Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/03/2012City of Diamond Bar City Council Agenda Tuesday, April 3, 2012 5:00 p.m. — Closed Session — Room C-8 5:15 p.m. - Study Session — Room CC -8 6:30 p.m. — Regular Meeting The Government Center South Coast Air Quality Management District/ Main Auditorium 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Ling -Ling Chang Jack Tanaka Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Ron Everett Carol Herrera Steve Tye 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 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 If 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. W CITY OF DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA April 3, 2012 Next Resolution No. 2012-15 Next Ordinance No. 04(2012) CLOSED SESSION: 5:00 p.m., Room CC -8 Public Comments on Closed Session Agenda ► Government Code Section 54956.9 (c) Initiation of Litigation (1 case). STUDY SESSION: 5:15 p.m., Room CC -8 ► Updates on the 57/60 "Big Fix" Project; Lemon Avenue On -Off Ramp; and Park -n -Ride. Public Comments CALL TO ORDER: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE INVOCATION: ROLL CALL: APPROVAL OF AGENDA: 6:30 p.m. Mayor Pastor Mark Hopper, Evangelical Free Church Council Members Everett, Herrera, Tye, Mayor Pro Tem Tanaka, Mayor Chang Mayor 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 21810 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, California, during normal business hours. April 3, 2012 PAGE 2 1. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS: 1.1 Proclaiming April, 2012 as DMV/Donate Life California Month. 1.2. Proclaiming April, 2012 as Fair Housing Month. 1.3 Introduction of new City Employees. 2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 2.1 Update on the 57/60 "Big Fix" Project; Lemon Avenue On -Off Ramp; and Park -n -Ride. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: "Public Comments" is the time reserved on each regular meeting agenda to provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the Council on Consent Calendar items or matters of interest to the public that are not already scheduled for consideration on this agenda. Although the City Council values your comments, pursuant to the Brown Act, the Council generally cannot take any action on items not listed on the posted agenda. Please complete a Speaker's Card and give it to the City Clerk (completion of this form is voluntary). There is a five-minute maximum time limit when addressing the City Council. 4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT: Under the Brown Act, members of the City Council may triefly respond to public comments but no extended discussion and no action on such matters may take place. 5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 Annual Easter Egg Hunt— April 7, 2012 — 10:00 a.m. — Pantera Park, 738 Pantera Drive. (Pancake Breakfast hosted by Fire Explorers Post 19 beginning at 8:30 a.m.) 5.2 Planning Commission Meeting — April 10, 2012 — 7:00 p.m., Windmill Room, Diamond Bar City Hall, 21810 Copley Drive. 5.3 Traffic and Transportation Commission Meeting — April 12, 2012 — 7:00 p.m., Windmill Room, Diamond Bar City Hall, 21810 Copley Drive. 5.4 23`d Annual City Birthday Party — Saturday, April 14, 2012 — 11:00 a.m. — 5 p.m. (Carnival rides open until 6:00 pm). - Pantera Park, 738 Pantera Drive. 5.5 City Council Meeting April 17, 2012 — 6:30 p.m., AQMD/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive. April 3, 2012 R CONSENT CALENDAR: PAGE 3 6.1 City Council Minutes — Regular Minutes of March 20, 2012 —Approve as submitted. 6.2 Planning Commission Minutes: (a) Regular Meeting of January 24, 2012 — Receive and File. (b) Regular Meeting of February 28, 2012 — Receive and File. 6.3 Traffic and Transportation Commission Minutes— Regular Meeting of February 16, 2012 — Receive and File. 6.4 Ratification of Check Register — March 15, 2012 through March 28, 2012 totaling $1,537,723.07. Requested by: Finance Department 6.5 Treasurer's Statement — Month of February, 2012. Recommended Action: Approve. Requested by: Finance Department 6.6 Approve Notice of Completion for Residential Area 7 and Arterial Zone 5 Road Maintenance Project. Recommended Action: Approve. Requested by: Public Works Department 6.7 Approve Notice of Completion for Traffic Signal Battery Back -Up System Project. Recommended Action: Approve. Requested by: Public Works Department 6.8 Amend Contract Amount with Protech Engineering Corporation for the 21810 East Copley Drive (City Hall) Interconnect Project in the Amount of $7,000 for a Total Authorization Amount of $46,850. Recommended Action: Approve. Requested by: Public Works Department April 3, 2012 PAGE 4 6.9 Adopt Resolution No. 2012 -XX: Installation of Red Curb 600 ft on the West Side of Diamond Canyon Road from Brea Canyon Cutoff Road to 600 Feet Southerly. Recommended Action: Adopt. Requested by: Public Works Department 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 6:45 p.m., or as soon thereafter as matters may be heard. 7.1 Adopt Resolution No. 2012 -XX: Approving a One -Year Extension of Time for Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-10 and Development Review No. 2006-11 to Construct a Nine -Unit Residential Condominium Located at 23671 Golden Springs Drive (Assessor's Parcel Number 8281-028-030). Recommended Action: Receive Staffs Report, Open the Public Hearing, Receive Testimony, Close the Public Hearing and Adopt. Requested by: Community Development Department 7.2 Approve for First Reading Ordinance No. OX (2012): Amending the Following Sections of Title 22 of the Municipal Code: 22.10.030 Tables 2-5 and 2-6; 22.16.060(1); 22.22.120(a)(1); 22.38.030; 22.36.130; Table 3-14; 22.34.030; 22.42.060(2)0); 22.42.100(1); 22.42.100(c); 22.42.130; 22.68.030; 22.80.020. Recommended Action: Receive Staffs report, Open the Public Hearing; Receive Testimony; Close the Public Hearing; and Approve First Reading by title only. Requested by: Community Development Department 7.3 (a) Adopt Urgency Ordinance OX (2012) U: Approving Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement 2005-01 Between the City of Diamond Bar and JCCL-South Pointe West LLC for the South Pointe West Specific Plan and Declaring the Urgency Thereof. (b) First Reading of Ordinance No. OX (2012): Approving Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement 2005-01 Between the City of Diamond Bar and JCCL-South Pointe West LLC for the South Pointe West Specific Plan. Recommended Action: Receive Staff's Report, Open the Public Hearing; Receive Public Testimony; Close the Public Hearing and Adopt Urgency Ordinance No. OX(2012)U; and, First Reading by title only, waiving full reading of Ordinance No. 0X(2012). April 3, 2012 PAGE 5 Requested by: Community Development Department 8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: 8.1 Adopt Urgency Ordinance No. OX (2012) U: Pursuant to Government Code Section 65858 Prohibiting the Issuance of Permits for Establishment of Land Uses on the Site of the Former Diamond Bar Honda Dealership and its Adjacent Parcels at the Northwest Corner of the SR60/Grand Avenue Interchange Recommended Action: Adopt. Requested by: Community Development Department 9. COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS: 10. ADJOURNMENT: CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Via: .James DeStefano, City Manager From: % David G. Liu, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Date: April 3, 2012 SUBJECT: Park N Ride Lot at Diamond Bar Blvd and SR -60 Freeway Foothill Transit is in the process of identifying three (3) existing Park N Ride sites in the San Gabriel Valley that would be potential candidates for capacity enhancements through the construction of a multi level parking structure. An existing Park N Ride lot located at Diamond Bar Boulevard and the SR -60 Freeway may present such an opportunity. The attached exhibits are being provided to facilitate the discussion on the issues and opportunities of such a proposal: - Confluence Project Improvement - SR 57160 Feasibility Study Improvement - San Jose Creek Truck Lane Proposed Alignment 14 Aw mv AF if tr r •t Or t•���� ie 4 �'- Jam. Y6� -�,` � ��. It •. _t• � � 1 _ ., ' CEJJI/ - � � f• _ � �,�� r� a - � may[ 'v � r q,4, - `y �k ,;,�: t . ' a E . 's• / f z r >, rn ty " •r - � ;�_ ..� by � N i - ,�• R ,r s % ` - '`� ,� t - �lj r •�`- Fes- - ' 4,7 ;_;, ... •ryas - 1�_ n �} ..' - ,itl. S• 'i. .- . a./rc: ,► Z 2 V LU 3 L.L W z LL Z O Z cc V F - z W 2 W 0 a D F- U) F- J_ _m Q W H O O r Ln rr U) F - z w 2 z U J Q w (1) O CL O o, n w z Q J Y U OC Y w w U w O z Q b M N N � N � Qi U � •O S -a a � U LCA � � O M t!1 [d O � ct b -C 05 bb -O •O F4 o� 4-J I � I •o Ccn U) MCt 4-j Li �� 0 7r� M rz� 0 H C� U a� h rd 00 4-3 r rg ' r v U O 4-4 OLO N CSS Urc bA (1) 1-4 � C) bA O U � .P-4 U o . o oco 0 4-3 o •° Q C) JN O H " ctct CCS bjo .WD w N W U Q r� C) 9) CCS F4 of � U � U � CIS C'7 LO COD bjQ ° C 4-3 cq �+ P-4 �;�4 K )) ., z O � � N C� cd Lo 0 co ~✓ • NPt bip cd Cd 4 o v o 0J 1 + Co 0tO cn H Cd ct o C� C)o o A U A.� O o 4 !�I O N O ro O N bio U � v � o � A � Ca 0 rd 0 .0 +b 0 U 'U 0 rd W P-4 co O N W rd o N � c o O N O � a 'moi •,--� }, v � � U O (1) ° ,o e o p b o CW A U rd 0 .0 +b 0 U 'U 0 rd W P-4 bio r arME4 • rME4 i 0 V +r c� 4n i N N �- 4 J 0 P� •r-4 y.. 4-jcn i O ,o 0 0 0 'o Poi � P4 cn PQ fA- O LO `O Poi � P4 cn PQ w O O O �O O LO \,c LO LO P4 P4 P4 cn cn cn H W cn � � W CO �O 0 cn G) 0 0 7 -E-J ;L -I • CU 4) rcj� Ct Q.) Ct +� 4-j ct ( CU cn lc�H ^ ', rf:q cd `t oF=-n •° Ct P ct o .-J o o ct C � ;-4 Ct ° P-44 Ct °' � � , � b�o� 0 0 0 f� r.s 0 �. o CL >• O E } O � O 0 J = J _ as •� • > 0 � �E =a O 0 O 0 M = cn = a i o s y- o 0 E I 44- o O 0 , 3 = - N o W V LL .2 -0 m coV •� o .�G �=mom 3 = CL r.s �. O } J = J s as ° • > � �E =a O •- O 0 M = cn i o s y- > 0 E V o V) t m i s 0 .�G 3 = CL o o >. -E a� E u o .- CL E am _ a o a o >. O _W a)4- ..O D LL O aV000 °' 0 > 0 %0 O 'ONEai •� (D V � E to am �_ NINE a a o O ._ 0o 0 0 N L m M E 0 O z d) 0 amCL a 0 E V O rie a meC0 E O W a ._ aL W= • u'} 2 O QL A&571 ( 4— CL C E � L a .> L O L tW nQ L� a N � s N v) a O N v �V O N N Q L 1 O O N a v v a O E V V 0 �v a c LL CD C O U N L v CL 0 CL L D U 0— (D (D E a a 1 E o E -0 O u O O N 4 v v > v •L i— N OC E •� O V) u C � 0 O N f Il N �.J v C � a J a `0 O C Ln O v E s J Q a� N in O a? L L C > C L a 0 Q T N U i 3 T CL } O L o E L C SL } .O D 0- a Q. IL E u O E m O CQ Cl) CL L O `) a tn 4- E N O •} V L tA r_ O i Q c ani } L s 3 O N W B �U O N N CL E y -- 4-- O O v v a O E O V V a O v a C LL CD C O a � O L � (D CN 0 CLU L v a O E 0 V a E E 0 u 7 } L CL E L C W • j u a O N r_ O 0 W c 3 1 O t s O N a � a� L9 -m! r Lnu N }O s a� i Q 3 � N u 0 o Q • - 4- W (U O p 3 .� o O .w O N CLC3 N 0 CL :— Q 4 ._ O 3 tA tA s +n a Q- Q .� N _ 4) � s o ♦m q L L �" V W W O O a- u V i EU O o oN�0��CL .� �CL L .� iJi u 00} c } s •-- �+ _ 3° Q p a c c O V � X V) s �� O A +- N .0-- s a a O .� � .- -I.- 00 CL O 4� u u s o Q O a 0 CL CL 4- C Q 0 CL p CL 4-0 0 3 a� D aO N N ) O} O O O C a N 0` ° O 0 V O us u O 4-4) a CL o a CL .y M V N O- O o •� N �I— C M CL Cr N a > a y O Q c E � V vi a O =Q •- s� s o L a s CL :� a to0 0 N L. 0 _ p a s c a CL 0 s � } ,� L .0 .3 ami s u E- C: u 3 Q a u uD 3 •' U 0 O L 0 a�ooQo�o�� �1 �� E El Q � N (n t/f J L o W o S LL in O {- o va7 N 5 .� O O D o a � .� o D LO •�' 4 -OO 'O' •� •a 0 x > cv Q. — N u rn , +..,� � -0a T o 4- N L Jc a E in 0:� O } -0 O ,} i jS u, a p LL p U �. N n s E 2 N L a CL — .- LL- N O Q < "n O 'o 00 - N p O -O } O C%4O S p In p m ISL © p i 1 m U LL 9.. O N ii')- 1j)- qj)- V)- 00 ,O N ro N Ln N d: Lf) N (1-4 +rl 0 V v 4O L a V)- ij'� V-)- tr)- ira co E o E tz0 0 c E �_ O V ❑CA 4 o N v1 O a", O 4-0 cn 4--, u > O Ew .0 E C CL u —_ O E O A w G V m LU mQ m as U O CA .Q O < cn o -0 s °' M -a 4- -0 .a ~ ■� .� Q � ~ •0 Lc oz N OP- w= w w U. ❑ 2 2 V C- U O. 1 F A c O a) CL E O V as V a) O i �J O N L E a� v O V s 3 O D LVIIJ i. O a� CL E O u Iii �`J Agenda No. 6.1 MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MARCH 20, 2012 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Ling -Ling Chang called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member Carol Herrera led the Pledge of Allegiance. INVOCATION: Pastor Randy Lanthripe, Church in the Valley, gave the invocation. ROLL CALL: Council Members Ron Everett, Carol Herrera, Steve Tye, Mayor Pro Tem Jack Tanaka, and Mayor Ling -Ling Chang. Staff Present: James DeStefano, City Manager; David Doyle, Assistant City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City Attorney; Ken Desforges, IS Director; David Liu, Public Works Director; Dianna Honeywell, Finance Director; Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; Ryan McLean, Assistant to the City Manager; Rick Yee, Senior Civil Engineer; Kimberly Young, Associate Engineer; Christy Murphey, Recreation Superintendent; Natalie Tobon, Planning Technician; Anthony Santos, Senior Management Analyst; Lauren Hidalgo, Public Information Specialist, and Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Submitted. 1. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS: 1.1 Mayor Chang and the City Council presented Los Angeles County Sheriff Deputy Mark St. Amant with a City Tile upon his retirement from the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department after 31 years of service. Capt. Dave Halm and Lt. Chris Blasnek with the Diamond Bar/Walnut Station said a few words. Presentations were also made by Jody Roberto representing Senator Huffs office; Pat Fabio representing Congressman Miller's office; and a Certificate from Assemblyman Hagman's office. BUSINESS OF THE MONTH: 1.1 M/Chang presented on behalf of the City Council a City Plaque to Shawn Thonen, owner of Boba ni Taco, 1220 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard #C as New Business of the Month for March 2012. 2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: None 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Vinod Kashyap again stated that the City spent public monies to provide an EIR for Site D for the purchase of public land which was given to the school district. He asked why this was allowed to happen. He felt that it was wrong for the City to use public funds for the preparation of an EIR; even though, after it is sold DB MARCH 20, 2012 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL gets its land and its money back. He does not think this is right. In his opinion, it raises ethical, moral and integrity issues. He stated that he intends to speak with his Congressman, State Senator, Assemblyman and County Supervisor about this issue. Seven schools in DB are being funded by all of the citizens of DB including those who attend schools in the PUSD. 4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS: CM/DeStefano stated that this matter had been brought up at the last Council meeting and at that time he had responded to those comments; however, it should not go without saying that the School District is the owner of this property and that the decision to sell the property is based on the best interests of the School District and the citizens of DB who are served by the School District. The District went through a public process with a public committee comprised of members of the DB community taking a look at the property and determining whether it was necessary for ongoing school district operations. Those things took place a few years ago and again about a year ago. The School District's committee determined that the property should be declared surplus, the WVUSD Board of Directors took action to declare the property surplus and began a process to dispose of the property. In an effort to enhance the value of the property the School District pursued an entitlement of land that would allow for 200 dwelling units to be constructed on the property — that greatly enhances the value that will then be received by the School District for betterment of the District and the residents of DB who are served by the School District. WVUSD went through a process with the City of DB. The City and the School District entered into an agreement whereby the City agreed to front the cost of the development, particularly the development component identified through the Environmental Impact Report. When that agreement was approved by both the School District and the City Council in public meetings, the idea at the time was a project comprised of 50 percent commercial and 50 percent residential land uses. That decision was ultimately modified to a project that was comprised of 200 dwelling units and a public park of least 2 -acres in size. It was that project that was approved by the City Council and that project has been adopted as the new land use plan by the City Council. The School District's next steps are to complete the process of disposal and are now undergoing those efforts by putting the property out to a competitive bid. They have a minimum sales price that is well over $20 million. If the School District is able to achieve that sales price it will provide significant benefit back to the School District and back to the residents of DB. The City is receiving 100 percent of those costs when the sale of the property concludes which the City would expect the School District to enter into escrow later this year and likely close escrow possibly by the end of the year but more likely about this time next year. At the close of escrow, the City will receive 100 percent of its contributions to this effort to better the community of DB. This project has been underway for more than three years with a dozen or more public meetings/workshops and the like by both the City and the School District. As previously indicated, the City Council has taken action and the project. MARCH 20, 2012 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL Project is now concluded but for the sale and a future entitlement by a developer for a specific type of house which will include future public meetings for the components that would comprise the two -acre public park. 5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 6. 5.1 State of the City — March 22, 2012 from 6:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., Diamond Bar Center, 1600 Grand Avenue. 5.2 Planning Commission Meeting — March 27, 2012 — 7:00 p.m., Diamond Bar City Hall Windmill Room, 21810 Copley Drive. 5.3 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting — March 29, 2012 — 7:00 p.m. — Diamond Bar City Hall Windmill Room, 21810 Copley Drive. 5.4 City Council Meeting — April 3, 2012 — 6:30 p.m., South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Tye moved, C/Herrera seconded, to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Everett, Herrera, Tye, MPT/Tanaka, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 6.1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES — Regular Meeting of March 6, 2012 - Approved as submitted. 6.2 RATIFIED CHECK REGISTER - Dated March 1, 2012 through March 14, 2012 totaling $1,084,262.57. 6.3 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2012-13: ESTABLISHING AN APPROVED VENDOR LIST AS DEFINED BY ORDINANCE NO. 05(2006) EFFECTIVE FROM FEBRUARY 1, 2012 THROUGH JANUARY 31, 2013. 6.4 AUTHORIZED PURCHASE OF ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT AND OTHER DEVICES FOR THE DIAMOND BAR LIBRARY IN AN AMOUNT NOT -TO -EXCEED $150,000 AND APPROPRIATE THE NECESSARY FUNDS FROM GENERAL FUND RESERVES. 6.5 AUTHORIZED INCREASE TO CONTRACT WITH WOODCLIFF CONSTRUCTION IN AN AMOUNT NOT -TO -EXCEED $150,000 FOR A TOTAL AUTHORIZATION OF $6,218,616 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF CITY HALL AND DIAMOND BAR LIBRARY. PUBLIC HEARING: None MARCH 20, 2012 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL 8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: 8.1 ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2012-14: ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. PL2012-087 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A DOG PARK ON 1.35 ACRES OF UNIMPROVED LAND WITHIN PANTERA PARK, 738 PANTERA DRIVE. CDD/Gubman reported that over the past several months since April 2011 when the City Council authorized the planning effort to commence, staff has been working on plans to construct a dog park at Pantera Park. As with any development project, staff was required to determine if the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed dog park warranted further analysis in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Staff chose to deem this project "subject to CEQA" in order to disclose to the public potential noise, traffic and air quality impacts that might be created by the dog park. The formal process by which this is done is through the preparation of a document that is called an Initial Study. The format of the Initial Study is established by CEQA guidelines and requires an evaluation of the project's potential impacts in 17 environmental categories, each of which must be analyzed even if most of them are not necessarily relevant to a particular project. Staff completed the Initial Study and released it for public review in early February. The initial study concluded that the construction and continued operation of the dog park as planned and programmed, will not have a significant effect on the environment. When such a conclusion is reached CEQA requires the City to publish its findings by filing a document known as a Negative Declaration. Based on the conclusions set forth in the Initial Study, staff is recommending that the Council approve the Resolution provided in the agenda packet adopting the Negative Declaration for the Pantera Park Dog Park. M/Chang said she was very pleased to see this item on tonight's agenda. She has received only praise for the City Council for its pursuit of a Dog Park. Typically, council members receive emails from people who might not appreciate a certain project. In this instance she has received only emails of praise. There was no one present who wished to speak on this matter. C/Herrera said she had received dozens of emails from DB residents urging a "Yes" vote on this agenda item. C/Herrera moved, C/Tye seconded, to approve the resolution adopting the Negative Declaration No. PL 2012-087 for construction of a Dog Park on 1.35 Acres of unimproved land within Pantera Park at 738 Pantera Drive. