in consultation with the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District and shall be of a type which minimizes the potential for vector (public nuisance) problems and maintained throughout the project life so as not to contribute to those problems. Unless accepted by 5-5 the County andlor by the City, the responsibilities for and the funding of the maintenance of Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall constitute obligations of the homeowners' association as to those BMPs associated with the project's residential component and the property owners' association as to those BMPs associated with the project's commercial component BMPs not directly attributable to a single project component or use shall, by agreement between owners, become the shared obligation of both associations. Transportation and Circulation Construction Worker Parkino and Eauioment Staging Plan. Priorto the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the City Engineer shall approve a construction worker parking and equipment staging plan (PESP) designed to minimize disturbance to the 6-1 surrounding residences to the greatest extent feasible. Unless otherwise authorized therein, contractors and other construction personnel performing construction activities in proximity to the project site shall be prohibited from parking and/or operating construction equipment, dumpsters, trailers, or other material within a public right-of-way or other public property. The PESP can be combined with or become a part of the construction traffic safety plan and/or any other construction management plan as may be required by the City. Draft Environmental Impact Report June 2009 Executive Summary "Site V Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -3 RFCnMmr=KinFn rnNnITInNS OF PRn.1FCT APPROVAI No. Condition. of Approval Transportation and Circulation (Continued) Unless previously approved by the City Engineer, no construction access shall be authorized from and no construction traffic shall be permitted along 6-2 Castle Rock Road and Pasado Drive, except as may be required to construct and maintain any project -related street and other improvements within and adjacent to those rights-of-way. Construction Traffic Safety Plan. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the City Engineer shall approve a construction traffic mitigation plan (CTMP). The CTMP shall identify the travel and haul routes to be used by construction vehicles; the points of ingress and egress for all construction vehicles; temporary street or lane closures, temporary signage, and temporary striping; location of materials and equipment staging areas; maintenance plans to remove spilled debris from roadway surfaces; and the hours during which large construction equipment maybe brought on/off the project site. The Applicant shall keep all haul routes clean and free of debris including but not limited to gravel and 6-3 dirt as a result of its operations. The Applicant shall clean adjacent streets, as directed by the City Engineer, of any material which may have been spilled, tracked, or blown onto adjacent streets or areas. Hauling or transport of oversize loads will be allowed between the hours of 9:00 AM and 3:00 PM only, Monday through Friday, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. No hauling or transport will be allowed during nighttime hours, weekends, or federal holidays. The use of local streets shall be limited only to those that provide direct access to the destination. Haul trucks entering or exiting public streets shall at all times yield to public traffic. If hauling operations cause any damage to existing pavement, street, curb, and/or gutter along the haul route, the Applicant will be fully responsible for repairs. The repairs shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Traffic Control Plan. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the City shall approve a traffic control plan (TCP). The TCP shall be consistent with the Southern California Chapter of the American Public Works Association's "Work Area Traffic Control Handbook" (WATCH), the California Department of Transportation's "Manual of Traffic Controls for Construction and Maintenance Work Zones," or such alternative as may be deemed acceptable by the City. The TCP shall describe the Applicant's plans to safely and efficiently maintain vehicular and 6-4 non -vehicular access along local roadways throughout the construction period. If any temporary access restrictions or lane closures are proposed by the Applicant, the TCP shall delineate detour routes, the hours, duration and frequency of such restrictions, and the emergency access and safety measures that will be implemented during those closures or restrictions. The TCP can be combined with or become a part of the construction traffic safety plan and/or any other construction management plan as'may be required by the City. Shared Parking Plan. Prior to the issuance of building permits for any on-site commercial use, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the Community Development Director and the City Engineer shall approve a shared parking study. The study, conducted using the Urban Land Institute's "Shared Parking" (Second Edition, 2005) unless otherwise approved by the City, shall present a quantification of on-site commercial parking needs, 6-5 quantify the number of on-site parking spaces required under existing City regulations, discuss and evaluate opportunities for shared parking between on- site commercial uses, and quantify the number and type of parking spaces that need to be provided to support those commercial uses to be developed on the project site. The number, type, and location of on-site parking shall be determined by the City based, in whole or in part, by the findings of that shared parking study. Air Quality The Applicant shall include as part of the real estate disclosure documentation, as required by the California Department of Real Estate for purchasers of 7-1 those residential units to be constructed on the project site, the disclosure that commercial activities are proposed on the adjacent property and that the operational characteristics of those activities may include trucking, delivery, and maintenance operations involving diesel -fueled vehicles. Draft Environmental Impact Report June 2009 Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -3 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF PROJECT APPROVAL No. Condition of Approval Noise B-1 All residential and commercial units shall include forced air ventilation designed and installed in accordance with Title 24 of California Building Code standards. Public Services Prior to the commencement of grading activities, the Applicant shall prepare and submit for review by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department 9_1 (LACSD) a draft construction security plan outlining the activities that will be instituted by the Applicant to secure the construction site and the equipment and materials located thereupon from potential criminal incidents. The Applicant shall incorporate the recommendations of the LACSD, if any, into a final construction security plan and shall implement that plan during the construction period. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the LACSD shall be provided the opportunity to review and comment upon building plans and the configuration of 9-2 the development in order to: (1) facilitate opportunities for improved emergency access and response; (2) ensure the consideration of design strategies that facilitate public safety and police surveillance; and (3) offer specific design recommendations to enhance public safety and reduce potential demands upon police protection services. Prior to the commencement of grading or grubbing activities, the Applicant shall prepare and submit and the Los Angeles County Fire Department 9-3 (LACFD) shall review and, when deemed acceptable, approve a fire protection program and workplace standards for fire safety outlining those activities to be undertaken by the Applicant during the construction period. The Applicant shall abide by specific project -level permit conditions identified by the LACFD. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and the Los Angeles County Fire Department shall review and, when deemed 9-4 acceptable, approve a fuel modification, landscape, and irrigation plan in compliance with County Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (Fire Zone 4) standards. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) will review and, when deemed acceptable, approve (1) final 9-5 water improvement plans including, but not limited to, the location, sizing, design, and fire flow capacity of the proposed water mains and fire hydrants and proposed access improvements to ensure compliance with applicable Fire Code requirements; and (2) building plans. The projects water system shall be designed in response to final fire flow requirements identified by the LACFD. 9 G Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit to the Building Official for review and approval a temporary fencing and signage plan designed to discourage access to any active construction areas by children and other unauthorized parties. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall present the City with a certificate of compliance or other documentation demonstrating that the 9-7 Applicant has complied with the Walnut Valley Unified School Districts School Board resolutions governing the payment of school impact fees or has kiLentered into an Assembly Bill 2926 authorized school fee mitigation agreement or is not subject to the school impact fee exaction. Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map, unless an alternative milestone event or other manner of fulfillment of the Applicant's obligations under 9-8 Section 21.32.040 (Park Land Dedications and Fees) in Chapter 21.32 (Subdivisions) of the Municipal Code is first approved by the City Council, the Applicant shall provide the City with an in4ieu park fee payment in the manner and in the amount authorized thereunder. Draft Environmental Impact Report June 2009 Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table -ES -3 RFcr)MMFNDFD CONDITIONS OF PROJECT APPROVAL No. .Condition.of:Approval Utilities and Service Systems Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, a sewer area study, prepared by a licensed civil engineer registered in the State of California, shall be submitted to the City Engineer and to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) for review and, when deemed acceptable, for approval. The sewer area study shall include sewer flow monitoring at specific locations to be determined by the City Engineer and the LACDPW. The 10-1 sewer flow analysis shall include calculations for the quantities of sewer flow for the pre -development and post -development conditions and determine the impact on all affected City and County -operated sewerage facilities. Should project -related sewer flows be determined to impact the sewer capacity downstream from the proposed development, the Applicant shall be required to mitigate any potential capacity deficiency by a method approved by the City Engineer or the LACDPW, subject to appropriate jurisdictional authorities. The Applicant shall be responsible for all costs required to mitigate the potential capacity deficiency, including upgrading existing sewer mains. Aesthetics The specific plan shall include design details, acceptable to both the City Engineer and to the Community Development Director, for all proposed retaining 12-1 walls. Retaining wall plans shall include landscape and irrigation details sufficient to ensure that each of those elements are, as appropriate, integrated into wall design and that the interrelationship between those elements are considered from structural integrity and aesthetic viewpoints. Draft Environmental Impact Report June 2009 Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 MDAV=-r 111I1TIr,ATinni RFpORTimrz aNn MONITORING PROGRAM Draft Environmental Impact Report June 2009 Executive Summary Page ES -16 50 Com Hi p.", Mitigation - No: :Mitigation Measure ,V.erification Milestone Biological Resources Jurisdictional Features. In order to reduce impacts to United States Army Corps of Engineers and Regional Water Quality Control Board (ACOE/RWQCB) and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdictional waters, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director, receipt of any discretionary permits and approval as may be required from the Community Issuance of 5-1 ACOE, RWQCB, and CDFG and committo the provision of compensatory jurisdictional resources meeting or Development Grading exceeding the following minimal standards: (1) the on-site and/or off-site replacement of ACOE/RWQCB Director Permits jurisdictional waters and wetlands at a 2:1 ratio; (2) the on-site and/or off-site replacement of CDFG jurisdictional streambed and associated riparian habitat at a 2:1 ratio; and (3) the incorporation of design features into the proposed projects design and development. Traffic and Circulation Prior to the recordation of the final tract map, the Applicant shall provide, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, the intersection improvements identified in the traffic impact analysis or provide a "fair -share" contribution toward the cost of the improvements to the following intersections: (1) Brea Canyon Road (W) at Pathfinder Road; (2) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Pathfinder Road; (3) Brea Canyon Road at Cold Spring Lane; (4) Diamond Bar City Final Tract Map 6-1 Boulevard at Cold Spring Lane; (5) Pathfinder Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (6) SR -57 SB Ramps at Brea Engineer Recordation Canyon Cutoff Road; (7) SR -57 NB Ramps at Brea Canyon Cutoff/Diamond Bar Boulevard; (8) Brea Canyon Road at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (9).Cherrydale Drive at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (10) Brea Canyon Road at Silver Bullet Drive; (11) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Grand Avenue; and (12) Colima Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff. The final site plan shall include and accommodate those traffic measures, improvements, and such other City Site Plan 6-2 pertinent factors and/or facilities as may be identified by the City Engineer to ensure the safe and efficient Engineer Approval movement of project -related traffic. Air Quality All non-residential paints shall contain no more than 0.22 pound/gallon (100 gram/liter) of volatile organic Community Cvelopm Building 7-1 compound (VOC). Development Director n Issuance The Applicant shall abide by any other air pollution reduction measures as may be approved by the City of Building Permit 7_2 Diamond Bar and/or by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Issuance Traffic lane improvements and signalization, as outlined in the traffic study, shall be implemented and will Building Permit 7-3 generally improve local traffic flow, thereby reducing emissions created in the project area.Cit y Engineer Issuance To encourage the use of mass transportation, the Applicant shall place bus stop shelters at any bus stops Building Permit 7-4 situated or to be situated along any site frontage routes if not already so equipped. Issuance Draft Environmental Impact Report June 2009 Executive Summary Page ES -16 50 "Site D'° Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 (Continued) n— nnnn117ADlAlrz O1Znn12AM UKA1-1111111KJAllvr+n"rv".....+...�-•- - - .,. - No Mitigation Measure. C.pmpliance Verification. Mitigation Milestpne Air Quality (Continued) To encourage the use of localized commercial facilities and reduce the need for vehicle travel, the Applicant shall include bothbikelanes (where feasible) and bike paths between the residential and commercial development areas. Additionally, the Applicant shall provide sidewalks and walking paths to the proposed commercial areas. The Applicant shall specify the installation of energy efficient lighting, air conditioning, water heaters, and appliances for all residential.and commercial uses. City Engineer Final Tract Map Recordation 7-5 7-6 City Engineer Building Permit Issuance 7-7 The Applicant shall specify the installation of energy efficient street lighting. Noise In accordance With the Development Code, construction shall be restricted to between the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM on weekdays and Saturdays. No construction shall occur at any time on Sundays or on federal holidays. These days and hours shall also apply any servicing of equipment and to the delivery of materials'to or from the site. All construction equipment shall be properly maintained and tuned to minimize noise emissions. All equipment shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers, air intake silencers, and engine shrouds no less effective than originally equipped. The construction contractor shall place temporary noise barriers along the site perimeter when doing any work within 100 feet of any residential units. Such barriers shall attempt to block the line of sight between the residents and construction equipment. The construction contractor shall specify the use of electric stationary equipment (e.g., compressors) that can operate off the power grid where feasible. Where infeasible, stationary noise sources (e.g., generators and compressors) shall be located as far from residential receptor locations as is feasible. Construction shall be subject to any and all provisions set forth by the City of Diamond Bar Planning Department. No residential units shall be located within 830 feet of the SR -57 Freeway's nearest travel lane unless additional sound attention is provided to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Building Inspector Construction Term 8-1 Building Inspector Construction Term 8-2 iBsilding Construction Term. 8-3 Building Inspector City Engineer Planning Manager Construction Term Building Permit Issuance Building Permit Issuance E-4 8-5 8-6 Community Development Director Final Tract Map Recordation 8-7 Building Permit Issuance 8-8 No commercial units shall be located within 60 feet of the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard. June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES -17 Executive Summary "Site V Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 (Continued) nPAPT nmTtrrnTlnnl R1=hnRTINr. aNn MONITORING PROGRAM No. - Mitigation:Measpre= :: Compliance Verification Mitigation. Milestone Noise (Continued) 8-g No residential units shall be located within 130 feet of the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard unless additional Community Development De Final Tract Map sound attention is provided to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Director Recordation Cultural Resources Priorto the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the Applicant and Community approved by the City to monitor all vegetation removal and ground disturbance to a depth of three feet within the Development following portions of the study area: (1) the boundary of SD -Cultural -1; (2) the open valley floor adjacent to SD- Director Issuance of 11-1 Cultural -1; and (3) the riparian areas that were not previously surveyed due to dense vegetation cover. The and Grading Grading archaeologist will determine if additional monitoring below the depth of three feet is warranted based on soil and Permits bedrock conditions and presence/absence of archaeological materials. No archaeological monitoring is required Engineer for ground disturbing activities outside of these monitor areas. If cultural resources are identified during monitoring of the ground disturbing activities, the archaeologist shall be allowed to temporarily divert or redirect grading or excavation activities in the vicinity of those resources in order to make an evaluation of the find and determine appropriate treatment Treatment will include the goals of preservation where practicable and public interpretation of historic and archaeological resources. All cultural resources recovered will be documented on California Department of Parks and Recreation Site Forms to be filed with the CHRIS-SCCIC. The archaeologist shall prepare a final report about the monitoring to be filed with the Applicant, the City, and the California Historical Resources Information System South Central Coastal Information Center at the California State University, Fullerton (CHRIS-SCCIC), as required by the California Office of Historic Building Construction 11-2 Preservation. The report shall include documentation and interpretation of resources recovered, if any. Inspector Term Interpretation will include full evaluation of the eligibility of SD -Cultural -1 with respect to the California Register of Historic Places and CEQA. The report shall also include all specialists' reports as appendices. The City shall designate repositories in the event that significant resources are recovered. If cultural resources are identified during ground disturbing activities that occur outside the designated monitoring area, ground disturbing activities shall be temporarily redirected away from the vicinity of the find until the retained archaeologist is notified by the Applicant. The archaeologist shall coordinate with the Applicant as to the immediate treatment of the find until a proper site visit and evaluation is made by the archaeologist. If human remains are encountered unexpectedly during construction excavation and grading activities, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Building Construction 11-3 Code. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the County Coroner has 24 hours to Inspector Term notify the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC will then identify the person(s) thought to be the Most Likely Descendent of the deceased Native American, who will then help determine what course of action should be taken in dealing with the remains. Draft Environmental. Impact Report June 2009 Executive Summary Page ES -18 "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 (Continued) onr oonr_onnn June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES -19 Executive Summary UKAI- I IVII I I A I IVIV Iccrvn nvv r+.v .•�.+••. • • ••^— • — - - .. ... .. Mitigation .Meas.uie : ;:'.,:"'. :' .Comp lance.: Verification . 1 ,.ga"1 Milestone No• Cultural Resources (Continued) Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified paleontologist meeting the qualifications established by the be retained by the Applicant and approved by the City to develop and Community Issuance of 11-4 Society of Vertebrate Paleontologists shall implement a paleontological monitoring plan. Development of the monitoring plan shall include a site visit by the Development Grading Permits paleontologist prior to initiation of project development in order to determine or delineate sensitive areas. The Director may also perform collections of fossils from the surface and near -surface. paleontologist The paleontologist shall attend a pre -grade meeting in order to become familiar with the proposed depths and City Engineer Issuance of Grading 11-5 patterns of grading of the study area. Permits The paleontologist shall establish a curation agreement with an accredited facility prior to grading permit' Cit Engineer uance of �:Gradfng 11-6 issuance. Permits A paleontological monitor, supervised by the paleontologist, shall monitor all excavations in the Puente Formation into the Puente Formation. If fossils are found during ground disturbing Building Construction 11-7 or excavations anticipated to extend sturbing activities within 25 feet of activities, the paleontological monitor shall be empowered to halt the ground-dirm Inspector Te the find in order to allow evaluation of the find and determination of appropriate treatment. The paleontologist shall prepare a final report on the monitoring. If fossils were identified, the report shall contain curation. A copy of the report shall be filed with the City Community Development Grading Sign -Off 11-8 an appropriate description of the fossils, treatment, and and the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County and shall accompany any curated fossils. Aesthetics Pole -mounted or wall -mounted luminaires installed for the purpose of illuminating commercial areas, parking lots, lighting standards and demonstrate that light trespass not Director Community Development BuildingPermit 12-1 roadways, and driveways shall conform to appropriate exceed 0.5 horizontal foot candle, as measured at the project boundaries abutting any existing residential use. Director Issunce These standards shall not be applied to any adjoining public streets or other non -light-sensitive land uses. June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES -19 Executive Summary Attachment 4 ORDINANCE NO. XX (2010) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING ZONE CHANGE NO. 2007-04 CHANGING THE EXISTING ZONING TO SPECIFIC PLAN FOR PROPERTY COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 30.36 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BREA CANYON ROAD AND DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-903 and 8714-015-001). A. RECITALS On July 1, 2007, the property owner/co-applicant, Walnut Valley School District, and property owner/lead agency/co-applicant, City of Diamond Bar, executed a Memorandum of Understanding whereby the parties agreed to collaborate in the planning of the future land use to rezone the approximately 30.36 -acre parcel property located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard, City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, California so that both parties may each advance their respective objectives for the disposition of the property. Hereinafter in this resolution, the subject Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Program shall collectively be referred to as the "Application;" 2. In accordance to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15168 et seq., an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the project which found that the proposed project may have remaining significant impacts that requires adoption of "Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations." Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15090, the EIR was reviewed by the City Council before project approval; 3. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15090 through 15093, a resolution recommending certification of the EIR, adoption of a mitigation reporting and monitoring program, and adoption of "Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations" was approved by the City Council prior to considering this resolution; 4. The approval of Specific Plan No. 2007-01 (Site D Specific Plan) that is being reviewed concurrently with this application, includes a land use plan that divides the property into three sub -planning areas (Residential, Commercial, and Open Space/Circulation) and includes standards and guidelines for future development of the specific plan site; 5. The following approval is requested to the City Council: (a) Specific Plan No. 2007-01 to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential (RL), Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM), and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan; Notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on June 4, 2010. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site and public notices were posted at the City's designated community posting sites. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the project site was posted with a display board and the notice was posted at three other locations within the project vicinity; 7. On April 13, April 27, and May 11, 2010, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on the application and approved Resolution No. 2010-13 recommending the City Council approve Zone Change No. 2007-04; 8. On June 15, 2010, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. On XXX X, 2010, held a public hearing on a second reading of Specific Plan No. 2007-01; 9. The City Council has determined that the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change represents a consistent, logical, appropriate and rational land use designation and implementing tool that furthers the goals and objectives of the City General Plan; and 10. The documents and materials constituting the administrative record of the proceedings upon which the City's decision is based are located at the City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, Planning Division, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby ordain as follows: The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct; The City Council finds that the initial study prepared for the project identified above in this Resolution concluded that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 2007-02 (SCH No. 2008021014) be prepared. An EIR has been prepared according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. On June 15, 2010, the City Council reviewed the EIR and adopted Resolution No. 2010 -XX certifying the EIR as complete and adequate after conducting and concluding a duly noticed public hearing. Ordinance No. 2010 -XX (Approval of ZC) On XXX X, 2010, the City filed a Notice of Determination with the Los Angeles County Clerk's office pursuant to Section 15094 of the CEQA Guidelines; 3. This City Council does hereby find, as required by Municipal Code Section 22.70.050 and in conformance with California Government Code Section 65853 and 65860, that the Zone Change No. 2007-04 is consistent with the General Plan, as follows: a. The amendment to the Zoning Map is internally consistent with the General Plan and the adopted goals and policies of the City. The Zoning Map does not presently reflect the General Plan designation for the property. Zone Change No. 2007-04 will place the City's Zoning Map in conformance with the General Plan by designating the Property as SP (Specific Plan), with sub -areas corresponding to those in the Site D Specific Plan. The existing approximate 30.36 acres located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard (Assessors Parcel Numbers 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002- 903, and 8714-015-001) shall have a zoning designation of SP - Specific Plan; and 4. The City Council does hereby approve Zone Change No. 2007-04'based on the above findings, as required by Municipal Code Section 22.70.050 and in conformance with California Government Code Sections 65853 and 65860. 5. The City Council hereby adopts the Site D Specific Plan No. 2007-01 attached herein as Exhibit A and hereby incorporated by reference. 6. The Community Development Director shall modify the Official Zoning Map in accordance with this ordinance to indicate thereon that the real property legally described in Exhibits A-1 through A-4 as attached herein is within the Site D Specific Plan. The City Council shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Ordinance; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Ordinance, by certified mail, to: Walnut Valley Unified School District, 880 South Lemon Avenue, Walnut, CA 91789. Ordinance No. 2010 -XX (Approval of ZC) APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS XXfh DAY OF XXX 2010, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. L - Carol Herrera, Mayor 1, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar on the XX`h day of XXXX, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT` Councilmembers: ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: ATTEST: Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk 4 Ordinance No. 2010 -XX (Approval of ZC) EXHIBIT A Site D Specific Plan Copies of the Final Draft of the Site D Specific Plan, dated March 19, 2010, are available for public inspection and review at the City Clerk's Office in City Hall and the Diamond Bar Public Library. EXHnTT A-1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SCHOOL PROPERTY THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 1: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 9 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF LOT 76 (BREA CANYON CHANNEL) OF TRACT 27577, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 702,PAGES 22 TO 25 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DISTANT THEREON NORTH 3('41' 18" EAST 245.38 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN ON SAID MAP AS HAVING A BEARING AND DISTANCE OF NORTH 3('41'18" EAST 745.38 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 518'42" EAST 235.80 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 71'00'13" EAST 580.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 3400'00" EAST, 120.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 56CO0'00" EAST 340.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 4$00'00" EAST 980.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2$07'43"WEST 570.00 FEET TO A POINT IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF TRACT 25991, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 702 PAGES 16 TO 21 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; SAID POINT BEING ON A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2050.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 2$07'43" EAST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD; THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 4'1.1'33" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID LAST MENTIONED CURVE, ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD SOUTH 66b3'50" WEST 875.89 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1050.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20'50'10" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 381.83 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 76; THENCE SOUTH 3d'41'18" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 76, 500.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID SECTION 29 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF LOT 76 OF TRACT 27577, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 702 PAGES 22 TO 25 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DISTANT THEREON NORTH 3(741'18" EAST 259.67 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE HAVING A BEARING OF NORTH 3('41'18" EAST AND A DISTANCE OF 745.38 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 76, NORTH 3041'18" EAST 485.71 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT 27577; SAID SOUTHERLY LINE BEING A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1050.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 4°21'50" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 79.97 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 3041'18'.' WEST 527.99 FEET TO A LINE THAT BEARS SOUTH 63026'06" EAST FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 63Q.6'06" WEST 64.82 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPT THEREFROM SAID LAND ALL OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS AND MINERALS NOW OR AT ANY TIME HEREAFTER SITUATED THEREIN OR THEREUNDER OR PRODUCIBLE THEREFROM, TOGETHER WITH THE FREE AND UNLIMITED RIGHT TO MINE, STORE, DRILL AND BORE BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AT ANY LEVEL OR LEVELS 500 FEET OR MORE BELOW THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING OR REMOVAL OF SUCH SUBSTANCES, PROVIDED THAT THE SURFACE OPENING OF SUCH WELL AND ALL OTHER SURFACE FACILITIES SHALL BE LOCATED ON LAND OTHER THAN DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND SHALL NOT PENETRATE ANY ' PART OF. PORTION OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SURFACE THEREOF, AND ALL OF THE RIGHTS SO TO REMOVE SUCH SUBSTANCES ARE HEREBY SPECIFICALLY RESERVED, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO DRILL FOR, PRODUCE AND USE WATER FROM SAID REAL PROPERTY IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH OPERATIONS, AS EXCEPTED AND RESERVED BY TRANSAMERICA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, A CORPORATION WHICH ACQUIRED TITLE AS CAPITAL COMPANY, A CORPORATION, IN DEED. RECORDED AUGUST 12, 1964 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1401. PARCEL 2: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 9 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF LOT 76 OF TRACT 27577, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 702, PAGES 22 TO 25, INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DISTANT THEREON NORTH 3041'18" EAST 259.67 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE HAVING A BEARING OF NORTH 3041'18" EAST AND A DISTANCE OF 745.38 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 76, NORTH 3(?41'18".EAST, 485.71 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT 27577, SAID SOUTHERLY LINE) BEING A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1050.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH CENTRAL ANGLE OF (41'50" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 79.97 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 3041'18" WEST 527.99 FEET TO A LINE THAT BEARS SOUTH 63Q26'06" EAST FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 63026'06" WEST 64.82 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPT THEREFROM ALL OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS AND MINERALS NOW OR AT ANY TIME HEREAFTER SITUATED THEREIN OR THEREUNDER, TOGETHER WITH THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO DRILL FOR, PRODUCE, EXTRACT, TAKE AND MINE THEREFROM SUCH OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS AND MINERALS AND TO STORE THE SAME UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND; TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT TO STORE UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND, OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS AND MINERALS WHICH MAY BE PRODUCED FROM OTHER LANDS, WITH THE RIGHT OF ENTRY THEREON FOR SAID PURPOSES, AND WITH THE RIGHT TO CONSTRUCT, USE, MAINTAIN, ERECT, REPAIR, REPLACE AND REMOVE THEREON AND THEREFROM, ALL PIPE LINES, TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH LINES, TANKS, MACHINERY, BUILDINGS AND OTHER STRUCTURES WHICH. MAY BE NECESSARY AND REQUISITE TO CARRY ON OPERATIONS ON SAID LAND, WITH THE FURTHER RIGHT TO ERECT, MAINTAIN, OPERATE AND REMOVE A PLANT, WITH ALL NECESSARY APPURTENANCES FOR THE EXTRACTION OF GASOLINE FROM GAS, INCLUDING ALL RIGHTS NECESSARY OR CONVENIENT THERETO,, AS EXCEPTED AND RESERVED IN THE DEED FROM TRANSAMERICA DEVELOPMENT' COMPANY, A CORPORATION, RECORDED MARCH 29, 1968 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2456, IN BOOK D3955 PAGE 185, OFFICIAL RECORDS AND RE- RECORDED JUNE 19, 1969 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1776 IN BOOK D4407 PAGE 591, OFFICIAL RECORDS. SAID INTEREST WAS CONVEYED TO TRANSAMERICA MINERALS COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 20, 1985 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 85-74005. AN INSTRUMENT PURPORTEDLY QUITCLAIMING, RELEASING AND SURRENDERING ONLY THE SURFACE RIGHTS TO A DEPTH OF 500 FEET AND PROVIDING FOR REMOVAL OF ALL GAS, MINERALS AND HYDROCARBONS BELOW SAID DEPTH AS CONVEYED TO TRANSAMERICA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION BY DEED RECORDED JANUARY 5, 1987 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 87-10522. EXHIBIT A-2 MAP OF SCHOOL PROPERTY S)� P.o.e. b073'e o� s� y�^m. SCALE'. 1'-760' pE4M ENGNEE18NG. INC. ONE TECHNOLOGY PARK J-725. IRMNE. CA. 92618 (949) 753-8111 hn 47 i'33' L=381.94' PDR, SEC, 20 iyugh L=1050.D r 2 J, yryro sb" �* �PARGEL R=tasom,L-79.97-PARCEL 1 Z 2a.61 ACRES 0.75 ACRES S)� P.o.e. b073'e o� s� y�^m. SCALE'. 1'-760' pE4M ENGNEE18NG. INC. ONE TECHNOLOGY PARK J-725. IRMNE. CA. 92618 (949) 753-8111 EXHIBIT A-3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF CITY PROPERTY THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY IS: ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 9 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER RECORD OF SURVEY, FILED IN BOOK 76 PAGES 51 THROUGH 56 INCLUSIVE OF RECORD OF SURVEY, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT AREA SHOWN AS "NOT A PART OF THIS SUBDIVISION ON THE MAP OF TRACT NO. 27577, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 702 PAGES 22 THROUGH 25 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. SAID AREA BEING BOUNDED ON THE NORTHWEST BY SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF BREA CANYON ROAD, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT 27577; BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT NO, 27577; BOUNDED ON THE SOUTHEAST BY THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF LOT 76, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT NO. 27577; BOUNDED ON THE SOUTHWEST BY THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF LOT 39, THE NORTHERLY TERMINUS OF CASTLE ROCK ROAD, AND THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TEN (10) FOOT WALK, ALL BEING SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT NO. 27577. EXCEPT M ALL N SUBSTANCES LYING BELOW THE SURFACE URFAOIOTHER E OF SAIDLAND, BUT WI IL, GAS, MINERALS, ANDNRIGHT ROF SUROFACE ENTRY, AS PROVIDED IN DEEDS OF RECORD. EXHIBIT A-4 MAP OF CITY PROPERTY pA Attachment 5 ORDINANCE NO. XX (2010) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING SITE D SPECIFIC PLAN, SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2007-01, FOR PROPERTY COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 30.36 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BREA CANYON ROAD AND DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-903 and 8714-015-001). A. RECITALS On July 1, 2007, the property owner/co-applicant, Walnut Valley School District, and property owner/lead agency/co-applicant, City of Diamond Bar, executed a Memorandum of Understanding whereby the parties agreed to collaborate in the planning of the future land use to rezone the approximately 30.36 -acre parcel property located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard, City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, California so that both parties may each advance their respective objectives for the disposition of the property. Hereinafter in this resolution, the subject Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Program shall collectively be referred to as the "Application;" Pursuant to Development Code Section 22.60.040 and Government Code Section 65451 as part of the application for Specific Plan 2007-01, the Site D Specific Plan contains a land use plan that divides the property into three sub -planning areas (Residential, Commercial, and Open Space/Circulation), proposed infrastructure improvements, implementation measures, a discussion of the plan's relationship to the General Plan, and land use development standards and guidelines for future development of the specific plan site with 202 residential dwelling units; 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial use; and approximately 10 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights-of-way. 3. In accordance to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15168 et seq., an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the project which found that the proposed project may have remaining significant impacts that requires adoption of "Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations." Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15090, the EIR was reviewed by the City Council before project approval; 4. In accordance to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15090 through 15093, a resolution recommending certification of the EIR, adoption of a mitigation reporting and monitoring program, and adoption of "Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations" was approved by the City Council prior to considering this resolution; The application is being reviewed by the City Council concurrently with General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03, Zone Change No. 2007-04, Tentative Tract Map No. 70687, and Environmental Impact Report No. 2007-02; 6. The following approval is requested to the City Council: (a) Specific Plan No. 2007-01 to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential (RL), Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM), and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan; 7. Notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on June 4, 2010. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site and public notices were posted at the City's designated community posting sites. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the project site was posted with a display board and the notice was posted at three other locations within the project vicinity; 8. On April 13, April 27, 2010 and continued to May 11, 2010, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on the application and approved Resolution No. 2010-14 recommending the City Council approve Specific Plan No. 2007- 01; Said Resolution No. 2010-14 included a recommendation from the Planning Commission to incorporate a 1.3 net acre usable neighborhood public park within the area of the project site designated for commercial development, adjacent to slope areas or water quality management areas, and which shall incorporate features such as, but not limited to, a tot lot, picnic tables, seating areas and shade structures. In addition, the park shall be constructed to City standards, and then dedicated to the City. 10. On June 15, 2010, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. On XXX X, 2010, held a public hearing on a second reading of Specific Plan No. 2007-01; 11. The City Council has determined that the proposed Specific Plan represents a consistent, logical, appropriate and rational land use designation and implementing tool that furthers the goals and objectives of the City General Plan; and 12. The documents and materials constituting the administrative record of the proceedings upon which the City's decision is based are located at the 2 Ordinance No. 2010 -XX (Approval of SP) City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, Planning Division, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby ordain as follows: 1. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct; 2. The City Council finds that the initial study prepared for the project identified above in this Resolution concluded that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 2007-02 (SCH No. 2008021014) be prepared. An EIR has been prepared according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. On June 15, 2010, the City Council reviewed the EIR and adopted Resolution No. 2010 -XX certifying the EIR as complete and adequate after conducting and concluding a duly noticed public hearing. On XXXX X, 2010, the City filed a Notice of Determination with the Los Angeles County Clerk's office pursuant to Section 15094 of the CEQA Guidelines; This City Council hereby specifically finds and determines that, having considered the record as a whole including the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in this application, there is no evidence before this City Council that the project proposed herein will have the potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, this City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5(d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; 4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the City Council hereby finds as follows: a. The Site D Specific Plan is to allow vacant land comprised of approximately 30.36 acres located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard (Assessors Parcel Number 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-903 and 8714-015-001) with 202 residential dwelling units at a density of 20 units per acre; 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial use at a 0.35 floor area ratio; and approximately 10 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights-of-way; b. The current General Plan land use designations for the site include Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C). General Plan Ordinance No. 2010 -XX (Approval o(SP) Amendment No. 2007-03 being considered concurrently with this application proposes to change the land use designation for the site to Specific Plan. With approval of the General Plan Amendment, the Application will be consistent with the General Plan land use designation; c. The project site is within the Low Density Residential (RL), Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM), and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1). Zone Change No. 2007-04 is being reviewed concurrently with the Application that requests that the City Council approve the zone change from the current zoning to Specific Plan for General Plan compliance; d. The project site is generally surrounded by single-family homes to the north, south, and west, and a gas station and professional office buildings to the east. The site is bordered on the north by Diamond Bar Boulevard, and Brea Canyon Road to the west. The Brea Canyon Flood Control Channel runs roughly parallel to Brea Canyon Road and cuts through the western portion of the property; and e. The application involves a request for the following: Adoption of the Site D Specific Plan for development of the site with 202 residential dwelling units; 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial use; and approximately 10 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights- of-way. Specific Plan: Pursuant to Development Code Section 22.60.040 and Government Code Section 65451, the City Council finds as follows: f. The Site D Specific Plan document contains plans showing the distribution, location and extent of the uses of land, including open space; g. The Site D Specific Plan includes the proposed distribution, location, extent, and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan; h. The Site D Specific Plan includes standards and criteria for development to proceed, and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources; i. The Site D Specific Plan includes a program of implementation measures including regulations and performance standards to carry out the project; and Ordinance No. 2010 -XX (Approval of SP) The Site D Specific Plan includes a statement attesting to the consistency of the specific plan with the City's General Plan. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above, the City Council approves Specific Plan No. 2007-01 attached herein as Exhibit A with the following conditions: a. GENERAL 1. This approval for the Site D Specific Plan shall be null and void and of no effect unless the EIR (SCH No. 2008021014) is certified, the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program, Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations are adopted, and General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03, Zone Change No. 2007-04, and Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 are approved; 2. In addition to the conditions in this Ordinance, all conditions of approval in City Council Resolution No. 2010 -XX for Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 shall be complied with. A copy is attached hereto and referenced herein; and 3. The project shall comply with the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program for EIR 2007-02 (SCH No. 2008021014). A copy is attached hereto and referenced herein. 6. The Community Development Director shall modify the Official Zoning Map in accordance with this ordinance to indicate thereon that the real property legally described in Exhibits A-1 through A-4 as attached herein is within the Site D Specific Plan. The City Council shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Ordinance; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Ordinance, by certified mail, to: Walnut Valley Unified School District, 880 South Lemon Avenue, Walnut, CA 91789. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS XX(h DAY OF XXXX 2010, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. 1A Carol Herrera, Mayor 5 Ordinance No. 2010 -XX (Approval of SP) I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar on the XXih day of XXXX, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: ATTEST: Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk 6 Ordinance No. 2010 -XX (Approval of SP) EXHIBIT A Site D Specific Plan Copies of the Final Draft of the Site D Specific Plan, dated March 19, 2010, are available for public inspection and review at the City Clerk's Office in City Hall and the Diamond Bar Public Library. EXHIBIT A-1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SCHOOL PROPERTY THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 1: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 9 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF LOT 76 (BREA CANYON CHANNEL) OF TRACT 27577, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 702,PAGES 22 TO 25 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DISTANT THEREON NORTH 30'41'18" EAST 245.38 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN ON SAID MAP AS HAVING A BEARING AND DISTANCE OF NORTH 3041'18" EAST 745.38 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 59018'42" EAST 235.80 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 71000'13" EAST 580.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 3400'00" EAST, 120.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 5600100" EAST 340.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 4 00'00" EAST 980.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2n7'43"WEST 570.00 FEET TO A POINT IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF TRACT 25991, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 702 PAGES 16 TO 21 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; SAID POINT BEING ON A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2050.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 2$07'43" EAST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD; THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 4'11'33" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID LAST MENTIONED CURVE, ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD SOUTH 66003'50" WEST 875.89 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1050.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 2050'10" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 381.83 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 76; THENCE SOUTH 3041'18" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 76, 500.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID SECTION 29 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF LOT 76 OF TRACT 27577, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 702 PAGES 22 TO 25 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DISTANT THEREON NORTH 3041'18" EAST 259.67 FEET FROM .THE SOUTHWESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE HAVING A BEARING OF NORTH YAPI8 EAST AND A DISTANCE OF 745.38 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 76, NORTH 3641'18" EAST 485.71 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT 27577; SAID SOUTHERLY LINE BEING A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1050.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 4°21'50" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 79.97 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 3641'18" WEST 527.99 FEET TO A LINE THAT BEARS SOUTH 63Q26'06" EAST FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 63q26'06" WEST 64.82 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPT THEREFROM SAID LAND ALL OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS AND MINERALS NOW OR AT ANY TIME HEREAFTER SITUATED THEREIN OR THEREUNDER OR PRODUCIBLE THEREFROM, TOGETHER WITH THE FREE AND UNLIMITED RIGHT TO MINE, STORE, DRILL AND BORE BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AT ANY LEVEL OR LEVELS 500 FEET OR MORE BELOW THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING OR REMOVAL OF SUCH SUBSTANCES, PROVIDED THAT THE SURFACE OPENING OF SUCH WELL AND ALL OTHER SURFACE FACILITIES SHALL BE LOCATED ON LAND OTHER THAN DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND SHALL NOT PENETRATE ANY PART OF PORTION OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SURFACE THEREOF, AND ALL OF THE RIGHTS SO TO REMOVE SUCH SUBSTANCES ARE HEREBY SPECIFICALLY RESERVED, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO DRILL FOR, PRODUCE AND USE WATER FROM SAID REAL PROPERTY IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH OPERATIONS, AS EXCEPTED AND RESERVED BY TRANSAMERICA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, A CORPORATION WHICH ACQUIRED TITLE AS CAPITAL COMPANY, A CORPORATION, IN DEED RECORDED AUGUST 12, 1964 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1401. PARCEL 2: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 9 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF LOT 76 OF TRACT 27577, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 702, PAGES 22 TO 25, INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DISTANT THEREON NORTH 3641'18" EAST 259.67 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE HAVING A BEARING OF NORTH 30'41'18" EAST AND A DISTANCE OF 745.38 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 76, NORTH 30'41'18" EAST, 485.71 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT 27577, SAID SOUTHERLY LINE) BEING A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1050.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH CENTRAL ANGLE OF lf4l'50" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 79.97 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 3041'18" WEST 527.99 FEET TO A LINE THAT BEARS SOUTH 63°26'06" EAST FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 63026'06" WEST 64.82 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPT THEREFROM ALL OIL; GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS AND MINERALS NOW OR AT ANY TIME HEREAFTER SITUATED THEREIN OR THEREUNDER, TOGETHER WITH THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO DRILL FOR, PRODUCE, EXTRACT, TAKE AND MINE THEREFROM SUCH OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS AND MINERALS AND TO STORE THE SAME UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND; TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT TO STORE UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND, OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS AND MINERALS WHICH MAY BE PRODUCED FROM OTHER LANDS, WITH THE RIGHT OF ENTRY THEREON FOR SAID PURPOSES, AND WITH THE RIGHT TO CONSTRUCT, USE, MAINTAIN, ERECT, REPAIR, REPLACE AND REMOVE THEREON. AND THEREFROM, ALL PIPE LINES, TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH LINES, TANKS, MACHINERY, BUILDINGS AND OTHER STRUCTURES WHICH MAY BE NECESSARY AND REQUISITE TO CARRY ON OPERATIONS ON SAID LAND, WITH THE FURTHER RIGHT TO ERECT, MAINTAIN, OPERATE AND REMOVE A PLANT, WITH ALL NECESSARY APPURTENANCES FOR THE EXTRACTION OF GASOLINE FROM GAS, INCLUDING ALL RIGHTS NECESSARY OR CONVENIENT THERETO, AS EXCEPTED AND RESERVED IN THE DEED FROM TRANSAMERICA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, A CORPORATION, RECORDED MARCH 29, 1968 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2456, IN BOOK D3955 PAGE 185, OFFICIAL RECORDS AND RE- RECORDED JUNE 19, 1969 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1776 IN BOOK D4407 PAGE 591, OFFICIAL RECORDS. SAID INTEREST WAS CONVEYED TO TRANSAMERICA MINERALS COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 20, 1985 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 85-74005. AN INSTRUMENT PURPORTEDLY QUITCLAIMING, RELEASING AND SURRENDERING ONLY THE SURFACE RIGHTS TO A DEPTH OF 500 FEET AND PROVIDING FOR REMOVAL OF ALL GAS, MINERALS AND HYDROCARBONS BELOW SAID DEPTH AS CONVEYED TO TRANSAMERICA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION BY DEED RECORDED JANUARY 5, 1987 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 87-10522. EXHIBIT A-2 MAP OF SCHOOL PROPERTY aa. a8a• P.0.13. " 11073 e 4 SCALE: 1'-:500' -a,it PENM ENGINEEfWP3C. INC_ ONE TECHNOLOGY PARK J-725. IMAME. CA. 92518 (969) 753 L'w 471'33' a• L-150 00 LG20'50'10� � R=105000' , L-381 �i626'zo" Po R, SEG, 21) �`S" Cty R=10.50.00' r 2 j, 3/0t'1 �'�' a421.50 ,Vy�o w� R=705000' PARCEL 2 2e.o1 ACRES L=79.97' PARCEL 1 /,oP 0.75 ACRES aa. a8a• P.0.13. " 11073 e 4 SCALE: 1'-:500' -a,it PENM ENGINEEfWP3C. INC_ ONE TECHNOLOGY PARK J-725. IMAME. CA. 92518 (969) 753 EX alBIT A-3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF CITY PROPERTY THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY IS: ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 9 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN COUNTY Or LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER RECORD OF SURVEY, FILED IN OFFICE OF THEOpOUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.VE OF RECORD OF SURVEY, IN TH BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT AREA SHOWN AS 'NOT A PART OF THIS SUBDIVISION ON THE MAP OF TRACT NO. 27577, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 702 PAGES 22 THROUGH 25 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. SAID AREA BEING BOUNDED ON THE NORTHWEST BY SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF BREA CANYON ROAD, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT 27577; BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT NO. 27577; BOUNDED ON THE SOUTHEAST BY THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF LOT 76, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT NO. 27577; BOUNDED ON THE SOUTHWEST BY THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF LOT 39, THE NORTHERLY TERMINUS OF CASTLE ROCK ROAD, AND THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TEN (10) FOOT WALK, ALL BEING SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT NO. 27577. EXCEPT THEREFROM ALL OIL, GAS, MINERALS, AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES LYING BELOW THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND, BUT WITH NO RIGHT OF SURFACE ENTRY, AS PROVIDED IN DEEDS OF RECORD. EXalBIT A-4 MAP OF CITY PROPERTY u "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -3 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF PROJECT APPROVAL No. Condition.of.Approvat' Land Use 1-1 Unless effective sound mitigation can be demonstrated once the project is operational or other controls imposed on delivery and related activities, no delivery activities shall occur between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM. The Applicant shall include as part of the real estate disclosure documentation, as required by the California Department of Real Estate for purchasers of 1-2 those residential units to be constructed on the. project site, the disclosure that commercial activities are proposed on the adjacent property and that the operational characteristics of those activities may include trucking, delivery, and maintenance operations by diesel -fueled and non -diesel -fueled vehicles. Following the approval of the specific plan and/or any associated amendments to the City's General Plan, the Lead Agency shall provide notification of 1-3 that action to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), requesting that any subsequent amendments to SCAG's "Regional Transportation Plan" (RTP) and other regional planning forecasts reflect a greater level of population and housing growth within the City during the 2005- 2010 time period. Total new residential and non-residential development constructed on the project site shall not exceed 202 dwelling units and 153,985 gross leaseable square feet, respectively, unless a subsequent traffic study, addressing the traffic -related impacts associated with any such increase, is prepared by or 1-4 submitted to and deemed acceptable by the City or unless such increase can be determined by the City to not result in any substantial increase in project - related traffic impacts. Should additional traffic impacts be identified, the City, at its sole discretion, may initiate additional environmental review and/or impose additional conditions or other measures in response to those impacts. Geotechnical Hazards Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits, the Applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, that each of the recommendations contained in the project's preliminary geotechnical investigation and in any supplemental reports as may be prepared by the Applicant's 3-1 Geotechnical Engineer or by others have been incorporated into the project's design, development, and operation: The project shall be constructed, operated, and maintained in accordance with those recommendations and with such additional geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and soils recommendations as may result from further analyses that may be presented to, imposed, or adopted by the City. Hydrology and Water Quality If the flood control channel right-of-way is to be utilized as part of the project's development plan, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant 4-1 shall obtain,all requisite permits and approvals from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works — Flood Control District allowing for the overbuilding of the Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel and shall provide the City Engineer with documentation, acceptable to the City Engineer, demonstrating County approval and authorization, including a complete list of all permit requirements that may be associated therewith. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall prepare and, when acceptable, the City Engineer shall approve a standard urban stormwater 4-2 mitigation plan (SUSMP) conforming to the requirements of Section 8.12.1695 (Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan Requirements for New Development and Redevelopment Projects) of the Municipal Code. June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table E5-3 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF PROJECT APPROVAL No. Condition.ofApproval- Biological Resources (Continued) in order to demonstrate compliance with applicable State and federal resource protection policies designed to protect or compensate for the loss of biological resources, prior to the approval of a grading permit, were applicable, the Applicant shall provide the Director with documentation of receipt of the 5 1 following permits: (1) Section 401 (Federal Clean Water Act) water quality certification or waiver of waste discharge requirements from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region; (2) nationwide Section 404 (Federal Clean Water Act) permit from the United States Army Corps of Engineers; and (3) Section 1602 (California Fish and Game Code) streambed alteration agreement from the California Department of Fish and Game. The Applicant shall comply with all associated permit requirements. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit to the Community Development Director and, when acceptable, the Director shall accept for subsequent processing an arborist -prepared tree survey, specifying: (1) the precise number and type of protected trees that will be directly or 5 2 indirectly impacted by the proposed project; (2) the number (ratio), type, size, and source of trees that will be planted in compensation thereof; (3) the location of all replacement trees; (4) planting notes and irrigation requirements; (4) performance standards for the survivability of replacement trees; (5) a maintenance agreement stipulating the Applicant's obligations for a minimum 3 -year period, including the annual reporting; and (6) the amount and derivation of the security deposit required under the City's tree preservation ordinance. California Walnut Woodland. Measures to mitigate impacts to California walnut woodland will be orchestrated in concert with the replanting of trees protected by the City's tree preservation and protection ordinance. To the extent possible, southern California black walnut trees will be planted on 5-3 manufactured slopes within the development. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Director and, when acceptable, the Director shall approve a plan describing the number, size, and location of walnut trees to be planted and outline success criteria and adaptive management procedures to ensure that the mitigation plan is successful. As determined feasible by the Community Development Director, initial vegetation removal activities shall be conducted outside the nesting season (February 15 -August 15) to avoid impacts upon nesting birds. If initial vegetation removal activities occur during the nesting season, prior to the 5-4 commencement of any grading or grubbing activities, all suitable habitat shall first be Thoroughly surveyed by qualified biologist for the presence of nesting birds. if any active nests are detected, a buffer of at least 300 feet (500 feet for raptors) shall be delineated, flagged, and vegetation removal activities avoided therein until the nesting cycle is complete, as determined by the surveying biologist or a qualified biological monitor. BMP devices shall be designed in consultation with the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District and shall be of a type which minimizes the potential for vector (public nuisance) problems and maintained throughout the project life so as not to contribute to those problems. Unless accepted by the County and/or by the City, the responsibilities for and the funding of the maintenance of Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall constitute 5-5 obligations of the homeowners' association as to those BMPs associated with the project's residential component and the property owners' association as to those BMPs associated with the project's commercial component. BMPs not directly attributable to a single project component or use shall, by agreement between owners, become the shared obligation of both associations. Transportation and Circulation Construction Worker Parking and Equipment Staging Plan. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the City Engineer shall approve a construction worker parking and equipment staging plan (PESP) designed to minimize disturbance to the 6 1 surrounding residences to the greatest extent feasible. Unless otherwise authorized therein, contractors and other construction personnel performing construction activities in proximity to the project site shall be prohibited from parking and/or operating construction equipment, dumpsters, trailers, or other material within a public right-of-way or other public property. The PESP can be combined with or become a part of the construction traffic safety plan and/or any other construction management plan as may be required by the City. June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -3 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF PROJECT APPROVAL No, I Condition of Approval Transportation and Circulation (Continued) Unless previously approved by the City Engineer, no construction access shall be authorized from and no construction traffic shall permitted along 6-2 Castle Rock Road and Pasado Drive, except as may be required to construct and maintain any project- adjacent roject related street and other improvements within and adjacent to those rights-of-way. Construction Traffic Safety Plan. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the City Engineer shall approve a construction traffic mitigation plan (CTMP). The CTMP shall identify the travel and haul routes to be used by construction vehicles; s the points of ingress and egress for all construction vehicles; temporary street or lane closures, temporary signage, and temporary striping; to materials and equipment staging areas; maintenance plans to remove spilled debris from roadway surfaces; and the hours during which large construction equipment may be brought on/off the project site. The Applicant shall keep all haul routes clean and free. of debris including but not limited to gravel and 6-3 dirt as a result of its operations. The Applicant shall clean adjacent streets, as directed by the City Engineer, of any material which may have been spilled, tracked, or blown onto adjacent streets or areas. Hauling or transport of oversize loads will be allowed between the hours of 9:00 AM and 3:00 PM only, Monday through Friday, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. No hauling or transport will be allowed during nighttime hours, weekends, or federal holidays. The use of local streets shall be limited only to those that provide direct access to the destination. Haul trucks entering or exiting public streets shall at all times yield to public traffic. If hauling operations cause any damage to existing pavement, street, curb, and/or gutter along the haul route, the Applicant will be fully responsible for repairs. The repairs shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Traffic Control Plan. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the City shall approve a traffic control plan (TCP). The 7CP shall be consistent with the Southern California Chapter of the American Public Works Association's "Work Area Traffic Control Handbook' (WATCH), the California Department of Transportation's "Manual of Traffic Controls for Construction and Maintenance Work Zones," or 6 4 such alternative as may be deemed acceptable by the City. The TCP shall describe the Applicant's plans to safely and efficiently maintain vehicular and non -vehicular access along local roadways throughout the construction period. If any temporary access restrictions or lane closures are proposed by the duration and frequency of such restrictions, and the emergency access and safety measures Applicant, the TCP shall delineate detour routes, the hours, tion traffic safety plan that will be implemented during those closures or restrictions. The TCP can be combined with or become a part of the construction and/or any other construction management plan as may be required by the City. Shared Parking Plan. Prior to the issuance of building permits for any on-site commercial use, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the Community Development Director and the City Engineer shall approve a shared parking study. The study, conducted using the Urban Land Institute's Shared Parking" (Second Edition, 2005) unless otherwise approved by the City, shall present a quantification of on-site commercial parking needs, 6-5 quantify the number of on-site parking spaces requiredundearking sexistinpades thatlneled t be provided to re, discuss and support those couatemmercial aI uses t for sharedparking developed n site commercial uses, and quantify the number and typeop the project site. The number, type, and location of on-site parking shall be determined by the City based, in whole or in part, by the findings of that shared parking study. Air Quality The Applicant shall include as part of the real estate disclosure documentation, as required by the California Department of Real Estate for purchasers of 7-1 those residential units to be constructed on the project site, the disclosure that commercial activities are proposed on the adjacent property and that the operational characteristics of those activities may include trucking, delivery, and maintenance operations involving diesel -fueled vehicles. June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -3 JECT APPROVAL June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF PRO Condition -of Approval No. Noise All residential and commercial units shall include forced air ventilation designed and installed in accordance with Title 24 of California Building Code 8-1 standards. Public Services Prior to the commencement of grading activities, the Applicant shall prepare and submit for review by the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department the activities that will be instituted by the Applicant to secure the construction site and the equipment 9 (LACSD) a draft construction security plan outlining a 1 final and materials located thereupon from potential criminal incidents. The Applicant shall incorporate the recommendations of the LACSD, if any, construction security plan and shall implement that plan during the construction period. be the opportunity to review and comment upon building plans and the configuration of Prior to the issuance of building permits, the LACSD shall provided the development in order to: (1) facilitate opportunities for improved emergency access and response; (2) ensure the consideration of design strategies design recommendations to enhance public safety and reduce potential demands 9 2 that facilitate public safety and police surveillance; and (3) offer specific upon police protection services. Prior to the commencement of grading or grubbing activities, t he Applicant shall prepare and submit and the Los Angeles County Fire Department fire program and workplace standards for fire safety outlining those activities to 9 3 (LACFD) shall review and, when deemed acceptable, approve a protection be undertaken by the Applicant during the construction period. The Applicant shall abide by specific project -level permit conditions identified by the LACFD. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and the Los Angeles County Fire Department shall review and, when deemed irrigation in compliance with County Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (Fire Zone 4) 9-4 . acceptable, approve a fuel modification, landscape, and plan standards. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the. Los Angeles County Fire Departmentd,snnd fire ) will capacity and,when deeme location, sizing, proposed water meinslandpfire hyrovedra is and 9 5 . water improvement plans including, but not limited to, the access improvements to ensure compliance with applicable Fire Code requirements: and (2) building plans. The project's water system shall be proposed designed in response to final fire flow requirements identified by the LACFD. submit to the Building Official for review and approval a temporary fencing and signage plan 9 6 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall designed to discourage access to any active construction areas by children and other unauthorized parties. documentation demonstrating that the Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall present the City with a certificate of compliance or other Unified School District's School Board resolutions governing the payment of school impact fees or has 9-7. Applicant has complied with the Walnut Valley Assembly Bill 2926 authorized school fee mitigation agreement or is not subject to the school impact fee exaction. entered into an Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map, unless an alternative milestone event or other manner of fulfillment of the Applicant's obligations under 21.32 of the Municipal Code is first approved by the City Council, the 9-8 Section 21.32.040 (Park Land Dedications and Fees) in Chapter (Subdivisions) Applicant shall provide the City with an in -lieu park fee payment in the manner and in the amount authorized thereunder. June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table -ES -3 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF PROJECT APPROVAL N.7 Condition of Appmal Utilities and Service Systems Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, a sewer area study, prepared by a licensed civil engineer registered in the State of California, shall be e Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) for review and, when deemed acceptable, for submitted to the City Engineer and to th itoring at specific locations to be determined by the City Engineer and the LACDPW. The approval. The sewer area study shall include sewer flow mon 10-1 sewer flow analysis shall include calculations for the quantities of sewer flow for the pre -development and post development conditions and determine the impact on all affected City and County -operated sewerage facilities. Should project related sewer flows pa ity deficiency to impact the sewer capacity downstream from the proposed development, the Applicant shall be required to mitigate any potential capacity deficiency by a method approved by the City Engineer or the LACDPW, subject to appropriate jurisdictional authorities. The Applicant shall be responsible for all costs required to mitigate the potential capacity deficiency, including upgrading existing sewer mains. Aesthetics The specific plan shall include design details, acceptable to both the City Engineer and to the Community Development Director, for all proposed retaining 12-1 walls. Retaining wall plans shall include landscape and irrigation details sufficient to ensure that each of those elements are, as appropriate, integrated into wall design and that the interrelationship between those elements are considered from structural integrity and aesthetic viewpoints. June 2009 Draft Environmental impact Report Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM DRAFT MITIGATION Compliances Mitigation Mitigation.`Measure Verification Milestone No. Biological Resources Jurisdictional Features. In order to reduce impacts to United States Army Corps of Engineers and Regional an California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdictional the I Board (ACOE/RWQCB) Water Quality Controd waters, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of of any discretionary permits and approval as may be required from the CommunityIssuance Development of Grading 5-1 Community Development Director, receipt ACOE, RWQCB, and CDFG and commit to the provision of compensatory jurisdictional resources meeting or replacement of ACOE/RWQCB Director Permits exceeding the following minimal standards: (1) the on-site and/or off-site replacement of GDFG the int dtheionai ureambednal �andt(3) theoincorpoeation of design features and asrs sociated ripard�an habitat atla 2(1)ratio proposed project's design and development. Traffic and Circulation Prior to the recordation of the final tract map, the Applicant shall provide, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, tion rd a "fair -sat the intersection improvements identified in the traffic impact analysis or provide Pathfinderb Road; (2) of the improvements to the following intersections: (1) Brea Canyon Road (W)Cit the Spring Lane; (4) Diamond Bar Final Tract Map cost Diamond Bar Boulevard at Pathfinder Road; (3) Brea Canyon Road at Cold Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (6) SR -57 SB Ramps at Brea Engineer Recordation 6-1 Boulevard at Cold Spring Lane; (5) Pathfinder Canyon Cutoff Road; (7) SR -57 NB Ramps at Brea Canyon Cutoff/Diamond Bar Boulevard; (8) Brea Canyon oad at Canyonyon Cutoff. Boulele vard at is nue; and (12) Comond lima Roadrat Brea Canea Road at Diamond Bar Boulevard; Bar evad at Silver Bullet Drive; (11) D The final site plan shall include and accommodate those traffic measures, Improvements, and such other to ensure the safe and efficient City Engineer Site Plan Approval 6-2 pertinent factors and/or facilities as may be identified by the City Engineer movement of project -related traffic. Air QualityBuilding llon g paints shall contain no more than 0.22 pound/gallon (1D0 ram/liter) of volatile organic Community Permit Issuance 7-1 . All non-residential compound (VOC). reduction measures as may be approved by the City of Development Director Building Permit Issuance 7-2 The Applicant shall abide by any other air pollution Diamond Bar and/or by the South Coast Air Quality Management District Building Permit Traffic lane improvements and signalization, as outlined in the traffic study, shall be implemented and will created in the project area. City Issuance 7-3 generally improve local traffic flow, thereby reducing emissions bus stop shelters at any bus stops Engineer Building Permit 7-4 To encourage the use of mass transportation, the Applicant shall place situated or to be situated along any site frontage routes if not already so equipped. Issuance June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES -16 Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 (Continued) DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM Compliance Mitigation No Mitigation fVleasure: - Verificat'ion Milestone Air Quality (Continued) To encourage the use of localized commercial facilities and reduce the need for vehicle travel, the Applicant shall City Final Tract Map Engineer Recordation 7-5 include both bike lanes (where feasible) and bike paths between the residential and commercial development areas. Additionally, the Applicant shall provide sidewalks and walking paths to the proposed commercial areas. The Applicant shall specify the installation of energy efficient lighting, air conditioning, water heaters, and City Building Permit 7-6 appliances for all residential and commercial uses. Engineer Issuance 7-7 1 The Applicant shall specify the installation of energy efficient street lighting. June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES -17 Executive Summary Noise In accordance with the Development Code, construction shall be restricted to between the hours of 7:00ral AM and time on Sundays or on federal Building Construction 8-1 c 8:0o PM on weekdays and Saturdays. No construction shall occur at any any servicing of equipment and to the delivery of materials to or Inspector Term holidays. These days and hours shall also apply from the site. Building Construction 6-2 All construction equipment shall be properly maintained and tuned to minimize noise emissions. Inspector Term All equipment shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers, air intake silencers, and engine shrouds no less uilding Inspector for Construction Term 8-3 effective than originally equipped. the site p when doing any work Building Construction The construction contractor shall place temporary noise barriers along line o f sight Such barriers shall attempt to block the line of sight between the residents Inspector p Term 8-4 within 100 feet of any residential units, and construction equipment. compressors that can The construction contractor shall specify the use of electric stationary equipment (e.g., generators and noise sources (e.g., g City Engineer Building Permit Issuance 8-5 operate off the power grid where feasible. Where infeasible, stationary shall be located as far from residential receptor locations as is feasible. Building Permit compressors) to any and all provisions set forth by the City of Diamond Bar Planning Department. planning Manager Issuance 8-6 Construction shall be subject travel lane unless additional Final Tract Map 8-7 No residential units shall be located within 830 feet of the SR -57 Freeway's nearest of the Community Development Director. Community Development Recordation sound attention is provided to the satisfaction be located within 60 feet of the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard. Director Building Permit Issuance 8-8 No commercial units shall June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES -17 Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 (Continued) DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM Mitigation No. Mitigation.Meas� Milestone Noise (Continued) ie of Diamond Bar Boulevard unless additional No residential units shall be located within 130 feet of the centerli 8-g sound attention is provided to the satisfaction of the Community t evelopment Director. Cultural Resources Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified archaeologi: shall be retained by the Applicant and approved by the City to monitor all vegetation removal and groun the study area: (1) the boundary of SD -Cults 11-1 following portions of Cultural -1; and (3) the riparian areas that were not previously sur I disturbance to a depth of three feet within the archaeologist will determine if additional monitoring below the de Issuance of bedrock conditions and presence/absence of archaeological mat al -1; (2) the open valley floor adjacent to SD- for ground disturbing activities outside of these monitor areas. Grading If cultural resources are identified during monitoring of the group eyed due to dense vegetation cover. The allowed to temporarily divert or redirect grading or excavation ac permits to make an evaluation of the find and determine appropriate tree )th of three feet is warranted based on soil and preservation where praticable and public interpretation of histor resources recovered will be documented on California Departure CHRIS-SCCIC. The archaeologist shall prepare a final :rials. No archaeological monitoring is required with the 'Applicant, the City, and the California Historical Resources Infon Center at the California State University, Fullerton (CHRIS-SCCI 11-2 Preservation. The report shall include documentation and interp Interpretation will include full evaluation of the eligibility of SD -Ci vibes in the vicinity of those resources in order Historic Places and CEQA. The report shall also include all spa designate repositories in the event that significant resources are ment. Treatment will include the goals of during ground disturbing activities that occur outside the designs be temporarily redirected away from the vicinity of the find shall Applicant. The archaeologist shall coordinate with the Applicani and archaeological resources. All cultural . proper site visit and evaluation is made by the archaeologist. If human remains are encountered unexpectedly during constru and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturb it of Parks and Recreation Site Forms to be filed made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursue 11-3 Code. Ifthe remains are determined to be of Native American c Native American Heritage Commission (NAI Sport about the monitoring to be filed with the notify the California thought to be the Most Likely Descendent of the deceased Nati) course of action should be taken in dealing with the remains. re. compliance Verification Milestone ie of Diamond Bar Boulevard unless additional Community Development Final Tract Map Recordation ! evelopment Director. Director shall be retained by the Applicant and Community I disturbance to a depth of three feet within the Development Issuance of al -1; (2) the open valley floor adjacent to SD- Director Grading eyed due to dense vegetation cover. The and permits )th of three feet is warranted based on soil and City :rials. No archaeological monitoring is required Engineer disturbing activities, the archaeologist shall be vibes in the vicinity of those resources in order ment. Treatment will include the goals of and archaeological resources. All cultural . it of Parks and Recreation Site Forms to be filed Sport about the monitoring to be filed with the cation System South Central Coastal Information ;), required by the California Office of Historic ilding Construction ! as Station of resources recovered, if any. Inspector Term Itural-1 with respect to the California Register of ialists, reports as appendices. The City shall recovered. If cultural resources are identified ted monitoring area, ground disturbing activities the archaeologist is notified by the intil retained as to the immediate treatment of the find until a tion excavation and grading activities, Health nce shall occur until the County Coroner has it to Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Building Construction scent, the County Coroner has 24 hours to Inspector Term IC). The NAHC will then identify the person(s) a American, who will then help determine what June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES -18 Executive Summary 9 "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 (Continued) AND MONITORING PROGRAM DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING Compliance Mitigation :. Mitigation Measure:. Verification Milestone No. Cultural Resources (Continued) issuance of a grading permit, a qualified paleontologist meeting the qualifications established by he by the City. to develop and Community Issuance of Prior to the Society of Vertebrate Paleontologists shall be retained by the Applicant and approved shall ude a areas'tThehe of tt edetermine De�Di Director oent Grading Permits 11-4 oPd delineate selan nsitive five project development naordernt implementa pist paleontological tol gii initiationmonitoring paleontologist may also perform collections of fossils from the surface and near -surface. Issuance of The paleontologist shall attend a pre -grade meeting in order to become familiar with the proposed depths and city Grading Engineer Permits 11-5 pattems of grading of the study area. Issuance of permit The shall establish a curation agreement with an accredited facility prior to grading p city Grading Engineer Permits 11-6 paleontologist issuance. Formation monitor, supervised by the paleontologist, shall monitor all excavations in the Puente an found during ground -disturbing Building Construction Term A paleontological or excavations anticipated to extend into the Puente Formation. If fossils are be to halt the ground -disturbing activities within 25 feet of Inspector 11 7 activities, the paleontological monitor shall empowered the find in order to allow evaluation of the find and determination of appropriate treatment, p identified, the report shall contain Community ng ty Sign -Off The paleontologist shall prepare a final report on the monitoring. If fossils were and curation. A copy of the report shall be filed with the City Development Director 11-8 an appropriate description of the fossils, treatment, curated fossils. Museum of Los Angeles County and shall accompany any and the Natural History Aesthetics Pole -mounted or wall -mounted luminaires installed for the purpose of illuminating commercial areas, parkinglots. lighting standards and demonstrate ot ential Community Building Permit Development Issuance existing rlesidght roadways, and driveways shall conform to appropriate use. at the putilec b Director 12-1 sct leets or otheoundaries exceed 0.5 horizontal foot candle, as measured �oinglight sensitive land uses. be to any adjoining p These standards shall not applied June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES -19 Executive Summary Attachment6 AGENDA REPORT CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21825 COPLEY DRIVE - DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117 ITEM NO. 7.1 DIATE: April 13, 2010 CASE/RILE NUMBER: "Site D" Specific Plan - General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03, Zone Change No, 2007-04, Specific Plan No. 2007-01, Tentative Tract Map No. 70687, and Environmental Impact Report 2007-02 (SCH No. 2008021014). PROJECT APPL11CAN T: Walnut Valley Unified School District and City of Diamond Bar LEAD AGENCY- City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department PROJECT LOCATION: Site D is comprised of approximately 30.36 acres located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Numbers 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-903 and 8714-015-001). APPLICATION REQUEST: To recommend that the City Council take the following actions: 1. Certify Environmental Impact Report 2007-02 which provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the Specific Plan area.. The EIR includes mitigation measures for the project, addresses project alternatives, and identifies the environmentally superior project alternative. Because the project will result in environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels, adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations would be required before the City Council can approve the Specific Plan. 2. Adopt Facts and Eindilnga and Statement of Overriding Consideratilons for the Site D Specific Plan based on findings that the Specific Plan would result in identified economic and social benefits that will accrue to the City, to the School District, and to the region, and important public policy objectives will result from the implementation of the proposed Specific Plan. Therefore the proposed Specific Plan's identified benefits override e number of significant environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated. 3. Adopt General Plan Amendiment No. 2007-03 to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C) to Specific Plan (SP). 4. Adopt Zone Change No. 2007-04 to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential (RL) and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan. 5. Adopt Specific Plan No. 2007-01 to adopt the Site D Specific Plan for the approximately 30.36 -acre site for the construction of up to 202 residential dwelling units; up to 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial; and approximately 8 acres of open space areas, easements and rights-of-way. The Specific Plan contains development standards and guidelines tailored to take into account the physical characteristics of the property and its context, and to prescribe design.criteria that will govern the future build -out of the site. 6. Approve Tentative Tract Map No. 706007 to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes. STAFF RECOMMENDATION. - Open the public hearing to take public testimony from the public regarding the Draft Environmental Impact Report and all land use entitlements, and continue the matter to the April 27, 2010 meeting. The Site D Specific Plan (SDSP) was prepared to facilitate processing and approval of an approximately 30.36 -acre property referred to as Site D, and its associated discretionary and administrative approvals. The Specific Plan will guide the build -out of the property in a manner which is consistent with City and State policies and standards, and assures that the project is properly developed in .a coordinated manner. The proposed Specific Plan would allow the construction of 202 residential dwelling units; 153,985 gross square feet of commercial use; and approximately 8 acres of open space areas, easements and rights-of-way. The Specific Plan is a detailed policy document, which replaces the land use designation and zoning of the underlying properties with more detailed criteria and performance standards. It is not a development plan to construct the residential and commercial buildings. Future developers will be required to submit project -specific development plans in accordance with the criteria set forth in the Specific Plan, which will be subject to review and approval by the City. Page 2 of 22 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010,docx BACKGROUND: The SDSP project area consists of 30.36 acres and comprise of the following properties: The Walnut Valley Unified School District owns 28.71 acres. As early as the 1970s, the District has found the property unnecessary for future school use and declared it surplus property. A 0.98 -acre strip of land along Brea Canyon road is owned by the City. A 0.67 -acre segment of a flood control channel, owned and maintained by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, separates the City and School District properties. Under the proposed Specific Plan, the channel will be covered and .used for parking, non -habitable structures, and landscape and circulation elements, which are allowed under a lease agreement with the Flood Control District. Prior Development Proposals In 1990, the School District prepared a tentative tract map to subdivide Site D into 87 lots for the purpose of developing single-family detached residences. This effort prompted the City to study the feasibility of purchasing the land from the District for the purpose of developing a community park, which was supported by a School Board appointed advisory committee (the 7-11 Committee"). In 1991, the City pursued park development grants for Site D and the Pantera Park site, but received grant monies for Pantera Park only. In the years following this endeavor, the City completed upgrades to nearby Heritage Park, and the School District upgraded the recreational facilities at Castlerock Elementary School (the City and School District have joint -use agreements for the recreational facilities at all of the schools located in Diamond Bar). The City and School have since agreed to cooperate and collaborate in'the planning efforts for Site D so that each may advance its respective objectives for the disposition of the property. PROJECT ®BJL C T 11VE3 The Walnut Valley Unified School District desires the disposition of the property to yield the maximum return to the District for the benefit of its constituents and its educational mission. The City of Diamond Bar desires that the project site be developed in a manner as to assure compatibility with and to meet the needs of the surrounding area; to implement Senate Bill 375 through the creation of a mixed-use development that promotes reductions in greenhouse gas emissions through reductions in vehicle miles traveled; to help respond to the identified housing demand outiineol in the,current Regional Housing Needs Assessment (PHNA); and to provide a desirable level of sales tax revenues to the City. Page 3 of 22 CD: StafrReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010.docx On July 1, 2007, the City and the Walnut Valley Unified School District executed a Memorandum of Understanding (M®U) whereby the, parties agreed to collaborate In the planning of the future land use for the project site—through the creation of a Specific Plan—so that both parties may each advance their respective objectives for the disposition of the property. The M®U further stipulates that "(o)f the usable acreage, on Site D, a minimum of fifty percent (50%) will be designated for residential development, and fifty percent (50%) will be designated for commercial use, exclusive of necessary infrastructure." A copy of the M®U is provided as Attachment #4. The land use parameters set forth in the M®U establish the following additional project objectives: Pursue the establishment of site-specific land use policies that allow, in reasonable comparable acreage, the development of both commercial and residential uses of the property, accommodating the provision of additional housing opportunities and the introduction of revenue -generating uses; and Establish a specific plan as the guiding land -use policy mechanism to define the nature and intensity of future development, and to establish design and development parameters for the project site, so as to allow conveyance of the subject property to one or more developers and/or master builders, and provide to the purchasers reasonable assurance as to the uses that would be authorized on the project site and the nature of those exactions required for those uses. The District and the City are currently not partnered with or in discussions with any developers. The focus at this time is solely to adopt a prescriptive land use plan while the public entities, as the property owners, are in a position to exert maximum control/influence over the outcome of subsequent development. SURROUNWNG LAID USES AND DEVELOPMENT- The EVELO MENT-The vacant 30.36 -acre site is located in the southwestern portion of the City of Diamond Bar, on the southeast corner of Brea Canyon road and Diamond Bat Boulevard. The site is bordered on the north by Diamond Bar Boulevard, single-family neighborhoods to the southeast and southwest, and Brea Canyon Road to the west. The Brea Canyon Flood Control Channel runs roughly parallel to Brea Canyon Road and cuts through the western portion of the property. The area north of Diamond Bar Boulevard is developed with a church, and single-family residential homes, and the area across Brea Canyon Road is developed with a gas station and professional office buildings. EX@STlNG S6TE CHARIACTi ERIISTtCS: The site is a relatively flat plateau with steep slopes facing north and west. The elevation differential falls approximately 10.0 feet from a high point in the northeast to the low point in the southwest portion of the property. The site is currently characterized by the following features: Page 4 of 22 CID: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Repot 04-13-2010.docx Much of the site is covered with annual grasses, brush and small trees. However there are areas of dense brush and trees located in the central and northern portions of the site. A stand of mature eucalyptus trees is located on the slope adjacent to Diamond Sar Boulevard. Three species of protected tre'es, as listed on the City's tree preservation and protection ordinance exist, including 75 Southern California Slack Walnuts, two Coast Live Oaks and five Willows. The Oaks and Willows, however, do not meet the size criteria in the tree ordinance to be classified as protected trees. Foot trails and access roads traverse the site. A Restricted Use Area (RUA) exists along the rear slope areas coterminous with the property. The RUA is comprised of engineered slopes and designed to transmit surface waters away from the slopes. A small area at the eastern portion of the property drains northerly to Diamond Sar Boulevard. The balance of runoff flows westerly to the Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel, a concrete -lined flood control channel owned and maintained by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District. Three intermittent blue -line streams flow generally from east to west. "Blue -line streams" are naturally -occurring watercourses that are depicted on the official maps of the U.S. Geological Survey. Site D Project Area boundaries Page 5 of 22 CD: Staff Reports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010.docx Site and Suer oundiin Gsneral PlIan, Zoning and Land Uses bite Public Facility and RLIJ�-1 Vacant General Commercial Low -Medium Diamond Sar Blvd., RLM Res Residential Church and Single -Family Residential South Low Density RL, RLM Single -Family Residential Residential East bow Density RL Single -Family Residential Residential Brea Canyon Load, West Professional Office C-1 Gas Station and Professional Office Buildings KEY ELEMENTS OF THE SITE D SPEC11FIZ PLAN: The proposed Specific Plan seeks to promote the creation of a high-quality, mixed-use development through the establishment of development standards and design guidelines. Copies of the draft Specific Plan have been distributed to the Commission under separate cover. Copies have also been made available at City Hall,. County of Los Angeles Public Library, and on the City's website. The Site D Specific Plan creates a master planned community, with three building pads. The Specific Plan incorporates physical design elements that reflect the unique topographical characteristics of Diamond Bar through the creation of a landform grading design that emulates natural topographic contours and undulations. One building pad will be graded, to a slightly elevated level above the surrounding streets and designated for commercial use. The remaining two building pads are elevated as it slopes up along Diamond Bar Boulevard and designated for residential use. Without a Specific Plan proposed for this area, the City will have less input or control in the manner in which the property is developed, the nature of the resulting land uses, and the design standards established for the new uses. Conditions of project approval are included into the Specific Plan as performance standards. Land Use Flan The illustrative site plan and summary below depict the primary components of the SDSP: Page 6 of 22 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010.docx Secondary Access a 9 +..r �., L ,•x ! yx rf o ma, '` ��Xii" j 4g / f p r h Primary Access' -� Residential Pad ,a r .off ��. / Y. Commercial Pad 1 st `� a � ;'� ra�,�v ° " C t-rrIr PVi L3 6 Lam" C Residential f L Pad'r �rC•� Emergency Vehicle Access Three elevated building pads (one commercial and two residential pads); A maximum of 202 residential dwelling units. The Site D Specific Plan intended residential uses will be "for sale" products only. It is envisioned that an attached townhome product would be best suited for the site, but does not preclude the development of any of a variety of housing product types, such as attached or detached single-family units, attached multi -family units, condominiums, townhomes, senior housing, or affordable housing; Up to maximum of 153,885 sq, ft. of commercial use could be developed on the project site, The intent is to have a small grocery store as the major anchor with secondary anchor retail commercial and free-standing restaurants to be located at the project entry corners in high profile locations. The permitted uses include those allowed under the Community Commercial (C-2) zone of the City's development code with certain exclusions such as manufacturing, auto sales/rental,.second hand stores, bed and breakfast inns, car wash, child day care centers, medical services, vehicle services, etc.; and L.A. County Flood Control Channel will be covered and used for parking, non - habitable structures, landscape and circulation. Page 7 of 22 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 0413-2010.docx Lard Use: Development Standards • Green, Sustainable Development: Provides a green and sustainability model requirement looking at energy efficiency, healthy indoor air quality, waste reduction, water efficiency, use of renewable and recyclable materials for building construction, etc. The required energy standards for the project exceed those currently required by State Title 24; • Building Setbacks: The buildings will have minimum setbacks requiring 15 feet from Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road measured from top or toe of pad, 85 feet from the southerly property line (which abut residential), and 30 feet from the easterly edge. Visual analysis was performed to understand how the building massing of both commercial and residential would look from the street and neighboring. properties. This analysis led the City to expand some of the building setbacks; Landscaped Setbacks: There are minimum parking lot setbacks that will have landscaped screenings and buffer, providing 35 feet setback from Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road and 30 feet from the southerly property line and easterly edge; Page S of 22 CD: StaffiReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010.docx 10.1 acres Commercial (153,985 Sq. Ft. 10.1 acres Residential (202 dwelling units) ®pen Space, Basements, 8 acres Rights -of -Way Totall 30.36 Development Standards • Green, Sustainable Development: Provides a green and sustainability model requirement looking at energy efficiency, healthy indoor air quality, waste reduction, water efficiency, use of renewable and recyclable materials for building construction, etc. The required energy standards for the project exceed those currently required by State Title 24; • Building Setbacks: The buildings will have minimum setbacks requiring 15 feet from Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road measured from top or toe of pad, 85 feet from the southerly property line (which abut residential), and 30 feet from the easterly edge. Visual analysis was performed to understand how the building massing of both commercial and residential would look from the street and neighboring. properties. This analysis led the City to expand some of the building setbacks; Landscaped Setbacks: There are minimum parking lot setbacks that will have landscaped screenings and buffer, providing 35 feet setback from Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road and 30 feet from the southerly property line and easterly edge; Page S of 22 CD: StaffiReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010.docx Retaining Walls: Plantable crib walls will be used as retaining walls, which are filled with suitable backfill and live vegetation planted in the individual cells; Protected . Species: Replant Southern California Walnut Woodland within the development; Landscape and Streetscape Requirements: There will be planting of a dense stand of native California trees such as Sycamores and Willows that are more native to the environment within the large slopes and predominately around the internal streets along the perimeter of the residential pads to replace the removal of Eucalyptus trees; © Streetscape: Parkways, sidewalks, and bike trails link the site to Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard; and Recreational Facilities: Incorporate private, passive and active recreational facilities. Circulation flan Primary entryway/access will be via a new signalized intersection located at Cherrydale Drive. The primary access will consist of a 60 -foot wide right-of-way, consisting of two 18 -foot wide travel lanes. A 7 -foot wide curb -adjacent parkway and a 5 -foot wide sidewalk will align both sides of the street; and Secondary entryway/access. to the commercial site will be provided along Brea Canyon Road, via a right -in and right -out only point of ingress and egress. Additional emergency -only access to the project site will be provided from Posado Drive. Traffic Improvements e The existing roadways will be improved as part of implementing the Specific Plan. The development's obligations toward the existing, and plus project traffic conditions will be improved through the following traffic improvements: Pathfinder Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff Road: Widen and/or restripe eastbound Brea Canyon Cutoff Road to provide one left -turn lane, two through lanes and a separate right -turn lane. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re-cut/install new vehicle loop dgtectors, modification to traffic signal controller); SR -57 Southbound Ramps at Brea Canyon Cutoff Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard: Install a traffic signal. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing signing and striping on Brea Canyon Cutoff or SR -57 southbound ramps; and Page 9 of 22 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010.docx Cheerydale Drive at Diamond Bar Boulevard: Provide an option left/through lane and a separate right -tum lame on the northbound approach; restdpe southbound approach to provide an option left/through/right-turn'lane on Cherrydale. Widen eastbound approach to provide a separate right -turn lane. Modify median and restrips Diamond Bar Boulevard to provide dual westbound left -turn lanes. Install traffic signal. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing signing and striping on Cherrydale Drive or Diamond Bar Boulevard. I t.T P �..✓iu+ ,.w �. v,�rrrtirl niarsection 1u - area Canyon Road and ulamona bar aoulevaro lSLjik r 1 ¢ 01 '_A ri IL JF. ��NTjg tY Lw L }!y,..1 i.„_— Interseodon 17 - Cherrydale Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard &ea Cap,nn Fiaada} Ofamer}Q�ar daufe.a.N 141den andrar ra•atApe noN:tmund apprmd on 6— Canyon Road to pronde a s=-cmd fight -Ln lane. Aiiden ander -Op' .-L— rd approach and depedora oh Dianond S.. 6.1 vald to a 9" through Vie. RE- Wpe � Ihn nd app—hon D'onond Sar9aule ar: la pmNde a seeand M*n lana. dhaneare Dave a1 D,amane aa•ao,ra.-ay FroHde as option IaNUwugh lana and a sapanis dghl-lun lane m the norcrhound anpro 'c r svipee soalnhound approach la provide an op6an laldduoughl dghl-tum i— on Chen; dale. LYden and or re -ship Ihouod app -oh and depanur . VU nd 6s 6oula and to a Md through lane and pmdde a eeparale dgr-mn 1313. , My roadion and re dpe Dia d F ­ .19—d to Amide dual—lhoune laiden lanae. hs13u harm sigml o The developers of the site will also be required to pay fair -share fees of the construction costs to implement additional improvements to mitigate the cumulative traffic impacts of existing traffic, future non -project traffic, and project traffic. Seethe Traffic and Circulation Improvements and Cost Estimates, and Traffic Improvement Study Maps attached to this report (Attachments ##5 & 6). ANALYSIIS: Review Authority (Diamond Bar Municipal Code Sections 22.70 and 22.60.010) A General Man Amendment, Zone Change, Specific Flan, Tentative Tract Map, and an Environmental Impact Report are required for the proposed Specific Flan. Each approval is described below: Page 10 of 22 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 0413-2010.docx General] tiara Amendment No. 2007-03 is .a request to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C) to Specific Plan (SP). The City s General Plan, adopted on July 25, 1995, is a long-range planning document developed as a comprehensive growth -management and community development strategy. It defines citywide policies that are achieved through subsequent community plans, ordinances, standards and guidelines, studies, capital improvements, economic development and other pertinent programs. The adopted policies of the General Plan guide the physical development pattern and promote the necessity of adequate public services and facilities. The General Plan is the controlling document. The preparation, adoption, implementation and maintenance of the General Plan aids in informing developers, Citizens, decision -makers, and others of the rules that will guide development, and provide a basis for local government judgments. All land use decisions of the City have a direct correlation to the established goals and policies of the General Plan. The existing General Plan land use designation in the area east of the L.A. County Flood' Control Channel is Public Facility (PF), and the area west of the. Channel is General Commercial (C). It is the objective of the City to promote and facilitate the attainment of the goals, objectives, plans, and policies contained in the General Plan by requiring new development to be compatible with surrounding land uses, and balancing -the retention of the natural environment with its conversion to urban form. The project site is the only area within the City that was designated as Public Facility (PF). At the time the General Plan was prepared, this property was perceived as a unique property requiring a site-specific land -use status. The PF designation is designed to identify existing or potential (future) sites for necessary public facilities or infrastructure improvements. The primary purpose is to provide areas for the conduct of public and institutional activities, such as public schools, parks and water facilities, etc. With regards to the General Commercial (C) designation, the intent is to provide for regional, freeway -oriented, and/or community retail and service commercial uses at a floor area ratio between 0.25 and 1.0. The land use designation is being changed to allow for more suitable uses. The PF designation no longer serves the long-term goals and objectives for the City or the School District. Zone Change Pio. 2007-04 is a request to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential (R!