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: MARCH 20, 2012 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Everett, Herrera, Tye, MPT/Tanaka, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 9. COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS: C/Everett congratulated the new Miss Diamond Bar 2012 Alexandra Miller and her court and thanked 2011 Miss Diamond Bar Stephanie Turner and her court for the support to the City this past year. He also thanked Deputy Mark St. Amant for his service to DB. He congratulated the Girl Scouts on their 100th Anniversary and thanked their families and girls for their support to the community. He and MPT/Tanaka as members of the Neighborhood Improvement Sub -Committee met with CDD/Gubman and the City's Building Official for an update. Staff has continued to work with Shell Station on its project. March 29 is the deadline for completing the insulation, drywall and exterior approvals. The subcommittee also continues to work on the matter of inoperable vehicles and a new Inoperable Vehicle Abatement Ordinance that is being developed and will come to the Council soon. With respect to the Lighting Landscape Assessment Districts, the subcommittee met with CSD/Rose and PWD/Liu and staff members to address concerns about ongoing General Fund subsidies for Districts 39 and 41. He and MPT/Tanaka are liaisons to PUSD and applaud their work in dealing with a significant budget. He invited residents to attend a Town Hall Meeting in Room CC -6, of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, with Assemblyman Curt Hagman on Saturday, March 24 from 1:30 to 2:30 p.m. and to attend a wreath making demonstration at the library on Grand Avenue on March 31 from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m. C/Tye congratulated Eagle Scouts Timothy Peterson and Brandon Reynoso who on Sunday were honored by friends and proud families. Tim's project was done at Pantera Park and Brandon's project was done at Schubarum Park in Rowland Heights. People often talk about the cost of things and he wondered if a value could be assigned to volunteer hours and what those hours mean to this community and what a better community residents enjoy because of the efforts of the Boy Scouts, Eagle Scouts, Girl Scouts, Friends of the Library, Diamond Bar Community Foundation and others and the number of hours these individuals put forth and what is accomplished and given back to the community. He hoped everyone would join M/Chang and the City Council at the Diamond Bar Community Center for the Mayor's State of the City address. This Saturday at 12:30 he hoped everyone would join together at Mt. SAC for the Inland Valley Spelling Bee sponsored by the Diamond Bar Friends of the Library. C/Herrera said she, M/Chang and staff members just returned from a lobbying trip to Washington D.C. where she spoke with many representatives including the offices of Senator Dianne Feinstein, Senator Barbara Boxer, Congressman Gary Miller, Congresswoman Judy Chu and Congressman Ed Royce to talk about the SR57160 Confluence project and how this project was one of national signi- MARCH 20, 2012 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL ficance and "Goods Movement" corridor which should receive funding from the next Federal Reauthorization Bill. All comments were well received and the point of the discussion was readily accepted. She attended the Miss Diamond Bar Pageant and was very impressed with all nine young women who courageously put themselves on the line to be judged. She congratulated the new Miss Diamond Bar, Alexandra Miller. She also thanked Congressman Ed Royce for putting in an appearance at the Miss Diamond Bar Pageant and appreciated his support of DB by attending many of its different events. C/Herrera stated that she is greatly concerned about San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments (SGVCOG) for which the City pays annual dues of $23,000 because the organization has been going through some very serious issues including a recent Caltrans audit where conflict of interest was found in the way the executive director is doing business. The Board ordered a management study and one of the items in the study was to make a recommendation that the executive director and the employees become employees of the SGVCOG. This subcommittee was commissioned to study how this would take place, determine what the costs would be and what the implication to the 31 member cities, 3 LA District's and water districts would be. For the member cities to take on an additional obligation of employees, PERS, etc. will mean a significant expense to all of the cities. As details are revealed in the study she will bring those forward to the Council and residents. MPT/Tanaka reported that he and C/Everett attended the Lighting and Landscape Assessment District Subcommittee meeting and the Neighborhood Improvement Program's Standing Committee meeting. Thursday he attended the PUSD School Board meeting during which the Board continued discussions regarding budget cuts and the possible closing of Pueblo Elementary School. Today he visited Armstrong Elementary School which has been invited to be recognized as a California Distinguished School. The accreditation staff was onsite and congratulated Principal Sanchez for doing such a wonderful job. Wednesday he attended the Grand Opening of the Sheraton Fairplex Conference Center adjacent to the LA County Fair Grounds and Sheraton Fairplex Hotel. On Saturday, March 17 he attended the Diamond Bar Library Boy's Only party. Last Monday he attended the first meeting of the year at the LA County Fair. DB Day will be on Thursday, September 6 and will include a parade, a hero's program and entertainment for the evening. Thursday was the SGCOG meeting. Last week he visited businesses in DB including Massage Envy Spa and Boba ni Taco's where he and Wanda had lunch. Construction on the Eden Garden property includes plans for a Farmer's Market. There is a business banner at the Acapulco property proposing a buffet and banquet business. Last Sunday was the 45th Miss Diamond Bar Pageant. He congratulated 2012 Miss Diamond Bar Alexandra Miller and her princesses and thanked all the candidates for participating. He thanked last year's Miss Diamond Bar Stephanie Turner and her Court. He congratulated and thanked Deputy Mark St. Amant for his service to the department and the City of DB. MARCH 20, 2012 PAGE 7 CITY COUNCIL M/Chang reminded residents her activities can be followed on Facebook and Twitter and Foursquare as well as, the City's Facebook and Twitter. Residents can download a mobile phone app via the City's website. She thanked C/Herrera for updating everyone on the lobbying trip to D.C. She congratulated all of the participants of the Miss Diamond Bar Pageant. She reminded everyone to attend the State of the City presentation on Thursday from 6:30 to 7:30 p.m. at the Diamond Bar Center. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Chang adjourned the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:29 p.m. TOMMYE CRIBBINS, CITY CLERK The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this day of 2012. LING -LING CHANG, MAYOR Agenda No. 6.2(a) MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 24, 2012 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Shah called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: PT/Tobon led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Jimmy Lin, Steve Nelson, Tony Torng, and Chairman Jack Shah Absent: Vice Chairman Kwang Ho Lee was excused. Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; Natalie Tobon, Planning Technician; David Alvarez, Assistant Planner; and Stella Marquez, Administrative Coordinator. 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 January 10, 2012. C/Torng moved, C/Lin seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 10, 2012, as amended. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Nelson, Torng NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Shah ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Lee 5. OLD BUSINESS: None 6. NEW BUSINESS: None 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 Time Extension for Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-10 and Development Review No. 2006-11_ — Recommend approval to the City Council for a one-year time extension for a nine -unit residential condominium project on a 0.62 acre lot. Under the authority of Diamond JANUARY 24, 2012 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION Bar Municipal Code Section 22.66.050, the applicant submitted a request for a one-year extension of time ;to begin construction. The project was approved on November 20, 2007, with a three (3) year timeframe to obtain building permits and begin construction. On February 15, 2011, the City Council approved a one-year time extension. PROJECT ADDRESS PROPERTY OWNER/ APPLICANT: 23671 Golden Springs Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 GSDB Investment LLC 625 Fair Oaks Avenue #115 South Pasadena, CA PT/Tobon presented staff's report and recommended that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-10 and Development Review No. 2006-11, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Joseph Kwok, representing the owner, stated that the applicant is requesting a one-year time extension for the Conditional Use Permit and Development Review. The applicant has been working diligently with the Public Works to get the plans approved. However, the grading plan process seems.to be a lot more complex than originally anticipated. The third plan check corrections were processed last Friday and he believes they are very close to complete approval. He hopes to resubmit the plans before the end of January, early next week, and hopes to begin construction very soon thereafter. Chair/Shah opened the public hearing With no one present who wished to speak on this item, Chair/Shah closed the public hearing. C/Nelson moved, C/Torng seconded, to recommend City Council approval of the Time Extension for Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-10 and Development Review 2006-11, 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: Lin, Nelson, Torng, Chair/Shah NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Lee JANUARY 24, 2012 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION 7.2 Development Review and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. PL2011-423 - Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Sections 22.48 and 22.56, applicant Ben Kawachie and property owner Karen Lui, requested Development Review approval to construct a 1,188 square foot, ground floor addition to an existing 1,906 square foot, one- story single family residence. A Minor Conditional Use Permit was also requested to continue a nonconforming building separation of 14' 6" distance to the residence on the adjacent lot to the west. PROJECT ADDRESS: 1228 Calbourne Drive Diamond bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER: Karen Liu 1915 W. 235th Street Torrance, CA 90501 APPLICANT: Ben Kawachi 19210 Allwood Court Rowland Heights, CA 91748 AP/Alvarez presented staffs report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. PL2011-423; based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. C/Lin asked for clarification that the side setbacks that do not conform to the City's current standards are grandfathered in to which AP/Alvarez responded affirmatively and further clarified that the new addition must comply with current development standards. C/Nelson said he was not opposed to the project but wanted to know whether the City had ever acted in such a way that anon -conforming use where the wall does not change, but in the addition to it, conform to current standards, be upheld? CDD/Gubman asked for clarification that such'a request had ever been rejected and C/Nelson responded "right." This is an existing non -conforming structure (non -conforming to the City's standards because it was approved under County standards), and an addition to that structure, the line continues on, and he wanted to know if such a proposal had ever been rejected in favor of any addition to the structure being in conformance with the City's standards. CDD/Gubman said he did not believe such a proposal had ever been rejected and it is a good question because the City is preparing to bring to the Commission an omnibus code cleanup in about a month. And in light of the fact that staff brings these Conditional Use Permits to allow the addition to continue JANUARY 24, 2012 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION that same non -conformity, it supports the argument that the requirement to go through the CUP process is overly burdensome. So in the code amendment language that staff will be bringing to the Commission, staff is going to be proposing that this be allowed to be approved administratively rather than requiring a Conditional Use Permit. Ben Kawachi, applicant, spoke about the neighboring home, the side setbacks, explained the project and asked for approval of the Minor Conditional Use Permit for the higher grade improvement which he felt would be an improvement for the neighborhood. Chair/Shah opened the public hearing. Herbert Rudeking, Ackfold Drive, directly behind the proposed project, asked what the height of the new roof would be because he was concerned it would block his view. AP/Alvarez responded that the existing roofline height is 12 feet 10 inches and the new roofline is proposed to be 20 feet 10 inches which is eight feet higher. C/Nelson asked the speaker what view he currently enjoyed that he felt would be blocked. Mr. Rudeking said he currently overlooks the entire area. He has a five foot fence and was concerned about whether the project was proposed to be a single story or multiple story structure that would not be higher than his fence which would block what little view he currently has. It appears that is not the case and thanked the Commission. Chair/Shah closed the public hearing C/Torng moved, C/Lin seconded, to approve Development Review and Minor Conditional Use Permit No. PL2011-423, 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: Lin, Nelson, Torng, Chair/Shah NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Lee CDD/Gubman advised the speaker that the Planning Commission's decision may be appealed ,to the City Council within 10 calendar days. The appeal, along with the appeal fee, would need to be filed with the City Clerk no later than 10 calendar days from tonight. JANUARY 24, 2012 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION In response to C/Torng, CDD/Gubman reminded the Commission and speaker that the City has no view regulations, particularly when the Commission is reviewing individual projects. When subdivisions are laid out view factors are taken into consideration but when there are existing lots, there are no view regulations. 7.3 Development Review Minor Variance and Tree Permit No. PL2011 449 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Sections 22.38, 22.48 and 22.52, the applicant, Simon T. Shum and property owners Tengly and Anna Tan, requested Development Review approval to construct a new 10,414 square foot single family residence on a 1.33 gross acre (53,040 square foot) lot; a Minor Variance for reduction of the front setback from 30 feet to 24 feet; and a Tree Permit to remove protected trees and replace at a 3:1 ratio. The lot is zoned Rural Residential (RR) with a consistent underlying General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential. PROJECT ADDRESS: 23540 Mirage Lane Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNERS: Tengly and Anna Tan 16808 Sunny Ridge Court Cerritos, CA 90703 APPLICANTS: Simon T. Shum 385 S. Lemon Avenue #E383 Walnut, CA 91789 AP/Alvarez presented staff's report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Development Review, Minor Variance and Tree Permit No. PL2011-449, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution. C/Nelson asked if there were any Pepper Trees on site to which AP/Alvarez responded no, just Black Walnuts. C/Torng asked if this permit would last for another two years and AP/Alvarez responded "yes." C/Lin asked the difference between a major and minor variance. AP/Alvarez responded that a minor variance is 20% or less reduction and anything greater would be a major variance. CDD/Gubman stated that the JANUARY 24, 2012 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION threshold is 20% so in this case, the minimum setback is 30 feet. A 20% reduction would be six feet. The project proposes 24 feet_ Anything that deviates more than 20 percent would be a major variance. C/Lin felt the property sloped more east to west and a 25 percent grade is equal to one and a half feet in elevation in a six foot run so if the building is lowered by one and a half feet, the property could maintain the 30 foot setback. He felt there would not be that much difference in the cost because some areas would be filled and some would be excavated. There is 70 feet of backyard area to accommodate the building and he wondered if there was a compelling reason to approve this minor variance? Chair/Shah asked the rationale for the first variance. AP/Alvarez said he included the staff report and resolution as an attachment. CDD/Gubman stated that the findings that were originally made had to do with the amount of retaining walls to build up the pads to accommodate this site. The issue with this particular parcel was the amount of flat pad on the front of the property was relatively small which wouldresult in a lot of retaining wall construction to build up the buildable area for the site. The consideration at that time was the amount of the grade was so extreme that it seemed reasonable to allow the 20 percent encroachment to reduce the impact of additional retaining walls. So the consideration was the tradeoff between complying strictly to all of the Development Code standards and require more retaining walls and more intensive grading, or allow the 20 percent reduction in the setback, so as to allow that encroachment/deviation to reduce the grading impacts somewhat. The judgment on approving this original variance was the relative benefit of reducing some of the grading in exchange for allowing that the encroachment to occur was preferred. Chair/Shah said he had similar concerns about justifying the variance. He wanted to know what kind of setbacks neighboring properties had and AP/Alvarez said he did not know what kind of setbacks the neighboring properties have. C/Lin said that if the pad were lowered by one and a half feet the fill at the back of the building would be substantially less as would the retaining wall at the back of the house. According to the report, four foot and seven foot ` tall retaining walls are called for and there is a massive fill in the back. So if the building pad was lowered by a foot and a half there would be a lot' less grading required for this project (drawing A-6). JANUARY 24; 2012 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION SP/Lee asked for clarification. The current fill for the proposed project is approximately 4000 cubic yards. She asked if C/Lin was saying that by lowering the pad an addition foot and one-half it would result in less fill? Would it not in fact, mean additional fill? She believes the reason staff recommended a Minor Variance in 2008 was to minimize the fill. CDD/Gubman said it would take time to go back and review how this project came about but it may have had to do with where the grade at the front of the existing pad was at that time and he would guess at this point that the goal was to bring the grades up to what the current pad was rather than take that amount of existing pad down. He said he understood what C/Lin was saying and felt the applicant would be able to shed more light on this issue. CDD/Gubman said it would appear that they were raising the rear to bring it up to the existing front of the property. With that said, if the pad was following the natural elevation, the amount of fill would certainly be less: C/Lin asked if the City had encountered conditions similar to this in recent years and was there a precedent in granting minor variances on a lot of projects? CDD/Gubman responded that minor variances have been granted previously and part of the justification and the decision to do so has been that the remaining vacant parcels are becoming increasingly difficult to develop. The easier parcels were built out long ago which is why the currently vacant lots remain vacant — because of the difficulties in developing those lots. The other question that arises is certainly this is a massive house and another solution would be to make the house a little bit smaller so that it would not have to sprawl out over the site so much and that would take care of the. setback issue as well. However, that is an issue of precedence as well, because the bar keeps _getting raised, in terms of how large these developments are becoming. C/Lin said his basic concern was that such a massive building should beset back from the street as far as possible. Chair/Shah opened the public hearing Simon Shum, Architect, stated that this .house is sitting on a corner property with two sides to meet the requirement. He referred to the site plan to provide a perspective of the setback variance to the Commissioners which is on Mirage Lane. The long side which borders Indian. Creekhas met the setback requirement. The grade runs steeper from Mirage Lane to the west than it does from Indian Creek to the north. He conducted a survey of the neighborhood and found that most of the houses built in 'The Country Estates" by the residents across the street on Mirage Lane as well as, on Indian Creek have a 20 foot setback requirement which was in place at the time of the subdivision filing. In JANUARY 24, 2012 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION addition, as CDD/Gubman stated, most of the easier lots are already built out and the lots that are left have a legacy of steep slopes. Mr. Shum said he believed that 30 foot setbacks were initiated in about 2000, well after "The Country Estates" subdivision recordation of 1975. This proposal is a. request to help with the grading situation on Mirage. Lane. Because the house is in the corner he wants to design a smooth transition from Mirage Lane onto Indian Creek by anchoring a rotunda in the corner which would add a great deal of transition and be a focal point for the street. Mr. Shum pointed out that the 24 foot setback is not to the building, it is only to the canopy at the one story roof which transitions to a two-story. The long side (Indian Creek) meets the 30 foot setback and the building down the street has only a 20 foot setback. His architectural attempt has been in keeping with the subdivision design done in 1975 and later, in order to keep the same flavor and minimize grading. In addition, the architecture of the building has broken up to assimilate different building elements to minimize its impacts. This structure is designed to take advantage of the view toward the ocean area and believed that the addition would add to the City of Diamond Bar. C/Nelson asked if this project was. approved by "The Country Estates" Architectural Review Committee and Mr. Shum responded "yes." Chair/Shah stated that the project is a very nice design and particularly the stepping back and reducing of the mass: His main concern is that if the trees are removed from the street the structure is imposing. Mr. Shum confirmed to Chair/Shah that the reason for this request was to minimize the grading. Chair/Shah said he admired Mr. Shum's work. C/Lin asked Mr. Shum to explain the negative impact to the project if the Commission were to require him to comply with the setback requirement. Mr. Shum used the drawings to again point out that from the Mirage Lane side going down into the canyon is much steeper than it is on the other side (Indian Creek). He could create an ugly building by taking the canopy out and putting the building there to meet the requirement. But the question is, can the City work with him to design a building that the City can be proud of that meets the architectural requirements. Strictly from a code compliance standpoint he could remove the canopy and the eye would immediately encounter a two-story building. He felt that in addition to the grading issue there was some cooperation between the builder and the City to have an avenue to address this touchy issue. Ninety percent of the buildings surrounding the project site meet the 20 foot setback. Because of the code change they are working with the 10% Code change JANUARY 24, 2012 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION which to him places a burden on the owner. Because aesthetics are involved he stepped forward to work with the City to overcome the adversities to create a better product. Chair/Shah asked if it was 2000 when the setbacks changed from 20 feet to 30 feet and CDD/Gubman stated that it was actually 1998, but in the bigger picture, the development of the surrounding homes did occur beginning in the mid 1960's. C/Torng asked for clarification that without the canopy the setback would exceed 30 feet. Mr. Shum responded that the one-story canopy is about 10 feet which reduces the impact of having a two-story structure sitting at the corner. Chair/Shah felt the elevation was enhanced by the canopy because it is part of the architectural design he created. Sometimes little people get trapped in new regulations and his concern is to compromise to everyone's advantage for this corner lot and they are only asking for the short side to be 24 feet and not the long side which actually meets the requirement. Mr. Shum responded to Chair/Shah he believed Mirage Lane was dedicated at 60 feet in width. Chair/Shah closed the public hearing C/Nelson commented that the Commission has made the decision in the past to reduce the front yard setback to reduce grading on several occasions. He has not changed that view. There is no one present who opposes this project and he believed that any variation to what was approved previously for this project he will oppose. C/Torng stated that the Commission always has a problem with a minor variance but after the applicant's explanation he believes there is merit to the project. Although he personally does not favor variances, in this situation it is acceptable to him. C/Lin reiterated his contention that a two-story structure would look okay and if the elevation were lowered, the applicant would reduce the fill in the back by about a foot and a half. He does not see a lot of impact by moving it back to 30 feet from a 24 foot setback at all. Chair/Shah agreed that variances have been approved before. Once a building is moved back the design would have to be revised and the geotechnical impacts would have to be recalculated. JANUARY 24, 2012 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSION C/Nelson stated that the Commission just discussed a proposal to extend a house toward the rear using the same setback as when the county was in charge, Any building, any residence in "The Country Estates" is considered imposing by anyone who does not live in "The Country Estates and he does not find that a valid reason to re-engineer the project. C/Torng moved, C/Nelson seconded, to approve Development Review, Minor Variance, and Tree Permit No. PL2011-449, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Motion carried 3-1 by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Nelson, Torng, Chair/Shah NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Lee 8. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: C/Torng said he would miss having the Commission meetings in the SCAQMD Auditorium. He thanked staff for their reports and for a good meeting. Chair/Shah said he would miss the SCAQMD Auditorium and looked forward to the new City offices location. He said he appreciated tonight's spirited discussions. C/Lin said he agreed with Chair/Shah and if everyone agreed there would be no need for meetings and discussions. He wished everyone a Happy New Year. 9. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: CDD/Gubman reported that the February 14 Planning Commission is being canceled for lack of agenda items. Staff anticipates the February 28 meeting will be held in the community room at the new City Hall. Projects for the February 28 agenda are the following: Proposed modifications to a home under construction at 22909 Ridge Line Road and a code amendment/code cleanup. In reference to the February 28 meeting, Chair/Shah stated that he most likely would have to recuse himself from the item concerning proposed modifications to 22909 Ridge Line Road, C/Torng asked if an open house was plannedfor the new City ` Hall. CDD/Gubman responded that an open house was proposed for February and Commissioners would be advised by email of the date. JANUARY 24, 2012 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION 9.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects. 10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As listed in tonight's agenda. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Chairman Shah adjourned the regular meeting at 8:15 pm to February 28, 2012. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 28th day of February, 2012. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, Greg Gubman '^ Community Development Director Jack ShO, Chairman Agenda No. 6.2(b) MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 28, 2012 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Shah called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. in the City Hall Windmill Room, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: C/Lee led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Jimmy Lin, Steve Nelson, Tony Torng, Vice Chairman Kwang Ho Lee, and Chairman Jack Shah Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; Bradley Wohlenberg, Assistant City Attorney; Natalie Tobon, Planning Technician; Raymond Tao, Building Official; Kimberly Young, Associate Engineer, and, Stella Marquez, Administrative Coordinator. 2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None offered. -- 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 24, 2012. C/Torng moved, Chair/Shah seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 24, 2012, as amended. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Nelson, Torng, Chair/Shah NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Lee ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 5. OLD BUSINESS: None 6. NEW BUSINESS: None 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 Development Code Amendment No. PL2011-454 — Under the authority of Diamond Bar Municipal Code (DBMC) Section 22.70 this was a request to amend the following sections of Title 22 of the Diamond Bar Municipal FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION Code: 22.43; 22.10.040; 22.10.030 Table 2-5 and Table 2-6; 22.42.100; 22.38.030; 22.36.130 Table 3-14; 22.34.030; 22.42.130(g)(3)(d); 22.56.020; 22.47.020; 22.68.030(br 22.66.050(c) and (d); 22.80.020; 22.22.080(b)(6); 22.16.060; 22.22'.120; 22.20.040; 22.22.080(b)(7); 22,42.110(c); 22.42.060(2)(j); 22.22.100(a). PROJECT ADDRESS APPLICANT: Citywide Diamond Bar, CA 91765 City of Diamond Bar CDD/Gubman stated that as of the: publication deadline for this matter, staff's report was not completed. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing for this item and continue the matter to the March 13, 2012, agenda. By opening the public hearing the matter can be continued without re -noticing. Chair/Shah opened the public hearing. C/Lin moved, C/Lee seconded, to continue the public hearing to March 13, 2012. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Nelson, Torng, VC/Lee, Chair/Shah NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 7.2 Conditional Use Permit No. PL2012-08 - Under the authority of DBMC Section 22.58 the applicant., Jamie Dietz-Felez and the property owner, Diamond Bar/Grand LLC, requested Conditional Use Permit approval for a jiu-jitsu studio for students ages four years and older Mondays through Fridays from 4:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. and Saturdays from 11:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. The subject property is zoned Regional Commercial (C-3) with an underlying General Plan Land Use designation of General Commercial. PROJECT ADDRESS: 1273 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard Diamond bar; CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNER/ Diamond Bar/Grand LLC APPLICANT: 2717 WestCoast Highway Newport Beach, CA 92663 - PT/Tobin presented staffs report and recommended Planning Commission approval of Conditional Use Permit No. PL2012-08, based on FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. C/Lin asked for clarification of Condition 4. CDD/Gubman stated that the approval resolution includes the operating conditions by which the applicant must abide and approves, by reference, the plans that were submitted depicting how the business operation would be laid out in that particular tenant space. By approving this condition the Commission is limiting the number of students, the hours and other operating parameters for this use. If the applicant or the successor is found to violate any of the conditions they are potentially subject to Conditional Use Permit revocation. Under the project description submitted by the applicant staff found that there is sufficient parking to satisfy the parking demand generated by this use. CDD/Gubman recommended that the Commission strike Condition 4and renumber the rest of the conditions in the Resolution because he concurred that this condition as written may be vague and perhaps somewhat unnecessary because there are other provisions in the Municipal Code where staff could bring this matter back to the Commission should staff find that this use creates a nuisance or some other land use impact. ACA/Wohlenberg stated that once a Conditional Use Permit has been issued and the applicant has expended the money and effort to construct their business and begin operating, Conditional Use Permits essentially west at that point. Once that has happened, the City cannot merely revoke a Conditional Use Permit without a hearing. If there were a violation of the City's parking standards, it would be something staff would have to schedule for hearing and notice the applicant. PT/Tobin responded to VC/Lee and pointed to the non load bearing walls on the overhead stating they are within the locker room. The area where the students will be practicing is a different area which she pointed out on the PowerPoint. BO/Tao responded to C/Lee that the wall to the left of the locker room is shown incorrectly on the plan. Generally, these small tenant spaces consist of non-bearing walls. When staff visits the site that will be verified FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION and staff will ask for proper modifications to the plan if required. BO/Tao said a condition could be included so that staff verifies the site structure prior to issuance. Chair/Shah said they did not have to be bearing walls as long as it is structurally strong enough to withstand the intended use and it should be left to staff to determine whether the structure is safe. CDD/Gubman said staff would add a new Condition #5 to the effect that "the entire perimeter of the open mat area should be either load-bearing walls or walls that are constructed to withstand potential impacts that may occur during the course of activities." Jaime Dietz, applicant, offered to respond to Commissioner's questions. VC/Nelson said he felt C/Lee had brought up a very good point and asked Mr. Dietz if there was any problem with the structure. Mr. Dietz responded that C/Lee's concern was valid. Mr. Dietz has taught for many years. Students can hit the walls and create holes in walls so the impact can be serious and one hundred percent agreed that the wall would need to be strong whether load-bearing or non load-bearing. The wall will be padded which will soften some of the blows but the wall needs to be solid. Chair/Shah opened the public hearing. With no one present who wished to speak on this item, Chair/Shah closed the public hearing. C/Lee moved, C/Lin seconded, to approve Conditional Use Permit No. PL2012-08, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within the resolution, with the removal of Condition DA and addition of a condition to ensure that the wall is safe and secure.' Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Lin, Nelson, Torng, VC/Lee, Chair/Shah NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None Chair/Shah recused himself from discussion of Item 7.3. Prior to leaving the meeting, he thanked C/Lee for his past service to the Commission and said he would be missed. C/Lin asked if Chair/Shah would have a conflict of interest because he knows the applicant. ACA/Wohlenberg responded that there would only be a conflict of interest if Chair/Shah felt he would be unable to render an unbiased decision. That said, it is a frequent practice FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION for office holders to choose to recuse themselves from a matter in order to avoid any appearance of impropriety. C/Lin said that Item 7.3 was a fairly significant item and for the Commission to discuss and felt it would warrant a conclusion from the entire Commission. Chair/Shah said he appreciated C/Lip's concerns and felt he was honor bound to recuse himself and believed the Commission would make the appropriate decision. C/Torng suggested to staff that it might be appropriate for another Commissioner to assume control of the meeting in place of VC/Lee since he will be leaving the Commission and would not be available to participate in the discussion should Item 7.3 be continued. ACANVohlenberg responded that since VC/Lee is the Vice Chairman he would normally be the person to receive the gavel in the absence of the Chairman. The Planning Commission will be reorganized and there could be a change at that point anyway. The decision on who should chair the rest of the meeting is a parliamentary issue which resides with the Chairman and is not open to a vote of the Commission. Chair/Shah passed the gavel to VC/Lee and left the meeting at 7:35 p.m. 7.3 Revision to Development Code Review No. 2006-38 and Minor Variance No 2007-06 (Planning Case No. PL2011-387) - Under the authority of DBMC Section 22.66.060, applicants Pete Volbeda and Sam Bhogal as well as, property owner Paul Ghotra requested approval for revisions to the height of the building pad and finished grades for a new single family residence approved by the Planning Commission on July 24, 2007. The subject property is zoned Rural Residential (RR) with an underlying General Plan Land Use designation of Rural Residential. PROJECT ADDRESS: 22909 Ridge Line Road Diamond Bar, CA 91765 PROPERTY OWNERS: Paul Ghotra 1241 S. Grand Avenue Diamond Bar, CA 91765 APPLICANTS: Pete Volbeda 180 N. Benson Avenue, Suite D Upland, CA 91786 And Sam Bhogal 23415 Pleasant Meadow: Diamond Bar, CA 91765 FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION. CDD/Gubman presented staffs report and recommended the Planning Commission open the public hearing, consider all testimony and evidence, direct staff to prepare a resolution to approve or deny the requested revisions, and continue the matter to March 13, 2012, for adoption of said resolution. RECESS: VC/Lee recessed the meeting at 8:00 p.m. RECONVENE: C/Nelson asked if he heard correctly that staff stated that the new retaining wall would be reduced in height by putting down slope of the wall a 2:1 slope so that visibility of the wall would be what is within the eight foot condition but in effect, it would still go down as far as it is currently. CDD/Gubman responded that C/Nelson was correct. At one point, a new retaining wall was introduced on the site at the lower level to then allow the 2:1 slop to be built up to cover up the exposed faces. The footings are where they are and they are where they are proposed to remain. C/Nelson asked for confirmation that the point was so that the actual visibility of the retaining wall would be reduced but it would still be the -same size to which CDD/Gubman responded that C/Nelson was correct. C/Nelson asked CDD/Gubman if he understood correctly that "The Country Estates" Homeowner's Association is opposed to this and CDD/Gubman responded yes, that the HOA has requested that the grading be restored to what was on the approved plans. C/Nelson asked if the 2:1 slope would start at the property line and go up .and CDD/Gubman responded that along the side property line that was the case so that part of the wall would be buried. C/Lin referred to Page 7, last paragraph, 5th line from the bottom of staff's report it indicates that "The Country Estates" HOA is "not inclined" to approve the modification to the site. C/Lin asked if the City approved the project and the HOA said no it would serve no purpose and the applicant should have the blessing of the HOA before coming to the City for approval. CDD/Gubman stated that the property owner has to serve the two masters. The HOA and the City have no accountability to one another. The City does not require HOA approval as a prerequisite to its approval and visa versa. Ultimately, however, the City and the HOA have the ability to veto each other, the City through its police powers and the HOA through the contract that exists between the property owner and the HOA. C/Lin said he observed the property line between the subject property and property to the south has a trench that has been dug. Abutting the trench VC/Lee reconvened the meeting at 8:05 p.m. FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION there is a stair that was constructed from the neighboring property that immediately abuts the property line. The landing goes nowhere and said he was curious why that was constructed. With respect to whether this project interferes with the neighboring property and the neighbor said he was opposed to the height and was curious why two feet would suddenly make a difference and the potential impacts to resale of the property. Does staff have sound statistics that a two -foot higher wall would affect those two questions the Commission is asked to consider. CDD/Gubman responded to the two -foot height concern by setting up the projection screen to show the neighbor's property and proposed new residence. The blue line shows the proposed new finished floor elevation for the new pad. A two -foot differential from this perspective does not appear to be much of a difference. The question is whether it is a serious enough differential to place it in the negative column. Looking at the record of the original approval there was no discussion that where the proposed elevations were on the original plan pushed the project to the acceptable threshold. There is nothing in the previous approval that says that at a certain height the wall becomes intolerable. He has only the response from the HOA and from the neighbor that they find this change to be objectionable and based on that controversy he made the determination that this is a decision that should not be relegated to staff making an over the counter decision but that it was an important decision that needed to come back to the Planning Commission for full discussion. To the second question about Finding #5 and whether there is any tangible evidence about how this affects property values, the affect on property values is generally too speculative to make a decision on whether the findings can be made. C/Lin asked if the Commission is today considering this as a new application due to the revision or is the Commission considering this application relative to its original approved plan. CDD/Gubman responded that under the Development Code this application can be considered a revision to something that was previously approved. It is not regarded as a "new" project. C/Lin asked if it was true that any decision this body makes must take the original approval into consideration and CDD/Gubman responded yes. Staff's advice is for the Commission to revisit the findings that were made when the project was originally approved in light of these changes and determine whether those original findings still track with the proposed changes or with the changes in combination with the efforts the applicant proposes to mitigate the raised pads would potentially create. ACA/Wohlenberg said that in the end, the Commission's decision will stand on its own and the facts in the record. Because it is a modification to an existing approval the record includes all of the facts and information that was before the Commission in the previous decision. The reconsideration includes a determination as to FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 8 PLANNING COMMISSION whether the facts have changed enough to change those conclusions. C/Lin said the only difference was that he remembered that three weeks ago the Commission was talking about a project that had a two foot setback and the difference in this instance is this consideration is after the fact because the construction has been completed and now the project is in an "as built" condition for consideration. He said it was important to him because if the Commission considers this as a brand new application it requires a different mindset. If this is a modification that the Commission has, to tie into with an original approval, he believes his thinking will be different. C/Torng asked if the 2011 aerial photograph depicted the current status and CDD/Gubman responded that he believed the applicant had lowered and cut back that particular wall. The wall has been cut down to where the hinge point angled it up and the amount that extended forward was demolished. So the wall has been restored to its original layout. C/Torng asked if in addition to the violations the rest of the plan would remain unchanged and CDDZGubman responded "essentially, yes." The house height was lowered and the pad height was increased. C/Torng asked if the project met all of the Hillside Management standards and CDD/Gubman responded affirmatively. C/Torng asked if the City has codes to prevent these types of violations from occurring. CDD/Gubman responded that the development standards allow for retaining walls to be terraced in that manner and when the project was approvedit was found that the findings could be made. C/Torng felt that Finding No. 2 "development will not interfere with use and enjoyment with the existing neighborhood or future development" which to him was an important consideration in this instance. When this code was set up why was there no follow up or determination of this violation by the City's building department? If the neighbor had not complained there apparently would never have been a finding and the issue would not have come before the Planning Commission. CDD/Gubman responded that when the project was inspected the walls were as shown in the Power Point presentation. Subsequent to that inspection additional construction and extension of the wall occurred which occurred after the project passed inspection for rough grading and another inspection had not yet been scheduled. Ultimately, this would have been caught without it having been brought to staff's attention by the neighbor. VC/Lee said the Commission must comply with the law and wanted to make sure the City did not have a "view easement" or an "air easement and CDD/Gubman responded that VC/Lee was correct. FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 9 PLANNING COMMISSION C/Nelson wanted to know how this happened. C/Lin asked BO/Tao about the recent changes. BO/Tao responded that since June 30, 2011, modifications that have occurred were in relation to getting the project closer to the original approval. Staff requested the applicant to lower the wall and bring it back to closer to the original approval and subsequent to that, the survey was done by the HOA which indicated that there were even more discrepancies. BO/Tao reiterated to C/Torng that the project currently does not meet the code and cannot unless it is modified. The lower slab has already been poured but it has to be brought down. C/Torng asked BO/Tao if the CUP approval would satisfy the code and meet the development code. BO/Tao said the project could technically meet the development code, but it would not be in compliance with the original plan. VC/Lee asked if based on her professional opinion, AE/Young felt an eight -foot retaining wall was safe. AE/Young deferred to the Building Official because retaining walls are reviewed by the City's Building Department. BO/Tao said the City typically does not allow standard details. There is a detail on the original plans for a maximum nine foot tall retaining wall so anything beyond that was not designed appropriately. VC/Lee opened the public hearing. Pete Volbeda, applicant, said this project is .on hold due to a surveying error and the applicant had no reason to question his survey. It was not the applicant's intent to raise the pad by two feet. In fact, the HOA found the error by hiring another surveyor. Original approval was received for this house in 2007 and many lots on Ridgeline are steep and do not have usable rear yards. At that time, the applicants and property owner were encouraged to find more of a usable rear yard and that was the reason there was a front yard reduction of 24 feet granted which would allow the project to increase the rear yard. In addition, with the variance, the project was allowed to raise the walls from four to six to eight feet high to accommodate a larger usable rear yard. The photos look bad because the walls are not stuccoed to match the house and there are not plantings to screen the walls. But once the work is completed they will dissolve into the landscaping and wall coverings. Some of the walls are above the eight foot height and will either be cut down or fill dirt will be placed in front or, some of the steps will be modified so that the wall heights do not exceed eight feet. Because the house pad is two feet higher, to mitigate any view the structure might be impairing, they have volunteered to lower FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 10 PLANNING COMMISSION the building elevations to where the ridge height is the same as it was in the previously approved plan. The project will reduce the ceiling heights in order to accommodate the lower ridge height. ` The major views on Ridgeline are to the north and the valley out and those will not be impacted too much by the adjacent homes. He understands the neighbor's concern about views adjacent but the major views are not to the side or to the left, they are to the north to the valley. In addition, the neighbor to the left is much lower than the project site and the neighbor to the right ,is slightly higher than the project and the owner and applicants feel the impact with neighbors looking to the side will be very minimal. In addition, the applicants propose to increase the landscaping in conjunction with the revised proposal. More shrubs and trees will be planted and those plantings will grow eight feet (the height of the retaining wall) or higher so that in a couple of years the neighbors should be seeing virtually only green landscape. The project has since retained a new engineer to help with the surveying and he is present this evening if the Commission has questions. Ed Eckert, Gilbert Engineering Company, said he was hired last year to look into what had transpired at this site. He does not have a long history with the site but he did inspect the walls and found that the elevations were higher than per the approved plan and his firm submitted a plan to the City for mitigation which has been passed on to the Commission. C/Nelson asked of the builder why when he has a project with approved plans that stipulate a certain retaining wall height and a surveyor comes out and surveys it and all of a sudden that height increases, where are the "checks and balances and who says "wait, that's not what was approved. In this case, that was not done and who is the person that should have taken care of this matter? Mr. Eckert said that if his firm staked the walls for construction his firm stakes the location and gives the applicant a cut or fill to the footing. Beyond that, the top of the wall is based off the top of that footing and if the plan calls for a six-foot wall that is what the builder should build. If they are building beyond that his firm sometimes gets involved and sometimes not. C/Nelson asked who the backup person would be that would see and recognize that error. Mr. Eckert responded that the wall builder and general contractor should FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 11 PLANNING COMMISSION become aware of it from the wall contractor. C/Nelson asked if the general contractor was present. Sam Bhogal, contractor, said he lives in "The Country Estates" and has built homes there for many years. Itis nice that the Commission is asking questions to make the right decision. It is good that this picture has been taken and that C/Lin is concerned and answering questions. The wall is too big and it was a mistake made by his sub -contractor. As soon as he found out that his sub -contractor made a mistake the wall was removed right away. He does not intend to build anything wrong. If the entire house is built two feet higherthanwhat was approved what would it benefit the owner? In "The Country Estates" there are 700 lots and houses and out of those 700 about 20 percent of the houses are 20 feet higher than the street or lower than the street and how would a house that is two feet up or down affect the neighbors negatively? But if the neighbor wants to complain and hurt the job, this house was never built until now and he has been living there for 15 or 20 years and he feels the side lot should be empty. C/Nelson explained to Mr. Bhogal that it does make a difference. First, if you are the next door neighbor, two feet higher creates more of a shadow effect. Second, the wall and pad were constructed in spite of the City's conditions and if this. Commission sets a precedent for allowing this to happen then everybody will start to feel that it is easier to request forgiveness than to play by the rules. Third, as CDD/Gubman pointed out to him several weeks ago, even though the Commission does not need to consider the HOA's feelings in its decision-making, they represent the community and this Commission's primary charge is to serve the community and to do what is right for the community. So, the contractor telling him that it does not make any difference does not compel him to override the feelings of the community and the fact that the conditions of approval were violated. VC/Lee said that C/Nelson has pointed out so many thingsthe Commissioner's value. This is a community that pursues common interests in spite of the City not having a view easement. Subcontractors must comply. Subcontractors are under the authority of the general contractor and must comply with the regulations — no exceptions. Mr. Bhogal has presented himself as a professional and is trying to blame his subcontractor for making a mistake which is unacceptable. Surveyors are professionals and whereas a two inch tolerance might be acceptable, two foot mistakes are not acceptable. VC/Lee advised Mr. Bhogal to accept responsibility because a two -foot mistake by professionals is not acceptable Mr Bhogal said that he builds long walls and even the City Inspector did not catch this error. VC/Lee reminded Mr. Bhogal that it was not the City Inspector's job to catch a survey error. Mr. Bhogal said that is FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 12 PLANNING COMMISSION why they are cutting down the height of the house. VC/Lee said he understood that is a logical compromise. C/Lin asked Mr. Eckert if he agreed that the error was not from the benchmark but instead was merely shoddy work. Mr. Eckert said the error was in the construction of the walls themselves. C/Lin asked the property owner why he was not willing to tear down and rebuild the walls to code and Mr. Ghotra responded it was for financial reasons because he has already spent almost one-half million dollars on the retaining walls and grading. C/Lin explained that every engineering firm carries professional liability insurance and the owner can file a claim against the engineering firm for the cost to rebuild. Mr. Ghotra said that timing is an issue as well. It is a mistake and he apologizes for that. He is not an engineer. He is just resident of Diamond Bar. He never tried to make it difficult for his neighborhood because he wants to be a good neighbor and have a good relationship with the doctor. He felt he had a good relationship with his neighbor and does not know how these things happened and why he has to spend all of this time on these kinds of issues. He needs help from his neighbors, from the Commission and from the City staff to tell him how he can resolve this matter and survive. C/Lin said that he read in staff's report that the engineer admitted in writing that it was his error. Mr. Ghotra said he had no idea if that was so. He cannot even read the report. Fadi Madanat, 22835 Ridgeline, explained that earlier the Commission was discussing whether to review the project as it currently exists or whether to go back and disregard the original approval and the City Attorney mentioned whether the facts have changed enough to make a difference. When C/Nelson asked for the general contractor to come up and speak he asked how something likethis could happen. This happened because someone parades around the City representing himself as a contractor and builder and does not have a license. That is how these things happen. So have the facts changed enough to make a difference? Well, this is a project being built by someone who is not a licensed. contractor who puts the City and the HOA at risk for liability and puts the residents in jeopardy as well. Earlier staff showed photos of the retaining walls when the project was first approved which shows retaining walls of two feet, four feet, six feet, eight feet and five feet and the project was given a variance and the state licensing board put a hold on the project. Subsequently, the HOA and, the City surveyed the project and marked walls after conducting a comprehensive study. - And the Commission has been provided evidence of the wall markings indicating the amount by which the walls exceeded what was approved. So if the FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 13 PLANNING COMMISSION Commission compares the diagram to what was originally approved, it will see that the amount of feet by which the walls exceed the approved height and the amount they need to be cut to the height originally approved. Many areas were actually graded to the height they would have been graded if the walls had been built to the proper according to the plan. The issue is not just a two -foot error at the very top. There are 3.43 and 4.18 foot errors. "The Country Estates" homeowners take their plans to the HOA to determine and when the HOA sees a plan that shows a four -foot retaining wall and a three-foot retaining wall and a two -foot retaining wall it is easy for the members to sit back and say it seems like it is going to be okay and in good faith the HOA assumes the owners are not trying to misrepresent their project and the HOA members assume that the City is acting according to regulations. So when a project suddenly turns into a twelve foot wall here, a fourteen and one-half foot wall there and so forth, what there is, is not a two -foot error, it is a major differential The before picture Mr. Madanat provided shows what the property looked like before any work was done by Mr. Bhogal. The after picture taken by Mr. Madanat this afternoon shows the dramatic effect of the construction. The pad was engineered to sit higher than the roofline of Mr. Madanat's house. The plan provided to the Association shows a three-foot, four -foot and two -foot retaining wall and does not represent that the pad would turn into what it has become. He summarized by stating that he believed the applicant had broken the law and compromised the neighborhood and the City. He recommended that the Planning Commission deny the requested revisions. VC/Lee asked if Mr. Madanat had any proof that the applicant broke the law. Mr. Madanat reiterated the blatant disregard for City codes, regulations and ordinances and the fact that the contractor is not and was not licensed. C/Lin asked Mr. Madanat if he knows for a fact that the general contractor does not have a contractor's license and Mr. Madanat deferred to staff. VC/Lee asked if the City has a way to verify whether a contractor is licensed and ACA/Wohlenberg responded that the City has general rules that anyone operating a business within the City has to comply with all applicable law. Enforcement of the contractor licensing and standards is handled at a state level and generally, if there is a state or federal law being broken the City does not have an independent criminal authority to enforce that. BO/Tao stated that the City raised that question originally and contacted the contractor license board to verify whether or not it was appropriate to FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 14 PLANNING COMMISSION allow Mr. Bhogal to be the project manager under a licensed contractor and the state indicatedit was acceptable. There were issues with respect to the applicant receiving a citation from the contractor's license board and the allowance of them to issue the permit and have that contractor be the contractor and have Mr. Bhogal act as the project manager which was acceptable to the contractors licensing board. VC/Lee asked if Mr. Bhogal was licensed and BO/Tao responded that Mr. Bhogal is not licensed but is acting on behalf of a contractor. VC/Lee said this was a very important point and he wants to make sure he has the correct answer before moving forward. Was the permit issued under an owner -builder license and BO/Tao responded no that is incorrect, it is actually a separate contractor by a different name. VC/Lee asked when the building permit expires and BO/Tao responded that the two year permit expires sometime in April for the Planning Review, The Building permit is valid for 180 days from the last inspection. VC/Lee asked if the Building Permit has expired, and BO/Tao responded that it has not expired because there was progress on the project. VC/Lee asked if the applicant is acting legally and BO/Tao responded affirmatively. George Madanat, neighbor of Mr. Ghotra, said he is a member of a civilized society and he lives by the law and no one should take the law into his own hands. His family lives in the house and they have had a difficult time during the past five years. His house burned down on March 18, 2007, so he and his family lived in a hotel for several months and then rented a place. He wanted to sell the house but his wife loved the house so he proceeded with the rebuild. So far he has spent $2.4 million to rebuild their home. So far, Mr. Ghotra's house is a manmade disaster. Certain words spoken by CDD/Gubman during his staff report struck him such as, "conceal, to mitigate, to change words that indicate, one can proceed with impunity. This is truly unfortunate that someone is allowed to proceed in this manner. Mr. Ghotra was talking with Mr. Madanat's son Michael, after he tore down the fence between their two properties he said he would rather do things his way and apologize later. Mr. Madanat said he had documentation of this event and went on to explain that this is what he has been dealing with from his neighbor. He. would love to have nice neighbors with whom he could visit and share his home. Unfortunately, this is not the case. He has a gorgeous sun room in his home but unfortunately, the sun cannot get to the sunroom because of the 30 foot wall next to it. He and his family are miserable. There is no FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 15 PLANNING COMMISSION reason for Mr. Ghotra to do what he has done. His property is the same elevation as the speaker and he could have gone down 10 feet and hada gorgeous home. He asked for everyone to be reasonable and play by the rules. For Mr. Ghotra to claim he does not have the money is not an accurate statement. RECESS: VC/Lee recessed the meeting at 9:07 p.m RECONVENE: VC/Lee reconvened the meeting at 9:15 p.m. C/Lin said that Mr. Madanat's speech was very compelling but based on C/Lin's assessment is that if the house is built according to plan, Mr. Madanat would still have shadows in his sunroom. However, the approved plan does not dismiss the fact that the approved plan was violated. But as it stands, if the project is built as approved it will still be in the shadow of the house. Agop Calliene, designer and contractor, asked CDD/Gubman if he could show the picture of the cross section. Mr. Eckert is a good engineer and does not know what happened. The dark area is filled with excess soil and they could have cut and filled and these problems would have been avoided. Unfortunately, it is done. Vice Chair/Lee closed the public hearing. C/Torng asked staff to provide the Commission with a scale of the approved plan versus the current status, especially at the lower end. Also, he wants to see if the retaining wall in the approved plan is that high and whether the current proposal will resolve the issue. He understood the neighbors were suffering as a result of this project but hope that staff can communicate with Mr. Madanat and the builder to understand how they can reach a mutual understanding about the project. He would like to have this be a win-win situation for both neighbors. As a last resort, the applicant would have to redo the project according to the original plan but that has not yet been decided and hoped that all parties could reach a conclusion that would resolve this matter. C/Nelson said he too would like to see a mutually satisfactory conclusion to this dilemma and was not sure that would happen He thinks the Commission is held to a standard and that standard would be grossly violated if it did not hold a property owner to the conditions that were set forth when the project was approved. It is almost irrelevant to him whether this was an "error" or not. The responsibility does not lie on the applicant's neighbors to accommodate the mistake, the responsibility lies with the FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 16 PLANNING COMMISSION property owner. And if the mitigation does not resolve the matter, he will find for the neighbors because what happened was not what they expected to happen and regardless of whether it was an honest error, the responsibility still lies on the owner and he feels very strongly about that. He wants to leave the Commission as someone who can be known as a Commissioner who did his best for the community and not for individual interests. A couple of years back the Commission denied a cell phone tower at Ronald Reagan Park and the decision was based not on the fact that the Commission could not judge it on the basis of any health effects which was illegal, but it was based on the fact that it created a stigma for the surrounding community and that it was a bad thing that would create a pall over the community. Despite the fact the Commission could not judge the matter on the health issue, it based its decision on the community benefit. C/Lin found when he looked at Finding No. 2 that after all of the testimony he is of the conclusion that the neighboring property has indeed been interfered with. If the Commission has to consider all six findings in order to approve this revision he finds it puzzling whether the Commission should grant approval even though it could represent significant financial difficulties for the applicant. He is inclined to recommend denial of the application. VC/Lee said he understood that staff brought several suggestions and the Commission must carefully consider all of the issues involved. People live in a democratic society and must respect private property owners and their rights. Owners have a right to proceed as long as they comply with the law. He reiterated that the City does not have a View Easement law and even though the project might cover certain view areas for the neighbors, the Commission cannot enforce that because of the law. The applicant suggested they increase the elevation by two feet but they cut down the building so overall the end result is that the height of the building has not changed. Humans can make mistake and if the, applicant claims it was a mistake the Commission must accept their word. Also, the neighbor said the contractor is not licensed but in fact, they can build the project as long as the person who pulled the permit is licensed so it is not illegal construction. The City and this Commission must evaluate all factors and if the applicant complies with the conditions of approval, it must be approved. If the Commission and the City do not act in this way, it is liable and can be sued FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 17 PLANNING COMMISSION C/Lin asked CDD/Gubman to again recite the three options open to the Commission. CDD/Gubman stated that the three alternatives presented for the Commission's consideration are 1) to determine that the findings for the changes of the project cannot be made and continue the matter to March 13, 2012, and direct staff to prepare a resolution for denial; 2) to determine that the findings can still be made in the affirmative, continue the matter to March 13, 2012, and direct staff to prepare a resolution for approval; and, 3) continue the matter to a later date for further information. ACA/Wohlenberg stated that because the Commission is dealing with a decision that requires factual findings by the Commission he said he wanted to walk through the issues to make certain the Commission is properly following all of the issues in the Code that are required by law. The staff report discusses how staff determined that this was a major change to the existing entitlement based on the criteria contained in the Municipal Code Section 22.66.020 and what that says as contained within the staff report is that those kinds of changes can only be approved by the review authority - in this case the Planning Commission, through a new entitlement application or modification process in compliance with the Development Code. And what the Development Code says in that regard (Section 22.52.040) as to findings and decisions as part of the approval process, is that a Minor Variance application shall not be approved, modified, conditioned or disapproved by the Director (so the Director has exercised his ability to send the matter forward to the Planning Commission) unless all of the following findings can be made. One of the. questions from C/Lin was whether this was a new decision or a modification. The Code does not really differentiate between a new decision and a modified decision. If there is a modified decision the Commission still has to make all of the findings that are required by the Code which again, ,are all discussed in staff's report. It is common (also discussed in the Commissioner's Handbook) that when the Commission has a factually intensive decision like this the Commission makes a tentative decision and then directs staff to prepare a formal written set of findings and decision for the Commission to adopt at a later meeting as CDD/Gubman stated. If the Commission has any facts or issues that it wishes to add to the discussion tonight to make sure those can be taken into account to create the findings in support of the Commission's decision, please make sure each Commissioner has placed those comments into the record or emphasize those to staff so that when staff prepares the decision it will properly reflect the Commission's findings and conclusions. From what; he has heard so far it sounds like the Commission is leaning toward being unable to make the Finding#2 and Finding #5 that are discussed in the staff report. Finding #2 is "will the design and layout of the proposed development not interfere with the use FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 18 PLANNING COMMISSION and enjoyment of neighboring existing and future development and will it not create traffic or pedestrian hazards" and he wanted to make sure that there was general consensus about C/Nelson's comment; Finding #5 is "will the proposed development not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties and improvements in the vicinity" as discussed by C/Lin and other Commissioners. As CDD/Gubman pointed out, the other Findings probably have not changed that much but ACA/Aohlenberg wanted to make certain that Findings 2 and 5 were brought out in sufficient detail to support the Commission's decision. C/Lin asked if the motion should cite the Findings. ACA/Wohlenberg , responded that the Commission makes a tentative decision for or against the request and direct staff to prepare a resolution appropriate to the Commission's decision and staff will make certain all of the items in the record will be called out to support the decision. Tonight's decision is a tentative decision because staff will bring back a full discussion and explanation of all of the facts in writing for final consideration. C/Torng said he would like more information from staff in order to be able to make a good decision. C/Lin moved, C/Nelson seconded, to direct staff to prepare a Resolution of Denial based on the negative findings. Motion approved by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMISSIONERS: Lin, Nelson, VC/Lee NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN COMMISSIONERS: Torng ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Chair/Shah 8. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: C/Torng thanked VC/Lee for his service on the Planning Commission and wished him well in his future ventures. C/Nelson said it had been a pleasure serving with VC/Lee who has often expressed alternative perspectives on issues which is important for this Commission. C/Nelson thanked VC/Lee for his good service to the Commission. C/Lin wished VC/Lee good fortune. Tonight, one of C/Nelson's statements really touched him which was the fact that this Commission is charged with protecting the public interest, and he feels that was accomplished this evening. FEBRUARY 28, 2012 PAGE 19 PLANNING COMMISSION VC/Lee thanked staff for their support and his colleagues for their support as well. While he has truly enjoyed his time with the Commission he has other things to pursue and we will meet in another time and place. 9. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: CDD/Gubman stated that for the March 13 meeting which will be held in the Windmill Room, there are three agenda items: 1) Resolution for Denial for Item 7.3 that was heard this evening; 2) Development Code Amendment cleanup; 3) seat the new Planning Commissioner and have a reorganization of the Planning Commission. CDD/Gubman, on behalf of staff, thanked Commissioner Lee for his years of service to the Planning Commission and the City. CDD/Gubman said he enjoyed working with Commissioner Lee and enjoyed being challenged by Commissioner Lee with tonight being no exception, and for his finale Commissioner Lee went out with a bang! CDD/Gubman said he was very impressed this evening with VC/Lee's management of item 7.3. 9.1 Public Hearing dates for future projects. 10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: As listed in tonight's agenda. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission, Chairman Shah adjourned the regular meeting at 9:15 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 13th day of March, 2012. Attest: Respectfully Submitted, Greg Gubman Community Development Director Planning mmissio Chairman Agenda No. 6.3 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 16, 2012 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Pincher called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Diamond Bar City Hall Windmill Community Room, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Mahlke led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Commissioners Kevin House, Jen "Fred" Mahlke, Kenneth Mick, and Chair Liana Pincher Absent: Vice -Chair Ted Carrera was excused. Also Present: David Liu, Public Works Director; Rick Yee, Senior Civil Engineer; Kimberly Young, Associate Engineer; Christian Malpica, Associate Engineer (Traffic), and Marcy Hilario, Administrative Coordinator. L APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A. Minutes of the January 12, 2012 regular meeting. C/Mahlke moved, C/Mok seconded, to approve the January 12, 2012 minutes as submitted. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: House, Mahlke, Mok, Chair/Pincher — NOES: -----& MM—&S1ONERS: -Norte-- ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Carrera IL PUBLIC COMMENTS: Frank Chang asked if bike striped lanes could be added from the SR -60 to Longview Drive on south and northbound Grand Avenue. SE/Yee had previously responded to Mr. Chang via e-mail that, after previous consideration of this matter, the City's Traffic Engineer decided not to add these bike lanes. Mr. Chang asked the Commission to request another evaluation of the situation due to increased bike traffic. He also requested speed bumps on Summitridge Drive and he was told by staff that he needed to collect 50 signatures in order for the City to consider the request. Mr. Chang felt this to be unreasonable. FEBRUARY 16, 2012 PAGE 2 T&T COMMISSION SE/Yee responded to the speaker's comments. He confirmed that he responded to the speaker's e-mail regarding his request for a Class II bike lane (a striped lane). This request was considered in 2008 when the City's Traffic Engineer conducted a study to determine whether Class II bike lanes would be appropriate to install on Grand Avenue. As a result of the study, and staff's research involving design guidelines for bike lanes on arterial roadways including examining slope conditions on Grand Avenue, the Traffic Engineer's recommendation was to not install Class II striped bike lanes on the street. This was due to studies indicating that when striping is installed, it gives a false sense of security for bikers who are less experienced. Under the current conditions, there is signage that allows for biking on Grand Avenue. As a result of the Engineer's study and in regard to the design guidelines, staff felt it was best to follow the Traffic Engineer's recommendation to not install any type of permanent striping on Grand Avenue. PWD/Liu added that, with respect to the speaker's request to have "speed bumps" installed on Summitridge Drive, the City has a very successful Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) and staff will be happy to work with the residents along Summitridge Drive to determine whether the residents want to pursue traffic calming devices installed. As everyone knows, when traffic calming devices are installed, it impacts the residents along the street as well. Collaboration of residents is needed and staff will provide the speaker and residents with the necessary information. Mr. Chang requested to speak again. He questioned what kind of false impression bike lanes would create with respect to bikers feeling protected within the bike lanes. SE/Yee explained his understanding of the reason the City has Class II bike lanes on Diamond Bar Boulevard and Golden Springs Drive. The grades on Grand Avenue are higher than the grades on Diamond Bar Boulevard and Golden Springs Drive and because of that fact, there are concerns about bikers picking up unsafe speeds - especially inexperienced bikers. Mr. Chang again took exception with staff's explanation and decision. SE/Yee offered to discuss this matter with Mr. Chang at a future time. III. ITEMS FROM STAFF: A. Received and Filed Traffic Enforcement Updates for: 1. Citations: November, December 2011 and January 2012 2. Collisions: November, December 2011 and January 2012 3. Street Sweeping: November, December 2011 and January 2012 IV: OLD BUSINESS: None FEBRUARY 16, 2012 PAGE 3 T&T COMMISSION V. NEW BUSINESS: 0 Diamond Canyon Road On -Street Parking SE/Yee presented staff's report which included seven written responses. Four of the responses were from carpoolers who park on the street and asked that staff retain the parking. Letters were received from the following persons who spoke in favorofkeeping the current parking: James Inouye, Rowland Heights; Chris Floursch, Chino Hills; Thomas Chen from Diamond Bar. Three responses against the current parking were received from Brian S.Sim, Qimei Tang, and one from Evelyn Chu of Diamond Bar. A petition was also submitted that included the signatures of 45 residents.: Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission receive public comments. Peter Valter, 3503 S. Oak Valley Place, spoke against parking on Diamond Canyon Road based on safety issues. He said he did not receive a written notice from the City about this matter and, therefore, did not have an opportunity to respond in writing. Eric Chang, 20608 E. Oak Meadow Lane, spoke against parking on Diamond Canyon Road based on safety issues. There are no sidewalks and people have to walk in traffic lanes. Jill Chang, 20608 E. Oak Meadow Lane, speaking for herself and on behalf of Qiang Ni, 20602 E. Oak Meadow Lane, spoke against parking on Diamond Canyon Road due to safety concerns for service vehicles and children. Marlene Seng; 3503 S. Oak Valley Place, spoke against parking on Diamond Canyon Road stating her main concern is for pedestrians. Most days there are 20-24 cars parked on the street. There are no sidewalks and also, people throw their trash in the street. She also believed it was close to impossible for the Sheriffs Department to respond to calls on the street in a timely fashion. She said.she did not sign the petition because she did not know about it. -- --- - Anna-Chiflgg -3528 S. Diamond-CanY-0n Road, -spoke --agains#-parCing--on Diamond Canyon Road stating her concern was u -turns, lack of accessibility for service vehicles, double parking and trash in the neighborhood. Victor Lee, 853 Pinefalls Avenue, Walnut said he understands the pain of the residents. Because he is a carpcoler, he needs a solution because there is not enough room to park on Pathfinder Road. He does not dump trash and tries to be respectful of the residents and he believes those who dump trash should be penalized No one should be permitted to park close to or at the curve; however, along the street are safe parking areas. He understands that people may be walking but because they do not have sidewalks `people should not be walking in the area. He asked if the City could leave parking spaces on the street. He also asked if it was possible to request use of church parking. FEBRUARY 16, 2012 PAGE 4 T&T COMMISSION Jack Phone, 3502 S. Oak Valley Place, spoke against parking on the street due to safety concerns and the amount of trash left on the streets. PWD/Liu thanked residents for their comments before the Commission for their consideration. Staffs goal is to continue soliciting comments until the next Traffic and Transportation Commission meeting in March. At that time, staff will offer its recommendation. The Park'n Ride lots in the City are owned and maintained by the State of California (Caltrans); therefore, the City has no jurisdiction over the lots. The City has little opportunity for input as to what occurs at those lots. However, staff has observed that these lots are fully maximized. The City streets are public streets and because the City is at the crossroads of freeway intersections, individuals utilize this area more frequently and on a regular basis to carpool This presents a balancing act opportunity for residents and the City. Staff hopes to come back to the Commission with workable solutions. B. Centerline Striping on Palomino Drive and EI Encino Drive. AE/Malpica presented staffs report and recommended that the Traffic and Transportation Commission receive public comments and concur with staff to install approximately 50 feet of double yellow centerline striping: Ben Mayorga, 23843 Palomino Drive, spoke against the centerline stripping. He feels throughout the day there are different volumes of traffic and the issue is not people crossing over the raised crosswalk; the issue is the speed drivers are traveling. Some of the mitigation efforts have helped with the speeding, but unfortunately, there is too much ground to cover for cars to slow down and drivers use the crosswalk as a launching pad. In his opinion, centerline striping will do nothing to mitigate the problem of speeding cars. He suggested installing a stop sign instead: SE/Yee stated that as part of this analysis, the City's Traffic Engineer conducted a stop sign warrant analysis for this location and visited the location during peak hours when children are being dropped off, picked up and when they are walking home from school. Based on the analysis, the stop sign was not warranted. Stop signs are not meant to be used for traffic calming; they are meant to be used for traffic control purposes. When stop signs are placed in locations where they are not warranted, driver behavior would change. For example, drivers would feel that they would lose time by having to stop at Palomino Drive and EI Encino Drive so theywould speed up on the approach or on the departure. A stop sign was considered; however, for this reason; it was found to be not warranted for this location. C/Mahlke responded to the speaker that the City has no control over school parking issues. The City has been advised about what the school is doing but itis not the City'sproperty and we therefore do not have a say in the matter. However, she imagined that once the new traffic pattern is implemented at Golden Springs School, the City would then re-evaluate the issue. FEBRUARY 16, 2012 PAGE 5 T&T COMMISSION AE/Malpica explained that the recommendation was an incremental approach which would allow staff to further monitor the traffic patterns. C/House moved, C/Mahlke seconded, to approve staffs recommendation to install approximately 50 feet of double yellow centerline striping on Palomino Drive and EI Encino Drive. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: House, Mahlke, Mok, Chair/Pincher NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT:- - COMMISSIONERS: VC/Carrera C. Centerline Striping on Evergreen Springs Drive at Harmony Hill Drive AE/Malpica presented staffs report and recommended that the Traffic and Transportation Commission receive public comments on this matter. C/House stated that there has recently been red curb painting installed at the location. He observed the crossing guard experiencing problems with cars parking at the red curb locations and behind cones that were placed to block parking. Drivers do not obey these traffic barriers and should be cited by law enforcement. Striping or additional red curb painting willnotsolve this problem. The Sheriffs Department needs to provide enforcement in the area. AE/Malpica responded that he and law enforcement have been to the site many times and the moment drivers see law enforcement presence, they start behaving. ' The deputy, has written a couple of tickets and people complain about receiving tickets when others are not cited. The proposed striping improvements would open up the cornerwhich would make it easierfor drivers to see oncoming cars: C/House stated thereis already a red curb. He: believes the Sheriffs Department needs to put more time into working these hot spots. The City needs to stop people from parking in the red zones and no -stopping zones and the City needs to change the behavior of drivers, not just with signs and -striping. AE/Malpica-responded that staff has-askedtheschool -W remindthe parents that they should not park at a red curb and that they should not double park. Chair/Pincher asked if the striping beyond Harmony Hill Drive down on Evergreen Springs Drive where the street turns into Castle Rock Road would be repainted at the same time. She stated the yellow paintispretty faded. AE/Malpica said, he believed this location was included in the maintenance schedule together with all of the other area striping. He did not have specific information about when it was scheduled to be repainted. C/Mok asked if the restriping would impact any of the nearby residences. AE/Malpica said he did not believe it would, since no residents currently park in that area. FEBRUARY 16, 2012 PAGE 6 T&T COMMISSION C/House moved C/Mok seconded, to approve centerline striping and add 55' of red curb on Evergreen Springs Drive at Harmony Hill Drive. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: House, Mahlke; Mok, Chair/Pincher NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT:COMMISSIONERS: VC/Carrera D. Evergreen Springs Drive Lane Striping SE/Yee presented staffs report and recommended that the Traffic and, Transportation Commission receive public comments and concur with staff to install the proposed lane striping and red curb: C/Mok asked if the striping included the wide striping letting traffic knowthat in the left lane, drivers can either move forward across Pathfinder Road or make aleft turn, and that the right lane is strictly a right turn lane. He also asked if there will be signage that indicates "right turn only." SE/Yee responded that all of C/Mok's statements are correct:' Legends will be painted on the pavement and there will be signage to compliment that legend as well. C/Mok asked if staff had any comment from the resident who lives on the corner about painting the curb red. SE/Yee responded that the City notified the resident and did not receive a response. C/House moved, C/Mahlke seconded, to concur with staffs recommendations to install lane striping and red curbing on Evergreen Springs Drive at Pathfinder Road. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: House, Mahlke, Mok, Chair/Pincher NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Carrera VI. STATUS OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS: None VII. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS: C/House asked if staff would put him in contact with the person in charge of traffic enforcement at the Sheriff's Department. VIII. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: A. Traffic Signal Battery Backup System Project - AE/Malpica stated that staff has 'completed testing of all of the units and conducted' a project walk on February 2°d. During. the field inspection, staff noticed that a couple of units were faulty. Staff is working with the contractor and vendor to resolve these FEBRUARY 16, 2012 PAGE 7 T&T COMMISSION issues. Initially, staff felt some of the intersections needed to be upgraded with LED's which are more energy efficient. As'a result, the contractor is currently 'upgrading those intersections. Once the upgrades are completed, staff will schedule a final project walk to make certain that the upgrades were correctly completed. The final punch -list will be done two weeks after the final project walk and a Notice of Completion will be filed in March. Once the current project is finalized, 11 locations will be added and the same process will be followed. B. Tin Drive and Bridle Drive Striping improvement—AE/Malpica reported that the City installed the four -inch channelized line and staff continues to monitor the site. Staff has not received any complaints and is assuming that the striping is doing what it was intended to do. Staff will continue to monitor the striping and make certain it is well-maintained. C Median Modification - Diamond Bar Boulevard/Clear Creek Canyon Drive — AE/Malpica stated that a,pre-construction meeting was held on Monday to discuss with the contractor how this project should be approached, since construction was scheduled to happen on a main arterial. Construction start date is set for February 27th: The contractor will engage message boards to inform residents and other motorists when construction will begin and that the left turn lane will eventually close, When the lane closes, the contractor will provide detour signage. Residents in the area have an option to use Rapidview Drive, which turns into Clear Creek Canyon Drive. Construction is anticipated to take 30 -days or less. D. Silver Fir Road and Windwood Drive Stop Sign —AE/Malpica, reported that the stop sign legend was installed on January 25th; Staff has received no comments and continues to monitor the site. E. "The Rock" Move - SE/Yee reported that there has been significant progress since staffs last update to the Commission. The hauling company notified staff that they now have a target date of March 2'd and 3`d for moving. This move will occur in the middle of the night between those two dates, with temporary lane closures -o -n Chino Avenue,- Chino -Hills Parkway, Grand -` Avenue, Diamond Bar Boulevard and Pathfinder Road. The hauler will be accompanied by a fleet of CHP vehicles and notifications to affected businesses will be out at least 72 hours prior to the move In addition, notification boards will be posted along the route three days priorto the move. Chair/Pincher asked if there would be restricted parking on Pathfinder Road during the move. SE/Yee responded affirmatively. C/Mok asked how many lanes the hauler would occupy during the move and about how much time the hauler would spend on DBstreets, SE/yee responded two lanes for the transport vehicle and time is estimated to be about six or seven hours beginning at 11:00 p.m. or midnight on March 2°d and be out of DB by about 6:30 a.m. on March 3 d. PDW/Liu explained that the FEBRUARY 16 2012 PAGE 8 T&T COMMISSION vehicle travels at about 2-3 mph. C/Mok asked if any traffic would be allowed to pass the vehicle and CHP. " SE/Yee responded that most likely, only emergency vehicles would be permitted to go around the transport vehicle(s). All other vehicles will be detoured to other routes. Message boards and the CHP will advise and monitor all vehicles. C/Mahlke said she would like to witness the transport and asked if anyone has been tasked with documenting this historical event for the City. SE/Yee said staff believes that either National Geographic or Discovery Channel will complete a video of the move. He said he would personally be present because he is concerned with the move and is sure there will be video footage to capture the event, F. U.S. Post Office Parking Lot (Diamond Bar Boulevard/Montefino Avenue) - SE/Yee reported, that staff met with the branch manager to discuss circulation issues. He explained that changes were made due to'a significant amount of cut -through traffic coming through Montefino Avenue and cutting through the post office drive to get to the Albertson's shopping center. The post office is Federal property and the City has no leverage to suggest particular changes; however, staff did suggest that they install more permanent regulatorytype signage to replace the homemade signs currently in place. SE/Yee drove by the site today and discovered that proper signage had been installed for the "do not enter" portion of the driveway. I G. Lemon Avenue On/Off-Ramps Project =AE/Young explained that she has no additional information to report at this time. The E76 is still with Caltrans Headquarters and until staff receives further word from Caltrans staff, the project is at a standstill with respect to moving forward with the right-of-way phase. She received a call from a resident who received notice from Caltrans about the upcoming property appraisal, indicating that the notice phase is moving forward. H. Residential Area 1(a)/Arterial Zone 6 Road Maintenance Project AE/Young reported that design is currently underway by Onward Engineering` and is expected to be completed by the end of March. The City will go out to bid shortly thereafter with a scheduled bid opening at the end of April, Assuming that the low bid comes in responsive and City Council awards the contract, staff anticipates construction will commence the beginning of June. 1. CABG Curb Ramp Project (FY 2011-2012) AE/Young stated that bids were opened yesterday. Nine bids were received and the apparent low bidder was Gentry Brothers with a bid of $165,500. The engineer's estimate for this project was $195,000 for 82 curb ramps in the vicinity of Maple Hill Elementary and Chaparral Middle Schools. The high bid was $268,000. The award of contract for Gentry Brothers is expected to go to Council on February 21st. if approved, construction will commence the beginning of March. FEBRUARY 16, 2012 PAGE 9 T&T COMMISSION J. Chino Hills-Parkway/Chino Avenue StreetRehabilitation Project - AE/Young indicated that this week staff received word that the City's right-of- way certification was approved for this project and the E76 was sent to Caltrans Headquarters. Staff hopes to have authorization in the next few months and be able to go out to bid shortly thereafter. K. Caltrans Slope Repair — Golden Springs Drive AE/Young reported that staff met with the contractor and Caltrans inspector. All construction for this project is anticipated to be completed by next Wednesday. The anchors are installed, the netting along the face of the slope has been installed, and the next steps are to repair some broken sidewalk and hydro seed the slope which is expected to be done next week. L SCAG East-West Freight Corridor Proposal - PWD/Liu reported that this week staff prepared and submitted written comments on the EIR for the draft 2012 RTP. SCAG staff continues to focus the truck lanes on the SR-60 and the San Jose Creek as part of the east-west freight corridor between the SR- 710 and the SR-1 5 freeways. Staff raised a few issues: 1) staff believes it is premature to identify these two alignments as a viable east-west freight corridor when the EIR indicates that further studies are necessary; 2) DB also believes SCAG has understated the environmental impacts by including three segments of the east-west freight corridor in the financially constrained plan and; 3) inaccurately assumed that all of the trucks that would be using this corridor would produce zero emissions by the year 2035. DB's ongoing effort is to request that SCAG continue considering_ all possible east-west routes in order to meet the demands of the growing regional goads movement. However, it appears that DB's ongoing efforts have proven futile because when he attended this afternoon's meeting of COG's Transportation Committee meeting, they voted ".yes" on SCAG's proposal. DB was the Ione negative vote. While the process is not over, SCAG will continue to receive public comment and the 2012 RTP will go before the Regional Council of SCAG in early April, at which time SCAG will take formal action to adopt the RTP. On- another note, SE/Yee referred to a letter received by staff from PUSD A copywas distributed to the Commissioners before tonight's meeting. This was in regard to memorializing the items and status of the new parking/drop off/playground construction project and status of last meetings updates to the Commission. IX.'_ SCHEDULE OF FUTURE CITY EVENTS: As stated in the agenda with the addition of the New City Hall Open House, 21810 Copley Drive at 4:00 p.m. on February 21St FEBRUARY 16 2012 PAGE 10 T&T COMMISSION Agenda 9 6-4 Meeting Date. April 3, 2012 CITY COUNCIL ,��0 ' AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: James DeStefano, City Manager TITLE: Ratification of Check Register datNMarch, 2012 through March 28, 2012 totaling $ 1,537,723.07. RECOMMENDATION: Ratify. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Expenditure of $ 1,537,723.07 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 March 15, 2012 through March 28, 2012 for $ 1,537,723.07 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. PREPARED BY: Luisa Fua Accounting Technician REVIEWED BY: 1. Finance Director Attachments: Affidavit and Check Register — 03/15/12 through 03/28/12. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR CHECK REGISTER AFFIDAVIT The attached listings of demands, invoices, and claims in the form of a check register including checks dated March 15, 2012 through March 28, 2012 has been audited and is certified as accurate. Payments have been allowed from the following funds in these amounts: Description General Fund Com Org Support Fund Prop A - Transit Fund Prop C - Transit Tax Fund Integrated Waste Mgt Fund Com Dev Block Grand Fund COPS Fund (Public Safety) LLAD 38 Fund LLAD 39 Fund LLAD 41 Fund Capital Imp Projects Fund Signed: Y Dianna Honeywell Finance Director Amount $1,101,678.58 $200.00 $113,093.49 $49,703.44 $3,713.82 $2,386.00 $65,000.00 $6,838.91 $3,278.43 $1,149.48 $190,680.92 $1,537,723.07 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 03/15/2012 thru 03/28/2012 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept A=# Amount Total Check Amount 3/15/2012 12 -PP 06 PAYROLL TRANSFER P/R TRANSFER-12/PP 06 001 10200 164,684.09 $175,007.05 3/15/2012 98464 PAYROLL TRANSFER P/R TRANSFER-12/PP O6 112 10200 4,175.70 $400.00 3/15/2012 PAYROLL TRANSFER P/R TRANSFER-12/PP 06 113 10200 4,605.94 3/15/2012 98465 PAYROLLTRANSFER P/R TRANSFER-12/PP 06 115 10200 1,541.32 $741.67 3/15/2012 1 98460 JACCESS CONTROL SECURITY SECURITY SVCS -FEB 2012 10015333 1 45010 1 604.201 $604.20 3/15/2012 98461 ACE CONSTRUCTION RETENTIONS PAYABLE 250 20300 1 -4,739.00 $42,650.95 3/15/2012 1 ACE CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION-SYC CYN 2505310 46415 47,389.95 3/15/2012 98462 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP INC CONSTRUCTION-SYC CYN 2505310 R46415 476.25 $7,390.80 3/15/2012 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP INC CONSTRUCTION-SYC CYN 2505310 R46415 2,125.00 3/15/2012 98464 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP INC ADA RETRO -MINI PARKS 2505310 R46415 2,909.25 $400.00 3/15/2012 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP INC ADA RETRO -FIT -MINI PARKS 2505310 R46415 61.05 3/15/2012 98465 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP INC CONSTRUCTION-SILVERTIP 2505310 R46415 1,819.25 $741.67 3/15/2012 98463 NONIAAN BAIG FACILITY REFUND -DBC 1 001 1 23002 1 100.00 $100.00 3/15/2012 CHICAGO TITLE HIP PROG-283 S PLATINA 1255215 44000 65.00 3/15/2012 1 98464 IDOROTHY BAMGBOYE IFACILITY REFUND -DBC 1 001 1 36615 1 400,001 $400.00 3/15/2012 CHICAGO TITLE HIP PROG-530 ARMITOS 1255215 44000 18.00 3/15/2012 1 98465 IBENESYST 3/16/12-P/R DEDUCTIONS 001 1 21105 1 741.67 $741.67 3/15/2012 98466 CHICAGO TITLE HIP PROG-23834 CHINOOK 1255215 44000 18.00 $166.00 3/15/2012 CHICAGO TITLE HIP PROG-283 S PLATINA 1255215 44000 65.00 .3/15/2012 98468 CHICAGO TITLE HIP PROG-1421 S WILLOW BL 1255215 44000 65.00 $2,235.00 3/15/2012 CHICAGO TITLE HIP PROG-530 ARMITOS 1255215 44000 18.00 3/15/2012 1 98467 ISOOJIN CHU RECREATION REFUND 001 34740 79.001 $79.00 3/15/2012 1 98468 ICITY OF WEST COVINA IFORENSIC SVCS -OCT -DEC 11 0014411 1 45401 1 2,235.00 $2,235.00 3/15/2012 1 98469 ICOMMUNITY INDUSTRIES I PARKWAY MAINT-FEB 12 0015558 45503 1,982.761 $1,982.76 3/15/2012 1 98470 1CONSTRUCTION HARDWARE SUPPLIES -CITY HALL 0014093 41200 163.121 $163.12 3/15/2012 1 98471 ICORNERSTONE RECORDS MGMT ITAPE STORAGE -FEB 12 0014070 45000 645.30 $645.30 Page 1 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 03/15/2012 thru 03/28/2012 Check Date ICheckNumberl Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct# Amount Total Check Amount 3/15/2012 98472 DAPEER ROSENBLIT &LITVAK LLP LEGAL SVCS-NOV 2011 0014020 44023 2,659.84 $19,820.78 3/15/2012 DAPEER ROSENBLIT & LITVAK LLP IDAPEER LEGAL SVCS -JAN 2012 0014020 44023 8,610.17 3/15/2012 98474 ROSENBLIT & LITVAK LLP LEGAL SVCS-DECORAH TRUST 0014020 44023 8,550.77 $92.19 3/15/2012 1 98473 DAVID VOLZ DESIGN CONTINGENCY -MINI PARK 12505310 1 R46415 1 532.00 $532.00 3/15/2012 CAROL DENNIS PROF.SVCS-CC MTG 3/6 0014030 44000 100.00 3/15/2012 1 98474 DAY & NITE COPY CENTER PRINT SVCS -DOC REQ I 0014030_F41200 42210 92.191 $92.19 3115/2012 98475 CAROL DENNIS PROF.SVCS-P/C MTG 2/28 0015210 44000 300.00 $400.00 3/15/2012 CAROL DENNIS PROF.SVCS-CC MTG 3/6 0014030 44000 100.00 3/15/2012 98476 DH MAINTENANCE MONTHLY MAINT-CITY HALL 0014093 45300 3,250.00 $16,236.00 3/15/2012 DH MAINTENANCE JANITORIAL SVCS -DBC 0015333 45300 12,250.83 3/15/2012 98480 DH MAINTENANCE JANITORIAL SVCS -PARKS 0015340 42210 735.17 $6,993.00 3/15/2012 1 98477 IDIAMOND BAR COMMUNITY FOUNDATION COMM ORG SUPPORT FUND I 0114010 42355 1 200.00 $200.00 3/15/2012 98478 DIAMOND BAR MOBIL VEH MAINT-COMM SVCS 0015350 1 42200 73.80 $434.89 3/15/2012 DIAMOND BAR MOBIL FUEL -FEB 2012 0015310 42310 361.09 3/15/2012 1 98479 DIANA CHO & ASSOCIATES CDBG CONSULTANT -FEB 12 1 1255215 1 44000 2,220.00 $2,220.00 3/15/2012 1 98480 DIVERSIFIED PRINTERS PRINTING SVCS -CITY NEWS 0014095 1 44000 6,993.00 $6,993.00 3/15/2012 1 98481 DMS CONSULTANTS CIVIL ENGINEERS INC CONSULTANT SVCS -EN 11-753 001 23012 16,639.00 $16,639.00 3/15/2012 1 98482 DOGGIE WALK BAGS INC SUPPLIES -PARKS 0015340 1 41200 1,631.25 $1,631.25 3/15/2012 1 98483 EMERALD LANDSCAPE SERVICES INC ILANDSCAPE MAINT-CITY HALL 001 1 45300 816.00 $816.00 3/15/2012 1 98484 RODERICK L ERTEL CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 0015350 45320 240.00 - $240.00 3/15/2012 1 98485 FEDEX EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL 0014090 42120 29.11 $29.11 3/15/2012 1 98486 JARTURO GARCIA FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 500.00 $500.00 Page 2 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 03/15/2012 thru 03/28/2012 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 3/15/2012 98487 GIRL SCOUTS LAS CAB SERVICE UNIT FACILITY REFUND-REAGAN 001 23002 200.00 $200.00 3/15/2012 98488 GLENN'S REFRIGERATION CORP REPAIR SVCS -DBC 0015551 1 41200 490.00 $490.00 3/15/2012 1 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. RUAREVIEW-MINNEQUA 0015551 45223 1,350.54 3/15/2012 98489 JGLOBALSTAR USA SATELLITE PHS -FEB 2012 0014440 1 42125 685.09 $685.09 3/15/2012 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. ADMIN FEES -EN 10-698 001 23012 136.58 3/15/2012 98490 GRAFFITI CONTROL SYSTEMS GRAFFITI REMOVAL -FEB 12 0015230 45520 4,940.00 $4,940.00 3/15/2012 98491 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. RUAREVIEW-MINNEQUA 0015551 1 45223 1,350.54 $3,459.83 3/15/2012 1 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. RUAREVIEW-MINNEQUA 0015551 45223 1,350.54 3/15/2012 98493 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. PROF.SVCS-EN 10-698 001 23012 758.75 $40.91 3/15/2012 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. ADMIN FEES -EN 10-698 001 23012 136.58 3/15/2012 HALL & FOREMAN, INC. ADMIN FEES -EN 10-698 001 34650 -136.58 3/15/2012 1 98492 HARRIS&ASSOCIATES ADA TRAIL DESIGN-PANTERA 2505310 1 46415 1 1,510.00 $1,510.00 3/15/2012 1 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES VEH MAINT-COMM SVCS 0015310 42200 18.19 3/15/2012 1 98493 1HOLLYWOOD DELIVERY SERVICES INC DELIVERY SVCS -DEC it 1 0014090 1 42121 1 40.91 $40.91 3/15/2012 98494 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES SUPPLIES -CITY HALL 0014093 42210 30.22 $253.95 3/15/2012 1 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES VEH MAINT-COMM SVCS 0015310 42200 18.19 3/15/2012 98498 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES SUPPLIES -PARKS 0015340 42210 66.39 $3,530.00 3/15/2012 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES SUPPLIES -DBC 0015333 41200 139.15 3/15/2012 1 98495 TRISH HOWARD RECREATION REFUND 1 001 1 34780 1 55.00 $55.00 3/15/2012 98496 IMSA CERTIFICATION TRNG-P/WRKS STAFF 0015551 42340 440.00 $930.00 3/15/2012 1 IMSA CERTIFICATION - TRNG-P/WRKS STAFF 0015510 42340 1 490.00 3/15/2012 1 98497 INCONTACT INC LONG DIST SVCS -FEB 12 1 0014090 1 42125 1 50.57 $50.57 3/15/2012 1 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN LEGALAD-FPL 2005-147 001 23010 444.60 1 3/15/2012 1 98498 INFRASTRUCTURE ENGINEERS CDBG CURB RAMP -FEB 12 2505510 1 46420 1 3,530.00 $3,530.00 3/15/2012 98499 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN LEGALAD-FPL 2010-394 001 23010 363.40 $808.00 3/15/2012 1 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN LEGALAD-FPL 2005-147 001 23010 444.60 1 3/15/2012 1 98500 INLAND VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY ANIMAL CONTROL -MAR 12 1 0014431 1 45403 1 10,551751 $21,107.50 Page 3 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 03/15/2012 thru 03/28/2012 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct# Amount Total Check Amount 3/15/2012 98500... INLAND VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY ANIMAL CONTROL -FEB 12 0014431 45403 10,553.75 $21,107.50... 3/15/2012 98501 1 MOHAMAD R JAHANVASH CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 1 0015350 1 45320 1 108.00 $108.00 3/15/2012 98502 JENKINS & HOGIN, LLP LEGAL SVCS -FEB 2012 0014020 44020 2,020.20 $7,698.60 3/15/2012 1 JENKINS & HOGIN, LLP LEGAL SVCS -COM DEV FEB 0014020 44020 21056.60 3/15/2012 JENKINS & HOGIN, LLP LEGAL SVCS -COMM SVCS 0014020 44020 145.60 ` 3/15/2012 JENKINS & HOGIN, LLP LEGAL SVCS-PANORKS 0014020 44020 782.60 3/15/2012 JENKINS & HOGIN, LLP LEGAL SVCS -MINI PARKS 0014020 44020 618.80 3/15/2012 JENKINS & HOGIN, LLP LEGAL SVCS -SITE D 0014020 44020 2,074.80 3/15/2012 98503 JOE A. GONSALVES & SON INC. LEGISLATIVE SVCS -FEB 12 0014030 44000 3,000.00 $6,045.00 3/15/2012 1 JOE A. GONSALVES & SON INC. LEGISLATIVE SVCS -MAR 0014030 44000 , 3,000.00 3/15/2012 JOE A. GONSALVES & SON INC. QUARTERLY FILING FEE 0014030 44000 45.00 3/15/2012 98504 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC PROF.SVCS-FPL 2011-394 001 23010 562.50 $7,312.50 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2011-394 001 23010 101.25 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2011-394 001 34430 -101.25 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC PROF.SVCS-FPL 2006-234 001 23010 150.00 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2006-234 001 23010 27.00 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2006-234 001 34430 -27.00 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC PROF.SVCS-FPL 2005-147 001 23010 543.75 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2005-147 001 23010 97.88 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2005-147 001 34430 -97.88 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC PROF.SVCS-FPL 2002-65 001 23010 112.50 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC - ADMIN FEES -FPL 2002-65 001 23010 20.25 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC - ADMIN FEES -FPL 2002-65 001 34430 - -20.25 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC PROF.SVCS-FPL2011-433 001 23010 37.50 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2011-433 001 23010 6.75 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2011-433 001 34430 -6.75 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC PROF.SVCS-FPL 2011-428 001 23010 187.50 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2011-428 001 23010 33.75 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2011-428 001 34430 -33.75 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC PROF.SVCS-FPL 2012-457 001 23010 75.00 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2012-457 001 23010 13.50 Page 4 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 03/15/2012 thru 03/28/2012 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 3/15/2012 98504... KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES-FPL2012-457 001 34430 -13.50 $7,312.50 ... 3/15/2012 98508 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC PROFSVCS-FPL 2011-431 001 23010 187.50 $84.00 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2011-431 001 23010 33.75 3/15/2012 98509 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2011-431 001 34430 -33.75 $404.13 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC PROF.SVCS-FPL 2011-452 001 23010 37.50 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2011-452 001 23010 6.75 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2011-452 001 34430 -6.75 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC PROF.SVCS-FPL 2011-446 001 23010 37.50 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2011-446 001 23010 6.75 3/15/2012 KAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC ADMIN FEES -FPL 2011-446 001 34430 -6.75 3/15/2012 IKAL PLANNING SERVICES LLC CONSULTING SVCS -FEB 12 0015210 1 44250 5,381.25 3/15/2012 1 98505 ILEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES MTG-COUNCILS 1 0014010 1 42325 1 70.001 $70.00 3/15/2012 98506 LEWIS ENGRAVING INC. ENGRAVING SVCS -CITY TILE 0014090 42113 19.58 $53.90 3/15/2012 1 LEWIS ENGRAVING INC. ENGRAVING SVCS -BADGES - 0014090 42113 34.32 3/15/2012 1 98507 ILOS ANGELES COUNTYASSESSOR JSBF ABSTRACT CD DATA:W38 1385538 1 44000 1 399.111 $399.11 3/15/2012 1 PERS RETIREMENT FUND RETIRE CONTRIB-EE 001 21109 11,285.22 3/15/2012 1 98508 IMICHAEL MELLOH IRECREATION REFUND 1 001 1 34780 1 84.001 $84.00 3/15/2012 1 98509 JOTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY ELEVATOR SVCS -CITY HALL 1 0014093 1 42210 1 404.131 $404.13 3/15/2012 98510 PERS RETIREMENT FUND SURVIVOR BENEFIT 001 21109 1 45.57 $11,330.79 3/15/2012 1 PERS RETIREMENT FUND RETIRE CONTRIB-EE 001 21109 11,285.22 3/15/2012 1 98511 1PINSVILLE INC IPROMO SUPPLIES -CITY PINS 1 0014090 1 41400600.00 $600.00 3/15/2012 98512 PROTECTION ONE INC ALARM SERVICES -DBC 001533342210 1 45535 59.62 $180.99 3/15/2012 1 PROTECTION ONE INC ALARM SERVICES -HERITAGE 0015340 42210 89.87 3/15/2012 PROTECTION ONE INC ALARM SERVICES-SYC CYN 0015340 42210 31.50 3/15/2012 98513 REGIONAL TAP SERVICE CENTER TAP PASSES -FEB 2012 1125553 1 45535 1 11,567.05 $14,458.82 3/15/2012 1 REGIONAL TAP SERVICE CENTER CITY SUBSIDY -FEB 2012 1125553 45533 2,891.77 3/15/2012 98514 IREINBERGER PRINTWERKS PRINT SVCS -BUS CARDS 10014090 1 42110 1 3,505.01 $3,976.98 Page 5 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 03/15/2012 thru 03/28/2012 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct# Amount Total Check Amount 3/15/2012 3/15/2012 98514... REINBERGER PRINTWERKS REINBERGER PRINTWERKS PRINT SVCS -LETTERHEAD PRINT SVCS -CITY ENVELOPES 0014090 0014090 42110 42110 85.91 386.06 $3,976.98 ... 3/15/2012 98515 RHF INC. EQ MAINT-SHERIFF DEPT 1264411 42200 85.00 $0.00 3/15/2012 RHF INC. EQ MAINT-SHERIFF DEPT 1264411 42200 85.00 3/15/2012 98517 RHF INC. EQ MAINT-SHERIFF DEPT 1264411 42200 -85.00 $200.00 3/15/2012 RHF INC. EQ MAINT-SHERIFF DEPT - 1264411 42200 -85.00 3/15/2012 98516 RKA CONSULTING GROUP JBLDG & SFTY SVCS -JAN 12 0015220 1 45201 351.361 $351.36 3/15/2012 MAGED SOLIMAN FACILITY CHRGS-DBC 001 36615 -100.00 1 3/15/2012 1 98517 MARIASANGCO FACILITY REFUND -HERITAGE 001 1 23002 1 200.00 $200.00 3/15/2012 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS -PARKS 0015340 42126 3,597.11 3/15/2012 1 98518 NADINE SARIELDIN FACILITY REFUND-REAGAN 001 1 23002 1 50.00 $50.00 3/15/2012 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS-TRFFC CONTROL 0015510 42126 103.33 3/15/2012 98519 SHARP SEATING TICKETS ROSE PARADE -DEP 0015350 45310 635.00 $635.00 3/15/2012 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS -CITY HALL 0014093 42126 7,062.12 3/15/2012 1 98520 CHERYL SKIDMORE CONTRACT CLASS-WINTE 1385538 1 45320 1 252.001 $252.00 3/15/2012 1 98521 SMART & FINAL SUPPLIES -COMM SVCS 0015350 1 41200 1 1,620.511 $1,620.51 3/15/2012 98522 ROXANNE SMITH RECREATION REFUND 1 34740 79.00 $79.00 3/15/2012 98523 MAGED SOLIMAN FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 500.00 $400.00 3/15/2012 MAGED SOLIMAN FACILITY CHRGS-DBC 001 36615 -100.00 1 3/15/2012 98524 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS -DIST 38 1385538 42126 540.60 $16,351.43 3/15/2012 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS -DIST 39 1395539 42126 385.77 3/15/2012 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS -DIST 41 1415541 42126 219.34 3/15/2012 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS -PARKS 0015340 42126 3,597.11 3/15/2012 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS-TRFFC CONTROL 0015510 42126 442.77 3/15/2012 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS-TRFFC CONTROL 0015510 42126 103.33 3/15/2012 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS -DBC 0015333 42126 3,976.28 3/15/2012 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS -CITY HALL 0014093 42126 7,062.12 3/15/2012 ISOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS -DIST 38 1385538 42126 24.11 3/15/2012 1 98525 SPARKLETTS EQ RENTAL-SYC CYN MAR 1 0015340 1 42130 1 12.00 $196.09 Page 6 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 03/15/2012 thru 03/28/2012 Check Date - Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 3/15/2012 98525... SPARKLETTS WATER SUPPLIES-SYC CYN 0015340 41200 18.98 $196.09 ... 3/15/2012 98527 SPARKLETTS EQ RENTAL-SYC CYN 0015340 42130 2.37 $2,172.50 3/15/2012 SPARKLETTS WATER SUPPLIES -CITY HALL 0014090 41200 151.99 3/15/2012 98528 SPARKLETTS EQ RENTAL -CITY HALL 0014090 42130 10.75 $15.00 3/15/2012 98526 SPECTRACOM GPS NETWORK TIME SERVER 00140931 46310 1 4,205.571 $4,205.57 3/15/2012 VANTAGEPOINTTRNSFRAGNTS-303248 3/16/12-P/R DEDUCTIONS 001 21108 4,783.95 3/15/2012 98527 SUSTAIN ABLE ENVIRONMENTAL MNGMT COM CONSULTANT SVCS-FE132012 1155515 44000 1 2,172.501 $2,172.50 3/15/2012 98528 TAB PRODUCTS LLC FILE CABINETS -CITY HALL 1 0014093 1 46220 4,664,291$4,664.29 $15.00 3/15/2012 98529 TAYLOR TIME & EQUIPMENT CO EQ MAINT-TIME CLOCK 0014030 1 42200 1 108.52 $108.52 3/15/2012 98530 THE COMDYN GROUP INC CONSULTANT SVCS -WK 2/24 0014070 1 44000 1 1,090.67 $1,090.67 3/15/2012 1 98531 TNT PRINTING PRINT SVCS -DAY CAMP BRCHR 0015350 1 42110 1 626.12 $626.12 3/15/2012 1 98532 TRI -CITIES POOL SERVICE & REPAIR FOUNTAIN MAINT-DBC FEB 0015333 1 45300 1 160.00 $160.00 3/15/2012 1 98533 TURBOSCAPE INC INSTALL -PLAYGROUND CHIPS 001 1 31620 1 2,100.001 $2,100.00 3/15/2012 98534 VANTAGEPOINT TRNSFRAGNTS-303248 3/16/12 -LOAN DEDUCTIONS 001 21108 1,582.96 $6,366.91 3/15/2012 VANTAGEPOINTTRNSFRAGNTS-303248 3/16/12-P/R DEDUCTIONS 001 21108 4,783.95 3/15/2012 1 98535 IWALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT WATER SVCS -DIST 38 1385538 1 42126 561.511 $561.51 3/20/2012 CDW GOVERNMENT EQ -CAMERA LENSES 1264411 46250 3,319.63 3/15/2012 1 98536 CATHY WANG REFUND -PARKING FINES 1 001 1 32230 120.00 $120.00 3/15/2012 98537 CAROL WILLIAMS RECREATION REFUND 001 1 34730 15.001 $15.00 3/15/2012 1 98538 CARRIE YEE FACILITY REFUND-PANTERA 1 001 23002 1 50.001 $50.00 3/15/2012 1 98539 1CLEMENTZIROLI REFUND -GRADING BOND 001 23001 1 1,296.00 $1,296.00 3/20/2012 98540 CDW GOVERNMENT CAMERAS -CITY HALL 1264411 1 46250 1 24,755.69 $205,049.31 3/20/2012 CDW GOVERNMENT EQ -CAMERA LENSES 1264411 46250 3,319.63 3/20/2012 CDW GOVERNMENT SUPPORT SVCS -CITY HALL 1264411 1 46250 3,942.16 1 Page 7 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 03/15/2012 thru 03/28/2012 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total CheckAmount 3/20/2012 98540... CDW GOVERNMENT HARDWARE -CAMERA SERVER 1264411 46250 20,497.96 $205,049.31 ... 3/20/2012 98542 CDW GOVERNMENT EQ -DMP CITY HALL 0014093 46220 11,390.21 $206.70 3/20/2012 CDW GOVERNMENT EQ -DIGITAL MEDIA 0014093 46220 6,689.85 3/20/2012 98543 CDW GOVERNMENT SUPPORT SVCS -CITY HALL 0014093 46220 701.46 $216.00 3/20/2012 CDW GOVERNMENT SUPPORT SVCS -CITY HALL 0014093 46220 140.30 3/20/2012 98544 CDW GOVERNMENT PHONES -CITY HALL 0014093 46220 5,733.48 $500.00 3/20/2012 CDW GOVERNMENT PHONE COMPONENTS-C/HALL 0014093 46220 1,144.17 3/20/2012 98545 CDW GOVERNMENT PHONE COMPONENTS-C/HALL 0014093 46220 20.26 $200.00 3/20/2012 CDW GOVERNMENT PHONES -CITY HALL 0014093 46220 795.73 3/20/2012 98546 CDW GOVERNMENT PHONES COMPONENTS-C/HALL 0014093 46220 13,475.45 $924.00 3/20/2012 CDW GOVERNMENT PHONES -CITY HALL 0014093 46220 38,465.87 3/20/2012 98547 CDW GOVERNMENT HARDWARE -PHONES 0014093 46220 9,211.22 $570.00 3/20/2012 CDW GOVERNMENT SUPPORT SVCS -CITY HALL 0014093 46220 1,423.68 3/20/2012 98548 CDW GOVERNMENT SUPPORT SVCS -CITY HALL 0014093 46220 1,527.22 $302.97 3/20/2012 CDW GOVERNMENT NETWORK LABOR -CITY HALL 0014093 46220 37,402.94 3/20/2012 98549 CDW GOVERNMENT NETWORK LABOR -CITY HALL 1264411 46250 12,484.56 $35.00 3/2012012 CDW GOVERNMENT SUPPORT SVCS -CITY HALL 0014093 46220 983.78 3/20/2012 JCDW GOVERNMENT FIREWALL -CITY HALL 0014093 46220 10,943.69 3/22/2012 1 98541 AARP MATURE DRIVING -MAR 2012 1 0015350 1 45300 1 168.00 $168.00 3/22/2012 1 98542 ACCESS CONTROL SECURITY SECURITY SVCS -DBC 1 0015333 1 45010 1 206.701 $206.70 3/22/2012 1 98543 AGI ACADEMY CORP CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 1 0015350 1 45320 1 216.001 $216.00 3/22/2012 1 98544 ROSAAGREDANO FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 1 23002 1 500.00 $500.00 3/22/2012 1 98545 ANAALCANTARA FACILITY REFUND -HERITAGE 001 1 23002 1 200.001 $200.00 3/22/2012 1 98546 AND 1 OFFICIALS OFFICIAL SVCS-FEB/MAR 12 0015350 1 45300 1 924.00 $924.00 3/22/2012 1 98547 ISMATARASTU FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 1 23002 1 570.00 $570.00 3/22/2012 1 98548 JARC IMAGING RESOURCES SUPPLIES-P/WORKS 1125553 1 41200 1 302,971 $302.97 3/22/2012 98549 MARCOSARGUDO RECREATION REFUND 001 1 34730 35.00 $35.00 Page 8 Check Date (Check City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 03/15/2012 thru 03/28/2012 Vendor Name Description I Fund/ Dept I Acct# I Amount I Total Check Amount 3/22/2012 1 98550 ARMIJO NEWS &ABC PR AD -CITY HALL OPEN HOUSE 0014095 1 42115 1 90.00 $90.00 3/22/2012 1 COROVAN RELOCATION -CITY HALL 0014093 45000 1 1 2,955.30 3/22/2012 1 98551 IBEAR STATE AIR CONDITIONING SVCS IN MAINT--DBC 1 0015333 1 42210 1 773.001$773.00 $96.00 3/22/2012 DIAMOND BAR HAND CAR WASH CAR WASH -COMM SVCS 0015310 42200 23.98 3/22/2012 1 98552 JOHN E BISHOP CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 0015350 1 45320 1 583.20 $583.20 3/22/2012 1 98553 KATHY BREAUX CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 0015350 1 45320 1 201.60 $201.60 3/22/2012 1 98554 ICALIFORNIA COMMERCIAL LIGHTING SPPL SUPPLIES -DBC 0015333 1 41200 1 369.75 $369.75 3/22/2012 1 98555 AMYCAMPBELL FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 1 100.00 $100.00 3/22/2012 98556 CLIMATEC MAINT-CITY HALL 0014093 42210 997.50 $997.50 3/22/2012 1 98557 CONSTANCE J. LILLIE CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 0015350 1 45320 1 393.00 $393.00 3/22/2012 1 98558 COROVAN RELOCATION -CITY HALL 0014093 45000 19,377.13 $22,332.43 3/22/2012 1 COROVAN RELOCATION -CITY HALL 0014093 45000 1 1 2,955.30 3/22/2012 1 98559 DAY& NITE COPY CENTER PRINT SVCS-P/INFO 0014095 1 42110 1 213.151 $213.15 3/22/2012 DIAMOND BAR HAND CAR WASH CAR WASH-NGHBRHD IMP 0015230 42200 11.99 3/22/2012 1 98560 DAY LITE MAINTENANCE CO INC MONTHLY MAINT-CITY HALL I 0014093 42210 96.00 $96.00 3/22/2012 98561 DIAMOND BAR HAND CAR WASH CAR WASH -POOL VEH 0014090 42200 245.79 $320.04 3/22/2012 DIAMOND BAR HAND CAR WASH CAR WASH-NGHBRHD IMP 0015230 42200 11.99 3/22/2012 98564 DIAMOND BAR HAND CAR WASH CAR WASH -ROAD MAINT 0015554 42200 38.28 $529.80 3/22/2012 DIAMOND BAR HAND CAR WASH CAR WASH -COMM SVCS 0015310 42200 23.98 3/22/2012 98562 DIAMOND BAR MOBIL VEH MAINT-COMM SVCS 0015333 42200 522.86 - $790.50 3/22/2012 1 DIAMOND BAR MOBIL VEH MAINT-COMM SVCS 0015310 42200 1 267.64 1 3/22/2012 1 98563 DIVERSIFIED TRANSPORTATION INC DIAMOND RIDE SVCS -FEB 12 1 1135553 1 45529 1 45,097.50 $45,097.50 3/22/2012.1 98564 IDOG DEALERS INC CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 1 0015350 1 45320 1 529.801 $529.80 3/22/2012 1 98565 EVETTE DOMINGUEZ FACILITY REFUND-PANTERA 001 1 36625 1 70.00 $70.00 Page 9 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 03/15/2012 thru 03/28/2012 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name I Transaction Description I Fund/ Dept I Acct # I Amount I Total CheckAmount 3/22/2012 1 98566 IJEFF DUNATH FACILITY REFUND-REAGAI 1 23002 1 50.00 $50.00 3/22/2012 98567 EXPRESS MAIL CORP ORATE ACCOUNT EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL 0014090 42120 15.30 $139.55 3/22/2012 EXPRESS MAIL CORP ORATE ACCOUNT EXPRESS MAIL -FPL 11-431 001 23010 35.50 3/22/2012 98569 EXPRESS MAIL CORPORATE ACCOUNT EXPRESS MAIL -FPL 11-445 001 23010 17.75 $1,870.00 3/22/2012 EXPRESS MAIL CORPORATE ACCOUNT EXPRESS MAIL -FPL 12-455 001 23010 35.50 3/22/2012 98570 EXPRESS MAIL CORPORATE ACCOUNT EXPRESS MAIL -FPL 11-445 001 23010 35.50 $50.00 3/22/2012 98568 FEDEX EXPRESS MAIL -GENERAL 0014090 42120 42.09 $42.09 3/22/2012 GENTRY BROTHERS INC CDBG CURB RAMP PROJ 2505510 46420 1 134,510.00 3/22/2012 1 98569 IFESTIVAL OFARTS EXCURSION-PAGEANT/MSTRS 0015350 1 45310 1 1,870:001 $1,870.00 3/22/2012 1 98570 IJOANNE FRANCO IFACILITY REFUND-SYC CYN 001 1 23002 1 50.001 $50.00 3/22/2012 98571 GENTRY BROTHERS INC RETENTIONS PAYABLE 250 20300 1 -6,725.50 $127,784.50 3/22/2012 GENTRY BROTHERS INC CDBG CURB RAMP PROJ 2505510 46420 1 134,510.00 3/22/2012 1 98572 IWILLIAM GIEBE CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 1 0015350 1 45320 1 1,524.001 $1,524.00 3/22/2012 GOVPARTNER REQUEST PARTNER -MAR 12 0014070 44030 1 850.00 1 3/22/2012 1 98573 1HERBERT GOETZ IRECREATION REFUND 1001 1 34730 1 35.00 $35.00 3/22/2012 98574 GOVPARTNER REQUEST PARTNER -FEB 12 0014070 44030 850.00 $1,700.00 3/22/2012 GOVPARTNER REQUEST PARTNER -MAR 12 0014070 44030 1 850.00 1 3/22/2012 1 98575 ILILY GYSLER IFACILITY REFUND -DBC 1 001 1 23002 1 350.00 $350.00 3/22/2012 HOFFMAN SOUTHWEST CORP MAINT-HERITAGE PK 0015340 42210 1 205.50 1 3/22/2012 1 98576 IHEERY INTERNATIONAL INC CONSTRUCTION-C/HLL/LBRY I 0014093 46310 34,184.821 $34,184.82 3/22/2012 98577 HOFFMAN SOUTHWEST CORP MAINT-DBC 0015333 42210 178.75 $384.25 3/22/2012 HOFFMAN SOUTHWEST CORP MAINT-HERITAGE PK 0015340 42210 1 205.50 1 3/22/2012 1 98578 JINLAND EMPIRE MAGAZINE AD -DBC MAR 12 1 0014095 1 42115 1 955.001 $995.00 3/22/2012 1 98579 1 MOHAMAD R JAHANVASH 1CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 1 0015350 1 45320 1 30.001 $30.00 3/22/2012 1 98580 VIVIAN JASSO IFACILITY REFUND -DBC 1 001 1 23002 1 100.001 $100.00 Page 10 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 03/15/2012 thru 03/28/2012 Check Date iCheck Numbers Vendor Name I transaction Fund/ Dept I Acct # I Amount I Total Check Amount 3/22/2012 1 98581 CAMILLE KAMINSKI RECREATION REFUND 1001 1 34730 1 25.00 $25.00 3/22/2012 1 LA HABRA FENCE CO INC MAINT-PARKS - 0015340 42210 1 13.24 1 3/22/2012 1 98582 YOUNG SEUNG KIM CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 1 0015350 45320 408.00 $408.00 3/22/2012 LANCE, SOLL & LUNGHARD LLP AUDIT SVCS -BEST WESTERN 001 31200 1,250.00 3/22/2012 1 98583 KIRK STEINKE ELECTRIC REPAIR SVCS -HERITAGE PK 0015340 1 42210 1 280.00 $280.00 3/22/2012 1 98584 GABRIELA KLEIN CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 0015350 1 45320 1 954.001 $954.00 3/22/2012 98585 LA HABRA FENCE CO INC MAINT-PARKS 0015340 42210 -13.24 $0.00 3/22/2012 1 LA HABRA FENCE CO INC MAINT-PARKS - 0015340 42210 1 13.24 1 3/22/2012 98586 LANCE, SOLL & LUNGHARD LLP AUDIT SVCS -FY 2011 0014050 44010 264.00 $4,014.00 3/22/2012 LANCE, SOLL & LUNGHARD LLP AUDIT SVCS-AYRES HOTEL 001 31200 1,250.00 3/22/2012 98588 LANCE, SOLL & LUNGHARD LLP AUDIT SVCS -HOLIDAY INN 001 31200 1,250.00 $1,055.00 3/22/2012 LANCE, SOLL & LUNGHARD LLP AUDIT SVCS -BEST WESTERN 001 31200 1,250.00 3/22/2012 1 98587 SAMYONG LEE FACILITY REFUND -DBC 1 001 1 23002 1 100.001 $100.00 3/22/2012 LOS ANGELES COUNTY MTA CITY SUBSIDY -FEB 2012 1125553 45533 30.00 3/22/2012 1 98588 JLIZARDTECH COMP MAINT-I.T. 1 0014070 142205 1 1,055.00 $1,055.00 3/22/2012 98589 LOS ANGELES COUNTY MTA MTA PASSES -FEB 2012 112555345535 45535 120.00 $4,763.50 3/22/2012 LOS ANGELES COUNTY MTA CITY SUBSIDY -FEB 2012 1125553 45533 30.00 3/22/2012 98592 LOS ANGELES COUNTY MTA MTA PASSSES-MAR 2012 1125553 45535 3,571.55 $537.60 3/22/2012 LOS ANGELES COUNTY MTA CITY SUBSIDY -MAR 2012 1125553 45533 1,041.95 3/22/2012 98590 METROLINK METROLINK PASSES -FEB 12 1125553 45535 82,506.19 $89,392.50 3/22/2012 METROLINK CITY SUBSI DY -FEB 12 1125553 45533 18,790.81 3/22/2012 98592 METROLINK PASSES RETURNED -FEB 12 1125553 45535 -11,904.50 $537.60 3/22/2012 1 98591 MARLENE RAMIREZ MOONEY CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 1 0015350 1 45320 1 120.00 $120.00 3/22/2012 98592 CHARLES MORALES CONTRACT CLASS WINTER 1 0015350 1 45320 1 537.601 $537.60 3/22/2012 98593 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS A/R SVCS-PANC/S,C/D 1 0014090 1 42125 557.10 $557.10 3/22/2012 98594 ORKIN PESTCONTROL INC PEST CONTROL-B/CYN 1385538 45500 63.37 $129.43 Page 11 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 03/15/2012 thru 03/28/2012 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 3/22/2012 98594... ORKIN PEST CONTROL INC - PEST CONTROL-SYC CYN 0015340 42210 66.06 $129.43. 