-) and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan. The City has elected to prepare and process a Specific Plan for this property for the purposes of: Defining the types of permitted and conditionally permitted land uses that the City believes to be appropriate for the project site and the project setting; a Defining the reasonable limits to the intensity and density of those uses; and Establishing the design and development standards for those uses. Page 11 of 22 CD: StafiReports - PCISite D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010.docx Specific Plan No. 2007-01 is a request to adopt the Site D Specific Plan for the approximately 30.36 -acre site for the construction of 202 residential dwelling units at a density of 20 units per acre; 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial use at a 0.35 floor• area ratio; and approximately 8 -acres of open space areas, easements and rights-of-way. The Specific Plan contains development standards and guidelines tailored to take into account the natural resources of the property. A Specific Plan is a regulatory tool that local governments can use to implement the General Flan and guids development in a localized area. California Government Code Sections 65450 through 65454 establishes the authority to adopt a Specific Plan, identify the required contents of a Specific Plan, and mandate consistency with the General Plan. A Specific Plan is able to focus on the unique characteristics of a specific area by customizing the planning process and land use regulations for that area. It also provides for flexibility and encourages innovative use of land resources and development of a variety of land use types. The use of a Specific Plan was chosen to guide the development on this site to establish development standards (e.g., permitted uses, setbacks, landscaping, sign criteria, subdivision, etc.), design guidelines, and public improvement requirements unique to this property that would facilitate the goals of the General Plan and augment the City's revenue base to better support public services and facilities. Through the adoption of a site-specific planning document, the Site ® Specific Plan seeks to promote the creation of a high-quality, mixed-use development through establishment of development standards and design guidelines. A maximum of 202 . residential dwelling units and 153,985 sq. ft. of commercial use could be developed on the project site. Tentative Trach Map No. 706987 is a request to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels, create an internal circulation system and common open space areas, and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes. The subdivision of the project site creates separate development areas within the subject property that can be conveyed to subsequent holders of real property interests, as well as establish an internal circulation system and common open space areas. The development of the project site will be designed with a common landscape and architectural theme. Trails and sidewalks will be provided to allow easy access to each use from within the project and from the surrounding community. The Site D Specific Plan is a set of guiding criteria. A developer will have to go through another approval process for a development plan to construct the residential and commercial buildings. Page 92 of 22 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-201 O.docx General Plan ConslstenCv California Government Code states that a Specific Plan shall include a statement of the relationship of the Specific Plan to the General Plan, and further, that it may not be adopted or amended unless found to be consistent with the General Plan. Consistency with the General Plan is achieved when the various land uses within the Specific Plan are compatible with the objectives, policies, general pattern of land uses and programs contained in the General Plan. The Site D Specific Plap implements the goals and policies of the City's General Plan, listed in the Draft Specific Plan and Findings of Fact. Project Benefits The proposed Specific Plan would result in a number of identifiable community benefits, some of which include. • Defines the types of permitted and conditionally permitted land uses that will be appropriate for the project site and for the project setting, defines reasonable limits to the type, intensity, and density of those uses, and establishes the design and development standards for.those uses; • Serves as a valuable regulatory tool for the systematic implementation of the City's General Plan; el Imposes reasonable development controls and standards designed to ensure the integrated development of the project site; Facilitates the School District's efforts to sell the surplus property by providing a subsequent purchaser reasonable certainty as to the type, intensity, and general configuration of allowable on-site land uses; Optimizes the benefits of the School District sale of surplus property of the benefit of its constituents and its educational mission; Results in the production of 202 new housing units within the City, thus helping the City to respond to the identified housing demand outlined in the current Regional Housing Deeds Assessment (RHNA). This project would represent about 18.5 percent of the projected housing needs for the period between 2005- 2014; Increases the diversity of housing types in the City; Presents homebuyers with additional purchase options and price variations allowing homebuyers to better match housing choices with household needs and demands through construction and sale of attached residential condominium units; Page 13 of 22 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010.docx 0 Creates a mixed-use development that will promote the attainment or regional jobs -to -housing ratio objectives established by regional governmental entities and produce corresponding environmental benefits, consistent with Southern California Association of Governments Policies; Implements Senate Bill 375 which drives land use development to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by: > Promoting a mixed-use development by providing both residential and commercial uses on the -same site which serve to reduce vehicle r piles traveled (VMT) and corresponding air quality benefits; ➢ Promote alternative modes of transportation by providing bike and pedestrian trails and bus stops located adjacent to Site D and facilitate alternative modes of transportation: Transit is expected to be provided by the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA), Foothill Transit, and the City's fixed -route transportation system; and Integrate green building strategies into its design through energy efficiency; water -efficient land use and development using drought -tolerant landscaping and use of low -flow toilets, showerheads, and other fixtures; and use of renewable and recyclable materials for building construction, etc. a Allows for the productive use of an underutilized property in the City's General Plan, converting a tax-exempt property to a private use, and introduces a land use that will generate sales and other taxes for the benefit of the City and its constituents; Traffic improvements to the Diamond Bar Boulevard/Brea Canyon Road intersection will improve traffic flow in and through that intersection; and E) Facilitates the ability of the City and other agencies to undertake improvements to specific public facilities through payment of school impact, park, and traffic impact fees and other exactions. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires an environmental review of projects, and the Site D Specific Plan is a project that is subject to the provisions of CEQA. The Draft, Env! ro n rnental Impact Deport (EIR) provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the Specific Plan area. The Draft EIR includes mitigation measures for the project, addresses project alternatives, identifies the environmentally superior project alternative, and adopts a statement of overriding considerations. Page 14 of 22 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010.docx Public Motices and Molting bates Notice of Pre station (NOP February 1 — March 5, 2008 Scoping Meeting February 21, 2008 Notice of Com letion (NOC) June 25 — August 10, 200.9 Neighborhood Meeting August 3, 2009 Notice of Preparation: The City circulated a Notice of Preparation. (NOP) to public agencies, special districts, and members of the public requesting such notice for a 30 - day period commencing February 1, 2008 and ending March 5, 2008. Scoping Meeting: During the NOP period, the City advertised a public scoping meeting on February 21, 2008 held at the South Coast . Air Quality Management District/Government Center, Room CC -6. The meeting was intended to facilitate public input. Approximately 20 residents attended the meeting with the majority from the Ambushers Street neighborhood. Several issues raised at this meeting include impacts of view from Cherrydale, noise, traffic, buffer from commercial development, need for green space at entryway, preference to see residential development with less commercial, and to consider senior housing development. Notice of Completion/Availability: The Draft EIR was prepared by the City's environmental consultant, Environmental Impact Sciences on June 2009. A Notice of Completion and Availability was filed with the Office of Planning and Research on June 22, 2009. The 45 -day public review period was from June 25, 2009 through August 10, 2009. Neighborhood Meeting: On August 3, 2009, a neighborhood forum was held at the Heritage Park Community Center to provide the public with an additional opportunity to ask questions and comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, prior to the close of the 45 -day public review period. All written and verbal public testimony was taken, and written responses to the comments and issues raised are provided in the Response to Comments on the Draft EIR (Attachment #9). The Response to Comments includes all comments received during the 45 -day public review period. CEC,A requires that the City evaluate comments on environmental issues received from persons or agencies who prepared a written response. Key Areas of Impacts Analyzed The Draft EIR addresses significant and potentially significant environmental effects, including land use, population and, housing, geotechnical hazards, hydrology and water quality, -biological resources, traffic and circulation, air quality, noise, public services and facilities, utilities and service systems, cultural resources, aesthetics, and growth inducement. Where significant and potentially significant adverse impacts were identified, the Draft EIR proposes measures to mitigate them. The mitigation measures are set forth in the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program listed in Table ES -2 in the Draft EIR. Page 15 of 22 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010.docx Alternatives Exolored In addition to the analysis of the proposed project, one of the primary purposes of the EIR is to provide public agencies and other parties with an analysis of a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed project that, if implemented, could reduce or avoid one or more of the project's significant environmental effects. Four development alternatives and one no -development alternative, representing a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed. project, are listed below: Alternative 1 ("No Project"): No physical changes to the project site would occur, the property would remain in its present condition, and no now development activities or other public improvements would occur. Alternative 2 ("Public Facilities"): Under this alternative, it is assumed that the estimated developable area of the project site (20.2 acres) is developed at a floor area ratio of 0.25. A total of 220,000 sq. ft. of public facilities use would be developed on the site. The Draft EIR assumes the sale of the property to a private entity and thus, assumes that the project would be developed to include a 73,000 sq. ft. (500 -student) private school, and a 147,000 sq. ft. church. Alternative 3 ("Community Commercial'): Based on the estimated net acreage of 20.2 acres at a floor area ratio of 0.35, a total of 307,969 sq..ft. of commercial use would be developed. Alternative 4 ("Low -Dan sity Residential'): Based on the estimated net acreage of 20.2 acres at a density of 3 dwelling units, a total of approximately 60 single-family detached and/or single-family attached units would be developed on the project site. Alternative 5 ("High -Density Residential'): Based on the estimated net acreage of 20.2 acres, a total of approximately 404 dwelling units could be constructed on the site. Continuer) on Next Page Page 16 of 22 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010.doc;� h=A ND -USE ASSUMPTiONS FOR PROJECT ALTEMMATIVES Alternatives Considered But Eliminated by the City (Lead Agency) Page 17 of 22 CD: StaftReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Star Report 04-13-2010.docx Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternative i 2.. 3. 4 5 Public Community Low- High- Land Use Proposed ProjectNo Project Facilities Commercial Density Residential Density residential Project Acreage 29.7 29.7 29.7 29.7 29.7 29.7 Total Developed Acres (gross 29.7 - 29.7 29.7 29.7 29.7 acres) Retained Open Space - 29.7 - - - (gross acres Developable Area 20.2 - 20.2 20.2 20.2 20.2 (net acres) Residential Acreage 10.1 - - - 20.2 20.2 (net acres) Number of 202 DU 0 - - 60 DU 404 Dwelling Units Residential 20 DU/A - - - 3 DU/A 20 DU/A Density Commercial Acreage 10.1 - - 20.2 - - (net acres) Commercial 153,985 - 307,969 - - Square Footage Sq. Ft. 73,000 S.F. Other Square School Footage (square - - 147,000 - - footage) S.F. Church . Floor Area Ratio 0.352 - 0.253 0.354 - - General PlanCity City District City and Amendment Yes No Property Property Property District Required Properties Zone Change Yes No City District City City and Required Property I Property Property District Specific Plan Approval Yes No Nos Nos Nos Nos Required Notes: 1. A "no project" alternative Is specifically required under CECIA. 2. Calculated by dividing the commerclal acreage (10.1 acres or 439,956 sq. ft) by the commercial square footage (153,885). 3. Calculated by dividing the net developable area (20.2 acres or 879,912 sq. ft.) by the total square footage (220,000). 4. Calculated by dividing the total site area (20.2 acres or 879,912 sq. ft.) by the commercial square footage (307,969). 5. None of these alternatives preclude the development of a specific plan; however, because only a single land use If proposed, develo ment could proceed absent the City's consideration of a specific plan. Source: i RG Land, Enc. Alternatives Considered But Eliminated by the City (Lead Agency) Page 17 of 22 CD: StaftReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Star Report 04-13-2010.docx The following alternatives were considered but were rejected as infeasible during the environmental scoping process: o Alternative Site: There is no comparable property which could be substituted for the project site; © Conservation/Retained Open Space: The City has not identified a funding source which would allow for the public acquisition of the property, including its long-term maintenance. Additionally, the property is not designated for conservation or other open space purpose in the General flan. To designate this property for open space requires approval of a bond measure with a favorable vote of the people; e Senior Housing: The inclusion of one or more residential alternatives ensures the City's consideration of housing options; and o Component Parts: The property could be developed separately under different ownership. However, it would eliminate or reduce the potential planning benefit inherent in a more holistic approach. Selection of Environmentally Superior Alternative CECnA requires an identification of the environmentally superior alternative. In circumstances such as this one where Alternative 1: No Project is environmentally superior (because it is the only one that reduces the unavoidable air impacts), it is necessary to identify a feasible, the second most environmentally superior alternative. In this case, Alternative 2: Public f=acilities, Alternative 4: Low -Density Residential, and Alternative 5: High -Density Residential was considered to be environmentally superior to the proposed project. Since the economic feasibility of Alternative 4: Low -Density Residential cannot be determined at this time, the environmentally superior alternatives are the Alternative 2: Public Facilities and Alternative 5: High -Density Residential. Page 18 of 22 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010.docx COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Source: Environmental Impact Sciences The project site is currently zoned Low -Density Residential (RL) and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1). It should be assumed that the property can be developed for residential and commercial uses in accordance with existing land use policies. Without a Specific Plan, the City will have less input with regards to the manner in which the property is developed, the nature of the resulting land uses, and the design standards established for those uses. Mitiaatlon Reporting and Monitoring Proaram (MRMP) A mitigation reporting and monitoring program has been prepared, which address site- specific conditions for the project. The purpose of the MRMP is to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures. The program also identifies the timing and responsibility for monitoring each measure and is attached as an exhibit to the draft resolution recommending Certification of the DER and, adoption of the mitigation reporting and Page 19 of 22 CD: Stafr•Reports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010.docx Project Alternative Significant Environmental Proposed Project NoPublic Community Low-Denslt r High Effect Project Facilities Commercl I Residential RDensity ldet al Environmental Considerations Air Quality (Construction) Significant Not Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant Air Quality Significant Not Not Significant Not Not (Operational) Significant Si nificant Significant Significant Air Quality (Cumulative) Significant Not Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant Number of Unmitigated 3 0 2 3 2 2 Significant Impacts Attainment of Stated Objectives Lead Agency Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Applicant Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Feasibility Economics Unknown? No Unknown2 Unknown? Unknown? Unknown Legal Yes No Yes. Yes Yes Yes Socially Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Technologically Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Environmentally Superior Alternative - Superior I Superior Superior I Superior Notes: 1. No detailed economic analysis, marketing study, or real property appraisal of the proposed project or the examined alternatives were developed by the Lead Agency or provided to the Lead Agency by the Applicant. 2. Subject to an economic feasibility analysis. Source: Environmental Impact Sciences The project site is currently zoned Low -Density Residential (RL) and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1). It should be assumed that the property can be developed for residential and commercial uses in accordance with existing land use policies. Without a Specific Plan, the City will have less input with regards to the manner in which the property is developed, the nature of the resulting land uses, and the design standards established for those uses. Mitiaatlon Reporting and Monitoring Proaram (MRMP) A mitigation reporting and monitoring program has been prepared, which address site- specific conditions for the project. The purpose of the MRMP is to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures. The program also identifies the timing and responsibility for monitoring each measure and is attached as an exhibit to the draft resolution recommending Certification of the DER and, adoption of the mitigation reporting and Page 19 of 22 CD: Stafr•Reports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010.docx (monitoring program `(Attachment #1). At the time of the certification of the EIR, the MRMP is adopted as part of project approval Environmental Impacts That Cannot. Be Mitigated The construction of the site leads to temporary air quality impacts resulting from construction emissions and stationary source emissions. This project site lies in the South Coast Air Basin, an area that is already located in a non -attainment area. Based of i South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) guidelines, any construction cannot be mitigated, but are subject to standard conditions and uniform codes. The air quality impact could not be feasibly mitigated and would result in a significant and unavoidable impact with implementation of the proposed Specific Plan. The City is required to adopt findings in accordance with Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations in accordance with Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines. The proposed Specific Plan would produce significant unavoidable adverse impact in the following three areas: 1. Air Quality (Construction Impact): Combined emissions or reactive organic gases (ROG) are estimated at 136.02 pounds/day. This value would exceed the 75-pound/day threshold recommended by the South Coast Air Quality Management District and the impact would be, deemed to be significant; 2. Air Quality (Operational Impact): Operationally, the proposed project is projected to create ROG, oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and carbon dioxide (CO) emissions in excess of the SCAQMD suggested daily threshold criteria; and 3. 'Air Quality (Cumulative Impact): Related project activities, in combination with the construction and operation of the proposed project, will incrementally contribute to regional air emissions within the South Coast Air Basin. Facts of Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Prior to approving the proposed Specific Plan, the City. shall certify that the FEIR has been completed in accordance with CEQA; that the FEIR was presented, reviewed and considered by the decision making body; and that the FEIR reflects the decision making body'sindependent judgment and analysis. The City is required to adopt findings in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 when significant effects have been identified in the Draft EIR relating to changes or aiterations in the project, mitigation measures, and alternatives. The Findings of Fact and Statement of. Overriding Considerations is attached as an exhibit to the draft resolution recommending certification of the DEIR and adoption of the mitigation reporting and monitoring program (Attachment #1). Details of these impacts are discussed in the Draft EIR. All impacts have been mitigated below a level of significance, except air quality impacts. Page 20 of 22 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010.docx No alternatives or mitigation measures were identified which could reduce the air quality impacts below a level of significance. Even though a review of environmental impacts shows that an environmentally superior alternative exists, the City can still approve the proposed project. According to Section 15093 of the CE01A Guidelines, CEOA requires that the City balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of the proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable." In order to do this, the public agency must adopt a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" — a document that states the reasons for why the project should be approved even though there are environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated. The City has identified economic and social benefits that will accrue to the City, to the School District, and to the region, and important public policy objectives that will result from the implementation of the proposed project. Therefore, the Planning Commission may find that the proposed project's identified benefits override the project's air quality impacts. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site on March 22, 2010, and the notice was published in the Inland Valley Daily Tribune and San Gabriel Valley Tribune newspapers on April 2, 2010. The project site was posted with a notice display board, and a copy of the public notice was posted at the City's three designated community posting sites. The draft Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report were also posted on the City's website. RECOMMEN©ATIION: Open the public hearing to take public testimony from the public regarding the Draft Environmental Impact Report and all land use entitlements, and continue the project to the April 27, 2010 meeting. Prepared by: Grace S. Lee Senior Planner Attactiments: Reviewed by: Greg Gubman, AICP Community Development Director 'i. Draft Resolution No. 2010 -XX (Recommending Certification of the DEIR and Adoption of the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program) 2. Draft Resolution No. 2010 -XX (Recommending Approval of GPA and ZC) 3. Draft Resolution No. 2010 -XX (Recommending Approval of SP and TTM) Page 21 of 22 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D. Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010.docx 4. Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Diamond Bar and the Walnut Valley Unified School District, executed July 1, 2007 6. Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 6. Traffic Improvement Study maps .7. Traffic and Circulation Improvements and Cost Estimates 8. E-mail from Judy Leung on April 6, 2010 Page 22 of 22 CD: StafrReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 0413-2010.docx Errata to April 13, 2010 ESC Staff Report The following corrections are made to the !Tanning Comifiission staff report dated April 13, 2010. Page 3: Land Use Im ,.x,. fin Commercial 10.1 acres (153,985 Sq. Ft. 10.1 acres Residential (202 dwelling units Open Space 8 acres Basements, Rights; -of -Way .2.16 Total 30.36 [gage 9-110: Traffic Improvements © The following roadway improvements will be required at the time of development: Cherrydale Drive at Diamond Bar Boulevard: Provide an option left/through lane and a separate right -tum lane on the northbound approach; restripe southbound approach to provide an option left/through/right-turn lane on Cherrydale. Widen eastbound approach to provide a separate right -turn lane. Modify median and restripe Diamond Bar Boulevard to provide dual westbound left -tum lanes. Install traffic signal. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing signing and striping on Cherrydale Drive or Diamond. Bar Boulevard; and A Widen and/or restripe RIB approach on Brea Canyon Road to provide a second right -tum lane. Widen and/or restripe BB approach and departure on Diamond Bar Boulevard to a third through lane. Re -stripe WB approach on Diamond Bar Boulevard to provide a second left -turn lane. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to'existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. recut/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller), as well as the termination of the existing bike lane. I n flmn hdnn �r I1, ptt QJ"! � WE 'All, a !- r{ zl ,1� ms r tn[ersecnon _, � - u[snyoane unrve mnu unnnnunu oar ouurovm� arta camoa Roadar oiamoad earns n ward "id"'e"Or n:-sbips nOrihbOund spproac l On B.. Canyon Reed 1.p,.Ada a sewed right -tum lana. Miid.wd. na-stripe easihOund app—a and departure On Mend Bar Boulevard 1. a thin) Through We. Re Mpe Y.•eed—nd approach On Men.ed S.BOulevardto provide a sawed M.I..lane. Chem reDdve aloiam dBarBoelevard Pmvda an Option Ie;dlhmugM1 hna antl a ssparale dg1d-W lane oe the nodhbowdapproach; r ehs pe .—beend app—. tO p,.Aide ae Option IONtluOugtd 6&-U. lane On ChenyeA..Men and Or—hip. eastbound approach and bp a te. On Diamond Ber Baulsv-ard to a Od thrsugh Ione and provide a separala dghbWm lane. Me* rewr- and rt -stripe Diamond Bar Bwlev,W to provide dual ueebemd la&tum lanes Inalail tree¢ sigmd © The developers of the site will also be required to pay fair -share fees of the construction costs to implement additional improvements to mitigate the cumulative traffic impacts of existing traffic, future non -project traffic, and project traffic. See the Traffic and Circulation Improvements and Cost Estimates, and Traffic Improvement Study Maps attached to this report (Attachments #5 & 6). Page 2 of 2 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-13-2010 Errata.docx Allachment 4 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ("Memorandum") is executed as of July 1, 2007 by and between the City of Diamond Bar, California, a municipal corporation ("City") and the Walnut Valley Unified School District, a unified school district organized under the California Education Code ("District"), hereinafter together occasionally referred to as "the parties." RECITALS A. District owns an undeveloped parcel of real property within the territorial limits of City ("School Property"), and legally described in Exhibit A-1 and depicted in Exhibit A-2 attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. District has found the School Property to be unnecessary for future school use and has declared it surplus property. B. City owns an approximate .93 acre undeveloped parcel of real property immediately adjacent to the School Property ("City Property"), legally described in Exhibit A-3 and depicted in Exhibit A-4, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. C. District desires the disposition of the School Property to yield the maximum retain to the District for the benefit of its constituents and its educational mission. City desires that the School Property and City Property (collectively referred to hereinafter as "Site D") be developed in a manner as to assure compatibility with and to meet the needs of the surrounding area, to provide a desirable level of sales tax revenues to the City. The legal description of Site D is described in Exhibit A-5 and depicted in Exhibit A-6, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. D. In light of the foregoing, the parties desire to cooperate and collaborate in the planning of the future land use and zoning designations for Site D in order that District and City may each advance its respective objectives for the disposition of the property. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, City and District hereby agree as follows: Preparation of Specific Plan. 1.1 City agrees to engage the services of TRG Land, Inc. to prepare a specific plan for Site D in accordance with California Government Code sections 65450 through 65457, pursuant to its proposal dated June 6, 2007, and to advance the cost of preparation of the specific plan. 1,2 District shall reimburse City the cost of preparation of the specific plan upon sale of Site D, the reimbursement to be paid through escrow, from the proceeds of the sale. The reimbursement shall consist of the final direct cost of TRG Land Inc.'s services, the additional cost of associated consulting services provided by TRG's :subconsultants and others for civil engineering, geotechnical engineering and environmental services, plus an administrative overhead charge of five percent ( 5%) of the total of the foregoing reflecting City staff time and public hearing expenses. Total reimbursement pursuant to this paragraph shall not exceed the sum of Two Hundred Ninety -Four Thousand Four Hundred Ninety-five Dollars and 45/100 ($294,495.45) absent written consent of District, which consent shall not be unreasonably denied or delayed. The not to exceed costs of TRG Land, Inc. and its subconsultants for the services to be rendered under this Memorandum are attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference. 1.3 The specific plan will include a mix of residential and commercial uses as more specifically described in the agreement for services between City and TRG Land, Inc based upon a mutually agreed upon site map such as is attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by this reference. Of the usable acreage on Site D, a minimum of fifty percent (50%) will be designated for residential development, and fifty percent (50%) will be designated for commercial use, exclusive of necessary infrastructure. Should the specific plan adopted by City provide for less residential development than the minimum described above, District may, at its sole discretion, elect to be released from the reimbursement obligation set forth in paragraph 1.2 above, and upon such election shall have no further obligations under this Memorandum. Consideration of Specific Plan by City. 2.1 City agrees to present the specific plan prepared pursuant to Paragraph 1 to its Planning Commission and City Council for consideration. Nothing herein, however, constitutes a commitment or guaranty that City will adopt the specific plan. City reserves all of its police powers relative to consideration of the specific plan, and City's Planning Commission and City Council retain the discretion to take any such action each deems appropriate with respect to the specific plan. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to limit, restrict, amend or modify, nor to constitute a waiver or release of, the discretion vested in the City by its Municipal Code to make independent judgments, findings and decisions with regard to the approval or disapproval of the specific plan. 2.2 City agrees to use best efforts, subject to force mejeure events beyond its control, to process the specific plan and related entitlements in accordance with the schedule attached hereto as Exhibit D and incorporated herein by this reference thereto. 3. Sale of Site D by DistrigKity. 3.1 Upon City's approval of the specific plan for the development of Site D, District agrees to use its best efforts to sell the School Property as entitled by the City for the fair market value, in accordance with the provisions of California Education Code commencing with section 17455. City agrees to use its best efforts to sell the City Property for the fair market value. The parties agree to cooperatively work with each other to coordinate the sale of Site D. 3.3 In the event District and/or City fails to receive a responsive bid for either the residential or commercial components of Site D, as applicable, within thirty (30) days following the date in which no responsive bid has been received, the parties agree to meet in good faith to identify mutually acceptable option(s) to sell Site D. 4. Term. This Memorandum shall commence on July 1, 2007 and remain in effect until the actions contemplated herein have been fully consummated Notwithstanding, the parties agree, subject to force mejeure events beyond the reasonable control of the parties, that should the specific plan for Site D not be approved by City within eighteen (18) months from the date and year first written above consistent with the schedule attached as Exhibit D, either party may temlinate this Memorandum upon providing written notice to the other party. In the event this Memorandum is terminated pursuant to thus paragraph 4, District shall be released from the reimbursement obligation set forth in paragraph 1.2 above. Binding Effect. This Memorandum is binding on the parties in accordance with its terms. The parties signing below represent and warrant that they have the legal authority to bind the patty for whom they are signing. Indemni , Each party agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the other party, its officers, agents and employees from any and all liabilities, claims, or losses of any nature, including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit, to the extent caused by, arising out of, or in connection with, the indemnifying party's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions arising from its respective activities pursuant to this Memorandum. 7. Goveming Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. 8. Notices. All notices permitted or required under this Memorandum shall be in writing, and shall be deemed made when delivered to the applicable party at the following addresses either by first class mail postage prepaid, facsimile or personal delivery: If to City: City of Diamond Bar 21825 E. Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Attention: City Manager If to District: Walnut Valley Unified School District 880 South Lemon Avenue Walnut, CA 91789 Attention: Superintendent Entire Agreement This Memorandum represents the entire integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, written or oral, regarding the joint program provided for herein. This Memorandum may be amended only by a written instrument signed by the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Memorandum of Understanding as of the date and year first written above. Dated: ,2007 CITY OF D } OND BAR By: 7a`n3e�s DeStefao City Manager WALNUT VALLY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Dated: ,2007 By: Kent L. Bechler, Ph.D. Superintendent EX -R BIT A-1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SCHOOL PROPERTY THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL l: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 9 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF LOT 76 (BREA CANYON CHANNEL) OF TRACT 27577, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 702,PAGES 22 TO 25 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DISTANT THEREON NORTH 3641'19" EAST 245.38 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN ON SAID MA -P AS HAVING A BEARING AND DISTANCE OF NORTH 3(F41'18" EAST 745.38 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 59018'42" EAST 235.80 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 71'b0'13" EAST 580.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 34'00'00" EAST, 120.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 560'00" EAST 340.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 4800'00" EAST 980.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 28t7'43' -WEST 570.00 FEET TO A POINT IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF TRACT 25991, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 702 PAGES 16 TO 21 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; SAID POINT BEING ON A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2050.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 2807'43" EAST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD; THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF x#'11'33" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID LAST MENTIONED CURVE, ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD SOUTH 6003'50" WEST 875.89 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1050.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 2650'10" AN ARC DISTANNCE OF 381.83 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 76; THENCE SOUTH 3641'18" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 76, 500.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID SECTION 29 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF LOT 76 OF TRACT 27577, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 702 PAGES 22 TO 25 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID CDUNTY, DISTANT THEREON NORTH 3CP41'18" EAST 259.67 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE HAVING A BEARING OF NORTH 3041'18" EAST AND A DISTANCE OF 745.38 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 76; NORTH 3641'18" EAST 485.71 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF DIAMOND BAR. BOULEVARD, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT 27577; SAID SOUTHERLY LINE BEING A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1050.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 4'121'50" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 79.97 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 3641'18" WEST 527.99 FEET TO A LINE THAT BEARS SOUTH 6P6'06" EAST FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 63"26'06" WEST 64.82 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPT THEREFROM SAID LAND ALL OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS AND MINERALS NOW OR AT ANY TIME HEREAFTER SITUATED THEREIN OR THEREUNDER OR PRODUCIBLE THEREFROM, TOGETHER WITH THE FREE AND UNLIMITED RIGHT TO MINE, STORE, DRILL AND BORE BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AT ANY LEVEL OR LEVELS 500 FEET OR MORE BELOW THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING OR REMOVAL OF SUCH SUBSTANCES, PROVIDED THAT THE SURFACE OPENING OF SUCH WELL AND ALL OTHER SURFACE FACILITIES SHALL BE LOCATED ON LAND OTHER THAN DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND SHALL NOT PENETRATE ANY*PART OF PORTION OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SURFACE THEREOF, AND ALL OF THE RIGHTS SO TO REMOVE SUCH SUBSTANCES ARE HEREBY SPECIFICALLY RESERVED, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO DRILL FOR, PRODUCE AND USE WATER FROM SAID REAL PROPERTY IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH OPERATIONS, AS EXCEPTED AND RESERVED BY TRANSAMERICA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, A CORPORATION WHICH ACQUIRED TITLE AS CAPITAL COMPANY, A CORPORATION, IN DEED RECORDED AUGUST 12, 1964 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1401. PARCEL 2: THAT.PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 9 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF. LOT 76 OF TRACT 27577, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 702, PAGES 22 TO 25, INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DISTANT THEREON .NORTH 3641'18" EAST 259.67 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE HAVING A BEARING OF NORTH 3641'18" EAST AND A DISTANCE OF 745.38 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 76, NORTH 3641'18" EAST, 485.71 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT 27577, SAID SOUTHERLY LINE) BEING A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1050.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH CENTRAL ANGLE OF X41'50" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 79.97 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 3641'18" WEST 527.99 FEET TO A LINE THAT BEARS SOUTH 63Q26'06" EAST FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 63°26'06" WEST 64.82 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPT THEREFROM ALL OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS AND MINERALS NOW OR AT ANY TIME HEREAFTER SITUATED THEREIN OR THEREUNDER, TOGETHER WITH THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO DRILL FOR, PRODUCE, EXTRACT, TAKE AND MINE THEREFROM SUCH OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS AND MINERALS AND TO STORE THE SAME UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND; TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT TO STORE UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND, OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBONS AND MINERALS WHICH MAY BE PRODUCED FROM OTHER LANDS, WITH THE RIGHT OF ENTRY THEREON FOR SAID PURPOSES, AND WITH THE RIGHT TO CONSTRUCT, USE, MAINTAIN, ERECT, REPAIR, REPLACE AND REMOVE THEREON. AND THEREFROM, ALL PIPE LINES, TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH LINES, TANKS, MACHINERY, 'BUILDINGS AND OTHER STRUCTURES WHICH. MAY BE NECESSARY AND REQUISITE TO CARRY ON OPERATIONS ON SAID LAND, WITH THE FURTHER RIGHT TO ERECT, MAINTAIN, OPERATE AND REMOVE A PLANT, WITH ALL NECESSARY APPURTENANCES FOR THE EXTRACTION OF GASOLINE FROM GAS, INCLUDING ALL RIGHTS NECESSARY OR CONVENIENT THERETO, AS EXCEPTED AND RESERVED IN THE DEED FROM TR ANSAMERICA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, A CORPORATION, RECORDED MARCH 29, 1968 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2456, IN BOOK D3955 PAGE 185, OFFICIAL RECORDS AND RB - RECORDED TUNE 19, 1969 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1776 IN BOOK D4407 PAGE. 591, OFFICIAL RECORDS. SAID INTEREST WAS CONVEYED TO TRANSAMERICA MINERALS COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 20, 1985 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 85-74005. AN INSTRUMENT PURPORTEDLY QUITCLAIMING, RELEASING AND SURRENDERING ONLY THE SURFACE RIGHTS TO A DEPTH OF 500 FEET AND PROVIDING FOR REMOVAL OF ALL GAS; MINERALS AND HYDROCARBONS BELOW SAID DEPTH AS CONVEYED TO TRANSAMERICA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION BY DEED RECORDED JANUARY 5,19 87 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 87-10522.. MAP OF SCHOOL PROPERTY ' h=417'33' Q �� L 150 00•D� TJ aj ! I • / 6.4550 c6 / t)=2030'10' R=1050.00' " L=387.84' �-yn �7 6 76.28'2tl" r 0R, .�• 75C, �J L0 o o hti ro. _ ri I"k 0 L=301.87' � % � ,�,1 , SBI,IJ ho a�r�h' h � tr• � ,4� CP421•So" R=7080.00` L=79.97' PARCEL 1 gg S �o v: PARCEL75ACR Z 28.07 ACRES � 11- . 0.75 ACRES �[Q ,� P.o.s. s>it�•1� e oy 3-4-0,00e izp RY SCALE: 1"=300' pMW Ek1d1 G IkC_ WE TECHNOLOGY PARK a 725. IRv1aF. cA. 92gla (9491 753-8119 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF CITY PROPERTY THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY IS: ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 9 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER RECORD OF SURVEY, FILED IN BOOK 76 PAGES 51 THROUGH 56 INCLUSIVE OF RECORD OF SURVEY, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT AREA SHOWN AS "NOT A PART OF THIS SUBDIVISION ON THE MAP OF TRACT NO. 27577, AS PER IRE OORDER OF SAID COUNTY. THROUGH 25 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY SAID AREA BEING BOUNDED ON THE NORTHWEST BY SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF BREA CANYON ROAD, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT 27577; BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT NO. 27577; BOUNDED ON THE SOUTHEAST BY THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF LOT 76, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT NO. 27577; BOUNDED ON THE SOUTHWEST BY THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF LOT 39, THE NORTHERLY TERMINUS OF CASTLE ROCK ROAD, AND THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TEN (10) FOOT WALK, ALL BEING SHOWN ON MAP OF SAID TRACT NO. 27577. EXCEPT THEREFROM ALL OIL, GAS, MINERALS, AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES LYING BELOW THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND, BUT WITH NO RIGHT OF SURFACE ENTRY, AS PROVIDED IN DEEDS OF RECORD. EXRIBIT A-4 MAP OF CITY PROPERTY u LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SITE D rni'IP= ' >' MAP OF SITE D Low OR EIT 13 SITE D COSTS AND MILESTONES Site '13' CoEtE and Idfilestones Costs TRG Land . PENCO Engineering ICFM Geoscience Environmental Impact Sciences Linscott, Law & Greenspan engineers PCR Total Phase I Phase II 13 -fun -07 Services Reimbursablesn73 $67,340.00 $3,000.00 $47,008.00 $4,701.00 $26,500.00 $66,970.00 $40,400.00 $24,990.00 $24,990.00 7,701 Team Meeting EIR Administrative Draft Initial Study / Obtain signature on NOP Begin 30 day comment period Preliminary Specific Plan Outline Preliminary Grading Plan Preliminary Review of available Geotechnical Reports Geotechnical Field Investigation and Laboratory Testing Traffic Count Study Preliminary Review and Sensitive Habitat Assessment Begin Biological Field Investigation Preliminary Hydrology / Drainage Team Meeting .00 Phase III FIR Technical Studies Administrative Draft EIR Finalize Site Plan and Grading Begin Draft Specific Plan and Graphics Begin Draft Geotechnical Report Begin Draft Screencheck Traffic Report Finish Biological Field Survey Prepare Biological Resource Report Begin Tract Map Prepare Water Quality Report DraftEIR 45 Day Comment Period Finalize Specific Plan Finalize Tentative Tract Map Preliminary Cost Estimates for Land Improvements Finalize Evaluation of Geotechnical Constraints Final Environmental Impact Report Team Meeting Phase N Planning Commission Hearings Citv Council Hearings SITE wLkp SITE Ficy / n I -rCITY Or DIAMON IA Va 11.0 Z7 - P9 SITE Ficy / n I -rCITY Or DIAMON SITE D PROJECT SCHEDULE Attachment 7 TABLE 11-1 YEAR 2007 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS AND COST ESTIMATES Key Intersection Improvement Description Preliminary Cost Estimate 12. Pathfinder Road at Widen and/or re -stripe eastbound Brea Canyon Cutoff Road $357,813.00 Brea Canyon Cutoff Road to provide one left -turn lane, two through lanes and a separate right -tum lane. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re-cut/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller). 14. SR -57 SB Ramps at Brea Install traffic signal. The implementation ofthis $228,125.00 Canyon Cutoff Road/Diamond improvement may require some modification to existing Bar Boulevard signing and striping on Brea Canyon Cut-off or SR -57 SB ramps3'-. 17. Chenydale Drive at Diamond Provide an option left/through lane and a separate rigbt-tum $308,250.00 BarBoulevard lane on the northbound approach; re -stripe southbound approach to provide an option left/through/right-tum lane on Chenydale. Widen eastbound approach to provide a separate right -tum lane. Modify median and restripe Diamond Bar Boulevard to provided dual westbound left - tum lanes. Install traffic signal. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing signing and striping on Chenydale Drive or Diamond Bar Boulevard31. Total Costs of Year 2007 Improvements $894,188.00 3' Appendix D contains traffic signal warrant worksheets for this intersection. UNscorr, LAw & GREENSPAN, engineers 60 LLG Ref. 2-07-2918 WVUSD Site D Mixed -Use Development, Diamond Bar \:3o1x13a739Il: Iicpnn 3913 :Y\TSO cite O:�Ii�tA.l're 1'1.1 J -3? -IN dc.: TABLE 11-2 VMAo')nan c tnnnenov nc RFrnnn i:K1nFn IMPROVEMENTS AND COST ESTIMATES Key Intersection Improvement Description Preliminary Cost Estimate 1. Brea Canyon Road (West) at Widen and/or re -stripe Pathfinder to provide a second $280,750.00 Pathfinder Road eastbound left -tum lane and a second westbound right -turn lane. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to the existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re-cut/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller. 5. Diamond Bar Boulevard at Re -stripe northbound approach and departure on Diamond $572,575.00 Pathfinder Road Bar Boulevard to provide a third through lane, and re -stripe existing bike lane as necessary. Widen and re -stripe southbound approach and departure on Diamond Bar Boulevard to provide a second right -tum lane and a third through lane. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re-cut/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller), as well as the termination of the existing bike lane. 12. Pathfinder Road at Widen and/or re -stripe Pathfinder Road to provide separate $729,688.00 Brea Canyon Cutoff Road northbound and southbound right -turn lanes. Widen and/or re -stripe Brea Canyon Cutoff Road to provide two eastbound and westbound through lanes and a separate eastbound right -tum lane. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re-cut/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller). 14. SR -57 SB Ramps at Brea Same at Year 2007 improvements. Install traffic signal. The $228,125.00 Canyon Cutoff Road/Diamond implementation of this improvement may require some Bar Boulevard modification to existing signing and striping on Brea Canyon Cut-off or SR -57 SB rampS33. 16. Brea Canyon Road at Diamond Widen and/or re -stripe northbound approach on Brea $684,125.00 Bar Boulevard Canyon Road to provide a second right -tum lane. Widen and/or re -stripe eastbound approach and departure on Diamond Bar Boulevard to a third through lane. Re -stripe westbound approach on Diamond Bar Boulevard to provide a second left -tum lane. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re-cut/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller), as well as the termination of the existing bike lane. Subtotal $2,495,263.00 33 . Appendix D contains traffic signal waaant worksheets for this intersection. 39 LLG Ref. 2-07-2918 LMacorf, lAW & GREENSPAN, engineers W VUSD Site D Mixed -Use Development, Diamond Bar Rqm 3411 W\'1SDShe D'diaai-t'tt l'I:\123-(W.6- TABLE 11 -2 (CONTINUED) YEAR 2010 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS AND COST ESTIMATES aq Appendix D contains traffic signal warrant worksheets for this intersection. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers 4U . LLG Ref. 2-07-2918 VdVUSD Site D Mixed -Use Development, Diamond liar � �aoetnr•�nsro,..:na<nis�tn•t::arsaeuyr.�r�.t�«7ina.,�.oa.a,w Preliminary Key Intersection improvement Description Cost Estimate 17, Cherrydale Drive at Diamond Same at Year 2007 improvements. Provide an option $308,250.00 Bar Boulevard lefdthrough lane and a separate right -tum lane on the northbound approach; re -stripe southbound approach to provide an option left/through/right-turn lane on Cherrydale. Widen eastbound approach to provide a separate right -tum lane. Modify median and restripe Diamond Bar Boulevard to provided dual westbound left - tum lanes. Install traffic signal. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing signing and striping on Cherrydale Drive or Diamond Bar Boulevard34. 18. Brea Canyon Road at Re -stripe northbound approach/departure and southbound $37,500.00 Silver Bullet Drive approacb/departure on Brea Canyon Road to provide a second through lane. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re-cut/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller). 19. Diamond Bar Boulevard at Widen and re -stripe northbound, southbound, eastbound $1,509,625.00 Grand Avenue and westbound approaches to provide 2 left -tum lanes, 3 through lanes, and I right -tum lane. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re-cut/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller). 20. Colima Road at Widen and/or re -stripe Brea Canyon Cutoff Road to provide $500,000.00 Brea Canyon Cutoff Road a separate right -tum lanes. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re-cut/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller). r Subtotal $2,355,375.00 Total Costs of Year 2010 Improvements $4,850,638.00 aq Appendix D contains traffic signal warrant worksheets for this intersection. LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers 4U . LLG Ref. 2-07-2918 VdVUSD Site D Mixed -Use Development, Diamond liar � �aoetnr•�nsro,..:na<nis�tn•t::arsaeuyr.�r�.t�«7ina.,�.oa.a,w TABLE 11-3 YEAR 2030 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS AND COST ESTIMATES Key Intersection Improvement Description Preliminary Cost Estimate 1. Brea Canyon Road (West) at Similar to Year 2010 Improvements, widen and/or re -stripe $280,750.00 Pathfinder Road Pathfinder to provide a second eastbound left -turn lane and a second westbound right -turn lane. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to the existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re-cut/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller. 5. Diamond Bar Boulevard at Re -stripe eastbound through lane on Pathfinder Road to $591,325.00 Pathfinder Road provide an option left/through lane. Similar to Year 2010 Improvements, re -stripe northbound approach and departure on Diamond Bar Boulevard to provide a third through lane, and re -stripe existing bike lane as necessary. Widen and re - stripe southbound approach and departure on Diamond Bar Boulevard to provide a second right -tum lane and a third through lane. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re-cut/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller), as well as the termination of the existing bike lane. 10. Brea Canyon Road at Re -stripe southbound approach to provide one left -tum $9,375.00 Cold Spring Lane lane, one through lane and one right -turn lane. 11. Diamond Bar Boulevard at Re -stripe northbound approach and departure and $18,750.00 Cold Spring Lane southbound approach and departure on Diamond Bar Boulevard to provide a third through lane. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re- cut/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller). 12. Pathfinder Road at Similar to Year 2010 Improvements, widen and/or re -stripe $729,688.00 Brea Canyon Cutoff Road Pathfinder Road to provide separate northbound and southbound right -tum lanes. Widen and/or re -stripe Brea Canyon Cutoff Road to provide two eastbound and westbound through lanes and a separate eastbound right - tum lane. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re-cut/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller). 14. SR -57 SB Ramps at Brea Same at Year 2007 improvements. Install traffic signal. The $228,125.00 Canyon Cutoff Road/Diamond implementation of this improvement may require some Bar Boulevard modification to existing signing and striping on Brea Canyon Cut-off or SR -57 SB ramps" Subtotal $1,858,013.00 35 Appendix D contains traffic signal warrant worksheets for this intersection. LINscorr, LAw 8 GREENSPAN, engineers 42 LLG Ref. 2-07-2918 WVUSD Site D Mixed -Use Development, Diamond Bar ,Nr31100 2,07M8 ReP;m_ma lvvusn sae n:w;:<a-t!< nA 4-23-139 d„o TABLE 11-3 (CONTINUED) YEAR 2030 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS AND COST ESTIMATES Key Intersection Improvement Description Preliminary Cost Estimate 15. SR -57 NB Ramps at Brea WidenNB off -ramp to provide a third approach lane and $355,000.00 Canyon Cut-off/Diamond Bar . stripe off ramp to provide a northbound left-tunt lane, and Boulevard option left -through -right lane, and a right -turn lane. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re- out/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller). 16. Brea Canyon Road at Diamond Similar to Year 2010 Improvements, widen and/or re -stripe $684,125.00 Bar Boulevard northbound approach on Brea Canyon Road to provide a second right -turn lane. Widen and/or re -stripe eastbound approach and departure on Diamond Bar Boulevard to a third through lane. Re -stripe westbound approach on Diamond Bar Boulevard to provide a second left -tum lane. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re- cuttinstall new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller), as well as the termination of the existing bike lane. 17. Cherrydale Drive at Diamond Same at Year 2007 improvements. Provide an option $454,875.00 Bar Boulevard left/through lane and a separate right -turn lane on the northbound approach; re -stripe southbound approach to provide an option left/through/right-tum lane on Cherrydale.. Widen and/or re -stripe eastbound approach and departure on Diamond Bar Boulevard to a third through lane and provide a separate right -tum lane. Modify median and restripe Diamond Bar Boulevard to provided dual westbound left -tum lanes. Install traffic signal. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing signing and striping on Cherrydale Drive or Diamond Bar Boulevard 36. 18. Brea Canyon Road at Similar to Year 2010 Improvements, re -stripe northbound $37,500.00 Silver Bullet Drive approach/departure and southbound approach/departure on Brea Canyon Road to provide a second through lane. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re- cut/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller). Subtotal $1,531,500.00 36 Appendix D contains traffic signal warrant worksheets for this intersection. ,,scorn, LnwB Gal ENspm, engineers 43 LLG ReE 2-07-2918 wVUSD Site D Mixed -Use Development, Diamond Bar VW 20441 20.91S Rrpnn MH ql INI) iim D *4h: d.Vse 11A 1 --??-tin d<a TABLE 11-3 (CONTINUED) YEAR 2030 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS AND COST ESTIMATES LINScoTT, LAw 8 GREENSPAN, engineers 44 LLG Ref. 2-07-2918 WVUSD Site D Mixed -Use Development, Diamond Bar >won_mr»sr.,j,_v1sWzus1)Sil,D>ai­&5,TI.A4s=41nAn Preliminary Key Intersection Improvement Description Cost Estimate 19. Diamond Bar Boulevard at Widen and/or re -stripe southbound and eastbound $2,216,500.00 Grand Avenue approaches to provide 2 left -tum lanes, 3 through lanes and 1 right -tum lane. Widen and re -stripe eastbound to provide 21eft-tum lanes, 4 through lanes and 1 right -tum lane. Re - stripe northbound approach to provide 21eft-tum lanes, 3 through lanes, and 1 free-flow right -turn lane. Widen the eastbound departure to accommodate the northbound free- flow right -tum lane; additional ROW (11 feet) is required from the existing parking lot on the south side of Grand. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re- cut/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller). 20. Colima Road at Widen and/or re -stripe Colima Road to provide a second $1,299,375.00 Brea Canyon Cutoff Road left -turn lane and separate right -turn lanes. Widen and /or re -stripe Brea Canyon Cutoff Road to provide a second left - tum lane and separate right -tum lanes. The implementation of this improvement may require some modification to existing traffic signal equipment (i.e. re-cut/install new vehicle loop detectors, modification to traffic signal controller). Subtotal $3,515,875.00 Total Costs of Year 2030 Improvements $6,905,388.00 LINScoTT, LAw 8 GREENSPAN, engineers 44 LLG Ref. 2-07-2918 WVUSD Site D Mixed -Use Development, Diamond Bar >won_mr»sr.,j,_v1sWzus1)Sil,D>ai­&5,TI.A4s=41nAn C1 o tp h v1 to O of O O o � C` p IIR (l t": r,� O Fl o O O l� tri t- N o0 0o -,t ri vi v to o 0 00 0 % 7 o N' N -r � N �o O d• � � 7 M o � ou 0.i G m 0 0 O N 0 0 tll N 0 0 t/l t` 0 0 O to 0 0 to 0 0 V1 N 0 0 O o 0 0 t/1 N 0 0 h r 0 0 O O 0 0 O o 0 0 ury n 0 0 tb W U o CT s�9 N N vii moi» vii tai V-] ,-• o U b3 � b9 FA 64 K ER ,y c V L r.� �bD C o o e o 0 0 u L N m N d d o � L �1 W � O C y d" � r+l G� c•t O O l0 � to � L1 � D\ O vi iD N P� a I i o 0 0 0 0 0 0 p O O o O N Ur o 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 < dw ¢w ¢F. da P ¢w ¢a ¢w G �.. a m ^O b TJ 0 d r v 0 0 > a > NO ryJ D b i O b U n O O .b 7 O .b G O ccl 7 y O iy O 'O 7 i d 7 �' 7 O y N> O O O O y 0 O 'y O "O m w w xa w U FU ^U ✓w M coq y U !h' q o nn nCo �i o R4 o o o b [tl '^7 C 7 '-d C b m Gq C d 0 o o[ Urn rn U U U U o T U �o! � U ro N Co 4 N N N 2 w> Ej ++ N "�" 4 U 4 G Q W W U 6 U w q W va M, R7 Q U q pl n 5 C7 r1 m N Attachment 8 Grace Lee From: Greg Gubman Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 12:56 PM To: Grace Lee Cc: James DeStefano; David Doyle; Brad Wohlenberg; Mark Rogers; JoAnne Sturges; Peter Lewandowski Subject: FW: Objection to "Site D Specific. Plan". Importance: High Grace, For distribution to the PC along with any other correspondence we receive Greg Gubman (909) 839-7065 From: Stella Marquez Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 12:54 PM To: Greg Gubman Subject: FW: Objection to "Site D Specific Plan" Importance. High St02wMcwga&k Senior Administrative Assistant City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 phone: 909.839.7030 fax: 909.861.3117 e -mall: stella.marguez(c_ci.diamond-bar.ca.us From: Judy Leung [mailto:sljleung@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 12:02 PM To: Carol Herrera; Steve Tye; ling. ling-chang@ci.diamond-bar.ca.us; Ron Everett; Jack Tanaka; Stella Marquez Subject: Objection to "Site D Specific Plan" Importance: High To the Planning Commissioners and City Counsel members, I am writing this e-mail with deep frustration regarding the "Site D Specific Plan". First of all, I would like to express strongly my objection to the plan. I, along with many local residents, were at the Public Hearing in the neighborhood meeting (whatever it is called) at Heritage Park last Sept/Oct. All of us there expressed our opposition to this plan. Many of us got up to the podium to express our views/opinion on our resentment to this Site D Specific Plan. Almost all of us stated our wish of having a recreational park or city facilities (such as library) on that site. We all understand that with this economy, the school district and City of Diamond Bar are looking for "financial gain" in selling the land to developer. Again, as Planning Commissioners and City Counsel members, you should not just consider the financial impact from selling the site. The entire. plan of this project should also integrate land use planning to improve the built and social environments of the communities. Did the Planning staff take the residents' opinion in this land use planning ? Yes, airight, we have several public hearing. But there really is no "active public involvement". Have the Planning staff and the City really listened to the public's needs and preferences? I can only see more money is spent by hiring the consultant to do more so-called Environmental Impact Reportto "shut off' the public's needs and preferences. Has the City of Diamond Bar provide a real opportunity for the public to make the decisions affecting their communities ? I called and talked to Grace Lee (one of the planning staff) in regard to the procedure of disapproving the project. I asked what is the percentage of residents' objection needed to stop the project to be recommended for approval. The answer from her is such criteria is not existed. Then, to my understanding, there are procedures for approval on this project but no procedure to stop the approval of the project. This approval of project, without looking into the public's needs and preferences, will certainly lower the quality of life for the communities and would be difficult to restore. I understand if the Planning Commission approves this plan, it will go to final approval with the City Counsel members. Grace Lee stated that the public hearing is to provide a chance to express our opinions and views to these members and is up to us to convince these 8-10 members to approve or disapprove. She further stated that the Planning Commission members are appointed by the City Counsel and City Counsel members were elected by the residents. Therefore, the residents do have the final "say so" on the project. If this is the view from the City, this is a very "irresponsible" statement. When the City Counsel were elected, the project was not thrown in the table yet and how would we know the standpoint of the would-be City Counsel members. Further, how would we know the appointed Planning Commission's view on this issue. Being tax -payers and residents of the City, we are "in a sense" paying the city staff. Is the City and their staff doing the jobs for or against the residents ? You can easily know how we feel. The "public hearing" is simply a session of "fake democracy". Another thing that I noticed, the public hearing notice was sent 2 weeks ago to the property owners within 1,000 foot radius from the site. First of all, the ethnicity makeup in the City is very diverse. Sending the notice in "English" only probably missing 30-40% of the "audience". It is almost impossible for the residents to gather any organized community effort within a 3 week time period to reflect our objection. 1 will try my very best to be present at next week public hearing if,l can find child care for my kid. That also tells you not all the residents are able to show up at the meeting to express their opinion. The main question here is how much (as residents) have to show our resentment on this project and how many residents that you need to hear from in order for you to believe our deep objection on this project and for you to make the disapproval ? I don't get an answer for that from the City staff. Does that mean this project is set for approval only since the beginning and not otherwise regardless of the public's opinion ? The other point that I don't understand is Grace Lee mentioned that without this "Site D Specific Plan", more than 600 dwelling units can be build (and not commercial) instead of the 202 dwelling units. Please clarify what can and cannot be done with Site D Specific Plan. Being in the Planning Commission and the City Counsel members, are you really doing your job to listen and find out the public's needs and preferences ? You can hire another ten team of consultants to do more EIR, but does that really mean the City fulfills their civil responsibilities in helping their own people? How many of you members live in the City of Diamond Bar and reflect the real needs of the communities ? I am very tired of all these red tapes. I know I probably wasting my time and effort in writing this e-mail and the turn out of this project would be exactly like the Stadium project ......regardless the residents' needs and preferences, the bottom line is money. Please do not disappoint your residents. Don't forget you get elected/appointed, because in our minds you are FOR the residents. Regards, Judy Leung (resident of 21175 Running Branch Road, DB) The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail. Get busy. cIr `-D�1►IOND B COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21825 COPLEY DRIVE - DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117 ITEM NO. 7.1 DATE: April 27, 2010 CASEIFILE NUMBER: CONTINUED "Site.D" Specific Plan - General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03, Zone Change No. 2007-04, Specific Plan No. 2007-01, Tentative Tract Map No. 70687, and Environmental Impact Report 2007-02 (SCH No. 2008021014). PROJECT APPLICANT: Walnut Valley Unified School District and City of Diamond Bar LEAD AGENCY: City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department PROJECT LOCATION: Site D is comprised of approximately 30.36 acres located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Numbers 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-903 and 8714-015-001). APPLICATION REQUEST: To recommend that the City Council take the following actions: 1. Certify Environmental Impact Report 2007-02 which provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the Specific Plan area. The EIR includes mitigation measures for the project, addresses project alternatives, and identifies the environmentally superior project alternative. Because the project will result in environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels, adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations would be required before the City Council can approve the Specific Plan. 2. Adopt Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Site D Specific Plan based on findings that the Specific Plan would result in identified economic and social benefits that will accrue to the City, the School District, and the region, and important public policy objectives will result from the implementation of the proposed Specific Plan. Therefore the proposed Specific Plan's identified benefits override the significant environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated, to less -than -significant levels. 3. Adopt General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C) to Specific Plan (SP). 4. Adopt Zone Change No. 2007-04 to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential (RL) and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan. 5. Adopt Specific Plan No. 2007-01 to adopt the Site D Specific Plan for the approximately 30.36 -acre site for the construction of up to 202 residential dwelling units; up to 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial; and approximately 8 acres of open space areas, easements and rights-of-way. The Specific Plan contains development standards and guidelines tailored to take into account the physical characteristics of the property and its context, and to prescribe design criteria that will govern the future build -out of the site. 6. Approve Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes. SUMMARY: The Planning Commission continued this item from the April 13, 2010 meeting after receiving testimony from eleven speakers who raised concerns over air quality, traffic, conservation of open space, removal of existing trees, and visual impacts, among other things. The April 27, 2010 meeting has been scheduled to allow the Commission to resume discussion of the matter, begin the deliberation process, and formulate its recommendations to the City Council. As of the writing of this report, staff received five written communications in opposition to the proposed Specific Plan, which are included as Attachments 5 through 9. NOTICE OF PUBLIC BEARING: The project was continued from the April 13, 2010 Planning Commission meeting, and therefore no further noticing was required. For the April 13, 2010 public hearing, notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site on March 22, 2010, and the notice was published in the Inland Valley Daily Tribune and San Gabriel Valley Tribune newspapers on April 2, 2010. The project site was posted with a notice display board, and a copy of the public notice was posted at the City's three designated community posting sites. The draft Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report were also posted on the City's website, and hard copies are available for review at City Hall and the Diamond Bar Branch of the Los Angeles County Library. Page 2 of 4 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report b4-27-2010.docx STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions: 1. Adopt the attached resolution (Attachment 1) recommending that the City Council certify the Final Environmental Impact Report, approve the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program, and adopt the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Site D Specific Plan and related Zone Change, General Plan Amendment, and Tentative Tract Map; 2. Adopt the attached resolution (Attachment 2) recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C) to Specific Plan (SP); and Zone Change No. 2007-04 to change the zoning map. designations from Low Density Residential (RL) and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan; and 3. Adopt the attached resolution (Attachment 3) recommending that the City Council approve Specific Plan No. 2007-01 to establish land use and development standards to facilitate and govern the development of up to 202 residential dwelling units, up to 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial floor area; and approximately 10.16 acres of open space areas, easements and rights-of-way; and Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes. ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION In addition to staffs recommendations, the following alternatives have been identified: Alternative Environmental Actions 1. Recommend that the City Council Certify the Final EIR, but determine that the Findings of Fact do not warrant the adoption of the Statement of Overriding Considerations, continue the matter to May 11, 2010 and direct staff to prepare the necessary resolution. 2. Identify the reasons why the Final EIR should not be certified, specifying deficiencies in the environmental analysis and/or conclusions, and recommend that the City Council direct staff to revise the environmental analysis accordingly, continue the matter to May 11, 2010 and direct staff to prepare the necessary resolution. 3. Continue the item for additional information or revisions. Page 3 of 4 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-27-2010.doex Alternative Proiect Actions 1. Recommend that the City Council deny the Site D Specific Plan and all associated land use applications as described in the attached resolutions (Attachments 2 and 3), state the reasons for the recommendation, continue the matter to May 11, 2010 and direct staff to prepare the necessary resolutions. 2. 'Recommend that the City Council approve one of the project alternatives listed in the Final EIR (Public Facilities, Community Commercial, Low -Density Residential, or High -Density Residential), continue the matter to May 11, 2010 and direct staff to prepare the necessary resolution. 3. Recommend that the City Council approve another project alternative, or a modified version of one of the alternatives listed in the Final EIR (including the Project Alternative), continue the matter to May 11, 2010 and direct staff to prepare the necessary resolution. Prepared by: Grace Lee Senior Planner Attachments: ReviAbD'GregCP Community Development Director 1. Draft Resolution No. 2010 -XX (Recommending Certification of the DEIR and Adoption of the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program) 2. Draft Resolution No. 2010 -XX (Recommending Approval of GPA and ZC) 3. Draft Resolution No. 2010 -XX (Recommending Approval of SP and TTM) 4. Draft PC Minutes of April 13, 2010 5. Letter from Mary Rodriguez dated April 13, 2010 6. E-mail from John Yang on April 13, 2010 7. E-mail from David R. Busse on April 14, 2010 8. E-mail from Judy Leung on April 15, 2010 9. E-mail from Chris Chung on April 15, 2010 Page 4 of 4 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 04-27-2010.docx Artac h rmenl i 5 Mary E. Rodriguez 3419 Pasado Drive Diamond Bar, Ca 91765 April 13, 2010 City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department?Planning Division 21825 CopleyDrive Diamond Bar, Ca 91765 Re: Public Hearing "Site D" Specific Plan ("Project") I am hereby requesting that this letter be entered into the Environmental Document. What is the basis for your mitigation efforts? With regards to the traffic, the vegitation, the trees, the wildlife, the air health, the noise. Example, the tree options given to mitigate the distruction of 75 California Walnut Trees. The traffic report does not make good math. Also, you do not show all the streets that are critically affected. Where is Copper Canyon? Copper Canyon goes directly into the project area, yet it is not accounted for in your report. There many things wrong with the Environmental Report. Why is the Walnut School District getting in the real estate business. The property belongs to the school district. They have no right to go into the land speculation business in this terrible economic time. Mary E. Rodriguez —4AV� Attachment 6 Grace Lee To: Greg Gubman Subject: RE: Site D Specific Plan Project Opposal From: John Yang [mailto:johnkyang@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 10:39 AM To: Stella Marquez Subject: Site D Specific Plan Project Opposal City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department Planning Division 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Re: "Site D" Specific Plan ("Project") To Whom It May Concern: I am unable to appear at the public hearing and therefore am challenging this application and project byihis letter. I object for the following reasons/issues: Increase in Traffic and Safety Concerns The area in which this proposed project is located at the southeast comer of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Blvd. which consists of one of the already busiest intersections in Diamond Bar with its entrances to and exits from the 57 freeway. The additional traffic that would be contributed by the new occupants of the proposed 202 residential dwelling units would cripple the already inundated flow of traffic in this area. Additionally, the project would bring more commercial trucks into the vicinity because of the commercial businesses that are proposed in this project. More commercial trucks in the area will absolutely lead to more traffic because of their larger sizes compared to small vehicles. More traffic leads to increased probability of car accidents. The safety of Diamond. Bar residents should be put first and this project seems contrary to that goal. Impact on Local Schools Diamond Bar prides itself of being the part of a great school district and home to many exceptional, and even nationally recognized schools. Adding the 202 residential dwellings would add more students to existing classrooms, adding a strain to the already large classroom sizes and ultimately having a negative impact on the quality of education due to the children of Diamond Bar. Buildings will clash with existing neighborhoods Diamond Bar has been a wonderful suburban community. We pride ourselves with an almost "country feel" lifestyle and it was this small town character that has led many Diamond Bar residents to live here. I have lived at the same Diamond Bar home for over twenty years and attribute my long residency to the charm and character of this city. The proposed site will be at the south "entrance" to Diamond Bar. To have a complex as described by the "Site D" Specific Plan Project be the first impression of our city would be a shame as it would diminish the very character of our city. Although there are some multifamily dwelling complexes that exist in Diamond Bar, it is the single family homes that are exemplary of our city as seen through the Diamond Ridge area, the Country, and surrounding area of the "Site D" Specific Plan Project area. For the above mentioned reasons, I object to the "Site D" Specific Plan Project. Diamond Bar does not need a multifamily dwelling complex with associated commercial businesses as it will lead to an unnecessary, additional strain on the lives of existing residents and business of the local area. Sincerely, John Yang Owner and Resident 3166 Cherry Dale Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Attachment 7 Grace Lee To: Greg Gubman Subject: RE: Site D From., Ron Everett Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 9:50 PM To: David Busse Subject: RE: Site D Mr. David Busse, Thank you for your comments on the subject matter; I will make certain the Community Development Department receives a copy for follow-up. Sincerely, Ron Everett From: David Busse [DRBusse@roadrunner.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 5:02 PM To: Ron Everett Subject: Site D Thank you for attending the Site D hearing meeting last night. I trust you and the other council members in attendance got some idea of the uproar in South Diamond Bar over this plan. I believe there is some common ground to be found on this issue and I urge you and other council members to seek a compromise plan that both satisfies the neighbors and the (arguable) financial interests of the WVUSD. Let's make sure this whole process doesn't get dragged into an extended draina in a courtroom. I am eager to work toward some sort of compromise. That's tough to do when the school board tells me "it's the city's plan" and the city says "were in this to help the schools." Best Regards, David R. Busse Attachment 8 Grace Lee From: Judy Leung [sljleung@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 3:17 PM To: Stella Marquez Ling -Ling Chang (Off -Site); Carol Herrera; Steve Tye; Ling -Ling Chang; Ron Everett; Jack Cc: Tanaka Subject: Questions / concerns on Site D Specific Plan Attachments: 1991 DBIA resolution.PDF To DB Planning Commission members I have the following questions / concerns on Site D Specific Plan - 1) Why Site D Specific Plan is chosen compare to other alternatives such as only building single family house; public facilities; recreational park? There isn't anything mentioned about how this plan is chosen in the Draft EIR or Draft Site D Specific Plan ..... maybe I missed it, please explain. 2) Why was there no public information meeting on the EIR ? We demand an "interactive" meeting with the consultants and the Planning Commission. 3) In Section 7.0 "General. Plan Consistency Analysis" (page 39) under Draft - Site D Specific Plan, it stated the Vision Statement in Land Use Element: " It is the overall goal of the land use element to ensure that the land uses and development decisions of Diamond Bar maintain and enhance the quality of life for its residents." In page 40, Goal stated : "Consistent with the Vision Statement, encourage long-term and regional perspectives in local land use decisions, but not at the expense of the quality of life for Diamond Bar residents." - Explain how these are accomplished ? How can the consultants determine "Site D Specific Plan" will maintain and enhance the quality of life for its residents ???? No DB residents ever received any survey on this subject and never have a channel to express our feelings on this. Now, I am "submitting" my feel on this matter..... it will definitely lower the quality of life. 4) In Section 7.0 "General Plan Consistency Analysis" under Draft - Site D Specific Plan, it stated the Goal in Housing Element (page 40) "Consistent with the Vision Statement„ preserve and conserve the existing housing stock and maintain property values and residents' quality of life" ........ Under Consistency (same page), it stated "Furthermore, the project may enhance surrounding property values..." - Explain how is the "conclusion" (maintain and even enhance surrounding property values) derived from ?? What type of study was done on this? How is "maintain property values and residents' quality of life" determined? What type of factors that this is based on ?? 5) On the very last sentence under Section 7.0 "General Plan Consistency Analysis" under Draft - Site D Specific Plan (Page 43), it stated " Due to the projects convenient location and site planning, Site D presents an economically viable plan that is good for the City of Diamond Bar and its residents. " - Again, how is the conclusion ( good for its residents) arrived ? What type of survey, research study on this plan has used ? What type of factors were considered in the study ? 6) What type of actions/ways that the City has used to contact the DB residents notify and explain the Site D Specific Plan (besides sending to property owners within 1,000 ft radius from the site)? I am concern about the "bias" view from the Consultant that this plan is very well taken and welcomed by the Diamond Bar residents. No response from not being informed about this plan is differ from "no opinion" (but with knowledge) on the plan. 7) The April 13 public hearing meeting was happened to be 2 days from the April 15 tax day. This "strategically" chosen date made many residents not be able to attend the meeting and voice out their views and opinion of this plan. The Planning Commission should arrange another date of public hearing meeting. I am sincerely asking the Planning Commission members to consider all the comments submitted here and other residents. We understand the School Board would need to sell this site; but the proceeds of the land sold will only go to the Capital Improvement Fund (CIF) and won't be able to use on operating expense. The school district have in fact over $100 million in the CIF currently. If the land needs to be developed, let's compromise on something that the City, School Board and its residents can all live with and proud of for years to come Oust Pike the published resolution of DBIA (Diamond Bar Improvement Association) in April 1991 issue of Windmill magazine) -- see attached. Sincerely, Judy Leung (21175 Running Branch Rd., DB) The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. Get started. Confidential Communications The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use of the individual or individuals named above. If the person actually receiving this message or any other reader of the message is not the named recipient or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the named recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of the communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately destroy AND notify us by telephone at 909.839.7058. Apr 07 10 04:49p Ridgegate 15624636368 p.2 41� eAtV11-1t, IN +Fid ti _��' � t'i i++ua� t>Fl: ::io Gt U} fir �Ci-its t c^• ��ii6 ���'r Vit. Q ®. hereto se I of your EXT- ical including: a Hearing Tem & Se ning o Speech & Swallowing Disorders Q Allergiesa Office Minor Surgery g Dizziness igo) o CeAudiologist on Staff ® Middle Surgery � Hearing reening & Hearing Aims ® Sinu isordersOfflce .ff �t fnem o I Plastic Stlrigm & Evening ppnrntrrrsnts, Avaifabfe ft AcceurAff Insurance a Mastercard a Visa L Whereas, A 28 acre parcel of land, located in south Dia- mond Bar at Diamond Bair Boulevard and Brea Canyon Ko4 and owned by the MWnut School Distriet, is pre- sently proposed for development; and Wherew, public discussion has focused upon several alternative development options e.g. a residential sub- division, community parks, undeveloped pristine status; and illlhareae, Citizens of Diamond Bar would benefit fromdevelopment of the parcel into a major recMdonal center; featuring ball fields fbr Little fugue Softball and soccer, multi-purpose courts for volleyball, basketball, tennis and racquetball: childrerei. play area; paths; passive recreation area; as well as a Community Center Building; would mutually enhance the social and rex- reational amenities of the Marnond Bar area; ,and- _ It That the Board"of Dlme ing read botanical studies for our lecal schoob-and students. And be it further resolved that this resolutiorn• unanimously adopted by the Diamond Bar Improvement Association Board of Directors be transmitted to approp- riate City authmities COTTONTAIL CLASSIC A HIT The 3rd Annual Cottontail Classic was held on Satur- day and Sunday, March 16th and 17th. Eight Diamond Bar ttearrs competed with (5) of the teams making it into the final% These teams included Girls Dmsion 2, Boys Division 2, Boys DR&Ion 3, Girls Division 4 (Devesation) and Boys Division 4. There were 88 trams participating $brr throughout the Southern California area. The tournament was a smashing success due to the participation of SpringTeam pmvft coaches, referees, and • the following local rnerchant= . Boma Sports Dr. Wang; DDS McDonald's 5chmidtCannon SoccerJunetion Albertson's Alta.Spom Del Taco New York seltzer ThYlestAssociates phpsi Cola KRIS F Benxi a Domino's pizza 1R9etrdy's Hudson's Grill BorgerKing • MillerMeat Wsbs ae's Wade Ugt. Butler Paper SoccezManla Kmart Cad's&. Whole Enchilada TbdWs Out thanks for supporting the Diamond Elar A.Y.S.O. Ptogram. "owns ffrom Diamond lar will now be compet- ing let the local farm play and tournarnents throughout Califarnia. Att-5-ch ent 9 Grace Lee To: Greg Gubman Subject: RE: Site D - City of Diamond Bar -----original Message ----- From: <cchungl263@roadrunner.com> Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 04:44:23 To: <Steve.Tye@ci.diamond-bar.ca.us> Cc: <sljleung@hotmail.com> Subject: Site D - City of Diamond Bar Mayor Pro Tem Tye: My name is Chris Chung and I was forwarded your email and wanted to take some time to respond to your email. .I hope you don't mind. There has been a growing number of residents, like myself, who are regular people that have jobs and families and do not get involved in what is happening in our City. But there is a difference if not being involved because of other commitments versus not being informed and knowledgeable of what's going on. I do not wish to argue with anyone on this subject or on any subject for that matter nor desire to make anyone look bad. I want to express my concerns, state fact, and ask the City Council to support its residents, your constituents. I will be sending the Planning Commission under separate letter a lists of concerns that I have developed just by a cursory review of the documents under a short time frame.. I understand that not all residents will be happy. I also understand that not all residerits will come away with everything they hoped for. The question to the City Council is have you heard at any meetings on this subject where one resident was happy or where one resident got something they hoped for? I haven't heard of one resident getting a single thing they hoped for. Not one. In fact, you will see that all comments by residents were essentially ignored and set to the sidelines. I was one of the only residents that originally said,I wasn't opposed to the development, but that has now changed as I see that my very minor concerns were brushed to the side. Walnut Valley Unified School District's EIR consultant (I say that because the consultant said he had a 20 year relationship with them) are not doing you or the City Council any favors to protect you, the City and its residents by developing a quality and defensible CEQA document. How do I know that? It doesn't really matter, but I have over 20 years of experience in a related field. The EIR, traffic report and communications on this project are ill-prepared and highly challengeable. I simply ask you to consider the residents' comments with an open mind without any ill -will. We are not attacking the City Council. We are not attacking the City staff. We are asking the City Council to hear us, protect us, and support us. Not Walnut Valley. All blame, if any, for not approving this could be placed on the EIR consultant or even the residents for not wanting it as you will hopefully see. But how can the City Council ever look bad by saying that you have heard from your constituents and they don't want it and you can't support it based on listening to us? You come out the winner, not loser. The City of Diamond Bar City Council can in fact tell Walnut Valley "No," we do not want your proposed project. other, cities have turned down proposed projects by property owners. The City of Inglewood told Wal-Mart "No, we don't want you." The City of West Covina City Council told Foothill Transit that they didn't want their proposed Specific Plan for a Park and Ride parking structure off of Vincent Avenue. A City can turn down any project in which the City feels is a.negative impact to the community. It's a matter of whether the City wants to turn it down. You are correct that as a property owner, that property owner has the right to develop the property. But only to the limits for which the property is zoned for. Currently, I understand that Site D is zoned for single family housing only. If that is correct, they can only developed single family homes and what's wrong with that? It complements the area. Others may disagree as they may want no development. The proposed Specific Plan is actually intensifying the land use and multi -family high density housing is not compatible with the area. I understand that the City may want a commercial component to increase the City's tax base. I'm all for that as long as impacts are addressed and mitigation measures are carried out. But that is clearly not the case. I do disagree with the statement "We have a responsibility that, if they are going to develop it, we provide them with a specific plan as to what can and cannot be included on the property." Perhaps you meant that you have a responsibility to consider a specific plan, but the City is under no obligation to approve a specific plan if it deems that plan to be detrimental to the City of Diamond Bar. I hope you agree with that. As long as the zoning, for the site does not change, they are limited as to what they can do. However, even then they must mitigate impacts. But in no event can they currently develop high-density housing on site. If it is your understanding that the City Council must approve a specific plan or cannot say no, I ask you to please check with your City Attorney. If you need any documentation to show that other City Councils have said no to projects, I would gladly provide such information. one last item that I will be informing others, at the last Planning Commission meeting, I was sitting behind the representatives from Walnut.Valley School District. They were laughing and making fun of several residents' comments during public comment. That is no lie and not made up. I found those actions to be unprofessional and offensive. I hope that it is also offensive to you as our City Council. I urge you to please consider the comments not only here, but all comments submitted by me and other residents. There has been no attempts by the EIR consultants to address any concerns, develop dialogue, or seek compromises. I hope that your mind is not made up on this matter and that with the information that is forthcoming, you will side with the residents that have taken the time to speak out. Not one resident has yet spoken in support and not all residents in opposition have come out to speak up as well. Thank you for your valuable time. Christopher Chung From: Steve.Tye@ci.diamond-bar.ca.us To: sljleung@hotmail.com Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 12:04:09 -0700 Subject: RE: Objection to "Site D Specific Plan" Hello Ms. Leung, Thanks for taking the time to make your City Council aware of your concerns. It is important to have scoping meetings like the one you attended at Heritage Park. Not every resident is going to come away with everything they hope for, but it is an opportunity to have input. The Walnut Valley School District owns that property and, as a property owner, they have a right to develop their property. We have a responsibility that, if they are going to develop it, we provide them with a specific plan as to what can and cannot be included on the property. We cannot simply say "No, you cannot develop it", as they have property rights just like you and I do with the property we own. I hope you will take the opportunity to participate in the public hearing to be held by.the Diamond Bar Planning Commission Tuesday evening, April 13th, and provide your input. Thanks again for taking the time to share your views. Sincerely, Steve T ye Mayor Pro Tem Diamond Bar This transmission is intended for the sole use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. Said transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected by both Federal and State law. Any dissemination, distribution or transmission of this information is strictly prohibited. If you receive this e-mail communication in error, please notify me immediately by telephone (909) 732-3486 so that remedial measures may be taken to properly direct this correspondence. Confidential Communications The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use of the individual or individuals named above. If the person actually receiving this message or any other reader of the message is not the named recipient or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the named recipient, any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of the communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately destroy AND notify us by telephone at 909.839.7058. PLANNING COMM I S H O I AGENDA REPORT CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21825 COPLEY DRIVE - DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117 ITEM 1�i10. 8.1 DATE: May 11, 2010 CASE/RLE NUMBER: CONTINUED "Site D" Specific Plan - General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03, Zone Change No. 2007-04, Specific Plan No. 2007-01, Tentative Tract Map No. 70687, and Environmental Impact Report 2007-02 (SCH No. 2008021014). PROJECT APPLICANT: Walnut Valley Unified School District and City of Diamond Bar LEAD AGENCY: City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department PROJECT LOCATION: Site D is comprised of approximately 30.36 acres located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Numbers 8714-002-900, 8714-002-501, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-903 and 8714-015-001). APPLICATION REQUEST: To recommend that the City Council take the following actions: Certify Environmental Impact Report 2007-02 which provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the Specific Plan area. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) includes mitigation measures for the project, addresses project alternatives, and identifies the environmentally superior project alternative. Because the project will result in environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels, adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations would be required before the City Council can approve the Specific Plan. 2. Adopt Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Site D Specific Plan based on findings that the Specific Plan would result in identified economic and social benefits that will accrue to the City, the School District, and the region, and important public policy objectives will result from the implementation of the proposed Specific Plan. Therefore the proposed Specific Plan's identified benefits override the significant environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated, to less -than -significant levels. 3. Adopt General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C) to Specific Plan (SP). 4. Adopt Zone Change No. 2007-04 to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential. (RL), Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM), and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan. 5. Adopt Specific Plan No. 2007-01 to adopt the Site D Specific Plan for the approximately 30.36 -acre site for the construction of up to 202 residential dwelling units; up to 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial; and approximately 10.16 acres of open space areas, easements and rights-of-way. The Specific Plan contains development standards and guidelines tailored to take into account the physical characteristics of the property and its context, and to prescribe design criteria that will govern the future build -out of the site. 6. Approve Tentative Tract [flap leo. 706807 to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other- rights-of-way for utility and other purposes. STAFF RECOIVtIMENDATiON: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions: 1. Adopt the attached resolution (Attachment 1) recommending that the City Council certify the Final Environmental Impact Report, approve the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program, and adopt the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Site D Specific Plan and related Zone Change, General Plan Amendment, and Tentative Tract Map; 2. Adopt the attached resolution (Attachment 2) recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C) to Specific Plan (SP); and Zone Change No. 2007-04 to change the zoning map designations from Low Density Residential (RL), Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM), and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan; and 3. Adopt the attached resolution (Attachment 3) recommending that the City Council approve Specific Plan No. 2007-01 to establish land use and development standards to facilitate and govern the development of up to 202 residential dwelling units, up to 153,985 gross sq, ft. of commercial. floor area; and approximately 10.16 acres of open space areas, easements and rights-of-way; and Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create Page 2 of 15 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 05-11-2010.docx an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes. SUMMARY: At the April 27, 2010 meeting, the Planning Commission continued its discussion of the Site D Specific Plan and Final Environmental Impact Report to May 11, 2010. Three of the four commissioners expressed the intent to recommend certification of the Environmental Impact Report, and adoption of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. The same three Commissioners also expressed support for the Specific Plan with the addition of a provision to incorporate a neighborhood park feature into the plan, directed staff to prepare a revised resolution that reflects the majority's recommendation, and continued the matter to May 11, 2010. As discussed at the last meeting, staff recommends that the Commission add a condition of approval to Resolution 3—under Subsections B.5.a and, if warranted, B.5.b—that incorporates appropriate language to require park features into the future development plans for Site D. However, the precise language for this condition must be specified by the Commission. To assist in this task, staff prepared an analysis of neighborhood parks in the City, ranging in size from 0.3 to 3.4 acres, so that the Commission has a better general understanding of the types and numbers of amenities that parks of various sizes can accommodate. Because there was not consensus among the commissioners as to whether a separate, dedicated public park should be required, or if one or more active public spaces with park -like amenities should be incorporated into the commercial component of the Site D Specific Plan, a discussion of planning principles for the creation of commercial public spaces is also provided. This concept will be supplemented by an interactive design exercise during the May 11th meeting. Nor was there consensus regarding specifying a location for the park space, as some Commissioners expressed the opinion that the location and configuration should be determined at the design development phase of Specific Plan buildout. For this reason, potential locations for the park space are not addressed in this report. The options presented herein for the Commission's consideration with respect to the incorporation of a park/public space component are thus summarized as follows: m A dedicated public park of a minimum specified acreage and amenities such as a tot lot, picnic tables and shade structures; or The integration of one or more public spaces into the future commercial development, comprised of a minimum . specified aggregate acreage, that incorporates amenities such as a tot lot, picnic tables, shade structures and public art. Page 3 of 15 CD: StafrReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 05-11-2010.docx Regardless of the option the Commission chooses to incorporate into its recommendation to the City Council, a future development proposal to implement the Specific Plan will be subject to subsequent review and approval by the Commission. Specifying the criteria on acreage and type of amenities now does not tie the Commission down to approving a future proposal that simply meets the letter of those criteria: the Commission will have the opportunity to review a development project for consistency with the intent from which those criteria were formulated. In addition, the City has at its disposal a preliminary project review process, where there is the opportunity for the Commission to review the future development project at earlier conceptual stages in the submittal process. The Commission can provide input and direction before the project is further refined. This process can be done in a study session format, or as a regular business agenda item. Op -d- on #1. Traditional Public Park Space, To give the Commission an idea of the type, size, facilities, and amenities of existing parks in the City, please refer to the inventory below. As shown, parks sized at one acre or less will accommodate all of the desired amenities previously discussed by the Commission, and could even facilitate small sports courts. Larger acreages are required to accommodate sports fields and the needed buffers around them. Taking into consideration that the nearby Heritage Park and Castle Rock Elementary School provide ball fields, and these were not features that the Commission expressed interest in previously, a park sized at approximately one acre may be an appropriate recommendation for the Commission to forward to the City Council. Advantages of a Public Park Space Increases park space serving the neighborhood; Provides public amenities that residents can enjoy; and e Affords the City full control over the maintenance, programming, and long-range planning after the park is constructed. Disadvantages of a Public Park Space • Requires ongoing City maintenance costs such as expense and liability for providing' such a facility; • Depending on the size, may impact the type and size of a commercial development. The opportunity to incorporate significant, pedestrian -oriented amenities into the commercial development may be constrained. • May require renegotiation of the MOU between the City and School District for the disposition of the Site D property. Suggested Resolution Language (Planning Commission to specify acreage): B.5.a.4) "At the time that a development plan is formally submitted for Planning Commission consideration, the subsequent play shall incorporate within its boundaries Page 4 of 15 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report D5-11-2010.docx a neighborhood park of at least _ acres, and shall incorporate features such as, but not limited to, a tot lot, picnic tables, seating areas and shade structures." B.5.b.B) "The Final Map shall include a lot delineating the boundaries of the park as prescribed under Subsection B.5.a.4 of this Resolution." inventory of Existing and Approved Parks Page 5 of 15 CD: StaffRepdrts - PC/Site 0 Specific Plan PC Staff Report 05-11-2010.docx 0 Tot Lot Washington Street Park 0 Open Green Space (approved for 0.3 Acres 0 Gazebo construction) 0 5 Picnic Tables 0 3 Benches 0 Decomposed Granite Walkway 0 Tot Lot Longview Park North 0.8 Acres 0 Open Green Space 0 2 Benches 0 Paved Walking Trail 0 Basketball Court 0 Turf Volleyball Court .Longview Park South 0.9 Acres 0 Tot Lot 0 2 Picnic Tables a 1 BBQ 0 Tot Lot Stardust Park 0.9 Acres 0 Open Green Space 0 2 Benches 0 Paved Walking Trail Summitridge Mini Park 1 Acres 0 Open Green Space 0 Tot Lot 0 Open Green Space Starshine Park 2 Acres o 2 Picnic Tables 0 3 Benches 0 1 BBQ 0 Concrete Walkway 0 Softball Field o Tot Lot 0 Open Green Space Heritage Park 3.4 Acres © Community Recreation Building 0 5 Picnic Tables 0 3 BBQs 0 Concrete Walkway Page 5 of 15 CD: StaffRepdrts - PC/Site 0 Specific Plan PC Staff Report 05-11-2010.docx Washington S tiree t Park — 0.3 Aoires GRORGII71r3.QiF)781RIfUE, �\ " .\\\'� g7;OGPiJGGE r t ° r ° riac W➢OLEI�, Z j 90 OOX SPCCIVQI'fPlk .� -� �S/I �Zr .�� .�IOdYJfvi �F 'i [SIrH L'HUYlt C1Ai9 '\ s , :.}�,. 'C y,�J 1��' ... L'?.�" .Vita � r FYIE6psrcRF•,c ' CIIITHtJLPFIICF 9,CNL' Th7L7 REGGm4`EfluacuBFIE i1r - `,Jj rraaIEH mmAW cli. EARN wmj t ( ROM GrAT7/N1Lr7,1 %91 Kmkol- i , cls 11 eaHeacn,G [ t p 31,11, •QVIMIEAT&R6°( "��! I II (i P/+dbG 5 iAi6 L191R'(I1P.) w;auvi�r,.AGG I rr 5• :r i�l7�lff - -a ... .gym.,, GONMIEf£AIYTERWiGE}- _ ` [. •+ FLAY ICURAEUT C.UREIR:tT gUIICGt13LF"o • ' 1 j - - 'ei.�s.v9La.._;.---��� 19's�,�--IB,:e7p4talE. •i I . I/aT�li rt4'=�� n - .merT`"_rT'�' L-PIIGPERI Y LN: Page 6 of 15 CD: Staffteports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 05-11-201 Mom " 1 1 1 Longview Park North — 0e8 Acres ��' I,� $ � 5 J'3 ITih ' - t � i L 'r•Y+S'iAo1��� ParXr � I � ,� lLnn,��i���77 �i�I, � � �, , � f • �� . S,�!:.� �� �•.-W, ,.� i.K.t:::.: t �'ut_u �..,� t -i , ,,..-.:: .... ,-. ... ' .r . , c.� P4��u . ,. � .A . , ,.. � -.gym.. �� t r • .. , � �� t� 2r� � r 5 � t t y - M s A sirs die -� 57, yr,'S K € t -.m• ec:_ec n tt�ze,-,�n-t'..s�.,-_°f-5M. _�- - "v� is���f��1:a� ,d. yr ` -'� ] 4S 3 � ��ti` i4},�'1� �� * 1` +F.. HeUrNaH79• oe _ T.`.. ... r'-^�T3f" � J, I „xr,3 Page 7 of 15 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 05-11-2010.docx Longview Park South — 0.9 Acres Page 8 of 15 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 05-11-2010.doc)c - Stardust Park — 0.9 Acres NMI ffi� 1322 Stardual Orly© Dlomond Bar, CA. (909) 307-4475 : 2 wenohea Dog Sag Dlsponaor 1 Open Green Space PwadWalldng Trall 2 'trash Receptacles 4 i3...#. .�� i-,-1✓ J�'a,,?�. i f` pw� -rye t"'�+� 1 Tot Lot k~: © Dench Trash Rocaputals to Dog Bag Dlaponsar Irrlgagon Conant d'"r i11sy:k �`'.lus ai4Y i 1L 1 i 4� t- "+`f"� R >• Parking Golfara: ' A—h.j, i s ,�.rt _ 'r0+'a s I -t 'at- SaourltY Ughgng: No 149MI hied. Condlllon Is Good IJ { lMr, ss i �¢frkJ�ic�.'� ✓ Af�+l�+7 AOas J 6 Send - 1 .Play Area Doas'Nut Meal ALA -d Cf -SC F� �ii. y- �' ipg .00 yZ I�I(Z/1t1,- Page 9 of 15 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 05-11-2010.docx Page 10 of 15 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 05-11-2010.docx e4 Ed - , , 09 397-4175 1307 B.—Itrlrlye Orlve Olm—d gar, CArea '. h '� ¢'''- r`4 •. �"� k 1 Open Breen Space k� - _ r ir Y r .irrl0allQn Control -.. _ p S _�„r� F,Y �- � r iia"n •. r �§c �� - - 1.04 Covolopod Parking Surface: Asphalt. Limited --?'3r>ir Not Lighted, Condition le Good y, p .N YR x lxit �Y .: 1 f{1 {� A. 4. Im 4 } T r,.,, f - Y• •Y .,. - J 'ICU I Itl r '•' LCU Page 10 of 15 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 05-11-2010.docx Starrshine Park — 2 Acmes Page 11 of 15 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 05-11-2010.docx I rrr )rr 201336 Siarahlne Road olamond Bar, CA. (9W) 307-4476 �..4 ^[X"� n.- _"'^ J I45L - aFP `+4 ;, t k? _ r _ ''..yS�``', • 7 Dog Hart Dlepens s, Drinking Fountain (ADA) yT,_ _- "I Open Green spade • 1 Park Monument 5l®n 'I Paved WallAng Tall r 2 Plonlc Tables 4 Trash Receptacle.- 1 Tat Lot .tom. r z i - ZF- r ` rl. ae Bunch Traah Receptacle Dag BaC, Dlcncnser - ta.rW, t;'�x C}`.�"-s- _',' nt Drinking Fountain t Plenlc Table • t !) - ^'� 3 `i �G'�.r R��5,' r t t� a +'.� 1-1 Irrigation Control Z DeValoAed f-, l „� , •Asphalt Y ' 1 •, Parlift 5uljAcel Security I-1phdrip! Llmlted _ -` _ _ __ _ NObLighicd,,CDndIII0n is DODJ ngss 2-5 HubbWSand .Agra 5-92 Rubbor/Sand: - ff �l sem- It"• •r J�ti'n/' �' J: K r AV IV IBM 1r �➢ cc Page 11 of 15 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 05-11-2010.docx Heritage Park — 3,4 Acres MM 1 2000 S. area Canyon Rd, Dlsmond Dar, CA, (999) 397-4.175 ` vke7� Ro9lrgoma • �, dJ yJ•+ , t �pflA + z� r^ .!' 1 Dlcyclo Rack 1 Softball Field 2 Bleaehers (B row) 4, atoraga Bins t Community Building 1 Telephone 8 Drinklny Fountains (ADA) 1 Trash Fno)oauro r -ry �''" `AFF 1 - "- .fes, '1c 's 2 Dog Bag Dlepensers 11 Trash Receptacles 1 Flagpclo 1 Tot Lot A tri-`y� P F t ,1 i Hot Coale Recepteola 7 Vending Maohlne 7 Cpsn Green Space to A� fe r �;^>i -r ;` ,. f>r ff '"' Nark Monument sign 1 Paved Walldng Trall OJ i .} ,.. ;r:=R��l� „��..' V 5 Plonlo Tables (ADA) •�*� /� .., , �.� v"A•T �^ fi -i- l -r K J `� • , ` �'Blko Rock Vonding Mschlnc Flag Polo M stomBo Ell.c n -` at' f = Orinldng Fountain ra Dog Bag Dispenser Telephone m Bench liol Coale Rocnptlolo BBDe Trash Enalosnre Bloachorn W Trash Receplaple Picnic Table -Irrigation Control f �� t�� e ..f � J}'1 ,�,�. •'� 3.4 Developed _ dot r'l ���. �`� tn. �� 1 1 y /k�� •.� r � �yr�i ,IP ! '�g*'+�r�.D` ."'F 40 513tandard 2 Handloap - Parking Surtaco tspliall 6CCurINl t:lghting Ycs t < -f • r _ J -4 i�,-yr of- - l ' , , t l rJ+•y, i 1_� S,,n % r# rs'F: t` .� outboorwomon l alalia,. i sink flutDoor Nlan;::i ur6 ai. I. rtall. 1 sink InDoorwomon: 3stal1 , 2 ainkn 1nRbpr;Mon 2:amlle, 2 umals, 2 nlnks 41, r I-UIVC url Llghled _. Oam o-1 Id Light d, Dricrtduxt Inlleld, t -IoW Cpitdltl t I Goad Bnubbar/Bend 5-12 Rublior/Send �t Sim. i i -....� �•: i£� t - d-•-.: �+..c7M._M1w+hP� P � is ' - ,.+t,. {�i��f�� ' 'l�lllAllUIM1 11' iU < UU tUU SLU .ail Page 12 of 15 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 05-11-2010.docx OfgUon 2a tntsractive Pubt¢c Ogen Space: Concept Incorporate one or more interactive public open spaces such as social gathering spaces with a park -like feel, to include public amenities such as benches, shade trees, water features, landscaping, tot lot, outdoor dining areas, public art, etc. integrated into the commercial development. The spaces shall be of sufficient size and shape to accommodate the amenities and features, subject to Planning Commission reviewto ensure the intent of the public open space is met. An example of these public amenities can be found in well known popular developments such as the Grove in Los Angeles and The Americana at Brand in Glendale. A more local, but less intensive example can be found in the recently expanded Claremont Village public plaza. An interactive design exercise will be conducted at the Planning Commission meeting to illustrate more clearly the opportunities for incorporating public spaces into the commercial component. Advantages of an Interactive Public Open Space • Takes into account the Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the Walnut Valley Unified School District that stipulates a minimum of fifty percent of the designated area for residential development and fifty percent designated for commercial use, exclusive of necessary infrastructure; o Allows a potential developer to creatively design the site with a quasi -public space by having the public open space area incorporated and designed at the B level map; and o Creates a focal point in the commercial component with a complementary public space to support the commercial development. Adding the interactive public open space area can enhance the commercial component as well as enhance the experience to visitors and residents of the area. Disadvantages of an Interactive Public Open Space o Certain amenities found in a traditional neighborhood park, such as barbecue and picnic facilities, and small sport courts, may not be feasible in this type of a setting. The City would not own the property or facilities comprising the spaces, and would not have the opportunity to program or revise the features after initial development is completed. Suggested Resolution Language (Planning Commission to specify acreage): 13.5.a,4) "At the time that a development plan is formally submitted for Planning Commission consideration, the subsequent plan shall incorporate within the Commercial development, one or more interconnected public open spaces, consisting of a total aggregate area of at least acres, and shall incorporate features such as, but not limited to, a tot lot, picnic tables, seating areas, shade structures and public art." Page 13 of 15 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 05-11-2010.docx Public Plaza, The Village, Claremont, California NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: The project was continued from the April 27, 2010 Planning Commission meeting, and therefore no further noticing was required. For the April 13, 2010 public hearing, notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site on March 22, 2010, and the notice was published in the Inland Valley Daily Tribune and San Gabriel Valley Tribune newspapers on April 2, 2010. The project site was posted with a notice display board, and a copy .of the public notice was posted at the City's three designated community posting sites. The draft Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report were also posted on the City's website, and hard copies are available for review at City Hall and the Diamond Bar. Branch of the Los Angeles County Library. As of this.writing, two letters were received in opposition to the proposed Specific Plan, and are included as Attachments 5 and 6. Arlt%110 In the April 13 and 27, 2010 resolutions, the existing zoning designation for the project area was listed as Low Density Residential (RL) and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1), but should have stated Low Density Residential (RL), Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM), and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1). This correction has been incorporated into the attached resolutions. Page 14 of 15 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 05-11-2010.docx Prepared by: Grace S. Lee Senior Planner Attach,mants: Reviewed by: Greg Gubman, AICP Community Development Director Draft Resolution No. 2010 -XX (Recommending Certification of the DEIR and Adoption of the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program) Draft Resolution No. 2010 -XX (Recommending Approval of GPA and ZC) Draft Resolution No. 2010 -XX (Recommending Approval of SP and TTM) Draft PC Minutes of April 27, 2010 Letter from Christopher Chung dated May 6, 2010 Letter from Judy Leung dated May 5, 2010 Page 15 of 15 CD: StaffReports - PC/Site D Specific Plan PC Staff Report 05-11-2010.docx Attachment 5 May 6, 2010 City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission C/O Grace Lee City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bair, CA 91765 SUBJECT: SITE D SPECIIi'IC PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Mr. Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission: At the April 27, 2010 Planning Commission meeting, • City staff indicated that there were some factual errors in my letter that needed to be addressed. In response, I would like to address factual errors, which should be considered before you proceed. I have stated in my letter that my opinions are based on a cursory review of a large volume of documents and therefore there may be errors. However, as proof that I am human and do make errors, I also raised some really good points that would be an error for the City to overlook. While.staff addressed a few of the issues that they felt were incorrect, I feel that some important ' - — — issues were -glossed -over and -perhaps misdirected away from. 4 -am -not going to redress -every- - issue in detail as it has been already stated in my previous letter that I believe still has merit, but I am going to readdress (and add) a few. 1. ObiectivjV and Independent: While staff is correct that TRG Landis not the environmental consultant or the traffic consultant, the environmental consultant and traffic consultant are sub -consultants to TRG and take direction and payment from TRG Land directly. As a result, the potential issue of conflict of interest, objectivity and not being independent still remains as TRG Land has indicated that they have over a 20 -year relationship with the School District. The City should have hired a team that did not have any prior relationship to either the City or Walnut Valley Unified School District to ensure independency. The selection. of TRG Land was not based for the purpose of creating an objective independent evaluation, but. to minimize potential issues to further the goals of the MOU. The hiring of the consultant was not developed out of a.competitive bid process, but was solely based on past relationships with the School District and negotiated as a condition of the MOU (Section 1.1 of the MOU). Page 1 of 7 The genesis of the Specific Plan and EIR does not appear to be about protecting and serving the residents; nor has it been about wanting to obtain community input. The purpose of the Specific Plan and EIR appears to be to justify the intent of the MOU to increase land use intensity for 50% housing and 50% commercial in order that the District and City can capitalize on the sale of one large property at a higher value. The more money the District makes on the sale of the property, the more money the City will also receive from the increased value of the City's share of 4.6 percent of land sale proceeds. It is also about the City not losing money. Should the City not approve a Specific Plan by November 4, 2010, the District does *not have to reimburse the City for the cost of consultants paid for the preparation of the Specific Plan, traffic report and EIR and the City stands to lose $334,221.25. As a result, the City is motivated, if not already committed, to approve any specific plan and EIR by November 4, 2010 just to ensure that the City does not lose money, regardless if the Specific Plan and EIR are flawed and inadequate. This type of arrangement is highly irregular and has set up the process to fail in protecting and representing the residents from the very beginning. The City should be reviewing the Specific Plan for land use. compatibility and benefits (amenities and tax revenues) and not for economic gain or loss. 2. Notification of residents within a 1,000 -foot radius. Staff pointed out that one of my factual errors in my lettdr is stating that the City exceeded its 700 feet radius noticing requirement. I would like to point out that the information that the City's noticing requirement is 700 feet (not 1,000) was provided to others and me from the Community Development Department. As such, I commented on incorrect factual information that was provided to me. I understand that mistakes may happen, but it is not encouraging or comforting that the error is identified as one of my factual.errors instead of the Department's. But in any case, it draws concerns of accuracy of the information being provided to the public and to the Planning Commission. It further -~ - -- - -'-illustrates that the Cityis-onlymeetingthabare legal requirement -versus going - - - - - -- beyond and informing and involving residents in the process. Traffic Study: The current (3 -year old) traffic study contained in the EIR has several major flaws that cannot be overlooked and if addressed properly, would require re- circulation of the Traffic Study and EIR. Any "Significant New Information" must and should be considered and studied. The traffic report may have been submitted to the City in 2009, but the traffic study is based on a 2007 traffic counts, which is evident on the fact that the traffic study reports "existing 2007" traffic and projects 2010 traffic. If the traffic report was updated, the traffic reportshould state existing 2009 traffic, not 2007. As a result, the consultant's statement that the traffic report was updated one year ago is factually incorrect. In November 2008, the City paid for an additional traffic study to focus only on a double left from Diamond Bar Boulevard into project for $2,500.00. It is not clear whether this 2008 study is included as the report still references 2007 traffic counts. Page 2 of 7 Staff has not addressed the concern that the cumulative impact of traffic and mitigation is not based on current recent growth within and nearby the City. One major project, which has been recently better defined and has significant impacts to the City of Diamond Bar and adjacent communities, is the Industry NFL stadium. The EIR only looks at the previous defined mixed-use project. The NFL Stadium will have different traffic impacts not yet known as no one has studied it. Industry received a waiver from the Governor and Diamond Bar is ignoring the newly redefined project. This is a major deficiency. The traffic report should be updated to reflect the cumulative impacts of the NFL Stadium, which will increase cumulative traffic impacts on the freeways and on in all major intersections in the City. While staff was correct that the traffic report did include projected traffic of the Diamond. Hills Plaza shopping center, the old 3 -year traffic study was completed prior to the opening of the Super H Supermarket and new adjacent retail uses and does not reflect actual current traffic. The City's consultant stated at the April 13, 2009 Planning Commission meeting that that an updated traffic study was completed about one year ago. If an updated traffic study was completed one year ago, why has it not been disclosed or included in the EIR? If public funds were used to pay for the updated traffic study, the report should be disclosed and included in this EIR. This draws question as to whether the updated study found additional impacts that were not addressed. The. non -disclosure of all information is a basis for the comment period not being closed, as all information has not been fully disclosed for public review and comment. A new traffic study must be completed to reflect accurate -cumulative impacts of newly identified projects and impacts. The revised traffic study and, revised EIR. needs to be re -circulated. 'd. The traffic study failed to analyze worse case scenario for the high:density - -' --- — --- -- - -' tesidential units:' The -Specific Plan and-EIR state -that -the project-canbe granted -a-_ - - - - - density bonus of 25% more units if the project is developed as affordable units. However, the traffic study ONLY analyzes trips generated from the 202 residential units, not the full potential of 253 units (202 units times 1.25 = 253 units). As a result, the traffic study is inadequate and flawed. A new traffic study must be completed to reflect the total potential density of 253 residential units and the traffic study and revised EIR needs to be re -circulated. The traffic study failed to analyze worse case scenario or maximum intensity for the commercial development. The traffic engineer used ITE category 820 for shopping centers (an integrated group of commercial establishments planned, developed, and owned as a unit). Typically, a traffic study of this type would be based on a proposed or better -defined project, as different percentages of office space would have varying impacts to AM and PM peals traffic. The Specific Plan and EIR state that the types of use can include commercial retail, office, restaurants, .and so on. As a detail plan has not been developed, the project should be analyzed for impacts for different possible scenarios and the Lead Agency should select the scenario that generated the most AM and PM peak traffic and Page 3 of 7 impacts to mitigate. One very possible scenario is the development of all office buildings that would have significant traffic impacts to AM and PM peak traffic. As a result, the traffic engineer should have also analyzed traffic impacts based on an office park category, such as ITE category 720 "Office Park." As the traffic study did not analyze the worse case scenario, the traffic study is inadequate and flawed. A new traffic study must be completed and the traffic study and revised EIR needs to be re -circulated. The traffic study did not include three (3) intersections (Cold Spring Lane and Castlerock, Brea Canyon Road and Cold Spring Place, and Brea Canyon Road and Copper Canyon Drive). Copper Canyon Drive and Brea Canyon Road is the first intersection just 850 feet south of the site. Brea Canyon Road and Cold Spring Place isapproximately 1,535 feet north of the site and Cold Spring Lane and Castlerock is approximately 2,600 feet away from the site. These close intersections were not analyzed and mitigated and will be further impacted by the proposed development. It is completely unacceptable to say that there will not be any impact to these intersections without analyzing and proving that there will not be any impacts. A new traffic study must be completed to include these three intersections and the traffic study and revised EIR needs to be re -circulated. g. With respect to traffic impacts leading to and away from CastlerockElementary (and Cold Spring Land and Castlerock and Cold Spring Place and Brea Canyon Road), the Lead Agency cannot ignore potential traffic impacts based on the traffic consultant's representation that the LA County Sheriffs should regulate such traffic impacts. That is completely and utterly unacceptable to not study intersections and traffic that currently exist based on such factors. It is also alarming that that this area of concern that is being ignored by the consultants that have a 20=year relationship with Walnut Valley Unified School District is an area — - — — -- -- — - — directly -impacted by the weekday activities --of the-cq=applicant; the Walnut- - -- — — — — — -- Unified School District. How can the Lead Agency and City ignore this issue of objectivity? Why of all intersections ignored were the two intersections leading to Castlerock Elementary School, which is a part of the Walnut Valley Unified School District? It doesn't make any sense whatsoever. A new traffic study must be completed to include these two intersections and the traffic study and revised EIR needs to be re -circulated. The Amendment No. 1 to the MOU (November 4, 2008) identified an additional traffic study for a double left from Diamond Bar Boulevard into project. This additional traffic study, which cost the City an additional $2,500.00 in November 2008, was not made available to my knowledge as the EIR only identified the 2007 -traffic study. This draws question as to whether this traffic study found additional impacts that were not addressed. The non -disclosure of all information is a basis for the comment period not being closed, as all information has not been My disclosed for public review and comment. Page 4 of 7 Federation of Hillside and Canyon Associations v. City of Los Angeles. Staff failed to explain the Planning Commission that although there may be a mitigation measure for the developer to -pay a pro rata share to the City at the time of Tract Map submittal, such mitigation measure does not ensure That the traffic impacts will be mitigated and thereby substantially reducing adverse traffic impacts. In Federation of Hillside and Canyon Associations v. City of Los Angeles, the petitioners argued that there was no substantial evidence supporting the city's finding that mitigation measures would significantly reduce adverse impacts' on transportation. This is same for the Site D EIR. The developer's payment of pro rata share of impacts does not ensure that the City, will ever construct all traffic improvements, thereby reducing adverse impacts on transportation. In this case, the developer will pay the City, but that does not ensure that the City will construct the improvements. Case in point, the City has not identified if, where and when the remaining funds would be funded and whether the improvements will be completed prior to the completion of the project. As a result, the project could be completed, the City may not have all the funds to construct the improvements and adverse traffic impacts are not mitigated. It is a factual error to state that the payment of a pro rata share of costs will ensure the traffic mitigation measures will ever be completed and will therefore significantly reduce adverse traffic impacts. Other cities have addressed. this same issue by not only requiring a pro -rata payment of the cost of improvements, but also requiring that the project cannot be opened (Certificate of Occupancy) until the traffic improvements have been completed. The Lead Agency needs to correct the mitigation measure and re -circulate the EIR. 5. The Specific Plan is not consistent with the General Plan. It is a factual error for staff to state that they believe that the proposed Specific Plan is consistent and compatible with the adjacent land uses and General Plan without providing concrete explanations of why itis consistent. In my last letter; I pointed out several inconsistencies that —: — -were not addressed.—I also feel that -there -are-no-social•benefits-thathave-been clearly-------- — --- identifiedi as the final project is yet to be defined. This project will not reduce crime, blight or impacts onpublic services. The project could only add crime, blight or increase demand on public services. It is not NRYIBYism (Not In My Back Yard) for the public to say we want a voice of the type of use(s) to be developed at this site in the future. It is easy for anyone (including Planning Commissioners and City Councihnembers) to support a project that is not near his or her place of residency. But if a Planning Commissioner or City Councilmember did live nearby a project that they didn't support, I am certain that it would not be called NIMBYism. As not one resident has been in favor of this project, how can the Specific Plan be consistent with the vision of the residents? Master planning (advance planning) is not only the vision of the City Council, but also the vision of the residents that elected the City Council. • The high-density housing at this site will most likely end up as 253 unit affordable apartments at 25 units per acre (density bonus plus. no requirement or conditions that the housing be owner -occupied). Apartments are not compatible with the adjacent land uses of Page 5 of 7 single-family homes and certainly not the vision of the residents that moved in the area. Site D does not have the same characteristics as other high-density housing complexes in our City. Unlike all other high-density housing projects cited by the consultants, Site D is surrounded 76% by single-family homes (land uses). There are single-family homes immediately adjacent to the South, East and North of the site (representing approximately 76% of property boundary): The only sides not adjacent to single-family homes are to the West and a small portion to the North that is commercial and represents approximately 24% of property boundary (along Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard). It would be more consistent and compatible to retain the zoning for single-family housing and change land use to low/low medium residential to match the current zoning. It is also important to note the development of single-family housing in replace of high density housing would also be consistent with the MOU as the MOU does not specify what type of residential development the -50% of residential development must be. Regional Housing Needs Assessment: Any development of residential units will meet the goals of RENA. I have heard the City use RMA as a reason the City had to rezone up to high density. My statement was that the City couldn't use RHNA as the sole excuse rezoning Site D for high-density housing. RIINA is not proper justification for a General Plan Amendment to increase density from single-family housing to high-density in a single family housing area. The development of single- family housing would also meet the purpose of RHNA. 7. Memorandum of Understanding (MOU): The City has stated many times that the Specific Plan is consistent with the MOU with Walnut Valley Unified School --District. -Consistency to the MOU is not justification.ofthe• Specific Plan being — cones stentvaith the -General -Plan- The-purpose-ofthe�MOU is%r•the-City-and-Walnut-- --- -- Valley Unified School Disi ict to capitalize on the resale of the newly rezoned land. As the value of the District's property increases in result of the City approving a higher intensity zoning of the. land, the City also benefits from the increases of the value of land sale with the 4.6% that the City is entitled to receive pursuant to the Amendment No. 1 to the MOU. In addition, should the City not approve the Specific Plan by November 4, 2010, the District does not have to reimburse the City for the cost of consultants paid for the preparation of the Specific Plan, traffic report and EIR. Not knowing or understanding how this agreement evolved, the outward appearance of this type of arrangement is highly irregular and prejudices the City. The EIR and traffic report is based on a very conceptual Specific Plan with the primary purpose of justifying the change in land use and zoning. When the project is better defined, the project should be required to complete a Supplemental EIR to address impacts based on an actual well-defined project and to ensure that the project has not created more impacts as previously identified. Page 6 of 7 In summary, I am not certain that many of the issues can be addressed without the EIR having to be re -circulated. However, the residential development of the Specific Plan should be changed to single-family housing and a Supplement EIR. should be required once the project is better defined. The decision of approving a Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment should be based on the right reasons. I think it is unfortunate that the City has placed itself in such a precarious position where the City must approve a Specific Plan by November 4, 2010 hi order that the City does not stand to lose the reimbursement of over $346,221.75 of public funds from Walnut Valley Unified School District that could have been used for other community needs. But even more, it is very unfortunate that the City also stands to lose the price of selling out the adjacent residents by forcing this Specific Plan upon us. Sincerely, a i I Christop ex kSpringane 21470 Cold Diamond Bar, CA 91765 i Page 7 of 7 Attachment 6 May 5, 2010 To: City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission C/O Ms. Grace Lee, City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Dr, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Subject: Site D Specific Plan Chairman and Planning Commissioners, I would like to express my view/opinion to the April 27, 2010 planning commission meeting, additional and existed concerns on Site D Specific Plan. It seems to me the entire meeting was toward the "presumable" approval on Site D Specific Plan to develop 50% of commercial use and 50% of high density residential use. There is almost no reason presented at all on why other alternatives are not considered in this plan. As a Diamond Bar resident, I am very disappointed by the "strategically" planned way of how this entire Site D plan has been presented. The Planning staff has done a great job in discouraging residents to even attend this meeting by selectively addressed on issues that the City wants to answer. The residents' preferences/views/concerns are basically neglected throughout the whole process. Shortfalls on Site D Specific Pian: 1) Tunnel vision - not all the alternatives are explored and studied for Site D. Site D Specific Plan is only concentrated on the land use that derived maximum economic gain. None of the social factor or compatibility to the surroundings is carefully studies. Sited D Specific Plan deemed to be the best option for the City and the residents by the Consultant (TRG Land) and the Planning Staff without factual comparison with the other alternatives. This practice is totally unacceptable. 2) Inadequate Traffic report - i) The entire report was done in 2007 (3 years old data) and "projected" out to 2010. There are couple major impacts were left out. The impact from the future NFL Stadium, the opening of the Super H Mart Market, the increase traffic drawn from the population increase in the nearby cities were not in the study. ii) Several "close by" intersections were not in the study - Brea Canyon Road and Copper Canyon Drive, Cold Spring Lane and Castlerock, Brea Canyon Road and Cold Spring Price. 3) Inconsistent with General Plan - I have raised several points on the inconsistency of the Specific Plan to the General Plan in my "5 minutes" residents' view in the April 13 meeting and also in my last letter to the Commissioners. Again, no specific/concrete explanations on how and why they are consistent. To quote from my last letter : ** In Section 7.0 "General Plan Consistency Analysis" under Draft - Site D Specific Plan, it stated the Goal in Housing Element (page 40) "Consistent with the Vision Statement, preserve and conserve the existing housing stock and maintain property values and residents' quality of life" ........ Under Consistency (same page), it stated "Furthermore, the project may enhance surrounding property values..." - Explain how is the "conclusion" (maintain and even enhance surrounding property values) derived from ?? What type of study was done on this? How is maintain property values and residents' quality of life" determined? What type of factors that this is based on ?? ** On the very last sentence under Section 7.0 "General Plan Consistency Analysis" under Draft - Site D Specific Plan (Page 43), it stated " Due to the projects convenient location and site planning, Site D presents an economically viable plan that is good for the City of Diamond Bar and its residents. " - Again, how is the conclusion ( good for its residents) arrived ? What type of survey, research study on this plan has used ? What type of factors were considered in the study ? 4) Lack of input from Native American Organization — What are,the responses from the eight Native American Organization/Club? Nothing about these comments is addressed since Feb. 2008. These are just some of my concerns in addition to many concerns from other residents. Making the right choice for the City and the residents is the key. I am urging the Planning Commissioners use their authorities to properly act on this issue. We should not rush on the decision without understanding how the plan is consistent with the General Plan. Your decision will be affecting the future of this land use for the City and its residents. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Sincerely, Judy Leung 21175 Running Branch Road, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 13, 2010 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Torng called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Governm ent Center Auditorium, 2186 5 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: C/Shah led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Steve Nelson, Jack Shah, Vice Chairman Kathy Nolan, and Chairman Tony Torng. Absent: Commissioner Kwang Ho Lee was excused. Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; Brad Wohlenberg, Assistant City Attorney; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; David Alvarez, Assistant Planner; and Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant. Consultants: Mark Rogers and JoAnne Sturges, TRG Land; Peter Lewandowski, Environmental Impact Sciences. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes ofthe Regular Meeting of March 23, 2010 C/Nelson moved, VC/Nolan seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of March 23, 2010, as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson, Shah, VC/Nolan, Chair/Torng NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Lee 5. OLD BUSINESS: None 6. NEW BUSINESS: None APRIL 13, 2010 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 Site "D" Specific Plan — Pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act; Title 21 — City's Subdivision Ordinance; and Title 22 — Development Code Sections 22.60 and 22.70, the proposed project is to recommend approval of the following to the City Council: General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 — A request to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan (SP). Zone Change No. 2007-04 —A request to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential (RL) and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan (SP). Specific Plan No. 2007-01 — A request to adopt the Site D Specific Plan for approximately 30.36 -acre site for the construction of 202 residential dwelling units at a density of 20 units per acre; 153,985 gross square feet of commercial use at 10.35 floor area ratio; and approximately 10 acres ofopen space areas, easements and rights-of-way. Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 — A request to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes. Environmental Impact Report No. 2007-02 — A request to certify the Final EIR which provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the Specific Plan area . Project Address: Site comprised of approximately 30.36 -acres located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Numbers 8714-002-900, 8714-002- 901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002,093, and 8714-015-001.) Applicant: Walnut Valley Unified School District and City of Diamond Bar Lead Agency: City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department C/Nelson said he would recuse himself from deliberation on this matter because the company he works for, PCR Services Corporation provided the archaeological and biological assessments for the project and he was APRIL 13, 2010 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION personally involved in the project Chair/Torng laid out the ground rules for the meetin g protocol and public speaking. CDD/Gubman presented staffs report and recommended thatthe Planning Commission open the public hearing, receive public testimony regarding the staff EIR and all land use entitlements, and continue thepublic hearing to the April 27, 2010, meeting. Mark Rogers provided a history of the site and details of the proposed Site Specific Plan that included lower level commercial stepping up to residential pads adjoining existing single-family residences. He described the planning principles that have been incorporated into the Specific Plan and supplemented his presentation with a PowerPoint presentation and display boards. Nancy Lyons, 22536 Ridge Line Road and President, Walnut Valley Unified School District (WVUSD) Board of Directors, stated that the original intent was to develop the site as a school. At this point, the district has enough school sites with a declining number of students. WVUSD needs money instead of another school because the district has received less money every year for the past three years with a total enrollment decrease of 20 percent. This substantial decrease in income has led to drastic cuts in programs, teacher layoffs, cancellation of programs includi ng elementary music, etc. The district hopes to get the property entitled and sell it to provide the district with additional funds. She asked the Commission to recommend City Council approval. Chair/Torng opened the public hearing. Donald Daneault, 3154 Castle Rock Road, asked where students living in the 200 units this project would attend school. The schoo I district says student enrollment is declining; however, the elementary school on Castle Rock Road is overcrowded. He was very concerned about additional student drop off and pickup congestion close to his home because he finds it very difficult to get to his house under the current conditions. John Martin, 1249 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard #432, felt that since this project was on an entrance to the City, everyone in the City should have been provided the Notice of Public Hearing. He said he did not know who had been noticed but with the number of residents present at tonight's meeting, it seemed important to him that for the next meeting that everyone APRIL 13, 2010 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION in Diamond Bar should be noticed and given an opportun ity to learn about the plans. This is the same plan that was presented previously as well as, a time prior. Nothing has been changed. It is obvious to him that the City and the school district want the most money possible from the sale of this land. The best way to get money for a property is to have commercial and residential property. However, if the commercial is eliminated, the berm with the 100 year old trees is kept in place, and the homes are set back about 135 feet from the street, it would solve many problems including elimination of neon lights from the commercial area. Asstated in the report, the purpose of commercial is to have it at street level which would be an eyesore ata City entrance. The EIR contains one potentially significa nt impact; however, he counted eleven. The expectations he has for living in Diamond Bar is that it is a beautiful City and the City of Diamond Bar and WVUSD is saying it wants to put a commercial area at the heart and entrance of the City which in his opinion, was the wrong thing to do. He asked thatthe City consider some alternative to this Specific Plan because the DEIR states that of all of the alternatives, this plan is the worst environmental alternative. Christopher Chung, 21470 Cold Spring Lane, said he saw two different desires and alternatives. He wondered if the motive and intent of public hearing was to actually get public input orto do the minimal legal obligations the City is required to perform under CEQA. He felt the documents and reports this evening were telling in that normally a scop ing meeting takes place prior to issuing of an ElRorany document and is intended to be a time for input from the community. In this case the document was prepared first and then the City asked for input. It is telling him That the applicant indicates its purpose is to make money. He understands development. He has 20 years in this business and understands EIR's, traffic studies, etc., and he is pro -development and pro this project. If his concerns were addressed he would not be speaking tonight. His concerns include a flawed, inconsistent and outdated traffic report that does not include impacts of the stadium in Industry, cumulative impact from tenants atthe H -Mart shopping center; and impacts atschool intersections like Cold Spring Place and Brea Canyon Road or Cold Spring Lane and Castle Rock. Anyone who drops theirkidsoff in the morning knows there is a 10-15 minute wait. If 202 units are being added, there will be additional impact that has not been analyzed. He understood there was an applicant that had a desire and fully believe that people who own property have the right to develop their property as they see fit but they need to do it in such a way that it does no t adversely impact everyone else. In addition, he saw no traffic analysis of ingress/egress from the site. Projects are market-driven and actual analysis cannot bedone until the site has an actual development plan so there should be project first before determining the impact of import/export of dirt, for example. Also, in APRIL 13, 2010 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION his opinion, certain assumptions about daily trips are incorrect. Under CEQA, the document needs to indicate that the mitigation measures will actually happen. The City cannot just say it will put money in a pot. Federation of Hillside and Canyon Associations versus City of Los Angeles has declared an EIR similarto the EIR for this project to be in violation of CEQA mandate because the City did not include those mitigation measures. Chair/Torng asked the speaker to put his concerns in writing and present them to staff. Mr. Chung said he did not believe the Commission had sufficient information to move this project forward and should send the plan back to staff for further research. Michael Hasegawa, 21502 Cold Spring Lane, felt there were a lot of questions that needed to be answered including the avail ability of mass transit to handle the increased demand and whether the trees and water canal would be retained. These questions are guidelines, and residents do not know whether the developer will follow these guidelines because this project is market driven. It seems to him that this is a very haphazard plan because he sees no guarantees for the people who live in the area. What will happen with the screening, for example. If the schools are over packed now, why not keep the site for future school use. He knows the City is down $20 million; however, commercial real estate is not a surething. The large movie theater on Diamond Bar Boulevard is large commercial property that has not yet been purchased. There is no assurance anyone will buy this property. He was told by his Realtor when he purchased his home that the view was worth an additional $40,000. Will the home values decline in the area once there is a commercial development and the views are gone? His grandfather was a planner for Los Angeles County and helped to design Rowland Heights and surrounding communities including Diamond Bar. He says that the planning was based on population feasibility studies in designated commercial and residential zoning. Has there been an analysis of how this plan would affect those studies. Judy Leung, 21175 Running Branch Road, said that according to what she understood, proceeds of the sale of this land could be used for capital improvements only, therefore, would not help the district with operating expenses. There have been no public information meetings on the EIR and the plan, and its details, and she feels the City and school district owe it to the residents to explain this plan in greater detail. Only the residents living within 1000 feet of the site receive meeting notices and the people she has spoken with who live across the street from the project did not receive notices. Only 200 residents received the notice. She believed that many more residents would have come to the meeting tonight to express their feelings if they knew about this project. She wants to knowwhy this project APRIL 13, 2010 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION has been kept a secret. The consultant forgot to mention the 1991 DBIA Resolution about this plan that was discussed and declined. The EIR is a large document that requires a college degree to understand and comprehend. She is just an ordinary resident and three week's notice about this meeting is not a sufficient amount oftime to try and understand a1000 page document. Again, where is the public information meeting that should have explained more in depth about what this proposed project is all about. Section 7.0 of the Specific Plan (General Plan Consisten cyAnalysis) states that "this specific plan provides a site specific detailed description of regulations, standards and guidelines for implementing General Plan goals and policies. To achieve this, the specific plan must be in conformance with and be consistent with the General Plan. The Californ is government code states that a specific plan shall include a statement of the relationship of the specific plan to the General Plan and further, that it may not be adopted and amended unless found to be consistent with the General Plan." The vision statement under land use reads "It is the overall goal of the land use element to ensure that the land uses and development decisions of Diamond Bar maintain and enhance the quality of life for its residents." Does anyone actually believe that this project will enhance the quality of life? If so, she and others would not be here. Residents are trying to let the Commissioners know that this particular plan is going to decrease and lower the residents' quality of life. With very limited notice to the residents, everyone cannot be present tonight to let the Commissioners know how they really feel and this is very, very sad. She said she hoped the response from the City about public comments would not be a comment that the response was "acknowledged" only, because that will serve no purpose. Mary Rodriguez, 3419 Pasado Drive, said she would like to know about the 1991 DBIA Resolution as well and would like to see alternative plans that would not include destruction of 100 year old Califomi a Walnut trees. Atthe August 2009 meeting she asked about Copper Canyon not showing up in the traffic report and it is not included in this report. Since 1991 it seems likethe Commission and Council are not listening to the people. Members of the public speak up and no one pays attention because the sameplans continue to be presented with no alternative plan to save the area. David Busse, 21455 Ambushers Street, owns commercial property in the San Gabriel Valley and wanted to warn the Commission that the commercial real estate business is no place for a school board or a City Council to be messing around at this time. The WVSUD Public Hearing Site D report from March 11, 1991, when there was an attempt to build homes in the area, the timing of the school board speculating on that land was so bad that if that had gone through the school board would have lost great deal of money. APRIL 13, 2010 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION He asked that the WVUSD Site D Public Hearing report from March 11, 1991, be entered into the record which clearly indicates that people in the neighborhood wanted this property used for public use. Politics is the art of compromise and he has not seen any compromise on this plan or in discussions. The EIR is impressive but full of errors. The traffic study is flawed. One can hire a traffic engineer to say anything they want him to say. Common sense tells one that 220 units of housing traffic cannot be made better by using a bunch of stoplights. Section 4.9 of the EIR, page 4.9-12, the Angeles National Forest is a national forest under the US Department of Agriculture, not the National Parks Service (Department of the Interior). When he opened the EIR to the first page and saw that mistake he wondered how many others were included in the report that he did not know about. Every time one drives the SR60 and experiences the debacle at the SR57/60 they should remember that a registered professional traffic engineer signed off on that project. Traffic is a nightmare and the concept of putting more cars on the street and saying that everything will be fine, it has not been addressed in this EIR and it makes no sense. Thereneeds to be a lot more thought put into the project and more importantly, from the property owner and the developers and everyone else, he wants to see plan alternatives. He understands the schools need money. Kids live in the neighborhood already and there needs to be a lot more thought given to what is being proposed other than making the most money possible. Hehas served on jury duty many times and he has always been impressed by others who serve at their ability to use common sense to solve complex problems. Don't be fooled by a bunch of material in an EIR compi led by people who allegedly know what they are talking about. He urged the Commissioners to look for themselves and ask themselves if this proposal makes sense and is it for the betterment of the community. Mary Hasegawa, 21502 Cold Spring Lane, said she has a beautiful view from her home and does not want to wake up every mornin g to look at a development. And to think the area will be filled with apartments is disheartening. She said she intended to die in her home and will most likely be killed by the smog. Where are the animals going to go? She gardens on her hill and it is like sand. The earth comes down and what assurance is there that when a developer starts grading the hill, those houses won't tumble down? When she bought her home there was apparently a disclosure about Site Dwhich she never bothered to read because she was enthusiastic about her house. She would not have bought her house if she had taken a minute to read the disclosure. She walks every day and she has to go very early or very late because of the smog. It is da ngerous at night and she wants to feel safe and secure walking in her neighborhood. APRIL 13, 2010 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION Jeff Leighton, 3703 Crooked Creek, said when he was before the Commission a year ago he saw the same presentation and agreed that no one was listening to the residents. He agreed that there are fewer people present tonight because fewer people were notified. He sent a letter to CDD/Gubman after the last meeting and was told hewou Id be notified of tonight's meeting. However, he did not receive a notice about tonight's meeting. He said he was concerned about the increase in traffic generated by this proposed high density housing and commercial use plan. In essence, Diamond Bar is a single traffic thoroughfare City. Because of its geography, the City will always be in this condition. The added congestion that will be generated on the south end of town will dominate the southern gateway to the City. The proposed 202 plus units and the 800-900 additional cars, 400 rush-hour cars, will likely occur atthesame timethat the commercial area may seethe most traffic. Another concern is increased air pollution as pointed out on ES -11. Statements like "violation of air quality standards and considerable increase in criteria pollutants"are bone -chilling and should be enough to stop the Alternate 5 project plan now. How can the City that houses the AQMD facility consciously support a plan that increases bad air at a portion of the City that is already severely affected by a parallel freeway a block away from the proposed site? Again, it can only be assumed that the intent is to maximize sale price and I think that fact has been made apparent tonight. The northerly view on Diamond Bar Boulevard will change dramatically from the country living atmospher epresent today. The proposed plan for Site D calls for abrupt changes at the southern gateway to the City. In order to accommodate a large commercial area on the south tip of the site, the hills must be reduced to street level in order to achieve this and still maintain the maximum area above thestrip mall for housing. This plan must call for huge retaining walls as shown on the plans. The plan must call fora huge retaining wall behind the commercial buildings similarto the midtown Target location. Although the Target wall is somewhat camouflaged and set back from the street it is still unsigh tly and an eyesore. The wall that will need to be planned for Site D will be much less pleasing and more of focal point than the Target wall. The site of it will be the first thing seen by people entering the City from the south. In addition, the plan calls for removal of 75 100 -year old trees that border Site D. In all, itwould be a horrific sight and give a lasting impression of how Diamond Bar chooses to represent itself to its residents and visitors. In summary, the residents understand the need for progress but the City must remember that it needs to take into account the need to give preference to the residents who live in Diamond Bar, pay their taxes and elect the officials who are supposed to represent them. A short-sighted plan to maximize revenue generated atthe expense ofthe residents as voiced by every speaker here tonight and also by speakers who spoke a year ago is an indi cation of the APRIL 13, 2010 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION disdain felt by the residents who will most be affected by the proposed project. The City needs to take another look, please. Gregory Shockley, 3711 Crooked Creek, said itis pretty bad when a City throws out CEQA in order to accommodate the goal ofob taining money. Over the years the school district has had its ups and downs and the student population increases and decreases. The school district will continue to survive and will continue to be a good school district with or without the sale of this property because of the teachers and administrators. If people want to live in a place that looks like Irvine they can move there. Other cities like Anaheim and Brea seem to be following suit. People who live here want open space. He does not see where the consultants tried to minimize anything. The Commission does not have to recommend that this be approved by the City Council. In fact, he believes it is the Commission's responsibility not to recommend approval. He has heard it said that if this master plan is not accepted 2200 homes will be built on the site. He said he felt itwas the Commission's responsibility was to decline this plan. This is land designated for general public use and no one can put anything on the land without the Council's approval. He believed the City could develop a plan that met the intent of the General Plan and meet the CEQA requirements. The seller may not get as much money for the property but at least itwould be more user-friendly to Diamond Bar. I think the Citycan do a better job. Robert Velasquez, 24336 Seagreen Drive, said the Planning Commission and City Council have done a lot of good things for Diamond Bar. It is a safe place to live; there are nice trails and a brand new recreation center and he believes residents appreciate the City's efforts. Diamond Bar was based on a country living style with more open space and reduction of traffic and the trend of more building is disturbing. The NFL Stadiu m will affect the Cityand he believed that the City should have a long term goal of what it wants to look like 10 years from now and he believed itwas the job of the Planning Commission to plan ahead. Walnut was up in arms about the NFL Stadium and they should understand that the residents of Diamond Bar will be left to the consequences of project like this proposal. Christopher Chung returned to the podium to state that the mitigation monitoring report must, when approved, include all mitigation measures that are required ofthe project. What hestated previously about not including the mitigation measures, if those are not included in the document and more mitigation measures are found the document will have to be re -circulated. He said he truly believed that the document is very full of holes and is easily challenged. Residents do not want to have to challenge this project and APRIL 13, 2010 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSION hope that the Commissioners determine that the document poorly considers all of the ramifications. If all of the comments that were provided did not make it into the mitigation report, something is wrong . Mary Rodriguez returned to the podium to ask if the Commissioners had read all of the letters and comments that were submitted and Chair/Tomg responded yes, that the document under consideration includes "response to comments on the DEIR Site D Specific Plan." Chair/Torn g said that Ms. Rodriquez's letter is in the document. VC/Nolan assured Mary Rodriguez that she read all public comments, emails and letters that have been provided to the Commission. Chair/Torng closed the public hearing. RECESS: Chair/Torng recessed the meeting at8:40 p.m. RECONVENE: Chair/Torng reconvened the meeting at8:50 p.m 8. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: 8.1 Development Code Amendment No. PL2010-78 —An Ordinance of the City of Diamond Bar amending the zoning regulations governing group residential uses in residential zones and amending the Diamond Bar Municipal Code, and providing reasonable accommodation provisions for the disabled, pursuant to Government Code Section 65858(4). (Continued from March 23, 2010) Applicant: City of Diamond Bar CDD/Gubman stated that at the March 23 meeting, the Commission expressed concerns primarily having to do with the "distance" criteria proposed for group homes and separately for parolee or probation housing. With respect to group homes, staff proposed that not only would a Conditional Use Permit be required for group resident ial and group homes for more than six clients, staff also limited zones for those uses to the multi- family districts and specified a 300 -foot minimum separati on between such uses. The Commission was concerned with the 300 -foot distance in that it might facilitate an over-prolifer ation of such uses. Staff based the 300 -foot separation on state licensing criteria for group homes like daycare or adult daycare facilities licensed by the State Department of Social Services. The City is not bound by that criteria and looked at pushing the buffers wider. Staff is comfortable recommending that the distance separation be increased from 300 feet to 1320 feet which significantly reduces theoverall number of APRIL 13, 2010 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION group homes that would bepotentially available for those uses CDD/Gubman reported that the Commission's second issue was the recommended spacing of5000 feet between parolee/proba tioner housing. Staff learned that with the additional requirement that such uses be located no closer than a quarter of mile from schools, parks and the library, it effectively resulted in not being able to get them closer than 10,000 feet apart. As a result, staff changed the distance requireme ntfrom 5,000 to 10,000 feet and added a requirement that there shall be no more than two (2) parolee/probatio ner housing facilities operating in the City atany one time. CDD/Gubman indicated that the third issue voiced by the Commission was that there was not any ongoing monitoring of group homes in the ordinance. Staff responded that conditions of approval could be in cluded that would mandate ongoing monitoring. However, staff added a standard that states "these shall be subject to periodic monitoring" so all Conditional Use Permits will need to specify how frequently the facilities are monitored and what kind of reporting requirements would be included. Still left to the discretion of the Commission on a case by case basis is the matter of how frequ ently it would like a facility to be monitored. The fourth and final issue from the Commission was about the lack or absence of the requirement for onsite security at parolee/probationer homes. The ordinance stipulates onsite supervision but not onsite security. After conferring with the City Attorney, staff believes that to require security for these facilities would detract from the residential chara cter of the neighborhoods in which these facilities are located and staff is concerned that that perception of an unsecure environment that would require officers or security personnel would in themselves be detriment to the community so staff would recommend that the standard previously endorsed for onsite supervision rather than security would be the most appropriate measure to betaken if the Commission elects to approve a Conditiona I Use Permitfor a parolee/probatio ner home. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of Development Code Amendment No. PL 2010-78 as presented this evening. C/Shah asked about the difference between onsite security and onsite supervision. CDD/Gubman likened supervision to a hall monitor or resident advisor in a dormitory to make sure everyone is accounted for and make certain all are following the rules of the house and to ensure that peace and APRIL 13, 2010 PAGE 12 PLANNING COMMISSION order is maintained in the residence rather than having a "security guard" on the premises making sure that individuals are remaining on premises and not causing problems by venturing about unsupervised. C/Sh ah said he concurred with all recommendations as long as supervision be defined as 24/7 onsite supervision. VC/Nolan agreed with C/Shah that the intent of the Commissioners comments was not to provide armed guards. She felt staff did a great job of revising the numbers. APRIL 13, 2010 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION Chair/Torng asked if 10,000 was the maximum and CDD/Gubman said that hespent a lot oftime discussing this matter with the City Attorney's office and their advice is to go out farther than 10,000 feet would be reducing the likelihood to possibly zero that there would be any facility that could locate in the City. There might be a possibility for one; however , the City Attorney advised that it is somewhat risky to confine it down to one , especially when the one proposed location might not work given that a g roup home nearby would disqualify the site. Staff wanted to provide at least two possible sites that could accommodate a parolee/probat ioner facility and whether the City would ever actually get two such facilities would bequesti onable. Chair/Torng opened the public hearing. With no one present who wished to speak on this item, Chair/Tonng closed the public hearing. C/Shah moved, VC/Nolan seconded, Development Code Amendment No following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: to recommend City Council approval of PL 2010-78. Motion carried by the Shah, VC/Nolan, Chair/Torn g None Lee, Nelson 9. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMA TIONAL ITEMS: C/Shah complimented staff on its Site Ddocumentation and report for the Site D Specific Plan. He appreciated the Planners Institute an d wished there had been more for him to learn. VC/Nolan said she appreciated staffs report on the proposed Site D Specific Plan. She would like to have staff continue the public hearing as if there had not been a break so that the Commission would have an opportunity to ask staff questions. She said she would put her questions in writing prior to the next meeting. 10. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMA TIONAL ITEMS: 10.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects. 11. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As listed in tonight's agenda. APRIL 13, 2010 PAGE 14 PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Chairman Torng adjourned the regular meeting at 9:2 5 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 27th day of April, 2010. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, Greg Gubman Community Development Director Tony Torng, Chairman MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 27, 2010 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Torng called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Govemm ent Center Auditorium, 2186 5 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: C/Lee led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Kwang Ho Lee, Jack Shah, Vice Chairman Kathy Nolan, and Chairman Tony Torng. Absent: Commissioner Steve Nelson was excused. Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; Brad Wohlenberg, Assistant City Attorney; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; Rick Yee, Senior Engineer, and Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant. Consultants: Mark Rogers and JoAnne Sturges, TRG Land; Peter Lewandowski, Environmental Impact Sciences, Steve Sasaki, Sasaki Transporta tion Services. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes ofthe Regular Meeting of April 13, 201 0. C/Shah moved, VC/Nolan seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 13, 2010, as corrected. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Shah, VC/Nolan, Chair/Torng NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Lee ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson 5. OLD BUSINESS: None 6. NEW BUSINESS: None APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 Site "D" Specific Plan - Pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act; Title 21 - City's Subdivision Ordinance; and Title 22 - Development Code Sections 22.60 and 22.70, the proposed project is to recommend approval of the following to the City Council. (Continued from April 13, 2010) General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 - A request to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan (SP). Zone Change No. 2007-04 - A request to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential (RL) and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan (SP). Specific Plan No. 2007-01 -a Request to adopt the Site D Specific Plan for approximately 30.36 -acre site for the construction of 202 residential dwelling units; 153,985 gross square feet of commercial use; and approximately 10.11 acres of open space areas, easements and rights-of-way. Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 - A request to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes. Environmental Impact Report No. 2007-02 - A request to certify the final EIR which provides a detailed analysis of potential environmen tal impacts associated with the development of the Specific Plan area. The EIR includes mitigation measures for the project, addresses project alternatives, identifies the environmentally superior project alternative, and adopts a statement of overriding considerations. Project Address: Site comprised of approximately 30.36 -acres located atth e southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Numbers 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002, 093, and 8714-015-001). Applicant: Walnut Valley Unified School District and City of Diamond Bar Lead Agency: City of Diamond Bar APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION Community Development Department APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION ACA/Wohlenberg explained that at its last meeting on April 13, 2010, the Commission closed the public hearing following the public comment period. There is a procedure for reopening public hearings during the same meeting. If the public hearing is reopened ata different meeting itwould require that the item be officially re -noticed and continued to the next Planning Commission meeting. This procedure is notjustfor the benefit ofthose present chis evening that would liketo speak; if it were known that there would be additional opportunity for public comment there may have been others who would have appeared at tonight's meeting to speak but did not do so because they believed there was no opportunity for further public comment. Itwould requ ire action of the Commission to direct staff to re -notice the hearing so that itcoul d be reopened atthe next meeting. C/Shah said he would recommend the public hearing not be reopened and that the Commission move forward as scheduled to receive responses to comments and that the Commission continue with its deliberation as scheduled. C/Lee concurred stating that he listened to the tapes of the last meeting and was prepared to move forward. VC/Nolan moved to continue the item to May 11, 2010, and direct staff to re -notice the meeting to allow for further public comment. The motion died for lack of a second. C/Lee confirmed to Chair/Torng that he had listened to the entire taped meeting and was prepared to move forward to deliberation. Chair/Torng advised the public that the Planning Commission was acting in an advisory capacity to the City Council and that following sta ffs responses to the public comments received during the public hearing on April 13, 2010, the Commissioners would deliberate and the Commission would make its recommendation to City Council. The City Council is the final authority on the matter and the public will be notified of future pub lic hearings if and when the matter goes to the City Council for deliberation. Chair/Torng acknowledged receipt of letters from Lee Paulson, Melony Paulson, Mary Rodriquez and Christopher Chung. Emails were received from Mary Rodriquez, John Yang, David Dorsey, Julie Leung and Christopher Chung. CDD/Gubman presented staffs report and addressed questio ns and comments raised by audience prior to close of the public hearing followed by response to Commissioner's questions after which the Commission will determine the next steps. CDD/Gubman said that rather than respond to the questions and APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION comments item by item, he would address them collectively by topic. CDD/Gubman said that staff understands that this project has garnered a great deal of opposition from the community and there has been a great deal of criticism of staff for not making any fundamental changes to the parameters of the Specific Plan. While the criticism is well received, he clarified that the cornerstone for this Specific Plan is the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that was crafted between the City and the Walnut Valley Unified School District (WVUSD), the premise of which was that staff was to develop a Specific Plan that consisted of 50 percent residential and 50 percent commercial. The plan that staff crafted and worked on is based on those fundamentals. Accordingly, the City's consultant TGR Land studied the property and developed a physical plan that established the land form that would be appropriate for accommodating a commercial development and residential development. The physical plan that has been presented demonstrates how that land form has been envisioned for this site based on technical analysis and existing conditions of the site as well as, access points to the project. CDD/Gubman stated that the Specific Plan is characterized as an "umbrella" or framework plan for this site. As stated atthe first meeting, there is a range of planning tools that could be used to set forth the long range development objectives for the site, one of which could simply be rezoning the property. However, a Specific Plan is a tool in which much more rigorous land use strategies, requirements and other specifications tailored to the particular characteristics ofthis property can beemployed. As memorialized in the MOU, staff opted to do a Specific Plan, the intent of which was not to create a detailed development plan. There are no developers that are lined up, signed up or even in talks to develop this property. So, there is not a development plan that staff can base a document on, but instead staff formulated some planning principles and created a document of what the City's vision for this site is based on the commercial/resid ential makeup of the property and specify in diagrams, graphics and words what the physical and land use characteristics of this site should beat build -out. By creating this plan and conducting the environmental analysis, the strategy is to have an entitlement orvested approval in place to put this property out to market. Having an entitlement in place adds valu eto the property and removes many of the unknowns about what can or cannot bed eveloped on this site. By eliminating those uncertainties, the value of the land is increased. Atthe same time, it is very clear how many units are the maximum that may be developed and possibly fewer units can be developed. However, 202 units would bethe maximumunder what is being proposed with this site plan, along with about 154,000 square feet of commercial development. This plan also specifies where those land uses will be organized on the site and outlin es the physical envelopes for those physical components, along with the access, backbone road and provisions for pedestrian interaction between the commercial and residential APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION components. The plan for residential is based on the General Plan Consistency Analysis and promotes several General Plan Goals and Objectives as well, and staff has presented its recommendations for making those findings in the Specific Plan. This public hearing process provides an opportunity for the Commission to consider opposing viewpoints that have been presented by th e public. Staff is confident that the project is furthering several developm ent General Plan goals and objectives to provide housing in the community, to diversify the housing stock and staff believes that it has formulated a plan that is compatible with the surrounding areas to preserve the integrity of the neighboring land uses. Again, that is a matter for the Planning Commission to deliberate and in doing so, consider all of the testimony, and determine whether to concur with staffs recommendation. CDD/Gubman stated that if the objective was for the City to help the school district maximize its return (get the most money for its property) the City would be presenting a plan comprised of 100 percent residential; however, the City is looking at this site with other community needs in mind to create a balanced community, to provide a range of services for the community and to provide a sustainable revenue opportunity given that the site is located at a major intersection in the City. The part of the plan that introduces the commercial was the City's contribution to the MOU. The City did not view 100 percent residential as the best long-range plan for this site understanding that market conditions are really a snapshot in time and a market study done two years ago would look nothing like a market study done today and looking into the long-term horizon for the City, would the community be better served by additio nal commercial or a neighborhood serving commercial uses. The City contributed this component to the MOU that provided this. Is the tax revenue generat ion orthe potential to generate tax revenue the sole driving factor? While it is certainly one of the driving factors itis certainly not the only driving factor. Again, ifthe City was solely motivated toward tax revenue it would not necessarily be looking at a commercial component that would only accommodate a neighb orhood serving commercial use because the amount of sales tax generated from that component would not make or break the City. It certainly helps to diversify and enhance the City's revenue portfolio but it is not something that is the only factor that the City feels is a justification to propose commercial at this site — it is the opportunity to take a corner at an arterial and to seize the opportunity to add additional commercial services for the community. Staff understands tha t there is not support from those who have participated in this process with their oral and written comments; however, that is the reason why the City holds the hearing process. CDD/Gubman said that staff takes exception to the comments that the public input was ignored or disregarded or treated flippantly. There was a scoping meeting prior to the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) preparation and there was a public APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION comment meeting to provide an opportunity for the publ is to speak on the aspects of the EIR. Staff explained that those were not the times for the City to debate or deliberate on the merits of the plan itself but to focus on the environmental issues that need to be analyzed, and if the analysis was thoroug h and sufficiently fleshed out to enable the Commission to feel that it has been disclosed and apprised of all facts that go into the entirety of this decision — not only the environmental, but the appropriateness of the proposed land uses in the Specific Plan document as a whole. Staff certainly did not preclude people from speaking on the merits of the plan and voice their opposition to the project itself, to bring up the 1991 Resolution by the DBIA to develop the site as a park, etc. All of those comments are in the record and they have all been published and presented to the Commission in the Draft and Final EIR. All comments received have been recorded. Now that the decision making process begins through the Planning Commission and City Council hearings itisthe time to consider the appropri ateness, the merits and the benefit to the community of this Specific Plan in its entirety. Staff believes that it made a genuine effort to facilitate government to incl ude all comments and to provide the public the opportunity to express their views. Staffs responses through the EIR process were only to the environmental issues and for that reason in the response to comments of the EIR there are numero us occasions that repeat "this comment is acknowledged" because it is not a CEQAissue but another issue. Nevertheless, those comments are acknowledged and published and they are disclosed to the Commission. In addition to the public hearing process opened last meeting (April 13, 2010) there is a very detailed and extensive record of where those members ofwho have taken the time to parti cipate in this process stand on the matter. He hopes with that said that there is some consideration for staffs effort to provide the Commission with that information. This process was not a municipal or park or public improvement project where a neighborhood charette would have been used to solicit public input. This was a development proposal with staff acting as the applicant. This process did not provide the format for the type of participation that a community project would. CDD/Gubman stated that there are numerous factual errors contained in the letter from Christopher Chung that need to be addressed on th e record. First comment is that the Specific Plan is inadequate, inconsistent and does not meet statutory requirements. With that statement the contention isthatthe Specific Plan does not prescribe architectural and landscape details or specify other criteria in greater detail. Section 65451 of the California Government Code specifies the required content of the Specific Plan and that level of detail is not mandated. In fact, the Governor's Office of Planning and Research has a publication entitled The Planner's Guide to Specific P/answhich states in its opening paragraph "a Specific Plan may be as general as setting forth broad policy concep is or as detailed as providing direction to every facet of the development from the type, location and intensity of uses, to the design and capacity ofinfrastructu re, from the resources APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION used to the financed public improvements, to the design guidelines of the subdivision." The Draft Specific Plan the City is presenti ng fits within these very broad parameters. Moreover, the Site D Specific Plan is very similar in format to the Specific Plan that was prepared for the Target/ Brookfield/Calvary Chapel site, which was adopted and approved. The second point raised is "the City cannot use Site D as justification to meet regional housing needs assessment housing needs orto meet RHNA numbers" and this is simplyuntrue. The City is obligated to accommodate 1,098 new housing units during the curren t RHNA cycle. Part of that obligation is to designate 15.6 acres for residenti al development ata density of 30 units per acre to accommodate lower income housing needs for 466 units. Site D is not one of the several sites being studied to a ccommodate that need. Site Dwould help fulfill the City's obligation to provide the 632 market rate units under the current RHNA allocation. The third comment that is factually incorrect is that the EIR scoping meeting was conducted after the Dra ft EIR was released. This is incorrect. The scoping meeting was conducted on February 21, 2008. The Neighborhood Forum held on August 3, 2009, was during the Draft EIR public comment period and was provided as an additional opport unity for the public to ask questions and provide oral and written comments regarding the adequacy of the EIR. Unlike the previous scoping meeting, the August 3, 2009, meeting was not mandated under CEQA but the City scheduled the meeting in an effort to inform the public and to solicit comments. The fourth comment is that the EIR was not completed by an objective third party independent consultant that has no prior relationship with the WVUSD. For the record, TRG Lan d did not prepare the EIR and does not provide environmental services. The City selected the firm Environmental Impact Sciences to prepare the EIR. The fifth comment stated in effect that the traffic mitigation in the form offai r -share fees is inadequate and violates case law set forth under Federation of Hillside and Canyon Associates v. the City of Los Angeles. The EIR's mitigation reportin g and monitoring program that is part of the EIR document requires the specific improvements or fair -share contributions shall be provided prior to the recording of the final Tract Map. This is not a violation of FHCA v. Los Angeles. FHCA v. Los Angeles did not deem the payment of fair -share fees to be invalid. What the case law cited determined was that although the City of Los Angeles adopted mitigation measures for its General Plan framework program, it failed to require that they be implemented as a condition of development. The Site D EIR does not make that error in that the improvements orfair-share contributions are required to be paid orcompleted upon recordation of the final Map. In fact, going further, he pointed out that the court decision went on to state that it found no fault with Los Angeles's certification of that EIR but only with the failure to show substanti al evidence in the record to support a finding that the mitigation measures had been required or incorporated into the planning document. The sixth statement was a comment that it is the responsibility ofthe lead agency to consider all viable project alternatives. This is untrue. Under Goleta Valley vs. The Board of Supervisors, it was determined that APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION an EIR mustdiscuss a reasonable range ofpotentially feasible alternatives to the proposed project. Staff believes that the Site D EIR has indeed discussed a reasonable range of project alternatives. Finally, there is a statement that the City of Diamond Bar's noticing radius is 700 feet from property lines and the City arbitrarily increased the radius to 1000 feet, therefore, should extend the notification range even farther out. This is untrue. In fact, Section 22.72.020 requires a 1000 -foot notification radius for the Site D Specific Plan. CDD/Gubman asked ifthe Commissioners had any questions. C/Lee said he heard the same story last time and he believes that the public hearing process is not a lecturing process. He listened to the two and one-half hour tapes of the last meeting and heard many residents voice their concerns as wel I as their wishes. Heunderstands residents clearly expressed their thoughts; heunderstands this project and its relative impact to the community. But on the agenda it states a Finding of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerat ions, and implementation with the identified economic and social benefits. He said he understood the economic benefit but did not understand the social benefit. CDD/Gubman explained that itis adding to the diversity of Diamond Bar's housing stock and providing additional housing opportunities. C/Lee asked if "housing stock is a social benefit" and CDD/Gubman responded "yes." C/Lee said there is maybe sociality? But a social benefit is not that. Maybe housing stock is a benefit but not a social benefit. He asked for a better explanation of "social benefit." ACA/Wohlenberg explained that there is an underlying thought in California Land Use law and in Housing law that there should be a community that has a variety of housing types and pricing available. And something that Diamond Bar hears as a comment from the State of California in the review of its Housing Element is that so much of Diamond Bar's housing is focused on the higher economic spectrum. So in order to seek out that benefit of having diverse housing choices within the City, that is part of what this project is aimed at providing —not the high end housing that Diamond Bar has so much of but mid-range housing units that Diamond Bar needs (another 632 units) under its RHNA obligation. C/Lee argued that the statement should be "housing stock benefits" and not social benefits. Mark Rogers stated that in addition to the aforementio ned benefits, the project seeks to do a number of things. First, the project is using both commercial and residential land uses in an area that as he understands, has a need for neighborhood commercial services. The idea today and what is seen as handed down by the State of California is that it is looking for projects where there is a blend of land uses to cut down vehicle miles traveled and place uses where there is a pedestrian trail that connects the adjoining neighb orhood on the south end of the project into a plaza -like feature anticipated with a commercial side of the project. In that instance, this project meets social standards from the state's standards in providing a mixed land use with both residential and commercial. He hopes that he is not stretching when he also states that the benefit of this project APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSION monetarily to the WVUSD and maybe secondarily to the City, has tremendous social benefit. The values that he sees in this community a re born out of the great education that the children get from their school systems. This is a timely project from the standpoint of providing needed fund for the district and that, he believes, has tremendous and long -reaching social benefit. C/Lee said the report mentions this project would be co nvenient for people but can he talk about social benefit as common sense. This project will be good for families, education involvement. He heard many negative comments from residents because there is no social benefit. So hewants to understand clearly what social benefit is. But Mr. Rogers's understanding is a convenience of more houses so there is a contradiction. This comment should be changed to "more housing stock or more convenience for shopping but not social benefit because people can misunderstand about this project. C/Lee asked how this project building more houses and building more commercial areas is related to education, and CDD/Gubman responded "in that the sale of the property benefits the school district." C/Lee asked if that is why it helps people and kids grow up in this community. He thought it was totally irrelevant explana tion about this project with respect to education. C/Lee asked for clarification of "social benefit" and asked if it could be changed "housing stock benefit or convenient to the people or shoppers." CDD/Gubman responded yes, that the changes can be made so that his concerns are addressed. VC/Nolan asked if socialize meant how it socially benefits the community at large. CDD/Gubman said that when the document addresses social benefit itrefers to the entire palette ofelements that enhance the society. ACA/Wohlenberg said that when making a statement ofoverriding consideration s it simply discusses the economic and social benefits that would occur from deciding to moveforward even though there is unmitigated significant impact. To him that is sort of "catch-all" language that the legislature adopted. There are economic benefits and social benefits and everything falls into one of those two categ ories. C/Shah asked what could be built under the land use designation of Public Facility and General Commercial if nothing is done to change th a land use to Specific Plan. CDD/Gubman responded that currently there is a fundamental inconsistency between the General Plan and the zoning. The General Plan designation is Public Facility which would suggest a school or park. The zoning that is overlaid on that is residential and commercial so there is a General Plan zoning inconsistency that would have to be resolved to enabl ethe property to be developed in some fashion. Chair/Torng asked for a response to Mr. Chung's statemen ton Page 1 of his letter APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION that refers to "the proposed high-density residential land use is incompatible with adjacent land use and inconsistent with the General Plan." CDD/Gubman said that was a fair argument. Staff's position is that this housi ng type is compatible with the surrounding uses. It is not located within a local neighborhood street completely encircled by single family detached residences. This property does have its back turned on the single family neighborhood and faces a major arterial. Based on that context an attached housing product on this site would be appropriate and if one looks throughout the City, one will see similar land use APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 12 PLANNING COMMISSION relationships between those housing types that co-existunder similarcontexts and disagreed that it is an inconsistent land use. Chair/Torng asked about Mr. Chung's statement on Page 6: "The consultant provided a representation that the development of the housing would be of high quality for moderate income families." The inconsistency is that thisshould below income. CDD/Gubman said that the first thing he needs to clarify is that high density would befor 30 -units to the acre. This residential project proposed at20- unit per acre on the development pads is exclusive of the slopes front and back. Therefore, the effective density is closer to 17 -units per acre. The 30 -unit per acre density requirement that staff is studying for locations elsewhere in the City is considered a default density for affordable housing so the state views a development at 30 -units per acre as probably accommodating affordable housing, at least in this region given the property values and existing levels of urbanization. Thirty units per acre in Manhattan would be extremely lowdensity for example, so it is all relative. Site D would be attached housing probably similar to the Brookfield development above Target which is market rate housing. Chair/Torng said he raised a concern about Page 15 of Mr. Chung's letter -the grubbing and grading near the homes toward the channe I to ensure that insects and rodents are driven away from homes. This should have been a mitigation measure but nothing has come up about it. Is there any way this can be mitigated? CDD/Gubman responded that there is a stand and requirement in the issuance of grading plans that rodent barriers be install ed around the perimeter of a project. Staff believes that would be more effecti ve means of containing the rodent population within the project site to effectively be decimated by development activity. The prospect ofgrubbing atthe edgeof the site orat the center is somewhat speculative in the belief that that is going to drive the rodent population inward. He said he did not see how that was something the City could guarantee unless there is one solid line of machinery that moves contiguously and together toward the center. The City's grading permit requirements include a rodent barrier to imbed into the ground and prevent the offsite migration in order to more effectively achieve that goal. Chair/Torng said, so in other words, staff already considered that and CDD/Gubman responded "yes," although it should be noted that specific discussion of rodent barriers was not included in the EIR response to comments. CDD/Gubman responded to Chair/Tonng that 7:00 a.m. (not 8:00 a.m.) is the citywide noise regulation standard for construction activity. VC/Nolan asked if the City had the resources of buyer to purchase green space for a recreational facility. CDD/Gubman explained tha t Site D is not included in the Parks Master Plan and since the MOU expressly states that the Specific Plan APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION should be prepared to accommodate 50 percent residential and 50 percent commercial, the response would be"no" atthis point. Mark Rogers, TRG Land, pointed out that one of the terms the Commissioners should keep in mind for the purposes of this process is "predictable outcome." Itis a term he uses a lot speaking about development and the experiences he has had with development. In an effort to ensure what the Commission deliberates on and what the Council will deliberate on and make a decision on is truly what can happen as a built project. This project, like many projects he has had an opportunity to work with, focus on ensuring that the property is mapped, set forward design parameters and a regulatory envelope so that attheend of the day as deliberated and conceived can be built. TRG has done an extraordinary amount of scientific work to ensure public safety in this project. A lot of what would normally be required in a process like this to ensur a this is a quality built site. These are two public bodies that are working together to bring a project before its constituents and what is so interesting about that is that he and his colleagues sat around brainstorming the project working with things everyone has experienced in an attempt to provide a framework that TRG Land feels meets the concerns and issues they deal with on a daily basis. Mr. Rogers stated that in the absence of more elaborate graphic, he focused his PowerPoint presentation on the edges of the project because this is a two-step process. This attempts to build an envelope or umbrella within which a project of merit can be built. So he has focused on the edges of the project to ensure adequate setbacks and spaces that meet the intent. Along Brea Canyon, the street grade is about 10 feet below pad grade. His firm ensures that fromthe back or right-of-way to anything within this project there is a minimum of 35 feet. In addition, there may be an area for cars to butt right up against that setback so an additional space was allocated so that car bumpers are sett ack well behind that area which offers a minimum setback from top of slope of an additional five feet beyond the 35 -foot setback. Atthe corner of the project, the vision was at that the corner of Brea Canyon and Diamond Bar Boulevard create something like an arrival/plaza space in the project. Chair/Torng asked if the lower legend side is people's view driving from Diamond Bar Boulevard and the view on the right is the potenti al site elevation. He asked about the triangle. Mr. Rogers responded that is the condition he is describing — the arrival/plaza space. The first section is the section going toward Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon so that it shows on the right hand side the upslope to the project. When he spoke two weeks ago he said the project was "at grade." In fact, it is as close as possible. It is still above the street. One of the comers was that drivers would see it as asphalt and that isnot true. He said he would later show similar projects and how they are monumented. The second section is APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 14 PLANNING COMMISSION driving down Diamond Bar Boulevard in the direction of Grand Avenue away from Brea Canyon. This shows a very strong setback of 35 -feet to a monument feature with a very strong community gathering type of spot such as a n outdoor eating area or loggia located atthe corner to monument the corner. Asone moves closer to the entry at Cherrydale driving down Diamond Bar Boulevard toward Grand Avenue, the project is much closer to grade and the building setback from back of right-of-way is a minimum of 35 -feet. These are very healthy setbacks well above most minimum standards for most typical zoning. Sections along the project edges such as mid -point locations, Section 4 is cut from Dia mond Bar Boulevard with the uphill section showing the project considerably elevated above the street. Again, this area ensures adequate setbacks without allowing any buildings closer than 15 feet to the top of slope. In this case, at a minimum will be set back 125 feet away from Diamond Bar Boulevard. The slope planting incorporates indigenous, low water, drought tolerant plants as well as plants that will mitigate for the reduction of black walnut. Mr. Rogers responded to C/Shah that the elevation difference between the houses and the street is roughly 60 feet. The next section is the section cut along the edge of the project that joins Ambusher. The existing housing is below grade to the site. In th is case the grade is being lowered to reduce some of the vertical between the two relationships. This is very unique to a standard imbedded in a project like this because a minimum 85 foot setback will exist along the edge to ensure adequate distance for buffering and landscape and so that the buildings do not create an incompatible relationship to the adjoining residential. One hundred twenty (120) feet of horizontal distance lies between the houses and the buildings and landscape screening will beused to enhance the edge. Again, these setbacks are above and beyon d the normal setback requirements in a project of this nature. Mr. Rogers responded to Chair/Torng that there will be a fence between the trees. The upper south side neighborhood is well above the project. Section 6 at the midpoint of the project is well below that neighborhood. There is a huge setback distance both horizontally (184 feet) and vertically (60 feet) in this project rela tionship. The next section further up the street (Section 7) shows an even greater vertical and horizontal relationship with 365 feet between the existing residences and the project's buildings. Mr. Rogers shared images of other projects that are similar to how he visualizes some of the key elements in the commercial center for the Site DSpecific Plan. VC/Nolan asked if the ratio of black walnut replacement ratio is based on the actual success rate or unsuccessful rate. CDD/Gubman responded that the ratio is not related to any estimated success rates and is a code requirement found in the Municipal Code that there be a 3:1 ratio for pro tected trees that are removed. The applicant may also be required, as a condition of approval, to enter into a tree maintenance agreement to warranty the survival of the replacement trees. For APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 15 PLANNING COMMISSION example, the City may require the applicant to replace any tree that does not survive during the first three years. VC/Nolan asked the ratio of successful replacement tree plantings and CDD/Gubman said itwould depend on the quality of the nursery stock. If the replacement tree is from a reputable nursery that employs best practices for cultivating trees and offering guarantees, then the likelihood ofsuccess should not bea concern. Chair/Torng asked why the City would want to remove the 100 -year old Eucalyptus trees and replace them with better trees. CDD/Gubman stated thatthe plan for the site with the commercial component compels the commercial pad to be lowered. The fact that the site is going to be graded necessitates removal of th a trees. The Tree Ordinance focuses on protected trees — trees that are indigenous to this area. And what the City envisions is restoring the urban forest in the new development with climate appropriate trees. The Eucalyptus tree is not within that realm. Mr. Rogers further stated that ifthere were a way to realize the project before the Commission for consideration and maintain those trees, the project would probably have sought to do that. These trees have a life cycle and they are reaching the end of that cycle where they will no longer be vital. In fact, they may become more of a hazard over time. More importantly, he has done a number of projects wherein the Eucalyptus was retained and it is a tough task on flat ground much less on a hillside environment. If the trees were liveoak that had an extended life period there may have been consideration for boxing and relocating the trees to the project feature and if the trees could be retained in their present location the project would have sought to do that. However, these trees are nearing the end of their life cycle and over time will be more of a problem than a benefit. This project attempts to implement current legislation to attempt to get a carbon footprint down. A lot of things being done in terms of water harvesting, plant selection, utilization of 50 percent solar, everything that is imbedded in current technology for purposes of meeting these goals, is a part of this project. He invited the district to use this project to measure the benefits of going in this direction. This project will be state -of -the art and raises the bar for what projects can be in terms of carbon footprints and meeting goals handed down by the state today. Chair/Torng said he appreciated Mr. Roger's effort to create the site cross- sections for clarity which he requested and believes it helps to clarify and provide a better understanding of the project. He read a comm ent from Page 3 of the letter from Melony Paulson. She said "Part of the site could be park. It might not be as large as some of us might like, but it would (be) better than acres of hot, desolate pavement that is now being envisioned for the site." In the final paragraph she said "Then, think about the plan I have suggested above. Think about an urban city center, a living, shopping, park space set into the natural setting of Site `D'." So by looking at what has been shown on the plan, is there a APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 16 PLANNING COMMISSION possibility of incorporating a small park. Mr. Rogers said that naturally, there is always the possibility of doing a park feature. He liked the focus on an idea brought forward by CM/DeStefano to have a plaza in the corner near the flood channel. Perhaps the project could include a pedestrian corridor that reaches back to the main commercial structures from that location. Maybe a park of a different nature that utilizes green space and canopy tha t extends a walkway system back from the corner with the loggia concept, an urb an gathering space, and maybe that loggia concept is connected with the green way that goes back to the main structures. What was envisioned by Council Memberwasthe inclusion of trail system from Posado down to the back of the commercial structure. So what was envisioned in the Specific Plan is a very similar type of feature as is called out on the corner at the apex of the buildings where they join at the back of the property. And what might be considered is those two being like an urban hub with a trellis or shaded walkway system that connects those two hubs to one another as an urban park setting, which might accommodate some of Ms. Paulson's concerns. VC/Nolan said she believed the raised separate pad off of Cherrydale at Diamond Bar Boulevard is potentially something that could be used for a restaurant. What is the size of that pad and what is the potential for an actual park in that area and perhaps 20-30 percent of the commercial area being removed and replaced by an actual park facility. She stated that the Commission has heard the concerns from the community again and again regarding a park and again, to speak to the social aspect of this area. Mr. Rogers said that naturally, thatis an opportunity that has not been explored at this point. What is located in the corner is a water quality feature/ambient open space. If there is a grassy swale thatfunctions as a water quality feature they usually like to associate it with othe ropen space to get a benefit from both being next to each other and the expanded idea. Corners are important places in commercial projects in terms of locatin g restaurants or banks on free standing pads. The more critical of those is probably atthe intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon. He believed that the concept as discussed is imbedded in the plan but certainly this would make for an opportunity to have a park feature that could be used by both residen is outside and inside the area. VC/Nolan asked how much area of the swale would be needed to make it designated park area in acreage off of the commercial portion. Mr. Rogers said it was a pretty tough question to answer on the fly because it is a function of programming. If it is seen as not having active uses but being a tot lot, seating area, passive shade structure, etc., it might be a two -acre site. When one gets into active facilities it begins to expand to five acres and certain municipalities require different sizes for those uses because the City would usually be responsible for the maintenance. A smaller venue that would be more appropriate to the plan ofresidential/c ommercial features would accommodate aone or two acre facility in that corner benefitted by the other adjacent features such as APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 17 PLANNING COMMISSION setbacks and water quality elements that would help to expand the usable area. Chair/Torng asked if the Commission could recommend inclusion of park feature and CDD/Gubman responded yes, if that is the direction the Commission wants to go he would suggest that it be incorporated into the recommendation to the City Council. Since there is draft resolution prepared for the Commission and if the Commission is in agreement with that draft resolution with the additional provision that a park element be incorporated staff could come back on May 11 with a revised resolution for adoption. Or, the Commission could take a short recess and craft language this evening if that is what the Commission would prefer. RECESS: Chair/Torng recessed the meeting at8:40 p.m. RECONVENE: Chair/Torng reconvened the meeting at8:45 p.m. SE/Yee and Consulting Traffic Engineer Steve Sasaki provided information in response to questions and comments raised at the April 13 meeting, as well as written questions and comments regarding traffic. SE/Yeestated that hewould collectively address the questions and comments by category. SE/Yee responded to a comment raised regarding whethe r or not cumulative impacts of the proposed project were adequately addressed in the traffic study. The traffic study did indeed address several proposed projects listed including residential development in The Country Estates, Diamond Hills Plaza (formerlythe Country Hills Towne Centre), the Industry Business Center/ Stadium and the Aera Energy planned community. Specifically, the resident raised an issuewith respect to the stadium and the traffic study for Site D began prior to when the stadium EIR was approved. However, the traffic engineer who prepared the Site D study assessed the current information available with respect to the stadium EIR and it was determined that the appropriate approach would be to look at the prior development proposed for the stadium site which is the Industry Business Center and to look atthe impact to the peak hour travel times. Ultimately, this resulted in looking at the am/pm peak hour trip forecasts and the conservative approach is to the use the Industry Business Center traffic forecast because itgenerated much higher forecasts for the am/pm peak periods. Second, there was a concern about the H -Mart. As previously mentioned, the H -Mart is part of Diamond Hills Plaza and was addressed in the study with respect to trip genera tion forecasts for that and other retail establishments in the plaza. Third, there was a comment regarding school area circulation and Castle Rock Elementary access concerns and wait times for student drop off and pick up. Essentially, this is a situation that occurs throughout Diamond Bar and in fact, with many communities in Southern California. The City experiences high levels of traffic during very specific timeframes in the early morning and early afternoon hours. The City has APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 18 PLANNING COMMISSION addressed this issue uniformly throughout the City byworkin g closely with the Sheriff's Department and school districts to monitor those situations and to proactively address operational improvements that can help with circulation during peak hour drop off and pick up. Chaparral Middle Schoo I is a good example of collaboration among the City, Sheriffs Department and school. Staff was able to establish one-way circulation routes; post additional regulatory signs, etc. Those types of actions have proved successful with regard to addressin g school area traffic. Fourth, there was a concern expressed about the general ingress/egress because there is a proposal for 202 dwelling units and the comments contended that there should be404 trips associated with peak hours. However, the analysis procedure that was followed in this traffic study is a procedure that is commonly followed in the industry. The traffic engineer used the Trip Generation Handbook published by the Institute of Traffic Engineers which is universally used for assessing impacts and determining trip generation rates. These trip generation rates are based on land uses and in this case, there was a component for the residential portion and aseparate trip generation forecast for the commercial/retail component. Asa result, 154 trips were considered to be the outbound A.M. peak hour number of trips from the residential units. Staff is confident with the methodology used in this study. SENee said that several individuals commented on particu lar intersections that were not studied in this report. One intersection referenced by two different individuals who offered comments was Brea Canyon Road and Copper Canyon. The report studied a total of 20 intersections in the vicinity of the proposed project with the farthest intersection being Grand Avenue at Di amond Bar Boulevard. The traffic engineer who prepared the study looked at several criteria forselecting the intersections such as whether or not there would be more than 50 trips added to a particular intersection as a result of the project; whether or not the intersections were signalized, whether or not the intersection is an arterial to arterial intersection, arterial to a collector road intersection, or a residential intersection. All of those factors were considered and evaluated in determining which intersections needed to be included. Based on the criteria, Copper Canyon was deemed not necessary to be included in the study. Copp er Canyon is a T - Intersection between an arterial and a residential collector street, it iscurrently not signalized, itisa single stop intersection and the intersection approach generally serves right turns in and right turns out. There are mitigations recommended in this study for the next intersection downstream from the project (Brea Canyon and Silver Bullet), which is an intersection that requires a fair -share contribution by the development to restripe and install an additional lane of traffic and to modify the traffic signal to improve flow through the intersection as well as, general traffic flow along Brea Canyon Road. That in combination with the determination to exclude Copper Canyon from the study was felt to be appropriate that the downstream mitigations would address any additional concerns. The lastcomment received APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 19 PLANNING COMMISSION addressed the relevance ofthe Traffic Study data. There were several concerns with the date of data collection versus present day. Data was collected in 2007 and much of this Traffic Study report, as with any traffi c study report has impacts and mitigations based on future forecasts. In this case the study was based on a 2030 year traffic forecast, the critical numbers used to determine ultimate mitigation. Again, it was deemed appropriate to use the data that was collected because the critical data and forecast were still relevant for determining mitigation for this project. SE/Yee addressed Chair/Torng's request for additional information related to the volumes for the project with and without the project by showing a slide that showed actual traffic counts for AM/PM peak hours for the intersections. There was also a question about fair -share contributions. Steve Sasaki, Sasaki Transportation Services, highlighted a question about use of fair -share as a mitigation practice. He confirmed that fair -share mitigation is an accepted mitigation procedure which serves to create a firm nexus between the project impacts and the required mitigations so that the City is able to offset the project impacts through use of a fair -share vehicle. It is also a way to satisfy the City's adopted Traffic Study Guideline procedure. Within the Traffic Study Guideline there is a requirement for fair -share contri butions and the fair -share mitigation serves to satisfy the guidelines. Within the mitigation measures themselves there is an opportunity to provide a fair -share or actual construction of improvements and whichever method is selected, would need to be done to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Within those paramet ers the City has a very solid mitigation program to offset the project's impacts. VC/Nolan said the A.M. traffic trips indicated were 154 trips and she assumed that would be mirrored for the P.M. trips. SE/Yee explained that they would be different based on the methodology. Mr. Sasaki explained that since there is a combination of both residential and commercial uses, the residential is pretty much as stated as those going out in the morning tend to come back in the evening so that is fairly balanced. However, with commercial, typically there will be a lower A.M. trip generation and more trips generated in the P.M. The net trip generation is 272 in the A.M. peak hour includes both inbound and outbound vehicles. For the P.M. itis actually 650 peak hour trips (332 inbound and 318 outbound). When there is a mixed use of residential and commercial, obviously some of the people who live on site are going to shop at the adjacent commercial and most likely that relationship is a lot higher than some residential away from the project. Individuals tend to shop atthe closest location. There can beand is often a reduction to account for the internal synergy. This particular study was done on a worst-case basis so it did not make those reductions. In attempting to create the envelope and looking at what mitigations were needed, that is one factor that makes it more of worst-case analysis that that particular reduction was not made within the trip generation analysis. So the numbers shown are APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 20 PLANNING COMMISSION essentially worst-case. SE/Yee clarified to VC/Nolan that out of the 154 trips outbound A.M., 75 of those trips were associated with the condominium development and 79 were associated with the retail center. C/Shah asked if nine percent increase in Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road P.M. traffic was a moderate or significant impact. Mr. Sasaki said that for Diamond Bar Boulevard at Brea Canyon there were impacts that were identified within the traffic study and then there werealso offsetting mitigation measures so it would be considered a significant impact that was identified through the traffic study within the EIR. But then also there were mitigation measures that were identified that would fix or offset those impacts. Chair/Torng asked at what point — two percent or four percent - a fair -share contribution would be required. SE/Yee responded to Chair/Tonng that the City's traffic guideline in general refers to a greater than two percent impact would kick it into a category of needing mitigation. The guideline s also indicate that if the City determines that an impact less than two percent is judged to be significant it would enable the City to require mitigation even though it did not meet the two -percent requirement. Chair/Torng asked staff to comment further on the impact to Copper Canyon because hebelieved itwould bevery difficult to make a left turn atthe peak hour. Mr. Sasaki said it was an advantage to have an internal connection and the signal at Silver Bullet presents an opportunity to make a left turn under signal control. In the P.M. drivers make left turns from Brea Canyon into the development so if someone is traveling southbound on Brea Canyon, residents do makea leftturn in but that was not viewed as problematic. Chair/Torng asked if striping could be added to help the residents. Mr. Sasaki said it was not determined that there was a project nexus. There may be over time that residents would ask for improvements from the City to help improve ingress/egress at that location butthat would be separate from this project. Chair/Torng asked if they would go to the Traffic and Transportation Commission and Mr. Sasaki said he did not know what the process was for that in Diamond Bar but obviously, the project does not have ingress/egress through that side street. So it is viewed as more of an issue related to the neighborhood which very well could be le gitimate and could be pursued for improvement. Asfar as the study, itis viewed as something separate from the project. CDD/Gubman said that the reports were completed and staff would respond to further questions. VC/Nolan asked how the number of new homes for this project compares in general to new home development over the past fiveyears as it pertains to overall APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 21 PLANNING COMMISSION traffic impacts citywide. CDD/Gubman responded that a total of 237 including the Brookfield development which is about 186 attached units from 2005 through 2009 based on the number of Certificates of Occupancy issued. VC/Nolan asked staff to elaborate on the issue of entitlement about the importance of how staff certified this EIR as opposed to if the land was purchased and an EIR was done post sale. CDD/Gubman said he touched on this matter before. Ha ving a Certified Environmental Document in hand and having some certainty of the entitlements in terms of the land uses, the density, number of units and amount of square footage, if that approval is already in hand it will add value to property when it is marketed because the developer is not assuming that riskupon purchase . VC/Nolan asked if there had been thought given to a park and recreati on area in the form of portion of this land being taken out of the sale and dedicated to the City of Diamond Bar for park and recreation use. CDD/Gubman asked if VC/Nolan intended that the commercial and residential mixwould be retained but adding the park component and VC/Nolan responded "adding the park component even as part of the development and requiring that the develo per create a park orjust taking a certain acreage out of the equation completely." CDD/Gubman said that would be a discussion at a higher level but if it is the Commission's recommendation to have that park feature added to this Specific Plan hewould presume, given the fiscally cautious approach the City takes on all matters of City business that the City would require the subsequent develo per to construct those improvements and dedicate that to the City for public use. VC/Nolan asked if it would make the project less feasible or desirable fora developer to come in if that is a requirement and CDD/Gubman said he could not real ly answer whether it would be less feasible. The sale price of the property would be affected if that was a feature that the developer was obligated to constr uct and there may be other funding tools that could be used such as adding wha tyou might call a "door charge" on the residential units that would be payable to the Citybecause the park would reduce square footage by potentially 80 cents to $1 dollar of foregone sales tax revenue. As a result, the City may look to require some sort of fee to offset that loss of revenue stream from the residential units. With all of those factors taken into account, yes, the price tag on the property wou Id reflect that requirement as any other development requirement would also affectthe pricetag. VC/Nolan said in that regard is there not already a fair -share amount toward park service per dwelling unit or per envelope and CDD/Gubma n responded affirmatively and indicated that it is called a Quimby fee and for every development unit there is an assessment that is payable and what he is saying is that the City would look into exacting an additional fee from the residential development to offset the fee of reduced sales tax revenu a that would be required to accommodate the park. CDD/Gubman said he was not suggesting that the fee he is talking about is the Quimby fee, it is something in addition to the Quimby fee to serve another purpose but it is the purview of the City Manager to determine how to manage the City's revenues and expenses. There will be a loss of sales APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 22 PLANNING COMMISSION tax revenue and there will be maintenance costs inherited with the addition of a new park facility so the City would look atsome means to o ffset those costs. VC/Nolan said and those funds would go directly to this project site specifically as opposed to the assessment for dwelling units which could be disbursed throughout other parks in the City. CDD/Gubman said the funds woul d go into the General Fund and through the budgeting process the money would be allocated. VC/Nolan asked the potential length of project like this from beginning to end when one considers inconvenience of construction, construction hours, a particular concern ofhers with hours noted from 7:00 a.m.to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. CDD/Gubman stated that Mr. Rogers may be able to elaborate more on that issue but it would probably be 12-18 month process from permit issuance to having pads ready for actual construction ofbuildings. Massgrading may take about sixmonths. Speaking from experience with construction hours he has worked in communities where the noise regulations allowed construction to begin at6:00 a.m. and asthe community developed and thenew development sites were starting to be surrounded by populated develop ment sites and there was beginning to be an impact on new residents the City looked at having the noise ordinance revised to require later construction hours and the hour was set at 7:00 a.m. He worked in another community where the construction ordinance was 8:00 a.m. and as development activity increased there was pressure from the construction industry to allow an earlier start time and it is really a matter of coordination with all of the trades and how the industry operates. There are concrete batching plants that are mixing concrete that ha s a short shelf life and that material needs to be delivered before itgets too hot; there are delivery trucks dropping off lumber and they are trying to make their rounds and then as construction starts later in the day and the weather is wa rm, the end time is not necessarily later in the day so it shortens the duration of the work day so that could potentially lengthen the construction period. So the balance seems to gravitate to 7:00 a.m. which seems to be the earliest that the building industry can really continue to do business under and it is seems to be the earliest tolerable timefor surrounding residents. So 7:00 a.m. seems to bethe universal standard. VC/Nolan asked staffs experience on surrounding property values for a project like this. CDD/Gubman said there is probably data to show that a new development going in will positively affect the comparable values and square foot values on older homes. As the homes are newer it may have less of a positive effect but it seems to have generally a positive effect on property values. With a commercial development that is less certain and so that is a question of compatibility and sensitivity to adjacent uses so taking that into account is what led to the increased setback requirements and other screening requirements to try to focus the use in a location that is farther away from residential development. Chair/Torng asked staff to comment on Mary Rodriquez concern about ground water flowing under the houses that sit on the slope at Cold Spring Lane and what APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 23 PLANNING COMMISSION would be done about the flow of water without disturbing the housing above. Peter Lewandowski stated that as indicated in the EIR, thegeotechnical analysis was at a programmatic level in the absence of a formal design plan. But subsurface investigations were conducted and groundwater was encountered ata depth of 37 feet. Grading activities are not anticipated to encounter ground water as part of its operations. And as part of typical gradin g procedures and practices, further geotechnical review will be required at the building permit stage once final development plans are finalized. To the extent additional geological conditions are identified those will be composed as conditions of ap proval on subsequent development projects. The subsurface ground water is not anticipated atthis stage to result in significant impacts to the project moving forward. Chair/Torng asked the school district to comment on for what the proceeds of the sale of this land can and cannot be used. Jack LeBrun, Assistant Superintendent of Business Services, WVUSD, responded that the question regarding the use of any type of capital outlay proceeds has to go back into the district's capital improvement program. Currently, the school district is not allowed to use proceeds to pay for salaries orongoing operational expenses. Chair/Torng asked for a more in depth explanation about the 1991 DBIA resolution and why that is not a consideration. CDD/Gubman explained that the DBIA Resolution that was passed in 1991 did formally record the position based on survey information that a park is a preferred development for that site. Certainly there has been public testimony that is indeed still the preferred alternative of many for this site. He would just have to go through a few points to respond to that. The firstwould bethat subsequent to that resolution was the City's adoption of the General Plan in 1995. The General Plan does not identify Site D as a park. It retained, I would say, an inconsistency between the General Plan and zoning designation but itwas not formally established in the General Plan as a potential park site. Prior to that, there was a grant applicatio n submitted by the City to secure funding for a park site and there were two locations under consideration: 1) what is currently Pantera Park; and 2) Site D. The funding was approved for Pantera and not approved for Site D. So that window of opportunity, the best opportunity to see that (a park) happen was when the grant application was submitted but itwas approved for another site. Subsequ ent to that and after the General Plan adoption in 1995, there were improvemen is to Heritage Park and there were improvements to Castle Rock Elementary School keeping in mind there is a shared use agreement between both the WVUSD and Pomona Unified School District (PUSD) for school facilities to be used by Diamond Bar residents. Finally, the Parks Master Plan that is currently being completed and will be presented for City Council consideration does not include Site D as a potential park site; it does, however, include future improvements to both Heritage Park and to Castle Rock Elementary. So in that entire timeline the City has nottaken a formal position or APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 24 PLANNING COMMISSION adopted a policy to designate or to plan for Site Das a public park. And finally, the MOU laid the groundwork for crafting of the Specific Plan. The basic criteria indicated 50 percent commercial and 50 percent residentia I and under the MOU there was no remaining percentage for a park use. Having said that, if the Commission is leaning in the direction of incorporating a park component staff can help formulate the recommendation to the City Council and staff believes that doing so would not affect the environmental analysis orfundamentally affect the Specific Plan. Chair/Torng asked for deliberation and input from individual Commissioners. C/Lee said his comments have been spoken loudly by the residents and he believes his colleagues believe the Commission's function is very limited. The Commission's function is to listen to the people and bring their issues and concerns and discuss those issues and concerns and make an informed decision. The decision should befor the people and not for someoneelse. Also, the EIR is great and he listens to the people and agree with the m that it does not go far enough to answer the residents' worries and concerns. The concept and implementation of the Site D Specific Plan looks great and appealing but he believes that professional companies have the money and technology to have a much respected profession like the City's consultants. Butthe residents have only five minutes. They have limited time. Most of them work and do not have time to prepare this type of appealing presentation that we ha ve seen tonight. But he believes it looks great and is a very good presentation but the facts do not change and the facts do not lie. The fact is that the City has enough retail space already and when he moved to Diamond Bar it used to take five minutes for him to get to the project area down Diamond Bar Boulevard and now it sometimes takes 30-40 minutes. One resident sent him an email today that stated "Diamond Bar is a virtual parking lot." And C/Lee thinks this is a tempora ry virtual parking lot but Diamond Bar does not want a long term parking lot. That's his one comment. Also, the EIR is pretty good but EIR is not everything. If there is a concern or problem the EIR writes down that everything is fine and can be mitigated. He does not believe that the EIR is a panacea. He understa nds there are professional reasons for this project and he really respects the professionals. He does not want to give any disrespect to them but even thou gh they are professionals they do not know the residents and if they live here they knowbetter than anyone else. So if the residents say there is a prob lem and this project will lead to negative impacts to the community then he really respects the opinion of the residents. Sometimes higher technology and speech does not make sense. Why does Diamond Bar need more cars? Sometimes itdoes notmake sense. Again, he really respects his residents' opinion and concern sand their worries and their effort and energy to come down here to express their ideas. And hisjob is to represent them and in this instance, if it does not make sense and does not APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 25 PLANNING COMMISSION help the community he believes there is no reason to modi fy or compromise the project. Sometimes when we say no that makes for a bette rfuture. C/Shah thanked staff and the consultants for a great presentation. He apologized to his fellow citizens that he has to say no to further comment because if the public hearing is opened again it may open up that issue over and over again and the Commission will never get to its final decision. He takes this business very seriously. At the same time he wants to make sure the process continues in an expedient manner. At the same time we will do justice with the problem at hand. He is keenly aware of the environment, neighborhoods, and needs of the people and the aesthetics of the neighborhood. Really atthis point ofthe debate atthis time is that the land belongs to somebody. Somebody wants to sell their land. And the issue brought to the Planning Commission includes five or six items and one of the items which is major is a General Plan amend ment to change the land use. If it is left the way it is, what will a new property owner do, and in the interest of the City, the City decided to go into a MOU with th e School District which states 50 percent residential/50 percent commercial. So with that background, the Commission has to look atthe overall picture and long range plan. Heunderstood that people want new things. He spent his time in tra nsit and he has seen a lot of NIMBYs—they want mass transit, but "not in my backyard." The same is truehere and we do not progress in our City, there will not be a computer, there will not be a new automobile, there will not be a new society. So we need to move forward. We can't just say "leave the land as it is." With the given plan, we have tools to work at it. One of the tools is the EIR and is the too I right now at hand. It talks about goals and objectives, long term horizons, tax implications and predictable outcome. Ultimately, the bottom line is what this entitlement does, it adds value to the property. And we are all in the business – people are in the business of ultimately wanting to add value to their properties. Considering all of these factors there are a few things that come to mind which the Commission should consider. His concerns with the plan are cut and fill. You can cut and fill without having to import or export dirtto maintain the natural environment and to develop this plan it needs to be developed so that its environment is park like. One potential discussion was that the City could develop the park but a small part of this 30 -acre parcel. Not a bad idea recommended by his colleague. He would be of the opinion that a future developer be allowed to develop in a park like environment meaning what hesaw today as planned and shown does provide more Iikea park like environment more than a piece of land somewhere in the 30 acres—one acre, two acres, three acres—because it boxes it in. When there is a commercial and residential component nearby people may not feel comfortable using it as a park. The City has Heritage Park nearby. There is a school nearby where people can use that area. Though he is more willing to put in language the City is better off leaving itto the future developer, but established criteria that the developer must have a certain percentage of open space for the overall size. He does not know APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 26 PLANNING COMMISSION the percentages required in Diamond Bar but that is the question he will be asking. So considering all of the facts, he does want his fellow citizens to feel that the Commission and staff does its job and the important thing is that he wants the City to progress in such a manner to make sure that what is done today is a move forward for future generations. He is open to other considerations but knowing what he knows today the matter at hand is to examine th a EIR and whether to recommend or not to recommend. VC/Nolan felt the EIR was not an end-all/be-al I for this project. It is a tool to use to come to a decision about what is best for the community at large, for the whole City of Diamond Bar. It is true that the WVUSD has a right to dispose of this property. Is it to the City's benefit to approve this EIR and obtain the entitlement so the City has more of a say in how this will move forward. She disagreed regarding the open space. She believed the property ha d approximately 8 or 9 acres ofopen space which is also considered easements, rightsof waysand other open areas. She wants an open green area. She wants a park like setting. She wants a place for people to take their dogs. And again , she thinks it could fit nicely with the type of community — the retail, the commercial community, that this has envisioned. She thinks there is space for both. This is a blank slate. The City has the opportunity to make this what the community wants to make itand to set the ground rules. Her question for staff is,would itbe best for the Commission to come back to this issue after looking at whether a park area is feasible. She does not feel comfortable moving forward with the term "park like." CDD/Gubman said that during the break he drafted language that could be incorporated into the resolution to recommend approval of the Specific Plan and the Tentative Tract Map. If the Commission would like he can read the language to see if it is consistent with the Commissioners' vision and if so, it can be incorporated in a motion to adopt the resolution with the provisions as recommended. C/Lee said that if you insinuate or leave it as some unidentified area, the Commission needs to decide the item but he (CDD/Gubman) says he wants to give a suggestion to ..... Chair/Torng interjected and said he thought CDD/Gubman was responding to VC/Nolan and make a suggestion for her to consider. C/Lee said maybe this is inappropriate because it is illegal for the Commission to insinuate a decision for a certain area. Chair/Torng said that right now itis a discussion and as you may recall, VC/Nolan just made a suggest ion about a park area. ACA/Wohlenberg said that there are always staffs recommendations on items before the Commission and he believed CDD/Gubman was attempting to react to comments to provide language that would move toward thatgoal. Buthedoes not APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 27 PLANNING COMMISSION believe it insinuates any sort ofpredeterminat ion ofth eCommission's action or trying to restrict the Commission to a particular action. The Commission has wide latitude to approve or deny or approve it with different modifications or change it. It is merely an attempt to fulfill all usual role and suggest language that would reach the goal that one of the Commissioners was proposin g. C/Lee felt that all of the Commissioners should make th eir comments and then CDD/Gubman could read his recommended language and then the Commission could deliberate. That would behis recommendation. VC/Nolan asked her colleagues if she was out in left field or, did she have the support of her colleagues being on board with this. Chair/Torng felt that development of a new site is generally not a very popular decision to be made. Asa Commissioner he understands the residents' points of views and shares their frustration in many aspects. However, as a Commissioner, he and his colleagues must understand their role as a deci sion-making agency and keep the objective in mind and endeavor to balance as a principal the economic, legal, social, technological and other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risk in determining whether to approve a project. If it cannot concur that legal, social, technolo gical or other benefits of the proposal outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, a diverse environmental effects may beconsidered acceptable. Based on the project there are some unavoidable air quality impacts that cannot be a voided but most of the other issues including the major ones such as traffic and landscaping issues have been mitigated to a less significant level. As a Commissioner serving more than eight years he really trusts that the staff is working extremely hard to make the City better every day and he commends staff for doing such a good job in responding to all of the questions, comments and concerns raised at the last meeting as well as through the emails and letters. He also believed that the consultants' technical expertise will make sure the mitigation measures willwork to make this the best possible project. From a benefit stand point he believes the City needs the tax revenue and the school district needs additi onal funds to support school activities. And hefeels it is important to maintai n a healthy City and school district because both will be a cornerstone of this community. A prestigious City with a prestigious school district will for sure maintain the City's quality of life and housing values, etc. The City's plan is a level A plan and is not the final development plan. But with a Specific Plan, the City is able to set some important guidelines for the future developer. He felt itwas very important for the City to set limits and make sure the best designed project will happe n at Site D. He supports recommending inclusion of small park area in the commercial development area and let the City Council make the final decision. And as he mentioned when he quoted a resident's comments, hefelt the comment that shehoped itwill bean APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 28 PLANNING COMMISSION urban city center with living shopping and park space set into the natural setting of Site Dfit what hewas trying to convey. VC/Nolan asked if the Commission should hear staffs recommendation for the language to include. C/Shah said his reference to a park like atmosphere was in support of an environment and the developer should decide how to include that option. He was thinking more on the order of unspecified open space areas where people can congregate. Second, the Commission is not considering the appropriateness of the MOU which has already been established with the relationship between the City and school district. One thing he wanted to add to his comment was about the trees and perhaps the City should consider having an a rborist to review the trees when the development occurs to advise the developer and the City whether those trees could be saved or what could be done. His last comment is that this should be showcase solar energy efficient project for the City. VC/Nolan said that regarding a park and regarding a specific location for it, she did not believe in leaving it up to the developer, she did not want to take away necessarily from the residential area. She likes that part of the plan. She thinks even regarding parking ora small park would infringe on a residential area. She would like to see something along Diamond Bar Boulevard , along Cherrydale something that is not just specific to this project but for the community at large. The south end of Diamond Bar has Heritage Park and schoo Is but to her it is lacking in this area. And she would liketo see something more specific and she is not even sure if change in language right now would suffice. There's so much put into the actual drawing, the grading, the specificity of the commercial and residential, but to just toss in a plot for a park seems a bit of rush. C/Lee said he concurred with VC/Nolan. He loves parks. And he means it since he moved down to Diamond Bar that area location was allocated for a park. He likes parks. But he does not like building commercial and houses and taking a small area for a park. It is a very complicated process if you want to get a park. Hewanted to make sure about VC/Nolan's intentions. He does not think that is the idea of the residents. And sometimes we need togivethem open space and sometimes the City does nothing and then gives it to somebody else. Our kids— the next generation - that's the issue right now. I always believe that development is good for developers. They come down here to our City and whatever they say and give you in a presentation or fancy words doesn't matter. The relevant fact is that development of Site D shouldn't be— wouldn't be good for our residents. That is the truth. And one does not alter or deviate it by other fancy words. That's my second comment. APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 29 PLANNING COMMISSION Chair/Torng said that regarding the park addition it belongs to the Specific Plan under the third resolution. CDD/Gubman indicated thatChair/Torng was correct but he would advise the Commission not to make any decision s on any of those three recommendations until the Commission discusses its intentfor the park provision because depending on what the Commission's inten t is it may or may not have an effect on the language of the Specific Plan or the Environmental Impact Report. So he really believed the Commission needed to discuss this matter before beginning its process of making decisions and motions on any of the resolutions. CDD/Gubman referred the Commissioners to Resolution 3 to recommend City Council approval of the Tentative Tract Map and Specific Plan and offered the following language on Page 3 which begins the resolution section. On Page 4 he suggested that a subsection "f'. be added: "At the timethat a development plan is formally submitted for Planning Commission consideration, the subsequent plan shall incorporate within its boundaries a neighborhood park of sufficient size to incorporate features such as, but not limited to, a tot lot, picnic tables and shade structures." This would be supplemented by a Tentative Tract condition to require APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 30 PLANNING COMMISSION the Final Map to include a lot that delineates the boundaries of the park as prescribed under that new subsection that he previously read. VC/Nolan said that since the Plan is already specific on a creage for commercial and easements and things passed already, delineating the size is not recommended? Or the location of it as opposed to being in the commercial area rather than the residential. CDD/Gubman said that if it is VC/Nolan's desire to recommend that level of detail he may have to confer with the EIR consultant and City Attorney to see if staff needs to go back and look at the environmental document to see if that would lead to more changes becau se the language he proposed to her just now would not mandate any changes to the EIR. The more precise the Commission wants to get, the recommended provisions still may be immune from any changes to the EIR but he thinks staff would have to study that further and come back to the Commission. Following staff deliberation, CDD/Gubman stated that the staffs discussion had to do with specifying a size and location and the agreement was that if the Commission wishes to specify a minimum size of the park itwo uld not affect the analysis and EIR. The EIR does analyze a maximum intensity and density scenario for residential and commercial so adding a park component would potentially reduce the intensity of the commercial develop ment but certainly not increase it. It may reduce the traffic impacts because the park component may generate some off-peak trip generation. Staff does not see any compromiseto the EIR. However, the location is problematic at this point so if the Commission were to include a location at this time the recommendation going forward to the City Council would not be in compliance with the Level A Plan before the Commission. The limit would be specifying some of the programming and size without the location. C/Shah recommended the park be no less than three-quarters of an acre or about 30,000 square feet or something like that so that it does not involve changing the EIR. C/Lee asked if he could make a motion to continue CDD/Gubman said again, the issue staff is struggling with is whether or not the Commission is intending to specify a location because that would be in conflict with the A level Specific Plan designations for commercial and residential. If the Commission wants to go into more specifics about aggregate park acreage or aggregate acreage with a minimum per park site within the plan, staff can help formulate that language in the resolution. Staff needs to re-emphasize that getting into the specifics of a location would not be consistent with the Draft Specific Plan staff is presenting to the Commission. APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 31 PLANNING COMMISSION VC/Nolan said that to do this tonight she does not know. She is going to be back here in a couple of weeks so for her this is not a proble m for the Commission to continue this if it is something that has to be more formulated, there's got to be more thought given to it. For her to pull out I want 2.25 acres designated to this ... She wanted something. They talked about the gatewa y— the view of the City at this location and she thinks that has to be something like a park like setting. She is not saying the corner of Brea Canyon and Diamond Bar Boulevard but something along the line that preserves that visually pretty area that is visible to the community to someone that does not live there is not necessarily going to walk down the path which she thinks is a great idea to th is area but someone will take their kids to what is on the other side of town or on the other side of Diamond Bar Boulevard. She is just not real comfortable. She does think that again, as it pertains to the EIR she does not necessarily think, like CDD/Gubman says, it is going to change that up a lot but she thinks this is just too big of change to the Specific Plan to not consider all of the three elements together. Mr. Rogers said he keeps coming back to the process that the City is in which is an A level and B level map. A saying in the business is "The devil is in the details" and ittruly is. The details, in terms of configuration on these properties have not yet come forward. The intent was not to, as an applican t or through the school district to try and design the project specifics. The wonde rful thing about this process because this is what we have been doing on the Irvine Ranch for decades, is that we create this envelope orumbrella underwhich we understand how setbacks work, how development standards work, thresholds in intensity, to get the process past some of the bigger meatier parts. He kind of agreed with VC/Nolan, but in the sense that trying to deliberate on the location and specificsof the park in this setting is a tough call. When VC/Nolan asked "how big a park" well, it's programmatic and C/Shah's comments about three quarters of an acre minimum —those are all the kinds of details that quite frankly he thought were borne out of the B level effort. He said he was not trying to defer it and he was not trying to shrug the responsibility of doing this but he was suggesting that an applicant that comes to the City with a commercial plan, in the creativity that he can elicit in the process of working with his architects and landscape architects with the mandate that the City might set forth at thi s A level might be a more productive venue for the Commission to vet these issues and get into those details with him and really force it out at that level because that is where he thinks itis most appropriate. The problem is if wejust plop a bl ob in there and say a park has to be right there, maybe what we're doing is we're inhibiting the creativity of the future applicant at the B level. So with that in mind, and remember, that is the most substantive part in terms of this issue. Where is the park located? Well,a lot of things have to be developed in an understanding of that commercial siteplan to discover that and he would believe that the City might be doing a disservice to the APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 32 PLANNING COMMISSION future purchaser of that property to make all of those decisions in advance. Maybe it is good enough that there is a performance criteria overlaid on this project. He said he appreciated that VC/Nolan wanted to get to certainty and the predictable outcome that he keeps talking about but perhaps it is better at the next I evel . Chair/Torng said that actually in a way he concurred with staffs response on this because actually, the location you suggested by VC/Nolan atCherrydale, he does not like that idea. He likes Mr. Roger's suggestion for the idea of the comer of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard. At this time the Commission is not going into the details and he believed that was a level II or Plan Level B, and right now the Commission is at Level A. Chair/Torng asked if the Commission could accept C/Shah's recommendation for a three quarter of an acre minimum with the location to be determined because he has a different opinion that VC/Nolan. VC/Nolan said she did not think itso specific, she thinks itis more general than specific. I just would like more thought put into it. We have 50/50 percent - I don't know if any third grader could come up with that figure but I would like to think there would be something that is more concrete regarding size, regarding location, that is just not random. This is why we are doing this so we can be on the front end of what we want. And maybe I am the only one thatwants it and that would be fine. But she just thinks it is just still too obscure. Chair/Torng asked that based on what VC/Nolan said what is the best that staff can do with the current plan? CDD/Gubman said at this point he would suggest that the Commission continue the matter because he needs to discuss this further with Counsel because he is not sure why a location cannot be specified and he needs to have a better understanding of why? Because this is still a recommendation to the City Council and the City Council is going to give the final direction on what changes, if any, are incorporated into this planning document. Right now he would suggest that the Commission continue the matter to May 11, 2010, and give him a chance to consult with the City Attorney and with the consultants and come back to the Commission with more developed guidance for formulating the Commission's recommendation. Chair/Torng said that for him his location is differen tfrom VC/Nolan. He does not like her location so he does agree that this is something that the Commission should setthe requirements that itwants a park and wantsto put that into theplan and let the developer know so that they have to create something — a park, for this location. AC/Wohlenberg said that the discussion would bewhether ornot the City can specify a location. And then that would be somet hing the Commission would have to debate at the next meeting and decide if you want to specify a APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 33 PLANNING COMMISSION particular location ornot. There may bethree votes forthat, there may not be. Butwewant to make sure wecan orcannot let the Commission recommend a specific location. VC/Nolan said she did not necessarily say itwould have to be at that corner. She justwould like some research done on it, some thought put into it. I mean if staff has an idea now that would be great too. She did not mean to insult anyone by saying that any third grader could come up with the 50/5 0 percent on this but itjust seems — I would just like something a little more concrete and still give a developer leeway. Butsomething that wehave more envisioned. Ijustdon'tthink we're being specific. C/Shah stated that he felt that given the opportunity for Plan B and let the developer come in the future and present a location and the Commission will get another report atthat time because the Commission will see the entire picture. Right now we are seeing just three lots there and we d o not know how they are going to develop them. He stated that he likes the idea of Mr. Rogers that leave it to the future developer; and maybe we should just identify the need for the park. He stated that he is of the opinion that maybe we should establish some criteria — any area and the criteria you describe — tot lot, etc., but leave it for the future and the Planning Commission will get an opportunity to deb ate and decide. Butat that time the Commission will have a better picture because we will know what other things are being developed in the area. We will have better information. He recommended not to insist on location at this time, but just insist on a park and an area of that park so at least we have areas (i.e., acreages) identified for the commercial and areas identified for the residential pads so let's identify the area for the park. C/Lee said he concurred with C/Shah's idea —a portion of it. Let's move on. C/Shah moved, Chair/Torng seconded, to Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report, approve the Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program, and adopt the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Site D Specific Plan and related Zone Change, General Plan Amendment, and Tentative Tract Map. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Shah, VC/Nolan, Chair/Torng NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson C/Shah moved, VC/Nolan seconded, to adopt a resolution recommending that the City APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 34 PLANNING COMMISSION Council approve General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (c) to Specific Plan (SP); and Zone Change No. 2007-04 to change the zoning map designations from Low Density APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 35 PLANNING COMMISSION Residential (RL) and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Shah, VC/Nolan, Chair/Torng NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson The Commission discussed continuation of Recommendation 3 and CDD/Gubman proposed modified language to reflect the Commission's request. CDD/Gubman reiterated "at the time that a developmen t plan is formally submitted for Planning Commission consideration, the subsequent plan sha II incorporate within its boundaries a neighborhood park of sufficient sizeto incorporate features such as, butnot limited to, a tot lot, picnic tables and shade structures, and shall bea minimum ofthree- quarters of an acre. Chair/Tonng asked if the Commission could make it one acre. Why make it three- quarters of an acre? CDD/Gubman said that is what he heard before so if he misunderstood ... C/ Shah said no, an acre is fine. Chair/Tonng asked the Commissioners to remember this is Plan A with certain guidelines. If the Commission starts to get into a specific location itwould become a different plan. He liked Mr. Roger's idea about integrating a park with the location with an eating area with a park surrounding it. It looked to him pretty good. But VC/Nolan's idea is at Cherrydale so then itwould require a little more detail to justify it. VC/Nolan said itwas not specifically Cherrydale. She knows she brought that up. But it is something, again, an entrance viewpoint for the City that when people drive down Diamond Bar Boulevard they see a park, that the residents see a park and that it is visible and usable for the community. She stated that she thinks an acre is a little small, is looking at this to some extent from the perspective of mom. Chair/Tonng asked if there was any more discussion. ACA/Wo hlenberg said staff had one more change to read into the record. CDD/Gubman said hewas reminded that the Commission discuss multiple locations with an aggregate sizeso he wants to make sure he understands so that staff provides the Commission with the language. So do we want itto say"park area orareas with an aggregate size of at least one acre? C/Shah said he was of the opinion of two acres total and one particula r lot is no less than one acre, then there would be two areas and let the developer decide what those two areas would be or where itcould be. CDD/Gubman said what ifthe two areas were contiguous so that itwas a total oftwo acres. C/Shah said that would beokay. ACA/Wohlenberg clarified that itcould betwo APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 36 PLANNING COMMISSION park areas with a total aggregate area oftwo acres, on a of the areas to be at least one acre in size. C/Shah said "that is correct, very well stated ." VC/Nolan said that if two acres is too big she would rather see an acre and one-quarter of something nice and particular. She appreciates the idea of two acres, but is that too much of an infringement into the commercial area? CDD/Gubman stated that staff would strongly suggest that this item be continued to give staff a chance to study this to determine what a differen tpark size would afford. Two acres could have a significant effect on the viability of th e commercial site. One maybe sufficient to provide all of the amenities that the Commission envisions. Staff needs to go back and study this. The one item staff wants to look at is the Planning Commission rules. It may be more appropriate to take one motion for all three actions at once rather than leave this evening with two down and one to go. Chair/Tonng felt the Commission had consensus and was waiting for staffs language. The Commission has consensus in a way that this is an importa nt Specific Plan but we want a park. But how much and how to do that is someth ing weare waiting for staff to provide guidance, and within the limitsand not to kind of impact the fiscal responsibility and not to impact the EIR and those kinds of things. So actually, the Commission can make a decision orwait until staff comes back and just notify the Commission with the appropriate language. VC/Nolan said she had to respectfully disagree to take staffs recommendation to give this a little more thought and we may come back with the same thing and do this again in two weeks with just a little more specificity, a few more details. There are just a lot of different things out there and now was your recommendat ion for the Commission to take all three items as a whole does that negate what weal ready voted on? C/Shah said there were two or more experts here and he has some experience visualizing one acre, two acre, three acre and helloes agreethat one orone and a quarter acre orone and one half acre are insufficient fora neighborhood park. Hekind of agreed with the Chair to agree with staffs experience and expertise on acreage which would not impact the future development or the school district and if that is in staffs opinion, sufficient, then hethinks the Commission should consider that. He thinks the Commission should be open to hear the experts and if th ey believe one acre is fine, so be it. He does not think it is very difficult right now at this stage to visualize it. Everybody agrees in principle that we need a park. The issue is whether it should be one acre, one and one half acre, or what. That is the issue. Chair/Tonng likened this debate to the parolee homes wherein the Commission wanted the maximum distance. So we can identify the language to the maximum size of the park that staff can identify for the Commission. APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 37 PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 38 PLANNING COMMISSION VC/Nolan said she thought ifstaff was willing to go back, rethink this, give itsome more detailed thought outside ofthis arena right here and come back, it may be as general as C/Shah recommends. It may be more specific to this is residential, this is commercial, whether it's specific land and location, she just likes the idea that staff seems to be recommending that the Commission come back in two weeks and revisit this particular item. C/Lee said the Commission already made a motion for item one and number two. There is no reason they should be combined together. If VC/Nolan thinks the recommendation is good make a motion for that and we get some action. VC/Nolan said she did not just want to do it. I don't just want to pull a place and a number out of my hat. C/Lee said no -just make a motion for continuance. ACA/Wohlenberg said he wanted to make a point of procedure and parliamentary procedure. These three resolutions constitute a single action and hewants to makesure there is not an issue with when a statute of limitation s starts to run or anything likethat so that all three are done at the same time. The Commission's rules allow for a motion of reconsideration betaken atthe same meeting where the Commission has already taken action on a resolution item. So what he would recommend is that the Commission proposed a motion for reconsideration of the first two items with that decision to be made simultaneously with the consideration of the third resolution so that we have sort of undone that approval and just moved it out to coordinate with the third resolution. VC/Nolan said, so we would bevoting again on the first two items that wevoted on already? ACA/Wohlenberg said first there would be a motion for reconsideration on the first two items. If that passes then those items would be reconsidered simultaneously with the third so they would bethen sort of unapproved and for consideration those would be moved to be simultaneous with the third. C/Lee said he had a question about that. The agenda clearly separates Items 1, 2 and 3 and then you said about a resolution. For example, if I agree with item number 2 and I don't agree with item 3 then he cannot express his opin ion if he votes on all three at once. If the items are separate he can express his opinio n on a certain item. With them combined together no matter whether I agree or disagree with a certain item I cannot do that. ACA/Wohlenberg said they would all still bevote d on separately. He wanted to make sure because the project requires all three resolutio ns. If two wereto pass and one were to not pass he would not be sure what would happen with that. So in order to make sure action is taken on all three of them either approva I or denial, he wanted to make sure they were all approved simultaneously because they all do constitute a single project. So the Commission has taken action on two and if the Commission is not taking action on the third yet he does not know if that will trigger any problems with review or appeal of those where there are essentially two approved resolutions that could go up, but they are essentially useless without the third and he does not know what kind of problems or delays that may cause the City. So to just avoid that problem his APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 39 PLANNING COMMISSION recommendation would be to pass a motion for reconsidera tion on Items 1 and 2 so that they can beconsidered again atthe next meeting so that at the next meeting staff has to come back with the additional information about the third resolution but the Commission would also then just start atthe beginning again and consider Resolution number 1, Resolution number 2 and then Resolution number 3. Ch air/Torng asked if at the next meeting the Commission would come back and go directly to deliberation or go through the whole process. ACA/Wohlenberg said the Commission would go directly to the resolutions. The Commission may want some additional deliberation amongst the Commission in order to make that decision. There is no problem with doing that and that does not bring up any due process issues like when there is public testimony. This is just the Commission acting. So the Commission is saying we need more information. Find that information and bring it back so we can continue ou rdeliberation on a particular date. VC/Nolan moved, C/Shah seconded, for reconsideration of Items 1 and 2 and request that staff bring back recommendations and additional information regarding the designation of a specific park space or size on May 11, 2010. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Shah, VC/Nolan, Chair/Torng NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: none ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson 9. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMA TIONAL ITEMS: C/Shah thanked everyone for their consideration this evening and thanked staff and the consultants for their good effort. VC/Nolan thanked everyone for their patience and said she looked forward to visiting this again in two weeks. Chair/Tonng thanked staff and the consultants for their efforts. Thanks to the audience that stayed with the Commission for such a long meeting. 10. STAFF COMM ENTS/INFORMA TIONAL ITEMS: 10.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects. 11. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As listed in tonight's agenda. APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 40 PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 27, 2010 PAGE 41 PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Chairman Torng adjourned the regular meeting at 10:54 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 11th day of May, 2010. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, Greg Gubman Community Development Director Tony Torng, Chairman MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 11, 2010 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Torng called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Govemm ent Center Auditorium, 2186 5 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: C/Nelson led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Kwang Ho Lee, Steve Nelson, Jack Sh ah, Vice Chairman Kathy Nolan, and Chairman Tony Torng. Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; Brad Wohlenberg, Assistant City Attorney; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; Natal ie Tobon, Planning Technician; David Alvarez, Assistant Planner; and Stella Marquez, Senior Administrative Assistant. Consultants: Mark Rogers, TRG Land; and Peter Lewandowski , Environmental Impact Sciences. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes ofthe Regular Meeting of April 27, 201 0 C/Shah moved, VC/Nolan seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 13, 2010, as corrected. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee, Shah, VC/Nolan, Chair/Tomg NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 5. OLD BUSINESS: None 6. NEW BUSINESS: None 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 Comprehensive Sian Proaram No. PL 2010-30 — Under the authority of MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.36.060, the applicant requested approval for a Comprehensive Sign Program for Firestone. The lot is zoned Regional Commercial (C-3) zoned parcel with a consistent underlying General Plan Land Use designation of General Commercial (c). Comprehensive Sign Programs are requested when two or more signs are requested on the same frontage. PROJECT ADDRESS: 1150 S. Grand Avenue Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Bridgestone Retail Operations 333 E. Lake Street Bloomingdale, IL 60108 APPLICANT: Sharon Willison Williams Sign Company 111 S. Huntington Street Pomona, CA 91766 PT/Tobon presented stafrs report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Comprehensive Sign Program No. PL2010-30, base on the Findings of Fact, subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. There were no ex parte disclosures. Chair/Torng opened the public hearing. There was no one present who wished to speak on this item. Chair/Torng closed the public hearing. VC/Nolan moved, C/Shah seconded, to approve Comprehensi veSign Program No. P1-2010-30, base on the Findings of Fact and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee, Nelson, Shah, VC/Nolan , Ch a i r/To rn g NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 7.2 Conditional Use Permit No. PL2010-89 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.58, James Kim submitted a requ est to operate a music and art school under the business name Orchepia School of Music The proposed MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION music and art school will provide music lessons to school age children and young adults. The proposed hours of operation are from 2:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on Saturd ay. The subject property is zoned C-2 (General Commercial) with an underlying General Plan designation of General Commercial. Approval of a Conditional Use Permit is required to operate a music school. PROJECT ADDRESS: 2751 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard, SuiteA Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Country Hills Holdings LLC 8115 Preston Road #400 Dallas, TX 75225 APPLICANT: James Kim 21700 Copley Drive, Suite 290 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 SP/Lee presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Conditional Use Permit No. P1-2010-89, based on the Findings of Fact and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. C/Shah asked if the applicant intended to rent the ha II for other uses or was it intended strictly for their own use and SP/Lee said she believed it was intended strictly for use by the music and art school but she would ask the applicant to clarify that point. C/Shah said if the hall was rented out he would be concerned about the time and the one door ingress/egress at the side of the hall. C/Nelson asked why the school was restricted to 65 students. SP/Lee responded that there are 29 individual classrooms and the number of students is related to the parking, traffic impacts and capacity. She confirmed to C/Nelson that there is surplus parking. C/Nelson asked why the City would restrict a business that is coming into an area that has been vacant for years. SP/Lee stated that part of the analysis includes a new office building atthe north end of the shopping center which was submitted to the Planning Department today for consideration, all of which has to do with the parking and traffic impacts of the shopping center. CDD/Gubman further stated that the applicant proposed that a maximum of 60 students was anticipated at any one time. Staff normally places restrictions on the maximum enrollment, hours of operation, days of the week, etc. Staff also wanted to provide some flexibility should there bean increase in enrollment because staff did not feel it should limit enrollment so tightly thatifthere might be 61 students for example, they would have to come back and request an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit. In this instance, staffs intent was to create a bit of a MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION cushion for the business to exceed their 60 student peak en rollment at any one time without having to seek a modified approval. Certainly, if the Planning Commission feels the cushion is insufficient the parking ana lysis would allow for more of cushion. However, he believes that there shoul d be some sort of cap set during this process. The 65 number was arrived atby adding a 10 percent MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION contingency. Any other number the Commission would like to discuss can certainly be brought forward for consideration. VC/Nolan asked for the building occupancy limit and CDD/ Gubman responded that would bedetermined bythe Building Official. CDD/Gubman said VC/Nolan would have to ask the applicant how that number was reach ed but certainly they would have done a preliminary building code analysis to determine exits and what kind of improvements would have to be included in the tenant improvements to accommodate this occupancy. C/Nelson asked how many parking places the proposed north end office building would require and SP/Lee responded that staff had not yet analyzed that sincethe application was submitted only today. The building is proposed to be three-story office building but she does not have the actual square footage figures. C/Nelson said hewas concerned about restricting an existing use because ofthe potential for future uses and while he thinks it is good to plan a head he would prefer to know what the future needs might because it might reveal that the Commission could increase the opportunity for the operations in-han d. SP/Lee confirmed to C/Nelson that if the applicant experiences problems they have a condition that allows them to come back for a possible increase. C/Nelson asked if the Commission were to increase the number of students and it became a problem, the applicant could come back for reconsideration as a condition of this approval and SP/Lee confirmed that was accurate. C/Lee said hewas not comfortable with children and young adults occupying the same space without supervision. He wanted to know what age and what kind of people. SP/Lee referred C/Lee to the applicant to a nswer the question. Chair/Torng said he recalled that the Commission appro ved a three-story office building for the south end and a two-story office build ing for the north end and wanted to know if the 158,922 square feet included the previous approval and CDD/Gubman responded that the square footage includes the most recent entitlement and accounts for the approved replacement for the theater building and cancellation of the medical building atthe south end as well as the remodel of the Tai Kwando in-line shops building and the daycare building. SP/Lee responded to Chair/Torng that the north end office building square footage is included in the entitlement. Chair/Torng asked if there would be a large crowd for recitals and wanted to know the capacity for the recital hall. Staff suggested that the applicant respond to that question. There were no ex parte disclosures MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION Chair/Torng invited the applicant to speak Bob Poyner, Country Hills Holdings LLC, stated that the recital room is for the applicant's use only and not for rental. The recital facility has room for 150 seats. Recitals take place twice a year and take place on the weekend. The interior drawing showing the doors is their preliminary plan and obviously, the property owner must complete construction drawings and go through the City's Building Department with respect to proper ingress/egress and signa ge interior to the space. The drawing submitted to the Commission this evening is a concept drawing. The age of the children and young adults, thisfacility is for elementary, middle and high school children. The 65 number was based on the rooms — a guess by the client. The 65 is acceptable for this approval based on the assumption that if the applicant required more capacity they could come back to request an increase from the Commission subject to traffic and parking considerations. C/Shah asked if the applicant means a maximum 65 studen is at any one time and Mr. Poyner responded yes. VC/Nolan asked for confirmation that the overall enrollment was greater than 65 and Mr. Poyner responded "yes." C/Nelson said that if Mr. Poyner wants 65, he gets 65. What he was thinking about was cuts to the public school music programs and where students will go. Chair/Torng asked Mr. Poyner if he read staffs report and concurred with the Conditions of Approval and Mr. Poyner responded affirmatively. Chair/Torng opened the public hearing. With no one present who wished to speak on this item, Chair/Torng closed the public hearing. CDD/Gubman requested that the Commission amend Condition No. 6 (future reviews) as follows: "Once the music school is in operation and should traffic and/or parking problems arise in the sole judgment of the City, the applicant shall provide parking management services to ease traffic flow an d congestion, etc." C/Lee moved, C/Shaw seconded, to approve Conditional Use Permit No. PL2010-89 as amended by staff. Motion carried by th e following Roll Call vote: MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee, Nelson, Shah, VC/Nolan , Ch a i r/To rn g NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 7.3 Development Review and Variance No. PL2010-17 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.48, the applican t requested approval to construct a 6,352 square foot new single family residence on a 48,252 net square foot (1.11 net acres), Rural Residential (RR) zoned parcel with a consistent underlying General Plan Land Use designation of Rural Residential (RR). Variances are requested to allow the building height to be increased from 35 feet to 40 feet 7 inches, and a driveway extension to provide for access to the front door and allow adequate turning radius for fire trucks as required by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. PROJECT ADDRESS: 2718 Steeplechase Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Terry and Rachel Hao 60 Seasons Irvine, CA 92603 APPLICANT: Jack Mitchell JWM Construction 2902 Calle Heraldo San Clemente, CA 92673 SP/Lee presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review and Variance No. PL2010-17, based on the Findings of Fact and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. VC/Nolan asked staff to elaborate on the design of the metal roof with a large pitch and whether it would present a nuisance to other neighbors. SP/Lee explained that the roof is sloped and if the applicant were to design the project to meet the building height itis possible that there would not be a sloped roof that is usually typical in very modern contemporary designs. In terms of impact to adjacent properties, again, the building is set back behind the two adjacent homes. VC/Nolan wanted to know what a metal roof would look like. SP/Lee said itwas an actual metal roof instead of a clay tile or shi ngles. C/Shah wanted to make sure that the fire department had approved the roadway system all the way to the building because he questioned the 15 percent grade. Also, he looked at the color rendering and the buildin g is mostly a modem looking MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION building. SP/Lee said she did not believe the color printer justified the actual colors that were submitted on the color board. The paint colors are beige tones. With respect to the LA County Fire Department, the app licant submitted plans to the LA County Fire Department which reviewed and approved the conceptual plan and the applicant is in building plan checked attheir own risk prior to getting Commission approval. The applicant has further commentfrom the firedepartment for which he can elaborate. CDD/Gubman said the driveway configuration has a switchback design to reduce the grade from what a straight line would create. In addition, the turnaround area was incorporated into the site plan atthe front door after consultation with the fire department. So, the applicant has done some due diligence in that regard and still has to go through the formal plan check process. However, the applicant attempted to come up with a design that reduces the driveway grade given the steep slope front to back on this property. C/Shah said that the plan indicates a 15 percent grade which is clearly a difficult grade. As long as the fire department approves it he is okay with it. CDD/Gubman indicated that 15 percent is the maximum grade that they would accept and there needs to be a rounding off at the brow to keep the vehicle from bottoming out. The applicant is attempting to work with the property as best they can. C/Shah asked if there would be cut and fill and CDD/Gubman respond ed that about 600 cubic yards of export. C/Shah asked if there was any way the cut and fill could be balanced within the site because 600 yards could easily be sed on the graded south side. CDD/Gubman said that would be a good question for the applicant. C/Nelson asked why the City's development standards restricted height to 35 feet. CDD/Gubman said that it seems that if one looks into any zoning code 35 feet is the default height limit. C/Nelson felt that if the Commission did not understand the reason for the standard how can it meaningfully determine whether a five foot seven inch variance would be acceptable. How many variances has the City granted to building heights for residential structures in the past three years, for example, and how many more requests will the City get in the future. He does not think the City should grant a variance without a good and consistent reason moving forward. If the City cannot define why it has a standard of 35 feet why does the City have any standard? SP/Lee said in an attemptto respond to why the code is 35 feet the rural residential zone for the City is predominately permitted single family detached homes which is the maximum height for those types of homes. C/Nelson said, so why are weallowing fivefeet seven inches on this one if most houses are 35 feet? SP/Lee responded that because this property has unique characteristics such as steep slope and unusual topography that justifies a variance. C/Nelson said "we've had steep slopes in the past without having to grant variances for height — am I right?" CDD/Gubman responded "that is true." C/Nelson said it was perhaps a question for the architect and he did not mean to put anyone on the spot but wanted to be very careful about the variances the City is granting going forward. CDD/Gubman said that the elevations for the MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION property show compound slopes in terms of having an ascendin g slope from the street and then a lateral slope that warps the property in a unique way. All properties obviously have some unique topographic characteristics. The ones that characterize this property are the steep ascending slope and the side to side slope as well. And architecturally, what the applicant attempted to do was slope the roof to follow the side to side slope but in the design challenge to take into account the varying topographic elevations, there is a small wedge — portion that does hook up above the 35 foot envelope. C/Shah felt the floor heights were standard heights and that it was the architectural feature that raises the height beyond 35 feet. In viewing the section on drawing A 1.9 section (a) it clearly depicts why the height exceeded 35 feet. Chair/Torng asked if the retaining wall met the six foot height requirement and SP/Lee responded affirmatively. There were no ex parte disclosures. John Danielian, Danielian Associates, 60 Corporate Park, Irvine, and Jack Mitchell, JWM Construction responded to Commissioner' s questions. Mr. Danielian responded to C/Shah that with respect to slope of the roof, the site slopes from north to south and the envelope of the home is within the 35 feet of the natural grade. When measuring the five additiona I feet, it is artificially taken from the new established finished grade. So when desig ning the home, they stayed within the natural grade. With regard to why the roof is sloping, the attempt isto mimicand follow the contours ofthe site i.e. responding to the site conditions. C/Shah asked the applicant to speak to the grade of the entrance ramp and the color of the building. Mr. Danielian responded that prior to commencing the project he met with the fire department to discuss critical issues. This is a very difficult site with a 29 '/2 percent slope and they attempted to minimize the steepness of the driveway. The fire department required the project to be no more than 15 percent and 14 feet in width and that is what is pictured in the design of the driveway. Anything over 15 percent is unacceptable. The turnaround space was also required bythe firedepartment and the architects/applicants have been working closely with the fire department since day one. And since that time the applicant has submitted plans atwill and atthe archite ct's own risk and have received comments back, one of which was to confirm that there was an appropriate turning radius at the top (of the driveway). The rest of the fire department comments addressed minor structural issues. In addition, the pool water will be used for emergency water as needed. C/Sh ah asked why the MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSION applicant wasunable to balance the sitewithout exporting dirt. Mr.Danielian said they did everything they could to balance the site. Unfortunately, because there is a basement it requires removing a lot of soil from the site but they are doing everything possible to distribute the dirt throughout th esite and help with the driveway grade. CDD/Gubman responded to C/Nelson that the 35 foot requirement is from "finished" grade. As the architect stated, the natural grade was at a higher elevation than the finished grade so the visual impact of the overall building height is mitigated to a certain extent by the fact that the pad is being lowered so that the effective height when viewed from Steeplechase which is at a fixed grade, would be mitigated by that feature of the development. C/Nelson said he would suggest the Commission keep that in mind for the future. VC/Nolan asked when the Hillside Management Ordinance was put in place and whether it was put in place because of the conditions where people are building more on the hillsides because of less area. And was the 35 foot limitin place prior to that ordinance. CDD/Gubman responded that the Hillside Ordinance was developed out of consideration for Diamond Bar and its topography and there is a need wherever ajurisdiction is in a hillside situation or with this type of topography to avoid some of the mass grading for steep roadway design that occurred in hillside developments in the 60s and 70s where developmen toccurred directlyon ridgelines and was destroying the natural features. The Hillside Development Standards are an effort to require homes and development overall to be designed to fit the overall topography rather than altering the topography to fit the development. SP/Lee stated the Hillside Management Development Standards were adopted in 1998. CDD/Gubman responded to VC/No Ian that the 35 foot height limitation is in all of the residential zones so the height limitfor the hillside district is overlayed on this additional concept of the building height envelope that is determined by some diagrams in the Hillside Developmen t Standards where one creates height envelopes from site property lines and from the grade fromthe front to the back of the property. SP/Lee said the 35 foot height limitrequirement was also included in the Hillside Standards. C/Shah asked how many truckloads of dirt would berequir ed to export the 600 cubic yards of export and Mr. Mitchell responded that due to the site he would have to bring in smaller trucks to accommodate the shared driveway forabout 100 trips of six to seven yards per truck. The dirt will be ha uled to the landfill justoff the SR60. He plans to remove the dirt in a slow and methodical manner so as to present as little interruption as possible to the neighborhood. When he first looked atthe site dirt export was his initial concern. Asa result, hedesigned retaining walls for an earth retention system that uses modular blocks and uses the onsite materials that are reprocessed and re -compacted onsite. MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION Mr. Danielian responded to Chair/Torng that he read stafrs report and concurs with the conditions of approval. Chair/Torng opened the public hearing. Victor Natividad, 2730 Steeplechase Lane, said hewas notpresent to object but was, in fact, pleased to welcome a new neighbor. He ha d concerns about the shared access road that is sitting on a steep slope and over 100 truckloads ofdirt will be moved across the shared access road that proceeds through six lots. This access road is owned by the land owners and it is not maintained by "The Country Estates" which is unfortunate because the road is in very, very bad condition. With the exception of Lot 52 which is partially paved with concrete and asphalt and Lot 55 which is paved with concrete, the rest of the roadway is in very poor condition. The concrete on his lot is only four inches thick and in 2005 during the paving the waterline broke because itwas not buried deep and also because of the heavy load. Informally, he mentioned this fact to Ja ck Mitchell on May 6 and suggested that a metal plate be placed on top of the concrete to protect the water and sewer lines and Mr. Mitchell assured him there should be no issue. Second, he was not sure how the concrete would handle the truckloads and whether there would bedamage to the access road. If large cracks result from hauling the dirt he would like to have the damage repaired as soon as possible before it developed into a bigger problem. The downside oflivi ng in the area is the hill erosion from the access road. He found the mitigation to be very expensive and the damage was not covered by insurance. Fortunately, he was able to secure access through other lots 56 and 57 to his house. He is requesting that any big cracks be repaired at once. It becomes worrisome when the construction coincides with the rainy season. He is sure there will be minor cracks which can be repaired later and he is willing to share that with his neighbor. Third, he accesses his property from the south end of Steeplechase from lot 57 through 56 and the up to his lot 55. It is in extremely poor cond ition and because there are no houses on lots 57 and 56 it continues to deteriorate beca use the absentee owners do not want to pave the road. If there are any potho les, he would implore the Commission to have them fixed before any hillside erosion occurs again. Chair/Torng closed the public hearing. SP/Lee asked for the applicant to comment on sharing the costs of improvements should there be damage to the concrete portion of the access road. Mr. Mitchell stated that itis implied that damage done by construction activitiesare the responsibility of the applicant. With respect to steel plate, itis generally conditioned on any larger grading job that he is requi red to have a "shaker plate," MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 12 PLANNING COMMISSION a 3/4 inch steel plate with ridges on it that shakes the dirt off the tires of the equipment as it leaves the site and comes onto the site. Hesaid hewould place the steel plate on top of Mr. Natividad's plumbing and he will take photographs and if any condition worsens of course hewould rectify it. With regard to the asphalt road in front of his client's property, it might as well be a gravel road because it has pretty much deteriorated to the point that it is almost non-existent and obviously, that will have to be rectified and the project has budgeted for the inevitability. The only issues are that "The Country Estates Homeowners Association" is resistant on the use of asphalt; however, there is asphalt in place at this time so that is an issue that must be addressed with the HOA. All of the paving surfaces would have to be left in good condition when they are finished. With regard to Mr. Natividad's pipes being shallow, he would hope that the steel plate would mitigate that but if they are shallow and something happens they have to be fixed in the normal course of business. CDD/Gubman explained that the access from Steeplechase to these properties has to be traversable and for this project to get throug h the fire department plan check process the applicants will have to demonstrate that the roadway is going to be surfaced to accommodate emergency vehicles. With respect to damage to the private drive and potential damage to water lines, this is a private property and reciprocally used, owned and accessed between private property owners so the City would not impose any requirements in this regard. This is a civil matter that would need to be dealt with in that venue should there be any claims or damage caused bythis construction project. VC/Nolan asked the length ofthe access road and Mr. Mitchell responded he believed itwas 500 to 600 feet traversing five orsix lots. There are sections that are in very poor repair. For his fire department requ irements he has to maintain emergency access at all times during combustible construction. There are rules and responsibilities that other agencies have that are standards and if one causes damage ithas to be repaired. C/Shah said he believed the architect could design the lot by balancing the dirt onsite rather than having dirt exported. C/Lee was confident that the applicant knew what he wa s doing and the City has full enforcement authority to take care of those concerns. C/Lee moved, VC/Nolan seconded, to approve Development Review and Variance No. PL2010-17, based on the Findings of Fact and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the Resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee, Nelson, VC/Nolan, Ch a i r/To rn g NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Shah ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 8. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: 8.1 Site "D" Specific Plan - Pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act; Title 21 - City's Subdivision Ordinance; and Title 22 - Development Code Sections 22.60 and 22.70, the proposed project is to recommend approval of the following to the City Council. General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 - A request to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan (SP). Zone Change No. 2007-04 - A request to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential (RL) and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan (SP). Specific Plan No. 2007-01 -a Request to adopt the Site D Specific Plan for approximately 30.36 -acre site for the construction of 202 residential dwelling units ata density of 20 units per acre; 153,985 gross square feet of commercial use at 0.35 floor area ratio; and approximately 10 acres of Open Space areas, easements and rights-of-way. Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 -A request to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes. Environmental Impact Report No. 2007-02 - A request to certify the final EIR which provides a detailed analysis of potential environmen tal impacts associated with the development of the Specific Plan area. The EIR includes mitigation measures for the project, addresses project alternatives, identifies the environmentally superior project alternative, and adopts a statement of overriding considerations. (Continued from April 27, 2010) Project Address: Site comprised of approximately 30.36 -acres located atth e southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Numbers MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 14 PLANNING COMMISSION 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002,093, and 8714-015-001.) Applicant: Walnut Valley Unified School District and City of Diamond Bar Lead Agency: City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department C/Nelson recused himself and left the dais and the meeting Chair/Tonng explained the Commission's direction on th is item and announced that in addition to the agenda packet the Commission also received a letter from Mary Rodriquez and an email from David Busse he requested be placed in the public record. CDD/Gubman stated that on April 27 there was intent to recommend certification of the Environmental Impact Report and adoption of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. There was general support for the Specific Plan, but there was a lack of consensus about how to craft the recommendation pertainin g to the incorporation of a park element on this site. The three supporting Commissioners expressed a desire to have some requirement for a park or public space as part of this project but continued the matter to allow staff to conduct further research and to come back to the Commission with its recommendation. Staff is ready to present information to help the Commission make its decision this evening. CDD/Gubman further stated that what staff heard from the Commission were two different concepts discussed. One was a dedication of a traditional public park as a standalone feature on this site. The second concept staff heard was the integration of one or more public spaces into the future commercial development comprised of some minimum acreage that would incorporate amenities such as tot lot, shade structure, picnic table, features that would be found in a traditional park but more integrated into the commercial development. Tonight's presentation is in two parts, thefirst of which hewill present to the Commission using a PowerPoint presentation that dep icts an overview of parks in the City of different sizes to help the Commissioners visualize what one and two acres and different sizes and palettes of amenities that parks of different sizes could accommodate. This presentation will be followed by discussion of the public space option for the commercial development by Mark Rogers who will present an interactive design exercise to help the Commission consider that option as well. CDD/Gubman first presented an overview of seven City parks that are within the size range discussed at the last meeting. These parks range in size from .3 acres (16,000 square feet) to about 3.4 acres. Staff will then show graphics of polygons that will give the Commissioners an idea of how those different sized pa rks would compare to the MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 15 PLANNING COMMISSION footprint of Site D. The staff report calls out acreag es in the table and when staff went through the actual graphic verification of park sizes more exact acreages were determined. CDD/Gubman first presented the approved construction pla n for the new Washington Street Park atthe intersection of Washington and Lincoln Streets. This .3 acre site has a tot lot, open green space, gazebo, five picnic tables, three benches and a walkway. This park is a neighborhood park and does not accommodate off-street parking. This park is intended to serve the neighborhood and visitors would have to park on the street. The next larger park is Longview Park South which was about .83 developed acres and has planned for it basketball court, turf volleyball court, tot lot, two picnic tables and a barbecue. Stardust Park is .98 acres and features a tot lot, open green space, two benches and a paved walking trail. Longview Park North is .99 acres with .8 acres improved. There isa grove/grouping ofvegetation attherear portion ofthe sitethat reduces the usable acreage. This park includes a tot lot, open green, two benches and a paved walking trail. Summitridge Mini Park (down slope from the Diamond Bar Center) is about 1.27 acres and is entirely passive green space. Starsh ine Park is 1.66 acres and includes tot lot, open green space, two picnic tables, two benches, a barbecue and a concrete walkway. Heritage Park is about 3.4 acres and includes a 1.5 acre softball field, tot lot, open green space, a recreation building, five picnic tables, three barbecues and a concrete walkway. He showed a diagram of the overview of the parks to scale so that the Commissioners could get a better idea of what they would look like on Site D. He overlayed the polygons onto the diagram to give the Commissioners an idea of the relative size of that park within Site D. C/Lee asked if there was a general standard or formula for a park size with respect to population or households. He thought the inclusion of small sites was irrelevant to Site without having a formula to guide them. Where is the formula or general understanding for the standard for park sizes and population ratio? CDD/Gubman said he did not have that information for C/Lee but there is a standard amount of recreation space per capita or per 1,000 persons. He does not have that informatio n because that is not what was requested for this evening's meeting. The direction staff was given was to provide options for a park or open space area so that is the focus of this presentation. C/Lee said he understood but what he wants to know is there a standard size or shape that should have a certain foundation and why did staff bring in the small size parks and how was it appropriate for this project. Without a general understanding about size and population ratio and park size it is very difficult to and erstand. CDD/Gubman said the reason he is showing these parks is because there was a menu of amenities the Commission asked for, and needed a better understanding ofthe acreage needed to accommodate them. VC/Nolan said that staff brought back to the Planning Commission a good visual and it MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 16 PLANNING COMMISSION helps to see the possible locations for the park C/Shah said that this park could be in one of those green areas shown on the drawing where the trees are shown and the roads can go around it. CDD/Gubman said hewould say itthat itcan be adjacent to those green areas. A lotof those green areas are slopes so it will give some visual contiguity if the park is abutte d against those green areas. C/Shah said it could be part and parcel of the overall development. CDD/Gubman agreed. C/Shah asked the area of the commercial portion of the project and CDD/Gubman responded 10.1 acres, about three times the size of Heritage Park. C/Lee asked if there were a certain number of people that could use a certain sized park. For example, Washington Park is 0.8 acre — how many peop le can it accommodate. CDD/Gubman said he did not have that information. C/Lee said that there should be a certain standard to build a park - a park based on the population of neighbors. CDD/Gubman reiterated that he did not have that information available. VC/Nolan asked atwhat point does a park need its own parking lot. There are pocket parks that are less than half an acre and to provide guesst imation of how large would a park bebefore itneeds itsown dedicated parking orparking that would beinclusive of the commercial lot. CDD/Gubman said itwould depend on context. Aneighborhood park is going to use neighborhood streets for parking or it is going to be accessed by pedestrians in the immediate vicinity. This park given its adjacency to an arterial and potentially not being within a neighborhood, it is go ing to need to rely on the off street parking provided by the shopping center. Mark Rodgers took the podium and explained to the Commission that he would lead them through an interactive sketch exercise to illustrate concepts of how usable public spaces could be integrated into a commercial shopping center environment. Hethen proceeded, using the auditorium's overhead projection system, to sketch diagrams onto Site D base maps to show different ways buildings and public plazas coul d be configured on the commercial portion of the site. VC/Nolan said she appreciated all of the presentations. It really puts a name to the face. VC/Nolan said that she visited a number of parks in the area. She visited both Longview Parks, Stardust Park, Starshine Park, Washington Park and other parks outside of the area. The smaller parks in residential areas did not fitwhat she envisions. The parks that she visited today were basically used by residents within those few blocks. Of all of those parks she visited there wasn't one person at any ofth em and itwas during after school hours. She envisions something that is for the community. Something that can be used by everyone. She said they talked about this being the gateway to Diamond Bar and she would like to see something that is visual. V/C Nolan said that she liked how it is MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 17 PLANNING COMMISSION incorporated with residential. She said that a park area less than an acre and a half would not be worth the effort to include in the project. She envisions more than a pocket park, although, pocket parks serve a great purpose - no discredit to them, however, they look like two lots that were planted with grass to make it look like a playground - they do serve a purpose for that immediate neighborhood, however, she does not see a pocket park being right for this kind of environment. Before the April meeting she visited a number of parks that she shared with Mr. Gubman and a number of them even had dog parks. When we talk about the social aspect of these park like areas, they were hugely populated, they were very nice environments that did brin g those communities, e.g., elderly and young, together throughout the day. V/C Nolan said that she did not care for the park area being in the residential area. She wan is to see this as something that can be used by the community at large. C/Shah said hethought itwas a good presentation. If there is a park in one area it's a question of maintaining it and who is going to mainta in it. If it becomes part of the public, then the property owner is going to say why am I paying for it. He always believes in rewarding designs. Frank Gehry is a famous architect known throughout the world. He has created these kind of spaces. He said that he has created at mass transit stations where it becomes a living and breathing space for the towns. He said that he sees that vision here that instead of identifying one area, the space should flow - there should be green, there should be areas where people can go and sit and in the commercial area that is best utilized for the people who are coming for shopping, who are visiting, going to the restaurant, etc. In the residential area where the other two areas are proposed maybe it can be combined with the water quality management areas and where the slopes are combined with itso itbecomes a larger area where the local community -the people living there - can use it. Providing a park for the entire City is the City's responsibility, not this property owner's responsibility. He said that he would like to see that this property owner maintain a park fortheir own use and in the commercial letitsplit out throughout the commercial area. For residential, maybe we can identify a third of an acre in each lot and whatever way the designer designs it along with the other green spaces. In the commercial area maybe a third of an acre orwhatever wedecide which could be spread around and make it a nice architectural feature for the people who come to shop in that area. It could be mixture where we do not dictate a location or we dictate an area where the future designer designs and comes back to the Commission and at that time the Commission again reviews it and then see whether it fits into the environment in which itis designed because we don't know the current environment of the future design. We assume so many things. Why assume? Wait. Identify the need and wait for the design. C/Lee said he thinks the park is the main point of our discussion but mainly he'd like to give his comment regarding the Site D plan. First of a II, we always encourage people to participate in the meeting and ask them to give us input but somehow after wefinish extensive talking and discussions he does not see any reflection of the residents' ideas MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 18 PLANNING COMMISSION and input. Somehow that is not the recommended way to do the public meeting. Secondly, this site project is seeking a zone change from lowdensity to the Specific Plan and the Specific Plan includes a density of 20 units per acre. When you see the surrounding area most houses are 6,000 to 12,000 square feet but compared to the numbers in this one that size asks us for about five times more high density zone change and he does not think that is appropriate. Also, there is an H -Mart shopping center across from Site D and a lot of business owners came to a higher rent rate before the renovation and now Site D project asks us to give approval for 150,000 square foot commercial area and there will betwo majorshopping centers that will compete with each other. He has visited the H -Mart shopping center and sees many small businesses that have closed and several ownerships have been changed. They are suffering from the economy and the higher rent and then we place another shopping center within distance and small business owners will suffer more and possibly wewill see more empty spaces in the future. He said that this did not make sense at all. C/Lee said that if we must develop Site D then he believes that we need to develop single-family residences or combine the single-family and high density. The commercial site doesn't make sense at all to him. VC/Nolan said that adding a park to the commercial area does reflect the concerns of the community. They want to keep this space green. It doesn't look liketo someextent that's not going to happen, but it does reflect that concern. She said that by reducing the commercial to a small extent does alleviate it being just this huge commercial lot. She does like the idea of the urban park -like setting for the use of the commercial, for the use of the residents in regard to restaurant and like outdo or seating. VC/Nolan exampled Downtown Brea Birch Street. But she does think this does serve the purpose for the neighborhood. Making the commercial area smaller, and incorporating a park into this area can tie in very well with the commercial use -build ing a path - making it trail where it is marked off for size, for distance, for walking , for exercise, and incorporating that with the residential, with the commercial and with the park. Chair/Tomg, in response to C/Lee's comments that we do not reflect the community's comments stated the Commission has gone through this process based on a legal process that staff explained during the last meeting with respect to working through the entire process overtime with public meetings, and public hearings. On April 27 staff responded to all of the questions from residents. After the Commissioners heard all of the input and staffs responses the Commission decided at the last meeting that it wanted more information regarding a park in the proposed project. All proper protocol has been followed and the Commission has considered the project on its merits in a legal manner. Chair/Tonng thanked staff for their presentation that helped the Commission to better understand how a park of different sizes would impact the commercial and residential areas. He understands that parks are maintained by the City and that would mean additional costs to the City. He concurred with C/Shah that the "park" space be more MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 19 PLANNING COMMISSION integrated public space. He also liked Mr. Roger's suggestion of a trail from the residential area through the center ofthe commercial siteto the corner ofthe Diamond Bar entrance and also atthe corner ofCherrydale, iftheCommission were decide to add one third of an acre, and take one third of an acre on to that comer. He said that he discussed with CDD/Gubman a third option. We may want o keep the options open for the B level plan by allowing that future developments must choose between the two options instead offorce choosing one option atthis time. At the plan level B the builder would have to come back to the Commission with a more detailed plan. Atthis time, the Planning Commission could consider the minimum acreage it would want to put into either a park or integrated space. That's something we might want to consider now. And if we cannot make a decision regarding a park or integra ted space — option one and two, the Commission could consider the third option. He asked CDD/Gubman to confirm the third option. CDD/Gubman explained that staff provided two options in its report and the Commission could come up with a third option that is a synthesis of those two to be proposed atthe B level. C/Shah said he felt Chair/Tomg was on the right track. He wanted to make the point that the Commission may want to identify the commercial portion be designated as one third of an acre of a park and one-quarter of an acre for each residential lot based on level B so that in the future the builder can propose to develo p the property in a certain way and comeback for the Commission's final determination and approval. At least if we give them the guidelines, they can interpret how to incorporate the space depending on how the design develops for both the commercial and residenti al. Chair/Tomg said hewas concerned about the residential because in the commercialarea the public can use the area but in a residential area that may be restricted to the residential within the project. He said that he would prefer to set the limits in the commercial site for public space. C/Shah said his intentio n was to have a park for the residents ofthe project because the City should not be in the business of maintaining any ofthe park area. VC/Nolan agreed with Chair/Tomg that this should stay in the commercialarea. Shesaid that the 202 homes are going to generate tax revenue. The community pays for parks with taxes that comes back to the City for all the parks. The project needs a park, and a park of this type. The Commission is in a role to recomme nd to the City Council our thoughts. At some point the City Council is going to vot eon this matter. VC/Nolan questioned CDD/Gubman that if the recommendation of C/Shah gets to the point where it is an off number as far as the vote, as far as this going forward in passing the resolution, is this an all-or-nothin g package? CDD/Gubman said the Commission will take three actions on three separate resolutions. Just to clarify, it is not an all or nothing issue. But the reason staff suggested the Commission reconsider the passage ofthe firsttwo resolutions atthatlastmeeting isthat MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 20 PLANNING COMMISSION these are all actions related to one project and there could bepotential timing issueswith expiration dates and other statutes of limitation if the Commission were to split the dates apart. So the only all or nothing aspect is to make all of the decisions atone meeting. Chair/Tonng questioned whether the Commission should make a determination on the amount of park coverage for the residential site, orshou Id the Commission focus on the commercial site. CDD/Gubman said his understanding was thatthe Commission was looking at either a dedicated park or some alternative public space. For the residential component, he believed the intent or expectation in the Specific Plan is that there will be private amenities forthat residential community whether it is a clubhouse, pool, and other such features that they would maintain through association dues but itwill beprivately used. This park feature that the Commission has been discussing is really something that is in addition to whatever private open space amenities that would be incorporated into the residential community that is part of the Specific Plan. VC/Nolan said that she believed this provides more reason why we don't need pocket parks in a residential area. They are going to have their own facilities or their own areas for those residents. She is not opposed to reducing the commercial area, it can be incorporated with the commercial, with the shopping, an d with the restaurants. She visited the parks and anything short of an acre and a half doesn't make much sense. Chair/Tomg said that at the last meeting he expressed his interested in a more integrated area (option 2). One of the comments from a resident is the desire to have an urban City center with a shopping center and some type of park space that all would be able to visit and atthe same time enjoy shopping and dining. The space is important. We want to reserve a space for this use. He liked the trail path Mr. Rogers described in his presentation. VC/Nolan asked if the Commission will re -vote on the resolutions voted on at the last meeting. ACA/Wohlenberg said that there are three resolutions, two of which have been approved by vote of 3-1 and the Commission reconsidered those and tabled those until this time for a revote and the reconsideration essentially removed the previous vote and now they are up for a vote again. The third resolution the Commission never reached consensus and so that will be up for a vote at this meeting. CDD/Gubman recommended that the Commission complete the discussion on Item 3 and see what, if any consensus can be reached. C/Shah recommended that the Commission reconsider the previous approved resolutions and consider Option 2 for a maximum of one acre. C/Shah said that VC/Nolan convinced him that the residential should manage their own common space. MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 21 PLANNING COMMISSION CDD/Gubman said that in Option 1 the residential development as envisioned would still have its community, its HOA amenities. To do Option 1 in the residential area would be to reduce the size of the residential area to put a park in that area. The idea of the park is undetermined at this time where on the 30 acres it would finally reside but if the Commission is going to recommend the park option itwill reduce the acreage of either the residential orcommercial side ofthe project. VC/Nolan asked how they should proceed. ACA/Wohlenberg said that all three actions are essentially taking place simultaneously so if the Commission wants to discuss 3 and vote on that item first because he believes itwill bemostdifficult, that would befine and then the Commission can move to Items 1 and 2. VC/Nolan moved to recommend that the City Council approve Specific Plan No. 2007-01 to establish land use and development standards to facilitate and govern the development ofup to 202 residential dwelling units, up to 153,985 gross square feet of commercial floor area; and approximately 10.15 acres of open space areas, easements and right-of-way, and Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes with the amendment to include 1.5 acres ofdedi cated park space within the commercial parcel. Mr. Rogers clarified that the water quality features arenot a functioning part ofa park. When he says "ambient" they may be adjacent and provide area for green space and planting, etc., but you do not recreate in them. We h ave calculated, for purposes of water quality, the area necessary to clean thewater underthe current standards and itis approximately about one third ofan acre and two shallowbasins lessthan three feet in depth. These areas collectively can be of benefit to, by virtue of their adjacency, creating a park environment and yet not have functioning uses within them. And it might result, if we so chose to modify the circulation, in a configuration that would allow those areas to be adjacent to a similar type of area the size of which would beat the Commission's discretion. C/Shah said that as long as the park isadjace ntto the area it would be acceptable Chair/Tonng asked VC/Nolan if the dedicated park area would be managed by the City or is that going to be managed by the commercial site. VC/Nolan responded that the park would have to be managed by the City. C/Shah said that the park has to be dedicated to the city for the community's use. CDD/Gubman explained that Option 1 as presented in staffs report would bededicated City Park as part of the City Park system. C/Shah said he iked the idea of the park having to be dedicated to the City, because otherwise, if people are going to use itthe MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 22 PLANNING COMMISSION private property owner can put up a fence not allowing entrance. If people want itto be used bythe community and anybody can use itthen ithas to bededicated to the City. CDD/Gubman said the way this would play out if it is to be a public park, is the developer would build it, dedicated itto the City and then the City takes the keys and ongoing maintenance. C/Shah said then ithas to be built to the City's standards. Chair/Tomg asked if the park would be in one place or broken up? VC/Nolan felt it should all be in one place because it was too small of an area to divide it up. ACA/Wohlenberg said hebelieved the motion was still being formulated so staff could make sure it knows exactly what is being proposed. C/Shah said hethought ifthey were going to develop a City Park ofone and one half acre including an adjacent water quality management area, whatever itcalculates to be, that amenity has to be taken from the commercial lot. He said one and one-half acres is a good size. CDD/Gubman said he heard the 1.5 acres and what he ne eds is clarification on how much usable park area is wanted. C/Lee said that if other fellow Commissioners want to put a size in now when eventually the adoption will be decided by the City Council members does not make sense. VC/Nolan disagreed. She suggested that one and one third acres of usable park space area be adjacent to the area off ofCherrydale, adjacent to the water use area. C/Lee asked VC/Nolan asked if there was any meaning or foundation for why she decided on 1.3 acre. VC/Nolan said yes. She said she walked a couple of parks and the ones that were under an acre were just a couple of small house lot sizes. The Starshine Park was a nice sized park of usable space. She walked off parks counting off how many paces it takes and gone from park to park and saw what it felt like, what it looks like including the dog park spaces and they were comfortable area. If the space is too small it did not make any sense to include a park of that small size. She added that she MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 23 PLANNING COMMISSION understands that the park should not take so much away from the commercial that it hurts that portion of it but she thinks 1.3 acres is an appropr iate minimum. C/Shah said that within the last year and a half he ha d been involved with the design of about one and one-quarter acres and he agreed with VC/Nolan. He said that he could visualize it and could see it being used. CDD/Gubman said the more exact size of Starshine Park is one and two-thirds acres. VC/Nolan said it was a very comfortable setting, the design of it and the open space. She said she visualized an area where people can actually use it, not just open land for the sake of open land but park settings. An acre and two-thirds of space was doable for her. C/Shah said hewas comfortable with moving forward with the motion for 1.3 acres and Option 2. But the word "usable" space for the park shou Id be included. VC/Nolan asked C/Shah to confirm that itwould beone space and not broken up. C/Shah concurred. ACA/Wohlenberg proposed the recommended resolution language for either option to be included within the staff report. He read the propose d language to the Commission, the original ofwhich would befound on Page 4 of 15 in the staff report. This would beto add to the resolution Section B.5.a.4 to read: "At the time the development is formally submitted to the Planning Commission for consideration, the subsequent plan shall incorporate within its boundaries a neighborhood park ofat least 1.3 acres usable area dedicated to the Citywithin the commercial development adjacent to slopeareas orwaste water management areas and shall incorporate features such as but not limited to, a tot lot, picnic tables, seating areas, shade structures." And he would also include Section B.5.b.8 as originally stated on Page 5 of 15 of staffs report. C/Shah asked if the amended language could include that "the park be designed to the City's standards and when completed should be dedicated to the City if the City is willing to accept it." ACA/Wohlenberg responded that after where in his previous language he said "dedicated to the City" they could add "and designed and constructed to City standards." And, not waste water management areas but "water quality management areas." He was reminded those are two different thing s. Chair/Tonng asked ifthere was any motion. C/Shah moved to General Plan amendment No. 2007-03, Zone Change No. 2007-04, Specific Plan No. 2007-01, Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 and Environmental Impact Report No. 2007-02, reconsider the previous passage ofthetwo previous considerations and the third one to be added to that one with the language provided by the counsel. ACA/Wohlenberg clarified for the record that the CEQA action is taking place first and that staffs opinion and recommendation that this alteration is within the existing scope of the EIR. C/Shah concurred. VC/Nolan received confirmation that the acreage was 1.3. MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 24 PLANNING COMMISSION V/C Nolan Seconded the motion. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Shah, VC/Nolan, Chair/Torng NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Lee ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson Chair/Tonng addressed the audience and asked that anyone with questions or concerns should contact the City staff and attend the City Council hearings on this matter. 9. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMA TIONAL ITEMS: C/Lee said he really appreciated his colleague's efforts a nd energy to make a better picture for Site D but to him the best scenario for the residents is that Site D should be developed for single residences and public parks. He believed that to be the best scenario. But WVUSD and the developer don't do that because they cannot generate income, he understood that. Hopefully, we made a bett er decision and then the result would be best for most people. C/Shah thanked staff and the consultant for doing an excellent job. Everyonestayed with the project and gave the Commission good insight and clarification. To the general public, our job and our intent is to see that we make a decision very seriously and to the benefit of the community, benefit of the City ofDiamond Bar residents and to make sure that what the Commission does is legally applicable so the Commission is making a recommendation to the City Council and the City Council will make the final determination. VC/Nolan congratulated Chair/Torng for his dedication to Diamond Bar and for his Volunteer ofthe Year award atthe Birthday Celebration. Chair/Tonng thanked his colleagues. This is a difficult project and we did itand we did it together even when we have different opinions. That is why we have five Commissioners. All opinions count, and that is very important. He appreciated everyone's efforts and especially staff and the consultant. Thanks for the good job and keep up the good work. 10. STAFF COMM ENTS/INFORMA TIONAL ITEMS: 10.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects. CDD/Gubman reminded the Commission to adjourn tonight's meeting to the Special Meeting of May 13, 2010, at 6:30 p.m. MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 25 PLANNING COMMISSION 11. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As listed in tonight's agenda. MAY 11, 2010 PAGE 26 PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Chairman Torng adjourned the regular meeting at 9:47 p.m. to the Special Meeting of May 13, 2010, at 6:30 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 25th day of May, 2010. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, Greg Gubman Community Development Director Tony Torng, Chairman Attachment 8 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2010-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 2008021014) AND RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM AND ADOPT FINDINGS OF FACT AND A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE SITE D SPECIFIC PLAN AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 70687 FOR A SITE COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 30.36 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BREA CANYON ROAD AND DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD,. DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBERS 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-903 and 8714-015-001). A. RECITALS On July 1, 2007, the property owner/co-applicant, Walnut Valley School District, and property owner/co-applicant/lead agency, City of Diamond Bar, executed a Memorandum of Understanding whereby the parties agreed to collaborate in the planning of the future land use for the approximately 30.36 - acre parcel property located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, California, so that both parties may each advance their respective objectives for the disposition of the property. 2. The following approvals are requested of the City Council [Items (a) through (d) below are collectively referred to as the "Project"): (a) General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C) to Specific Plan (SP); (b) Zone Change No. 2007-04 to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential (RL), Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM), and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan (c) Specific Plan No. 2007-01 to adopt the Site D Specific Plan for the approximately 30.36 acre site to facilitate the development of a maximum of 202 residential dwelling units; a maximum of 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial floor area; and approximately 10.16 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights-of-way; (d) Tentative Tract 'Map No. 70687 to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes; and (e) Environmental Impact Report 2007-02 to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report, which provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the Specific Plan area. The Final EIR includes mitigation measures for the project, addresses project alternatives, identifies the environmentally superior project alternative, and adopts a statement of overriding considerations; Notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on April 2, 2010. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the Project site and public notices were posted at the City's designated community posting sites. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the project site was posted with a display board and the notice was posted at three other locations within the project vicinity; and On April 13, April 27, and May 11, 2010, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all interested individuals, and concluded said hearing on that date. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct; 2. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the project identified above in this Resolution required an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). EIR (SCH No. 2008021014) has been prepared according to the requirements of the California Environmental Qualify Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. The 45 -day public review period for the EIR began June 25, 2009, and ended August 10, 2009. Furthermore, the Planning Commission has reviewed the EIR and related documents in reference to the Project; 3. The Planning Commission based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, hereby finds and determines that conditions have been incorporated into the Application, which mitigate or avoid significant adverse environmental impacts identified in Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2008021014) except as to those effects which are identified and made the subject of a Statement of Overriding Considerations which this Planning Commission recommends to City Council and finds are clearly outweighed by the economic, social, and other benefits of the proposed project, as more fully set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council certify the EIR to be complete and adequate; and adopt the Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Report and Monitoring Program attached herein as Exhibits "A" and "B" and hereby incorporated by reference. EIR 2007-02 — PC Resolution No. 2010-12 The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to: Walnut Valley Unified School District, 880 South Lemon Avenue, Walnut, CA 91789. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11th DAY OF MAY 2010, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. By: / T, orng, Chairm� I, Greg Gubman, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 111h day of May, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: shah, VC/Nolan, Chair/Torng NOES: Commissioners: Lee ABSENT: Commissioners: N�_Tson ABSTAIN: Commissioners: None ATTEST: Greg Gubman, cretary 3 EIR 2007-2007-02 Exhibit A FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT — "SITE D SPECIFIC PLAN STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO, 2008021014 Section 21081 and 21081.5, California Public Resources Code Sections 15091, 15092, and 15083, Title 14, Chapter 3, California Code of Regulations 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1'.1 Project Location The approximately 30.36 -acre project site is located within the corporate boundaries of the City Diamond Bar (City or Lead Agency), an incorporated community situated along the western edge of Los Angeles County (County). The project site is located in the southwestern portion of the City on the southeast corner of Brea Canyon. Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard. The project site is bordered on the north by Diamond Bar Boulevard, on the west by Brea Canyon Road, and on the south, east, acid southwest by existing single-family detached dwelling units. Existing engineered slope areas, including v -ditch drainage features, separate the project site from' existing homes on the south and west. Commercial and office professional uses are located to the north of Diamond Bar Boulevard and west of Brea Canyon Road. The project site is generally located east of State Route 57 (SR -57 Freeway) and Brea Canyon Road and southeast of the intersection of the SR -57 Freeway, Diamond Bar Boulevard, and Brea Canyon Cutoff. The project site is located to the north of.the terminus of Castle Rock Road and Pasado Drive. 1.2 Project Description The City of Diamond Bar (City or Lead Agency) and the Walnut Valley Unified School District (WVUSD or District) own separate properties within the corporate boundaries of the City, separated by an open flood control channel (Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel) operated by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LADFCD or County), a division of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW). The WVUSD's governing body has determined that the District's approximately 28.71 -acre property (Site D or District Property) is unnecessary for future school use and has declared it to "surplus property." The City's 0.98 - acre property (City Property) was acquired so that City would have access to property to address future traffic impacts as well as the existing traffic issues in this area. The Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel (Brea Canyon Channel), which runs generally parallel to Brea Canyon Road, separates the District Property from the City Property. The LACFCD's approximately 0.67 -acre facility (County Property) is presently an open box culvert. In accordance with the LACFC.D's "Guidelines for Overbuilding and Air Rights," in combination with such other standards and procedures as may be established by the County, leasehold interests in the "air rights" above the channel could be conveyed to a non -County entity, thus allowing the channel to be covered and the lands situated above that facility used for other purposes. On July 1, 2007 the City and the WVUSD executed a "Memorandum of Understanding" (MOU) whereby the parties agreed to a collaborative planning process for the District Property and the City Property whereby both entities could advance their respective objectives for the disposition of those land holdings. Under the terms of the MOU, as authorized under the provisions of Sections 65450-65457 of the California Government Code (CGC), the City agreed to prepare and process a "specific plan" for the combined properties for the purpose of establishing design and development parameters for the use of those properties. The proposed "'Site D' Specific Plan" (SDSP) project encompasses approximately 30.36 -acres and contains a number of related elements, including both specific actions and activities which are presently before the City of Diamond Bar (city or Lead Agency) and later activities which can be reasonably anticipated as a result of those actions presently under review. From a planning perspective, the Lead Agency is considering the possible adoption of a proposed specific plan (Specific Plan No. 2007-01) authorizing the development of 202 dwelling units and 153,985 gross leaseable square feet of commercial use within the 30.36 -acre specific plan boundaries. From a project perspective, it is assumed that the project site would be developed to accommodate those permitted and conditionally permitted land uses authorized under the specific plan. and developed to the maximum intensity allowable thereunder. Based on the site's existing "City of Diamond Bar General Plan" (General Plan) and zoning designations, the proposed project includes a General Plan amendment (GPA No. 2b07-03) from "Public Facility (PF)" and "General Commercial (C)" to "Specific Plan" (SP)," with a corresponding zone change (ZC) from "Low Density Residential (R-1 10,000)," "Low/Medium Density Residential (R-1 7,500)", and "Neighborhood Commercial (C-1)" to "Specific Plan (SP)." Also proposed is the approval of a tentative subdivision map (Tentative Tract Map No. 70687) establishing separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels and creating an internal circulation system and establishing easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes. Following the adoption of the specific plan, the City and the Walnut Valley Unified School District (WVUSD or District) may enter into a transferable development agreement for the purpose of facilitating the implementation of the specific plan and the development of the project site. In addition, the District and the City will cooperate in the al f District's isrct's to one holdings (District Property) and the City's holdings (City Property) more developers, master builders, end users, or other parties. 1.3 Project Objectives As more thoroughly described in the FEIR, both the City and the District have established specific objectives concerning the proposed project and/or the project site. It is the objective of the City to promote and facilitate the attainment of those goals, objectives, plans, and policies as contained in the General Plan. Specifically, those objectives include, but are not limited to, the following excerpts from the -General Plan: (1) Require that new development be compatible with surrounding land uses (Strategy 2.2.1, Land Use Element); and (2) Balance the retention of the natural environment with its conversion to urban form (Strategy 3.3.1, Land Use Element). The City has elected to prepare and process a specific plan for the proposed project for the purpose of defining the types of permitted and conditionally permitted land uses that the City believes to be appropriate for the project site and the project setting, to define reasonable limits to the intensity and density of those uses, and to establish. the design and development standards for those uses. The following additional broad project objective can be derived from Section 22.60.020 (Applicability) and Section 22.60.060 (Adoption of Specific Plan) in Chapter 22.60 (Specific Plans) of the Municipal Code: Prepare a specific plan which provides for. flexibility, encourages the innovative use of land, provides for the development of. a variety of housing and other development types, assists in the comprehensive master planning of the project site, and is consistent with the General Plan and other adopted goals and policies of the City- Since the MOU between the City and the .District constitute a declaration of the intent of both parties, that document contains information that can be utilized in the formulation of project objectives. The following additional objectives can be derived from that document: (1) District desires the disposition of the School Property to yield the maximum return to the District for the benefit of its constituents and its educational mission; and (2) City desires that the School Property and the City Property be developed in a manner as to assure compatibility.with and to meet the needs of the surrounding area and to provide a desirable level of sales tax revenues to the City. As further indicated in the MOU, of the usable acreage, it is explicitly specified that a minimum of 50 percent of the property will be designated for residential development and 50 percent will be designated for commercial use, exclusive of necessary infrastructure. Based on those actions, the following additional objectives can be established: (1) With regards to the project of site-specific land-use policies that allow, in reasonably site, pursue the establishment comparable acreage, the development of both commercial and residential uses of the rl o e p accommodating the provision of additional housing opportunities and the introduction of revenue-generating uses; and (2) Establish a specific plan as the guiding land-use policy mechanism to define the nature and intensity of future development and to establish design and development parameters for the project site, so as to allow conveyance of the subject property to one or more developers and/or master builders and provide to the purchasers reasonable assurance as to the uses that would be authorized on the project site and the nature of those exactions required for those uses. 1.3.1 Future Growth Needs It is a further objective of the City of Diamond Bar to meet its fair share of the region's housing .needs. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is a key tool for local governments to plan for anticipated growth. The RHNA quantifies the anticipated need for housing within each jurisdiction for the 81/,. -year period from January 2006 to July 2014_ Communities then determine how they will address this need through the process of updating the Housing Elements of their General Plans. The current RHNA was adopted by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) in July 2007. The future need for housing is determined primarily by the forecasted growth in households in a community. Each new household created by a child moving out of a parent's home or by a family moving to a community for employment creates the need for a housing unit. The housing need for new households is then adjusted to maintain a desirable level of vacancy to promote housing choice and mobility. An adjustment is also made to account for units expected to be lost due to demolition, natural disaster, or conversion to non -housing uses. The sum of these factors — household growth, vacancy need, and replacement need — determines the construction need for a community. Total housing need is then distributed among four income categories on the basis of the county's income distribution, with adjustments to avoid an over -concentration of lower-income households in any community. In July 2007 SCAG, adopted the final RHNA growth needs for each of the county's cities plus the unincorporated area. The total housing growth need for the City of Diamond Bar during the 2006-2014 planning period is 1,090 units. Site D is one of the very few available sites in the City that can significantly contribute toward meeting Diamond Bars RHNA obligation. 1.3.2 Senate_ _Bill 375 SB 375 (Steinberg) is California state legislation that became law effective January 1, 2009. It prompts California regions to work together to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from cars and light trucks. This new law would achieve this objective by requiring integration of planning processes for transportation, land -use and housing. The plans emerging from this process will lead to more efficient communities that provide residents with alternatives to using single occupant vehicles. SB 375 requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop regional reduction targets for automobiles and light trucks GHG emissions. The regions, in turn, are tasked with creating "sustainable communities strategy,' (SCS) which combine transportation and land -use elements in order to achieve the emissions reduction target, if feasible. SB 375 also offers local governments regulatory and other incentives to encourage more compact new development and transportation alternatives. In order to achieve the greenhouse gas reduction goals set out in California Assembly Bill'32: The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32), SB 375 focuses on reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and urban sprawl. AB 32 was the nation's first law to limit greenhouse gas emissions and SB 375 was enacted thereafter to more specifically address the transportation and land use components of greenhouse gas emissions. Through the implementation of regional SCS plans by 2020, the goal of SB 375 is to see a significant decrease in greenhouse gas emissions for the environment and an increase in quality of life for residents. There are two mutually important facets to the SB 375 legislation: reducing VMT and encouraging more compact, complete, and efficient communities for the future , SCAG and the San Gabriel Valley Council of Govemments—the subregional planning organization of which Diamond Bar is a member—are in the process establishing the parameters for an SCS for the subregions comprising the SCAG region. Although the SCS is not yet adopted, many local jurisdictions are making efforts to encourage developments that reduce VMT. The Site D Specific Plan furthers the objectives of SB 375 by facilitating horizontal mixed use with pedestrian connections between the residential and commercial components. In the absence of transit infrastructure (other than bus routes), mixed use developments can play a significant role in local efforts to reduce VMT. 2.0 INTRODUCTION TO FINDINGS 2.1 Format of Findings These Findings have been divided into a number of sections. Those sections and the information presented therein are. briefly outlined below. Secti_—_on 1_0 (Project Description). This section provides an overview of the proposed project, describes its location, and identifies the project's stated objectives. Section 2.0 (Introduction to Findings). This section provides an introduction to these Findings, and describes their purpose and statutory and regulatory basis. . Section 3.0 (General Findings). In addition to the specific findings presented herein, this section identifies the general CEQA findings of the Lead Agency Excerpts from Senate Bill 375 Factsheet published by SCAG (2010) Section 4.0 (Findings Regarding the Significant or Potentially Significant Environmental Effects of the Proposed Project which cannot Feasibly be Mitigated to Below a Level of Significance). This section sets forth findings regarding the significant or potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project which cannot feasibly be mitigated to a'less-than-significant level based on the threshold of significance criteria presented in the FEIR and which will or may result from the approval, construction, habitation, and/or use of the project and/or the project site. Section 5-0 (Findings Regarding the Significant or Potentially Significant Environmental Effects of the Proposed Project which can Feasibly be Mitigated to Below a Level of Significance). This section sets forth findings regarding the significant or potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project which either do not manifest at a level of significance based on the threshold of significance criteria presented in the FOR or which can feasibly be mitigated to a less -than -significant level through the imposition of standard conditions of approval and/or those mitigation measures included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the project's "Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program" (MRMP). " section 6,0 (Findings Regarding the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program). This section contains findings with regards to the MRMP. Section 7.0 (Findings Regarding Alternatives not Selected for Implementation). This section provides Endings regarding those alternatives to the proposed project which were examined in the FEIR and which were considered by the advisory and decision-making bodies of the Lead Agency as part of their deliberations concerning the proposed project but which were not selected by the City Council for implementation following those deliberations. section (Project Benefits). This section presents a number of identifiable community benefits —attributable to the proposed project. Section 9_0 (Statement of Overriding Considerations). This section contains the Lead Agency's "Statement of Overriding Considerations" (SOC) setting forth the City's reasons and rationale for firiding that specific economic, legal, social,. technological, and other considerations associated with or attributable to the proposed project outweigh the project's significant or potentially significant unavoidable adverse environmental effects. As applicable for each of the above referenced sections, the significant or potentially significant environmental effects identified in the FEIR have been referenced therein. Following each referenced environmental effect, the Lead Agency has identified the findings and facts that constitute the bases for the Lead Agency's actions. The findings set forth in each of the following sections are supported by facts in the administrative record of the proposed project. The referenced findings and facts presented herein may have relevancy both in the context of the specific environmental effect for which those findings and facts are indicated and for other environmental effects identified in the FOR and in these Findings. For the purpose of brevity, those findings and facts presented herein are not duplicated under multiple topical issues but should be assumed to collectively constitute the factual basis utilized by the decision-making body of the Lead Agency in making these Findings. Except as othenNise noted in the FEIR, the threshold of significance criteria' utilized by the Lead Agency to assess the significance of project -related and cumulative impacts are based on those 5 criterion contained in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines and constitute criterion which have been used by both the Lead Agency with regards to CEQA documentation prepared by the Lead Agency for other projects within the City and by other jurisdictions throughout California. 2.2 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations The following statement of facts and findings (Findings) has been prepared by the Lead Agency in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as codified in Section 21000 et seq. of the California Public Resources Code (PRC), and the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (State CEQA Guidelines), as codified in Section 15000 et seq., in Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), for the SDSP project and. for any and all discretionary actions reasonably associated therewith. For planning- purposes, the Lead Agency, the Governor's Office of Planning and Research - State Clearinghouse (SCH), and/or other responsible agencies have or may assign case or file numbers to certain actions now contemplated by the City, by the SCH, and/or by those responsible agencies. Those case or file numbers (and the assigning agency) include, but may not be limited to: (1) SCH No 2008021014 (SCH); (2) Environmental Impact Report 2007-02 (city)' (3) General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 (City); (4) Zone Change No. 2007-04 (City); (5) Specific Plan No. 2007-01 (City); and (6) Tentative Map No. 70687. Reference to the SDSP herein is intended to be inclusive of: (1) each of the above referenced discretionary actions; (2) such additional discretionary and ministerial actions as may be required for or associated with the construction, habitation, occupancy, use, and maintenance of the SDSP and the real property thereupon for the residential, non-residential, and infrastructure - related uses proposed within the geographic area examined in the "Final Environmental Impact Report -'Site D' Specific Plan, SCH No. 2008021014" (FEIR), whether or not included within the geographic area. encompassed by the SDSP; and (4) those standard conditions, mitigation measures, and other conditions of approval as may be imposed thereupon by the City's decision-making bodies and the decision-making bodies of those responsible agencies with jurisdiction thereupon. The State CEQA Guidelines provide that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report (EIR) has been completed which identifies one or more significant environmental effects on the environment that would occur if the proposed project is approved or carried out unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects. This document presents the findings of fact and substantial evidence that must be made by the City of Diamond Bar City Council (City Council), acting in that body's capacity as the Lead Agency s decision-making body, prior to determining whether to certify the FEIR and approve or conditionally approve the SDSP. The possible findings specified in Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, which shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record, include: (1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the final EIR. [This finding shall be referred to herein as "Finding (1)"j (2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the findings. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can .and should be adopted by such other agency. [chis finding shall be referred to herein as "Finding (2)'7 (3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible -the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. [this finding shall be referred to herein as "Finding (3)"j With respect to those significant effects that are subject to. Finding (1), the agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or lessen significant environmental effects. With respect to those significant effects that are subject to Finding (2), the findings shall not be made if the agency making the findings has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternaves. findings shall dWith reesthe pecis o those signs i ant for effects that are subject to Finding (3), the rejecting identified mitigation measures and alternatives. In accordance with Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City Council makes the following findings for each significant or potentially significant environmental effect identified in the FEIR. Those impacts are categorized under the.corresponding topical headings presented in the FEIR. Reference to mitigation measure numbers herein are as presented in the FEIR and may differ il elect to approve or conditionally approve the SDSP- As indicated in Section 4.0 (Significant or Potentially Significant Environmental Effects which Cannot Feasibly be Mitigated to Below a Level of Significance) herein, a number of significant environmental effects are identified in the FEIR which cannot be avoided or substantially. lessened. In recognition of the continuing existence of significant unavoidable adverse' environmental effects, a statement of overriding considerations (SO4 supported by substantial evidence in the record, is, therefore, required in order for the City to approve the SDSP. The SOC for the SDSP is presented in Section 9.0 (Statement of Overriding Considerations) herein and presents the rationale for the City's approval or conditional approval of the proposed project despite the continuing existence of those unavoidable adverse environmental effects. 2.3 Record of Proceedings . For purposes of CEQA and these Hndiiigs, at a minimum, the record of proceedings for the FEIR consists of the following documents and other evidence. All references to the FEIR herein shall be assumed to . be inclusive of each of the following documents and such other accompanying evidence as may be identified by the City Council: (1) "Initial Study," including all documents expressly cited therein; (2) "Notice of Preparation" (NOP), "Notice of Completion" (NOC), "Notice of Availability' (NOA), "Notice of Determination" (NOD), and all other public notices issued by the Lead Agency in conjunction with this CEQA process; (3) "Draft Environmental Impact Report —'Site D" Specific Plan, SCH No. 2008021014" and "Technical Appendix - Draft Environmental Impact Report —'Site D' Specific Plan, SCH No. 2008021014" (DEIR), including all documents incorporated by reference therein and all written comments submitted by public agencies and other stakeholders during the public, review periods established by the NOP and NOA; (4.) Other site-specific and/or project -specific technical studies and exhibits not included in the FEIR but explicitly referenced therein; (5) "Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report — 'Site D' Specific Plan, SCH No. 2008021014," including all written comments submitted by public agencies and other stakeholders during the public review period established by the NOC; (6) "Minutes of the City of Diamond Bar Neighborhood Forum of Site "D" Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report, Heritage Park Community Center, 2900 S. Brea Canyon Road, Diamond Bar, August 3, 2009," as prepared by the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department (Department); (7) All written and verbal public testimony presented during noticed scoping meetings and public hearings for the proposed project at which public testimony was taken; (8) "Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program" (MRMP), as presented in the DEIR and as subsequently adopted by the City Council; (9) All agendas, staff reports, and approved minutes of the City's Planning Commission and City Council relating to the proposed project; (10) All maps, exhibits, figure, and. text comprising the "'Site D' Specific Plan"; (11) Matters of common knowledge to the City including, but.not limited to, federal, State, and local laws, rule, regulations, and standards; (12) These Findings and all documents expressly cited in these Findings; and (13) Such other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings under Section 21167.6(e) of CEQA. 2.4 Custodian and Location of Records The following information is provided in compliance with Section 21081.6(a)(2) of CEQA and Section 15091(e) of the State CEQA Guidelines. The documents and other materials constituting the administrative record for the City Council's actions related to the FEIR are located at the City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, 21B25 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765-4178. The Community Development Director is the custodian of the administrative record for the proposed project. During the regular business hours of the City, copies of the documents constituting the FEIR's and the SDSP's record of proceedings are available upon request at the offices of the Community Development Department. .3.0 GENERAL FINDINGS In addition to the specific findings identified herein, the City Council hereby finds that: (1) Under CEQA, the City of Diamond Bar is the appropriate "Lead Agency" for the proposed project and during the project's CEQA proceedings no other agency asserted or contested the City's "Lead Agency" status; (2) As part of the CEQA process, in compliance with the provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 18 and the Governor's Office of Planning and Research's (OPR) "Supplement to General Plan Guidelines — Tribal Consultation Guidelines" (2005), the Lead Agency notified the appropriate California Native American tribe of the opportunity to conduct consultation for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural places, referred the proposed action to those tribes that are on the Native American. Heritage Commission (NAHC) contact list that have traditional lands within the agency's jurisdiction, and send notice to tribes that have filed a written request for such notice; (3) in recognition of the fact that the real property examined in the FEIR includes separate properties owned by the City, the 'District, and the County, the Lead Agency conducted extensive consultation with those agencies, in combination with other agencies identified by the Lead Agency in the FEIR, are identified as "Responsible Agencies" under CEQA; 8 (4) Copies of the Initial Study, NOP, DEIR, and NOC were provided to those Responsible Agencies identified in the FEIR and each such agency was provided a specified review period to submit comments thereupon; (5) In compliance with Section 21092.5(a) of CEQA, at least 10 days prior to the certification of the FEIR, the Lead Agency provided its written proposed response to those public agencies that submitted comments to the Lead Agency on the DEIR; (6) The - FOR and all environmental notices associated therewith were prepared in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines and in accordance with the City's local guidelines and procedures; (7) The City Council has independently reviewed and analyzed the FEIR and the FEIR reflects the independent judgment of the City Council; (8) A MRMP has been prepared for the proposed project, identifying those feasible mitigation measures that the City Council has adopted or will likely adopt in order to reduce the potential environmental effects of the proposed project to the maximum extent feasible; (9) The mitigation measures adopted or likely to be adopted by the City Council will be fully implemented in accordance with the MRMP, verification of compliance will be documented, and each measure can reasonably be expected to have the efficacy and produce the post-mitigated consequences assumed in the FEIR; (10) Each of the issues to be resolved, as identified in the FOR and/or subsequently raised in comments received by the City during the deliberation of the City's advisory and decision-making bodies, have been resolved to the satisfaction of the City Council; (11) The potential environmental impacts of the proposed project have been analyzed to the extent feasible at the time of certification of the. FEIR; (12) The City Council reviewed the comments received on the FEIR, including, but not limited to, those comments received following the dissemination of the DEIR and RTC, and the responses thereto and has determined that neither the comments received nor the responses thereto add significant new information under Section 15088.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines; (13) The City Council has not made any decisions that would constitute an irretrievable commitment of resources toward the proposed project prior to the certification of the FOR nor has the City Council previously committed to a definite course of action with respect to the proposed project; (14) Copies of all the documents incorporated by reference in the FEIR are and have been available for review during the regular business hours of the City at the office of the Community Development Department from the custodian of records for such documents; (15) These Findings incorporate by reference such other findings as may be required under Sections 65454, 65455, 66474, 66474.4, 65853, and 65860 of the California Government Code and those corresponding finding required under the "City of Diamond Bar Municipal Code" (Municipal Code); and (16) Having received, reviewed, and considered all information and documents in the record, the City Council has or will impose conditions, mitigation measures, and take other reasonable actions to reduce the environmental effects of the proposed project to the maximum extend feasible and finds as stated in these Findings. 4,0 FINDINGS REGARDING THE SIGNIFICANT OR POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WHICH CANNOT FEASIBLY BE MITIGATED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE The City Council has determined that existing statutes, regulations, donditions of approval, uniform codes, project design features, and/or feasible mitigation measures included in the FEIR and adopted by or likely to be adopted by the City Council will result in a substantial reduction of most but not all of those environmental effects identified' in the FEIR. Notwithstanding the existence of those statutes and regulations and the adoption of those conditions and measures, the City Council finds that the following significant or potentially significant environmental effects will continue to exist. 4.1 Air Quality 4.1 .1 Environmental Effect: Construction of the proposed project has the potential to violate or add to a violation of air quality standards (Air Quality Impact 7-2). Findings: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated herein by reference. (b) The air quality analysis was conducted in accordance with the methodology presented in the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) "CEQA Air Quality Handbook" (SCAQMD, April 1993), "Localized Significance Threshold Methodology". (SCAQMD, June 2005), and updates included on the SCAQMD Internet web site. The analysis makes use of the URBEMIS2007 urban emissions model (Version 9.4.2) for the determination of daily construction and operational emissions, the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) SCEEN3 Dispersion model for localized construction impacts, the provisions of the California Department of Transportation's (Caltrans) "Transportation Project -Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol," and CALINE4 computer model of on -road carbon monoxide (CO) dispersion modeling. (c) Air quality impacts will occur during site preparation and construction activities. Major sources of emissions during construction include exhaust emissions, fugitive dust generated. as a result of soil and material disturbance during grading activities, and the emission of reactive organic gases (ROGs) during site paving and the painting of the structures. (d) The terms "reactive organic gases" (ROGs), "reactive organic compounds" (ROCs), and "volatile organic compounds" (VOCs) are used interchangeable in the DEIR. (e) Based on the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, URBEMIS computer model results indicate that ROG emissions associated with the application of paints and coatings could result in a potentially significant short-term air quality impact. Because the construction phase could create ROG emissions is exceedance of the SCAQMD's recommended significance threshold, the Lead Agency has formulated a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 7- 1 and 7-2) to reduce that impact to the extent feasible. (f) In addition to those mitigation measures identified by the Lead Agency, all projects constructed in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) are subject to standard conditions and uniform codes. Compliance with these provisions is mandatory and, as such, does not constitute mitigation under CEQA. Those conditions mandated by the SCAQMD include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) Rule 403 requires the use of Best Available Control Technologies (BACT) during construction and sets requirements for dust control associated with construction activities; (2) Rules 431.1 and 431.2 require the use of low sulfur, fuel for stationary construction equipment; (3) Rule 1108 sets limitations on ROG content in asphalt; and (4) Rule 1113 sets limitations on ROG content in architectural coatings. (g) Notwithstanding the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures and the projects adherence to applicable standard conditions, uniform codes, and SCAQMD rules and regulations, other than through a substantial reduction in the size of the proposed project and/or reduction in the daily concentration of asphalt and architectural coatings applied, projected construction -term ROG emissions would remain at levels in excess of the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria. 4.1.2 Environmental Effect Operation of the proposed project has the potential to violate or add to a violation of air quality standards (Air Quality Impact 7.3). Finding s: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7. (Air Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated herein by reference. (b) The major source of long-term air quality impacts is that associated with the emissions produced from project -generated vehicle trips. With regards to mobile source emissions, based on the findings of the traffic analysis, the proposed project is estimated to produce 9,276 average daily vehicle trips (ADT). (c) Emissions associated with project -related trips are based on the URBEMIS2007 computer model and assumed site occupancy in 2009. Since emissions per vehicle are reduced annually due to tightening emissions restrictions and replacement of older vehicles, the use of 2009 emission factors presents a worst- case analysis with regards to operational air quality impacts. (d) Operational ROG, nitrogen oxides (NOx), and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions are projected to exceed the SCAQMD recommended threshold of significance values and the. impact is potentially significant. Because project occupancy is projected to create ROG, NOx, and CO emissions in excess of the SCAQMD suggested daily criteria, the Lead Agency has formulated a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 7-3 through 7-7) to reduce that impact to the extent as feasible_ (e) Implementation of those measures would not be expected to reduce ROG, NOx, and CO emission levels to a less -than -significant level. There are no reasonably available mitigation measures than can reduce projected operational ROG, NOx: and CO emissions to less -than -significant levels. 4.1.3 Environmental Effect: The proposed project, in combination with other related projects, has the potential to result in a cumulatively considerable increase in criteria pollutants (Air Quality Impact 7-6). Findin s: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: 11 (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated herein by reference. (b) Since ROG emissions associated with the application of asphalt, paints, and coatings and ROG, NOx, and CO mobile source' emissions are expected to remain significant, the project will add incrementally to the cumulative air quality impact produced by other related projects. (c) ROG and NOx are criteria pollutant precursors and go on to form secondary criteria pollutants through chemical and photochemical reaction in the atmosphere. (d) The SCAB is classified by the State as `extreme non -attainment' for ozone. Ozone is one of a number of substances (photochemical oxidants) that are formed when ROCS and NOx react with sunlight. (e) Mitigation for thecumulative impact is as specified for construction and operational impacts. However, even with the adoption of the recommended measures, air quality impacts will remain cumulatively significant. No mitigation measures, formulated specifically to address the project's potential incremental contribution to cumulative air quality impacts, are deemed to be reasonably feasible. 5.0 FINDINGS REGARDING THE SIGNIFICANT OR POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WHICH CAN FEASIBLY BE MITIGATED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE The City Council has determined that existing statutes, regulations, standard conditions, uniform codes, project design features, in combination with those conditions of approval and feasible mitigation measures included in the FEIR and adopted by or likely to be adopted by the City Council, will result in a substantial reduction of the following environmental effects and that each of the following environmental effects will either occur at or can be effectively reduced to below a level of significance. 5.1 Land Use b.1.1 Environmental Effect: New residential and recreational land uses could introduce land use compatibty issues between the proposed uses and those existing and reasonably foreseeable future land uses that now and which may exist in close proximity to those uses (Land Use Impact 1-1). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative land -use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1 (Land Use) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. •(b) Although no commercial site plan has been presented for the Lead Agency's consideration, once development plans are formulated, those plans are subject to the City's development review process and must conform to applicable property development and use standards_ (c) Chapter 22.48 (Development Review) in Title 22 (Development Code) of the Municipal Code establishes procedures for reviewing residential, commercial industrial, and institutional development to facilitate review in a timely and 12 efficient manner, and to ensure that development projects comply with all applicable design guidelines, standards, and minimize adverse effects on surrounding properties and the environment. Section 22.16.080 (Screening and Buffering) in Chapter 22.6 (General Property Development and Use Standards) therein presents the City's minimum standards for the screening and buffering of adjoining land uses, equipment and outdoor storage areas, and surface parking areas with respect to both multi -family and non-residential land uses. (d) Single-family attached and/or multi -family residential development is proposed adjacent and in close proximity to existing single-family detached residential areas located to the north, south, and east of the project site. Although residential densities between the two housing product types may vary, both existing and proposed residential uses would be expected to possess similar operational characteristics and use expectations. (e) The proposed residential, recreational, and open spaces uses are compatible with existing and proposed development within the general project area. (� Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 1- I and 1-2) designed to promote land -use consistency and compatibility. (g) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.1.2 Environmental Effect: The proposed mixed-use project, including the land uses, densities, and development standards now under consideration, could conflict with the adopted plans and policies of the City (Land Use Impact 1-2). Finding: The City Council.,hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative land -use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1 (Land Use) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The proposed project is generally consistent with the policies of the "City of Diamond Bar Genera Plan" (General Plan). (c) In addition to General Plan consistency, the project is subject to compliance with applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, including those contained in Chapter 22.22 (Hillside Management) of the Development Code. In accordance with the provisions of Section 22.22.040 (Density) in Title 22 (Development Code) of the Municipal Code, a total of 524 dwelling units could be developed on the site, which is substantially greater than the 202 dwelling units proposed. (d) Although a General Plan amendment (GPA) and/or zone change (ZC) would be required to accommodate the proposed residential use, the proposed densities are allowable in the City. Subject to a GPA and/or ZC, the residential portion of the project•would be deemed consistent with the "City of Diamond Bar General Plan" (General Plan). (e) Based on existing zoning and assuming a lot -line adjustment to better equate the existing zoning with the site's development potential, as specified in Section 22.10.020 (Purpose of Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts) in Chapter 22.10 (Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts) in Title 22 (Development Code) of the Municipal Code, the allowable floor -area -ratio (FAR) for non-residential development in the "Neighborhood Commercial (C-1)" zoning district shall be 13 from 0.25 to 1.00. In accordance therewith, a range of between 109,880 and 439,520 square feet of commercial use could be developed on the project site. The 153,985 square feet 'of commercial use now being proposed falls near the lower end (0.35 FAR) of the allowable FAR range and would, therefore, be consistent with the Citys land -use policies. (f) The proposed project is generally consistent with the applicable core policies of the Southern California Association of,Govemment's (SCAG) 2008 "Regional Comprehensive Plan — Helping Communities Achieve a Sustainable Future" (2008 RCP). (g) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 1-3) designed to provide notification to SCAG of projected growth within the City, so as to allow SCAG to more effectively update regional plans. (h) Sinca none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.1.3 Environmental Effect: Project implementation requires a General Plan amendment, adoption of. a specific plan, zone change, subdivision of the project site, and other discretionary actions to accommodate the proposed land uses. Each of those actions is subject to specific findings by the City Council and/or by other responsible agencies (Land Use Impact 1-3). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative land -use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1 (Land Use) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) A specific plan is a regulatory tool, authorized under the provisions of Sections 65450-65457 of the CGC, which is intended to guide the development of a localized area and serve as a tool for the systematic implementation of the general plan. A specific plan document establishes a link between the implementing policies contained in an agency's general plan and the individual development proposal in a defined area. No specific plan may be adopted or amended unless the proposed plan or amendment is consistent with the agency's general plan.. No public works project, no tentative map, and no zoning ordinance may be approved, adopted, or amended within the area covered by a specific plan unless consistent with the adopted specific plan. (c) As indicated in Section 66474, a legislative body of a city or county shall deny approval of a subdivision map if finds that: (a) the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans; (b) the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans; (c) the site is not physically suitable for the type of development; (d) the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development; (e) the. design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their. habitat; (f) the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is. likely to cause serious public health problems; andfor (g) the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict ,with easements, acquired by the public at 14 large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. Section 66473.5 restricts local agencies from approving a final subdivision map for any land use project unless the legislative body finds that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the general plan or any specific plan. A proposed subdivision shall be consistent with a general plan or a specific plan only if the local agency has officially adopted such a plan and the proposed subdivision or land use is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified therein. (d) Pursuant to the General Plan, it is the policy of the City to "[ejncourage the innovative use of land resources and development of a variety of housing and other development types, provide a means to coordinate the public and private provisions of services and facilities, and address- the unique needs of certain lands by recognizing Specific Plan (SP) overlay designations: (a) for large scale development areas in which residential, commercial, recreational, public facilities, and other land uses may be permitted; and (b) large acreage property(ies) in excess of ten acres that are proposed to be annexed into the City' (Strategy 1.1.9, Land Use Element). (e) The information presented in the FEIR may be used, in whole or in part, by the City and by other responsible agencies to support specific findings as mandated by State law and by agency requirements and procedures, both as may be required under CEQA and as may be required in support of other actions that may be taken by the City and by other agencies with regards to the proposed project or any aspect thereof. In the event that the City and/or other responsible agencies are unable to make requisite findings, those discretionary approvals associated with those findings cannot be issued. In the absence of the issuance of requisite permits and approvals, no physical changes to the project site would be anticipated to occur and no environmental impacts would result therefrom. (f) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 1-4) designed to ensure an appropriate nexus between the project's environmental review and any resulting land -use entitlements. (g) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.1.4 Environmental Effect: Cumulative residential development within the City and the population increase associated with the introduction of new dwelling, units could exceed the 2005-2010 population growth forecasts presented in the 'Regional Transportation Plan — Destination 2030" (SCAG, 2004) and which serves as a basis for regional transportation planning (Land Use Impact 1-4). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative land -use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1 (Land Use) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Implementation of the proposed project in combination with. those other related projects will result in the further urbanization of the general project area, including the conversion of vacant or under -developed properties to higher -intensity uses. 15 None of the land uses that are identified, however, constitute uses or activities (. that are not currently present within the City or the region. l (c) Anticipated residential development in the City exceeds the population growth estimates formulated by SCAG. SCAG's projections are used as the basis for establishing regional transportation plans. By under -estimating interim local demands, regional plans may not be as effective in responding to areawide interim transportation needs. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 1-3) designed to apprise SCAG of projected growth within the City, so as to allow SCAG to more effectively update regional plans. (e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2 population and Housing 5.2.1 Environmental Effect: Project construction will increase the local labor force and, through job creation and the possibility of worker relocation, has the potential to induce population growth ,in the general project area (Population and Housing Impact 2-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) • During construction, an estimated 73 workers would be associated with the project's 202 multi -family housing units and an additional estimated 49 workers would be associated with the project's 153,985 square feet of commercial use. (c) The workforce required for the project's construction, operation, and maintenance can be reasonably drawn from the available regional labor pool. (d) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2.2 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will result in the addition of up to 202 dwelling units to the City's existing housing stock and will increase the City's population by approximately 662 individuals, based on the California Department of Finance's existing (January 2008) Citywide vacancy rates and average household size (3.335 persons/unit) and vacancy rate (1.71 percent) (Population and Housing Impact 2-2). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) As indicated in California Department of Finance estimates, in January 2008, the City's population was estimated to be 60,360 individuals. The total number of dwelling units was estimated to be 18,380 units. (c) Total number of dwelling units now proposed (202 units) is less than the adopted SCAG 2006-2014 RHNA for new construction for "above moderate" income households (440. units) and only slightly more than SCAG's identified new construction need for "moderate" income households (188 units). The project represents about 18.5 percent of the projected housing needs for the period 2006-2014. Since the projected increase appears generally consistent with regional projections, the project will further the attainment. of SCAG's regional housing needs assessment. (d) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2.3 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will result in the construction of 153,985 square feet of commercial use, directly creating about 462 new permanent jobs (Population and Housing impact 2-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the FOR • and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein_ (b) Based on the projected number of direct new jobs (462 jobs) and the number of housing units associated with the proposed project (202 dwelling units), the project's projected on-site jobs -to -housing ratio is about 2.3, indicating the project is `jobs rich:' The relatively small number of jobs and housing units, however, is not significant in the broader regional context. (c) The inclusion of both residential and commercial uses on the same site serve to further attainment of the primary intent of jobs -housing 'balance, namely the reduction of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and the corresponding air quality benefits. (c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less _ than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2.4 Environmental Effect: Absent a corresponding and proportional increase in long-term employment opportunities, projects that increase the City's housing stock would contribute to the perpetuation of the existing Citywide jobs -housing imbalance (Population and Housing Impact 2-4). ' Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. 17 (b) Between 2010 and 2030, 1 the jobs -housing ratio for the City will decrease from only 0.86 to 0.82. As a result, the City will remain "housing rich" and "jobs poor." (c) Based on the projected number of direct new jobs attributable to the proposed project (462 jobs) and the number of housing units (202 units), the project's projected on-site jobs -to -housing ratio is about 2.3 and the proposed project would be categorized as being "jobs rich." As a'resuit, the proposed project promotes. the attainment of SCAG's jobs -housing policies and would not incrementally contribute to the existing imbalance. (d) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impaci would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.3 Geotechnical Hazards 4.3.1 Environmental Effect: Conversion ofJhe project site.from a vacant property to an urban use will expose site occupants to regional seismic hazards and localized geologic and geotechnical conditions. Shotild development occur in the absence of an understanding . of those regional and local conditions, site occupants may be subjected to unacceptable geotechnical hazards (Geotechnical Hazards Impact 3-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative geotechnical hazards impacts are addressed in Section 4.3 (Geotechnical Hazards) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and soils setting, including specific design and development recommendations formulated in response thereto, are presented in "Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report: Site D -Mass Grading, Walnut Valley Unified School District, Diamond Bar, California" (KFM GeoScience, January 15 2008). (c) The proposed project is feasible from a geotechnical perspective, provided that the recommendations presented in the project's geotechnical investigations are incorporated into the project's design and construction. Since the Applicant has committed to the incorporation of those recommendations, they are part of the proposed project and the project's design, construction, and operation will occur in conformity and compliance therewith. (d) Design and development activities will occur in conformance with applicable Uniform Building Code (UBC) and California Building Standards Code (CBSC) standards and requirements. (e) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 3-1) to ensure that each of the recommendations presented in the geotechnical investigation are incorporated into the design, development, and operation of the proposed project. (f) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be' less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or.required_ 5.3.2 Environmental Effect: During the life of the project, structures and other improvements constructed on the property will be subject to periodic ground shaking resulting from seismic events along earthquake faults located throughout the region (Geotechnical Hazards Impact 3-2). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Findlnq: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative geotechnical hazards impacts are addressed in Section 4.3 (Geotechnical Hazards) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and soils setting, including specific design and development recommendations formulated in response thereto, are presented in "Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report: Site D -Mass Grading, Walnut Valley Unified School District, Diamond Bar, California" (KFM GeoScience, January 15 2008). (c) The proposed project is feasible from a geotechnical perspective, provided that the recommendations presented in the projects geotechnical investigations are incorporated into the projects design and construction. Since the Applicant has committed to the incorporation of those recommendations, they are part of the proposed project and the projects design, construction; and'operation will occur in conformity and compliance therewith. (d) Design and development activities will occur in conformance with applicable UBC and CBSC standards and requirements. (e) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 1-3) to ensure that each of the recommendations presented in the geotechnical investigation are incorporated into the design, development, and operation of the proposed project. (f) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.3.3 Environmental Effect: Los Angeles County is located within a seismically active region. Since earthquakes have historically occurred throughout the region and can be expected to occur in the future, development activities that occur throughout the region, including their occupants and users, will remain subject to seismic forces (Geotechnical Hazards Impact 3-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative geotechnical hazards impacts are addressed in Section 4.3 (Geotechnical Hazards) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Adequate control measures have been formulated to ensure that all public and private structures are constructed and maintained in recognition of site-specific, area -specific, and regional geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and soils conditions. (c) Compliance with applicable UBC and CSBC standards and associated permit - 19. agency requirements will mitigate any potential cumulative impacts to below a level of significance. (d) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions andlor mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.4 Hydrology and Water Quality 5.4.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities may increase sediment discharge and/or result in the introduction of hazardous materials, petroleum products, or other waste. discharges that could impact the quality of the area's surface and ground water resources if discharged to those waters (Hydrology and Water Quality Impact 4-1). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the .existing hydrologic and water quality setting, including specific design and development recommendations formulated in response thereto, are presented in "Preliminary Drainage Report for Site 'D' Improvements at Intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road, Diamond Bar, California" (PENCO Engineering, Inc., February 7, 2008, revised April 6, 2009). (c) Water quality protection is ensured through preparation and implementation of the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), as required under the State Water Resources Control Board's '(SWRCB) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit), through Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed to ensure that grading and construction operations involving the transport, storage, use, and disposal of a variety of construction materials complies with certain storage, handling, and transport requirements. (c) Pursuant to the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Arigeles. Region's (LARWQCB) fourth -term General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit (NPDES No. CAS004001) for discharges to the municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) in County, a standard urban stormwater mitigation plan (SUSMP) shall be required, including appropriate BMPs and guidelines to reduce pollutants in storm water to the maximum extent possible (MEP). (d) The Construction General Permit and compliance with SWPPP and MS4 permit requirements constitute mandatory project measures. Compliance ensures that project -induced water -borne erosion does not significantly impact downstream drainage systems., (e) Although none. of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 4-2) requiring the City Engineers approval of a SUSMP conforming to the requirements of. Section 8.12.1695 of the Municipal Code. 20 ( Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.4.2 Environmental: Project implementation will result in the introduction of impervious surfaces onto the project site and, as a result of the impedance of opportunities for ers,.has the velocityon ad andndurationtion of those of storm waterstdischarged from theal to tracti the map area and Water Quality Impact 4-2). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Suaaort of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this.finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) According to the recorded plans for the Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel (Private Drain No. 395), a 25 -year discharge of 2,285 cubic feet per second (cfs) is shown at the downstream side of the Diamond Bar Boulevard culvert. The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) stipulated that the existing County -operated and maintained drainage system accommodate a 50 - year storm event of 2,602 cfs. (c) A 50 -year storm creates approximately 68.38 cfs of runoff from the western portion of the project site and on existing 33 -inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe located to the south of the project site currently carries off-site discharge of. 83.94 cfs. When combined with existing off-site discharge, the 50 -year storm runoff totals 174.80 cfs at the Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel. The summation of 50 -year flows (2,602 + 174.80 = 2,776.8) from the project site and from the channel total approximately 2,777 cfs at this reach. (d) Drainage improvements are proposed to accommodate projected flows. As proposed, at this reach, the existing Brea Canyon Channel will be replaced with reinforced concrete box (RCB). An existing tributary open channel east of the project site will be replaced with RCB, as well as the proposed entrance to the site. To convey the 50 -year discharge, the proposed channel section will be double cells 9 -foot -wide by 8 -foot -high RCB with an average 20 feet of cover. Approximately 50 feet of transition box will be constructed from the proposed RCB section to the existing culvert section under Diamond Bar Boulevard. A transition structure downstream of the proposed RCB will be construed to join the existing trapezoidal channel. (e) The Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 4-1) requiring receipt of all requisite permits and approvals from the LACDPW allowing for the overbuilding of the Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel. (fl To ensure that drainage improvements are consistent with applicable design and development standards and that post -project drainage flows do not result in any adverse public safety or other impacts, a mitigation measure (Condition of Approval 4-1) has been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP specifying that all drainage facilities and improvements are subject to final design and engineering 'review and approval by the City Engineer and, for those storm drain facilities under County jurisdiction, by the LACDPW. 21 Implementation of that measure will reduce identified impacts to below a level of significance. 5.4.3 Environmental Effect: Continuing urbanization of the general project area will collectively contribute'to surface flows within the Diamond Bar Creek watershed will result in the introduction of additional urban pollutants that could affect the beneficial uses of existing surface and ground water resources (Hydrology and Water Quality Impact 4-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this.finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are addressed in -Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) in the FEIR and ttiat analysis is incorporated by. reference herein. (b) Conversion of the project site to a mixed-use development will generate additional urban runoff that would be discharged into Diamond Bar Creek. Project -generated runoff could contribute to potentially significant cumulative water quality impacts generated by existing and future land uses within the tributary watershed area. (c) The proposed project and other related projects will be required to implement BMPs and fully comply with all applicable State water quality laws and regulations. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 4- 1 and 4-2) requiring receipt of all requisite permits and approvals from the LACDPW allowing for the overbuilding of the Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel and the City Engineer's approval of a SUSMP conforming to the requirements of Section 8.12.1695 of the Municipal Code. (e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than- significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5 Biological Resources 5.5.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities and fuel -modification requirements will result in direct impacts from vegetation removal of about 30.4 acres located within the tract map area. Fuel modification requirements imposed by the Los Angeles County Fire Department could directly impact additional vegetation (Biological Resources Impact 5- Findings: - Findin s: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section.4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing biological resource, arboreal, and jurisdictional setting, including an assessment of project -related impacts, are 22 presented in the following studies: (1) `Biological Re California" rces Assessment CIR — Site es D, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, Corporation, June 24, 2008); (2) Tree Survey Report — Site D, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (PCR Services Corporation, December 18, 2007); (3) "Results of Sensitive Plant Surveys Conducted for the Site D Project Site, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (PCR Services Corporation, December 18, 2007); and (4) "Investigation, of Jurisdictional Wetlands and. Waters of the U.S., Site D, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (PCR Services Corporation, June 24, 2008). (c) During grading operations, impacts will occur to approximately 20.4 acre of disturbedlruderal, 3.6 acre of eucalyptus stand/disturbed, 2.8 acres of mule fat scrub, 2.1 acres of California walnut woodlands, 0.9 acre of ruderal/goldenbush scrub, and 0.3 acres of southern willow scrub. With the exception of southern willow scrub, none of these plant communities are considered rare or of high priority for inventory by the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). (d) Rare natural communities are those communities that are of highly limited distribution. The most current version of the California Department of Fish and Game's "The Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program — List of California Terrestrial Natural Communities Recognized by the California Natural Diversity Database" (CDFG, 2003) serves as a guide to each community's status. (e) California walnut woodlands and southern willow scrub are considered high- priority for inventory under the CNDDB because they are experiencing decline throughout its range. These habitats are marginal in its value because they are fragmented (i.e., not contiguous with similar habitats) and not expected to support sensitive species. Focused sensitive plant surveys were negative and habitat assessments for sensitive wildlife species (e.g., the least Bell's vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher) determined that these habitats are not suitable to support these species. (� Although California walnut woodlands and southern willow scrub are associated with United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the loss, removal, and destruction of these plant communities on the project site would neither eliminate nor substantially diminish the functions and values of the on-site drainages as a regional biological resource. (g) The project would cause the direct mortality of some common wildlife species and the displacement of more mobile species to suitable habitat areas nearby. These impacts, by themselves, would not be expected to reduce general wildlife populations below self-sustaining levels within the region. (h) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.2 Environmental Effect: The project will permanently impact approximately 2,125 linear feet of streambed, including approximately 0.20 acres of United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACOS) and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) jurisdictional waters and approximately 4.10 acres of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdictional streambed and associated riparian habitat (Biological Resources Impact 5-2). Finding s: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2). 23 Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Project implementation will result in direct impacts to approximately 2,125 linear feet of streambed. A total of approximately 0.20 acre of ACOE/RWQCB jurisdictional waters of the United States (WoUS) and approximately 4.10 acres of CDFG jurisdictional streambed and associated riparian habitat would be impacted by the proposed development. No direct impacts to jurisdictional waters are anticipated beyond the project boundaries, (c) The project will require a nationwide Section 404 (CWA) permit from the ACOS, a Section 401 (CWA) water quality certification from the RWQCB, and a Section 1602 (CFGC) streambed alteration agreement from the CDFG.- Impacts to jurisdictional features will.be subject to the regulations set forth by the ACOE, RWQCB, and CDFG and will require mitigation or result in the imposition of other conditions for the identified impacts to jurisdictional waters. (d) In recognition of the presence of jurisdictional waters, a mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure 5-1) has been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP specifying that, unless a greater ratio is required by permitting agencies: (1) the on-site and/or off-site replacement of ACOE/RWQCB jurisdictional waters and wetlands occur at a 2:1 ratio; (2) the on-site and/or off- site replacement of CDFG jurisdictional streambed and associated riparian habitat occur at a 2:1 ratio; and (3) the incorporation of design features into the proposed project's design and development. Implementation of that measure will reduce identified impacts to below a level of significance. 5.5.3 Environmental Effect: Proposed grading and grubbing activities will result in the removal of• 83 protected ordinance -size trees, including 75 California black walnut, six willow, and two coast live oak trees, which now exist on the project site (Biological Resources Impact 5-3). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) A total of 75 California black walnut, six willow, and two coast live oak trees will be impacted by the proposed project. Each of these species is protected trees under Chapter 22.38 of the Municipal Code. The Oaks and Willows, however, do not meet the size criteria in the tree ordinance to be classified as protected trees. As required therein, the City may require a tree maintenance agreement prior to removal of any protected tree or commencement of construction activities that may adversely affect the health and survival of trees to be preserved. (c) The project is subject to compliance with the provision of Chapter 22.38 (Tree Preservation and Protection) of the Municipal Code. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 5- 24 2 through 5-4) requiring the preparation of an arborist -prepared tree study and specified replacement requirements for qualifying trees and California walnut woodlands, and promoting vegetation removal activities outside the nesting bird season. (e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.4 Environmental Effect: Construction activities initiated during the nesting season, typically extending from February 15 to August 15 of each year, could impact nesting birds and raptors'in violation of the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (Biological Resources Impact 5-4). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts inSupport of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) One sensitive bird species (Cooper's hawk) was observed within the project area and three additional species (white-tailed kite, . sharp -shinned. hawk, and loggerhead shrike) have the potential to occur within. the study area due to the presence of suitable habitat. Since these species are not protected by federal or State listings as threatened. or endangered and since the loss of individuals would not threaten the regional populations. (c) Based on the presence of suitable vegetation, the removal of vegetation during the breeding season (typically extending between February 15 and August 15) could constitute a potentially significant impact. (d) Disturbing or destroying active nests is a violation of the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and nests and eggs are protected under Section 3503 and 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code. (e) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 5-4) promoting vegetation removal activities outside the nesting bird season. (f) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.5 Environmental Effect: Project implementation has the potential to impede existing wildlife movement patterns across the project site (Biological Resources Impact 5-5). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Findinc4: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The project site is located to the north of the area identified by the Conservation Biological Institute as part of the "Puente -Chino Hills wildlife corridor." 25 (c) Although wildlife movement corridors exist in the general project area, the project site does not serve any connectivity or linkage role with regards to regional wildlife movement. (d) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.6, Environmental Effect: If improperly designed and maintained, the proposed on-site flood control facilities and structural and treatment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) could potentially provide a habitat for the propagation of mosquitoes and other vectors (Biological Resources Impact 5-6). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Urban stormwater runoff regulations now mandate the construction and maintenance of structural BMPs for both volume reduction and pollution management. Those BMPs can create additional sources of standing water and sources for mosquito propagation. (c) In the general project area, vector control is performed by the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District (GLACVCD), a County special district funded by ad valorum property and benefit assessment taxes. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 5-5) requiring that BMP devices shall be designed in consultation with the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District and shall be of a type which minimizes the potential for vector (public nuisance) problems. (e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be lessthan significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.7 Environmental Effect: Implementation of the proposed project, in combination with other reasonably foreseeable future projects, will contribute incrementally to the continuing reduction in open space areas in the general project area and contribute to the general decline in species diversity throughout the region (Biological Resources Impact 5-7). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed. in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Implementation of the proposed project and other reasonably foreseeable future projects will contribute incrementally to the continuing urbanization of the region. (c) The proposed project will impact approximately 2.1 acres of California walnut woodland and 0.3 acres of southern.willow scrub habitat.. As a result, the project 26 will add incrementally to the regional loss of plant communities considered high- priority for inventory under the CNDDB. (d) Although California walnut woodlands and southern willow scrub are considered high-priority for inventory under the CNDDB, these on-site habitats are marginal in its value because they are fragmented and not expected to support sensitive species. As a result, the incremental reduction in these habitats would not be cumulatively significant. (e) Under Section 22.38.030 of the Municipal Code, protected trees, including "native oak, walnut, sycamore and willow trees with a DBH [diameter at breast height] of eight inches or greater" shall be replaced at a minimum ratio of 3:1. (f) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.6 Traffic and Circulation 5.6.1 Environmental Effect: Construction vehicles will transport workers, construction equipment, building materials, and construction debris along local and collector streets and along arterial highways within and adjacent to established residential areas and other sensitive receptors (Traffic and Circulation Impact 6-1). Finding; The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing traffic and circulation setting, including an assessment of project -related impacts, is presented in "Traffic Impact Analysis Report, WVUSD Site D Mixed -Use Development, Diamond Bar, California" (Linscott, Law & Greenspan Engineers, April 23, 2009). (c) Construction traffic, including vehicles associated with the transport of heavy equipment and building materials to and from the project site and.construction workers commuting to and from work, will increase traffic ' volumes along Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road and, because site access can be obtained from Castle Rock Road and Pasado Drive, construction workers may elect to park along and construction vehicles could stage at those roadways. (d) Existing (2007) daily traffic volumes along project area roadway segments include: (1) Brea Canyon Road (north of Diamond Bar Boulevard) — 4,896 average daily trips (ADT); (2) Brea Canyon Road (south of Diamond Bar Boulevard) — 12,696 ADT; (3) Diamond Bar Boulevard (north of Cherrydale Drive) — 20,512 ADT; and, (4) Brea Canyon Cutoff (west of Fallow Field -Diamond Canyon) — 11,003 ADT. Since the projected 854 construction trips would be substantially less than those existing capacity figures and would primarily occur during off-peak periods, construction -related traffic would not adversely affect the existing levels of service (LOS) along those roadways. (e) Compliance with and enforcement of speed laws and other provisions of the California Vehicle Code (CVC) and the safe use and operation of vehicles by their drivers would be expected to keep public safety issues at a less -than - significant level. 27 M Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Condition of Approvals 6- 1 through 6-4) requiring the preparation of a construction workers' parking and equipment staging plan, construction traffic mitigation plan, and traffic control plan, and restricting construction -term access from and along Castle Rock Road and Pasado Drive. (g) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. Environmental Effect: The project is forecast to generate approximately 9,276 daily two- way vehicle trips, including 272 trips during the AM and 650 trips during the PM peak hours, and would increase traffic congestion on local and regional roadways (Traffic and Circulation Impact 6-2). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The project's traffic impact analysis was conducted in accordance with the City's "Guidelines for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Analysis Report" and, for each of the 20 study area intersections, included an assessment of the'following nine scenarios were examined: (1) 2007 existing traffic conditions; (2) 2007 existing - plus -project traffic conditions; (3) 2007 existing -plus -project traffic conditions, with Improvements; (4) 2010 cumulative -base conditions (existing, ambient growth, and related projects); (5) 2010 cumulative -base -plus project traffic conditions; (6) 2010 cumulative -base -plus project conditions, with Improvements; (7) 2030 cumulative -base conditions (existing, ambient growth, and related projects); (8) 2030 cumulative -base -plus -project traffic conditions; (9) 2030 cumulative -base - plus -project traffic conditions, with Improvements. (c) In accordance with City traffic impact analysis (TIA) requirements, the project's construction of or payment of a "fair share' contribution toward the construction costs of identified areawide street improvements serves to fully and effectively reduce the project's traffic and circulation impacts to a less -than -significant level. (c) Prior to implementation of any recommended traffic improvements, on a cumulative -plus -project bases, traffic associated with the proposed project will ions in the long-term (2030) and contribute to significantly impact nine intersect the adverse service levels at three additional intersections forecast to operate at an unsatisfactory LOS in 2030. Those locations projected to operate at an adverse service level in 2030 include: (1) Brea Canyon Road (W) at Pathfinder Road; (2) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Pathfinder Road; (3) Brea Canyon Road at Cold Springs Lane; (4) Cold Springs Lane at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (5) Pathfinder Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (6) SR -57 SB Ramps at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (7) SR -57 NB Ramps at Brea Canyon Cutoff', (8) Brea Canyon Road at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (9) Cherrydale Drive at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (10) Brea.Canyon Road at Silver Builet Drive; (11) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Grand Avenue; and (12) Colima Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff. .28 (d) Since twelve intersections which are forecast to operate at a poor level of service (LOS) under 2030 cumulative -plus -project traffic conditions, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 6-1 and 6-2) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP identifying associated street improvements and the proposed project's obligations toward those improvements and specifying that the final site plan shall include and accommodate those traffic measures, improvements, and such other pertinent factors and/or facilities as maybe identified by the City Engineer for the purpose of ensuring the safe and efficient movement of project -related traffic. Implementation of the recommended improvements and "fair -share" contribution will reduce identified traffic and circulation impacts to below a level of significance. 5.6.3 Environmental Effect: The implementation of the proposed project, in combination with other related projects, will collectively contribute to existing traffic congestion in the general project area and exacerbate the need for localized areawide traffic improvements (Traffic and Circulation Impact 6-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are. addressed in Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Prior to implementation of any recommended traffic improvements, the following twelve intersections are projected to operate at an adverse LOS in 2030: (1) Brea Canyon Road (W) at Pathfinder Road; (2) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Pathfinder Road; (3) Brea Canyon Road at Cold Springs Lane; (4) Cold Springs Lane at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (5) Pathfinder Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (6) SR -57 SB Ramps at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (7) SR -57 NB Ramps at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (8) Brea Canyon Road at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (9) Cherrydale Drive at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (10) Brea Canyon Road at Silver Bullet Drive; (11) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Grand Avenue; (12) Colima Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff. (c) Since twelve intersections which are forecast to operate at a poor level of service (LOS) under 2030 cumulative -plus -project traffic conditions, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 6-1 and 6-2) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP identifying associated street improvements and the, proposed project's obligations toward those improvements and specifying that the final site plan shall include and accommodate those traffic measures, improvements, and such other pertinent factors and/or facilities as may be identified by the City Engineer for the purpose of ensuring the Eiafe and efficient movement • of project -related traffic_ Implementation of the recommended improvements and "fair -share" contribution will reduce identified traffic and circulation impacts to below •a level of significance. 29 5.7 Air Quality 5.7.1 Environmental Effect: Because the project involves a General Plan amendment and zone change, it has the potential to be inconsistent with the applicable air quality management plan (Air Quality Impact 7-1). Finding. : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) CEQA requires that projects be consistent with the "Air Quality Management Plan" (AQMP). A consistency determination plays an essential role in local agency project review by linking local planning and unique individual projects to the AQMP in the following ways: (1) it fulfills the CEQA goal of fully informing local agency decision -makers of the environmental costs of the project under consideration at a stage early enough to ensure that air quality concerns are fully addressed; and (2) it provides the local agency with ongoing information assuring local decision -makers that they are making real contributions to clean air goals contained in the AQMP. (c) Only new or amended general plan elements, specific plans, and regionally significant projects need to undergo a consistency review. This is because the AQMP strategy is based on projections from local general plans. Projects that are consistent with the local general plan are, therefore, considered consistent With the air quality management plan. (d) As indicated in the analysis presented in the FEIR, the proposed project is consistent with the goals of 2007 AQMP and, in that respect, does not present a significant air quality impact. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.7:2 Environmental Effect: The proposed project has the potential to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations (Air Quality Impact 7-4). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) All 'construction emissions concentrations for carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM�o), and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5) are within their respective threshold values and are, therefore, less than significant. (c) Based on a CO micro -scale hot -spot analysis, predicted GO values are below the State's 1 -and 8 -hour standards and any potential impact is less than significant. (c) Mandatory adherence to the SCAQMD rules would ensure that any construction or operational impact from toxic air contaminants (TAC) associated with the operation of the project remains less than significant. 30 (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 7-1) requiring that future residential purchasers be notified of the presence or potential presence of proximal commercial uses on the subject property. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.7.3 Environmental Effect: The proposed project has the potential to create objectionable odors (Air Quality Impact 7-5). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Project construction would involve the use of heavy equipment creating exhaust pollutants from on-site earth movement and from equipment transporting materials to and from the site. In addition, some odors would be produced from the application of asphalt, paints, and coatings. With regards to nuisance odors,' any air quality impacts will be confined to the immediate vicinity of the odor source and would be of short-term duration. Such brief exposure to nuisance odors constitutes an adverse but less -than -significant air quality impact. (c) Operational odors could be produced from on-site food preparation and from diesel -fueled vehicles operating on the project site. These odors are common in the environment and subject to compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402 (Nuisance). (d) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.7.4 Environmental Effect: The construction and operation of the proposed project will contribute to the generation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. GHG have been linked to climate change (Air Quality Impact 7-7). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) At this time, greenhouse gases (primarily CO2) are not regulated as a criteria pollutant and there are no significance criteria for these emissions. The current AQMP does not set CEQA targets that can be used to.determine any potential threshold values. (c) Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the most common greenhouse gas. Construction activities would consume fuel and result in the generation of GHG emissions. Construction CO2 emissions were projected using the URBEMIS2007 computer model. In accordance with the projected URBEMIS construction schedule, approximately 1,347,095.44 pounds (673.55 tons) of CO2 would be produced over the approximate 299 days of active construction. 31 .(d) In the case of site operations, the majority of GHG emissions, and specifically CO2, are due to vehicle travel and energy consumption. Results of the URBEMIS2007 model indicate that, on average, 87,066.64 pounds.(43.53 tons) Of CO2 would be produced daily or about 31,779,323.60 pounds (15,889.66 tons) per year. (e) In accordance with the current AQMP, the emission levels in California are estimated to be 473 million metric tons (521.4 million short tons) CO2 equivalent for 2000 and 532 million metric tons (568.4 short tons) CO2 equivalent for 2010. Year 2009 (the worst-case scenario year that the emissions are based on) is then extrapolated to 526.1 million metric tons (579.9 short tons). At approximately 15,889.66 tons per year, the proposed project's operations represent less than 0.003 percent of this State's annual CO2 emissions' budget. ({) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5,8 Noise 5.5.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities could result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project (Noise Impact 8-1). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative noise impacts are addressedin Section 4.8 (Noise) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Noise levels associated with construction activities would be higher than the existing ambient noise levels in the project area but would subside once construction of the project is completed. (c) The mostproximate residential structures include the existing single-family homes located to the immediate south and east of the project site. The nearest of these. homes could . be on the order of 50 feet from on-site construction activities. At that distance, the equivalent noise level (Leq) noise levels would be projected to be as high as 89 A weighted decibel scale (dBA). (d) Construction noise is regulated in the City under the provisions of the Municipal Code. The Municipal Code limits the hours of heavy equipment operations. Notwithstanding those provisions, construction noise may continue to be a short- term nuisance to proximal noise -sensitive receptors. (e) In recognition of the presence of construction noise and the proximity of existing residential receptors, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 8-1 through 8-6) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP which are designed to reduce short-term noise impacts to the maximum extend feasible. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures would reduce construction noise impacts to a less -than -significant level. 5.8.2 Environmental Effer-,l Project implementation may result in an exceedance of noise standards established 'in the General' Plan and/or Municipal Code or applicable. standards formulated by other agencies (Noise Impact 8-2). 32 Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative noise impacts are addressed in Section 4.8 (Noise) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The Municipal Code sets a goal level of 55 dBA for mobile -source noise intrusioh on sensitive, multi -family land uses. The General Plan (Noise Element) allows for a conditionally acceptable exterior noise level of up to 65 dBA community noise equivalent level (CNEL) for residential uses as long as the dwelling units are fitted with forced air ventilation or air conditioning. Assuming the inclusion of forced air ventilation, commercial uses have an exterior goal of 65 dBA CNEL and a conditionally acceptable level of 70 dBA CNEL. (�) Based on projected traffic volumes, the 65 dBA CNEL along Diamond Bar Boulevard would fall at a distance of about 130 feet from the centerline of the road. The placement of any residential units within this distance could then expose future residents to excessive noise levels and result in a potentially significant impact. Since any commercial structures that would lie between the residential units and Diamond Bar Boulevard could serve as an effective sound wall if they were to shield the residents from a view of the road traffic, the 130 - foot distance is considered as conservative. (d) The 65 dBA CNEL deemed suitable for residential development, equipped with forced air ventilation, would fall at a distance of about 830 feet from the freeway. (e) The 70 dBA CNEL would fall at distances of about 60 feet from the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard. (f) The Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 8-1), as required under Title 24 standards, requiring forced air ventilation in the proposed residential development, thus allowing site occupants to leave windows closed and reducing interior levels by in excess of 20 dBA. (e) Based on the potential presence of significant noise impacts, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 8-7 and 8-8) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP specifying that no residential units shall be located within 830 feet of the SR -57 Freeway's nearest travel lane unless additional sound attention is provided and no commercial units shall be located within 60 feet of the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures would reduce construction noise impacts to a less -than -significant level. 5.8.3 Environmental Effect: Project implementation may result in a substantial permanent in in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project (Noise Impact 8-3). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1)_ Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a)Project-related and cumulative noise impacts are addressed in Section 4.8 (Noise) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) , As traffic volumes in the general project area increase, those areas located in proximity to the area's arterial highway system will experience increased traffic 33 noise. (c) The TIA indicates that the project would add 9,276 ADT to the roadway network. Modeling indicates that the noise increase along all access roads would not exceed 0.7 dBA CNEL. The project's contribution to ambient noise levels would, therefore, be less than significant. (d) The dominant sources of noise through the .project area are from freeway traffic and traffic along Diamond Bar Boulevard. Noise attenuates with distance and intervening objects and obstacles serve to further impede the transmittal of sound energy. The structures associated with the proposed development would serve as a partial sound wall reducing this noise at the existing residential location. The introduction of intervening structures could benefit adjacent residents by further reducing line -of -sight propagation of mobile source noise along adjoining. roadways. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no'standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.8.4 Environmental Effect: Short-term construction and long-term operational noise associated with the proposed project, in combination with other related projects, will contribute to both a localized and an areawide increase in ambient noise levels in proximity to those projects and along those roadways utilized by project -related traffic (Noise Impact 8-4). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative noise impacts are addressed in Section 4.8 (Noise) in the FEIRand that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Construction noise impacts are generally localized and limited to each related project site and those areas proximal to those construction operations. Cumulative construction noise impacts will be generally localized to each such project and the roadway network along which construction traffic travels. (c) As traffic volumes in the general project area increase over time, those areas located in proximity to the area's arterial highway system will experience increased traffic noise. Existing roadway volumes would, however, need to double in order to produce a perceptible noise increase. (d) Large-scale projects that contribute substantially to traffic volumes along the area's arterial highway system are subject to CEQA compliance. Similarly, the noise element of each agency's general plan specifies those roadways that are subject to excessive noise levels. As deemed appropriate, beyond those requirements already imposed by each agency's noise ordinance, land -use entities have the ability to impose additional mitigation measures and/or conditions of approval on each project in order to reduce potential short-term and long-term traffic noise impacts. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9 Public Services and Facilities 34 5.9.1 Environmental Effect: During construction, heavy equipment, materials, and other items of value will be brought to the project site. As buildings are erected, prior to site occupancy, structures may remain unsecured and susceptible to unauthorized entry. The presence of an unsecured site and items of value could result in theft and vandalism that could increase demands upon law enforcement agencies (Public Services Impact 9- 1). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Since the project site is presently vacant and since no public use is authorized thereupon, the property presently places little, if any, demand upon existing police protection services. An increased demand for police service will occur during the construction phases. (c) Provision of such services would .not require construction of any new Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department (LACSD) or California Highway Patrol (CHP) facilities or necessitate the physical alteration of any existing facilities. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 9- 1 and 9-2) requiring the preparation of a construction security plan outlining the activities that will be instituted to secure the construction site from potential criminal incidents and providing the LACSD the opportunity to review and comment upon building plans and the configuration of the development. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.2 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will result in the introduction of equipment, materials, and manpower into a County -designated fire hazard area prior to the provision of water system improvements designated to respond to on-site and near -site fire hazards (Public Services Impact 9-2). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The proposed project must fully comply with all applicable provisions of the "Uniform Building Code" (UBC) and "Uniform Fire Code" (UFC), as modified, and other applicable provisions of the "Los Angeles County Code" (County Code) established to address fire protection and public safety. (c) The project is subject to compliance with the Los Angeles County Fire Departments (LACFD) "Fuel Modification Plan Guidelines for Projects Located in Fire Zone 4 or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone" requirements_ (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has 35 identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 9- 3 through 9-5) requiring the Los Angeles County Fire Department's (LACFD) approval of fire protection program and workplace standards for fire safety, a fuel modification, landscape, and irrigation plan, a final water improvement plans, and associated building plans. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.3 • Environmental Effect: The public school located closest to the project site is Castle Rock Elementary School (2975 Castle Rock Road). Construction activities could constitute an attractive nuisance to children located near or passing by the project site and construction traffic could impose a safety hazard to children and/or become disruptive to school activities'and operations (Public Services Impact 9-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Since no substantial increase in the number of new households within the general project area would be anticipated in order to accommodate the projects construction, no direct construction -related impacts on WVUSD facilities have been identified. (d) Construction traffic accessing the site from Cold Springs Road will cross Castle Rock Road in the vicinity of Castle Rock Elementary School. Construction vehicles will transport equipment, building materials, and could discharge construction debris along streets adjacent to established residential areas, including the school, where children would be present. (e) Construction activities may present an attractive nuisance, defined as any condition which is unsafe or unprotected and, thereby, dangerous to children and which may reasonably be expected to attract children to the property and risk injury by playing with, in, or on it. (f) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 6- 2, 6-3, 6-4, and 9-6) restricting construction -traffic along Castle Rock Road and Pasado Drive, requiring the preparation of a construction traffic safety plan and a traffic control plan,.and requiring the fencing and signage of the construction site. (g) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.4 Environmental Effect: With a resident population of approximately 662 persons and an existing LACSD staffing ratio of one sworn officer for each 1,082 residents, in order to maintain existing staffing levels, ' the LACSD would need an additional 0.61 sworn deputies (Public Services Impact 9-4). . Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). 36 Facts in Support of Findinq: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Actual police protection personnel needs will be determined over time, based on that departments experience with the project's residential and commercial components, areawide incident trends, and other factors, and not derived purely through a projection of the number of on-site residents. (c) There is no formal basis to quantify project -related law enforcement impacts, no established nexus allowing for the collection of developer impact fees for police protection services, and no direct linkage between approved development and l the expansion of police resources, the purchase and new or the replacement of existing equipment, and the hiring of new sworn and non -sworn personnel. (e) Neither the LACSD nor the CHP have not established a functional mechanism for the collection of LACSD or CHP impact fees and there exists no formal basis to quantify project -related impacts upon police protection services. (f) Because funding for LACSD personnel, equipment, and facilities is derived through ad valorum taxation and based on yearly allocations by the County, the County has the ability to effectively respond to LACSD resource demands. (g) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 9-2) specifying that, prior to the issuance of building permits, the LACSD review and comment upon building plans and the configuration of the development. (h) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no' additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.5 Environmental Effect: The introduction of 202 new residential dwellings and 153,985 square feet of new commercial use will increase existing demands on LACFD facilities, equipment, and personnel, predicating an incremental need for facility expansion, the purchase 'of new and/or replacement equipment, and contributing to the need for addition LACFD personnel (Public Services Impact 9-5). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Water service to the project site will be provided by the Walnut Valley Water District (W\/WD), via existing water mains. The LACFD requires a minimum fire flow of 1,250 gallons per minute (gpm) at 20 pounds per square inch (psi) for a two-hour duration. Existing water mains are capable of delivering -those minimum flows to the project site. (c) With regards to commercial projects, the LACFD stipulates that the minimum fire flow and fire hydrant requirements shall be determined by the fire chief or fire marshal. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 9-5) specifying 37 that, prior to the issuance of building permits, the LACFD review and approve final water improvement plans and building plans. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.6 Environmental Effect: Project implementation.will increase enrollment within the Walnut Valley Unified School District by an estimated 31 new students, including approximately 11 new elementary school students (Grades K-6), 8 new junior high school students (Grades 7-9), and 12 new high school students (Grades 9-12) (Public Services Impact 9- 6). Finding : The City Council hereby makes.Finding (1). Facts in Support of Findin4: The. following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) For the 2009-2010 school year, Castle Rock. Elementary, Evergreen Elementary Schools, and South Pointe Middle School have the available capacity to accommodate 103, 117, and 62 additional students, respectively. Although no available capacity has been identified at Diamond Bar High School (a shortfall of 80 students is projected), any excess pupil enrollment at that facility will be temporarily housed in leased portable classrooms (in. space made available by reducing existing programs and in space reconstructed on existing sites) until more permanent measures can be taken. (c) As indicated in the WVUSD's current fee justification study, based on the application of the State -approved cohort survival method, it is estimated that student enrollment within the WWSD will decrease from 15,485 Grade K-12 students in the fall of the 2008 school year to 15,414 students in the 2011 school year, representing an increase of 75 Grade K-6 students and a decrease of 79 Grade 7-12 students. Alternatively, based on the application of the pupil per dwelling unit multiplier method, it is estimated -that student enrollment will increase from 15,485 Grade K-12 students in the fall of the 20D8 school year to 15,599 students in the 2016 school year, representing an increase of 49 Grade K-6 students and an increase of 50 Grade 7-12 students. (d) The WVLISD's current fee justification study concluded that no new school sites would need to be acquired and no new school facilities would need to be constructed to accommodate projected student population projections through at least 2023. (e) Payment of applicable fees to the WWSD or, alternatively, execution of an Assembly Bill (AB) 2926 mitigation agreement acceptable to the WVUSD constitutes full and complete mitigation of project -related impacts on the provision of school facilities from the proposed residential development. (f) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 9-7) specifying that, prior to the issuance of building permits, the City be provided with a certificate of compliance or other documentation demonstrating complied with the District's School Board resolutions governing the payment of school impact fees 38 or has entered into an AB 2926 authorized school fee mitigation agreement or is not subject to the school impact fee exaction. (g) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.7 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will increase the resident population of the City, including the number of school-age children, incremental increasing existing spatial and resource demands placed on the Diamond Bar Public Library (Public Services Impact 9-7). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding M. Facts in Support of Findinct: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and -Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The Diamond Bar Library is 9,935 gross square feet in size and houses a collection consisting of 89,446 books and other library materials. (c) The County Library's current service level guidelines for planning purposes are a minimum of 0.50 gross square foot of library facility space per capita and 2.75 items (books and other library materials) per capita. Based on an estimated service area population of 56,233 persons, as derived from United States Census data, the Diamond Bar Library would need a 28,115 square foot facility and 154,640 items in order to meet that standard. (d) The proposed project is projected to add about 662 new residents to the City. That population increase would create additional demand for library service and would further affect the County Library's ability to adequately serve the existing and future residents of the Diamond Bar Library's service area. Based on the County Library's service level guidelines, based on project -related demand -the Diamond Bar Library would require an additional 331 gross square feet of facility space and an additional 1,820 new items (books and other library materials). (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.8 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will increase the resident population of the City of Diamond Bar and generate a projected need for 2.12 acres (approximately 92,390 square feet) of additional parkland within the City (Public Services Impact 9-8). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Findinq: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Section 21.32.040 (Park Land Dedications and Fees) in Chapter 21.32 (Subdivisions) of the Municipal Code provides for the dedication of real property and/or the payment of in -lieu fees to the City for park and recreational purposes. 39 In accordance therewith, the proposed 202 dwelling units (assuming the classification of those units as multi -family dwellings) would generate a need for 2.12 acres (approximately 92,390 square feet) of additional parkland within the City. only the payment of fees shall be (c) As specified in Section 21.32.040(e)(2), y P Y required in subdivisions of 50 parcels or less, except that when a condominium project, stock cooperative, or community apartment project exceeds 50 dwelling units, dedication of land may be required even though the. number of actual parcels may be less than 50. Although the proposed development plan does not include a public recreational component, the City is authorized to require real property dedication rather or in addition to the payment of park fees. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 9-8) specifying that, prior to the approval of the final subdivision map, pursuant to Section 21.32.040 (Park Land Dedications and Fees) in Chapter 21.32 (Subdivisions) of the Municipal Code, in -lieu park fees shall be paid to the City in the manner and in the amount authorized thereunder. (e) Since . none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.9 Environmental Effect: The approval of other reasonably foreseeable future development projects within the general project area will increase existing demands on the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department and on the Los Angeles County Fire Department, increase the number of school -aged children served by the Walnut Valley Unified School District, and increase the demand for park and recreational facilities within the City (Public Services Impact 9-9). Find! n : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and. Facilities) in the FEIR and that an is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Based on a Statewide, regional, areawide, or local assessment of need, public agencies have the ability to construct new facilities, purchase new equipment, and add personnel in response to identified demand. Local agencies have the ability to deny or condition individual development applications based on their assessment of potential project -related impacts upon law enforcement and fire protection agencies, facilities, and personnel. Public agencies have the ability to respond to those changes through increases or decreases in annual budgetary allocations provided to police and fire protection agencies, including the LACSD and LACFD. (c) As indicated in the WVUSD's current fee justification study, based on the application of the State -approved cohort survival method, it is estimated that student enrollment within the WVUSD will decrease from 15,485 Grade K-12 students in the fall of the 2008 school year to 15,414 students in the 2011 school year, representing an increase of 75 Grade K-6 students and a decrease of 79 Grade 7-12 students. Alternatively, based on the application of the pupil per dwelling unit multiplier method, it is estimated that student enrollment will 40 increase from 15,485 Grade K-12 students in the fall of the 2008 school year to 15,599 students in the 2016 school year, representing an increase of 49 Grade K-6 students and an increase of 50 Grade 7-12 students. (d) The WVUSD's current fee justification study concluded that no new school sites would need to be acquired and no new school facilities would need to be constricted to accommodate projected student population projections through at least 2023. (e) All qualifying residential and non-residential development projects located within the WVUSD's district boundaries are required to pay school impact fees. Notwithstanding, the findings of the WVUSD's fee justification analysis, the payment of applicable school impact fees or the execution of an AB 2926 mitigation agreement constitutes full and complete mitigation for project -related impacts on WVUSD facilities. M In November 2007, the area's voters approved General Obligation Bond Measure S ($64.6 million. Academic Facilities .Measure) and Measure Y ($15.2 million Physical Education Facilities Measure). As a result of those ballot measures, WVUSD schools will receive needed repairs and upgrades. (g) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.10 Utilities and Service Systems 5.10.1 Environmental Effect: Wastewater collection facilities do not presently exist on the project site and will not be available until the infrastructure improvements required to accommodate the proposed land uses are constructed (Utilities and Service Systems Impact 10-1). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative utilities and service systems impacts are addressed in Section 4.10 (Utilities and Service Systems) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The provision of potable water and toilet facilities is required under United States Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (29 CFR 1926.51) and California Department of industrial Relations, Division of Industrial Safety (Cal/OSHA) (Section 1524-1526, CCR) standards. (c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.10.2 Environmental Effect: The project's residential and commercial components are projected to generate approximately 89,435 gallons of wastewater per day (0.09 mgd). Applying a peaking factor of 2.7, the peaked flow rate would be about 241,475 gallons of wastewater per day (0.25 mgd) (Utilities and Service Systems Impact 10-2). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: 41 (a) Project -related and cumulative utilities and service systems impacts 'are addressed in Section 4.10 (Utilities and Service Systems) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (CSDLAC or Districts) has formulated average wastewater generation rates for a variety of land uses. The CSDLAC projects that for "condominium" units, each unit will generate approximately- 195 gallons of wastewater per day (gpd). Based on that generation rate, the project's 202 dwelling units are projected -to generate approximately 39,390 gpd of wastewater or 0.04 million gallons per day (mgd). (c) For the purpose of this analysis, a "shopping center" has been assumed. The CSDLAC's sewage generation rate for a "shopping center" is estimated to be 325 gallons/day/1,000 square feet (ftz). Based on shopping center containing 153,985 gross leasable square feet, an estimated 50,045 gpd (0.05 mgd) of wastewater would be generated daily. When projected residential and commercial wastewater estimates are combined, approximately 89,435 gpd (0.09 mgd) of wastewater would be generated daily. (d) Peak daily flow rates are higher than daily rates and serve as the basis for facility planning. Applying a peaking factor of 2.7, the peak flow rate would be about 241,475 gpd (0.25 mgd). (e) The project generally gravity flows sewage toward the west portion of the property. The wastewater flow originating from the proposed project will discharge to a local sewer line, which is not maintained by the CSDLAC, for conveyance to the Districts No. 21 Outfall Trunk Sewer, located in Brea Canyon Road at Via Sorella. This 18 -inch diameter trunk sewer has a design capacity of 12.3 mgd and conveyed a peak flow of 4.9 mgd when last measured in 2005. Assuming that peak flow rates have not changed substantially since 2005, even with the proposed project's projected contribution (0.25 mgd), sufficient capacity exists in the Districts No. 21 Outfall Truck Sewer to teadily accommodate the proposed development. ( Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 10-1) specifying that, prior to the issuance of any grading permits, a sewer area study, prepared by a licensed civil engineer registered in the State of California, be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer and the County. (g) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.10.3 Environmental Effect: Implementation of the proposed project and other related projects would impose cumulative impacts on those sewage collection and disposal facilities located in the general project area (Utility and Service Systems impact 10-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative utilities and service systems impacts are addressed in Section 4.10 (Utilities and Service Systems) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) At the project -specific level, local agencies require project proponents to assess 42 the impacts of proposed projects on existing sewer facilities, on an as -needed basis. Those analyses are conducted to identify any site-specific or project - specific improvements that may be required to the local and/or GSDLAC's sewer systems that may be needed to handle increased sewage flows attributable to each project. As required, all related projects must construct any requisite local wastewater improvements needed to handle their respective flows. (c) CSDLAC facilities are sized and improvements phased to serve population and economic development in accordance with forecasts adopted by SCAG. Projects that are consistent with SCAG growth forecasts can be adequately served by existing and planned CSDLAC facilities. (d) In order to fund planned improvements, each new project within the County is required to pay connection fees to the CSDLAC. These fees are used to finance future expansions and upgrades to the regional trunk sewer system and wastewater treatment facilities. (e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.11 Cultural Resources 5.11.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities can result in the irretrievable loss or damage to any prehistoric, historic, or paleontological resources that may exist within the area of proposed disturbance (Cultural Resources Impact 11-1). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative cultural resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.11 (Cultural Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing cultural resources setting, including an assessment of project -related impacts, is presented in "Phase I Cultural and Paleontological Resource Assessment of the Proposed Site D Development, Los Angeles County, California" (PCR Services Corporation, January 24, 2008). (c) No prehistoric archaeological resources have been previously recorded within one mile of the project site and no prehistoric resources were identified on the subject property during the pedestrian survey. (d) Results of the historic aerial photograph and topographic map review revealed that a structure (HS -1) was once located within the boundaries of the project site that was associated with the historic Diamond Bar Ranch Headquarters Compound. The Compound included the residence of Frederick E. Lewis, who owned and operated the Diamond Bar Ranch. There is a moderate potential for the site to retain buried domestic or ranch maintenance components such as trash pits, privy holes, and similar features. (e) Results of the pedestrian survey revealed the identification of a historical archaeological site, consisting of more than 15 non-native eucalyptus trees and concrete debris concentration likely associated with the former location of HS -1. The significance of that site with respect to CEQA is considered to be undetermined. 43 ( Based on the potential presence of significant cultural resources impacts, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 11-1 through 11-3) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP requiring that, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified archaeologist be retained to.monitor all vegetation removal and ground disturbance to a depth of three feet within specified areas.- If cultural resources are identified during monitoring of the ground disturbing activities, the archaeologist shall temporarily divert or redirect grading or excavation activities in the vicinity of those resources in order to make an evaluation of the find and determine appropriate treatment. If human remains are encountered unexpectedly during construction excavation and grading activities, Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code (HSC) requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Section 5097.98 of the PRC. implementation of those measures will reduce identified impacts to below a level of significance. 5.11.2 Environmental Effect: Ground disturbance activities could result in impacts to on-site paleontological resources, including fossil remains, from the Puente Formation (Cultural Resources Impact 11-2). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative cultural resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.11 (Cultural Resources) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Results of the paleontological resources records search revealed that the study area is underlain by the Puente Formation (also known as the Monterey Formation in the region), which is a formation known to contain diverse and well- preserved marine vertebrate fossils. The results of the pedestrian survey confirmed the exposure of the Puente Formation on the project site identified four fossil localities in backdirt piles from geotechnical core sampling. The project site is considered to be highly sensitive for paleontological resources. (c) Based' on the potential presence of significant cultural resources impacts, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 11-4 through 11 8) have been included in the FOR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP requiring that, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified paleontologist meeting the qualifications established by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontologists be retained to develop and implement a paleontological monitoring plan. A paleontological monitor, supervised by the paleontologist, shall monitor all excavations in the Puente Formation or excavations anticipated to extend into the Puente Formation. The paleontologist shall prepare a final report on the monitoring. If fossils were identified, the report shall contain an appropriate description of the fossils, treatment, and curation. A copy of the report shall be filed with the City and the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County and shall accompany any curated fossils. Implementation of those measures will reduce identified impacts to below a level of significance. 5.11.3 Environmental Effect: Grading activities conducted on other sites located within the general project area could result in'impacts to any historic or prehistoric resources that 44 may be located thereupon. In addition, earth -moving activities conducted on other undisturbed sites containing the Puente Formation could result in the loss of recoverable paleontological resources (Cultural Resources Impact 11-3). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative cultural resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.11 (Cultural Resources) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) All cumulative project activities remain subject all applicable site-specific local, State, ands federal and must fully conform to and comply PP requirements. compliance with those requirements will ensure that all related project -specific and cumulative impacts upon prehistoric, historic, and paleontological resources are mitigated to a less -than -significance level. (c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.12 Aesthetics 5.12.1 Environmental Effect: Excluding those areas that will be retained as open space, the project site will take on a distinctively urban physiographic character as existing vegetation is removed, construction equipment introduced onto the site, hillside areas recontoured, new uses are introduced, and other physical modifications occur (Aesthetic Impact 12-1). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts�pport of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12 (Aesthetics) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The proposed development will consist of three mass -graded "super pads," including one proposed commercial pad (with an area of about 10.09 acres) and two proposed residential pads (ranging in area from about'4.02 to 6.05 acres). The pads w611 be developed by balanced cut and fill grading. Cuts will range from less than five feet to about 40 feet high. Fill slopes will range in height from a few feet to approximately 60 feet down-slope from the upper residential pad to Diamond Bar Boulevard. (c) City policies encourage the use of contour grading and landform grading techniques in order to create more naturalized engineered slope areas. Proposed grading activities seek to apply these contour grading principals to the proposed engineered slope areas, creating, where practical, curvilinear features that produce a visual transition between engineered and natural open space areas. (d) Although construction is short-term in duration, it serves as precursors to the long-term visual changes that will occur as a result of those activities. During development, construction activities may appear disharmonious with the current perception of the existing property as an open -space area. At the end of the 45 construction term, the site will take on a distinctively urban character and shall generally be perceived as an urban use. (e) Based on the City's interpretation and general application of the visual resource assessment methodology outlined in the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) ,Visual Resource Management Program.." (BLM, 1986), construction -induced changes would be considered adverse but less than significant. (� Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures are recommended or required. ation will alter 5.12.2 EnvironmentEnecessitate thel constru tion oftnumerous eta ni gthe wa Is (Aesthetic topography and Impact 12-2). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1)• Facts in Support of Findin4: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12 (Aesthetics) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Variable height Loffel (Loffelstein) retaining walls, ranging from several feet to about 23 feet high, are proposed near the mid -slope of the 2:1 fill slopes between each of the super pads. Although the proposed retaining walls exceeds the height limitations specified in 'Sections 22.20.040, 22.22.080(b) -(c), and 22.52.020 of the Municipal Code, the proposed walls would be authorized under the provisions of the proposed specific plan. R (c) Large retaining walls, absent integrated landscaping and irrigation, can become dominant visual elements that produce a sharp contrast between retained natural features and introduced cultural modifications. All walls over eight feet in height are cribwalls designed to incorporate landscaping as an integral design element. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standardcondition of approval (Condition of Approval 12-1) specifying that the specific plan include design details, acceptable to both the City Engineer and to the Community Development Director, for all proposed retaining walls. Retaining wall plans shall include landscape and irrigation details sufficient to ensure that each of those elements are, as appropriate, integrated into wall design and that the interrelationship between those elements are considered from structural integrity and aesthetic viewpoints. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.12.3 Environmental Effect: The introduction of new residential and commercial uses will add new sources of artificial lighting to the project site .and could result in light trespass extending beyond the project boundaries (Aesthetic Impact 12-3). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: 46 (a) ' Project -related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12 (Aesthetics) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) has established recommended outdoor lighting illumination levels. Lighting that conform to those standards would be assumed to produce a less -than -significant impact. (c) As defined by the IESNA and the International Darksky Association (IDA), a widely used light trespass standard specifies thato a maximuman te standard is to of 0.5 horizontal limit the exterior lighting originating on a property foot candles (HFC) at a distance of 25 feet beyond the property lines. (d) Based on the potential presence of significant aesthetic impacts, a mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure 12-1) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP requiring that pole -mounted or wall -mounted luminaires installed for the purpose of illuminating commercial areas, parking lots, roadways,. and driveways, conform to appropriate lighting standards and demonstrate that light trespass not exceed 0.5 NFC, as measured at the project boundaries abutting any existing residential use. implementation of that measure will reduce identified impacts to below a level of significance. 5.12.4 Environmental Effect: Much of the San Gabriel Valley is already highly urbanized and the area�s the dominance of�u ban development (Aesthetic glmpact 12-4)_significance as a respite to Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12 (Aesthetics) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The City and other municipalities located within the County formulate long-range planning documents with the intent of directing development and redevelopment activities to those areas most conducive to growth, based on a variety of planning considerations. Separate formal planning and environmental review processes exist when a development proposal seeks to modify those adopted long-range plans. (c) No development is authorized to occur in the absence of compliance with adopted agency plans and policies and in the absence of appropriate environmental review. Compliance with and conformity to adopted plans and policies helps to mitigate the potential cumulative impacts produced by the visual pes associated with future development and changes to existing landsca redevelopment activities. While the further intensification of the region may. constitute an adverse impact, the incremental and inevitable changes resulting from those activities would not be deemed a significant cumulative impact on the region's existing visual resources. (c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.13 Growth Inducement 5.13.1 Environmental Effect: Because the project includes both an amendment to the "City of Diamond Bar General Plan" and the adoption of a specific plan, the project may result in 47 on-site development activities that exceed current development assumptions and necessitate the provision of unplanned services and facilities beyond the project boundaries (Growth Inducement Impact 13-1). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Findinq: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative growth -inducing impacts are addressed in Section 4.13 (Growth Inducement) in the FOR and that analysis is in by reference herein. (b) California State law requires that every city and county prepare and. adopt a long- term, comprehensive general plan for its future development. The. -general plan serves as a "constitution for development' and the foundation upon which all land -use decisions in a city or county are to be based. (c) implementation of the proposed project will change existing land -use policies with regards to the allowable use of the project site, resulting in an intensification of uses within the City beyond that now envisioned in the City General Plan. Since planning for public services is, in whole or in part, based on existing and projected demands for those services, changes in public land -use policies have the potential to impose additional unplanned demands upon those services and facilities_ (d) Although the site is designated for public facilities, the public facility provider which owns the majority of the project site has declared the property to be surplus and not required for public facility use. As such, although. project implementation will result in a modification to existing land -use policies, the resulting use is not anticipated to necessitate the provision of unplanned services and facilities beyond the project boundaries. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.13.2 Environmental Effect: (Growth Inducement Impact 13-2). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Findinq: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative growth -inducing impacts are addressed in Section 4.13 (Growth Inducement) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The construction of 202 dwelling units and the introduction of 153,985 square feet of commercial use will increase the City's population by an estimated 662 individuals and directly create an estimated 462 new permanent jobs. (c) The size and duration of the proposed project is not sufficient to predicate any substantial in -migration of new workers into the general project area. The projects incremental contribution to localized, regional, and national employment opportunities would not create substantial significant secondary impacts. 48 (d) Project implementation will, therefore, not result in the removal of economic, itical constraints affecting either the project site or other near - physical, and/or pol site properties. (e) With the exception of off-site traffic improvements, the project does not include the expansion of any infrastructure systems that would accommodate additional off-site development. The traffic improvements identified as mitigation measures herein serve to accommodate the proposed project, ambient growth, and other related projects. (f) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 6,p FINDINGS REGARDING MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM The City Council has adopted or will likely adopt the MRMP set forth in the FEIR. The City council hereby finds n ds1 that the of he meets the requiGuiderements of Section 21081.6 of CEQA and Section 7.0 FINDINGS REGARDING AIPROJECT ALTERNATIVES NOT SELECTED FOR IMPLEM The City Council recognizes that the SDSP will result in significant unavoidable environmental cance. The City Council impacts due to specified econom c, legal, soc al, technological, feasibly reduced to below a level of f d other conside rations, eadch that () of the project alternatives examined in the FOR are infeasible; (2) each of the Project FOR will not fulfill the identified project's stated objectives; and/or alternatives examined in the F es examined in the ! (3) each of the leernativ ant or potentially significant ienvironmental feasibly nvi onmntal impacts assoa ated of any of the urr with the proposed project. 7.1 Alternative No. 1 ("No Project" Alternative) es Alternative Prosect Description: Under this be emainalternative !nno its present ndittiion,tandenoro ject i new site would occur, the property would development activities or other public improvements would occur thereupon. No grading or other landform modifications would occur. Maintenance activities, including weed abatement, would routinely be performed and the existing level of use would continue generally in the manner now experienced. In keeping with the general intent of this alternative, one possible variation would involve the use of a sufficient portion of the City Property to allow for the development of street improvements to the Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard intersection. Com arison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Project; The City Council finds that the "No Project" alternative" is "environmentally superior" to the since it would, at least in the short term, result in the avoidance of proposed project those significant construction, operational, and cumulative air quality impacts associated with the. proposed project. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: 49 (a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0 (Alternatives Analysis) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Under this alternative, no new housing units and no new commercial square footage would be constructed on the project site. (c) The "no project" alternative generally reflects the conditions and associated environmental impacts that would predictably occur should the Lead Agency elect to either deny the proposed project or fail to take affirmative action on the proposed application, resulting in, at least, the short-term retention of the site in its existing condition. The denial of the current development application or the cessation of current process would, however, neither preclude the submission of a subsequent development application either by the current project proponent or another party nor ensure the site's retention as an open space area. (d) With regards to construction air quality impacts, under the proposed project, combined emissions or reactive organic gases (ROG) were estimated at 136.02 pounds/day. Since that value exceeds the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, construction impacts would be deemed to be significant. Since, under the "no project" alternative, no development would occur on the site, construction emissions would be eliminated and short-term air quality impacts would be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (e) With regards to operational air quality impacts, the proposed project is projected to create ROG, oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and carbon dioxide (CO) emissions in excess of SCAQMD's suggested daily threshold criteria. Since, under the "no project" alternative, no development would occur on the project site, operational emissions would be eliminated and long-term air quality impacts would be reduced tb a less -than -significant level. (f) With regards to cumulative air quality impacts, independent of the Lead Agency's actions concerning the project site, related project activities will continue to incrementally contribute to regional air emissions within the SCAB_ However, since site-specific contributions will not add to those conditions, cumulative air quality impacts would be deemed to be less than significant. Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives: The City Council finds that the "No Project" alternative would not substantially meet the stated project Objectives. Feasibili : Although a substantial portion of the project site is owned by the District, the District has declared the District Property surplus and seeks to dispose of their real property holdings in order to raise funds for other eligible expenditures. As stipulated in the MOU between the City and the District, upon the approval of the specific plan for the development of Site D (if such approval were to occur), the "District agrees to use its best efforts to sell the School Property as entitled by the City for the fair, market value, in accordance with the provisions of California Education Code commencing with Section 17455. City agrees to use its best efforts to sell the City Property for the fair market value. The parties agree to cooperatively work with each other to coordinate the sale of Site D_" In the absence of public and/or private purchase of the project site for the purpose of open space preservation, there exists no mechanism to ensure. the long-term preservation of the project site in an undeveloped condition. As a result, absent that participation, the "No Project" alternative is deemed to be infeasible. 50 T.2 Alternative Flo. 2 ("Public f=acilities" Alternative) Alternative Prosect Description: The District Property is presently designed "Public Facilities (PF)" in the General Plan. Although there exists no corresponding zoning designation which relates exclusively to public facilities, this altemative is predicated lan designation across the entire upon the geographic expansion of that General P project site and the development of the property in accordance with the declared intent of that General Plan designation. For the purpose of this alternatives analysis, under this altemative, it is assumed that the estimated developable area of the project site his acres) is developed at afloor-area-ratio of 0.25. Under this alternative, a total of 220,0()o.2ac square feet of public facilities use would be developed on the project site. For the purpose of CEQA compliance, the FEIR assumed the sale of the project site to a private entity, such as a religious organization or operator of a parochial school. Under this alternative; the project site would be developed to include a 73,000 square foot (500 -student) private school and a 147,000 square foot (2,500 -seat) church. A fellowship area would be developed within the sanctuary building which would be made available for public use as a banquet facility. improvements wuld include s pare foot al school campus, including classrooms, library, and approximately q (1,000 -seat capacity) multi-purpose auditorium, outdoor recreational facilities, offices and administrative facilities, maintenance area, and caretaker's residence. The gymnasium would serve the private school and be available for the community for use after school hours, including after school programs administered by the Boys and Girls n. In addition, once operational, other on-site activities are Club or similar organizatio non-residential child-care services, family -care services, activities assumed to include non-res and uses catering to youth groups, music and drama ministries, counseling, prayer meetings, bible study, nutrition programs, homeless outreach and assistance programs, nd community and pus would alsoe coassociatd ntain 6!000 square feetf onal, job training, re ail uses (book store). s activities. The camp Com arison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Pro'ect: The City Council finds that the "Public Facilities" alternative is "environmentally superior' to the proposed project since it would result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of those significant operational air quality impacts associated with the proposed project. Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0 (Alternatives Analysis) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. Implementation of this alternative will result in the generation of approximately 2,478 daily vehicle trips during a typical weekday, including 336 AM peak -hour trips. in comparison, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 9,276 daily two-way vehicle trips, including 272 trips during the weekday AM and 650 trips during the PM peak hours. Based on the nature of this alternative, trip generation characteristics would differ between weekdays and on Sunday. Based on the Sunday operation, this alternative would generate approximately 5,508 daily (Sunday) vehicle trips, including 1,412 AM peak -hour trips. In comparison, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 9,276 daily two-way vehicle trips, including 272 trips during the weekday AM and 650 trips during the PM peak hours. (a) (b) (c) 51 (d) With regards to construction air quality impacts, under the proposed project, combined emissions or ROG were estimated at 136.02 poundstday. Since this value exceeds the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, construction impacts would be deemed to be significant. Although, under this alternative, on- site development activities may be reduced (220,000 square feet of public facility use as compared to 153,985 square feet of neighborhood -serving commercial use and 202 dwelling units), maximum daily construction activities would be anticipated to be similar. As a result, construction air quality impacts would be assumed to be similar to those associated with the proposed project and would remain significant. (e) With regards to operational air quality impacts, the proposed project is projected to create ROG, NOx, and CO emissions in excess of the SCAQMD suggested daily threshold criteria. implementation of this alternative would result in the generation of approximately 2,478 daily vehicle trips during a typical vdeekday (compared to 9,278 daily two-way vehicletrips associated with the proposed project), including 336 AM peak -hour trips (compared to 650 PM peak -hour trips associated with the proposed project). As a result, under this alternative, mobile source emissions would be substantially reduced. For the purpose of this alternatives analysis, it is assumed that operational air quality impacts would be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (fl With regards to cumulative air quality impacts, related project activities, in combination with this alternative's construction and operation, would incrementally contribute to regional air emissions within the SCAB. Under the SCAQMD's recommended methodology, development activities that generate significant air quality impacts are also assumed to generate significant cumulative air quality impacts. Effectiveness in Meeting Project Oblectives: The City Council finds that the "Public Facilities' alternative would not substanually meet the stated project objectives to minimum of 50 percent of the usable acreage, facilitate residential development on a and commercial development on 50 percent of the usable acreage. Moreover, insofar as public facilities are owned and run by tax exempt entities, development pursuant to the "Public Facilities" alternatives would not only fail to provide a desirable level of sales erty to be removed from the property tax rolls. tax revenue, but may also cause the prop Feasibilit : Excluding economic considerations which were not addressed in the FEIR, the City Council finds that.the "Public Facilities" alternative is feasible. 7.3 Alternative No. 3 ("Community Commercial" Alternative) Prosect Description: Under this alternative, the project site would be Alternative .developed for commeercial use in accordance with the "Neighborhood Commercial (C-1)" standards outlined Chapter 22.10 (Commercial/industrial Zoning Districts) of the Municipal Code. As specified in Section 22.10.020 (Purpose of Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts) therein, the C-1 zoning district is applied to areas appropriate for a wide range of retail shopping and service uses, primarily intended to serve the needs of City -area-ratio (FAR) for non-residential development shall be residents. The allowable floor from 0.25 to 1.00 (Section 21.10.040). Based on a FAR of 0.35 applied to the estimated net acreage (20.2 net acres), a total of 307,969 square feet of commercial use would be developed on the project site. The site would be developed as a multi -tenant center "big -box" uses and a number of out -pads. Except as provided in including one or more 52 the Municipal Coe, building heights would not exceed 35 feet. On-site parking would be provided at a ratio of one space for each 300 square feet of gross floor area plus one space for each 1,000 uare feet of outdoor aPe nat a specific grading display g plan could closely that associated with the SDSP.he Corn arison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Pro'ect: The City Council finds that the "Community Commercial" alternative is not "environmentally superior" to the proposed project since it would not result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of those significant construction, operational, and cumulative air quality impacts associated with the proposed project. Facts 1n Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The City s analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0 (Alternatives Analysis) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) With regards to construction air quality impacts, under the proposed project, combined emissions or ROG were estimated at 136.02 pounds/day. Since this value exceeds the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, construction impacts would be deemed to be significant. Under this alternative, on-site development activities may be increased (307,969 square feet of neighborhood- serving commercial use as compared to 153,985 square feet of comparable commercial use and 202 dwelling units). However, because an on-site grading rdi g ofthe project site would be required to create building p a aon system, maximum daily construction activities would be anticipated to be similar. As a result, construction air quality impacts would be assumed to be similar to those associated with the proposed project and would remain significant. (c) With regards to operational air quality impacts, the proposed project is projected to create ROG, NOx, and CQ emissions in excess of the SCAQMD suggested daily threshold criteria. Under this alternative, the resulting retail shopping center is projected to generate substantially greater volumes of peak hour and daily vehicle trips that the proposed residential and commercial development. Notwithstanding the elimination of 202 dwelling units, the doubling of the square footage of on-site commercial uses would result in a net increase in the number of peak hour and daily vehicle trips generated under this alternative. Based on that increase in alternative-related traffic, operational air quality impacts would be projected to remain significant. (d) With regards to cumulative air quality impacts, related project activities, in combination with this alternative's construction and operation, would incrementally contribute to reg. Under the ional air a development mentn th SCAQMD's recommended methodology, act vit esAB at generate significant air quality impacts are also assumed to generate significant cumulative air quality impacts. Effectiveness in Meeting Protect _Ob' _ecfives: The City Council finds that the "Community Commercial" alternative would not substantially meet the stated project objectives in that it would not provide for the requisite percentage of residential development. Feasibilit : Excluding economic considerations which are not addressed in the FEIR, the City Council finds that the "Community Commercial" alternative is feasible. 5:3 7.4 Alternative Pio. 4. ("Low -Density Residential" Alternative) EPCj t Description: The eastern portion of the project site is zoned "Low Density Residential (R 1-7,500)" on the City's official Zoning Map. This alternative is predicated upon the geographic expansion of the "Low Density Residential (RLY.zoning designation within the estimated developable area of the project site (20.2 net acres) at a density of 3 dwelling units per acre. Under this alternative, a total of about 60 single-family detached and/or single-family attached units would be developed on clos the eroject that Under this alternative, the alternative -specific grading p Yreplicate associated with the SDSP. Com arison of the Effects of the Altemative to the Effects of the Pro osed Project: The City. Council finds. that the "Low -Density Residential" alternative is "environmentally superior" to the proposed project since it would result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of those significant operational air quality impacts associated with the proposed project. Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The City's' analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0 (Alternatives Analysis) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) With regards to construction air quality impacts, under the proposed project, I combined emissions or ROG were estimated at 136.02 pounds/day. Since this value exceeds the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, construction impacts would be deemed to be significant. Under this alternative, on-site development activities may be substantially decreased (60 dwelling units compared to 153,985. square feet of commercial use and 202 dwelling units). v However, because mass grading of the project site would be required to create building pads and an on-site circulation system, maximum daily construction activities would be anticipated to be similar. As a result, construction air quality impacts would be assumed to be similar to those associated with the proposed project and would, therefore, remain significant. (c) With regards to operational air quality impacts, the proposed project is projected to create ROG, NOx, and CO emissions in excess of the SCAQMD suggested daily threshold criteria. Residential projects generate substantially lower volumes of peak hour and daily vehicle trips that comparably sized retail shopping center projects. Similarly, although some differences exist based on the type of residential development proposed, projects with fewer dwelling units can be assumed to generate a lesser number of peak hour and daily vehicle trips that projects with a greater number of dwelling units. 'As a result, under this alternative, mobile source emissions would be substantially reduced. For the purpose of this alternatives analysis, it is assumed that operational air quality impacts would be reduced to a less -than -significant level. . (d) With regards to cumulative air quality impacts, related project activities, in combination with this alternative's construction and operation would incrementally contribute to regional air emissions within the SCAB. Under the SCAQMD's recommended methodology, development activities that generate significant air.. quality impacts are also assumed to generate significant cumulative air quality impacts. 54 Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives: The City Council finds that the "Low - Density Residential alternative would not substantially meet the stated project objectives in that it would not provide for the requisite percentage of commercial development. Moreover, as a result of Diamond Bar's very limited land inventory, a low density alternative would not only cause the City to lose substantial ground in fulfilling its housing growth need on a site properly suited for higher density housing, but it would increase the burden on other available and potentially available (i.e. those which need to be rezoned during the current Housing Element period) sites to reach the City's RHNA targets. Feasibili Excluding economic considerations. which are not addressed in the FEIR, the City Council finds that the "Low -Density Residential" alternative is feasible. 7,5 Alternative No. 5 ("High -Density Residential" Alternative) Project Description: Under this alternative, the project site would be developed for with the "High Density Residential" (RH)" standards residential use in accordance outlined in Chapter 22.08 (Residential Zoning Districts) of the Municipal Code. As specified, the maximum allowable density in this district is 20 dwelling units per acre. Based on the estimated net acreage • (20.2 net acres), a total of approximately 404 dwelling units could be constructed on the property. Under this alternative, the alternative -specific grading plan could closely replicate that associated with the SDSP. Com arison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Project: The City Council finds that the "High -Density Residential' alternative is "environmentally superior" to the proposed project since it would result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of those significant operational air quality impacts associated with the proposed project. Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0 (Alternatives Analysis) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) As stipulated in Section 22.22.040 (Density) of the Municipal Code, the maximum number of units that may be allowed on a given parcel subject to the hillside management ordinance is calculated in compliance with specified requirements. In accordance with the City's hillside management ordinance, a maximum of 524 dwelling units can be constructed within the project area. The number of dwelling units that would be constructed under this alternative (404 units) is less than the number allowable under the City's hillside management ordinance. (c) Implementation of this alternative will result in the generation of approximately 2,368 daily vehicle trips during a typical weekday, including 178 AM peak -hour trips and 210 PM peak -hour trips. In comparison, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 9,276 daily two-way vehicle trips, including 272 trips during the weekday AM and 6.50 trips during the PM peak hours. (d) With regards to construction air quality impacts, under the proposed project, combined emissions or RQG were estimated at 136.02 poundslday. Since this value exceeds the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, construction impacts would be deemed to be significant. Under this alternative, on-site development activities would consist of 404 attached dwelling units, compared to 153,985 square feet of neighborhood -serving commercial use and 202 dwelling units. Because mass grading of the project site would be required to create building pads and an on-site circulation system, maximum daily construction activities would be anticipated to be similar. As a result, construction -term air quality impacts would be assumed to be similar to those associated with the proposed project and would, therefore, remain significant. (e) With regards to operational air quality impacts, the proposed project is projected to create ROG, NOx, and CO emissions in excess of the SCAQMD suggested daily threshold criteria. Because this alternative would generate substantially lower volumes of peak hour and daily vehicle trips that associated with the proposed project, mobile source emissions would be substantially reduced. For the purpose of. this altematives analysis, it is assumed that operational air quality impacts would be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (f) With regards to cumulative air quality impacts, related project activities, in combination with this alternative's construction and operation' would incrementally contribute to regional air emissions within the SCAB. Under the SCAQMD's recommended methodology, development activities that generate significant air quality impacts are also assumed to generate significant cumulative air quality impacts. Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives: The City Council finds that the "High - Density Residential" alternative would not substantially meet the stated project objectives in that it would not provide for the requisite percentage of commercial development. Feasibili : Excluding economic considerations which are not addressed in the FEIR, the City Council finds that the "High -Density Residential" alternative is feasible. 8.0 PROJECT BENEFITS The City Council finds the proposed project would result in a number of identifiable community benefits. Those benefits include, but may not be limited. to: (1) Adoption of the proposed $DSP will serve to define the types of permitted and conditionally permitted land uses that the City Council believes to be appropriate for the project site and for the project setting, define reasonable limits to the type, intensity, and density of those uses, and establish the design and development standards for those uses. (2) Adoption of the proposed SDSP will serve as a valuable regulatory tool fort e n of the City's General Plan. systematic implementatio (3) Adoption of the proposed SDSP will impose reasonable development controls and nsure the integrated development of the project site. standards designed to e (q) The proposed project will facilitate the District's efforts to sell surplus District Property by ble certainty as to the type, intensity, and providing a subsequent purchaser reasona general configuration of allowable on-site land uses. (5) Adoption of the proposed SDSP will optimize the benefits of the District sale of surplus District property for the benefit of its constituents and its educational mission. (6) The proposed project will result in the production of 202 new housing units within the City, thus helping the City respond to.the identified housing demand outlined in the current "Regional Housing Needs Assessment" (RHNA). 56 (7) The construction and sale of attached residential condominium units present future homebuyers with additional purchase options and price variations allowing homebuyers to better match housing choices with household needs and demands. (g) The jobs-to- housing `alto fa mixed-use ob'ectves established by lopment vreg oill nalogove nmentalattainment entities and regional produce housing 1 corresponding environmental benefits. (g) Project approval will allow for the productive use of r private underublized property introduce the (use General Plan, convert a tax-exempt Property P that will generate sales and other taxes for the benefit of the City and its constituents. (10) Improvements to the Diamond Bar Boulevard/Brea Canyon Road intersection will improve traffic flow in and through that intersection. (11) Payment of school impactions. and traffic impact fees and other exactions. will facilitate the ability of the City and other agencies to undertake improvements to specific public facilities. (12) Adoption con ectionsher the betweenent the fressiiid residential and facilitating mmehorizontal will commercial with components. with p Without transit infrastructure (other than bus routes), mixed use developments can p ay a greater role in local efforts to reduce VMT. 9.0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS As described above, the proposed project would produce significant unavoidable adverse impact in the following three topical areas: (1) Air Quality (Construction Impact); (2) Air Quality (operational impact): and (3) Air Quality (Cumulative Impact). Each of those identified the City Council's adoption or likely adoption of those mitigatiocts will continue to manifest as nmeasur s identified nificant impacts notwithstanding FEIR. the City In order to determine `y the ethe roposed anntic patedobenefi s, Section 15093 of he Stateal environmental cts are CEQA acceptably overridden by project's Guidelines requires the City to balance the potential benefits of the proposed project against the project's potential unavoidable significant environmental impacts. rev le The se envirocnlmendtaltrimptactsp( finsat of the (y stated proposed project. benefits outweigh ofthe significant theseparate and distinct adve benefits of the proposed project is determined to be, in themselves and independently of any riding all unavoidable environmental impacts, as other identified benefit, a basis for over identified in these Findings., The City Council has identified economic and social benefits and important public policy objectives that will result from implementation of the proposed project. The City Council has sought to balance these substantial economic social bene c and fits against the significant will project. the substantial unavoidable denvironmental effects of the ttDstrct, and tothe region from the anoomcbenefts that acrue to the city, o the implementation of the proposed project, the City Council finds that the proposed projects identified benefits override the project's identified significant environmental impacts. 1114 "Site D" Specific Pian City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 MONITORING PROGRAM itigatron AND ._.;. .Milestone DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING •v.erif�ca ion:.. •. Mitigation:Measure No Cors of Engineers and Regionaljurisdictional Hlologicai Resources to United States Army P CDFG) j Fish and Game ( Issuance of acts and California Department of Control Board (ACOEIRWQ eBr )mit the Applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction oft e Jurisdictional Features. In order to reduce Imp rove/ as may be required from the app o Community Grading Development permits Water Quality grading P discretionary Permits and waters, prior to the issuance of a g compensatory junsdietional resources meeting of ACOE/RWQC Development Director, receipt of any of comp Director Community urisdicuonal 5-1 ACOE, RWQCB, and CDFG and standar t the provision lacement ofe Diu ea Into the the fallowing minimal standards: (1) the on-site and/or off-site replacement h 2 the on -sit and/or of design )ratio; exceeding and ( ) elncorpoeation jurisdictional waters and wetlandsat habitat 2,1rattia 2(1 streambed and associated and development. proposed project's designity Engineer, of t �trCibutiongtoward Traffic and Circulation the Applicant shall provide, to the satisfaction act analysis or provide a "fair -share" Road (tM at Pathfinder Road; (Z) trafficBar Final Tract Map city Recordation Prior to the recordatiovaments identified in th Brea Canyon tersec ons: (1) Lane; (4) Diamond the intersection imp on Road at Cold SpringS-57 58 Ramps at Brea to the following •3 Brea Canyon ) Engineer the cost of the improvements 6 Pathfinder Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff; ( a Brea Canyon. Diamond Bar Boulevard atpathfinder (n) er Road; () CutofflDiamond Bar Bo10v��a(Canyon Road at 6-1 Boulevard at Cold Spring 57 N) Ramps at Brea CanyonCanyRn Cutoff. Cham dale Drive at Diamond Bar (12) Colima Road at Brea Cutoff Road; (7) SR- (1 Site Plan Canyon 9 Road at Diamond Bar Boulevard; () rove, encs, and such other Drive; (11) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Grand Avenue; and imp and efficient City Approval Engineer Eng Silver Bullet m id ntlf those traffic measures, shall includes identified by the Clty Engineer to ensure the safe The final site planas may be Building Permit 6.2 pe erri tf movement of project -related traffic. (loo gramlliter) of volatile organic Community Issuance Devefopment Building Permit Air Quality ound/gallon paints shall contain no more than 0.22 P roved by the City of p be app Director issuance All non-residential 7-1 compound (VOC). pollution reduction measures as may shall abide by any other air p ement District. QualityManag and will Building Permit Issuance City Applicant The APP the South Coast Air shall be implemented In the traffic study, 7-2 Diamond Bar and/or by ro act area. as created in the P i signta�e Engineer Building Permit Issuance eby r•educingned Traffic lane improvements and emissions pus stops 7-3 improve IOcal traffic flow, • shall Place bus stop shelters at any generally licant the us mass ortation, the App so equipped. tany ssite frontage routes if not already sTo ituated ora tobesituated along 7-4 June 2009 page ES -16 �— act Report nraft Environmental Imp M c3" �y "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 (Continued) :. ati DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM..Cgirlpliance_=-':.; ?Mitigation. Mitigation'tMeastare ?;: '•:>1fe:i I,cpg:<? %:�-`Milestone June 2009 Page ES -17 Draft Environmental impact Report Executive Summary } f Air Quality (Continued) commercial facilities and reduce the need for vehicle travel, the Applicant shall commercial development Cjky Final Tract Map Engineer Recordatien 7-5 To encourage the use of localized e paths Include both bike lanes (where feasible) and bike pa#hs between the residential and feasible) and walking paths to the proposed commercial areas. areas. Additionally, the App lie shall provide lighting, air conditioning, water heaters, and City Building Permit 7-g The Applicant shat! s eci the installation of energy efficient appliances for all residential and commercial uses. Engineer issuance 7-7 The Applicant shall specify the installation of energy efficient street lighting. Nose with the Development Code, construction shall be restricted to between the hours of dere AM and at any time on Sundays or on federal Building Construction Inspector Term In accordance n a or on weekdays and Saturdays. No construction shall occur an n steal o of equipment and to the delivery of materials to or Y 8-t holidays. These days and hours shall also apply Building Construction from the site. maintained and tuned to minimize noise emissions. Inspector Term Construction 8-2 All construction equipment shall be properly air Intake silencers, and engine shrouds no ess Building Inspector Term All equipment shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers, 8-3 effective than originally equipped, the site p work shall place temporary noise barriers along perimeter doing any the line of sight between the residents Building Construction Inspector Term The construction contractor feet of any residential units. Such barriers shall attempt to block 6-4 within 100 and construction equipment ry e, compressors) that can shall specify the use of electric stationary equipment generators and source (e.g., 9 City Building Permit Engineer issuance 6-5 The construction contractor , operate off the power grid where feasible. Where infeasible, stationary shall be located as far from residential receptor locations as is feasible. _ planning Building Permit Issuance compressors) forth by the City of Diamond Bar Planning Department. Manager e-6 Construction shall be subJect to any and all provisions set travel lane unless additional Final Tract Map Community Recordation No residential units shall be located within 630 feet of the 5R-57 Freeway's nearest the of the Community Development Director. Development Building Permit 6 7 sound attention is provided to satisfaction of Diamond Bar Boulevard. Director Issuance 8-6 . No commercial units shall be located within 60 feet of the centerline June 2009 Page ES -17 Draft Environmental impact Report Executive Summary } f "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 (Continued) REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM Compliance. Mitigation DRAFT MITIGATION -•verification. Milestone Mitigation •Measure No. Community Final Tract Map Noise (Continued)Development ulevard unless additions Recordation Director N o residential l units ll be located within13 f et 0CohmmunitylDevel plment Director. to th e g and pro so Cultural Resources the Applicant and permit, a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by th ofthrea feat within the disturbance to a e issuance of a grading p scent to SD- Community Development . Issuance of Director Grading Prior to the of SD -Cultural -1; (2) the open valley floor adj approved by the City to monitor all vegetation removal and ground following portions of the study area: (1) the boundary due to and is ed aced on and Permits City 11-1 Cultural -1; and (3) the riparian areas that were not previouslyodepth of three feet req logical lmon IcIareals aterials. Na archaeological monitoring is required will determine if additional monitoring Engineer archaeologist bedrock conditionsand disturbing prises outside of a of.archaeolese r she e for ground resources are identified during monitoring of the ground disturbing activities, the archaeologist in the vicinity of those resources in order include the goals of . if cultural ria divert or redirect grading or excavatio tractivities eatment. Treatment will allowed to tempora y ro riots All evaluation of the find and determine app p site Forms to be filed of his ao� to make an arttoricment of Parks and Recreation with the preservation where practicable and public interpretation about the m'onlitoring o be resources recovered will be documented on California Dep System South Central Coastal information shall prepare a final rep Historic SystemrequireSO.bY Construction Building Term with the CHRIS-SCCIC. The archaeologist as the California Office of recovered, i E.M. Applicant, the City, and the California Historical ResourcesCHRISSCCIC)tias Fullerton ( ( Inspector n and In of resources The report shall include daculleton -Culturalact to the Californa Register of 11-2 Center at the California State University, incluy of SDpecialists, with reThe City Preservation. endices. Interpretation will include full evaluatlon o,,, eo 85 aPPsp id aitifie es CEQA. The report shall also include all specialists, reports rbin disturbing di ad Historic Places and area, ground designate repositories in the event that significant resources adtby he ae and until the monitoringIs of the fin natad monitoring vicinity the desig during ground disturbing activities that occur treatment of the find until a om the shall be temporarily redirected awaylicant as to the immediate coordinate with the App Applicant. The archaeologist shall site visit and evaluation is made by the archaeologist. activities, Health proper of human remains are encountered unexpectedly during construction excavation and grading requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner a 5097.98 of the Public Resources Construction Building Term and Safety Code Section 7050.5 s as to origin and disposition pursuant to Section the County Coroner has 24 ours made the necessary finding the ersan,(s) Identify P Inspector The NAHC will then Native America determined Heritage Comm scion (NAHC).ent, If 11-3 not,fy American, who will then help determine what thetCaliforinia Likelyems ns.ative thought to be the Most k dealing with the remains. coe action should be taken in June 2009 page ES '18 Draft Environmental impact Report Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 (Continued) DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM iCQpliance= :;;Mitigation . - :•Mitigailori Measure'' •Versification' .No. June 2009 Draft -Environmental impact Report Page ES -19 Executive Summary ! ! Iv Cultural Resources (Continued) Prior r the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified paleontologist meeting the qualifications established by the Issuance of . approved by the City to develop and Community Grading Society of Vertebrate -Paleontologists shall be retained by the Applicant and monitoring plan. Development of the monitoring plan shall.inciude a site visit by the Development Permits implement a delineate sensitive areas. The Director 11-4 paleontological paleontologist prior to initiation of project development In order to determine or collections of fossils from the surface and near -surface. Issuance of paleontologist may also perform shall attend a pre -grade meeting in order to become familiar with the proposed depths and City Grading Engineer Permits 11-5 The paleontologist patterns of grading of the study area, Issuance of P grading permit City Grading The paleontologist shall establish a curatfon agreement with an accredited facility prior to radin p .Engineer Permits 11-6 ,issuance. A paleontological monitor, supervised by the paleontologist, shall monitor all excavations In the Puente Formation BuildingConstruction Puente Formation. If fossils are found during ground -disturbing Term Inspector 11-7 of excavations anticipated to extend into the activities, the paleontological monitor shall be empowered to halt the ground -disturbing activities within 25 feet of determination of appropriate treatment. the find in ordef to allow evaluation of the find and Grading identified, the report shall contain Community The paleontologist shall prepare a final report on the monitoring. If fosells were and curativn. A dopy of the r sport shall be filed with the City Development Sign -Off Director ' 11-8 an appropriate description of the fossils, treatment, and the Natural. History Museum of Los Angeles County and shall accompany any curated fossils. Aesthetics Community Building Permit not Pole -mounted or wall -mounted luminaires installed to lig purpose of illuminating commercial areas, parking lots, Development Issuance lighting standards and demonstrate that use. roadways, and driveways shall conform t0 appropriate residential use, . Director at the project b 12-1 sleets oriothees exceed 0.5'horizontal foot candle, as measured non -light-sensitive ht sensitive land uses) These standards shall not be applied to any adjoining public 9 June 2009 Draft -Environmental impact Report Page ES -19 Executive Summary ! ! Iv PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2010-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2007703 AND ZONE CHANGE NO. 2007-04 FOR PROPERY COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 30.36 ACRE LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BREA CANYON ROAD AND DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBERS 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-9.03 and 8714-015-001). A. RECITALS On July 1, 2007, the property owner/co-applicant, Walnut Valley School District, and property owner/co-applicant/lead agency, City of Diamond Bar, executed a Memorandum of Understanding whereby the parties agreed to collaborate in the planning of the future land use for the approximately 30.36 -acre parcel property located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard, City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, California so that both parties may each advance their respective objectives for the.disposition of the property; 2. The following approvals are requested to the City Council: (a) General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C) to Specific Plan (SP); (b) - Zone Change No. 2007-04 to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential (RL), Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM), and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan; (c) Specific Plan No. 2007-01 to adopt the Site D Specific Plan for the approximately 30.36 acre site to facilitate the development of a maximum of 202 residential; 153,985. gross sq. ft. of commercial; and approximately 10.16 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights-of-way; (d) Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 to establish separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes; and (e) Environmental Impact Report 2007-02 to certify the Final EIR, which provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the Specific Plan area. 3. In accordance to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15168 et seq., an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the project which found that the proposed project may have remaining significant impacts that requires adoption of "Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations." Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15090, the EIR is being reviewed concurrently with the approval of the General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 and Zone Change No. 2007-04 and must be certified by the City Council before project approval; In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15090 through 15093, a resolution recommending certification of the EIR, adoption of a mitigation reporting and monitoring program, and adoption of "Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations" to the City Council for the project is being reviewed by the Planning Commission concurrently with this resolution; The approval of Specific Plan No. 2007-01 (Site D Specific Plan) that is being reviewed concurrently with this project, includes a land use plan that divides the property into three sub -planning areas (Residential, Commercial, and Open Space/Circulation) and includes standards and guidelines for future development of the specific plan site; 6. Notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on April 2, 2010. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site and public notices were posted at the City's designated community posting sites. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the project site was posted with a display board and the notice was posted at three other locations within the project vicinity; 7. On April 13, April 27, and May 11, 2010, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all interested individuals, and concluded said hearing on that date; 8. The Planning Commission has determined that the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change represents a consistent, logical, 2 GPA No. 2007-03 and ZC No. 2007-04 — PC Resolution No. 2010-13 appropriate and rational land use designation and implementing tool that furthers the goals and objectives of the City General Plan; and g. The documents and materials constituting the administrative record of the proceedings upon which the City's decision is based are located at the City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, Planning Division, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct; 2.. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the Planning Commission hereby finds and recommends as follows: a. City Council approval of a. General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 for the Site D Specific Plan based on the following finding, as required by Section 22.70.050 of the Municipal Code and it conformance with California Government Code Section 65358: The amendment to the General Plan is internally consistent with the adopted goals and policies of the City and is in the public interest. General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 will permit residential and commercial, rather than public facility, in an area adjacent to an existing residential and commercial development. The General Plan Amendment promotes the following: Land Use Element Vision Statement states: It is the overall goal of the land use element to ensure that the land uses and development decisions of Diamond Bar maintain and enhance the quality of life for its residents. Goal 1 states: Consistent with the Vision Statement, maintain a mix of land uses which enhance the quality of life of Diamond Bar residents, providing a balance of development and preservation of significant open space areas to assure both economic viability and retention of distinctive natural features of the community. The Site D Specific Plan is a mixed use development that provides quality higher -density residential housing within proximity to a neighborhood -retail center, and open space. The Site D Specific Plan also incorporates physical design elements that reflect the unique topographical characteristics of Diamond Bar through the creation of a landform grading design that 3 GPA No. 2007-03 and ZC No. 2007-04 — PC Resolution No. 2010-12 emulates natural topographic contours and undulations, and incorporates native woodland species indigenous to the site. Land Use Element — Goal 2 states: Manage land use with respect to the location, density and intensity, and quality of development. Maintain consistency with the capabilities of the City and special districts to provide essential services which achieve sustainable use of environment and manmade resources. The Site D Specific Plan project is located at the corner of a major and a secondary arterial in the Diamond Bar area identified by the City's General Plan as a prime location for mixed-use development. This Specific Plan document will guide the build -out of Site D in a manner which is consistent with City and State policies and standards and assures that the project is developed in a coordinated manner. Land Use Element - Goal 3 states: Maintain recognition within Diamond Bar and the surrounding regions as being a community with a well planned and aesthetically pleasing physical environment. The Site D Specific Plan is consistent with the needs of the Diamond Bar community by offering housing and employment opportunities in an integrated, aesthetically pleasing, mixed-use development. Additionally, the commercial -retail facilities will provide service to both residents of the City of Diamond Bar and surrounding regions. Land Use Element — Goal 4 states: Encourage long-term and regional perspectives in local land use decisions, but not at the expense of the quality of life for Diamond Bar residents. The Site D Specific Plan sets the precedent for a new and vibrant mixed-use development in the City of Diamond Bar. Interweaving higher -density residential housing with a centrally located commercial -retail center, and open space, will allow Site D to be a quality mixed-use development that will positively contribute to the City of Diamond Bar. Housing Element Vision Statement states: It is the overall goal of the housing plan that there is adequate housing in the City, both in quality and quantity, to provide appropriate shelter for all without discrimination. Goal 1 states: Consistent with the Vision Statement, preserve and conserve. the existing housing stock and maintain property values and residents' quality of life. 4 GPA No. 2007-03 and ZC No. 2007-04 — PC Resolution No. 2010.12 The residential component of the Site D Specific Plan proposes up to 202 high-quality residential units to help fulfill Diamond Bar's portion of the region's housing needs. The criteria for residential development incorporate an internal circulation system that is not reliant on those of the surrounding residential neighborhoods, and ensure that new residential community will coexist harmoniously with the adjoining, established neighborhoods. m Housing Element — Goal 2 states: Provide opportunities for development of suitable housing to meet the diverse needs of existing and future residents. The higher -density residential housing of Site D project area meets the fiscal and culturally diverse needs of both future and existing City of Diamond Bar residents by offering an alternative to the predominantly detached single-family residential market largely found in the City of Diamond Bar. Housing Element — Goal 5 states: Encourage equal and fair housing opportunities for all economic segment of the community. The Site D Specific Plan will provide higher -density residential uses in the form of attached housing, which can accommodate various economic segments of the Diamond Bar community and its residents by supporting the variation in character of the Diamond Bar housing stock. Resource Management Element Vision Statement states: It is the overall goal of the resource management element to provide and maintain adequate open spaces in the City to serve the diverse recreational needs of its residents, while fostering the wise use of limited natural resources. Goal 1 states: Create and maintain an open space system which will preserve scenic beauty, protect important biological resources, provide open space for outdoor recreation and the enjoyment of nature, conserve natural resources, and protect public health and safety. The Site D Specific Plan preserves approximately 8.0 acres of 30.36 acres as open space, which includes vegetated slopes, residential amenities, and pedestrian pathways. Public Health and Safety Element Vision Statement states: It is the overall goal of the plan to provide a safe and healthy 5 GPA No. 2007-03 and ZC No. 2007-04 — PC Resolullon No. 2010-12 environment for the residents of Diamond Bar. Goal 1 states: Create a secure public environment which minimizes potential loss of life and property damage, as well as social, economic, or environmental disruption resulting from natural and manmade disasters. The Site D Specific Plan will provide a safe and secure environment for City residents by promoting the policies and ideals particular to the City of Diamond Bar. Specific standards are included in the Site D Specific Plan regulating development within the project area, which will minimize potential loss of life and property damage. Additionally, each stage of development permitted by this Specific Plan will adequately provide vehicular access, public facilities, and infrastructure for public health and safety. Circulation Element Vision Statement states: It is the overall goal of the plan to provide a safe, adequate and environmentally sensitive transportation system to meet the circulation needs of the citizens of Diamond Bar. Goal 1 states: Enhance the environment of the City's street network. Work toward improving the problems presented by intrusion of regionally oriented commuter traffic through the City and into residential neighborhoods. Consider programs to reinforce the regional transportation and circulation system to adequately accommodate regional needs. The Site D Specific Plan's improvement of interior roadways and circulation will ensure safe, direct, and convenient vehicular and pedestrian access to and through the project's various land uses. Because the site is bordered by existing and improved roadways (Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road), no major exterior roadway modifications will be developed by this Specific Plan. To the extent possible, existing lane configurations and right-of-way improvements on exterior project roadways will be retained. However, minor landscape and parkway improvements shall be provided along these roadways as well as additional strategically placed entrances, which will make Site D project area an easily accessible location for residents of the City of Diamond Bar. Circulation Element — Goal 2 states: Provide a balanced transportation system for the safe and efficient movement of people, goods, and services through the City. 6 GPA No. 2007-03 and ZC No. 2007-04 — PC Resolution No. 2010-12 The Site D Specific Plan will contain a strong internal circulation network that will serve to provide direct and efficient access to the site. While the automobile will be the predominant form of travel, the Site D Specific Plan recognizes the importance of alternative modes of transportation. A convenient and easily accessible transit system becomes an essential element of a mixed-use development such as Site D. Bus stops are located adjacent to Site D and facilitate alternative modes of transportation. Transit is expected to be provided by the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA), Foothill Transit, and the City's fixed -route transportation system. ® Circulation Element — Goal 3 states: Maintain an adequate level of service on area roadways. The Environmental Impact Report associated with the development of the Site D Specific Plan includes an analysis of project area roadways and existing and build -out levels of service. Appropriate mitigation measures shall be provided if area roadways are found to be operating under the required level of service as a result of the Site D development. Circulation Element — Goal 4 states: Provide or regulate the provision of the supply of parking to meeting the needs for both residents and commercial businesses. The Site D Specific Plan mixed-use development will be consistent with Chapter 22.30, Off -Street Parking of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code. © Public Services and Facilities Element Vision Statement states: It is the overall goal of the plan that the City acquire and maintain adequate resources to meet the needs of its resident. Goal 1 states: Provide adequate infrastructure facilities and public services to support development and planned growth. Public services and utilities, including water, sewer, gas, electricity, telephone, and cable will be extended into the Specific Plan area to support the Site D development. Public Services and Facilities Element — Goal 2 states: Achieve a fiscally solvent, financially stable community. The Site D Specific Plan area will contain a high-quality, mixed- use development, composed of commercial -retail, higher - density residential, and open space land uses. The provision of residential uses on-site creates an immediate market for retail 7 GPA No. 2007-03 and ZC No. 2007-04 — PC Resolution No. 2010-12 and service uses, thereby enhancing the potential for establishing a successful mixed-use master planned development. Additionally, Site D Specific Plan will provide housing and job opportunities to the City of Diamond Bar residents, which will generate property and sales taxes that can be used for improvement of public services and facilities. Due to the project's convenient location and site planning, Site D presents an economically viable plan that is good for the City of Diamond Bar and its residents. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with all of these goals. Therefore, the General Plan Amendment is consistent with City policies and is in the public interest; City Council approval of Zone Change No. 2007-04 for the Site D Specific Plan based on the following finding, as required by Section 22.70.050 of the Municipal Code and in conformance with California Government Code Sections 65853 and 65860: The amendment to the Zoning Map is internally consistent with the General Plan and the adopted goals and policies of the City. The Zoning Map does not presently reflect the General Plan designation for the property. Zone Change No. 2007-04 will place the City's Zoning Map in conformance with the General Plan by designating the Property as SP (Specific Plan), with sub -areas corresponding to those in the Site D Specific Plan. The existing approximate 30.36 acres located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard (Assessors Parcel Numbers 8714-002- 900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-903, and 8714-015- 001) shall have a zoning designation of SP — Specific Plan. The Planning Commission shall: (a) _ Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to: Walnut Valley Unified School District, 880 South Lemon Avenue, Walnut, CA 91789. 8 GPA No. 2007-03 and ZC No. 2007-04 — PC Resolution No. 2010-12 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11th DAY OF MAY 2010, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. By: y Torng, Chairm n I, Greg Gubman, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 11th day of May, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: shah, VC/Nolan, chair/Torng NOES: Commissioners: Lee ABSENT: Commissioners: Nelson ABSTAIN: Commissioners: None ATTEST: Greg Gubman, Secretary 9 GPA No. 2007-03 and ZC No. 2007-04 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 201014 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 70687 AND SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2007-01 FOR SUBDIVISION OF 30.36 ACRE SITE FOR RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PURPOSES AND ADOPTION OF THE SITE D SPECIFIC PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE WITH 202 -UNIT RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 153,985 GROSS SQ. FT. OF COMMERCIAL USE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BREA CANYON ROAD AND DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA (APN 8714-002-900, 8714-002-903, and 8714-045-001). A. RECITALS On July 1, 2007, the property owner/co-applicant, Walnut Valley School District, and property owner/co-applicant/lead agency, City of Diamond Bar, executed a Memorandum of Understanding whereby the parties agreed to collaborate in the planning of the future land use for the approximately 30.36 -acre parcel property located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard, Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, California so that both parties may each advance their respective objectives for the disposition of the property; 2. The Application is being reviewed by the Planning Commission concurrently with General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03, Zone Change No. 2007-04, and Environmental Impact Report No. 2007-02 (SCH No. 2008021014); In accordance to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15168 et seq., an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the project which found that the proposed project may have remaining significant impacts that requires adoption of "Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations." Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15090, the EIR is being reviewed concurrently with the approval of the General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 and Zone Change No. 2007-04 and must be certified by the City Council before project approval; In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15090 through 15093, a resolution recommending certification of the EIR, adoption . of a mitigation reporting and monitoring program, and adoption of "Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations" to the City Council for the project is being reviewed by the Planning Commission concurrently with this resolution; 5. The approval of Specific Plan No. 2007-01 (Site D Specific Plan) that is being reviewed concurrently with this application, includes a land use plan that divides the property into three sub -planning areas (Residential, Commercial, and Open Space/Circulation) and includes standards and guidelines for future development of the specific plan site; 6. The following approvals are requested to the City Council: (a) General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 to change the land use designations from Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C) to Specific Plan (SP); (b) Zone Change No. 2007-04 to change the zoning districts from Low Density Residential (RL), Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM), and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Specific Plan; (c) Specific Plan No. 2007-01 to adopt the Site D Specific Plan for the approximately 30.36 acre site to facilitate the development of a maximum of 202 residential; 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial; and approximately 10.16 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights- of-way; (d) Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 to establish separate residential; commercial, and open space parcels; create an internal circulation system and common open space areas; and establish easements and other right-of-way for utility and other purposes; and (e) Environmental Impact Report 2007-02 to certify the Final EIR, which provides a detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the Specific Plan area. 7. Notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers on April 2, 2010. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1,000 - foot radius of the project site and public notices were posted at the City's designated community posting sites. In addition to the published and mailed notices, the project site was posted with a display board and the notice was posted at three other locations within the project vicinity; & On April 13, April 27, and May 11, 2010, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing, solicited testimony from all interested individuals, and concluded said hearing on that date; and 9. The documents and materials constituting the administrative record of the proceedings upon which the City's decision is based are located at the City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, Planning Division, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct; 2 TTM No. 70687 and SP No. 2007-01 — PC Resolution No. 2010-14 2. In accordance to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15168 et seq., an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the project which found that the proposed project may have remaining significant impacts that requires adoption of "Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations.' Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15090, the EIR is being reviewed concurrently with the approval of the General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 and Zone Change No. 2007-04 and must be certified by the City Council before project approval; 3. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds and determines that, having considered the record as a whole including the findings set forth below, and changes and alterations which have been incorporated into and conditioned upon the proposed project set forth in the application, there is no evidence before this Planning Commission that the project proposed herein will have the potential of an adverse effect on wild life resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based upon substantial evidence, this Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5(d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the Planning Commission hereby finds and recommends as follows: a. The Site D Specific Plan is to allow vacant land comprised of approximately 30.36 acres located at the southeast corner of Brea Canyon Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard (Assessors Parcel Number 8714-002-900, 8714-002-901, 8714-002-902, 8714-002-903 and 8714- 015-001) with 202 residential dwelling units; 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial use; and approximately 10.16 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights-of-way; b. The current General Plan land use designations for the site include Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C). General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 being considered concurrently with this application proposes to change the land use designation for the site to Specific Plan. With approval of the General Plan Amendment, the Application will be consistent with the General Plan land use designation; C. The project site is within the Low Density Residential (RL), Low/Medium Density Residential (RLM), and Neighborhood Commercial (C-1). Zone Change No. 2007-04 is being reviewed concurrently with the Application that requests that the City Council approve the zone change from the current zoning to Specific Plan for General Plan compliance; d. The project site is generally surrounded by single-family homes to the north, south, and west, and a gas station and professional office buildings to the east. The site is bordered on the north by Diamond Bar Boulevard, and Brea Canyon Road to the west. The Brea Canyon Flood Control Channel runs roughly parallel to Brea Canyon Road and cuts through the western portion of the property. TTM No. 706B7 and SP No. 2007-01 — PC Resolution No. 2010-13 e. The application involves a request for the following: Adoption of the Site D Specific Plan for development of the site with 202 residential dwelling units; 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial use; and approximately 10.16 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights-of-way. Tentative Map Findings: Pursuant to Subdivision Code Section 21.20.080 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council make the following findings: The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan; The proposed project involves the subdivision of the site with 202 residential units; 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial use; and approximately 10. 16 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights - of -ways. The General Plan land use designations for the site include Public Facility (PF) and General Commercial (C). General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 being considered concurrently with this application proposes to change the land use designation for the site to Specific Plan. With approval of the General Plan Amendment, the Application will be consistent with the General Plan land use designation. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the concurrently proposed Site D Specific Plan document, as conditioned. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development; The proposed subdivision will be consistent with the amended General Plan land use designation that is being considered concurrently with the application. The proposed land use designation will be Specific Plan that will allow for the development of 202 residential dwelling units; 153,985 gross sq. ft. of commercial use; and approximately 10.16 acres of open space areas, easements, and rights-of-way. The buildings will have minimum setbacks requiring 15 feet from Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road, 85 feet from the southerly property line (which abut residential), and 30 feet from the easterly edge. Visual analysis was performed to understand how the building massing of both commercial and residential would look from the street. This analysis led the City to expand some of the building setbacks. Additionally, the EiR prepared for TTM No. 70687 reviewed the map's suitability for the project site, access, circulation, grading, aesthetics, land use, etc. The review concluded that the proposed subdivision would not have a significant effect on the environment and/or with the incorporation of mitigation measures would be reduced to a level of less than significant. 4 TTM No. 70687 and SP No. 2007-01 —PC Resolution No. 2010-13 The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15168 et seq., and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the application and found that the proposed project may have remaining significant impact thatrequires the adoption of "Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations." Per. CEQA Guidelines Sections 15090, the EIR is being reviewed concurrently with the Application and will be certified by the City Council before Application approval. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not cause serious public health or safety problems; The proposed subdivision will create three elevated building pads (one commercial and two residential). The grading will be constructed, operated, and maintained in accordance with the recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation to assure that geotechnical stability is maintained or increased. Detailed drainage and hydrology studies will be completed,' including the potential for debris flows, and the proposed conditions and mitigation measures will likely prevent any significant increases in erosion and flood hazards. The development will also have traffic improvements to mitigate existing plus project traffic conditions and cumulative traffic impacts. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. The site does not have any access easements on-site. k. The discharge of sewage from the proposed subdivision into the community sewer system would not result in violation of existing requirements prescribed by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board; The proposed subdivision has been analyzed under the Environmental impact Report and was not found to violate any requirement of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. To reduce water quality impacts to a level less than significant, the proposed subdivision is required to comply with mitigation measures that include compliance with the Califomia Regional Water Quality Control Board, Federal Clean Water Act, and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program, implementing construction -related Best Management Practices (BMP's) and Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) criteria. With project design features related to the storm drain System, conditions of approval and mitigation measures, potentially TTM No. 70687 and SP No. 2007-01 — PG Resolution No. 2010-13 significant water quality impacts would be reduced to a levels less than significant. A preliminary soils report or geologic hazard report does not indicate adverse soil or geologic conditions; and The grading will be constructed, operated, and maintained in accordance with the recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation to assure that geotechnical stability is maintained or increased. M. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable provisions of the City's subdivision ordinance, the development code, and the subdivision map act. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the concurrently proposed Site D Specific Plan and will be required to comply with the City's subdivision ordinance, subdivision map act, and applicable development code. Specific Plan Findings: Pursuant to Development Code Section 22.60 of the City's .Municipal. Code and California Government Code Section 65451, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council make the following findings: n. Shows the distribution, location and extent of the land uses proposed within the area covered by the specific plan, including open space areas; The Site D Specific Plan document contains plans showing the distribution, location and extent of the uses of land, including open space areas. Shows the proposed distribution, location, extent and intensity of major components of public and private drainage, energy, sewage, solid waste disposal, circulation/transportation, water and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the specific plan area and needed to support the proposed land uses; The Site D Specific Plan includes the proposed distribution, location, extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation and all other essential .facilities will be reviewed upon submittal of a development proposal. Includes standards, criteria and guidelines by which development will proceed, and standards for conservation, development and utilization of natural resources, where applicable; TTM No. 70687 and SP No. 2007-01 — PC Resolution No. 2010-13 The Site D Specific Plan includes standards, criteria and guidelines by which development will proceed, and standards for conservation, development and utilization of natural resources. Includes a program of implementation measures, including regulations, programs, public works and financing measures necessary to carry out the proposed land uses, infrastructure and development and conservation standards and criteria; and The Site D Specific Plan includes a program of implementation measures, including regulations necessary to carry out the proposed land uses, infrastructure and development and conservation standards and criteria. Includes a discussion of the relationship of the specific plan to the general plan. The Site D Specific Plan includes a statement attesting to the consistency of the specific plan with the City's General Plan. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the Planning Commission hereby finds and recommends that the City Council approve Specific Plan No. 2007-01 and Tentative Tract Map No. 70687, subject to the following conditions, the attached Conditions of Approval and the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program: , a. GENERAL This approval for Site D Specific Plan and Tentative Tract Map No. 70687 shall be null and void and of no effect unless the EIR (SCH #2008021014) is certified, the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program, Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations are adopted; and General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 and Zone Change No. 2007-04 are approved; 2. The development shall comply with the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program for EIR (SCH #2008021014). A copy is attached hereto and referenced herein; and The development shall comply with the Conditions of Approval/Performance Standards in the Site D Specific Plan. A copy is attached hereto and referenced herein. At the time that a development plan is formally submitted for Planning Commission consideration, the subsequent plan shall incorporate within its boundaries a neighborhood park of at least 1.3 acres usable area, dedicated to the City, constructed to City standards, within the area designated for commercial TTM No. 70687 and SP No. 2007-01 — PC Resolution No. 2010-13 development, adjacent to slope areas or, water quality management areas, and which shall incorporate features such as, but not limited to, a tot lot, picnic tables, seating areas and shade structures. b. TENTATIVE TRACT CONDITIONS 1. The development shall provide parcels, easements or rights-of- way for streets, water supply and distribution systems, sewage disposal systems, storm drainage facilities, solid waste disposal and public utilities providing electric, gas and communications services; 2. The development shall mitigate or eliminate environmental problems identified through the environmental review process, except where a statement of overriding considerations has been adopted in compliance with CEQA; 3. The development shall carry out the specific requirements of Chapter 21.30 (Subdivision Design and Improvement Requirements) and Chapter 21.34 (Improvement Plans and Agreements) of the Subdivision Ordinance; 4. The development shall secure compliance with the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance and the general plan; 5. Any designated remainder parcels shall not be subsequently sold or further subdivided unless a certificate or conditional certificate of compliance (Chapter 21.28) is obtained in compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance; 6. The development shall dedicate additional land for bicycle paths, and local transit facilities (including bus turnouts, benches, shelters, etc.), in compliance with subdivision map act chapter 4, article 3, where required by the general plan; and 7. The tentative tract map shall be modified to be consistent with the land use plan adopted as part of the Specific Plan. 8. The Final Map shall include a lot delineating the boundaries of the park as prescribed under Subsection B5.a.4 of this Resolution. The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to: Walnut Valley Unified School District, 880 South Lemon Avenue, Walnut, CA 91789. TTM No. 70687 and SP No. 2007-01 — PC Resolution No. 2010-13 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11th DAY OF MAY 2010, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. By:'%� Toffy—Torng, Chairman I, Greg Gubman, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 11th day of May, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: shah, VC/Nolan, Chair/Torng NOES: Commissioners: Lee ABSENT: Commissioners: None ABSTAIN: Commissioners: None ATTEST: Greg Gubman, ecretary 9 TTM No. 70687 and SP No. 2007-01 Exhibit A FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIE)ERATIONS FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT — "SITE D' •• SPECIFIC PLAN STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO.20OB021014 Section 21081 and 21081.5, California Public Resources Code Sections 15091, 15092, and 15083, Title 14, Chapter 3, California Code of Regulations 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.1 Project Location The approximately 30.36 -acre project'site is located within the corporate boundaries of the City Diamond Bar (City or Lead Agency), an incorporated community situated along the western edge of Los Angeles County (County). The project site is located in the southwestern portion of the City on the southeast corner of Brea Canyon . Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard. The project site is bordered on the north by Diamond Bar Boulevard, on the west by Brea Canyon Road, and on the south, east, and southwest by existing single-family detached dwelling units. Existing engineered slope areas, including v -ditch drainage features, separate the project site from existing homes on the south and west. Commercial and office professional uses are located to the north of Diamond Bar Boulevard and west of Brea Canyon Road. The project site is generally located east of State Route 57 (SR -57 Freeway) and Brea Canyon Road and southeast of the intersection of the SR -57 Freeway, Diamond Bar Boulevard, and Brea Canyon Cutoff. The project site is located to the north of.the terminus of Castle Rock Road and Pasado Drive. 1.2 Project Description The City of Diamond Bar (City or Lead Agency) and the Walnut Valley Unified School District (WVUSD or District) own separate properties within the corporate boundaries of the City, separated by an open flood control channel (Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel) operated by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LADFCD or County) a division of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW). The WVUSD's governing body has determined that the District's approximately 28.71 -acre property (Site D or District Property) is unnecessary for future school use and has declared it to "surplus property." The City's 0.98 - acre property (City Property) was acquired so that City would have access to property to address future traffic impacts as well as the existing traffic issues in this area. The Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel (Brea Canyon Channel), which runs generally parallel to Brea Canyon Road, separates the District Property from the City Property. The LACFCD's approximately 0.67 -acre facility (County Property) is presently an open box culvert. In accordance with the LACFCD's "Guidelines for Overbuilding and Air Rights," in combination with such other standards and procedures as may be established by the County, leasehold interests in the "air rights" above the channel could be conveyed to a non -County entity, thus allowing the channel to be covered and the lands situated above that facility used for other purposes. On July 1, 2007 the City and the WVUSD. executed a "Memorandum of Understanding" (MOU) whereby the parties agreed to a collaborative planning process for the District Property and the City Property whereby both entities could advance their respective objectives for the disposition of those land holdings. Under the terms of the MOU, as authorized under the provisions of Sections 65450-65457 of the California Government Code (CGC), the City agreed to prepare and process a `specific plan" for the combined properties for the purpose of establishing design and development parameters for the use of those properties. The proposed "Site D' Specific Plan" (SDSP) project encompasses approximately 30.36 -acres and contains a number of related elements, including both specific actions and activities which are presently before the City of Diamond Bar (City or Lead Agency) and later activities which can be reasonably anticipated as a result of those actions presently under review. From a planning perspective, the Lead Agency is considering the possible adoption of a proposed specific plan (Specific Plan No. 2007-01) authorizing the development of 202 dwelling units and 153,985 gross leaseable square feet of commercial use within the 30.36 -acre specific plan boundaries. From a project perspective, it is assumed that the project site would be developed to accommodate those permitted and conditionally permitted land uses authorized under the specific plan and developed to the maximum intensity allowable thereunder. Based on the site's existing "City of Diamond Bar General Plan" (General Plan) and zoning designations, the proposed project includes a General Plan amendment (GPA No. 2007-03) from "Public Facility (PF)" and "General Commercial (C)" to "Specific Plan" (SP)," with a corresponding zone change (ZC) from "Low Density Residential (R-1 10,000)," "Low/Medium Density Residential (R-1 7,500)", and "Neighborhood Commercial (C-1)" to "Specific Plan (SP)." Also proposed is the approval of a tentative subdivision map (Tentative Tract Map No. 70687) establishing separate residential, commercial, and open space parcels and creating an internal circulation system and establishing easements and other rights-of-way for utility and other purposes. Following the adoption of the specific plan, the City and the Walnut Valley Unified School District (WVUSD or District) may enter into a transferable development agreement for the purpose of facilitating the implementation of the specific plan and the development of the project site. In addition, the District and the City will cooperate in the sale of the District's holdings (District Property) and the City's holdings (City Property) to one or more developers, master builders, end users, or other parties. 1.3 Project Objectives As more thoroughly described in the FEIR, both the City and the District have established specific objectives concerning the proposed project and/or the project site. It is the objective of the City to promote and facilitate the attainment of those goals, objectives, plans, and policies as contained in the General Plan. Specifically, those objectives include, but are not limited to, the following excerpts from the -General Plan: (1) Require that new development be compatible with surrounding land uses (Strategy 2.2.1, Land Use Element); and (2) Balance the retention of the natural environment with its conversion to urban form (Strategy 3.3.1, Land Use Element). The City has elected to prepare and process a specific plan for the proposed project for the purpose of defining the types of permitted and conditionally permitted. land uses that the City believes to be appropriate for the project site and the project setting, to define reasonable limits to the intensity and density of those uses, and to establish the design and development standards for those uses. The following additional broad project objective can be derived from Section 22.60.020 (Applicability) and Section 22.60.060 (Adoption of Specific Plan) in Chapter 22.60 (Specific Plans) of the Municipal Code: Prepare a specific plan which provides for flexibility, encourages the innovative use of land, provides for the development of a variety of housing and other development types, assists in the comprehensive master planning of the project site, and is consistent with the General Plan and other adopted goals and policies of the City. Since the MOU between the City arid the -District constitute a declaration of the intent of both parties, that document contains information that can be utilized in the formulation of project objectives. The following additional objectives can be derived from that document: (1) District desires the disposition of the School Property to yield the maximum return to the District for the benefit of its constituents and its educational mission; and (2) City desires that the School Property and the city Property be developed in a manner as to assure compatibility.with and to meet the needs of the surrounding area and to provide a desirable level of sales tax revenues to the City. As further indicated in the MOU, of the usable acreage, it is explicitly specified that a minimum of 50 percent of the property will be designated for residential development and 50 percent will be designated for commercial use, exclusive of necessary infrastructure_ Based on those actions, the following additional objectives can be established: (1) With regards to the project site, pursue the establishment of site-specific land -use policies that allow, in reasonably comparable acreage, the development of both commercial and residential property, uses of the accommodating the provision of additional housing opportunities and the introduction of revenue -generating uses; and (2) Establish a specific plan as the guiding land -use policy mechanism to define the nature and intensity of future development and to establish design and - development parameters for the project site, so as to allow conveyance of the subject property to one or more developers and/or master builders and provide to the purchasers reasonable assurance as to the uses that would be authorized on the project site and the nature of those exactions required for those uses. 1.3.1 Future Growth Needs It is a further objective of the City of Diamond Bar to meet its fair share of the region's housing needs. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is a key tool for local governments to plan for anticipated growth. The RHNA quantifies the anticipated need for housing within each jurisdiction for the 8'/Z -year period from January 2006 to July 2014. Communities then determine how they will address this need through the process of updating the Housing Elements of their General Plans. The .current RHNA was adopted by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) in July 2007. The future need for housing is determined primarily by the forecasted growth in households in a community. Each new household created by a child moving out of a parent's home or by a family moving to a community for employment creates the need for a housing unit. The housing need for new households is then adjusted to maintain a desirable level of vacancy to promote housing choice and mobility. An adjustment is also made to account for units expected to be lost due to demolition, natural disaster, or conversion to non -housing uses. The sum of these factors — household growth, vacancy need, and replacement need — determines the construction need for a community. Total housing need is then distributed among four income categories on the basis of the county's income distribution, with adjustments to avoid an over -concentration of lower-income households in any community. In July 2007 SCAG, adopted the final RHNA growth needs for each of the county's cities plus the unincorporated area. The total housing growth need for the City of Diamond Bar during the 2006-2014 planning period is 1,090 units. Site D is one of the very few available sites in the City that can significantly contribute toward meeting Diamond Bar's RHNA obligation. 1.3.2 Senate Bill 375 SB 375 (Steinberg) is California state legislation that became law effective January 1, 2009. It prompts California regions to work together to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from cars and light trucks. This new law would achieve this objective by requiring integration of planning processes for transportation, land -use and housing. The plans emerging from this process will lead to more efficient communities that provide residents with alternatives to using single occupant vehicles. SB 375 requires the California Air Resources Board (CARE) to develop regional reduction targets for automobiles and light trucks GHG emissions. The regions, in turn, are tasked with creating "sustainable communities strategy," (SCS) which combine transportation and land -use elements in order to achieve the emissions reduction target, if feasible. SB 375 also offers local governments regulatory and other incentives to encourage more compact new development and transportation altematives. In order to achieve the greenhouse gas reduction goals set out in California Assembly Bill 32: The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32), SB 375 focuses on reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and urban sprawl. AB 32 was the' nation's first law to limit greenhouse gas emissions and SB 375 was enacted thereafter to more specifically address the transportation and land use components of greenhouse gas emissions. Through the implementation of regional SCS plans by 2020, the goal of SB 375 is to see a significant decrease in greenhouse gas emissions for the environment and an increase in quality of life for residents. There are two mutually important facets to the SB 375 legislation: reducing VMT and encouraging more compact, complete, and efficient communities for the future.' SCAG and the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments—the subregional planning organization of which Diamond Bar is a member—are in the process establishing the parameters for an SGS for the subregions comprising the SCAG region. Although the SCS is not yet adopted, many local jurisdictions are making efforts to encourage developments that reduce VMT. The Site D Specific Plan furthers the objectives of SB 375 by facilitating horizontal mixed use with pedestrian connections between the residential and commercial components. In the absence of transit infrastructure (other than bus routes), mixed use developments can play a significant role in local efforts to reduce VMT. 2.0 INTRODUCTION TO FINDINGS 2.1 Format of Findings These Findings have been divided into a number of sections. Those sections and the information presented therein are briefly outlined below. Section 1.0 (Project Description). This section provides an overview of the proposed project, describes its location, and identifies the project's stated objectives. Section 2.0 (Introduction to Findings). This.section provides an introduction to these Findings, and describes their purpose and statutory and regulatory basis. Section 3.0 (General Findings). In addition to the specific findings presented herein, this section identifies the general CEQA findings of the Lead Agency Excerpts from Senate Bill 375 Factsheet published by SCAG (2010) U Section 4_0 (Findings Regarding the Significant or Potentially Significant Environmental Effects of the Proposed Project which cannot Feasibly be Mitigated to Below a Level of Significance). This section sets forth findings regarding the significant or potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project which cannot feasibly be mitigated to a'less-than-significant level based on the threshold of significance criteria presented in the FOR and which will or may result from the approval, construction, habitation, and/or use of the project and/or the project site. 5e_cti_on 5.0 (Findings Regarding the Significant or Potentially Significant Environmental Effects of the Proposed Project which can Feasibly be Mitigated to Below a Level of Significance). This section sets forth findings regarding the significant or potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project which either do not manifest at a level of significance based on the threshold of significance criteria presented in the FEIR or which can feasibly be mitigated to a less -than -significant level through the imposition .of standard conditions of approval and/or those mitigation measures included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the projects "Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program" (MRMP). section (Findings Regarding the Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program). This section contains findings with regards to the MRMP. Section 7,0 (Findings Regarding Alternatives not Selected for Implementation). This- section provides findings regarding those alternatives to the proposed project which were examined in the FOR and which were considered by the advisory and decision-making bodies of the Lead Agency as part of their deliberations 'concerning the proposed project but which were not selected by the City Council for implementation following those deliberations. Section B,o (Project Benefits). This section presents a number of identifiable community benefits attributable to the proposed project. section 9.0 (Statement of Overriding Considerations). This section contains the Lead Agency's "Statement of Overriding Considerations" (SOC) setting forth the City's reasons and rationale for finding that specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other considerations associated with or attributable to the proposed project outweigh the projects significant or potentially significant unavoidable adverse environmental effects. As applicable for each of the above referenced sections, the significant or potentially significant environmental effects identified in the FOR have been referenced therein. Following each referenced environmental effect, the Lead Agency has identified the findings and facts that Lead Agency's actions. The findings set forth in each of the constitute the bases for the following sections are supported by facts in the administrative record of the proposed project. The referenced findings and facts presented herein may have relevancy both in the context of the specific environmental effect for which those findings and facts are indicated and for other environmental effects identified in the FEIR and in these Findings. For the purpose of brevity, those findings and facts presented herein are not duplicated under multiple topical issues but should be assumed to collectively constitute the factual basis utilized by the decision-making body of the Lead Agency in making these Findings. Except as otherwise noted in the FOR, the threshold of significance criteria *utilized by the Lead Agency to assess the significance of project -related and cumulative impacts are based on those 5 criterion contained in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines and constitute criterion which have been used by both the Lead Agency with regards to CEQA documentation prepared by the Lead Agency for other projects within the City and by other jurisdictions throughout California. 2.2 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations The following statement of facts and findings (Findings) has been prepared by the Lead Agency in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as codified in Section 21000 et seq. of the California Public Resources Code (PRC), and the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (State CEQA Guidelines), as coded in Section 15000 et seq., in Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), for the SDSP project and for any and all discretionary actions reasonably associated therewith. For planning, purposes, the Lead Agency, the Governor's Office of Planning. and Research - State Clearinghouse (SCH), and/or other responsible agencies have or may assign case or file numbers to certain actions now contemplated by the City, by the SCH, and/or by those responsible agencies. Those case or file numbers (and the assigning agency) include, but may not be limited to: (1) SCH No 2008021014 (SCH); (2) Environmental impact Report 2007-02 (City); (3) General Plan Amendment No. 2007-03 (City); (4) Zone Change No. 2007-04 (City); (5) Specific flan No. 2007-01 (City); and (6) Tentative Map No. 70687. Reference to the SDSP herein is intended to be inclusive of: (1) each of the above referenced discretionary actions; (2) such additional discretionary and ministerial actions as may be required for or associated with the construction, habitation, occupancy, use, and maintenance of the SDSP and the real property thereupon for the residential, non-residential, and infrastructure - related uses proposed within the geographic area examined in the "Final Environmental Impact Report- 'Site D' Specific Plan, SCH No. 2008021014" (FEIR), whether or not included within the geographic area. encompassed by the SDSP; and (4) those standard conditions, mitigation measures, and other conditions of approval as may be imposed thereupon by the City's decision-making bodies and the decision-making bodies of those responsible agencies with jurisdiction thereupon. The State. CEQA Guidelines provide that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmentalimpact impact report (EIR) has been completed which identifies one or more significant environmental effects on the environment that would occur if the proposed project is approved or carried out unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects. This document presents the findings of fact and substantial evidence that must be made by the City of Diamond Bar City Council (City Council), acting in that body's capacity as the Lead Agencys decision-making body, prior to determining whether to certify the FEIR and approve or conditionally approve the SDSP. The possible findings specified in Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, which shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record, include: (1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects, as identified in the final EIR. [This finding shall be referred to herein as "Finding (1)"] (2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the findings. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (This finding shall be referred to herein as "Finding (2)'] 6 (3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible•the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. [This finding shall be referred to herein as "Finding (3)"] With respect to those significant effects that are subject to. Finding (1), the agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or lessen significant environmental effects. With respect to those significant effects that are subject to Finding (2), the findings shall not be made if the agency making the findings has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. With respect to those significant effects that are subject to Finding (3), the findings shall describe the specific reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and alternatives. In accordance with Section 15091 of the.State CEQA Guidelines, the City Council makes the following findings for each significant or potentially significant environmental effect identified in the FEIR. Those impacts are categorized under the corresponding topical headings presented in the FEIR. Reference to mitigation measure numbers herein are as presented in the FEIR and may differ from those numbers or notations that may be subsequently assigned should the City Council elect to approve or conditionally approve the SDSP. As indicated in Section 4.0 (Significant or Potentially Significant Environmental Effects which Cannot Feasibly be Mitigated to Below a Level of Significance) herein, a number of significant environmental effects are identified in the FEIR which cannot be avoided or substantially. lessened. in recognition of the Continuing existence of significant unavoidable adverse environmental effects, a statement of overriding considerations (SOC), supported by substantial evidence in the record, is, therefore, required in order for the City to approve the SDSP. The SOC for the SDSP is presented in Section 9.0 (Statement of Overriding Considerations) herein and presents the rationale for the City's approval or conditional approval of the proposed project despite the continuing existence of those unavoidable adverse environmental effects. 2.3 Record of Proceedings For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, at a minimum, the record of proceedings for the FEIR consists of the following documents and other evidence. All references to the FEIR herein shall be assumed to -be inclusive of each of the following documents and such other accompanying evidence as may be identified by the City Council: (1) "Initial Study," including all documents expressly cited therein; (2) "Notice of Preparation" (NOP), "Notice of Completion" (NOC), "Notice of Availability" (NOA), "Notice of Determination" (NOD), and all other public notices issued by the Lead Agency in conjunction with this CEQA process; (3) "Draft Environmental Impact Report — Site p" Specific Plan, SCH No. 2008021014" and 'Technical Appendix - DraftEnvironmental Impact Report —'Site D' Specific Plan, SCH No. 2008021014" (DEIR), including all documents incorporated by reference therein and all written comments submitted by public agencies and other stakeholders during'the public review periods established by the NOP and NOA; (4) Other site-specific and/or project -specific technical studies and exhibits not included in the FEIR but explicitly referenced therein; (5) "Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report —'Site D' Specific Plan, SCH No. 2008021014," including all written comments submitted by public 7 agencies and other stakeholders during the public review period established by the NOC; (6) "Minutes of the City of Diamond Bar Neighborhood Forum of Site "D" Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report, Heritage Park Community Center, 2900 S. Brea Canyon Road, Diamond Bar, August 3, 2009," as prepared by the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department (Department); (7) All written and verbal public testimony presented during noticed scoping meetings and public hearings for the proposed project at which public testimony was taken; (8) "Mitigation Reporting and Monitoring Program" (MRMP), as presented in the DE1R and as subsequently adopted by the City Council; (9) All agendas, staff reports, and approved minutes of the City's Planning Commission and City Council relating to the proposed project; (10) All maps, exhibits, figure, and, text comprising the "'Site D' Specific Plan'; (11) Matters of common knowledge to the City including, but.not limited to, federal, State, and local laws, rule, regulations, and standards; (.12) These Findings and all documents expressly cited in. these Findings; and (13) Such other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings under Section 21167.6(e) of CEQA. 2,4 Custodian and Location of Records The following information is provided in compliance with Section 21081.6(a)(2) of CEQA and Section 15091(e) of the State CEQA Guidelines. The documents and other materials constituting the administrative record for the City Council's actions related to the FEIR are located at the City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, 21825 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765-4178. The Community Development Director is the custodian of the administrative record for the proposed project. During the regular business hours of the City, copies of the documents constituting the FEIR's and the SDSP's record of proceedings are available upon request at the offices of the Community Development Department. .3.0 GENERAL FINDINGS In addition to the specific findings identified herein, the City Council hereby finds that: (1) Under CEQA, the City of Diamond Bar is the appropriate "Lead Agency" for the proposed project and during the project's CEQA proceedings no other agency asserted or contested the City's `Lead Agency" status; (2) As part of the CEQA process, in compliance with the provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 18 and the Govemor's Office of Planning and Research's (OPR) "Supplement to General Plan Guidelines — Tribal Consultation Guidelines" (2005), the Lead Agency notified the appropriate California Native American tribe of the opportunity.to conduct consultation for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural places, referred the proposed action to those tribes that are on the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) contact list that have traditional lands within the agency's jurisdiction, and send notice to tribes that have filed a written request for such notice; (3) In recognition of the fact that the real property examined in the FEIR includes separate properties owned by the City, the *District, and the County, the Lead Agency conducted extensive consultation with those agencies, in combination with other agencies identified by the Lead Agency in the FOR, are identified as "Responsible Agencies" under CEQA; (4) Copies of the Initial Study, NOP, DEIR, and NOG were provided to those Responsible Agencies identified in the FEIR and each such agency was provided a specified review period to submit comments thereupon; (5) In compliance with Section 21092.5(a) of CEQA, at least 10 days prior to the certification of the FEIR, the Lead Agency provided its written proposed response to those public agencies that submitted comments to the Lead Agency on the DEIR; (6) The FOR and all environmental notices associated therewith were prepared in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines and in accordance with the City's local guidelines and procedures; (7) The City Council has independently reviewed and analyzed the FEIR and the FEIR reflects the independent judgment of the City Council; (g) A MRMP has been prepared for the proposed project, identifying those feasible mitigation measures that the city Council has. adopted or will likely adopt in order to reduce the potential environmental effects of the proposed project to the maximum extent feasible; (9) The mitigation measures adopted or likely to be adopted by the City Council will be fully implemented in accordance with the MRMP, verification of compliance will be documented, and each measure can reasonably be expected to have the efficacy and produce the post -mitigated consequences assumed in the FEIR; (10) Each of the issues to be resolved, as identified in the FEIR and/or subsequently raised in comments received by the City during the deliberation of the City's advisory and decision-making bodies, have been resolved to the satisfaction of the City Council; (11) The potential environmental impacts of the proposed project have been analyzed to the extent feasible at the time of certification of the.FEIR; (12) The City Council reviewed the comments received on the FEIR, including, but not limited to, those comments received following the dissemination of the DEIR and RTC, and the responses thereto and has determined that neither the comments received nor the responses thereto add significant new information under Section 15088.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines; (13) The City Council has not made any decisions that would constitute an irretrievable commitment of resources toward the proposed project prior to the certification of the FEIR nor has the City Council previously committed to a definite course of action with respect to the proposed project; (14) Copies of all the documents incorporated by reference in the FEIR are and have •been available for review during the regular business hours of the City at the office of the Community Development Department from the custodian of records for such documents; (15) These Findings incorporate by reference such other findings as may be required under Sections 65454, 65455, 66474, 66474.4, 65853, and 65860 of the California Government Code and those corresponding finding required under the "City of Diamond Bar Municipal Code" (Municipal Code); and (16) Having received, reviewed, and considered all information and documents in the record, the City Council has or will impose conditions, mitigation measures, and take other reasonable actions to reduce the environmental effects of the proposed project to the maximum extend feasible and finds as stated in these Findings. 4,0 FINDINGS REGARDING THE SIGNIFICANT OR POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROP05ED PROJECT WHICH CANNOT FEASIBLY BE MITIGATED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE The City Council has determined that existing statutes, regulations, conditions of approval, uniform codes, project design features, and/or feasible mitigation measures included in the FEIR and adopted by or likely to be adopted by the City Council will result in a substantial reduction of most but not all of those environmental effects identified in the FEIR Notwithstanding the existence of those statutes and regulations and the adoption of those conditions and measures, the City Council finds that the following significant or potentially significant environmental effects will continue to exist. 4.1 Air Quality 4.1.1 Environmental Effect: Construction of the proposed project has the potential to violate or add to a violation of air quality standards (Air Quality Impact 7-2). Findings The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated herein by reference. (b) The air quality analysis was conducted in accordance with the methodology presented in the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) "CEQA Air Quality Handbook" (SCAQMD, April 1993), "Localized Significance Threshold Methodology". (SCAQMD, June 2005), and updates included on the SCAQMD Internet web site. The analysis makes use of the URBEMIS2007 urban emissions model (Version 9.4.2) for the determination of daily construction and operational emissions, the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) SCEEN3 Dispersion model for localized construction impacts, the provisions of the California Department of Transportation's (Caltrans) "Transportation Project -Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol," and CALINE4 computer model of on -road carbon monoxide (CO) dispersion modeling. (c) Air quality impacts will occur during site preparation and construction activities. Major sources of emissions during construction include exhaust emissions, fugitive dust generated as a result of soil and material disturbance during grading activities, and the emission of reactive organic gases (ROGs) during site paving and the painting of the structures. (d) The terms "reactive organic gases" (ROGs), "reactive organic compounds" (ROCs), and "volatile organic compounds" (VOCs) are used interchangeable in the DEIR. (e) Based on the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, URBEMIS computer model results indicate that ROG emissions associated with the application of paints and coatings could result in a potentially significant short-term air quality impact. Because the construction phase could create ROO emissions is exceedance of the SCAQMD's recommended significance threshold, the Lead Agency has formulated a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 7- 1 and 7-2) to reduce that impact to the extent feasible. (f) In addition to those mitigation measures identified by the Lead Agency, all projects constructed in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) are subject to standard conditions and uniform codes. Compliance with these provisions is mandatory and; as such, does not constitute mitigation under CEQA. Those conditions mandated by the SCAQMD include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) Rule 403 requires the use of Best Available Control Technologies (SACT) during construction and sets requirements for dust control associated with construction 10 activities; (2) Rules 431.1 and 431.2 require the use of low sulfur fuel for stationary construction equipment; (3) Rule 1108 sets limitations on ROG content in asphalt; and (4) Rule 1113 sets limitations on ROG content in architectural coatings. (g) Notwithstanding the implementation of the recommended mitigaijon measures and the project's adherence to applicable standard conditions, uniform codes, and SCAQMD rules and regulations, other than through a substantial reduction in the size of the proposed project and/or reduction in the daily concentration of asphalt and architectural coatings applied, projected construction -term ROG emissions would remain at levels in excess of the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria. 4.1.2 Environmental Effect: Operation of the proposed project has the potential to violate or add to a violation of air quality standards (Air Quality Impact 7.3). Findings: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated herein by reference. (b) The major source of long-term air quality impacts is that associated with the emissions produced from project -generated vehicle trips. With regards to mobile source emissions, based on the findings of the traffic analysis, the proposed project is estimated to produce 9,276 average daily vehicle trips (ADT). (c) Emissions associated with project -related trips are based on the URBEMIS2007 computer model and assumed site occupancy in 2009. Since emissions per vehicle are reduced annually 'due to tightening emissions restrictions and replacement of older vehicles, the use of 2009 emission factors presents a worst- case analysis with regards to operational air quality impacts. (d) Operational ROG, nitrogen oxides (NOx), and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions are projected to exceed the SCAQMD recommended threshold of significance values and the. impact is potentially significant. Because project occupancy is projected to create ROG, NOx, and CO emissions in excess of the SCAQMD suggested daily criteria; the Lead Agency has formulated a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 7-3 through 7-7) to reduce that impact to the extent as feasible. (e) Implementation of those measures would not be expected to reduce ROG, NOx, and CO emission levels to a less -than -significant level. There are no reasonably available mitigation measures than can reduce projected operational ROG, NOx; and CO emissions to less -than -significant levels. 4.1.3 Environmental Effect- The proposed project, in combination with other related projects, has the potential to result in a cilmulatively considerable increase in criteria pollutants (Air Quality Impact 7-6)- Findings: -6). Findin s: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: 11 (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated herein by reference. (b) Since ROG emissions associated with the application of asphalt, paints, and coatings and ROG, NOx, and CO mobile source- emissions are expected to remain significant, the project will add incrementally to the cumulative air quality impact produced by other related projects. (c) ROG and NOX are criteria pollutant precursors and go on to form secondary criteria pollutants through chemical and photochemical reaction in the atmosphere. (d) The SCAB is classified by the State as "extreme non -attainment" for ozone. Ozone is one of a number of substances (photochemical oxidants) that are formed when ROCS and NOx react with sunlight. (e) Mitigation for the cumulative .impact is as specified for construction and operational impacts. However, even with the adoption of the recommended measures, air quality impacts will remain cumulatively significant. No mitigation measures, formulated specifically to address the project's potential incremental contribution to cumulative air quality impacts, are deemed to be reasonably feasible. 5.0 FINDINGS REGARDING THE SIGNIFICANT OR POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WHICH CAN FEASIBLY BE MITIGATED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE The City Council has determined that existing statutes, regulations, standard conditions, uniform codes, project design features, in combination with those conditions of approval and feasible mitigation measures included in the FEIR and adopted by or likely to be adopted by the City Council, will result in a substantial reduction of the following environmental effects and that each of the following environmental effects will either occur at or can be effectively reduced to below a level of significance. 5.1 Land Use 5.1.1 Environmental Effect: New residential and recreational land uses could introduce land use compatibility issues between the proposed uses and those existing and reasonably foreseeable future land uses that now and which may exist in close proximity to those uses (Land Use Impact 1-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in,support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative land -use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1 (Land Use) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Although no commercial site plan has been presented for the Lead Agency's consideration, once development plans are formulated, those plans are subject to the City's development review process and must conform to applicable property development and use standards_ (c) Chapter 22.48 (Development Review) in Title 22 (Development Code) of the Municipal Code establishes procedures for reviewing residential, commercial industrial, and institutional development to facilitate review in a timely and 12 efficient manner, and to ensure that development projects comply with all applicable design guidelines, standards, and minimize adverse effects on surrounding properties and the environment. Section 22.16.080 (Screening and Buffering) in Chapter 22.6 (General Property Development and Use Standards) therein presents the City's minimum standards for the screening and buffering of adjoining land uses, equipment and outdoor storage areas, and surface parking areas with respect to both multi -family and non-residential land uses. (d) Single-family attached and/or multi family residential development is proposed adjacent and in close proximity to existing single-family detached residential areas located to the north, south, and east .of the project site. Although residential densities between the two housing product types may vary, both existing and proposed residential uses would be expected to possess similar operational characteristics and use expectations. (e) The proposed residential, recreational, and open spaces uses are compatible With existing and proposed' development within the general project area. (f) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 1- 1 and 1-2) designed to promote land -use consistency and compatibility. (g) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.1.2 Environmental Effect: The proposed mixed-use project, including the land uses, densities, and development standards now under consideration, could conflict with the adopted plans and policies of the City (Land Use Impact 1-2). Findin : The City Council.hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative land -use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1 (Land Use) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The proposed project is generally consistent with the policies of the "City of Diamond Bar Genera Plan" (General Plan). (c} In addition to General Plan consistency, the project is subject to compliance with applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, including those contained in Chapter 22.22 (Hillside Management) of the Development Code. In accordance with the provisions of Section 22.22.040 (Density) in Title 22 (Development Code) of the Municipal Code, a total of 524 dwelling units could be developed on the site, which is substantially greater than the 202 dwelling units proposed. (d) Although a General Plan amendment (GPA) and/or zone change (ZC) would be required to accommodate the proposed residential use, the proposed densities are allowable in the City. Subject to a GPA and/or ZC, the residential portion of the project•would be deemed consistent with the "City of Diamond Bar General Plan" (General Plan). (e) Based on existing zoning and assuming a lot -line adjustment to better equate the existing zoning with the site's development potential, as specified in Section 22.10.020 (Purpose of Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts) in Chapter 22.10 (Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts) in Title 22 (Development Code) of the Municipal Code, the allowable floor -area -ratio (FAR) for non-residential development in the "Neighborhood Commercial (C-1)" zoning district shall be 13 from 0.25 to 1.00. In accordance therewith, a range of between 109,880 and 439,520 square feet of commercial use could be developed on the project site. The 153,985 square feet of commercial use now being proposed falls near the lower end (0.35 FAR) of the allowable FAR range and would, therefore, be consistent with the City s land -use policies. (f) The proposed project is generally consistent with the applicable core policies of the Southern California Association of,Governmenfs (SCAG) 2008 "Regional Comprehensive Plan — Helping Communities Achieve a Sustainable Future" (2008 RCP). (g) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 1-3) designed to provide notification to SCAG of projected growth within the City, so as to allow SCAG to more effectively update regional plans. (h) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.1.3 Environmental Effect: Project implementation requires a General Plan amendment, adoption of a specific plan, zone change, subdivision of the project site, and other discretionaryactions to accommodate the proposed land uses. Each of those actions is subject to specific findings by the City Council and/or by other responsible agencies (Land Use Impact 1-3). . Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative land -use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1 (Land Use) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) A specific plan is a regulatory tool, authorized under the provisions of Sections 65450-65457 of the CGC, which is intended to guide the development of a localized area and serve as a tool for the systematic implementation of .the general plan. A specific plan document establishes a link between the implementing policies contained in an agency's general plan and the individual development proposal in a defined area. No specific plan may be adopted or amended unless the • proposed plan or amendment is consistent with the agency's general plan. No public works project, no tentative map, and no zoning ordinance may be approved, adopted, or amended within the area covered by a specific plan unless consistent with the adopted specific plan. (c) As indicated in Section 66474, a legislative body of a city or county shall deny approval of a subdivision map if finds that: (a) the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans; (b) the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans; (c) the site is not physically suitable for the type of development; (d) the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development; (e) the. design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; (f) the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is, likely to cause serious public health problems; and/or (g) the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at 14 large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. Section.66473.5 restricts local agencies from approving a final subdivision map for any land use project unless the legislative body finds that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the general plan or any specific plan. A proposed subdivision shall be consistent with a general plan or a specific plan only if the local agency has officially adopted such a plan and the proposed subdivision or land use is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified therein. (d) Pursuant to the General Plan, it is the policy of the City to "[e]ncourage the innovative use of land resources and development of a variety of housing and other development types, provide a means to coordinate the public and private provisions of services and facilities, and address the unique needs of certain lands by recognizing Specific Plan (SP) overlay designations: (a) for large scale development areas in which residential, commercial; recreational, public facilities, and other land uses may be permitted; and (b) large acreage property(ies) in excess of ten acres that are proposed to be annexed into the City" (Strategy 1.1.9, Land Use Element). (e) The information presented in the FOR may be used, in whole or in part, by the City and by other responsible agencies to support specific findings as mandated by State law and by agency requirements and procedures, both as may be required under CEQA and as may be required in support of other actions that may be taken by the City and by other agencies with regards to the proposed project br any aspect thereof. In the event that the City and/or other responsible agencies are unable to make requisite findings, those discretionary approvals associated with those findings cannot be issued. In the absence of the issuance of requisite permits and approvals, no physical changes to the project site would be anticipated to occur and no environmental impacts would result therefrom. (f) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 1-4) designed to ensure an appropriate nexus between the project's environmental review and any resulting land -use entitlements. (g) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.1.4 Environmental Effect: Cumulative residential development within the City and the population increase associated with the introduction of new dwelling units could exceed the 2005-2010 population growth forecasts presented in the "Regional Transportation Plan — Destination 2030" (SCAG, 2004) and which serves as a basis for regional transportation planning (Land Use Impact 1-4). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative land -use impacts are addressed in Section 4.1 (Land Use) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Implementation of the proposed project in combination with. those other related projects will result in the further urbanization of the general project area, including the conversion of vacant or under -developed properties to higher -intensity uses. 15 None of the land uses that are identified, however, constitute uses or activities that are not currently present within the City or the region. (c) Anticipated residential development in the City exceeds the population growth estimates formulated by SLAG. SCAG's projections are used as the basis for establishing regional transportation plans. By under -estimating interim local demands, regional plans may not be as effective in responding to areawide interim transportation needs. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 1-3) designed to apprise SCAG of projected growth within the City, so as to allow SCAG to more effectively update regional plans. (e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2 Population and Housing 5.2.1 Environmental Effect: Project construction will increase the local labor force and, through job creation and the possibility of worker relocation, has the potential to induce population growth•in the general project area (Population and Housing Impact 2-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein: (b) • During construction, an estimated 73 workers would be associated with the project's 202 multi -family housing units and an additional estimated 49 workers would be associated with the project's 153,985 square feet of commercial .use. (c) The workforce required for the project's construction, operation, and maintenance can be reasonably drawn from the available regional labor pool. (d) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2.2 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will result in the addition of up to 202 dwelling units to the City's existing housing stock and will increase the City's population by approximately 662 individuals, based on the California Department of Finance's existing (January 2008) Citywide vacancy rates and average household size (3.335 persons/unit) and vacancy rate (1.71 percent) (Population and Housing Impact 2-2). Finding: The City Council. hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the FEIR and that analysis .is incorporated by reference herein. (b) As indicated in California Department of Finance estimates, in January 2008, the city's population was estimated to be 60,360 individuals. The total number of dwelling units was estimated to be 18,380 units. (c) Total number of dwelling units now proposed (202 units) is less than the adopted SLAG 2006-2014 RHNA for new construction for "above moderate" income households (440. units) and only slightly more than SCAG's identified new construction need for "moderate" income households (188 units). The project represents about 18.5 percent of the. projected housing needs for the period 2006-2014. Since the projected increase appears generally consistent with regional projections, the project will further the attainment of SCAG's regional housing needs assessment. (d) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.2.3 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will result in the construction of 153,985 square feet of commercial use, directly .creating about 462 new. permanent jobs (Population and Housing Impact 2-3). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the FEIR - and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Based on the projected number of direct new jobs (462 jobs) and the number of housing units associated with the proposed project (202 dwelling units), the project's projected on-site jobs -to -housing ratio is about 2.3, indicating the project is "jobs rich." The relatively small number of jobs and housing units, however, is not significant in the broader regional context. (c) The inclusion of both residential and commercial uses on the same site serve to further attainment of the primary intent of jobs -housing balance, namely the reduction of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and the corresponding air quality benefits. (c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are fecommended or required. 5.2.4 Environmental Effect: Absent a corresponding and proportional increase in long-term employment opportunities, projects that increase the City's housing stock would contribute to the perpetuation of the existing Citywide jobs -housing imbalance (Population and Housing Impact 2-4). ' Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative population and housing impacts are addressed in Section 4.2 (Population and Housing) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. 17 (b) Between 2010 and 2030, the jobs -housing ratio for the City will decrease from only 0.86 to 0.82. As a result, the City will remain "housing rich" and "jobs poor." (c) Based on the projected number of direct new jobs attributable to the proposed project (462 jobs) and the number of housing units (202 units), the project's projected on-site jobs -to -housing ratio is about 2.3 and the proposed project would be categorized as being "jobs rich." As a *result, the proposed project promotes the attainment of SCAG's jobs -housing policies and would not incrementally contribute to the existing imbalance. (d) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.3 Geotechnical Hazards 4.3.1 Environmental Effect. Conversion of:the project site. from a vacant property to an urban use will expose site occupants to regional seismic hazards and localized geologic and geotechnical conditions. Should development occur in the absence of an understanding of those regional and local conditions, site occupants may be subjected to unacceptable geotechnical hazards (Geotechnical Hazards Impact 3-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative geotechnical hazards impacts are addressed in. Section 4.3 (Geotechnical Hazards) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and soils setting, including specific design and development recommendations formulated in response thereto, are presented in "Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report: Site D -Mass Grading, Walnut Valley Unified School District, Diamond Bar, California" (KFM GeoScience, January 15 2008). (c) The proposed project is feasible from a geotechnical perspective, provided that the recommendations presented in the project's geotechnical investigations are incorporated into the project's design and construction. Since the Applicant has committed to the incorporation of those recommendations, they are part of the proposed project and the project's design, construction, and operation will occur in conformity and compliance therewith. (d) Design and development activities will occur in conformance with applicable Uniform Building Code (UBC) and California Building Standards Code (CBSC) standards and requirements. (e) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 3-1) to ensure that each of the recommendations presented in the geotechnical investigation are incorporated into the design, development, and operation of the proposed project. (� Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and' no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 18 5.3.2 Environmental Effect: During the life of the project, structures and other improvements constructed on the property will be subject to periodic ground shaking resulting from seismic events along earthquake faults located throughout the region (Geotechnical Hazards Impact 3-2). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative geotechnical hazards impacts are addressed in Section 4.3 (Geotechnical Hazards) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and soils setting, including specific design and development recommendations formulated in response thereto, are presented in `Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report: Site D -Mass Grading, Walnut Valley Unified School District, Diamond Bar, California' (KFM GeoScience, January 15 2008). (c) The proposed project is feasible from a geotechnical perspective, provided that the recommendations presented in the project's geotechnical investigations are incorporated into the project's design and construction. Since the Applicant has committed to the incorporation of those recommendations, they are part of the proposed project and the project's design, construction; and operation will occur in conformity and compliance therewith. (d) Design and development activities will occur in conformance with applicable UBC and CBSC standards and requirements. (e) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 1-3) to ensure that each of the recommendations presented in the geotechnical investigation are incorporated into the design, development, and operation of the proposed project. (f) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.3.3 Environmental Effect: Los Angeles County is located within a seismically active region. Since earthquakes have historically occurred throughout the region and can be expected to occur in the future, development activities that occur throughout the region, including their occupants and users, will remain subject to seismic forces (Geotechnical Hazards Impact 3-3). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative geotechnical hazards impacts are addressed in Section 4.3 (Geotechnical Hazards) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. ' (b) Adequate control measures have been formulated to ensure that all public and private structures are constructed and maintained in recognition of site-specific, area -specific, and regionalc, and soils conditions. (c) Compliance with applicable UBC and CSBCstandardsand associatedpermit- 19 agency requirements will mitigate any potential cumulative impacts to below a level of significance. (d) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.4 Hydrology and Water Quality 5.4.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities may increase sediment discharge and/or result in the introduction of hazardous materials, petroleum products, or other waste discharges that could impact the quality of the area's surface and ground water resources if discharged to those waters (Hydrology and Water Quality Impact 4-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing hydrologic and water quality setting, including specific design and development recommendations formulated in response thereto, are presented in "Preliminary Drainage Report for Site 'D' Improvements at Intersection of Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road, Diamond Bar, California" (PENCO Engineering, Inc., February 7, 2008, revised April 6, 2009). (c) Water quality protection is ensured through preparation and implementation of the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), as required under the State Water Resources Control Board's (SWRCB) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit), through Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed to ensure that grading and construction operations involving the transport, storage, use, and disposal of a variety of construction materials complies with certain storage, handling, and transport requirements. (c) Pursuant to the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region's (LARWQCB) fourth -term General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit (NPDES No. CAS004001) for discharges to the municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) in County, a standard urban stormwater mitigation plan (SUSMP) shall be required, including appropriate BMPs and guidelines to reduce pollutants in storm water to the maximum extent possible (MEP). (d) The Construction General Permit and compliance with SWPPP and MS4 permit requirements constitute mandatory. project measures. Compliance ensures that project -induced water -borne erosion does not significantly impact downstream drainage systems. (e) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has Identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 4-2) requiring the City Engineer's. approval of a SUSMP conforming to the requirements of Section 8.12.1695 of the Municipal Code. 20 ({� Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions andlor mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.4.2 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will result in the introduction of impervious surfaces onto the project site and, as a result of the impedance of opportunities for absorption and infiltration of those waters, .has the potential to increase the quantity, velocity, and duration of storm waters discharged from the tract map area (Hydrology and Water Quality impact 4-2). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this.finding: (a) Project -related • and cumulative hydrology and Vater quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water duality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) According to the recorded plans for the Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel (Private Drain No. 395), a 25 -year discharge of 2,285 cubic feet per second (cfs) is shown at the downstream side of the Diamond Bar Boulevard culvert. The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) stipulated that the existing County -operated and maintained drainage system accommodate a 50 - year storm event of 2,602 cfs. (c) A 50 -year storm creates approximately 68:38 cfs of runoff from the western portion of the project site and an existing 33 -inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe located to the south of the project site currently carries off-site discharge of 83.94 cfs. When combined with existing off-site discharge, the 50 -year storm runoff totals 174.80 cfs at the Brea Canyon Stone Drain Channel. The summation of 50 -year flows (2,602 + 174.80 = 2,776.8) from the project site and from the channel total approximately 2,777 cfs at this reach. (d) Drainage improvement`s are proposed to accommodate projected flows. As proposed, at this reach, the existing Brea Canyon Channel will be replaced with reinforced concrete box (RCB). An existing tributary open channel east of the project site will be replaced with RCB, as well as the proposed entrance to the site. To convey the 50 -year discharge, the proposed channel section will be double cells 9 -foot -wide by B -foot -high RCB with an average 20 feet of cover. Approximately 50 feet of transition box will be constructed from the proposed RCB section to the existing culvert section under Diamond Bar Boulevard. A transition structure downstream of the proposed RCB will be construed to join the existing trapezoidal channel_ (e) The Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 4-1) requiring receipt of all requisite permits and approvals from the LACDPW allowing for the overbuilding of the Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel. (f) To ensure that drainage improvements are consistent with applicable design and development standards and that post -project drainage flows do not result in any adverse public safety or other impacts, a mitigation measure (Condition of Approval 4-1) has been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP specifying that all drainage facilities and improvements are subject to final design and engineering review and approval by the City Engineer and, for those storm drain facilities under County jurisdiction, by the LACDPW. 21 implementation of that measure will reduce identified impacts to below a level of significance. 5.4.3 Environmental Effect: Continuing urbanization of the general project area will collectively contribute 'to surface flows within the Diamond Bar Creek watershed will result in the introduction of additional urban pollutants that could affect the beneficial uses of existing surface and ground water resources (Hydrology and Water Quality Impact 4-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts are addressed in -Section 4.4 (Hydrology and Water Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by. reference herein. (b) Conversion of the project site to a mixed-use development will generate additional urban runoff that would be discharged into Diamond Bar Creek. Project -generated runoff could contribute to potentially significant cumulative water quality impacts generated by existing and future land uses within the tributary watershed area. (c) The proposed project and other related projects will be required to implement BMPs and fully comply with all applicable State water quality laws and regulations. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 4- 1 and 4-2) requiring receipt of all requisite permits and approvals from the LACDPW allowing for the overbuilding of the Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel and the City Engineer's approval of a SUSMP conforming to the requirements of Section 8.12.1695 of the Municipal Code. (e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5 Biological Resources 5.5.1 Environmental Effect. Construction activities and fuel -modification requirements will result in direct impacts from vegetation removal of about 30.4 acres located within the Tract map area. Fuel modification requirements imposed by the Los Angeles County Fire Department could directly impact additional vegetation (Biological Resources Impact 5- 1)- Findin s: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2). Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing biological resource, arboreal, and jurisdictional setting, including an assessment of project -related impacts, are 22 presented in the following studies: (1) "Biological Resources Assessment — Site D, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (PCR Services Corporation, June 24, 2008); (2) "Tree Survey Report — Site D, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California" (PCR Services Corporation, December 18, 2007); (3) "Results of Sensitive Plant Surveys Conducted for the Site D Project Site, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, Califomia" (PGR Services Corporation, December 1B, 2007); and (4) "Investigation, of Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters of the U.S., Site D, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California' (PGR Services Corporation, June 24, 2DOB). (c) During grading operations, impacts will occur to approximately 20.4 acre of disturbed/ruderal, 3.6 acre of eucalyptus stand/disturbed, 2.8 acres of mule fat scrub, 2.1 acres of California walnut woodlands, 0.9 acre of ruderalIgoldenbush scrub, and 0.3 acres of southern willow scrub. With the exception of southern willow scrub, none of these plant communities are considered rare or of high priority for inventory by the Califomia Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). (d) Rare natural communities are those communities that are of highly limited distribution. The most current version of the California Department of Fish and Game's "The Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program — List of California Terrestrial Natural Communities Recognized by the California Natural Diversity Database" (CDFG, 2003) serves as a guide to each community's status. (e) California walnut woodlands and southern willow scrub are considered high- priority for inventory under the CNDDB because they are experiencing decline throughout its range. These habitats are marginal in its value because they are fragmented (i.e., not contiguous with similar habitats) and not expected to support sensitive species. Focused sensitive plant surveys were negative and habitat assessments for sensitive wildlife species (e.g., the least Bell's vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher) determined that these habitats are not suitable to support these species. (f) Although California walnut woodlands and southern willow scrub are associated With United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACOS), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the loss, removal, and destruction of these plant communities on the project site would neither eliminate nor substantially diminish the functions and values of the on-site drainages. as a regional biological resource. (g) The project would cause the direct mortality of some common wildlife species and the displacement of more mobile species to suitable habitat areas nearby. These impacts, by themselves, would not be expected to reduce general wildlife populations below self-sustaining levels within the region. (h) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.2 Environmental Effect: The project will permanently impact approximately 2,125 linear feet of streambed, including approximately 0.20 acres of United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACOS) and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) jurisdictional waters and approximately 4.10 acres of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdictional streambed and associated riparian habitat (Biological Resources Impact 5-2). Findings: The City Council hereby makes Findings (1) and (2). IPA] Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of these findings: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Project implementation will result in direct impacts to approximately 2,125 linear feet of streambed. A total of approximately 0.20 acre of ACOE/RWQCB jurisdictional waters of the United States (WoUS) and approximately 4.10 acres of CDFG jurisdictional streambed and associated riparian habitat would be impacted by the proposed development. No direct impacts to jurisdictional waters are anticipated beyond the project boundaries. (c) The project will require a nationwide Section 404 (CWA) permit from the ACOE, a Section 401 (CWA) water quality certification from the RWQCB, and a Section 1602 (CFGC) streambed alteration agreement from the CDFG.- Impacts to jurisdictional features will.be subject to the regulations set forth by the ACOE, RWQCB, and CDFG and will require mitigation or result in the imposition of other conditions for the identified impacts to jurisdictional waters_ (d) In recognition of the presence of jurisdictional waters, a mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure 5-1) has been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP specifying that, unless a greater ratio is required by permitting agencies: (1) the on-site and/or off-site replacement of ACOE/RWQCB jurisdictional waters and wetlands occur at a 2:1 ratio; (2) the on-site and/or off- site replacement of CDFG jurisdictional streambed and associated riparian habitat occur at a 2:1 ratio; and (3) the incorporation of design features into the proposed project's design and development. Implementation of that measure will reduce identified impacts to below a level of significance. 5.5.3 Environmental Effect: Proposed grading and grubbing activities will result in the removal of 83 protected ordinance -size trees, including 75 California black walnut, six willow, and two coast live oak trees, which now exist on the project site (Biological Resources Impact 5-3). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) A total of 75 California black walnut, six willow, and two coast live oak trees will be impacted by the proposed project. Each of these species is protected trees under Chapter 22.38 of the Municipal Code. The Oaks and Willows, however, do not meet the size criteria in the tree ordinance to be classified as protected trees. As required therein, the'City may require a tree maintenance agreement prior to removal of any protected tree or commencement of construction activities that may adversely affect the health.and survival of trees to be preserved. (c) The project is subject to compliance with the provision of Chapter 22.38 (Tree Preservation and Protection) of the Municipal Code. (d) Although none.of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 5- 24 2 through 5-4) requiring the preparation of an arborist -prepared tree study and specified replacement requirements for qualifying trees and California walnut woodlands, and promoting vegetation removal activities outside the nesting bird season. (e) Since none of.the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.4 Environmental Effect: Constriction activities initiated during the nesting season, typically extending from Febuary 15 to August 15 of each year, could impact nesting birds and raptors in violation of the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (Biological Resources Impact 5-4). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) One sensitive bird species (Cooper's hawk) was observed within the project area and three additional species (white-tailed kite,. sharp -shinned. hawk, and loggerhead shrike) have the potential to occur within the study area due to the presence of suitable habitat. Since these species are not protected by federal or State listings as threatened or endangered and since the loss of individuals would not threaten the regional populations. ing (c) Based ad the presence of suitable extending between February 15 andati Augustr15) the breeding season (typically 9 . could constitute a potentially significant impact. (d) Disturbing or destroying active nests is a violation of the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and nests arid eggs are protected under Section 3503 and 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code. (e} Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 5-4) promoting vegetation removal activities outside the nesting bird season. (f) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.5 Environmental Effect: Project implementation has the potential to impede existing wildlife movement patterns across the project site (Biological Resources Impact 5-5). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed iri Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The project site is located to the north of the area identified by the Conservation Biological Institute as part of the "Puente -Chino Hills wildlife corridor." 25 (c} Although wildlife movement corridors exist in the general project area, the project site does not serve any connectivity or linkage role with regards to regional wildlife movement. (d) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or Mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.6. Environmental Effect: If improperly designed and maintained, the proposed on-site flood control facilities and structural and treatment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) could potentially provide a habitat for the propagation of mosquitoes and other vectors (Biological Resources Impact 5-6). Finding; The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Urban stormwater runoff regulations now mandate the construction and maintenance of structural BMPs for both volume reduction and pollution management. Those BMPs can create additional sources of standing water and sources for mosquito propagation. (c) In the general project area, vector control is performed by the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District (GLACVCD), a County special district funded by ad valorum property and benefit assessment taxes. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 5-5) requiring that BMP devices shall be designed in consultation with the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District and shall be of a type which minimizes the potential for vector (public nuisance) problems. (e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.5.7 Environmental Effect: Implementation of the proposed project, in combination with other reasonably foreseeable future projects, will contribute incrementally to the continuing reduction in open space areas in the general project area and contribute to the general decline in species diversity throughout the region (Biological Resources Impact 5-7). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative biological resources impacts. are addressed in Section 4.5 (Biological Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Implementation of the proposed project and other reasonably foreseeable future projects will contribute incrementally to the continuing urbanization of the region. (c) The proposed project will impact approximately 2.1 acres of California walnut woodland and 0.3 acres of southern willow scrub habitat. Asa result, the project will add incrementally to the regional loss of plant communities considered high- priority for inventory under the CNDDB. (d) Although California walnut woodlands and southern willow scrub are considered high-priority for inventory under the CNDDB, these on-site habitats are marginal in its value because they are fragmented and not expected to support sensitive species. As a result, the incremental reduction in these habitats would not be cumulatively significant. (e) Under Section 22.38.030 of the Municipal Code, protected trees, including "native oak, walnut, sycamore and willow trees with a DBH [diameter at breast height] of eight inches or greater" shall be replaced at a minimum ratio of 3:1. ( Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5,6 Traffic and Circulation 5.6.1 Environmental Effect: Construction vehicles will transport workers, construction equipment, building materials, and construction debris along local and collector streets and along arterial highways within and adjacent to established residential areas and other sensitive receptors (Traffic and Circulation Impact 6-1). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing traffic and circulation setting, including an assessment of project -related impacts, is presented in "Traffic Impact Analysis Report, WVUSD Site D Mixed -Use Development, Diamond Bar, California" (Linscott, Law & Greenspan Engineers, April 23, 2009). (c) Construction traffic, including vehicles associated with the transport of heavy equipment and building materials to and from the project site and ,construction workers commuting to and from work, will increase traffic volumes along Diamond Bar Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road and, because site access can be obtained from Castle Rock Road and Pasado Drive, construction workers may elect to park along and construction vehicles could stage at those roadways. (d) Existing (2007) daily traffic volumes along project area roadway segments include: (1) Brea Canyon Road (north of Diamond Bar Boulevard) — 4,896 average daily trips (ADT); (2) Brea Canyon Road (south of Diamond Bar Boulevard) — 12,696 ADT; (3) Diamond Bar Boulevard (north of Cherrydale Drive) — 20,512 ADT; and, (4) Brea Canyon Cutoff (west of Fallow Field -Diamond Canyon) — 11,003 ADT. Since the projected 854 construction trips would be substantially less than those existing capacity figures and would primarily occur during off-peak periods, construction -related traffic would not adversely affect the existing levels of service (LOS) along those roadways. (e) Compliance with and enforcement of speed laws and other provisions of the California Vehicle Code (CVC) and the safe use and operation of vehicles by their drivers would be expected to keep public safety issues at a less -than - significant level_ 27 (f) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Condition of Approvals 6- 1 through 6-4) requiring the preparation of a construction workers' parking and equipment staging plan, construction traffic mitigation plan, and traffic control plan, and restricting construction -term access from and along Castle Rock Road and Pasado Drive. (g) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.6.2 Environmental Effect The project is forecast to generate approximately 9,276 daily two- way vehicle trips, including 272 trips during the AM and 650 trips .during the PM peak hours, and would increase traffic congestion on local and regional roadways (Traffic and Circulation Impact 6-2). Fb6 : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in Section 4.6 Crraffic and Circulation) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The project's traffic impact analysis was conducted in accordance with the City's "Guidelines for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Analysis Report" and, for each of the 20 study area intersections, included an assessment of 'the 'following nine scenarios were examined: (1) 2007 existing traffic conditions; (2) 2007 existing - plus -project traffic conditions; (3) 2007 existing -plus -project traffic conditions, with Improvements; (4) 2010 cumulafive-base conditions (existing, ambient growth, and related projects); (5) 2010 cumulative -base -plus project traffic conditions; (6) 2010 cumulative -base -plus project conditions, with Improvements; (7) 2030 cumulative -base conditions (e)dsting, ambient growth, and related projects); (8) 2030 cumulative -base -plus -project traffic conditions; (9) 2030 cumulative -base - plus -project traffic conditions, with Improvements. (c) In accordance with City traffic impact analysis (TIA) requirements, the project's construction of or payment of a "fair share" contribution toward the construction costs of identified areawide street improvements serves to fully and effectively reduce the project's traffic and circulation impacts to a less -than -significant level_ (c) Prior to implementation of any recommended traffic improvements, on a cumulative -plus -project bases, traffic associated with the proposed project will significantly impact nine intersections in the long-term (2030) and contribute to the adverse service levels at three additional intersections forecast to operate at an unsatisfactory LOS in 2030. Those locations projected to operate at an adverse service level in 2030 include: (1) Brea Canyon Road (W) at Pathfinder Road; (2) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Pathfinder Road; (3) Brea Canyon Road at Cold Springs Lane; (4) Cold Springs Lane at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (5) Pathfinder Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (6) SR -57 SB Ramps at Brea Canyon 'Cutoff; (7) SR -57 NB Ramps at Brea Canyon Cutoff, (8) Brea Canyon Road at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (9) Cherrydale Drive at Diamond Bar Boulevard, (10) Brea. Canyon Road at Silver Bullet Drive; (11) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Grand Avenue; and (12) Colima Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff. 28 (d) Since twelve intersections which are forecast to operate at a poor level of service (LOS) under 2030 cumulative -plus -project traffic conditions, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 6-1 and 6-2) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP identifying associated street improvements and the proposed project's obligations toward those improvements and specifying that the final site plan shall include and accommodate those traffic measures, improvements, and such other pertinent factors and/or facilities as may be identified by the City Engineer for the purpose of ensuring the safe and efficient movement of project -related traffic. Implementation of the recommended improvements and "fair -share" contribution will reduce identified traffic and circulation impacts to below a level of significance. 5.6.3 Environmental Effect: The implementation of the proposed project, in combination with other related projects, will collectively contribute to existing traffic congestion in the general project area and exacerbate the need for localized areawide traffic improvements (Traffic and Circulation Impact 6-3). Finding; The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). . Facts in SuPPDrt of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are addressed in Section 4.6 (Traffic and Circulation) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Prior to implementation of any recommended traffic improvements, the following twelve intersections are projected to operate at an adverse LOS in 2030: (1) Brea Canyon Road (W) at Pathfinder Road; (2) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Pathfinder Road; (3) Brea Canyon Road at Cold Springs Lane; (4) Cold Springs Lane at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (5) Pathfinder Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (6) SR -57 SB Ramps at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (7) SR -57 NB Ramps at Brea Canyon Cutoff; (8) Brea Canyon Road at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (9) Cherrydale Drive at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (10) Brea Canyon Road at Silver Bullet Drive; (11) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Grand Avenue; (12) Colima Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff. (c) Since twelve intersections which are forecast to operate at a poor level of service (LOS) under 2030 cumulative -plus -project traffic conditions, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 6-1 and 6-2) have been included in the FOR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP identifying .associated street improvements and the proposed project's obligations toward those improvements and specifying that the final site plan shall include and accommodate those traffic measures, improvements, and such other pertinent factors and/or facilities as may be identified by the City Engineer for the purpose of ensuring the safe and efficient movement • of project -related traffic. Implementation of the recommended improvements and "fair -share' contribution will reduce identified traffic and circulation impacts to below •a level of significance. Ow 5.7 Air Quality 5.7.1 Environmental Effect: Because the project involves a General Plan amendment and zone change, it has the potential to be inconsistent with the applicable air quality management plan (Air Quality Impact 7-1). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support: of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) CEQA requires that projects be consistent with the "Air Quality Management Plan" (AQMP). A consistency determination plays an essential role in local agency project review by linking local planning and unique individual projects to the AQMP in the following ways: (1) it fulfills the CEQA goal of fully informing local agency decision -makers of the environmental costs of the project under consideration at a stage early enough to ensure that air quality concerns are fully addressed; and (2) it provides the local agency with ongoing information assuring local decision -makers that they are making real contributions to clean air goals contained in the AQMP. (c) Only new or amended general plan elements, specific plans, and regionally significant projects need to undergo a consistency review. This is because the AQMP strategy is based on projections from local general plans. Projects that are consistent with the local general plan are, therefore, considered consistent with the air quality management plan. (d) As indicated in the analysis presented in the FEIR, the proposed project is consistent with the goals of 2007 AQMP and, in that respect, does not present a significant air quality impact. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.7.2 Environmental Effect: The proposed project has the potential to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations (Air Quality Impact 7-4). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) All construction emissions concentrations for carbon .monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO?), particulate matter less than 10 microns (PMio), and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM25) are within their respective threshold values and are, therefore, less than significant. (c) Based on a CO micro -scale hot -spot analysis, predicted CO values are below the State's 1 -and 8 -hour standards and any potential impact is less than significant. (c) Mandatory adherence to the SCAQMD rules would ensure that any construction or operational impact from toxic air contaminants- (TAC) associated with the operation of the project remains less than significant. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 7-1) requiring that future residential purchasers be notified of the presence or potential presence of proximal commercial uses on the subject property. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.7.3 Environmental Effect: The proposed project has the potential to create objectionable odors (Air Quality Impact 7-5). Finding The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). The following facts are presented in support of this finding: Facts in Support of Finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Project construction would involve the use of heavy equipment creating exhaust pollutants from on-site earth movement and from equipment transporting materials to and from the site. In addition, some odors would be produced from the application of asphalt, paints, and coatings. With regards to nuisance odors,-- any dors,"any air quality impacts will be confined to the immediate vicinity of the odor source and would be of short-term duration. Such brief exposure to nuisance odors constitutes an adverse but less -than -significant air quality impact.. (c) Operational odors could be produced from on-site food preparation and from diesel -fueled vehicles operating on the project site. These odors are common in' the environment and subject to compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402 (Nuisance). (d) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.7.4 Environmental Effect: The construction. and operation of the proposed project will contribute to the generation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. GHG have been linked to climate change (Air Quality Impact 7-7). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative air quality impacts are addressed in Section 4.7 (Air Quality) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) At this time, greenhouse gases (primarily CO2) are not regulated as a criteria pollutant and there are no significance criteria for these emissions. The current AQMP does not set CEQA targets that can be used to.determine any potential threshold values. (c) Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the most common greenhouse gas. Construction activities would consume fuel and result in the generation of GHG emissions. Construction CO2 emissions were projected using the URBEMIS2007 computer model. In accordance With the projected URBEMIS construction schedule, approximately 1,347,095.44 pounds (673.55 tons) of CO2 would be produced over the approximate 299 days of active construction. 31 {d) In the case of site operations, the majority of GHG emissions, and specifically CO2, are due to vehicle travel and energy consumption. Results of the URBEMIS2007 model indicate that, on average, 87,066.64 pounds.(43.53 tons) of CO2 would be produced daily or about 31,779,323.60 pounds (15,889.66 tons) per year. (e) In accordance with the current AQMP, the emission levels in Califomia are estimated to be 473 million metric tons (521.4 million short tons) CO2 equivalent for 2000 and 532 million metric tons (568.4 short tons) CO2 equivalent for 2010. Year 2009 (the worst-case scenario year that the emissions are based on) is then extrapolated to 526.1 million metric tons (579.9 short tons). At approximately 15,889.66 tons per year, the proposed project's operations represent less than 0.003 percent of this State's annual CO2 emissions' budget. (t] Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation.measures are recommended or required. 5.8 Eloise 5.8.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities could result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project (Noise Impact 8-1). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support: of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative noise impacts are addressed in Section 4.8 (Noise) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Noise levels associated with construction activities would be higher than the existing ambient noise levels in the project area but would subside once construction of the project is completed. (c) The most proximate residential structures include the existing single-family homes located to the immediate south and east of the project site. The nearest of these. homes could . be on the order of 50 feet from on-site construction activities. At that distance, the equivalent noise level (Leq) noise levels would be projected to be as high as 89 A -weighted decibel scale (dBA). (d) Construction noise is regulated in the City under the provisions of the Municipal Code. The Municipal Code limits the hours of heavy equipment operations. Notwithstanding those provisions, construction noise may continue to be a short- term hortterm nuisance to proximal noise -sensitive receptors. (e) In recognition of the presence of construction noise and the proximity of existing residential receptors, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 8-1 through 8-6) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP which are designed to reduce short-term noise impacts to the maximum extend feasible. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures would reduce construction noise impacts to a less -than -significant level. 5.8.2 Environmental Effect: Project implementation may result in an exceedance of noise II standards established in the General, Plan and/or Municipal Code or applicable standards formulated by other agencies (Noise Impact 8-2). 32 finding; The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative noise impacts are addressed in Section 4.8 (Noise) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The Municipal Code sets a goal level of 55 dBA for mobile -source noise intrusioh on sensitive, multi -family land uses. The General Plan (Noise Element) allows for a conditionally acceptable exterior noise level of up to 65 dBA community noise equivalent level (CNEL) for residential uses as long as the dwelling units are fitted with forced air ventilation or air conditioning. Assuming the inclusion of forced air ventilation, commercial uses have an exterior goal of 65 dBA CNEL and a conditionally acceptable level of 70 dBA CNEL (c) Based on projected traffic volumes, the 65 dBA CNEL along Diamond Bar Boulevard would fall at a distance of about 130 feet from the centerline of the road. The placement of any residential units within this distance could then expose future residents to excessive noise levels and result in a potentially significant impact. Since any commercial structures that would lie between the residential units and Diamond Bar Boulevard could serve as an effective sound wall* if they were to shield the residents from a view of the road traffic, the 130 - foot distance is considered as conservative. (d) The 65 dBA CNEL deemed suitable for residential development, equipped with forced air ventilation, would fall at a distance of about 830 feet from the freeway. (e) . The 70 dBA CNEL would fall at distances of about 60 feet from the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard. ( The Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 8-1), as required under Title 24 standards, requiring forced air ventilation in the proposed residential development, thus allowing site occupants to leave windows closed and reducing interior levels by in excess of 20 dBA. (e) Based on the potential presence of significant noise impacts, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 8-7 and 8-8) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP specifying that no residential units shall be located within 830 feet of the SR -57 Freeway's nearest travel lane unless additional sound attention is provided and no commercial units shall be located within 60 feet of the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures would reduce construction noise impacts to a less -than -significant level. 5.8.3 Environmental Effect: Project implementation may result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project (Noise Impact 8-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a). Project -related and cumulative noise impacts are addressed in Section 4.8 (Noise) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) . As traffic volumes in the general project area increase, those areas located in proximity to the area's arterial highway system will experience increased traffic ON noise. (c) The TIA indicates that the project would add 9,276 ADT to the roadway network. Modeling indicates that the noise increase along all access roads would not exceed 0.7 dBA CNEL. The project's contribution to ambient noise levels would, therefore, be less than significant. (d) The dominant sources of noise through the project area are from freeway traffic and traffic along Diamond Bar Boulevard. Noise attenuates with distance and intervening objects and obstacles serve to further impede the transmittal of sound energy. The structures associated with the proposed development would serve as a partial sound wall reducing this noise at the existing residential location. The introduction of intervening structures could benefit adjacent residents by further reducing line -of -sight propagation of mobile source noise along adjoining. roadways. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no'standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.8.4 Environmental Effect: Short-term construction and long-term operational noise associated with the proposed project, in combination with other related projects, will contribute to both a localized and an areawide increase in ambient noise levels in proximity to those projects and along those roadways utilized by project -related traffic (Noise Impact 8-4). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative noise impacts are addressed in Section 4.8 (Noise) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Construction noise impacts are generally localized and limited to each related project site and those areas proximal to those construction operations. Cumulative construction noise impacts will be generally localized to each such project and the roadway network along which construction traffic travels. (c) As traffic volumes in the general project area increase over time, those areas located in proximity to the area's arterial highway system will experience increased traffic noise. Existing roadway volumes would, however, need to double in order to produce a perceptible noise increase. (d) Large-scale projects that contribute substantially to traffic volumes along the area's arterial highway system are subject to CEQA compliance. Similarly, the noise element of each agency's general plan specifies those roadways that are subject to excessive noise levels. As deemed appropriate, beyond those requirements already imposed by each agency's noise ordinance, land -use entities have the ability to impose additional mitigation measures and/or conditions of approval on each project in order to reduce potential short-term and long-term traffic noise impacts. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or rnitigation measures are. recommended or required. 5.9 Public Services and Facilities 34 5.9.1 Environmental Effect: During construction, heavy equipment, materials, and other items of value will be brought to the project site. As buildings are. erected, prior to site occupancy, structures may remain unsecured and susceptible to unauthorized entry. The presence of an unsecured site and items of value could result in theft and vandalism that could increase demands upon law enforcement agencies (Public Services Impact 9- 1). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Since the project site Js presently vacant and since no public use is authorized thereupon, the property presently places little, if any, demand upon existing police protection services. An increased demand for police service will occur during the construction phases. (c) .not require construction of any new Los Provision of such services would Angeles County Sheriffs Department (LACSD) or California. Highway Patrol (CHP) facilities or necessitate the physical alteration of any existing facilities. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 9- 1 and 9-2) requiring the preparation of a construction security plan outlining the activities that will be instituted to secure the construction site from potential criminal incidents and providing the LACSD the -opportunity to review and comment upon building plans and the configuration of the development. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less. than significant and no additional standard conditions and(or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.2 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will result in the introduction of equipment, materials, and manpower into a County -designated fire hazard area prior to the provision of water system improvements designated to respond to on-site and near -site fire hazards (Public Services Impact 9-2). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The proposed project must fully comply with all applicable provisions of the "Uniform Building Code" (UBC) and "Uniform Fire Code" (UFC), as modified, and other applicable provisions of the "Los Angeles County Code" (County Code) established to address fire protection and public safety. (c) The project is subject to compliance with the Los Angeles County Fire Departments (LACFD) "Fuel Modification Plan Guidelines for Projects Located in Fire Zone 4 or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone" requirements. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has 35 identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 9- 3 through 9-5) requiring the Los Angeles County Fire Department's (LACFD) approval of fire protection program and workplace standards for fire safety, a fuel modification, landscape, and irrigation plan, a final water improvement plans, and associated building plans. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.3 • Environmental Effect: The public school located closest to the project site is Castle Rock Elementary School (2975 Castle Rock Road). Construction activities could constitute an attractive nuisance to children located near or passing by the project site and construction traffic could impose a safety hazard to children and/or become disruptive to school activities and operations (Public Services Impact 9-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Since no substantial increase in the number of new households within the general project area would be anticipated in order to accommodate the project's construction, no direct construction -related impacts on WVUSD facilities have been identified. (d) Construction traffic accessing the site from Cold Springs Road will cross Castle Rock Road in the vicinity of Castle Rock Elementary School. Construction vehicles will transport equipment, building _ materials, and could discharge construction debris along streets adjacent to established residential areas, including the school, where children would be present. (e) Construction activities may present an attractive nuisance, defined as any condition which is unsafe or unprotected and, .thereby, dangerous to children and which may reasonably be expected to attract children to the property and risk injury by playing with, in, or on it. (f) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a number of standard conditions of approval (Conditions of Approval 6- 2, 6-3, 6-4, and 9-6) restricting construction -traffic along Castle Rock Road and Pasado Drive, requiring the preparation of a construction traffic safety plan and a traffic control plan, and requiring the fencing and signage of the construction site. (g) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.4 Environmental Effect: With a resident population of approximately 662 persons and an existing LACSD staffing ratio of one sworn officer for each 1,082 residents, in order to maintain existing staffing levels, the LACSD would need an additional 0.61 sworn deputies (Public Services Impact 9-4). i� Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). 36 Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 44.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Actual police protection personnel needs will be determined over time, based on that department's experience with the project's residential and commercial components, areawide incident trends, and other factors, and not derived purely through a projection of the number of on-site residents. (c) There is no formal basis to quantify project -related law enforcement impacts, no established nexus allowing for the collection of developer impact fees for police protection services, and no direct linkage between approved development and the expansion of police resources, the purchase and new or the replacement of existing equipment, and the hiring of new sworn and non-swom personnel. (e) Neither the LACSD nor the CHP have not established a functional mechanism for the collection of LACSD or CHP impact fees and there exists no formal basis to quantify project -related impacts upon police protection services. (fl Because funding for LACSD personnel, equipment, and facilities is derived through ad valorum taxation and based on yearly allocations by the County, the County has the ability to effectively respond to LACSD resource demands. (g) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has n identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 9-2) specifying that, prior to the issuance of building permits, the LACSD review and comment upon building plans and the configuration of the development. (h) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no' additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.5 Environmental Effect: The introduction of 202 new residential dwellings and 153,985 square feet of new commercial use will increase existing demands on LACFD facilities, equipment, and personnel, predicating an incremental need for facility expansion, the purchase 'of new and/or replacement equipment, and contributing to the need for addition LACFD personnel (Public Services impact 9-5). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Water service to the project site will be provided by the Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD), via existing water mains.Therequires inch sum fire flow of 1,250 gallons per minute (gpm) a 2pounds P q (psi) two-hour duration. Existing water mains are capable of . delivering -those minimum flows to the project site. (c) With regards to commercial projects, the LACFD stipulates that the minimum fire flow and fire hydrant requirements shall be determined by the fire chief or fire marshal. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 9-5) specifying 37 that, prior to the issuance of building permits, the LACFD review and approve final water improvement plans and building plans. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions andlor mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.6 Environmental Effect: Project implementatiomwill increase enrollment within the Walnut Valley Unified School District by an estimated 31 new students, including approximately 11 new elementary school students (Grades K-6), 8 new junior high school students (Grades 7-9), and 12 new high school students (Grades 9-12) (Public Services Impact 9- 6) Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1): Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) For the 2009-2010 school year, Castle Rock Elementary, Evergreen Elementary Schools, and South Pointe Middle School have the available capacity to accommodate 103, 117, and 62 additional students, respectively. Although no available capacity has been identified at Diamond Bar High School (a shortfall of 80 students is projected), any excess pupil enrollment at that facility will be temporarily housed in leased portable classrooms (in space made available by reducing existing programs. and in space reconstructed on existing sites) until more permanent measures can be taken. (c) As indicated in the WVUSD's current fee justification study, based on the application of the State -approved cohort survival method, it is estimated that student enrollment within the WVUSD will decrease from 15,485 Grade K-12 students in the fall of the 2008 school year to 15,414 students in the 2011 school year, representing an increase of 75 Grade K-6 students and -a decrease of 79 Grade 7-12 students. Alternatively, based on the application of the pupil per dwelling unit multiplier method, it is estimated that student enrollment will increase from 15,485 Grade K-12 students in the fall of the 2008 school year to 15,599 students in the 2016 school year, representing an increase of 49 Grade K-6 students and an increase of 50 Grade 7-12 students. (d) The WVUSD's current fee justification study concluded that no new school sites would need to be acquired and no new school facilities would need to be constructed to accommodate projected student population projections through at least 2023. (e) . Payment of applicable fees to the WVUSD or, alternatively, execution of an Assembly Bill (AB) 2926 mitigation agreement acceptable to the WVUSD constitutes full and complete mitigation of project -related impacts on the provision of school facilities from the proposed residential development. (f) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 9-7) specifying that, prior to the issuance of building permits, the City be provided with a certificate of compliance or other documentation demonstrating complied with the District's School Board resolutions. governing the payment of school impact fees 38 or has entered into an AB 2926 authorized school fee mitigation agreement or is not subject to the school impact fee exaction. (g) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.7 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will increase the resident population of the City, including the number of school-age children, incremental increasing existing spatial and resource demands placed on the Diamond Bar Public Library (Public Services Impact 9-7). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Findinq: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and .cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and • Facilities) in the. FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The Diamond Bar Library is 9,935 gross square feet in size and houses a collection consisting of 89,446 books and other library materials. (c) The County Library s current service level guidelines for planning purposes are a 'Minimum 6f 0.50 gross square foot of library facility space per capita and 2.75 items (books and other library materials) per capita. Based on an estimated service area population of 56,233 persons, as derived from United States Census data, the Diamond Bar Library would need a 28,115 square foot facility and 154,640 items in order to meet that standard. (d) The proposed project is projected to add about 662 new residents to the City. That population increase would create additional demand for library service and would further affect the County Library's ability to adequately serve the existing and future residents of the Diamond Bar Library's service area. Based on the County Library's service level guidelines, based on project -related demand,.the Diamond Bar Library would require an additional 331 gross square feet of facility space and an additional 1,820 new items (books and other library materials). (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.8 Environmental Effect: Project implementation will increase the resident population of the City of Diamond Bar and generate a projected need for 2.12 acres (approximately 92,390 square feet) of additional parkland within the City (Public Services Impact 9-8). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative public services and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and Facilities) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Section 21.32.040 (Park Land Dedications and Fees) in Chapter 21.32 (Subdivisions) of the Municipal Code provides for the dedication of real property and/or the payment of indieu fees to the City for park and recreational purposes. all In accordance therewith, the proposed 202 dwelling units (assuming the classification of those units as multi -family dwellings) would generate a need for 2.12 acres (approximately 92,390 square feet) of additional parkland within the City. (c} As specified in Section 21.32.040(e)(2), only the payment of fees shall be required in subdivisions of 50 parcels or less, except that when a condominium project, stock cooperative, or community apartment project exceeds 50 dwelling units, dedication of land may be required even though the number of actual parcels may be less than 50. Although the proposed development plan does not include a public recreational component, the City is authorized to require real property dedication rather or in addition to the payment of park fees. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 9-8) specifying that, prior to the approval of the final subdivision map, pursuant to Section 21.32.040 (Park Land Dedications and Fees) in Chapter 21.32 (Subdivisions) of the Municipal Code, in -lieu park fees shall be paid to the City in the manner and in the amount authorized thereunder. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.9.9 Environmental Effect: The approval of other reasonably foreseeable future development projects within the general project area will increase existing demands on the Los Pngefes County Sheriffs Department and on the Los Angeles County Fire Department, increase the number of school -aged children served by the Walnut Valley Unified School District, and increase the demandfor park and recreational facilities within the City (Public Services Impact 9-9). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The.following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative publicservices and facilities impacts are addressed in Section 4.9 (Public Services and. Facilities) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Based on a Statewide, regional, areawide, or local assessment of need, public agencies have the ability to construct new facilities, purchase new equipment, and add personnel in response to identified demand_ Local agencies have the ability to deny or condition individual development applications based on their assessment of potential project -related impacts upon law enforcement and fire protection agencies, facilities, and personnel. Public agencies have the ability to respond to those changes through increases or decreases in annual budgetary allocations provided to police and fire protection agencies, including the LACSD and LACFD. (�) As indicated in the WVUSD's current fee justification' study, based on the application of the State -approved cohort survival method, it is estimated that student enrollment within the WVUSD will decrease from 15,485 Grade K-12 students in the fall of the 2008 school year to 15,414 students in the 2011 school year, representing an increase of 75 Grade K-6 students and a decrease of 79 Grade 7-12 students.' Alternatively, based on the application of the pupil per dwelling unit multiplier method, it. is estimated that student enrollment will 40 increase from 15,485 Grade K-12 students in the fall of the 2008 school year to 15,599 students in the 2016 school year, .representing an increase of 49 Grade K-6 students and an increase of 50 Grade 7-12 students. (d) The WVUSD's current fee justification study concluded that no new school sites would need to be acquired and no new school facilities would need to be constricted to accommodate projected student population projections through at least 2023. (e) All qualifying residential and non-residential development projects located within the WVUSD's district boundaries are required to pay school impact fees. Notwithstanding. the findings of the WVUSD's fee justification analysis, the payment of applicable school impact fees or the execution of an AB 2926 mitigation agreement constitutes full and complete mitigation for project -related impacts on WVUSD facilities. (� In November. 2007, the area's voters approved General Obligation Bond Measure S ($64.6 million. Academic Facilities .Measure) and Measure Y ($15.2 million Physical Education Facilities Measure). As a result of those ballot measures, WVUSD schools will receive.needed repairs and upgrades. (g) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.10 Utilities and Service Systems 5.10.1 Environmental Effect: Wastewater collection facilities do not presently exist on the project site and will not be available until the infrastructure improvements required to accommodate the proposed land uses are constructed (Utilities and Service Systems Impact 10-1). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative utilities and service systems impacts are addressed in Section 4.10 (Utilities and Service Systems) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The provision of potable water and toilet facilities is required under United States Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) (29 CFR 1926.51) and California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Industrial Safety (Cal/OSHA) (Section 1524-1526, CCR) standards. (c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.10.2 Environmental Effect: The project's residential and commercial components are projected to generate approximately 89,435 gallons of wastewater per day (0.09 mgd). Applying a peaking factor of 2.7, the peaked flow rate would be about 241,475 gallons of wastewater per day (0.25 mgd) (Utilities and Service Systems Impact 10-2). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support'of this finding: 41 (a) Project -related and cumulative utilities and service systems impacts are addressed in Section 4.10 (Utilities and Service Systems) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (CSDLAC or Districts) has formulated average wastewater generation rates for a variety of land uses. The CSDLAC projects that for "condominium" units, each unit will generate approximately 195 gallons of wastewater per day (gpd). Based on that generation rate, the project's 202 dwelling units are projected -to generate approximately 39,390 gpd of wastewater or 0.04 million gallons per day (mgd). (c) For the purpose of this analysis, a "shopping center" has been assumed. The CSDLAC's sewage generation rate for a "shopping center" is estimated to be 325 gallonsldayl1,000 square feet (if). Based on shopping center containing 153,985 gross leasable square feet, an estimated 50,D45 gpd (0.05 mgd) of wastewater would be generated daily. When projected residential and commercial wastewater estimates are combined, approximately 89,435 gpd (0.09 mgd) of wastewater would be generated daily. (d) Peak daily flow rates are higher than daily rates and serve as the basis for facility planning. Applying a peaking factor of 2.7, the peak flow rate would be about 241,475 gpd (0.25 mgd). (e) The project generally gravity flows sewage toward the west portion of the property. The wastewater flow originating from the proposed project will discharge to a local sewer line, which is not maintained by the CSDLAC, for conveyance to the Districts No. 21 Outfall Trunk Sewer, located in Brea Canyon Road at Via Sorella. This 184nch diameter trunk sewer has a design capacity of 12.3 mgd and conveyed a peak flow of 4.9 mgd when last measured in 2005. Assuming that peak flow rates have not changed substantially since 2005. even with the proposed project's projected contribution (D.25 mgd), sufficient capacity exists in the Districts No. 21 Outfall Truck Sewer to readily accommodate the proposed development. ( Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 10-1) specifying that, prior to the issuance of any grading permits, a sewer area study, prepared by a licensed civil engineer registered in the State of California, be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer and the County. (g) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.10.3 Environmental Effect: Implementation of the proposed project and other related projects would impose cumulative impacts on those sewage collection and disposal facilities located in the general project area (Utility and Service Systems Impact 10-3). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative utilities and service systems impacts are 1� addressed in Section 4.10 (Utilities and Service Systems) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) At the project -specific level, local agencies require project proponents to assess 42 the impacts of proposed projects on existing sewer facilities, on an as -heeded basis. Those analyses are conducted to identify any site-specific or project - specific improvements that may be required to the local and/or GSDLAC's sewer systems that may be needed to handle increased sewage flows attributable to each project. As required, all related projects must construct any requisite local wastewater improvements needed to handle their respective flows. (c) CSDLAC facilities are sized and improvements phased to serve population and economic development in accordance with forecasts adopted by SCAG. Projects that are consistent with SCAG growth forecasts can be adequately served by existing and planned CSDLAC facilities. (d) In order to fund planned improvements, each new project within the County is required to pay connection fees to the CSDLAC. These fees are used to finance future expansions and upgrades to the regional trunk sewer system and wastewater treatment facilities. . (e) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5,11 Cultural Resources 5.11.1 Environmental Effect: Construction activities can result in the irretrievable loss or damage to any prehistoric, historic, or paleontological resources that may exist within the area of proposed disturbance (Cultural Resources Impact 11-1). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative cultural resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.11 (Cultural Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Information and analysis concerning the existing cultural resources 'setting, including an assessment of project -related impacts, is presented in "Phase I Cultural and Paleontological Resource Assessment of the Proposed Site D Development, Los Angeles County, California" (PCR Services Corporation, January 24, 2008). (c) No prehistoric archaeological resources have been previously recorded within one mile of the project site and no prehistoric resources were identified on the subject property during the pedestrian survey. (d) Results of the historic aerial photograph and topographic map review revealed that a structure (HS -1) was once located within the boundaries of the project site that was associated with the historic Diamond Bar Ranch Headquarters Compound. The Compound included the residence of Frederick E. Lewis, who owned and operated the Diamond Bar Ranch. There is a moderate potential for the site to retain buried domestic or ranch maintenance components such as trash pits, privy holes, and similar features. (e) Results of the pedestrian survey revealed the identification of a historical archaeological site, consisting of more than 15 non-native eucalyptus trees and concrete debris concentration likely associated with the former location of HS -1. The significance of that site with respect to CEQA is considered to be undetermined. 43 (� Based on the potential presence of significant cultural resources impacts, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 11-1 through 11-3) have been included in the FOR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP requiring that, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified archaeologist be retained to monitor all vegetation removal and ground disturbance to a depth of three feet within specified areas.- If cultural resources are identified during monitoring of the ground disturbing activities, the archaeologist shall temporarily divert or redirect grading or excavation activities in the vicinity of those resources in order to make an evaluation of the find and determine appropriate treatment If human remains are encountered unexpectedly during construction excavation and grading activities, Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code (HSG) requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Section 5097.98 of the PRC. Implementation of those measures will reduce identified impacts to below a level of significance. 5.11.2 Environmental Effect: Ground disturbance activities could result in impacts to on-site paleontoiogical resources, including fossil remains, from the Puente Formation (Cultural Resources Impact 11-2). Finding. : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative cultural resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.11 (Cultural Resources) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Results of the paleontological resources records search revealed that the study area is underlain by the Puente Formation (also known as the Monterey Formation in the region), which is a formation known to contain diverse and well- preserved marine vertebrate fossils. The results of the pedestrian surrey confirmed the exposure of the Puente Formation on the project site identified four fossil localities in backdirt piles from geotechnical core sampling. The project site is considered to be highly sensitive for paleontological resources. (c) Based on the potential presence of significant cultural resources impacts, a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 11-4 through 11-8) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP requiring that, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified paleontologist meeting the qualifications established by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontologists be retained to develop and implement a paleontological monitoring plan. A paleontological monitor, supervised by the paleontologist, shall monitor all excavations in the Puente Formation or excavations anticipated to extend into the Puente Formation. The paleontologist shall prepare a final report on the monitoring. If fossils were identified, the report shall contain an appropriate description of the fossils, treatment, and curation. A copy of the report shall be filed with the City and the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County and shall accompany any curated fossils. Implementation of those measures will reduce identified impacts to below a level of significance, 5.11.3 Environmental Effect: Grading activities conducted on other sites located within the general project area could result in impacts to any historic or prehistoric resources that 44 may be located thereupon. In addition, earth -moving activities conducted on other undisturbed sites containing the Puente Formation could result in the loss of recoverable paleontological resources (Cultural Resources impact 11-3). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative cultural resources impacts are addressed in Section 4.11 (Cultural Resources) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) All cumulative project activities remain subject to site-specific environmental review and must fully conform to and comply with all applicable local. State, and federal requirements. Compliance with those requirements will ensure that all related project -specific and cumulative impacts upon prehistoric, historic, and paleontological resources are mitigated to a less -than -significance level. (c) Since none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.12 Aesthetics 5.12.1 Environmental Effect: Excluding those areas that will be retained as open space, the project site will take on a distinctively urban physiographic character as existing a. vegetation is removed, construction equipment introduced onto the site, hillside areas recontoured, new uses are introduced, and other physical modifications occur (Aesthetic Impact 12-1). Finding : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12 (Aesthetics) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The proposed development will consist of three mass -graded "super pads," including one proposed commercial pad (with an area of about 10.09 acres) and two proposed residential pads (ranging in area from about 4.02 to 6.05 acres). The pads will be developed by balanced cut and fill grading. Cuts will range from less than five feet to about 40 feet high. Fill slopes will range in height from a few feet to approximately 60 feet down-slope from the upper residential pad to Diamond Bar Boulevard. (c) City policies encourage the use of contour grading and landform grading techniques in order to create more naturalized engineered slope areas. Proposed grading activities seek to apply these contour grading principals to the proposed engineered slope areas, creating, where practical, curvilinear features that produce a visual transition between engineered and natural open space areas. (d) Although construction is short-term in duration, if serves as precursors to the long-term visual changes that will occur as a result of those activities. During development, construction activities may appear disharmonious with the current perception of the existing property as an open -space area. At the end of the 45 construction term, the site will take on a distinctively urban character and shall generally be perceived as an urban use. (e) Based on the City's interpretation and general application of the visual resource assessment methodology outlined in the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) "Visual Resource Management Program" (BLM, 1986), construction -induced changes would be considered adverse but less than significant. (� Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no project conditions or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.12.2 Environmental Effect: The project's implementation will alter the site's existing topography and necessitate the construction of numerous retaining walls (Aesthetic Impact 12-2). Finding; The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12 (Aesthetics) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Variable height Loffel (Loffelstein) retaining walls, ranging from several feet to about 23 feet high, are proposed near the mid -slope of the 2:1 fill slopes between each of the .super pads. Although the proposed retaining walls exceeds the height limitations specified in 'Sections 22.20.040, 22.22.080(b) -(c), and 22.52.020 of the Municipal Code, the proposed walls would be authorized under the provisions of the proposed specific plan. (c) Large retaining walls, absent integrated landscaping and irrigation, can become dominant visual elements that produce a sharp contrast between retained natural features and introduced cultural modifications. All walls over eight feet in height are cribwalls designed to incorporate landscaping as an integral design element. (d) Although none of the threshold criteria would be exceeded, the Lead Agency has identified a standard condition of approval (Condition of Approval 12-1) specifying that the specific plan include design details, acceptable to both the City Engineer and to the Community Development Director, for all proposed retaining walls. Retaining wall plans shall include landscape and irrigation details sufficient to ensure that each of those elements are, as appropriate, integrated into wall design and that the interrelationship between, those elements are considered from structural integrity and aesthetic viewpoints. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no additional standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. uses 5.12.3 Environmental Effect: The introduction othe f new site nand cotial uld result commercial light trespass new sources of artificial lighting project extending beyond the project boundaries (Aesthetic Impact 12-3). Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts In Support of Finding% The following facts are presented in support of this finding: 0 (a) - Project -related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12 (Aesthetics) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) has established recommended outdoor lighting illumination levels. Lighting that conform to those standards would be assumed to produce a less -than -significant impact. (c) As defined by the IESNA and the International Darksky Association (IDA), a widely used light trespass standard specifies that an appropriate standard is to limit the exterior lighting originating on a property to a maximum of 0.5 horizontal foot candles (HFC) at a distance of 25 feet beyond the property lines. (d) Based .on the potential presence of significant aesthetic impacts, a mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure 12-1) have been included in the FEIR and adopted or likely to be adopted in the MRMP requiring that pole -mounted or wall -mounted luminaires installed for the purpose of illuminating commercial areas, parking lots, roadways,. and driveways, conform to appropriate fighting standards and demonstrate that light trespass not exceed 0.5 HFC, as measured at the project boundaries abutting any existing residential use. Implementation of that measure will reduce identified impacts to below a level of significance. 5.12.4 Environmental Effect: Much of the San Gabriel Valley is already highly urbanized and sual the areming open -space the dominancea's reain urban developments(Aestheticto ke gImpact 12 -4) -significance as a respite to Findin : The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative aesthetics impacts are addressed in Section 4.12 (Aesthetics) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The City and other municipalities located within the County formulate long-range planning documents with the intent of directing development and redevelopment activities to those areas most conducive to growth, based on a variety of planning considerations. Separate formal planning and environmental review processes exist when a development proposal seeks to modify those adopted long-range plans. (c) No development is authorized to occur in the absence of compliance with adopted agency plans and policies and in the absence of appropriate environmental review. Compliance with and conformity to adopted plans and policies helps to mitigate the potential cumulative impacts produced by the visual changes to existing landscapes associated with future development and redevelopment activities. While the further intensification of the region may constitute an adverse impact, the incremental and inevitable changes resulting from those activities would not be deemed a significant cumulative impact on the region's existing visual resources. (c) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.13 Growth Inducement 5.13.1 Environmental Effect: Because the project includes both an amendment to the "City of Diamond Bar General Plan" and the adoption of a specific plan, the project may result in 47 on-site .development activities that exceed current development assumptions and necessitate the provision of unplanned services and facilities beyond the project boundaries (Growth Inducement Impact 13-1). Finding : The City.Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative growth4nducing impacts are addressed in Section 4.13 (Growth Inducement) in the FOR and that analysis is in by reference herein. (b) California State law requires that every city and county prepare and, adopt a long - (b) its future development. The general plan term, comprehensive general plan fo serves as a "constitution for development" and the foundation upon which all land -use decisions in a city or county are to be based. (c) Implementation of the proposed project will change existing land -use policies with regards to the allowable use of the project site, resulting in an intensification of uses within the City beyond that now envisioned in the City General Plan. Since planning for public services is, in whole or in part, based on existing and projected demands for those services, changes in public land -use policies have the potential to impose additional unplanned demands upon those services and facilities. si (d) Although the site is degnated for public facilities, the public facility provider which owns the majority of the project site has declared the property to be surplus and not required for public facility use. As such, although project implementation will result in a modification to existing land -use policies, the resulting use is not anticipated to necessitate the provision of unplanned services and facilities beyond the project boundaries. (e) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 5.13.2 Environmental Effect: (Growth Inducement impact 13-2). Finding: The City Council hereby makes Finding (1). Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) Project -related and cumulative growth -inducing impacts are addressed in Section 4.13 (Growth Inducement) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) The construction of 202 dwelling units and the introduction of 153,985 square feet of commercial use will increase the City's population by an estimated 662 individuals and directly create an estimated 462 new permanent jobs. (c) The size and duration of the proposed project is not sufficient to predicate any substantial in -migration of new workers into the general project area. The project's incremental contribution to localized, regional, and national employment opportunities would not create substantial significant secondary impacts. !f3 (d) Project implementation will, therefore, not result in the removal of economic, physical, and/or political constraints affecting either the project site or other near - site properties. (e) With the exception of off-site traffic improvements, the project does not include the expansion of any infrastructure systems that would accommodate additional off-site development. The traffic improvements identified as mitigation measures herein serve to accommodate the proposed project, ambient growth, and other related projects. (f) Since none of the threshold of significance criteria would be exceeded, the identified impact would be less than significant and no standard conditions and/or mitigation measures are recommended or required. 6.0 FINDINGS REGARDING MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM The City Council has adopted or will likely adopt the MRMP set forth in the FEIR. The City Council hereby finds that the MRMP meets the requirements of Section 21081.6 of CEQA and Sections 15097 and 15126.4 of the State CEQA Guidelines. 7.0 FINDINGS REGARDING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES NOT SELECTED FOR IMPLEMENTATION. The City Council recognizes that the SDSP will result in significant unavoidable environmental impacts that cannot be feasibly reduced to below a level of significance. The City Council finds that: (1) due to specified economic, legal, social, technological, and other considerations, each of the project alternatives examined in the FEIR are infeasible; (2) each of the project alternatives examined in the FEIR will not fulfill the identified project's stated objectives; and/or (3) each of the project alternatives examined in the FEIR will not feasibly result in the avoidance of any of the unmitigable significant or potentially significant environmental impact's associated with the proposed project_ 7,1 Alternative No. 1 ("No Project" Alternative) Alternative Project Description: Under this alternative no physical changes to the project site main.in its present condition, and no new would occur, the property would be re development activities or other public improvements would occur thereupon. No grading or other landform modifications would occur. Maintenance activities, including weed abatement, would routinely be performed and the existing level of use would continue generally in the manner now experienced. In keeping with the general intent of this alternative, one possible variation would involve the use of a sufficient portion of the City Property to allow for the development of street improvements to the Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard intersection. Com arison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Project: The City Council finds that the "No Project" alternative" is "environmentally superior' to the proposed project since it would, at least in the short term, result in the avoidance of those significant construction, operational, and cumulative air quality impacts associated with the proposed project. Facts in Support of Finding: The following facts are presented in support of this f riding: 49 (a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0 (Alternatives Analysis) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) Under this alternative, no new housing units and no new commercial square footage would be constructed on the project site. (c) The "no project' alternative generally reflects the conditions and associated environmental impacts that would predictably occur should the Lead Agency elect to either deny the proposed project or fail to take affirmative action on the proposed application, resulting in, at least; the short-term retention of the site in its existing condition. The denial of the current development application or the cessation of current process would, however, neither preclude the submission of a subsequent development application either by the current project proponent or another party not ensure the site's retention asan open space area. (d) With regards to construction air quality impacts, under. the proposed project, combined emissions or reactive organic gases (ROG) were estimated at 136.02 pounds/day. Since that value exceeds the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, construction impacts would be deemed to be significant. Since, under the "no project' alternative, no development would occur on the site, construction emissions would be eliminated and short-term air quality impacts would be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (e) With regards to operational air quality impacts, the proposed project is projected to create ROG, oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and carbon dioxide (CO) emissions in excess of SCAQMD's suggested daily threshold criteria. Since, under the "no project'' alternative, no development would occur on the project site, operational emissions would be eliminated and long-term air quality impacts would be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (f) With regards to cumulative air quality impacts, independent of the Lead Agency's actions concerning the project site, related project activities will continue to incrementally contribute to regional air emissions within the SCAB. However, since site-specific contributions will not add to those conditions, cumulative air quality impacts would be deemed to be less than significant. Effectiveness in Meeting Proiect Objectives: The City Council finds that the "No Project' alternative would not substantially meet the stated project objectives. Feasibility : Although a substantial portion of the project site is owned by the District, the District has declared the District Property surplus and seeks to dispose of their real property holdings in order to raise funds for other eligible expenditures. As stipulated in the MOU between the City and the District, upon the approval of the specific plan for the development of Site D (if such approval were to occur), the "District agrees to use its best efforts to sell the School Property as entitled by the City for the fair- market value, in accordance with the provisions of California Education Code commencing with Section 17455. City agrees to use its best efforts to sell the City Property for the fair market value. The parties agree to cooperatively work with each other to coordinate the sale of Site D." In the absence of public andlor private purchase of the project site for the purpose of open space preservation, there exists no mechanism to ensure the long-term preservation of the project site in an undeveloped condition. As a result, absent that participation, the "No Project" alternative is deemed to be infeasible. 50 7.2 Alternative No. 2 („Public Facilities” Alternative) Aie rnativ� Project Description: The District Property is presently designed Public Facilities (PF)" in the General Plan. Although there exists no corresponding zoning designation which relates exclusively to public facilities, this alternative is predicated upon the geographic expansion of that General Plan designation across the entire project site and the development of the property in accordance with the declared intent of that General Plan designation. For the purpose of this alternatives analysis, under this alternative, it is assumed that the estimated developable area of the project site (20.2 acres) is developed at a floor-area-ratio of 0.25. Under this alternative, a total of 220,000 square feet of public facilities use would be developed on the project site. For the purpose of CEQA compliance, the FOR assumed the sale of the project site to a private entity, such as a religious organization or operator of a parochial school. Under this alternative; the project site would be developed to include a 73,000 square foot (500-student) private school and a 147,000 square foot (2,50D-seat) church. A fellowship area would be developed within the sanctuary building which would be made available for public use as a banquet facility. Improvements would include a parochial school campus, including classrooms, library, and approximately 12,000 square foot (1,000-seat capacity) multi-purpose auditorium, outdoor recreational facilities, offices and administrative facilities, maintenance area, and caretaker's residence. The gymnasium would serve the private school and be available for the community for use after school hours, including after school programs administered by the Boys and Girls n, once operational, other on-site activities are Club or similar organization. In additio assumed to include non-residential child-care services, family-care services, activities and uses catering to youth groups, music and drama ministries, counselingprayer meetings, bible study, nutrition programs, homeless outreach and assistance programs, and othr nd community campuse ewould also d educational, job training, contain onttain 6 000 square feet of retail services activities. The re ail us s (book store) Com adson of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Prole ct: The City Council finds that the "Public Facilities" alternative is "environmentally superior" to the proposed project since it would result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of those significant operational air quality impacts associated with the proposed project. . Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0 (Alternatives Analysis) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. xi (b) 2,478nentation of this alternative typical weekday, generation 336 AM peak-hour 2,478 daily vehicle trips during a typ trips. In comparison, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 9,276 daily two-way vehicle trips, including 272 trips during the weekday AM and 650 trips during the PM peak hours. (c) Based on the nature of this alternative, trip generation characteristics would differ between weekdays and on Sunday. Based on the Sunday operation, this alternative would generate approximately 5,508 daily (Sunday) vehicle trips, including 1,412 AM peak-hour trips. In comparison, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 9,276 daily two-way vehicle trips, including 272 trips during the weekday AM and 650 trips during the PM peak hours. 51 (d) With regards to construction air quality impacts, under the proposed project; stimated at 136.02 pounds/day. Since this combined emissions or ROG were e value exceeds the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, construction impacts would be deemed to be significant. Although, under this. alternative, on- site development activities may be reduced (220,000 square feet of public.facility use as compared to 153,985 square feet of neighborhood -serving commercial use and 202 dwelling units), maximum daily construction activities would be anticipated to be similar. As a result, construction air quality impacts would be assumed to be similar to those associated with the proposed project and would remain significant. (e) With regards to operational air quality impacts, the proposed project is projected to create ROG, NOx, and CO emissions in excess of the SCAQMD suggested daily threshold criteria. implementation of this alternative would result in .the generation of approximately 2,478 daily vehicle trips during a typical vreekday (compared to 9,278 daily two-way vehicle trips associated with the proposed project), including 336 AM peak -hour trips (compared to 650 PM peak -hour trips associated with the proposed project). As a result, under this alternative, mobile source emissions would be substantially reduced. For the purpose of this alternatives analysis, it is assumed that operational air quality impacts would be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (� With regards to cumulative air quality impacts, related project activities, in combination with this alternative's construction and operation, would incrementally contribute to regional air emissions within the SCAB. Under the SCAQMD's recommended methodology, development activities that generate significant air quality impacts are also assumed to generate significant cumulative air quality impacts. Effectiveness in Meeting Protect Obiectives: The City Council finds that the "Public Facilities" alternative would not substantially meet the stated project objectives to facilitate residential development on a minimum of 50 percent of the usable acreage, and commercial development on 50 percent of the usable acreage. Moreover, insofar as public facilities are owned and run by tax exempt entities, development pursuant to the "Public Facilities" tax revenue, but may alscay ' alternatives desirablel to provide a use the property toberemovedf from the property tax rolls. Feasibilit . Excluding economic considerations which were not addressed in the FEIR, theCity Council finds that the "Public Facilities" alternative is feasible. 7,3 Alternative No. 3 ("Community Commercial" Alternative) Alternative Proiect Description: Under this alternative, the project site would be -developed for commercial use in accordance with the "Neighborhood Commercial (C-1)" standards outlined in Chapter 22.10 (Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts) of the Municipal Code. As specified in Section 22.10.020 (Purpose of Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts) therein, the C-1 zoning district is applied to areas appropriate for a wide range of retail shopping and service uses, primarily intended to serve the needs of City residents. The .allowable floor -area -ratio (FAR) for non-residential development shall be from 0.25 to 1.00 (Section 21:10.040). Based on a FAR of 0.35 applied to the estimated net acreage (20.2 net acres), a total of 307,969 square feet of commercial use would be developed on the project site. The site would be developed as a multi -tenant center including ohe or more "big -box" use and a number of out -pads. Except as provided in 52 the Municipal Coe, building heights would not exceed 35 feet. On-site parking would be provided at a ratio of one space for each 300 square feet of gross floor area plus one space for each 1,000 square feet of outdoor display area (Section 22.30.030). The alternative-specific grading plan could closely replicate that associated with the SDSP. comparison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Project: The City Council finds that the ,Community Commercial" alternative is not "environmentally superior" to the proposed project since it would not result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of those significant construction, operational, and cumulative air quality impacts associated with the proposed project. Facts in Su ort of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The Cit7r's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0 (Alternatives Analysis) in the FEIR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) With regards to construction air quality impacts, under the proposed project, combined emissions or ROG were estimated at 136.02 poundsiday. Since this value exceeds the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, construction impacts would be deemed to be significant. Under this alternative, on-site development activities may be increased (307,969 square feet of neighborhood- serving commercial use as compared to 153,985 square feet of comparable commercial use and 202 dwelling units). However, because mass grading of the project site would be required to create building pads and an on-site circulation system, maximum daily construction activities would be anticipated to be similar. As a result, construction air quality impacts would be assumed to be similar to those associated with the proposed project and would remain significant. (c) With regards to operational air quality impacts, the proposed project is projected to create ROG, NOX, and CO emissions in excess of the SCAQMD suggested daily threshold criteria. Under this alternative, the resulting retail shopping center is projected to generate substantially greater volumes of peak hour and daily vehicle trips that the proposed residential and commercial development. Notwithstanding the elimination of 202 dwelling units, the doubling of the square footage of on-site commercial uses would result in a net increase in the number of peak hour and daily vehicle trips generated under this alternative. Based on that increase in alternative-related traffic, operational air quality impacts would be projected to remain significant. (d) With regards to cumulative air quality impacts, related project activities, in combination with this alternative's construction and operation, would incrementally contribute to regional air emissions within the SCAB. Under the SCAQMD's recommended methodology, development activities that generate significant air quality impacts are also assumed to generate significant cumulative air quality impacts. Effectiveness in Meeting Project Objectives: The city Council finds that the "Community bstantially meet the stated project objectives in that Commercial" alternative would not su it would not provide for the requisite percentage of residential development. Feasibilit : Excluding economic considerations which are not addressed in the FEIR, the City Council finds that the "Community Commercial' alternative is feasible" 53 7,4. Alternative No. 4 ("Low -Density Residential" Alternative) Pcolect Description: The eastern portion of the project site is zoned Low Density Residential (R-9-7,500)" on the City's Oficial Zoning Map. This alternative is predicated upon the geographic expansion of the "Low Density Residential (RL)" zoning designation Within the estimated developable area of the project site (20.2 net acres) at a density of 3 dwelling units per acre. Under this alternative, a total of about. 60 single-family detached and/or single-family attached units would be developed on the project site. Under this alternative, the alternative -specific grading plan could closely replicate that associated with the SDSP. Com arison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Project: The City Council finds that the "Low -Density Residential" alternative is 'environmentally superior" to the proposed project since it would result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of those significant operational air quality impacts associated with the proposed project. Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The City s analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0 (Alternatives Analysis) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein. (b) With regards to construction air quality impacts, under the proposed project, combined emissions or ROG were estimated at 136.02 pounds/day. Since this value exceeds the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, construction impacts would be deemed to be significant. Under this alternative, on-site development activities may be substantially decreased (60 dwelling units compared to 153,985 square feet of commercial use and 202 dwelling units). However, because mass grading of the project site would be required to create building pads and an on-site circulation system, maximum daily construction activities would be anticipated to be similar. As a result, construction air quality impacts would be assumed to be similar to those associated with the proposed project and would, therefore, remain significant. (c) With regards to operational air quality impacts, the proposed project is projected to create ROG, NOx, and CO emissions in excess of the SCAQMD suggested daily threshold criteria. Residential projects generate substantially lower volumes of peak hour and daily vehicle trips that comparably sized retail shopping center projects. Similarly, although some differences exist based on the type of residential development proposed, projects with fewer dwelling units can be assumed to generate a lesser number of peak hour and daily vehicle trips that projects with a greater number of dwelling units. 'As a result, under this alternative, mobile source emissions would be substantially reduced. For the purpose of this alternatives analysis, it is assumed that operational air quality impacts would be reduced to a less -than -significant level. (d) With regards to cumulative air quality impacts, related project activities, in combination with this alternative's construction and operation would incrementally contribute to regional air emissions within the SCAB. Under the SCAQMD's recommended methodology, development activities that generate significant air quality impacts are also assumed to generate significant cumulative air quality impacts. 54 Ect Obje ffectiveness in Meeting Projectives: The City Council finds that the "Low - Density Residential alternative would not substantially meet the stated project objectives in that it would not provide for the requisite percentage of commercial development. Moreover, as a result of Diamond Bar's very limited land inventory, a low density alternative would not only cause the City to lose substantial ground in fulfilling its housing growth need on a site properly suited for higher density housing, but it would increase the burden on other available and potentially available (i.e. those which need to be rezoned during the current Housing Element period) sites to reach the City's RHNA targets. Feasibili . Excluding economic considerations. which are not addressed in the FEIR, the City Council finds that the "Low -Density Residential" alternative is feasible. 7.5 Alternative No. 5 ("High -Density Residential" Alternative) Under this alternative, the project site would be developed for Project Description: with the,"High "High Density Residential" (RH)" standards residential use in accordance outlined in Chapter 22.08 (Residential Zoning Districts) of the Municipal Code. As specified, the maximum allowable density in this district is 20 dwelling units per acre. Based on the estimated net acreage.(20.2 net acres). aUnder this total of altemately the dwelling units could be constructed on the property. rp rty alternative -specific grading plan could closely replicate that associated with the SDSP. Gom arison of the Effects of the Alternative to the Effects of the Proposed Proiect: The CityCouncil finds =hat "High -Density Residential" alternative is "environmentally superior" to the proposed project since it would result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of those significant operational air quality impacts associated with the proposed project. Facts in Support of Findings: The following facts are presented in support of this finding: (a) The. City's analysis of project alternatives is presented in Section 6.0 (Alternatives Analysis) in the FOR and that analysis is incorporated by reference herein_ (b) As stipulated in 5ectiori 22.22.040 (Density) of the Municipal Code, the maximum number of units that may be allowed on a given parcel subject to the hillside management ordinance is calculated in compliance with specified requirements. In accordance with the City's hillside management ordinance, a maximum of 524 dwelling units can be constructed within the project area. The number of dwelling units that would be constructed under this alternative (404 units) is less than the number allowable under the City's hillside management ordinance. (c) Implementation of this alternative will weekday, in the 9clud ng 178 AM peak -hour ion of approximate y 2,368 daily vehicle trips during a typical trips and 210 PM peak -hour trips. In comparison, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 9,276 daily two-way vehicle trips, including 272 trips during the weekday AM and 650 trips during the PM peak hours. (d) With regards to construction air quality impacts, under the proposed project, combined emissions or ROG were estimated at 136.02 pounds/day. Since this value exceeds the SCAQMD's recommended threshold criteria, construction impacts would be deemed to be significant. Under this alternative, on-site development activities would consist of 404 attached dwelling units, compared to 55 153,985 square feet of neighborhood -serving commercial use and 202 dwelling units. Because mass grading of the project site would be required to create building pads and an on-site circulation system, maximum daily construction activities would be anticipated to be similar. As a result, construction -term air quality impacts would be assumed to be similar to those associated with the proposed project and would, therefore, remain significant. (e) With regards to operational air quality impacts, the proposed project is projected to create ROG, NOx, and CO emissions in excess of the SCAQMD suggested daily threshold criteria. Because this alternative would generate substantially lower volumes of peak hour and daily vehicle tips that associated with the proposed project, mobile source emissions would be substantially reduced. For the purpose of, this alternatives analysis, it is assumed that operational air quality impacts would be reduced to• a less -than -significant level. (f) With regards to cumulative air quality impacts, related project activities, in combination with this alternative's construction and operation' would incrementally contribute to regional air emissions within the SCAB. Under the SCAQMD's recommended methodology, development activities that generate significant air quality impacts are also assumed to generate significant cumulative air quality impacts. Effectiveness in Meetincr Protect Obiectives: The City Council finds that the "High - Density Residential" alternative would not substantially meet the stated project objectives in that it would not provide for the requisite percentage of commercial development. Feasibili : Excluding economic considerations which are not addressed in the FEIR, the City Council finds that the "High -Density Residential" alternative is feasible. 8.0 PROJECT BENEFITS The City Council finds the proposed project would result in a number of identifiable community benefits. Those benefits include, but may not be limited to: (1) Adoption of the proposed $DSP will serve to define the types of permitted and conditionally permitted land uses that the City Council believes to be appropriate for the project site and for the project setting, define reasonable limits to the type, intensity, and density of those uses, and establish the design and development standards for those uses. (2) Adoption of the proposed SDSP will serve as a valuable regulatory tool for the systematic implementation of the City's General Plan. (3) Adoption of the proposed SDSP will impose reasonable development controls and standards designed to ensure the integrated development of the project site. (q.) The proposed project will facilitate the District's efforts to sell surplus District Property by providing a subsequent purchaser reasonable certainty as to the type, intensity, and general configuration of allowable on-site land uses. (5) Adoption of the proposed SDSP will optimize the benefits of the District sale of surplus District property for the benefit of its constituents and its educational mission. (6) The proposed project will result iri the production of 202 new housing units within the City, thus helping the City respond to the identified housing demand outlined in the p current "Regional Housing Needs Assessment' (RHNA). 56 (7) The construction and sale of attached residential condominium units present future homebuyers with additional purchase options and price variations allowing homebuyers to better match housing choices with household needs and demands. (g) The creation of a mixed-use development will promote the attainment or regional jobs -to - housing ratio objectives established by regional governmental entities and produce corresponding environmental benefits. (9) Project approval will allow for the productive use of an underutilized property in the City's General Plan, convert a tax-exempt property to a private use, and introduce a land use that will generate sales and other taxes for the benefit of the City and its constituents. (10) Improvements to the Diamond Bar Boulevard/Brea Canyon Road Intersection will improve traffic flow in and through that intersection. (11) Payment of school impact, park, and traffic impact fees and other exactions will facilitate the ability of the City and other agencies to undertake improvements to specific public facilities. (12) Adoption of the SDSP will further the intent of SB 375 by facilitating horizontal mixed use with pedestrian connections between the residential and commercial components. Without transit infrastructure (other than bus routes), mixed use developments can play a greater role in local efforts to reduce VMT. 9,0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS As described above, the proposed project would produce significant ignifc(Construction able adversQuale impact in the following three topical areas: (1) Air Quality (Operational Impact): and (3) Air Quality (Cumulative Impact). Each of those identified significant environmental effects will continue to manifest as significant impacts notwithstanding the City Council's adoption or likely adoption of those mitigation measures identified in the FEIR. In order to determine whether the proposed project's potential environmental impacts are acceptably overridden by the project's anticipated benefits, Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires unavoidable balance signicant environ al benefits I empactshe proposed project against the project's potential The city Council finds that the previously stated benefits outweigh the significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project. Each of the separate and distinct benefits of the proposed project is determined to be, in themselves and independently of any other identified benefit, a basis for overriding all unavoidable environmental impacts, as identified in these Findings. The City Council has identified economic and social benefits and important public policy m implementation of the proposed project. The City Council has objectives that will result fro ubstantial economic and social benefits against the significant sought to balance these s environmental effects of the proposed project. Given the substantial social unavoidable adverse and economic benefienvirot will accrue to the City, to the District, and to the region from the e City Council finds that the proposed project's implementation of the proposed project, th identified benefits override the project's identified significant environmental impacts. 57 „site D” Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar; California Table ES-2ation av m . :: . plt:'Mitance� : �. DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PR .Milestone M1tjgatic7n:Mea5ure ' No. Biological Resources Cors of Engineers and Regional tionai acts to United States Army P Issuance of Department of Fish and Game (CDFG)1 Community Jurisdictional Features. In order to reduce imp required from the ment Grading Water Quality ermit, the Applicant shall demonstrate,val as may be req tion of the Develop permits Control Bcard (ACOE/RWQCB) and Cc Dep grading p discretionary permits and app Director waters, prior to the issuance of a 9 provision of compensatory jurisdictional resources meeting or Community Development Director, receipt of any urisdiction?i 5.1 ACOE, RWQCB and CDFG arid, to the. p lacnt it of Cc 1 exceeding the fallowing minimal standards: (1) the on site andlor off-site replacement of ACOE/RWQC 2 the on-site andlor off-site rep orlon habitat s a 2:1 ratio; and (3) the incorporation of design features Into the jurisdictional waters and wetlands ata 2:1 ratio; ( ) streambed and associated rip proposed project's design and development. Traffic and Circulation the Applicant shall provide, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, act analysis or provide a "fall i) contribution toward city Final Tract Map Prior to the recordation of the final tract map, Brea Canyon Road (W) at Pathfinder Road; (2) Recordation rovements Identified In the traffic imp Lane; (4) Diamond Bar Engineer the intersection imp s at Brea the cost of the improvements to the following Intersections.. BreatCanyon Road (6)'SR-57 SB Ramp 8 Brea Canyon Diamond Bar Boulevard at ane; pathfinder Rua' Road at Brea Canyon10 Brea Canyon Road at 6-1 Boulevard at Cold Spring Lane; () sat Brea Canyon CutofflDlamond Bar Boulevard; () o Cutoff. Canyon Cutoff Road; (7) SR 57 N0 RamP dale Drive at Diamond Blid Boulevard; ( ) Site Plan g Cherry Colima Road at Brea Canyon Road at Diamond Bar Boulevard; ()ity Approval Silver Bullet Drive; (11).Diamond Bar Boulevard at Grand AveAvenue; improvements and such other Engineer ertinent factors and/or facilities as may identified by the City Engin to ensure the safe and efficient �— The final site plan shall include and accommodate those traffic measures, im 6-2. P Building Permit movement of project -related traffic. Issuance snit Community Air Quality oundlgallon (loo gram/liter) of volatile organic DeVelOpment Building Permit All non-residential paints shall contain no more than 0.22 P be approved by the City of Director Issuance 7-1 compound (VOC). pollution reduction measures as may Building Permit The Applicant shall abide by any other air P Management District issuance 7_2 shall be implemented and will City Diamond Bar and/or by the South Coast Air Quality M act area. Engineer Building Permit thereby reducing emissions created In the proj us stops Issuance Traffic lane improvements and signthereion, d outlined in the traffic study, shelters at any b 7-3 generally improve local traffic flow, Applicant -shall place bus stop To encourage the use of mass transportation, the App 7-4 situated or to be situated along any site frontage routes if not already so equipped - 7 -4 2009 page ES -16 Draft Environmental Impact Report M X rA „Site D” Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California 7-5 7_6 7-7 e-1 8-2 8-3 8-4' 8-5 Table ES -2 (Continued) DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING_PROGRAB `Mitigation':Meastice-:`.�:�'"_„=�•� �- � :. 71,Quality (Continued) ilcant shall To encourage the use of localized commercial facilities and reduce the need for vehice rrci commercial areas. paths to the proposed include both bike lanes (where. fe shall) and bike a path ll setween the and walking p dential and commercial developmen areas. Additionally, the App P water heaters, and efficient lighting, air conditioning, The Applicant shall specify the installation of energy appliances for all residential and commercial uses. The Applicant shall specify the installation of energy efficient street lighting - Noise In accordance with the Development Code, construction shall be restricted to between the hours of 7:00 AM and cur at any time on S ndas or on 8:oo PM on esekdays and hours shall also apply an Bery ciingcof equlpm nt and to the delivery of materials is to or holidays, from the site. All construction equipment shall be properly maintained and tuned to minimize noise emissions. All equipment shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers, air Intake silencers,. and engine shrouds no Tess effective than originally equipped. a work noise barriers alt t gblock the P line ofsightbetween the residents The construction contractor shall place temporary within 100 feet of any residential units. Such barriers shall attemp and construction equipment. a ui meant (e.g., compressors) that can The construction contractor shall specify the use of electric stationary q generators and Operate off the power grid where feasible. Where infeasible, stationary noise sources (e.g., receptor residential compressors) shall be located as farand all provions set iforth by the City of Diamond Bar Planning Department. Bance ;: • Mitl9aion, rificatiAn:='r: Milestone City Final Tract Map Engineer Recordation Building Permit City Engineer Issuance - Building Inspector Building Inspector Building Inspector Building Inspector City Engineer planning Manager 8-6 Construction shall be sUolectto any community No residential units shall be located within 830 feet of the SR -57 Freeway's nearest travel lane unless additional Community Development B-7 sound attention is provided to the satisfaction of the Development Director. Director 8-8 . thin 6o feet of the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard. No commercial units shall be located Wil Draft Environmental impact Report Executive Summary Construction Term Construction Term Construction Term Construction Term Building Permit Issuance Building Permit Issuance Final Tract Map Recordation Building Permit Issuance June 2009 Page ES -17 "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 (Continued) DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM Eompitance: Mitigation Mitigation ,Measure Verification. Milestone No. Noise (Continued) community Final Tract Map No residential units shall be located within 130 feet of the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard unless additional Development Recordation Director B-9 sound attention is provided to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Cultural Resources Applicant and Community permit a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the App ' Development Issuance of Prior to the issuance of a monitor p q en valla floor adjacent to SD- Director Grading approvod by the City to monitor all vegetation removal and ground disturbthe ance to a depthetatlon cover. of three feet The ithin t e and permits following portions of the study area: (1) the boundary of SD -C siurveyed(due to dense veg City below the depth of three feet is warranted based on soil and Engineer 11-1 Cultural -1; and (3) the riparian areas that were not previously archaeologist will determine if additional monitoring bedrock conditions and presence/absence of archaeological materials. No archaeological monitoring is require for ground disturbing activities outside of these monitor areas. of the ground disturbing activities, the archaeologist shall be or excavation activities in the vicinity of those resources in order If cultural resources are identified during monitoring ro nate treatment. Treatment will include the goals of . allowed to temporarily divert yr redirect grading to make an evaluation of the find and determine appropriate preservation where practicable and public interpretation of historic and archaeological resouI Site Forms to be filed rces. All cultural resources recovered will be documented on California Department o tParksout the South CentralCoastalbe le withthe mation Building Construction with the CHRIS-SCCIC. The archaeologist shall prepare a final repo n System redbyothe California Office of H steric Inspector Term Applicant, the City, and the California Historical Resources Information Sy 11 2 Center at the California State University, Fullerton (CHRIS-SCCIC), if Preservation. The report shall include documentation and interpretation i resources oas this appendices. City shall Interpretation will include full evaluation of -the eligibility of SD -Cultural -1 with respect to the California Register of Historic Places and CEQA. The report shall also include all specialists' reports area, ground disturbing activities designate repositories In the event that significant resources are recovered. if cultural resources are Identified the e retained during ground disturbing activities that occur outside the designated monitoring shall be e The arty rfile e archaeologist shall coordinatefrom the vwithithe Applicant of the find asuntiltohthe Immediate treatment osf the a find until a Applicant, proper site visit and evaluation is made by the archaeologist. If human remains are encountered unexpectedly during construction excavation and grading activities, Health Building Construction and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur unfil the County Coroner as Inspector Term Coroner has 24 hours'to Ma the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources 11-3 Code. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the County notify the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC will then identify the persons) thought to be the Most Likely Descendent of the deceased Native American, who will then help determine what course of action should be taken in dealing with the remains. June 2009 Page ES -18 Draft Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 (Continued) —"o n nn June 2009 Draft'Environmental Impact Report Page ES -19 Executive. Summary DRAFT MITIGATION REPUK I llvu hAwu 1VLW 1 —- - ,,Car�pliance4:;; -;Mifiigatiort - Mitigatfon'�Measure.'`" '`�" �`•Vsrifcation°••.'� 'Milestone. N Cultural Resources (Continued) Prior r the issuance of a (Continued) issuancef grading permit, a qualified paleontologist meeting the qualifications established by the approved by the City to develop and Community y Issuance of Grading gpe shall be retained by the Applicant and Society of rate• ale implement iety of a paleontological monitoring plan: Development of the monitoring plan shall.include a site visit by the delineate sensitive areas. The Development Director Permits 11-4 paleontologist prior to initiation of project development in order to determine or collections of fossils from the surface and near-surface. Issuance of paleontologist may also perform The paleontologist shall attend a pre -grade meeting in order to become familiar with the proposed depths and City Engineer Grading Permits 11-5 patterns of grading of the study area. Issuance of The paleontologist shall establish a curation agreement with an accredited facility prior to grading permit City Engineer Grading Permits 11-6 issuance. A paleontological monitor, supervised by the paleontologist, shall monitor all excavations in the Puente Formation Puente Formation. if fossils are found during ground -disturbing Building Inspector Construction Term or excavations anticipated to extend into the be empowered to halt the ground -disturbing activifies within 25 feet of 11-7 activities, the paleontological monitor shall find in order to allow evaluation of the Flnd and determination of appropriate treatment. Community the ort shall contain The paleontologist shall prepare a final report on the monitoring. if fossils were identified, the rep treatment, and curation. A copy of the report shall be filed with the City Development Director Grading Si n -Off g 11-6 an appropriate description of the fossils, an curated fossils. Museum of Los Angeles County and shall accompany Y and the Natural -History Aesthetics commercial areas, pole -mounted or wall -mounted lumconform to iappropriate lighting standards and deed for the purpose of monstrate ate that light trespass lnot to Community Development Building Permit issuance roadways, and driveways shall conform app p use. r a the project Director 12-1 blicbgats oriother non -light-sensitive ht sens t ve land uses., exceed standards steal foot candle, ed measured i These standards shall not be applied to any adjoining p g June 2009 Draft'Environmental Impact Report Page ES -19 Executive. Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -3 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF PROJECT APPROVAL No. Condition of Approval Land Use 1-1 Unless effective sound mitigation can be demonstrated once the project is operational or other controls imposed on delivery and related activities, no delivery activities shall occur between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM. The Applicant shall include as part of the real estate disclosure documentation, as required by the California Department of Real Estate for purchasers of 1-2 those residential units to be constructed on the project site, the disclosure that commercial activities are proposed on the adjacent property and hat the operational characteristics of those activities may include trucking, delivery, and maintenance operadiesel-fueled and non -diesel -fueled vehicles. tions by Following the approval of the specific plan and/or any associated amendments to the City's General Plan, the Lead Agency shall provide notification of s (5CAG), requesting that any subsequent amendments to SCAhe "Regional that action to the Southern California Association of Government Transportation Plan" (RTP) and other regional planning forecasts reflect a greater level of population and housing growth within the City during the 2005- 1-3 2010 time period. Total new residential and non-residential development constructed on the project site shall not exceed 202 dwelling units and 153,985 gross leaseable square feet, respectively, unless a subsequent traffic study, addressing the traffic related impacts associated with any such increase, is prepared by or 1-4 submitted to and deemed acceptable by the City or unless such increase can at is so sole se redonby e may initiate additional to not result in any substantial review and/or project traffic impacts. Should additional traffic impacts be identified, the City, Y impose additional conditions or other measures in response to those impacts. Geotechnical Hazards Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits, the Applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, that each of the recommendations contained in the project's preliminary geotechnical investigation and in any supplemental reports as may be prepared by the Applicant's 3-1 Geotechnical Engineer or by others have been incorporated into the project's design, development, and operation. The project shall be constructed, operated, maintained rthat such geologic, geotechnical, seismic, and soils recommendations s may result from further ay bthose e presented to, imposed, or additional he City. Hydrology and Water Quality permit, the Applicant If the flood control channel right-of-way is to be utilized as part of the project's development plan, prior to the issuance of a grading p, 4-1 shall obtain.all requisite permits and approvals from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works — Flood Control District allowing for the overbuilding of the Brea Canyon Storm Drain Channel and shall provide the City Engineer with documentation, acceptable to the City Engineer, demonstrating County approval and authorization, including a complete list of all permit requirements that may be associated therewith. Prior to the issuance of a grading permtt, the Applicant shall prepare and, when acceptable, the City Engineer shall approve a standard urban stormwater 4-2 mitigation plan (SUSMP) conforming to the requirements of Section 8.12.1695 (Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan Requirements for New Development and Redevelopment Projects) of the Municipal Code. June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary M X "Site V Specific Pian City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -3 ..-r n000n�rnl June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary RhL;UIVIIVItIVUtL %,U1eu111U10.�— Condition-of--ARproval.. No. Biological Resources (Continued) In order to demonstrate compliance with applicable State and federal resource protection policies designed to protect or compensate for the loss of to the approval of a grading, permit, were applicable, the Applicant shall provide the Director with documentation of receipt of the Water biological resources, prior following permits; (1) Section 401 (Federal Clean Water Act) water quality certification or waiver of waste discharge requirements from the Regional 404 (Federal Clean Water Act) permit from the United States Army Corps f 5-1 Quality Control Board, Las Angeles Region; (2) nationwide Section 1602 Fish and Game Code) streambed alteration agreement from the California Department of Fish an Engineers; and (3) Section (California The Applicant shall comply with all associated permit requirements. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit to the Community Development Director and, when acceptable, the Direct accept for subsequent processing an arborist prepared tree survey, specifying: (1) the precise number and type of protected trees that will be trees that will be planted in compensation thereof5-2 Id indirectly impacted by proposed project; (2) the number (ratio), type, size, and source of 3 including the annual reporting; and (6) the amoun location of all replacement trees; (4) planting notes and irrigation requirements; (4) performance standards for the survivability of replacementmaintenance agreement stipulating the Applicant's obligations for a minimum -year period, derivation of the security deposit required under the City's tree preservation ordinance. California Walnut Woodland. Measures to mitigate impacts to California walnut woodland will be orchestrated in concert with the replanting of trees the southern California black walnut trees will be planted on protected by the City's tree preservation and protection ordinance. To extent possible, the development. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Director 5-3 manufactured slopes within and, when acceptable, the Director shall approve a plan describing the number, size, and location of walnut trees to be planted and outline success criteria and adaptive management procedures to ensure that the mitigation plan is successful. As determined feasible by the Community Development Director, initial vegetation removal activities shall be conducted outside the nesting season occur during the nesting season, priorto the 5 4 (February 15 -August 15) to avoid impacts upon nesting birds. If initial vegetation removal activities commencement of any grading or grubbing activities, all suitable habitat shall first be thoroughly surveyed by a qualified biologist for the presence of delineated, flagged, and vegetation removal nesting birds. If any active nests are detected, a buffer of at least 300 feet (500 feet for raptors) shall be determined by the surveying biologist or a qualified biological monitor. activities avoided therein until the nesting cycle is complete, as BMP devices shall be designed in consultation with the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District and shall be of a type which minimizes the life so as not to contribute to those problems. Unless accepted by potential for vector (public nuisance) problems and maintained throughout the project ute City, the responsibilities for and the funding of the maintenance of Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall cooa 5-5 the County and/or by the association as obligations of the homeowners' association as to those BMPs associated with the project's residential component and the property owners' to a single project component or use shall, by to those BMPs associated with the project's commercial component. BMPs not directly attributable agreement between owners, become the shared obligation of both associations. Transportation and Circulation Construction Worker Parkine and Eeuioment Staaino Plana Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed worker parking and equipment staging plan (PESP) designed to minimize disturbance to the 6-1 acceptable, the City Engineer shall approve a construction surrounding residences to the greatest extent feasible. Unless otherwise authorized therein, contractors and other construction personnel performing to the site shall be prohibited from parking and/or operating construction equipment, dumpsters, trailers, or other construction activities in proximity project material within a public right-of-way or other public property. The PESP can be combined with or become a part of the construction traffic safety plan and/or any other construction management plan as may be required by the City. June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -3 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF PROJECT APPROVAL 11 No. lCondition of Approval Transportation and Circulation (Continued) Unless previously approved by the City Engineer, no construction access shall be authorized from and no construction traffic shall be permitted along 6-2 Castle Rock Road and Pasado Drive, except as may be required to construct and maintain any project -related street and other improvements within and adjacent to those rights-of-way. Construction Traffic Safety Plan. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the City Engineer shall approve a construction traffic mitigation plan (CTMP). The CTMP shall identify the travel and haul routes to be used by construction vehicles; the points of ingress and egress for all construction vehicles; temporary street or lane closures, temporary signage, and temporary striping; location of materials and equipment staging areas; maintenance plans to remove spilled debris from roadway surfaces; and the hours during which large construction equipment may be brought on/off the project site. The Applicant shall keep all haul routes clean and free of debris including but not limited to gravel and 6-3 dirt as a result of its operations. The Applicant shall clean adjacent streets, as directed by the City Engineer, of any material which may have been spilled, tracked, or blown onto adjacent streets or areas. Hauling or transport of oversize loads will be allowed between the hours of time hours, and ek ds only, Monday through Friday, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. No hauling or transport will be allowed during nighttime hours, weekends, or federal holidays. The use of local streets shall be limited only to those that provide direct access to thedestination. street, curb, and/or gutter along the haul trucks entering or exiting public streets shall at all times yield to public traffic. If hauling operations cause any damage to existing pavement, route, the Applicant will be fully responsible for repairs. The repairs shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Traffic Control Plan. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, the Cityshall approve a traffic control plan (TCP). The TCP shall be consistent with the Southern California Chapter of the American Public Works Association's "Work Area Traffic Control Handbook" (WATCH), the California Department of Transportation's "Manual of Traffic Controls for Construction and Maintenance Work Zones," or 6-4 such alternative as may be deemed acceptable by the City. The TCP shall describe the Applicants plans to safely and efficiently maintain vehicular and non -vehicular access along local roadways throughout the construction period. If any temporary access restrictions or lane closures are propo o. sed by the Applicant, the TCP shall delineate detour routes, the hours, duration and frequency of such restrictions, and the emergency access and safety measures that will be implemented during those closures or restrictions. The TCP can be combined with or become a part of the construction traffic safety plan and/or any other construction management plan as may be required by the City. ial use, the Applicant shall submit and, when deemed acceptable, Shared Parking Plan. Prior to the issuance of building permits for any on-site commerc the Community Development Director and the City Engineer shall approve a shared parking study. The study, conducted using the Urban Land Institute's ing needs, "Shared Parking" (Second Edition, 2005) unless otherwise approved by the City, shall present a quantification of on-siopportunities for haredcommercial ppalrki g between on - 6 -5 quantify the number of on-site parking spaces required under existing Cit re ulations, discuss and evaluate opp site commercial uses, and quantify the number and type of parking spaces that need to be provided to support those commercial uses to be developed on the project site. The number, type, and location of on-site parking shall be determined by the City based, in whole or in part, by the findings of that shared parking study. Air Quality The Applicant shall include as part of the real estate disclosure documentation, as required ctthe California Department of Real Estate for purchasers of 7-1 those residential units to be constructed on the project site, the disclosure that commercial activities are proposed on the adjacent property and that the operational characteristics of those activities may include trucking, delivery, and maintenance operations involving diesel -fueled vehicles. June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary "Site Y Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table E5-3 f101c nc oon imrl-r ADDIPM/AI June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary 11CI.UMMCIV000 AVIV LIl IIV 1Vv - Condition -of Approval No. Noise ng Code All residential and commercial units shall include forced air ventilation designed and installed in accordance with'Title 24 of Califo9nn 8-1 standards. Public Services Prior to the commencement of grading activities, the Applicant shall prepare and submit for review by the Los Angeles County Sartment that will be instituted by the Applicant to secure the.; he equipmentand 9 1 (LACSD) a draft construction security plan outlining the activities materials located thereupon from potential criminal incidents. The Applicant shall incorporate the recommendations of the Lny, into a finalconstruction security plan and shall implement that plan during the construction period. to the issuance of building permits, the LACSD shall be provided the opportunity to review and comment upon building planconfiguration of9-2 Prior the development in order to: (1) facilitate opportunities for improved emergency access and response; (2) ensure the consideratin strategies and (3) offer specific design recommendations to enhance public safety and reduce potential demands that facilitate public safety and police surveillance; upon police protection services. to the commencement of grading or grubbing activities, the Applicant shall prepare and submit and the Los Angeles County Fire Department standards for fire safety outlining those activities to 9-3 (LACFD) shall review and, when deemed acceptable, approve a fire protection program and workplace be by the Applicant during the construction period. The Applicant shall abide by specific project -level permit conditions identified by the LEAPrior undertaken LACFD. the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit and the Los Angeles County Fire Department shall review and, when deemed with County Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (Fire Zone 4) 9-4 acceptable, approve a fuel modification, landscape, and irrigation plan in compliance standards. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) will review and, when deemed acceptable, approve (1) final fire flow capacity of the proposed water mains and fire hydrants and 9-5 water improvement plans including, but not limited to, the location, sizing, design, and access improvements to ensure compliance with applicable Fire Code requirements; and (2) building plans. The project's water system shall be proposed designed in response to final fire flow requirements identified by the LACFD. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit to the Building Official for review and approval a temporary fencing and signage plan 9 6 designed to discourage access to any active construction areas by children and other unauthorized parties. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall present the City with a certificate of compliance or other documentation demonstrating that the has with the Walnut Valley Unified School District's School Board resolutions governing the payment of school impact fees or has 9-7 Applicant complied entered into an Assembly Bill 2926 authorized school fee mitigation agreement or is not subject to the school impact fee exaction. Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map, unless an alternative milestone event or other manner of fulfillment of the Applicant's obligations under Land Dedications and Fees) in Chapter 21.32 (Subdivisions) of the Municipal Code is first approved by the City Council, the 9-8 Section 21.32.040 (Park Applicant shall provide the City with an in -lieu park fee payment in the manner and in the amount authorized thereunder. June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table -ES -3 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF PROJECT APPROVAL No. I Condition of -Approval Utilities and Service Systems Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, a sewer area study, prepared by a licensed civil engineer registered in the State of California, shall be submitted to the City Engineer and to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) for review and, when deemed acceptable, for approval. The sewer area study shall include sewer flow monitoring at specific locations to be determined by the City Engineer and the LACDPW. The sewer flow analysis shall include calculations for the quantities of sewer flow for the pre -development and post -development conditions and determine the impact on all affected City and County -operated sewerage facilities. Should project -related sewer flows tie determined to impact the sewer capacity 10-1 downstream from the proposed development, the Applicant shall be required to mitigate any potential capacity deficiency by a method approved by the City Engineer or the LACDPW, subject to appropriate jurisdictional authorities. The Applicant shall be responsible for all costs required to mitigate the potential capacity deficiency, including upgrading existing sewer mains. Aesthetics The specific plan shall include design details, acceptable to both the City Engineer and to the Community Development Director, for all proposed retaining 12-1 walls. Retaining wall plans shall include landscape and irrigation details sufficient to ensure that each of those elements are, as appropriate, integrated into wall design and that the interrelationship between those elements are considered from structural integrity and aesthetic viewpoints. June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary "Site.D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM Compliances Mitigation . No: Mitigation,Nieasure_. VeriFcation Milestone N C Biological Resources In to reduce impacts to United States Army Corps of Engineers and Regional Jurisdictional Features. order Water Quality Control Board (ACOE/RWQCB) and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdictional demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the waters, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall Community Development Director, receipt of any discretionary permits and approval as may be required from the resources meeting or Community Development Issuance of Grading 5-1 ACOE, RWQCB, and CDFG and commit to the provision of compensatory jurisdictional off-site replacement of ACOEIRWQCB . Director Permits exceeding the following minimal standards: (1) the on-site and/or wetlands at a 2:1 ratio; (2) the on-site and/or off-site replacement of CDFG jurisdictional jurisdictional waters and streambed and associated riparian habitat at a 2:1 ratio; and (3) the incorporation of design features into the proposed projects design and development. Traffic and Circulation Prior to the recordation of the final tract map, the Applicant shall provide, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, or a "fair -share" contribution toward the intersection improvements identified in the traffic impact analysis provide to the following intersections: (1) Brea Canyon Road (W) at Pathfinder Road; (2) Cit [Fnl Tract Map6-1 the cost of the improvements Diamond Bar Boulevard at Pathfinder Road; (3) Brea Canyon Road at Cold Spring Lane; (4) Diamond Bar Brea Canyon Cutoff; (6) SR -57 SB Ramps at Brea Engineerecordation Boulevard at Cold Spring Lane; (5) Pathfinder Road at Road; (7) SR -57 NB Ramps at Brea Canyon Cutoff/Diamond Bar Boulevard; ea Canyon Canyon Cutoff Road at Road at Diamond Bar Boulevard; (9).Cherrydale Drive at Diamond Bar Boulevard; ( ) Y Avenue; and (12) Colima Road at Brea Canyon Cutoff. Silver Bullet Drive; (11) Diamond Bar Boulevard at Grand The final site plan shall include and accommodate those traffic measures, improvements, and such other facilites as may be identified by the City Engineer to ensure the safe and efficient city Engineer Site Pian Approval 6-2 pertinent factors andlor movement of project -related traffic. Air Quality All non-residential paints shall contain no more than 0.22 pound/gallon (100 gram liter) of volatile organic Community Building Permit Issuance Building Permit Issuance 7-1compound (VOC). Fe Applicant shall abide by any other air pollution reduction measures as may be approved by the City of Th the South Coast Air Quality Management District Development Director 7-2 Diamond Bar and/or by and signalization, as outlined in the traffic study, shall be implemented and will Building Permit Issuance 7-3 Traffic lane improvements generally improve local traffic flow, thereby reducing emissions created in the project area. To encourage the use of mass transportation, the Applicant shall place bus stop shelters at any bus stops frontage routes if not already so equipped. City Engineer =Building7 4 situated or to be situated along any site Impact Report June 2009 Page ES -16 Draft Environmental Executive Summary N C "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES -2 (Continued) REPORTING AND MONITORING PROGRAM DRAFT MITIGATION Compliance Mitigation Mitigation•Measure: .. Verification Milestone No Air Quality (Continued) facilities and reduce the need for vehicle travel, the Applicant shall City Final Tract Map To encourage the use of localized commercial feasible) and bike paths between the residential and commercial development Engineer Recordation 7-5 include both bike lanes (where Additionally, the Applicant shall provide sidewalks and walking paths to the proposed commercial areas. areas. The Applicant shall specify the installation of energy efficient lighting, air conditioning, water heaters, and City Building Permit Issuance 7 6 appliances for all residential and commercial uses. Engineer 7-7 The Applicant shall specify the installation of energy efficient street lighting. Noise In accordance with the Development Code, construction shall be restricted to between the hours of 7:0a AM and time on Sundays or on federal Building Construction Term 8:00 PM on weekdays and Saturdays. No construction shall occur at any apply any servicing of equipment and to the delivery of materials to or Inspector 8-1 holidays. These days and hours shall also from the site. shall be properly maintained and tuned to minimize noise emissions. Building Construction o Term Inspectr 8-2 All construction equipment be fitted with properly operating mufflers, air intake silencers, and engine shrouds no less Construction IBsilding Term 8-3 All equipment shall effective than originally equipped. the site when doing any work Construction Building Con B The construction contractor shall place temporary noise barriers along perimeter barriers shall attempt to block the line of sight between the residents Inspector Tenn 8-4 within 100 feet of any residential units. Such and construction equipment ry compressors) that can stationary equipment (e.g., cityBuilding Permit The construction contractor shall specify the use of electric generators and Where infeasible, stationary noise sources (e.g., g Engineer Issuance 8-5 opeYate off the power grid where feasible. shall be located as far from residential receptor locations as is feasible. Planning Building Permit compressors) shall be subject to any and all provisions sat forth by the City of Diamond Bat Planning Department. Manager Issuance 9 8-6 Construction units shall be located within 830 feet of the SR -57 Freeway's nearest travel lane unless additional Final Tract Map Community Recordation 8-7 No residential attention is provided to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Development Building Permit sound be located within 60 feet of the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard. Director Issuance 8-8 No commercial units shall June 2009 Draft Environmental impact Report. Page ES -17 Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar California Table ES -2 (Continued) w mrno�ntn oonf^o Anti - June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES -18 Executive Summary DRAFT MITIUA-IIUN RE UMI114v r,'Yw 1"�.,a,,��,••- ...—_...-.-- - Mitigation.Measure Compliance Verification Mitigation Milestone No Noise (Continued) No residential units shall be located within 130 feet.of the centerline of Diamond Bar Boulevard unless additional Community Development Final Tract Map Recordation 8 9 sound attention is provided to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Cultural Resources . Director Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the Applicant and disturbance to a depth of three feet within the Community Development approved by the City to monitor all vegetation removal and ground following of the study area: (1) the boundary of SD -Cultural -1; (2) the open valley floor adjacent to SD- Director Issuance of Grading 11-1 portions . Cultural -1; and (3) the riparian areas that were not previously surveyed due to dense vegetation cover. The below the depth of three feet is warranted based on soil and and City Permits archaeologist will determine if additional monitoring bedrock conditions and presence/absence of archaeological materials. No archaeological monitoring is required Engineer for ground disturbing activities outside of these monitor areas. If cultural resources are identified during monitoring of the ground disturbing activities, the archaeologist shall be activities in the vicinity of those resources in order allowed to -temporarily divert or redirect grading or excavation to make an evaluation of the find and determine appropriate treatment. Treatment will include the goals of of historic and archaeological resources. All cultural preservation where practicable and public interpretation recovered will be documented on California Department of Parks and Recreation Site Forms to be filed resources with the CHRIS-SCCIC. The archaeologist shall. prepare a final report about the monitoring to be filed with the Resources Information System South Central Coastal Information Applicant, the City, and the California Historical Center at the California State University, Fullerton (CHRIS-SCCIC), as required by the California Office of Historic el Ins ector Construction Term 11-2 Preservation. The report shall include documentation and interpretation of resources recovered, if any. of SD -Cultural -1 with respect to the California Register of P Interpretation will include full evaluation of the eligibility Historic Places and CEQA. The report shall also include all specialists' reports as appendices. The City shall designate repositories in the event that significant resources are recovered. If cultural resources are identified that occur outside the designated monitoring area, ground disturbing activities during ground disturbing activities shall be temporarily redirected away from the vicinity of the find until the retained archaeologist is notified by the the Applicant as to the immediate treatment of the find until a Applicant. The archaeologist shall coordinate with proper site visit and evaluation is made by the archaeologist, If human remains are encountered unexpectedly during construction excavation and grading activities, Health further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Building Construction 11-3 made Code. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the County Coroner has 24 hours to notify the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC will then identify the person(s) Inspector Term thought to be the Most Likely Descendent of the deceased Native American, who will then help determine what course of action should be taken in dealing with the remains. June 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report Page ES -18 Executive Summary "Site D" Specific Plan City of Diamond Bar, California Table ES-2 (Continued) MONITORING PROGRAM DRAFT MITIGATION REPORTING-AND Compliance Mitigation Mitigation.Meas.ure-. Verification Milestone -No. Cultural Resources (Continued) g qualifications established by the to the issuance of a grading permit, ll qualified by the City to develop and Community Issuance of Gradin Prior d by the Applicant approved Society of Vertebrate Paleontologists shall be retained by the App Ian shall include a site visit by the Development of the monitoring p Development permits Director 11 4 implement a paleontological monitoring plan. paleontologist prior to initiation of project development in order to determine or delineate sensitive areas. The the surface and near-surface. paleontologist may also perform collections of fossils from Issuance of shall attend a pre-grade meeting in order to become familiar with the proposed depths and The city Engineer Grading 11-5 paleontologist patterns of grading of the study area. Issuance of The paleontologist shall establish a curation agreement with an accredited facility prior to grading permit City Grading Engineer Permits 11-6 issuance. A paleontological monitor, supervised by the paleontologist, shall monitor all excavations in the Puente Formation Formation. If fossils are found during ground-disturbing Building Construction Inspector Term or excavations anticipated to extend into the Puente be empowered to halt the ground-disturbing activities within 25 feet of 11 7 activities, the paleontological monitor shall the find in order to allow evaluation of the find and determination of appropriate treatment. p identified, the re ort shall contain Community Gra mg The paleontologist shall prepare a final report on the monitoring. If fossils were treatment, and curation. A copy of the report shall be filed with the City Development Director Sign -Off 11-6 an appropriate description of the fossils, Los Angeles County and shall accompany any curated fossils. and the Natural History Museum of Aesthetics Pole-mounted or wall-mounted luminaires installed for the purpose of illuminating commercial areas, parking lots, lighting standards and demonstrate that light trespass not Community Building Permit Development Issuance roadways, and driveways shall conform to appropriate residential any at the pr 'ic er Director 12-1 sect treets or othoundaries -light-sensitive ht sensitve land uses.use. nonng exceed 0.5 horizontal foot candle, as measured to adjoining publ 9 These standards shall not be applied any June 2009 Page ES -19 Draft Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary 6.5 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENTS Over time, there may be need to revise various sections of this Specific Plan, as economic conditions and/or communitygoals dictate. The policies presented in the Specific Plan contain some degree of flexibility, but any Specific Plan amendments must bejudged by relativelyfixed criteria. California Government Code § 65453 clearlystates that a specific plan, "may be amended as often as deemed necessary by th e legislative body." Amendments to this Plan may be initiated by an owner of real property within the Specific Plan boundaries, or by the City, in accordance with any terms and conditions imposed during the original approval or in accordance with any terms and conditions pertaining to planned development ordinances. MU*X 11[0117:111 =UII Proposals to amend the Specific Plan must be accompanied by detailed information to document the change required. This information should include revised Specific Plan text (or excerpt there from) and revised Site Plan or map amendment, depicting the Amendment requested. PRESENTATION OF NEED FOR AMENDMENT Since the City has invested significant amount of time in the preparation of this Specific Plan, any proposals to amend the Specific Plan must document the need for such changes The applicant should indicate the economic, social, or technical issues that generate the need to amend the Specific Plan. The applicant must provide an analysis of the amendmen t'simpacts relative to the environmental review prepared for the Specific Plan. Depending on the nature of the amendment, supplemental environmental analysis may be necessary. The need for such additional analysis shall be determined by the City of Diamond Bar in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (§ 15162). CITY STAFF ANALYSIS Following any submittal of a request to amend this Plan, the Community Development Director shall determine whether the amendment is significant or insignificant. If the amendment is determined to be significant, the application shall be reviewed and considered by the Planning Commission and City Council in the manner prescribed by Section 22.70 of the Municipal Code. If the amendment isdetermined to be insignificant, the Director mayapprove or deny the application. Any decision of the Director may be appealed to the Planning Commission and/or City Council, provided said appeal is initiated within ten calendar days of receipt by the applicant of written notice of the Director's decision. Examples of significant changes include: 0 Changes to the development standards; • Increases in the maximum permissible density or intensity of development; • The introduction of new land use designation not contemplated in this original Specific Plan, or in the Specific Plan as subsequently amended; • Changes in the designation of land uses from that shown in this Specific Plan or in the Specific Plan as subsequently amended; • Changes to the circulation system or community facility design which would materially affect a planning concept detailed in this Specific Plan or in the Specific Plan as subsequently amended; • Changes or additions to the design guidelines which materially alter the stated intent of this Specific Plan, or this Specific Plan as subsequently amended; and • Any change which could result in a significant and adverse environmental impact. The consideration of any proposed amendment to this Plan shall include the determination of the following findings: • Since the approval of the original Specific Plan, chang es which warrant approving the proposed amendment have occurred in the community; • The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan for the City of Diamond Bar; and • The proposed amendment will result in a benefit to the area within the Specific Plan. PUBLIC HEARINGS If the Specific Plan amendment is considered significant by the Community Development Director, both the Planning Commission and the City Council must hold public hearings on the amendment in the manner prescribed by Section 22.7 0 of the Municipal Code. Attachment 10 Grace Lee From: Greg Gubman Sent: Monday, May 10, 2010 1:30 PM To: jack.shah@verizon.net; klee520264@aol.com; signedkat01 @aol.com; Torng, Tony Y Cc: Mark Rogers; James DeStefano; David Doyle; JoAnne Sturges; Grace Lee; Stella Marquez Subject: FW: Planning commission agenda for 5-11-2010 (SITE D) Dear Commissioners: The email below was submitted this morning for your consideration. Greg Gubman (909) 839-7065 -----Original Message ----- From: David Busse [mailto:DRBusse@roadrunner.com] Sent: Monday, May 10, 2010 10:37 AM To: Stella Marquez Subject: Planning commission agenda for 5-11-2010 I do not have Mr. Grubman's individual email address... please forward this to him. Reference page 4, item 8.1. The report says " Taking into consideration that the nearby Heritage Park and Castle Rock Elementary School provide ball fields..." and that is incorrect. Heritage Park provides an unlighted basketball court and lighted softball field available to anyone at any time. The Walnut Valley Unified School District apparently keeps all the property of Castle Rock School under lock -and key; usage of their playgrounds and fields are certainly not to be considered in the same category as Heritage Park. Neighbors cannot just walk to the property and use it. As a result, the acreage of Castle Rock school cannot and should not be considered a "park." Second, I would suggest that the following sentence be added to B.5.a. 4, the "suggested resolution language" about requiring a park of undetermined size to be added to the master plan of Site D. "Open use" areas of commercial or residential development on this site, may include (but not be limited to) such amenities as a food court seating areas, decorative fountains and planting areas, apartment swimming pools and patios, bar-b-que and picnic areas and open courtyards between buildings. Such areas will be considered part of the commercial and residential development and may not be included in the calculation of "park space" nor considered part of the public park described in the previous sentence. am not certain I will be able to attend the meeting tomorrow, and would request that this e-mail be included in the "Public Comment" on item 8.1 Yours truly, David R. Busse 21455 Ambushers Street Diamond Bar, CA Attachment 11 Page 1 of 5 May 7, 2010 Maty E. Rodriguez 3419 Pasado Drive Diamond Bar, Ca 91765 City of Diamond Bar Planning Commission c/o Ms. Grace Lee City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, Ca 91765 Re: Site D Specific Plan and EIR My letter plus 6 attachments to Be Included w/ Recorded Report Dear Chairman and Planning Commissioners, There are a couple of items I would like you to consider carefully, if you will. What is being done here is a very permanent thing. Once begun, there is no putting the hillside back. What you do today to Site D, will be your legacy to the City. It should be something you will be proud to show your children. Nobody is going to care one way or the other who it was that was responsible for building that crap on Site "D". What they will remember, and give thanks for, is who it was that had the foresight, and the courage, to stand up and do the right thing. How can City Officials, be officers of a city and not have pride in their City? It is beyond my comprehension how one can justify selling out the truly valuable things for a few "shiny trinkets". Site "D" holds the heart of the City of Diamond Bar. From 1918 to 1946 the Diamond Bar Ranch Headquarters Compound was located on much of what is now Site "D". Other portions of the Diamond Bar Ranch Headquarters Compound was located where the Church is on Diamond Bar Blvd., east of Brea Canyon Road. This area too should have been preserved for historical value. How can elected officials sell the heart of their City? How do you run a City without a heart? Our City officials need to see the benefit and the obligation to preserve the City's rich history. Site "D" is all that remains of the original ranch which was approximately 4,340 acres. Site "D" is where it started, it is a Landmark. It is the responsibility of all of our City Officials to protect and preserve these precious few acres, which is Site "D", for now and for always. The "diamond over the bar", that is how the City got it's name, started at Site "D". The Planning Commission should begin taking immediate action to preserve Site D. It should do everything it's power to make certain that Preservation of Site "D" is the only option. Pg2of5 Here is what the DEIR says about the value of Site "D" to our City: Appendix K Cultural Resource Assessment Results and Mitigation Cultural Resources Page ES -1 through page ES -2 of the DEIR states the following: Results of the historic aerial photograph and topographic map review revealed that a structure (HS -1) was once located within the boundaries of the study area that was associated with the historic Diamond Bar Ranch Headquarters Compound (Compound). The Compound included the residence of Frederick E. Lewis, who owned and operated the Diamond Bar Ranch (Ranch) which was located 0.75 miles northeast of the study area. It is unclear if HS -1 was the residence of Mr. Lewis or another individual. Mr. Lewis operated the Ranch from 1918 until 1946 when he sold it to the Bartholome family. At the time, the Ranch was one of the largest working cattle ranches in the western U.S. Mr. Lewis is considered a significant person in the history of the City of Diamond Bar because he registered the "diamond over a bar" branding iron with the California Department of Agriculture in 1918. This later became the symbol for which the City of Diamond Bar was named. No prehistoric archaeological resources have been previously recorded within one mile of the study area and no prehistoric resources were identified in the study area during the pedestrian survey. Prehistoric sites identified in the study vicinity consist of relatively small collections of surface artifacts; the distribution of subsurface prehistoric deposits in the vicinity is unknown. Given the lack of prehistoric materials identified on the surface of the study area and surrounding radius, in light of multiple previous surrounding studies, the potential for subsurface prehistoric deposits in the study area appears to be low. Results of the pedestrian survey revealed the identification of a historical archaeological site that will temporarily be designated as SD -Cultural -1 (see Figure 7, Results Map, on page 24). The site components include a landscape component consisting of more than 15 non-native eucalyptus trees as well as a concrete debris concentration and the former location of HS -1. These site components are associated with the former historic Compound. The significance of SD -Cultural -1 with respect to CEQA is considered to be undetermined. The site has strong associations with Frederick E. Lewis and the early ranching history of souther California, which entail consideration under criteria b and a of the California Register, respectively. The integrity of the surface components of the site, however, is low. The stand of eucalyptus trees appears to be an intact landscape component, but the built component is now represented by only by a few piles of rubble and retains little historical character. Given these conditions, the site does not appear to qualify under criteria c. Given the length of time the Compound was occupied; it is anticipated that there is at least moderate potential for the site to to Pg3of5 retain buried domestic or ranch maintenance components such as trash pits, privy holes, and similar features, which in turn may be encountered during ground disturbing activities during development of the proposed project. As the site, SD -Cultural -1, is associated with a known historical figure and a known timeframe, intact subsurface deposits may qualify as significant archaeological resources under criteria d. Development of the proposed project will entail grading over extensive portions of the study area. The grading will result in extensive disturbance within the boundaries of SD -Cultural -1. It appears that the City of Diamond Bar is a bit too quick to dismiss what could be a significant historical resource and potental tourist attraction. The Los Angeles Conservancy 2008 Los Angeles County Preservation Report Card The City of Diamond Bar was accorded a grade of "F" as a "Preservation Truant." The grading is based upon the following criteria: CLG? No Has ordinance that allows designation of historic landmarks? No How many landmarks designated? 0 Mills Act? No Has ordinance that allows designation of historic districts? No Number designated? 0 Has survey of historic architectural resources? No Has other list of identified resources? No Historic Preservation Officer? No Historic Preservation Commission? No If the Diamond Bar Planning Commission approves this project and chooses to bulldoze the historic site which gave the city it's name, then Diamond Bar deserves its "F" grade. (Please see attached Figure 8, Site D, Monitoring Extent) Another very important fact which I believe requires serious attention is the issue of Native American Consultation. Page ES -5 Native American Consultation A Native American Consultation is supposed to happen in the early planning stages of a project and if a tribe requests it to be private (without the developer present), the city must comply. Per the DE1R, the appropriate Native American groups identified by the Native American Heritage Commission [NAHC] were contacted via certified mail but none of them has responded. Pg4of5 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.11: cultural Resources Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.11: cultural Resources Page 4.11-4 and 4.11-5 On February 1, 2005, the Department submitted to the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) a "local government tribal consult4tion list request," requesting a list of California Native American tribes with whom the Cityneeded to provide notice. Although the NAHC did not formally provide the City with a written contact list of those tribes groups with traditional lands or cultural places13 within or potentially within the City's jurisdiction, a number of tribal organizations, including the Gabrieleno/Tongva Tribal Council, the Gabrielino/Tongva Council/Gabrielino Tongva Nation, and the Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians of California, were provided copies of the NOP and Initial Study and notice of the pre -circulation scoping meeting. No response to those notices was received by the City from the NAHC or by any of those tribal groups. Page 4.11-12 and 4.11-13 Sacred Lands File Search and Native American Consultation. On October 5, 2007, a Sacred N Lands File (SLF) records search of the study area was commissioned through the AHC and follow-up consultation with Native American groups and/or individuals identified by the NAHC as having affiliation with the study area vicinity was conducted. Each Native American group and/or individual listed was sent a pfoject notification letter and map and was asked to convey any Native American issues or concerns with the proposed project. The letter included information such as study area location and a brief description of the proposed development. Results of the search and follow-up consultation provide information as to whether there are any locations in the vicinity of the project site that are culturally sensitive to Native Americans. The NAHC SLF records search results did not indicate any known Native American cultural resources within the study area. Follow-up letters were sent, via certified mail, on November 21, 2007 to the eight individuals and organizations identified by the NAHC as being affiliated with the vicinity of the study area to request any additional information or concerns they may have about Native American cultural resources that may be affected by the proposed project. As of February 22, 2005, no responses had been received from any of the Native American individuals or organizations. This is the California Public Resource Code for Native American Consultation: 65352.3- 65352.4: Consultation with Native Americans on General Plan Proposals 65352.3. (a) (1) Prior to the adoption or any amendment of a city or county's general plan, proposed on or after March 1, 2005, the city or county shall conduct consultations with California Native American tribes that are on the contact list maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to places, features, and objects described in Sections 5097.9 and 5097.993 of the Public Resources Code that are located within the city or county's jurisdiction. (2) From the date on which a California Native American tribe is contacted by a city or Pg 5 of 5 county pursuant to this subdivision, the tribe has 90 days in which to request a consultation, unless a shorter thnefranme has been agreed to by that tribe. (b) Consistent with the guidelines developed and adopted by the Office of Planning and Research pursuant to Section 65040.2, the city or county shall protect the confidentiality of information concerning the specific identity, location, character, and use of those places, features, and objects. 65352.4. For purposes of Section 65351, 65352.3, and 65562.5, "consultation" means the meaningful and timely process of seeking, discussing, and considering carefully the views of others, in a manner that is cognizant of all parties' cultural values and, where feasible, seeking agreement. Consultation between government agencies and Native American tribes shall be conducted in a way that is mutually respectful of each party's sovereignty. Consultation shall also recognize the tribes' potential needs for confidentiality with respect to places that have traditional tribal cultural significance. The Tribes would have had 90 days to respond to a request for a consultation with the City of Diamond Bar on this matter so it seems strange that the EIR treats this as if it is still an open matter. Also, when the code says "Consultation between government agencies and Native American tribes shall be conducted in a way that is mutually respectful of each party's soverejgL7 "this means that the City should treat the Tribal leader or representative as they would a head of state, in other words, the person who should meet with them would ideally be the Mayor, a council member, City Administrator or some other top city leader. The Tribes are considered to be "authorities" when it comes to determining if a place holds any significance for Native Americans even if the City is unaware of such significance. That's why the consultation is held. If I remember correctly, the EIR states that pottery shards and other items were found on site and there is a chance that more artifacts may be present that would indicate the site had been used by Native Americans. Who knows? There might even be a burial site there. There seems to be some odd discrepancies about when this allegedly happened. The Planning Commission must be diligent that TRG Land, Inc. and PCR Services Corporation are not being dismissive of these very critical issues which affect the outcome of the Commissions decisions. The question remains open. Did the Tribes respond? And if so, where are their letters or documents stating their findings at Site D? If the Tribes did not respond, why wasn't there a follow up attempt to get a Tribal Consultation? This is a must! Please do not allow bulldozing without having the Tribal Consultation. • cerely,� Mar Ro2iig4z J AltRchmENT 1a LE1t62`Co �La�vrolaq Cao nniSSrory �i}1Er� VV1RY 7. MID "Y ROM PV�RrLY E. I�dRlg�n,c2 cl Figure 4 Site D 0 400 800 1600 Feet Historic Aerial Photograph - 1928 Source: Fairchild Aedal Pholography Coilecuon. "ItRchmENT to LE1tE2'lb YLRNfvira CoMmA5516m brrcd IlAitqchmENT to LE-U2'To TiLRNrv,i Cot�nnissrom bAed MRy 7, MID .�ft n VNP�tty 4 s` f Project Boundary,t" Survey Coverage and Visibility (1 Surveyed, 75-100% Visibility_:; k Not Surveyed 0-25% Visibility IT N 300 0 300 Feet Source: Google Earth, 2007; PCR Services Corporation, 2006. Figure 6 Site D Survey Coverage and Visibility Map �1�(�G�61lENI 3o I,E CR �o i;LftNmlrae�ConrenniSsronr bkraa N\pIy7'UIID -riLorq VUlar2y �- I�r,dRig�s�- Photograph 2: ovmvimv or eumlyptus trees wllhin 50-Cullurat-t. Wmv oat. ,!i` V I t Y t V RI to Mph 3: 0—Imv or bnrhart n1le or gwtcrhnlcal boring la ration. Wrsv oat. Project Boundary Paleontological Resource } . Concrete Debris Concentration Former Location of Historic Structure 1 (HS -1) (Approximate) Cultural Resource (SD -Cultural -1) Photagmph 1: Clascap of mncmte Eebns coneentmllon, Wawnonhmst. Photograph A: Closo-up of mprNltc aMJ Ifah f—ft. N �.,;... Figure 7 300 0 300 Feet Site D Source: Google Earth, 2007; PCR Services Corporation, 2008. Results Map Altlachmeiqt to Let Fik-to tLRNNINSCoMnni55i61V Dp&j N%Y 7, aD10 .�U" mwILY C. Waiv:rv— 6r iwn V; .tt 4 1. Y• � 4 tM ,LEt r kn Y�y�n q } tq.X . TO Project Boundary Note Paleontological monitoring is recommended in " El Paleontological Resource areas where excavations and/or ground disturbing r Recommended Archaeological Monitoring Extent F activities extend into the Puente Formation. Results of PCB's assessment reveal that the Puente Cultural Resource (SD -Cultural -1) Formation Is located over a majority ofthe study area and at depth GS NN Figure 8 300 0 300 Feet Site L =' Monitoring Extent Source: Google Earth, 2007; PCR Services Corporation, 2008. 9 I EL ri! Attachment 12 May 13, 2010 Mayor and City Council City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 SUBJECT: OPPOSITI®N TO SITE D SPECIFIC PLAN AND EIR Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers: This letter is to voice my opposition to the Site D Specific Plan and EIR. The preparation of the Specific Plan was completed without community input and the residents should have a voice into the vision of the City. Master planning of the community is for the community and by the community. Much of the public facility improvements have been along and north of Grand Avenue. The southern part of Diamond Bar does not have a quality park like Pantera Park. We only have a few mini -parks with minimal amenities. The Specific Plan is a poorly conceived plan that proposes high-density housing in a single- family residential area. Commercial retail and officedevelopment is also not needed as the City already has an abundance of vacant buildings. If developed, the project can create negative impacts to our community, which includes increased traffic, crime, and lower air quality. Most importantly, the project could have a negative impact on lowering our property values. This is just poor planning. The City has not notified all of the residents that would be impacted by this project. As Diamond Bar Boulevard is a main thoroughfare used to bypass traffic along the 57 Freeway, all residents in the City will be impacted by this development. I urge you to represent the residents of Diamond Bar and not approve the Site D Specific Plan and EIR. Sincerely, James Eng 20935 Running Branch Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Attachment 13 May 16, 2010 Mayor and City Council City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Q � SUBJECT: OPPOSITION TO SITE D SPECIFIC PIAN AND EIR � on ® QC Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers: pm This letter is to voice my opposition to the Site D Specific Plan and EIR. The preparation oYle �rZce Specific Plan was completed without community input and the residents should have'a voicto the vision of the City. Master planning of the community is for the community and by the community. Much of the public facility improvements have been along and north of Grand Avenue. The southern part of Diamond Bar does not have a quality park like Pantera Park. We only have a few mini -parks with minimal amenities. The Specific Plan is a poorly conceived plan that proposes bigh-density housing in a single- family residential area. Commercial retail and office development is also not needed as the City already has an abundance of vacant buildings. If developed, the project can create negative impacts to our community, which includes increased traffic, crime, and lower air quality. Most importantly, the project could have a negative impact on lowering our property values. This is just poor planning. The City has not notified all of the residents that would be impacted by this project. As Diamond Bar Boulevard is a main thoroughfare used to bypass traffic along the 57 Freeway, all residents in the City will be impacted by this development. I urge you to represent the residents of Diamond Bar and not approve the Site D Specific Plan and EIR. 7jery, NAME � � /� Y )41,1 ADDRESS Ancirm Salas Attachment 14 Chairman NadineSalas r �: •'t Vice-Cbairman r� od Felicia Sheerman-Garcia T,,5urer Christina Swindall-Martinez'` Secretary Martha Gonzale7-1..emos GAl RJtLEN0 FSAND Of= MISSION INDIANS Council Member Historically known as The San Gabriel 5ancl of Mission Indians recoanize� by the State of California as tke aboriginal tribe of the Los Angeles basin May 23, 2010 Mr. Greg Gubman, Community Development Director City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Ph: 909-839-7000 Reference: Site "D" Specific Plan Project/EIR Dear Mr. Gubman, Please be advised that we have reviewed the EIR for the above referenced project and we are quite confused on how the "Tribal Consultation" was handled altogether. We find it alarming that in the report its states the following: "on February 1, 2008, the Department submitted to the California Native .American heritage Commission (NAHC) a "local government tribal consultation list request,,, requesting a list of California Native American tribes with whom the City needed to provide notice. Although the NAHC did not formally provide the City with a written contact list of those tribes groups with traditional lands or cultural places -i3 within or potentially within the City's jurisdiction, a number of tribal organizations, including the Gabrieleno/Tongva Tribal Council, the Gabrielino/Tongva Council, Gabrielino Tongva Nation, and the Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians of California, were provided copies of the NOP and Initial Study and notice of the pre -circulation scoping meeting. No response to those notices was received by the City from the NAHC or by any of those tribal groups." Normal procedure has always been when the NAHC is contacted by an agency performing an EIR they immediately provide a list of tribes for the City to contact. In addition, the report mentions that "a number of tribal organizations including... were provided copies of the NOP..." This is the City's omission that they contacted tribal organizations but NOT from the NAHC contact list which gives our tribe two causes for alarm 1) how would the City know that they contacted all the tribal organizations if they didn't use a proper contact list? And 2) they did not follow the proper protocol nor give the proper notification to all tribal organizations. This project is within a culturally sensitive area and we as a tribe find it imperative to have a NA monitor on site during all excavation/ground disturbances. No exceptions as accepted. Due to the fact, that the EIR was handled erroneously by not giving sufficient notification to all the local Native American tribes provided by the NAHC. P.O. l5ox 593 ^ Covina, California 91723 - 6'26'.92,4.-1-131 ^ www.gabrielenoinclians.org Should you have any questions or comments, I can be reached at 626-926-4131 or please contact Felicia Sheerman our NA monitor coordinator. �i cerely Andy Salas Chairman Cc: Dave Singleton, NAHC Linda Strong, Sierra Club Margo Eiser, Sierra Club Environmental Impact Soences 26051Via Concha Mission Viejo, California 926915614 949.837.1]95 949.837.3935 Fax June 9, 2010 Greg Gubman, Director City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, California 91765-4178 Subject: "Site D" Specific Plan —Tribal Consultation Dear Greg: During the Planning Commission's recent deliberations concerning the proposed "Site D' Specific Plan" (SDSP) and its accompanying "Draft Environmental Impact Report for the 'Site D' Specific Plan" (DEIR), the City of Diamond Bar (City or Lead Agency) received correspondence, dated May 23, 2010, from Andy Salas, Chairman of the GabrleleLo Band of Mission Indians (Tribe). The Tribe alleged the project's environmental impact report (EIR) "was handled erroneously by not giving sufficient notification to all the local Native American tribes." This letter is submitted in response to the Tribe's letter. Background Senate Bill (SB) 18 (Chapter 905, Statutes of 2004 ), signed into law by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in September 2004, requires cities and counties to notify and consult with California Native American Tribes about proposed local land -use planning decisions for the purpose of protecting Traditional Tribal Cultural Places. Starting on March 1, 2005, cities and counties must send their general plan proposals to those California Native American Tribes that are on the Native American Heritage Commission's (NAHC) contact list and have traditional lands located within the city or county's jurisdiction. After March 1, 2005, if requested, cities and counties must also conduct consultations with those tribes prior to adopting or amending their general plans. To help local officials meet these obligations, SB 18 required the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to amend its "General Plan Guidelines" to include advice to local governments on how to consult with California Native American Tribes. On March 1, 2005, OPR issued interim guidelines and on April 15, 2005 issued "Tribal Consultation Guidelines." On November 14, 2005, OPR issued "Tribal Consultation Guidelines Supplement to General Plan Guidelines" (2005 Supplement). In accordance with the statutory requirements of SB 18, the 2005 Supplement (also known as Tribal Consultation Guidelines) provides advisory guidance to cities and counties on the process for consulting with Native American Indian tribes during the adoption or amendment of local general plans or specific plans. Erwayrental Camultarts awroment@cox net Greg Gubman, Community Development Director "Site D" Specific Plan —Tribal Consultation June 9, 2010 Page 2 For purposes of consultation with tribes, as required by Sections 65352.3 and 65562.5 of the California Government Code (CGC), the NAHC maintains a list of California Native American Tribes with whom local governments must consult. The "California Tribal Consultation List" is developed and maintained by the NAHC under authority granted under Sections 65092, 65352, and 65352.3 of the CGC. Section 65352.3 requires local governments to consult with tribes prior to the adoption or amendment of a general plan or specific plan proposed on or after March 1, 2005. As specified therein, only if a tribe is identified by the NAHC and that tribe requests consultation after being contacted by a local government must a local government consult with the tribe on the plan proposal. Notification and Outreach Efforts In accordance with the "Tribal Consultation Guidelines," the City has fully complied with all applicable noticing requirements with regards to tribal outreach efforts, including: (1) on February 1, 2008, sending a "Local Government Tribal Consultation List Request" to the NAHC; (2) on February 1, 2008, sending copies of the "Notice of Preparation" (NOP) to the NAHC and to the following tribal organizations: (a) the Gabiele'_o/Tongva Tribal Council, (b) the Gabriele' o Tongva Nation, and (c) the Gabrieli Lo Band of Mission Indians; and (3) on June 19, 2009, sending copies of the "Notice of Completion" (NOC) to the NAHC and to the following tribal organizations: (a) the Gabiele Lo/Tongva Tribal Council, (b) the Gabriele Lo Tongva Nation, and (c) the Gabrieli'_o Band of Mission Indians. It is noted that the NAHC never responded to the City's initial outreach efforts. In the absence of a response from the NAHC to the City's "Local Government Tribal Consultation List Request," the tribal contact information and mailing list was obtained from the NAHC website. No responses to any of the above referenced notices were received from the NAHC and/or from any tribal organization. Copies of the Lead Agency's "Local Government Tribal Consultation List Request" and NOP are included in the DEIR. A copy of the NOC is included in the "Response to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the 'Site D' Specific Plan" (RTC). In addition, as indicated in the DER, PCR Services Corporation (PCR) separately undertook consultation with the NAHC and with "Native American groups and individuals identified by the NAHC" (Appendix K, p. 15). In the preparation of this letter, EIS asked PCR to provide clarification of its actions. PCR provided the following response: As part of our cultural resources assessment of the Site D project, PCR commissioned a Sacred Lands File (SLF) records search of the study area through the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on October 8, 2007. The NAHC SLF records search results did not indicate any known Native American cultural resources within the study area or surrounding vicinity (see attached letter from NAHC). As per NAHC suggested procedure, follow-up letters were sent via certified mail on November 21, 2007 to the eight individuals and organizations identified by the NAHC as being affiliated with the vicinity of the study area to request any additional information or concerns they may have about Native American cultural resources that may be affected by the proposed Site D development (see attached list and letters). Each Native American group and/or individual listed was sent a project notification letter and map and was asked to convey any Native American issues or concerns with the proposed project. The letter included information such as study area location and a brief description of the proposed development. As of today (in our report it Greg Gubman, Community Development Director "Site D" Specific Plan —Tribal Consultation June 9, 2010 Page 3 states 'as of February 22, 2008'), PCR has not received a response from any of the Native American individuals or organizations. A copy of the NAHC's response letter to PCR's SLF records search, dated October 10, 2007, is included in Exhibit 1 (Native American Heritage Commission Letter [October 10, 2007]) and copies of correspondence from PCR, dated November 21, 2007, to each of the tribal organizations identified by the NAHC are included in Exhibit 2 (Solicitations for Tribal Participation [November 21, 2007]) herein. As evidenced by the extent of Lead Agency efforts, the City fully complied with all outreach and consultation obligations concerning the NAHC and California Native American Tribes. Any allegations to the contrary are, therefore, unfounded. Request for a Native American Monitor In correspondence dated May 23, 2010, the Tribe stated that "we as a tribe find it imperative to have a NA [Native American] monitor on the site during all excavation/groun d disturbances. No exceptions as [sic] accepted." EIS believes that no basis exists to support that request. Based on the findings of a records search and field reconnaissance survey, the DEIR concluded: "No prehistoric archaeological resources have been previously recorded within one mile of the project site and no prehistoric resources were identified on the subject property during the pedestrian survey. Prehistoric sites identified in the general project vicinity consist of relatively small collections of surface artifacts. The distribution of subsurface prehistoric deposits in the vicinity is unknown. Given the lack of prehistoric materials identified on the surface of the project site and surrounding radius, in light of multiple previous surrounding studies, the potential for subsurface prehistoric deposits in the study area appears to be low" (p. 4.11-15). Although the potential for prehistoric deposits was deemed to be low, based on the site's associations with Frederick E. Lewis (owner and operator the Diamond Bar Ranch from 1918 until 1946) and the early ranching history of southern California, the potential exists for unearthing historic artifacts during initial site grading and grubbing operations. The DEIR included a mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure 11-1) requiring that a "qualified archaeologist" be present to monitor initial vegetation removal activities. The on-site presence of a qualified archaeologist will ensure that, should any prehistoric and/or historic features be identified, appropriate actions are taken to protect those features in accordance with applicable statutory and regulatory obligations. EIS believes that no further actions are necessary with regards to the Tribe's letter. Sincerelv, �aa",. Peter Lewandowski, Principal Exhibits: (1) Native American Heritage Commission Letter (October 10, 2007) (2 Solicitations for Tribal Participation (November 21, 2007) Exhibit 1 Native American Heritage Commission Letter (October 10, 2007) 10/11/2007 06:33 FAX 916 657 5390 S_�HC 0001/002 TATE OF CAI IFORNIe emele NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION 915 CAPITOL MALL., ROOM 364 SACRAMENTO, CA 55814 40 (916) 653-b251 Fax (916) 657.5390 Web She www nanc.c .aov e-mafl� d5_nahc9pacbsll.nee October 10, 2007 Mr_ Kyle Garcia, Associate Archaeologist PCR SERVICES CORPORATION One Venture, Suite 150 Irvine, CA 92618 Sent by FAX to: 949-753-7002 Number of pages: 2 Re: QUItural Resource I S/Sacred Lands ' Search for Site D Pro of Diamond Bar: Los AOSI0 County. California Dear Mr. Garcia The Native American Heritage Commission was able to perform a record search of its Sacred Lands File (SLF) for the affected project area. The SLF failed to indicate the presence of Native American cultural resources in the immediate project area. The absence of specific site information in the Sacred Lands File does not guarantee the absence of cultural resources in any .area of potential effect (APE).' Early consultation with Native American tribes in your area is the best way to avoid unanticipated discoveries once a project is underway. Enclosed are the nearest tribes that may have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area. A List of Native American contacts are attached to assist you. The Commission makes no recommendation of a single individual or group over another. It is advisable to contact the person fisted; if they cannot supply you with specific information about the impact on cultural resources, they may be able to refer you to another tribe or person knowledgeable of the cultural resources in or near the affected project area (APE). Lack of surface evidence Of archeological resources does not preclude the existence of archeological resources. Lead agencies should consider avoidance, as defined in Section 15370 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) when significant cultural resources could be affected by a project_ Also, Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and Health & Safety Code Section 7050.5 provide for provisions for accidentally discovered archeological resources during construction and mandate the processes to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a project location other than a `dedicated cemetery_ Discussion of these should be included in your environmental documents, as appropriate. If you have any questions about this response to your request, please do not hesitate to contact me at (9 16) 653-6251 _ ave Singleton Program Analyst Attachment Native American Contact List 10/11/2007 06:38 FAX 916 657 5390 NdHC Native American Contacts Los Angeles County October 10, 2007 LA City/County Native American Indian Comm Ron Andrade, Director 3175 West 6th Street, Rm. 403 Los Angeles , CA 90020 (213) 351-5324 (213) 386-3995 FAX Ti'At Society Cindi Alvitre 6602 Zelzah Avenue Reseda , CA 91335 calvitre@yahoo.com (714) 504-2468 Cell U 002/002 Gabrielino/Tongva Council / Gabriellno Tongva Nation Sam Dunlap, Tribal Secretary 761 Terminal Street; Bldg 1, 2nd floor Gabrielino Tongva Los Angeles , CA 90021 Office @tongvatribe.net (213) 489-5001 - Officer (909) 262-9351 - cell (213) 489-5002 Fax Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians of CA Ms. Susan Frank Gabrielino PO Box 3021 Gabrielino Beaumont CA 92223 (951) 897-2536 Phone/Fax Tongva Ancestral Territorial Tribal Nation John Tommy Rosas, Tribal Adminstrator 4712 Admiralty Way, Suite 172 Gabrielino Tongva Marina Del Rey , CA 90292 310-570-6567 GabrielenolTongva Tribal Council Anthony Morales, Chairperson PO Box 693 Gabrielino Tongva San Gabriel CA 91778 ChiefRBwife@aol.com (626) 286-1632 (626) 286-1758 - Nome (626) 286-1262 Fax This list is current only as of the date of Ws document. Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council Robert Dorame, Tribal Chair/Cultural Resources 5.450 Slauson, Ave, Suite 151 PMB Gabrielino Tongva Culver City , CA 90230 9tongva@verizon.net 62-761-6417 - voice 562-920-9449 - fax Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council Mercedes Dorame, Tribal Administrator PO Sox 590809 Gabrielino Tongva San Francisco , CA 94159 Pluto05@hotmail.com Distribution of this list does not relieve any pereon of stabAory responslblllty as defined In Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 5097,90 of the Public Resources Code. This list Is only applicable for conlacting local Native Amadcan With regard to cultural resources for the proposed Diamond Bar Site D Prelact; located in sataheasiem Los Angeles County, Callfomla for which a Sacred lands File search and Native American Contact list was requested. Exhibit 2 Solicitations for Tribal Participation (November 21, 2007) November 21, 2007 Ron Andrade, Director LA CITY/COUNTY NATIVE AMERICAN INDIAN COMM. 3175 West 6t' Street, Rm. 403 Los Angeles, CA 90020 =PC Re: PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR -SITE D PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Andrade: PCR Services Corporation (PCR) is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the proposed Diamond Bar -Site D project in the City of Diamond, County of Los Angeles, California. The proposed development of the approximately 30 -acre area includes the installation of residential and commercial buildings dividing the project site in half Both the residential and commercial buildings will take up approximately 10.1 acres of the project site leaving the remaining acreage for the development of streets, off -streets, parkway separated walks and on -street bike trails As part of this effort, and in compliance with federal, state and local environmental regulations, we are writing to invite your comments and concerns with respect to the cultural research process. In order to ensure that any areas containing cultural resources or sacred lands are considered, PCR requests any information you are willing to share regarding Native American resources (including properties, places, or archaeological sites) in the vicinity of the project site that may be affected by the proposed project. The project site is located in: Township 2 South, Range 9 West, Section 29, of the Yorba Linda, CA 1964 (photo -revised 1981) 7.5' USGS Quadrangle. The project site is also illustrated on the enclosed map. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with our efforts to address Native American concerns that may be raised by the proposed project. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at m.rockman@pernet.com. Sincerely, PCR SERVICES CORPORATION a�g,Dzirector/Princ kman, Ph.D. Ac ipal Archaeologist One Venture, Suite 150, Irvine, California 92618 NT NET www.pernet.com TEL 949.753.7001 FAX 949.753.7002 November 21, 2007 Cindi Alvitre WAT SOCIETY 6602 Zekzah Avenue Reseda, CA 91335 =PC Re: PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR -SITE D PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Ms. Alvitre: PCR Services Corporation (PCR) is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the proposed Diamond Bar -Site D project in the City of Diamond, County of Los Angeles, California. The proposed development of the approximately 30 -acre area includes the installation of residential and commercial buildings dividing the project site in half. Both the residential and commercial buildings will take up approximately 10.1 acres of the project site leaving the remaining acreage for the development of streets, off -streets, parkway separated walks and on -street bike trails As part of this effort, and in compliance with federal, state and local environmental regulations, we are writing to invite your comments and concerns with respect to the cultural research process. In order to ensure that any areas containing cultural resources or sacred lands are considered, PCR requests any information you are willing to share regarding Nativ e American resources (including properties, places, or archaeological sites) in the vicinity of the project site that may be affected by the proposed project. The project site is located in: Township 2 South, Range 9 West, Section 29, of the Yorba Linda, CA 1964 (photo -revised 1981) 7.5' USGS Quadrangle. The project site is also illustrated on the enclosed map. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with our efforts to address Native American concerns that may be raised by the proposed project. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at m.rockman@pernet.com. Sincerely, PCR SERVICES CORPORATION &arcoc=kman, Ph.D. rr/Princ ipal Archaeologist One Venture, Suite 150, Irvine, California 92618 NT NET www.pernet.com TEL 949.753.7001 FAX 949.753.7002 November 21, 2007 John Tommy Rosas, Tribal Adminstrator TONGVA ANCESTRAL TERRITORIAL TRIBAL NATION 4712 Admiralty Way, Suite 172 Marina del Ray, CA 90292 =PC Re: PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR -SITE D PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Rosas: PCR Services Corporation (PCR) is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the proposed Diamond Bar -Site D project in the City of Diamond, County of Los Angeles, California. The proposed development of the approximately 30 -acre area includes the installation of residential and commercial buildings dividing the project site in half. Both the residential and commercial buildings will take up approximately 10.1 acres of the project site leaving the remaining acreage for the development of streets, off -streets, parkway separated walks and on -street bike trails As part of this effort, and in compliance with federal, state and local environmental regulations, we are writing to invite your comments and concerns with respect to the cultural research process. In order to ensure that any areas containing cultural resources or sacred lands are considered, PCR requests any information you are willing to share regarding Native American resources (including properties, places, or archaeological sites) in the vicinity of the project site that may be affected by the proposed project. The project site is located in: Township 2 South, Range 9 West, Section 29, of the Yorba Linda, CA 1964 (photo -revised 1981) 7.5' USGS Quadrangle. The project site is also illustrated on the enclosed map. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with our efforts to address Native American concerns that may be raised by the proposed project. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at m.rockman@pernet.com. Sincerely, PCR SERVICES CORPORATION &arcoc=kman, Ph.D. rr/Princ ipal Archaeologist One Venture, Suite 150, Irvine, California 92618 NT NET www.pernet.com TEL 949.753.7001 FAX 949.753.7002 November 21, 2007 Anthony Morales, Chairperson GABRIELENO/TONGV A TRIBAL COUNCIL P.O. Box 693 San Gabriel, CA 91778 =PC Re: PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR -SITE D PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Morales: PCR Services Corporation (PCR) is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the proposed Diamond Bar -Site D project in the City of Diamond, County of Los Angeles, California. The proposed development of the approximately 30 -acre area includes the installation of residential and commercial buildings dividing the project site in half. Both the residential and commercial buildings will take up approximately 10.1 acres of the project site leaving the remaining acreage for the development of streets, off -streets, parkway separated walks and on -street bike trails As part of this effort, and in compliance with federal, state and local environmental regulations, we are writing to invite your comments and concerns with respect to the cultural research process. In order to ensure that any areas containing cultural resources or sacred lands are considered, PCR requests any information you are willing to share regarding Native American resources (including properties, places, or archaeological sites) in the vicinity of the project site that may be affected by the proposed project The project site is located in: Township 2 South, Range 9 West, Section 29, of the Yorba Linda, CA 1964 (photo -revised 1981) 7.5' USGS Quadrangle. The project site is also illustrated on the enclosed map. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with our efforts to address Native American concerns that may be raised by the proposed project. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at m.rockman@pernet.com. Sincerely, PCR SERVICES CORPORATION ,,-ref arc ckman, Ph.D. Ac ' Director/Princ ipal Archaeologist One Venture, Suite 150, Irvine, California 92618 NT NET www.pernet.com TEL 949.753.7001 FAX 949.753.7002 November 21, 2007 Sam Dunlap, Tribal Secretary GABRIELINO/TONGV A COUNCIL/ GABRIELINO TONGVA NATION 761 Terminal Street, Building 1, 2nd Floor Los Angeles, CA 90021 =PC Re: PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR -SITE D PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Dunlap: PCR Services Corporation (PCR) is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the proposed Diamond Bar -Site D project in the City of Diamond, County of Los Angeles, California. The proposed development of the approximately 30 -acre area includes the installation of residential and commercial buildings dividing the project site in half. Both the residential and commercial buildings will take up approximately 10.1 acres of the project site leaving the remaining acreage for the development of streets, off -streets, parkway separated walks and on -street bike trails As part of this effort, and in compliance with federal, state and local environmental regulations, we are writing to invite your comments and concerns with respect to the cultural research process. In order to ensure that any areas containing cultural resources or sacred lands are considered, PCR requests any information you are willing to share regarding Native American resources (including properties, places, or archaeological sites) in the vicinity of the project site that may be affected by the proposed project. The project site is located in: Township 2 South, Range 9 West, Section 29, of the Yorba Linda, CA 1964 (photo -revised 1981) 7.5' USGS Quadrangle. The project site is also illustrated on the enclosed map. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with our efforts to address Native American concerns that may be raised by the proposed project. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at m.rockman@pernet.com. Sincerely, PCR SERVICES CORPORATION &arcoc=kman, Ph.D. rr/Princ ipal Archaeologist One Venture, Suite 150, Irvine, California 92618 NT NET www.pernet.com TEL 949.753.7001 FAX 949.753.7002 November 21, 2007 Ms. Susan Frank GABRIELINO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS OF CA P.O. Box 3021 Beaumont, CA 92223 =PC Re: P ROP OSED DIAMOND BAR -SITE D PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Ms. Frank: PCR Services Corporation (PCR) is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the proposed Diamond Bar -Site D project in the City of Diamond, County of Los Angeles, California. The proposed development of the approximately 30 -acre area includes the installation of residential and commercial buildings dividing the project site in half. Both the residential and commercial buildings will take up approximately 10.1 acres of the project site leaving the remaining acreage for the development of streets, off -streets, parkway separated walks and on -street bike trails As part of this effort, and in compliance with federal, state and local environmental regulations, we are writing to invite your comments and concerns with respect to the cultural research process. In order to ensure that any areas containing cultural resources or sacred lands are considered, PCR requests any information you are willing to share regarding Native American resources (including properties, places, or archaeological sites) in the vicinity of the project site that may be affected by the proposed project. The project site is located in: Township 2 South, Range 9 West, Section 29, of the Yorba Linda, CA 1964 (photo -revised 1981) 7.5' USGS Quadrangle. The project site is also illustrated on the enclosed map. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with our efforts to address Native American concerns that may be raised by the proposed project. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at m.rockman@pernet.com. Sincerely, PCR SERVICES CORPORATION arc ockman, Ph.D. Ac Director/Princ ipal Archaeologist One Venture, Suite 150, Irvine, California 92618 NT NET www.pernet.com TEL 949.753.7001 FAX 949.753.7002 November 21, 2007 Robert Dorame, Tribal Chair/Cultural Resources GABRIELINO TONGVA INDIANS OF CALIFORNIA TRIBAL COUNCIL 5450 Slauson Ave., Suite 151 PMB Culver City, CA 90230 =PC Re: P ROP OSED DIAMOND BAR -SITE D PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Dorame: PCR Services Corporation (PCR) is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the proposed Diamond Bar -Site D project in the City of Diamond, County of Los Angeles, California. The proposed development of the approximately 30 -acre area includes the installation of residential and commercial buildings dividing the project site in half. Both the residential and commercial buildings will take up approximately 10.1 acres of the project site leaving the remaining acreage for the development of streets, off -streets, parkway separated walks and on -street bike trails As part of this effort, and in compliance with federal, state and local environmental regulations, we are writing to invite your comments and concerns with respect to the cultural research process. In order to ensure that any areas containing cultural resources or sacred lands are considered, PCR requests any information you are willing to share regarding Native American resources (including properties, places, or archaeological sites) in the vicinity of the project site that may be affected by the proposed project. The project site is located in: Township 2 South, Range 9 West, Section 29, of the Yorba Linda, CA 1964 (photo -revised 1981) 7.5' USGS Quadrangle. The project site is also illustrated on the enclosed map. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with our efforts to address Native American concerns that may be raised by the proposed project. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at m.rockman@pernet.com. Sincerely, PCR SERVICES CORPORATION arc ockman, Ph.D. Ac Director/Princ ipal Archaeologist One Venture, Suite 150, Irvine, California 92618 NT NET www.pernet.com TEL 949.753.7001 FAX 949.753.7002 November 21, 2007 Mercedes Dorame, Tribal Administrator GABRIELINO TONGVA INDIANS OF CALIFORNIA TRIBAL COUNCIL P.O. Box 590809 San Francisco, CA 94159 =PC Re: P ROP OSED DIAMOND BAR -SITE D PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Ms. Dorame: PCR Services Corporation (PCR) is conducting a cultural resources investigation for the proposed Diamond Bar -Site D project in the City of Diamond, County of Los Angeles, California. The proposed development of the approximately 30 -acre area includes the installation of residential and commercial buildings dividing the project site in half. Both the residential and commercial buildings will take up approximately 10.1 acres of the project site leaving the remaining acreage for the development of streets, off -streets, parkway separated walks and on -street bike trails As part of this effort, and in compliance with federal, state and local environmental regulations, we are writing to invite your comments and concerns with respect to the cultural research process. In order to ensure that any areas containing cultural resources or sacred lands are considered, PCR requests any information you are willing to share regarding Native American resources (including properties, places, or archaeological sites) in the vicinity of the project site that may be affected by the proposed project. The project site is located in: Township 2 South, Range 9 West, Section 29, of the Yorba Linda, CA 1964 (photo -revised 1981) 7.5' USGS Quadrangle. The project site is also illustrated on the enclosed map. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with our efforts to address Native American concerns that may be raised by the proposed project. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact me at (310) 451-4488 or via email at m.rockman@pernet.com. Sincerely, PCR SERVICES CORPORATION arc ockman, Ph.D. Ac Director/Princ ipal Archaeologist One Venture, Suite 150, Irvine, California 92618 NT NET www.pernet.com TEL 949.753.7001 FAX 949.753.7002 Aerial Photo .e# Site D Project Area Boundaries Land Use Plan 15 Rosidenlial Buildin Seibork from Toe or Top of Slope 35 LLds.. doZone Seibeok \ 7_nm Curb a'5'Land— eZone Setback from Curb �1 1, Residential COMERCIAL GATEWAY _ s to Plan Ar ea teat.... a -' M.n End Cemmerval �`- Pad and Plaza nn� 35 Landsce eZone. Setback 15 Commi Buldin Setback from Curb V from To.or Top of Slope _ �Exidting e ore IN T 3s iieds doe use) �. to ST Co martial Pad entlal -�� 15 Rodent 85' Cmmml Build aemack/Rowing for from To. onT fro m Toe or Top of Slope \ EVA (fB D. 31 C mi alBuildin Setback ire T Top of Slope\' -/ /.. Trial l Con—tionfrom Residential to Comr ieI Residential Pad Commercial Pad Commercial & Residential Budding Setback 35'Landscape Zone Setback Residentialto Commercial Trail Landscape (Building Setback Overlay Landscape Concept Plan Site D PI anning Commission April 27, 2010 City of Diamond Bar Section 1, 2, & 3 Section 4 & 5 A&o770 ,, � I o. s:ve KEY MAP .N4Np� Y_.� /�pM/bf�T[F'Fl .9/JPf- r�9� fH9 t25' 42' �'I P 5(ape. es• Commercial Architecture Commercial Architecture Commercial Architecture Commercial Architecture l'r Commercial IIL I I , - A Architecture � ,�,,. �. :,�, � ,. k �[' ,�• v �z . ` _ r ;"r►� i � is ar�� � � � � . , . _ moi+ _��� Conceptual Grading Legend " ./� •\ Aenge Beg. Range £ntl cut 1 -50.00 -25.00 -25.00 0.00 / ���,�`/••/ `; fill U. 25.00 .� ® 25.00 50.00 i' RiO- %. aha � a� Qat Tentative Tract Map Site D Property Wal nut Val I ey Unified School District & City of Diamond Bar TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 70687 IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES STATE OF CALIFORNIA "t VICINITY MAP Mw L- o. + + Wt S" V 11 Li LM2 EARTHWORK !�Uf�_ 11--W. TRACT MAP NO. ',W7