3/22/2012 98595 PACIFIC TELEMANAGEMENT SERVICES PAY PH, SVCS -APR 2012 0015340 42125 495.84 $495.84 3/22/2012 PERS HEALTH APR 12 -HEALTH INS PREMS 0014090 40086 672.00 3/22/2012 98596 MONIQUE PEEVY FACILITY REFUND -DBC 001 23002 350.00 $350.00 3/22/2012 98597 PERS HEALTH APR 12 -HEALTH INS PREMS 001 21105 1 36,321.06 $37,138.72 3/22/2012 PERS HEALTH APR 12 -HEALTH INS PREMS 0014090 40086 672.00 3/22/2012 98599 PERS HEALTH APR 12 -HEALTH INS PREMS 0014060 40093 145.66 $500.00 3/22/2012 1 98598 PRIORITY MAILING SYSTEMS INC SUPPLIES -GENERAL 0014090 1 41200 1 50.12 $50.12 3/22/2012 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS-WSHNGTN ST 2505310 46415 2,885.53 3/22/2012 1 98599 DIANE RECENDEZ FACILITY REFUND -DBC 1 001 1 23002 1 500.001 $500.00 3/22/2012 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS -DIST 41 1415541 42126 23.98 3/22/2012 1 98600 GREGORY C REUEL CONSULTANT SVCS-P/INFO 1 0014096 1 44000 1 350.00 $350.00 3/22/2012 1 98601 AMANDARIVERA FACILITY REFUND-PANTERA 001 1 23002 1 50.001 $50.00 3/22/2012 1 98602 JOANNE ROMERO RECREATION REFUND 1 001 1 34740 1 70.00 $70.00 3/22/2012 1 98603 THOMAS SAGLIME REFUND -EN 10-698 1 001 1 23012 1 2,542.73 $2,542.73 3/22/2012 1 98604 SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVT TAC MTG-YEE 0015551. 1 42325 1 25.00 $25.00 3/22/2012 1 98605 jJOSEPHiNE SAULLO FACILITY REFUND -DBC 1 001 1 36615 1 275.001 $275.00 3/22/2012 1 98606 SCMAF BSKTBALL TRNMNT FEES -2012 0015350 1 42315 1 100.00 $100.00 3/22/2012 1 98607 JERRYL LYNN SHORT CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 0015350 1 45320 1 1,299,601 $1,299.60 3/22/2012 1 98608 SIMPSON ADVERTISING INC CITY NEWS -APR 2012 0014095 1 44000 1 1,725.00 $1,725.00 3/22/2012 98609 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS-WSHNGTN ST 2505310 46415 4,397.14 $7,420.33 3/22/2012 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS-WSHNGTN ST 2505310 46415 2,885.53 3/22/2012 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS -DIST 38 1385538 42126 22.76 3/22/2012 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS -DIST 41 1415541 42126 23.98 3/22/2012 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ELECT SVCS -DIST 38 1385538 42126 22.76 Page 12 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 03/15/2012 thru 03/28/2012 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct# Amount Total Check Amount 3/22/2012 1 98609... ISOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON JELECT SVCS -DIST 38 1385538 42126- 68.16 $7,420.33 ... 3/22/2012 1 98610 KARLA ST CYR FACILITY REFUND -DBC 1 001 1 36615 1 119.25 $119.25 3/22/2012 98611 STANDARD INSURANCE OF OREGON APR 12 -LIFE INS PREMS 001 21106 986.51 $3,189.58 3/22/2012 1 STANDARD INSURANCE OF OREGON APR 12-SUPP LIFE INS PREM 001 21106 333.00 3/22/2012 98613 STANDARD INSURANCE OF OREGON APR 12-STD/LTD 001 21112 1,870.07 $809.92 3/22/2012 1 98612 STITCHES UNIFORMS & EMBROIDERY SUPPLIES-REC 1 0015350 1 41200 1 174.74 $174.74 3/22/2012 1 THE GAS COMPANY GAS SVCS -HERITAGE 0015340 42126 249.84 3/22/2012 1 98613 ITELEPACIFIC COMMUNICATIONS T1 INTERNET SVCS -NEAR 1 0014070 44030 819.92 $809.92 3/22/2012 VALLEY CREST LANDSCAPE MAINT INC IRRIGATION REPAIR-PTRSN 0015340 42210 1,104.24 3/22/2012 1 98614 TENNISANYONE INC CONTRACT CLASS-WINTE 0014090 1 45320 1 3,031101 $3,033.10 3/22/2012 98615 THE GAS COMPANY GAS SVCS -CITY HALL 0014093 42126 840.96 $1,090.80 3/22/2012 1 THE GAS COMPANY GAS SVCS -HERITAGE 0015340 42126 249.84 3/22/2012 1 98616 JUSTINE TRAIN IFACILITY REFUND -DBC 1 001 1 23002 1 100.00 $100.00 3/22/2012 VALLEY CREST LANDSCAPE MAINT INC LANDSCAPE MAINT-PARKS 0015340 45300 24,604.11 3/22/2012 1 98617 ITRANE SERVICE GROUP INC REPAIR SVCS -DBC 1 0015333 1 42210 1 713.00 $713.00 3/22/2012 98618 VALLEY CREST LANDSCAPE MAINT INC LANDSCAPE MAINT-DCB 0015333 45300 5,645.47 $31,679.95 3/22/2012 VALLEY CREST LANDSCAPE MAINT INC LANDSCAPE MAINT-PARKS 0015340 45300 24,604.11 3/22/2012 98620 VALLEY CREST LANDSCAPE MAINT INC IRRIGATION REPAIR-REAGAN 0015340 42210 326.13 $79.00 3/22/2012 VALLEY CREST LANDSCAPE MAINT INC IRRIGATION REPAIR-PTRSN 0015340 42210 1,104.24 3/22/2012 1 98619 JULENE VARGAS FACILITY REFUND -HERITAGE 1 001 1 23002 1 200.00 $200.00 3/22/2012 VERIZON CALIFORNIA PH.SVCS-DATA MODEM 0014090 42125 42.61 3/22/2012 1 98620 ANTHONY VELASCO RECREATION REFUND 1 001 1 34740 79.00 $79.00 3/22/2012 98621 VERIZON CALIFORNIA PH.SVCS-HERITAGE ALARM 0015340 42125 86.19 $529.83 3/22/2012 VERIZON CALIFORNIA PH.SVCS-DATA MODEM 0014090 42125 42.61 3/22/2012 VERIZON CALIFORNIA PH.SVCS-DBC 0015333 42125 113.61 3/22/2012 VERIZON CALIFORNIA PH.SVCS-INFO TO GO 0014090 42125 183.93 3/22/2012 VERIZON CALIFORNIA PH.SVCS-CITY HALL 0014090 42125 103.49 Page 13 City of Diamond Bar - Check Register 03/15/2012 thru 03/28/2012 Check Date Check Number Vendor Name Transaction Description Fund/ Dept Acct # Amount Total Check Amount 3/22/2012 98622 IVIDIFLO LLC RELOCATION -BROADCAST RM 0014093 45000 9,676.861 676.86 3/22/2012 98623 ERIKAVIEYRA CONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 0015350 45320 252.00 $252.00 3/22/2012 WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT WATER SVCS -DIST 38 1385538 42126 5,136.53 3/22/2012 98624 VMI INC CONSULTANT SVCS-P/INFO 0014095 44000 1,200.00 $1,200.00 3/22/2012 98625 WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT WATER SVCS -PARKS 0015340 42126 7,327.16 $17,537.14 3/22/2012 WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT WATER SVCS -DIST 38 1385538 42126 5,136.53 3/22/2012 98629 WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT WATER SVCS -DIST 39 1395539 42126 2,892.66 $1,272.00 3/22/2012 WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT WATER SVCS -DIST 41 1415541 42126 20.21 3/22/2012 WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT WATER SVCS -CITY HALL 0014093 42126 531.24 3/22/2012 WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT WATER SVCS -DIST 41 - 1415541 42126 885.95 3/22/2012 WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT WATER SVCS -PARKS 0015340 42126 743.39 3/22/2012 98626 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY SUPPLIES -DBC 0015333 41200 1,042.31 $1,199.45 3/22/2012 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY SUPPLIES -CITY HALL 0014093 42210 1 157.14 3/22/2012 98627 WEST COASTARBORISTS INC TREE MAINT SVCS -FEB 12 0015558 45509 1 16,427.60 $17,549.30 3/22/2012 WEST COASTARBORISTS INC TREE MAINT SVCS -FEB 12 0015558 45509 776.70 3/22/2012 98629 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC WATERING SVCS -FEB 12 0015558 45510 345.00 $1,272.00 3/22/2012 1 98628 IWESTCOASTMEDIA, AD -CITY HALL JAN 12 1 0014095 1 42115 1 700.001 $700.00 3/22/2012 WOODCLIFF CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION -LIBRARY 0014093 46310 289,173.44 3/22/2012 1 98629 ITHERESAWINECKI ICONTRACT CLASS -WINTER 1 0015350 1 45320 1 1,272.001 $1,272.00 3/22/2012 98630 WOODCLIFF CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION-C/HALL 0014093 46310 118,340.36 $366,762.43 3/22/2012 WOODCLIFF CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION -LIBRARY 0014093 46310 289,173.44 3/22/2012 WOODCLIFF CORPORATION RETENTIONS PAYABLE 001 20300 -28,917.34 3/22/2012 WOODCLIFF CORPORATION RETENTIONS PAYABLE 001 20300 -11,834.03 3/22/2012 1 98631 1JULIAYOUNG FACILITY REFUND -DBC 1 001 1 23002 1 600.001 $600.00 3/22/2012 REQ #7 COMMONWEALTH BUSINESS BANK RETENTION -CITY HALL 001 20300 11,834.03 $40,751.37 3/22/2012 COMMONWEALTH BUSINESS BANK RETENTION -LIBRARY 001 20300 28,917.34 $1,537,723.07 Page 14 CITY COUNCIL TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Manager TITLE: Treasurer's Statement — February 2012 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the February 2012 Treasurer's Statement. FINANCIAL IMPACT: No Fiscal Impact BACKGROUND: Agenda # 6.5 Meeting Date: Apr. 3, 2012 AGENDA REPORT Per City policy, the Finance Department presents the monthly Treasurer's Statement for the City Council's review and approval. This statement shows the cash balances for the various funds, with a breakdown of bank account balances, investment account balances, and the effective yield earned from investments. This statement also includes a separate investment portfolio report which details the activities of the investments. All investments have been made in accordance with the City's Investment Policy. PREPARED BY: Susan Full, Senior Accountant REVIEWED BY: Finance Director Attachments: Treasurer's Statement, Investment Portfolio Report Ass tant tity Manager CITY OF DIAMOND BAR TREASURER'S MONTHLY CASH STATEMENT February 29, 2012 BEGINNING TRANSFER$ ENDING :BALANCE RECEIPTS DISBURSEMENTS IN(OUT) BALANCE GENERAL FUND $17,159,078.98 1,820,410.34 $2,230,201.81 ($296,011.85) $16,453,275.66 COMMUNITY ORG SUPPORT FD (5,275.00) PETTY CASH ACCOUNT 4,300.00 15,000.00 5,425.00 MEASURE R LOCAL RETURN FD 405,722.15 51,947.56 9,651,801.67 BONDS & CERTIFICATE DEPOSITS 457,669.71 GAS TAX FUND 286,224.18 893.40 $23,526,310.57 (141,205.11) 145,912.47 TRANSIT TX (PROP A) FD 280,942.35 167,703.34 33,935.17 (9,030.00) 405,680.52 TRANSIT TX (PROP C) FD 1,856,744.91 72,110.90 20,776.68 (27,200.00) 1,880,879.13 TEA Fund 0.00 0.00 INTEGRATED WASTE MGT FD 876,723.52 68,633.66 9,911.26 (18,128.36) 917,317.56 TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT FUND 587,972.19 1,081.28 715.40 (202,871.00) 385,467.07 A62928 -TR CONGESTION RELIEF FD 0.00 0.00 AIR QUALITY IMPRVMNT FD 160,447.13 15,466.77 1,080.26 174,833.64 TRAILS & BIKEWAYS FD 0.00 0.00 Prop 1 B Bond Fund 15,404.05 129.91 202,871.00 218,404.96 PARK FEES FD 319,806.15 494.13 (262,425.74) 57,874.54 PROP A- SAFE PARKS ACT FUND - (67,131.21) 81,978.00 14,846.79 PARK & FACILITIES DEVEL. FD 520,605.47 818.12 (63,024.02) 458,399.57 COM DEV BLOCK GRANT FD (1,498.33) 38,666.00 14,309.00 (37,523.00) (14,664.33) CITIZENS OPT -PUBLIC SAFETY FD 196,528.80 252.67 (26,700.68) 170,080.79 NARCOTICS ASSET SEIZURE FD 264,382.23 384.22 264,766.45 CA LAW ENFORCEMENT EQUIP PRGN 40,710.90 66.93 40,777.83 E BYRNE JUSTICE ASSIST GRANT -R (14,905.58) (26,787.16) (11,409.15) 472.43 E BYRNE JUSTICE ASSIST GRANT 0.00 26,764.47 11,409.15 (1.5,355.32) LANDSCAPE DIST #38 FD (6,060.33) 16,801.33 24,551.30 7,642.00 (6,168.30) LANDSCAPE DIST #39 FD (34,041.64) 8,663.19 21,529.64 68,652.00 21,743.91 LANDSCAPE DIST #41 FD 11,925.41 9,353.37 9,052.18 37,888.00 50,114.60 CDBG - R Fund 0.00 0.00 ENERGY EFF & CNSVTN BLK GRT (26,714.52) (26,714.52) CAP IMPROVEMENT PRJ FD (406,307.82) 37,166.00 217,460.35 342,954.76 (243,647.41) SELF INSURANCE FUND 756,040.51 1,098.69 409,112.00 1,166,251.20 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 215,512.72 313.20 215,825.92 COMPUTER REPLACEMENT FUND 383,594.90 558.15 123,340.68 260,812.37 PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY FUNC 246,782.24 1.86 2,000.00 244,784.10 TOTALS $24,023,214.36 $2,394,993.02 $2,713,141.04 $0.00 $23,705,066.34 SUMMARY OF CASH: DEMAND DEPOSITS: GENERAL ACCOUNT $135,651.32 PAYROLL ACCOU NT 41,604.45 CHANGE FUND 1,000.00 PETTY CASH ACCOUNT 500.00 TOTAL DEMAND DEPOSITS $178,755.77 INVESTMENTS: US TREASURY MONEY MARKET ACCT $2,413,724.80 LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FD 9,651,801.67 BONDS & CERTIFICATE DEPOSITS 11,216,000.00 CASH WITH FISCAL AGENT: 244,784.10 TOTAL INVESTMENTS $23,526,310.57 TOTAL CASH $23,705,066.34 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 estimated ��icgeiid.r uu es. James CITY OF DIAMOND BAR INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO REPORT for the Month of February 2012 Total investments 2011-12 Budgeted Interest Income Actual Year -To -Date Interest Income Percent of Interest Received to Budq Allocation of Book Value of Investment by Type (By Percent) Issue Maturity Curr Par / Market Fair Market Coupon Investment Type Cusip Rating Date Date Term Ong Par Price Value * Rate Fed Nall Mig Assn Note 3136FTBX6 AAA 10/24/11 10/24/13 2.0 Yrs 1,000,000 100.027 1,000,279.00 1.250% Fed Nall Mtg Assn Note 3136FTCR8 AAA 10/27/11 10/27/14 3.0 Yrs 1,000,000 99.990 999,904.00 1.325% GE Cap Corp 36962G503 AAA 01/30/12 01/30/15 3.0 Yrs 1,000,000 99.075 990,753.00 1375% GE Cap Corp 36962G577 AAA 02/18/12 02/08/16 4.0 Yrs 1,000 000 99.231 992,318.00 1.550% Fed Nat[ Mtg Assn Note 3136FTFW4 AAA 10/26/11 10/26/16 5.0 Yrs 1,000,000 100.430 1 004,304.00 1.500% Fed Nall Mtg Assn Note 3136FTLL1 AAA 11/16/11 11/16/16 5.0 Yrs 1,000 000 100,646 1,006,466.00 1.813% Fed Natl Mtg Assn Note 3136FTNK1 AAA 11/21/11 11/21/16 5.0 Yrs 1,000,000 100.062 1,000,623.00 2.000% Negotiable CD - Barclays Bank 06740KFH5 AAA 12/21/11 12/21/16 5.0 Yrs 248 000 100.344 248,854.85 2.000% Negotiable CD - Aurora Bank 05155THP6 AAA 06/29/11 06/28/13 2.0 Yrs 248,000 100.216 248,536.92 0.900% Negotiable CD - BMW Bank 05568PP35 AAA 06/29/11 06/28/13 2.0 Yrs 248,000 100.190 248,471.44 0.850% Negotiable CD - Compass Bank 20449E3C8 AAA 09/30/11 09/30/13 2.0 Yrs 248,000 100,166 248,413.66 1.000% Negotiable CD - State Bank India 856284837 AAA 10/28/11 10/28/13 2.0 Yrs 248,000 100.357 248,885.60 1.150% Negotiable CD - American Exp Bk 02587DBJ6 AAA 07/14/11 01/14/14 2.5 Yrs 248,000 100.483 249,200.07 1.050% Negotiable CD - Bank of China NY 06425HYA8 AAA 01/27/12 01/27/14 2.0 Yrs 248,000 99.895 247,741.83 0.900% Negotiable CD- Huntington Nat'l Bk 446438NSS AAA 01/27/12 01/27/14 2.0 Yrs 248,000 100.008 248,02058 0.800% Negotiable CD - GE Capital 3616OWU83 AAA 06/24/11 06/24/14 3.0 Yrs 248,000 100.506 249,256.12 1350% Negotiable CD- Discover Bank 25467OG30 AAA 06/29/11 06/30/14 3.0 Yrs 248,000 100541 249,343.41 1.250% Negotiable CD -Ally Bank UT 02005QVNO AAA 10/05/11 10/06/14 3.0 Yrs 248,000 100,354 248 880.15 1.300% Negotiable CD- Sallie Mae Bank 79545ONFB AAA 11101/11 12/01/14 3.0 Yrs 248,000 100.250 248,621.73 1.400% Negotiable CD- Safra Nat'l Bank NY 786580YA2 AAA 01/30/12 01/30/15 3.0 Yrs 248,000 100.155 248,385.64 1.000% Negotiable CD - GE Money Bank 36159AW71 AAA 06/24/11 06/24/15 40 Yrs 248,000 101.434 251,558.55 1750% Negotiable CD - CIT Bank 17284AUMS AAA 06/29/11 06/29/15 4.0 Yrs 248,000 101.464 251,63146 1.600% Negotiable CD- Goldman Sachs BanF 3814266Q3 AAA 10/05/11 10/05/15 4.0 Yrs 248,000 101.858 252,609.57 1.650% Negotiable CD - World Fin Captl Bank 98146QBNO AAA 11/16/11 11/16/16 5.0 Yrs 248,000 100.975 250,419.48 1.500% Total Securities & CDs $ 11,216,000.00 $ 11,233,478.06 Local Agency Investment Fund AAA 9,651,801.67 9,667,746.42 0.385% US Treasury Money Market AAA $2,413,724.80 2,413,724.80 0.010% Total Liquidity $ 12,065526.47 $ 12,081,47122 Union Bank -(Fiscal Agent) AAA 244,784.10 244,784.10 0.010% Total investments 2011-12 Budgeted Interest Income Actual Year -To -Date Interest Income Percent of Interest Received to Budq Allocation of Book Value of Investment by Type (By Percent) Federal AgencyLAIF Fund Securities 41.03% 36.08% Certificate U.S Treasury Deposits Money Market 11.60% 11.30% Total Investment-$2352fi 311 $ 23,526,310.57 $ 23,559,733.38 $213,200.00 $100,962.38 4T356% 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 had in a custodial account by Wells Fargo Institutional Securities LLC for safe- keeping services. Loral Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) LAIF 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 shortterm government securities, certificates of deposit and highly rated commercial paper. The City Investment Policy places no limit on this type of investment. Negotiable Certificate Of Deposit A certificate of deposit with a minimum face value of $100,000. These are insured by FDIC up to $250,000 per owner for single accounts. Agenda # 6 . 6 Meeting Date: April 3 2012 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ��RPSlR16�'9 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Manager TITLE: NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR RESIDENTIAL AREA 7 AND ARTERIAL ZONE 5 ROAD MAINTENANCE PROJECT. RECOMMENDATION: File a Notice of Completion. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The City Council awarded a construction contract to Sully -Miller Contracting Company - on June 2, 2011 in an amount not to exceed $1,819,990.00 with a contingency amount of $106,539.88 for a total authorization amount of $1,926,529.88. The City authorized the Notice to Proceed for the construction project on June 6, 2011. Sully -Miller has completed all work required of this project. However, during the striping phase, Sully -Miller experienced quality control issues with their striping subcontractor, J&S Striping. J&S Striping encountered multiple operational problems during the course of their work that resulted in striping errors in various locations within Arterial Zone 5 project. The striping errors were repaired by applying new slurry over the mistakes and then correcting it by restriping. This approach was pursued with staff's approval since black out paint is not allowed per the project specifications and City practices. Reapplying slurry in isolated (limited) areas created a disparity in color between the newer and older slurry applications in the adjacent areas. This short term disparity was perceived to be a decrease in the aesthetic value of the newly resurfaced street. The only alternative that would attain uniformity in appearance was to redo the slurry in its entirety. After multiple discussions with the contractor, staff accepted an offer of credit in the amount of $11,450.00 (10% of the contract bid amount for striping) for the perceived loss of aesthetic value. This was calculated by proportioning the area of the slurry repairs with the total area of slurry that was applied on arterial roadways. The acceptance of this offer was also predicated on the knowledge that this disparity in appearance will blend -in over time with use and weathering. Staff has confirmed that the repairs are slowly blending in with the adjacent areas. For future slurry seal projects, staff will be specifying the requirement to re -apply slurry from curb face to curb face to ensure that a uniform appearance of the roadway is maintained. The final construction cost of the project is $1,823,184.21 which includes $140,192.03 in change orders for additional AC repair, manhole adjustments, and striping in various locations in Residential Area 7 and Arterial Zone 5 Roadways. The project was completed with $103,345.67 in savings from the overall authorized project budget. PREPARED BY: Erwin Ching, Assistant Engineer REVIEWED BY: w� David G: Liu, Director of Public Works Attachments: Notice of Completion 2 DATE PREPARED: March 28, 2012 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 - 2. The full name of the owner is City 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" (Ifofner thanfew, strike"In fec'and inset, for example,`pureheser under contract fp mbeec,"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 tenantsin common are: NAMES ADDRESSES 6. A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was completed on February 23 2012. The work done was: Residential Area 7 and Art 'al Zone 5 Road Maintenance Proi pot - various locations 7. The name of the contractor, if any, for such work of improvement was Sully -Miller Contracting Company June 2, 2011 (ff no com.ct.a f.r,anrk of rn,. em m as a whole, mean amm") (Dav ofConhaa) - 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 Residential Area 7 and Arterial Zone 5 Road Maintenance Protect 9. The street address of said property is "none" (Ifno stred scIfte, has bom affleially assigned, ream"care") CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Dated: - Venficatim for lndwidual Owner Signature of owner m act torate officer ofowner oamcd In paragmph 2 or his agent VERIFICATION I, the undersigned, say: Ion, the Director of Public Works the declarant of the foregoing ('4esiJent of "Manager of "A Parma of; "'Owner of;'etc.) notice of completion; I have read said notice of completion and know the contests thereof, the same is Ime of my own knowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. _ Executed on 20 _, at Diamond Bar , California. (Dateofsignawm)- (City where signed) (Personal sipown, of the individual who is swearing that the contents of the notice of completion are me) CITY COUNCIL Agenda # _ 0 , 7 Meeting Date: April 3, 2012 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Manager Vol) 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 VT Electric, Inc. on June 7, 2011 in an amount not to exceed $134,475.00 with a contingency amount of $15,500.00 for a total authorization amount of $149,975.00. Once the procurement of all battery back-up equipment had been completed, the City authorized the Notice to Proceed for the construction project on September 8, 2011. VT Electric, Inc. has completed all work required as part of this project in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the City. An updated map of all signalized intersections with the battery back-up system is attached. The final construction cost of the project is $149,785.12 which is $189.88 under budget. Two (2) contract change orders were issued to replace traffic signal incandescent lighting bulbs with new lower energy consumption (LED) lighting bulbs to provide longer run time at the intersections equipped with new battery back-up system units in the event of a power outage. PREPARED BY: Christian Malpicca`, Associate Engineer REVIE�BY: d 1 David G. LiJirector of Public Works Attachments: BBS Location Exhibit Notice of Completion Date Prepared: March 27, 2012 BATTERY BACK-UP SYSTEM (BBS) LOCATIONS (2012) ID LOCA TON 1. GS/BALLENA 2. GS/DIAMOND BAR BLVD 3. DBB/MOUNTAIN LAUREL 4. DBB/PATHFINDER 5. DBB/BREA CANYON ROAD 6. PATH FIN DER/BREA CANYON ROAD 7. GS/LEMON 8. GS/BREA CANYON ROAD 9. BCR/DIAMOND CREST 10. PATHFINDER/BCY/FERN HOLLOW 11. GS/LAVENDER * 12. GS/GRAND AVE 13. GRAND/LAVENDER 14. GRAND/DIAMOND BAR BLVD" 15. DBB/QUAIL SUMMIT 16. GRAND/SHOTGUN LN 17. DBB/SUNSET CROSSING 18. GS/SUNSET CROSSING 19. DBB/TEMPLE/MISSION d r " QMOND BAR 'yew, Q j[ v ., INSTALLED FY 11-12 EXISTING * UPGRADE TO CLARY BBS UNIT RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO CITY OF DIAMOND BAR 21825 COPLEY DRIVE DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA 91765 ATTENTION: CITY CLERIC 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 estatestated below in the property hereinafter - described: 2. The full name of the owner is City of Diamond Bar 3. The frill address of the owner is 21810 Copley Drive - Diamond Bar CA 91765 4. The nature of the interest escalate of the owner is: "In fee" - (If odershirt fee stir ko In de" and insert, for example,`p under convert of praase,'or"lessee's S. The full names and full addresses of all persons, if any, who hold title with the undersigned as joint tenants or as tedants in common - are:. - NAMES ADDRESSES 6. A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was completed on FebruarV 27 2012. The work done was: Installation of Traffic Signal Batter Back -Up Systems at Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Crest Lane Diamond Bar Boulevard/Grand Avenue Diamond Bar Boulevard/Quail Summit Diamond Bar Boulevard/Sunset Crossing Diamond Bar Boulevard/Temple Avenue Golden Springs Drive/Sunset Crossing, Golden Springs Drive/Lavender Grand Avenue/Lavender Grand Avenue/Golden Springs Drive Grand Avenue/Shotgun Lane and Pathfinder Road/Brea Canyon Road -Fern Hollow Drive 7. The name ofthe contractor,.ifany, for such work ofimprovement was VT Electrlo, Inc. June 7 2011 (fine conractorfor work ofimprovement as dveholq losert'Stoae") (Date ofCoptraU) 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 Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Crest Lane Diamond Bar Boulevard/Grand Avenue Diamond Bar. Boulevard/Quail Summit. Diamond Bar Boulevard/Sunset Crossing Diamond Bar Boulevard/Temple Avenue Golden Springs Drive/Sunset Crossinq, Golden Springs Drive/Lavender Grand Avenue/Lavender Grand Avenue/Golden Springs Drive Grand Avenue/Shotgun Lane and Pathfinder Road/ - Brea Canyon Road -Fern Hollow Drive. - - - 9. The street address ofsaid property is"none" (If r, street address hes been officially assigned, insert "none") CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Dated: ire - ficatirn for lndrviderd owner Signatm'e of...d, or corporme dmcer of ms mrna nod in p.,h 2 or his agent II nouI BAR CITY COUNCIL Agenda # 6-8 Meeting Date: April 3 2012 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members ofthe Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Manager TITLE: AMEND CONTRACT AMOUNT WITH PROTECH ENGINEERING CORPORATION FOR THE 21810 EAST COPLEY DRIVE (CITY HALL) INTERCONNECT PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,000 FOR A TOTAL AUTHORIZATION AMOUNT OF $46,850 RECOMMENDATION: Approve. FINANCIAL IMPACT: As part of the Fiscal Year 2011/2012 Budget, $125,000 was appropriated from Prop C Local Return funds for the 21810 East Copley Drive (City Hall) Interconnect Project. The previously authorized contract amount was $39,850 (including a 10% contingency amount of $4,500) and there is sufficient budget to cover the requested contract increase. DISCUSSION: In order to accommodate the move to the new City Hall building, communications infrastructure to support the City's traffic signal system network had to be relocated from its prior termination point at AQMD. This infrastructure, consisting of fiber optic cable and conduit, was rerouted along Copley Drive and into the new City Hall located at 21810 Copley Drive. An existing conduit was available for use on the southerly side of Copley Drive, but a street crossing with new conduit was needed to access the existing conduit. The project required additional potholing for unmarked utilities in the street and the sidewalk to accommodate the new conduit. In addition, there was unanticipated cost associated with locating the existing conduit, removing concrete encasement, and then subsequently adjusting new conduit connections to accommodate the re -use of the existing conduit along Copley Drive. PREPARED BY: Rick Yee, Senior Civil Engineer REVIEWED David G. Liu, Director of Public Works Date Prepared: March 27, 2012 CITY COUNCIL Agenda # 6.9 Meeting Date :April3 2012 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Manager ��o TITLE: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -XX INSTALLING RED CURB ON THE WEST SIDE OF DIAMOND CANYON ROAD FROM BREA CANYON CUTOFF ROAD TO 600 FEET SOUTHERLY RECOMMENDATION: Adopt. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The cost of installation can be accomplished with existing resources within the Public Works Department Operating Budget. BACKGROUNDMISCUSSION: At the February and March 2012 Traffic and Transportation Commission Meetings (See attached meeting minutes), residents and other affected parties were invited to present their concerns related to proposed parking restrictions on Diamond Canyon Road. This item originated because of a petition that was signed by homeowners in the Diamond Canyon Community requesting elimination of all on street parking due to concerns with double parking and u -turns. Based on resident input and comments from those who park along Diamond Canyon Road, it was learned that several of the parked vehicles are carpoolers (several of whom are Diamond Bar residents) that are unable to park at designated Park n Ride facilities in the area. After evaluating the site, consulting with our traffic engineering consultant, and considering both written and oral comments, staff recommended the installation of parking restrictions on the curved portion of Diamond Canyon Road. This installation would include approximately 600 feet of red curb as shown in the attached exhibit. In order to address the double parking and u -turn movements in areas where the line of sight for oncoming traffic is obscured, it is necessary to restrict parking on the curved portion of the road. Street parking would still be permissible along the straight segment of Southbound Diamond Canyon Road. The northbound direction of Diamond Canyon Road would still remain a no parking zone for the entire length of the street. The Traffic Commission concurred with staff's recommendation and also requested staff to re -assess the situation in 6 months to determine if further action is warranted. Notices regarding the intent of the City Council to consider approval of this recommendation were sent to Diamond Canyon Christian Church, Biosense Webster, and all residents in the Diamond Canyon Community (See attached). Notices were also placed on the vehicles parked along Diamond Canyon Road. As of the writing of this report, no responses have been received on the matter. City Council approval is necessary in this situation because the requested length of red curb installation exceeds the administrative authority of the City Engineer. PREPARED BY: Rick Yee, Senior Civil Engineer Date Prepared: March 28, 2012 REVIEWEP�BY: —)" David G. Liu", Director' of Public Works Attachments: Red Curb Exhibit Letter to Residents February 2012 T&T Meeting Minutes March 2012 T&T Meeting Minutes Resolution No. 2012 -XX 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2012- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR INSTALLING RED CURB ON THE WEST SIDE OF DIAMOND CANYON ROAD FROM BREA CANYON CUTOFF ROAD TO 600 FEET SOUTHERLY A. RECITALS. WHEREAS, traffic concerns have been observed and prompted the need to establish a parking restriction that prohibits vehicles from parking along a portion of Diamond Canyon Road; and WHEREAS, Section 22507 of the California Vehicle Code permits local authorities to restrict parking on streets under their jurisdiction. B. RESOLUTION NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Said action is pursuant to Sections 10.08.010 and 10.08.080 of the City of Diamond Bar Municipal Code, as heretofore adopted; SECTION 2. The City Council hereby finds the public health, safety and welfare will be best protected by installing red curb along the west side of Diamond Canyon Road from Brea Canyon Cutoff Road to 600 feet southerly, as herein prescribed; SECTION 3. This resolution shall not become effective until the 600 feet of red curb on Diamond Canyon Road is installed; and SECTION 4. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar hereby authorize and direct the City Engineer to cause said red curbing to be installed. 1 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _ day of , 2012. Ling -Ling Chang, Mayor I, TOMMYE CRIBBINS, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the _ day of , 2012 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST: Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar 2 Ling -Ling Chang Mayor Jack Tanaka Mayor Pro Tem Ron Everett Council Member Carol Herrera Council Member Steve Tye Council Member March 27, 2012 City of Diamond Bar 21810 Copley Drive • Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4178 (909) 839.7000 • Fax (909) 861-3117 www.DiamondBarCA.gov Dear Diamond Bar Resident: SUBJECT: Diamond Canyon Road On -Street Parking At the City's most recent Traffic and Transportation Commission Meeting on March 8th, the Commission approved the proposal to implement parking restrictions on the curved portion of Diamond Canyon Road. This installation would include approximately 600 feet of red curb as shown in the attached exhibit. In order to eliminate the double parking and u -turn movements in areas where the line of sight for oncoming traffic is obscured, it is necessary to restrict parking on the curved portion of the road. Street parking would still be permissible along the straight segment of Diamond Canyon Road. Pending approval by the City Council, the red curb will be installed during the week of April 9t". The City Council will be considering approval of this proposed parking restriction on Tuesday. April 3rd, at South Coast Air Quality Management District, Main Auditorium located at 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, at 6:30 p.m. If you would like further information, please contact Mr. Rick Yee, Senior Civil Engineer, at (909) 839-7043 or via e-mail at ryee@diamondbarca.gov Sincere,y,� David G. Liu, P.E. Director of Public Works FEBRUARY 16, 2012 PACE 3 T&T COMMISSION V. NEW BUSINESS: Diamond Canyon Road On -Street Parking SE/Yee presented staffs report which included seven written responses. Four of the responses were from carpoolers who park on the street and asked that staff retain the parking. Letters were received from the following persons who spoke in favor of keeping the current parking: James Inouye, Rowland Heights; Chris Floursch, Chino Hills; Thomas Chen from Diamond Bar. Three responses against the current parking were received from Brian S.Sim, Qimei Tang, and one from Evelyn Chu of Diamond Bar. A petition was also submitted that included the signatures of 45 residents. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission receive public comments. Peter Valter, 3503 S. Oak Valley Place, spoke against parking on Diamond Canyon Road based on safety issues. He said he did not receive'a written notice from the City about this matter and, therefore, did not have an opportunity to respond in writing. Eric Chang, 20608 E. Oak Meadow Lane, spoke against parking on Diamond Canyon Road based on safety issues. There are no sidewalks and people have to walk in traffic lanes. Jill Chang, 20608 E. Oak Meadow Lane, speaking for herself and on behalf of Qiang Ni, 20602 E. Oak Meadow Lane, spoke against parking on Diamond Canyon Road due to safety concerns for service vehicles and children. Marlene Seng, 3503 S. Oak Valley Place, spoke against parking on Diamond Canyon Road stating her main concern is for pedestrians. Most days there are 20-24 cars parked on the street. There are no sidewalks and also, people throw their trash in the street. She also believed it was close to impossible for the Sheriffs Department to respond to calls on the street in a timely fashion. She said she did not sign the petition because she did not know about it. Anna Ching, 3528 S. Diamond Canyon Road, spoke against parking on Diamond Canyon Road stating her concern was u -turns, lack of accessibility for service vehicles, double parking and trash in the neighborhood. Victor Lee, 853 Pinefalls Avenue, Walnut said he understands the pain of the residents. Because he is a carpooler, he needs a solution because there is not enough room to park on Pathfinder Road. He does not dump trash and tries to be respectful of the residents and he believes those who dump trash should be penalized. No one should be permitted to park close to or at the curve; however, along the street are safe parking areas. He understands that people may be walking but because they, do not have sidewalks, people should not be walking in the area. He asked if the City could leave parking spaces on the street. He also asked if itwas possible to request use of church parking: FEBRUARY 16, 2012 PAGE 4 T&T COMMISSION Jack Phone, 3502 S. Oak Valley Place, spoke against parking on the street due to safety concerns and the amount of trash left on the streets. PWD/Liu thanked residents for their comments before the Commission for their consideration. Staffs goal is to continue soliciting comments until the next Traffic and Transportation Commission meeting in March. At that time, staff will offer its recommendation. The Park'n Ride lots in the City are owned and maintained by the State of California (Caltrans); therefore, the City has no jurisdiction over the lots. The City has little opportunity for input as to what occurs at those lots. However, staff has observed that these lots are fully maximized. The City streets are public streets and because the City is at the crossroads of freeway intersections, individuals utilize this area more frequently and on a regular basis to carpool This presents a balancing act opportunity for residents and the City. Staff hopes to come back to the Commission with workable solutions. B. Centerline Striping on Palomino Drive and EI Encino Drive,: AE/Malpica presented staffs report and recommended that the Traffic and Transportation Commission receive public comments and concur with staff to install approximately 50 feet of double yellow centerline striping. i Ben Mayorga, 23843 Palomino Drive, spoke against the centerline stripping. He feels throughout the day there are diffefent volumes of traffic and the issue is not people crossing over the raised crosswalk; the issue is the speed drivers are traveling. Some of the mitigation efforts have helped with the speeding, but unfortunately, there is too much ground to cover for cars to slow down and drivers use the crosswalk as a` launching pad. In his opinion, centerline striping will do nothing to mitigate the problem of speeding cars. He suggested installing a stop sign inste SE/Yee stated that as'" part of this analysis, the City's Traffic Engineer conducted a stop sign,,warrant analysis for this location and visited the location during peak hours vyhen children are being dropped off, picked up and when they are walking h 'me from school. Based on the analysis, the stop sign was not warranted. ' op signs are not meant to be used for traffic calming; they are meant to b used for traffic control purposes. When stop signs are placed in locations Wfiiere they are not warranted, driver behavior would change. For example, drf'vers would feel that they would lose time by having to stop at Palomino Drive and EI Encino Drive so they would speed up on the approach or on the departure. A stop sign was considered; however, for this reason, it was found to be not warranted for this location: C/Mahike responded to the speaker that the City has no control over school pa ing issues. The City has been advised about what the school is doing but not the City's property and we therefore do not have a say in the matter. owever, she imagined that once the new traffic pattern is implemented at Golden Springs School, the City would then re-evaluate the issue. MARCH 8, 2012 PAGE 2 {j 11 T&T COMMISSION rar�zwl1rrWiI01111r43l A. Minutes of the March 8, 2012 regular meeting. I C/Pincher moved, C/Mahlke seconded, to approve the February 16, 2012 minutes as submitted. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: II. PUBLIC COMMENTS: III. ITEMS FROM STAF Mahlke, Pincher, VC/Mok None Chair/Carrera None A. Receivedland Filed Traffic Enforcement Updates for: 1. Citations December 2011, January and February 2012 2. Collisi s: December 2011, January and February 2012 3. Str'ge Sweeping: December 2011, January and February 2012 IV. OLD BUSINESS: B. Diamond Canyon Road On -Street Parking Peter Valter, 3503 S. Oak Valley Place, said he was not opposed to the red curb installation; however, he wanted to be sure that no parking would remain in place for the remainder of the street. He also requested that a portion of the street to the entry coming into Diamond Canyon Road be red zoned as well, which would still allow for parking of 18 to 20 vehicles. SE/Yee stated that staff is making its recommendation to the Commission as a follow up to the discussion and comments received at the February 16th meeting. In addition, staff has conducted several field visits to the site, as well as consulted with the City's Traffic Engineer. After taking all of the aforementioned into consideration, staff determined that it would be appropriate to install approximately 600 feet of red curb on the southbound side of Diamond Canyon Road and recommends the Commission's approval based on comments and observations regarding the double parking and illegal u -turn movements in the curbed portion of the roadway. At this time, staff is not recommending the full red curb on the straight portion of Diamond Canyon Road, which will remain open to parking. Staff provided notifications to the same residents that were initially contacted when the issue first arose. Staff also placed notices on vehicles that were parked on the street on Tuesday notifying them of tonight's meeting. If the Commission concurs with staff's recommendation, this matter will be taken to the City Council for the final MARCH 8, 2012 PAGE 3 01 T&T COMMISSION decision since the amount of red curbing being requested is beyond the authority of the City Engineer. SE/Yee explained that parking is and will continue to be restricted on the north side of the street. Mr. Valter expressed his concerns about line -of -sight at the driveways along Diamond Canyon Road. SE/Yee responded that staff appreciates his comments and will look into the issue. SE/Yee said he believed that most of the landscaping is on private property and, if so, the City will work with the building owner to make sure the landscaping is trimmed to ensure adequate line -of -sight. If the issue relates to any publicly maintained landscaping, the City will make whatever accommodations are deemed necessary. With respect to parking at that location, staff will investigate the matter and, if so deemed, staff will further restrict parking in the area under the City Engineer's authority, if it involves less than 100 feet of red curbing. C/Pincher asked if parking was restricted on streets across Diamond Canyon Road from this location. SE/Yee explained that the area north of Brea Canyon Cutoff (Fallowfield Drive) has a parking district that restricts parking to permit parking. Staff did not observe the number of vehicles originally reported bythe residents during the past couple of months. Only about 10-12 vehicles were parked on the curve. Should there be an increased demand for parking, line - of -sight concerns would have to take priority over vehicles needing to park. Staff will address that issue as deemed necessary. VC/Mok asked if the area on Fallowfield Drive, across from the office building, is an area that allows parking. He stated that he has not noticed vehicles parking across from the building. When the building was occupied to capacity, cars parked across from the office building. Chair/Carrera asked if vehicles could park in the office building parking lot. SE/Yee responded that he believed that a large portion of the building was vacant. He checked with the City's Planning Division regarding parking needs based on the land use and office space designation, and given the current designation, the amount of parking at that location is sufficient and meets planning guidelines for adequacy of parking for the building. Historically, overflow of employees and/or patrons of the building occurred and created the need for creation of a parking district. Currently, with the vacancy, it is not an issue; however, it would be dealt with at the appropriate time should the building become occupied to a greater extent. SE/Yee shared that staff received a letter dated March 7th, which is the only response from residents in connection with the most recent mailings. The response from S. Ching states that the individual is a resident of the Diamond Canyon Community and reinforces their discontent with the u -turn movements and double parking on Diamond Canyon Road. The writer also indicated their concern about access for emergency vehicles. SE/Yee responded on record to the writer that the roadway width of Diamond Canyon Road is 42 feet and is MARCH 8, 2012 PAGE 4 T&T COMMISSION comparable to, or larger than, many of the City's residential streets which allow parking on both sides of the street. Anna Ching, 3528 S. Diamond Canyon Road, came forward to express that she is concerned about safety on Diamond Canyon Road, a major route for the community because there is only one access. Ms. Ching stated if something happened to block the street, no one could get in or out. She asked the City to allow no parking on the street whatsoever. C/House moved, C/Pincher seconded to accept staff's recommendation to install red curb on Diamond Canyon Road as presented by staff. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: V. NEW BUSINESS: VI. COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: None STATUS OF PREVIOUS ACTION ITEMS: VII. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS: House, Mahlke, Pincher, VC/Mok, Chair/Carrera None None None C/House said he would like to see the mitigation measures on Diamond Canyon Road move forward as quickly as possible, 'if people are making illegal u -turns or dumping trash or double parking, he does not believe that red curbing solves those problems. The City needs to stop the behavior and there needs to be a compromise about what is feasible. C/House also'suggested law enforcement should be urged to cite individuals for illegal and improper behavior. C/Pincher complimented staff/on the City Hall Open House which was very nice. The way staff conducted small group tours was very pleasant and it was nice to see the new offices. VC/Mok commented that it was encouraging to hear that the City is approaching the Diamond Canyon Rdad incrementally. He feels that if the parking situation escalates, the City can address it at a later date. At this point, the 600 feet of red curbing is a good idea and will push the cars further up on the street to allow for better entry onto the street. Making u -turns is technically not illegal on City streets. SE/Yee interjected that the Shecff 's Department states that as long as the u -turn movement does not obstruct t*flow of traffic, it is allowed. He said he believed that roughly 200 feet of clear spa)6e is necessary to make a safe u -turn. The Sheriff's Department can cite motorists for illegal u -turns if there is another vehicle approaching within 200 feet of the u- mmovement. VC/Mok said he believed 42 feet is pretty wide and he actually mad,a u -turn in his SUV on the street with no problem. He was also glad to learn that here would be no parking on the north side of the street. Agenda # Meeting Date: 7.1 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT J��kraaTK�'� 1989 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Cit Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Manager TITLE: Time Extension for Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-10 and Development Review No. 2006-11 PROPERTY OWNER: GSDB Investment Group, LLC, 625 Fair Oaks Avenue #115, South Pasadena, CA 91030 APPLICANT: Joseph Kwok, 625 Fair Oaks Avenue, #115, South Pasadena, CA 91030 PROJECT LOCATION: 23671 Golden Springs Drive (Los Angeles County Assessor's Parcel Number 8281-028-030). RECOMMENDATION: Approve SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting a one-year time extension to obtain permits and begin construction of a nine -unit residential condominium development on the site presently occupied by Diamond Jim's Dairy, located at 23671 Golden Springs Drive. Because the applicant has been actively working with the Public Works/Engineering Department to finalize the grading plan, staff supports the applicant's request for a one year extension of time to begin construction. The extension of time does not change the approved project in any way. The conditions of approval set forth in the City Council Resolution No. 2007-62 and 2007-63 will not change with the approval of an extension of time. BACKGROUND: On November 20, 2007, the City Council approved Tentative Tract Map No. 64881, Negative Declaration No. 2007-03, Zone Change No. 2006-01, Conditional Use Permit GPA No. 2007-03, ZC No. 2007-04, SP No. 2007-01, TTM No. 70687, EIR No. 2007-02 Page 1 No. 2007-10, and Development Review No. 2006-11, to construct a nine -unit, detached residential condominium subdivision at 23671 Golden Springs Drive. The property is located in the High Density Residential -Planned Development Overlay (RH-PD) zone with an underlying General Plan designation of High Density Residential. The approval for the entitlements included a three (3) year time frame to obtain building permits and begin construction. The City Council staff report and resolution approving the project is included in Attachment 3. On February 15, 2011, the City Council approved a one-year time extension to November 20, 2011 for the Conditional Use Permit and the Development Review applications. On November 7, 2011, the applicant requested a second time extension to complete the outstanding prerequisites to permit issuance. On January 24, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve an additional one-year time extension of the Conditional Use Permit No. 2007- 10 and Development Review No. 2006-11. The Planning Commission staff report and resolution approving the time extension is included in Attachment 2. On February 27, 2012, the Public Works/Engineering Department approved the grading plan. According to the applicant, the draft CC&Rs will be completed shortly, and will then be submitted to the City for approval prior to recordation with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office. Upon recordation of the CC&Rs and completion of a few minor conditions or approval, the Public Works/Engineering Department will be able to grant a grading permit. Upon commencement of construction, the project entitlements will be vested. ANALYSIS: Pursuant to Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.66.050, an extension of time may be granted up to a maximum of one year when a request for an extension of time, with good cause, is submitted to the Community Development Department. Because the applicant has been diligently working with the Public Works/Engineering Department to obtain a grading permit, staff supports the applicant's request for a one- year extension of time. Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment 1) to approve a one year time extension for Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-10 and Development Review No. 2006-11, based on the findings of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.66.050, subject to conditions of approval as listed within the draft resolution. GPA No. 2007-03, ZC No. 2007-04, SP No. 2007-01, TTM No. 70687, EIR No. 2007-02 Page 2 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: On March 23, 2012, public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 500 - foot radius of the project site, and on March 23, 2012, 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. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: This project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on that assessment, the City Council adopted Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 on November 20, 2007. No further environmental review is required to extend the time limit for the approved project. Prepared by: Natalie Tob n Planning Tec nician Reviewed by: David D e Assistant City Manager Attachments: Reviewed by: Greg Gubman, AICP Community Development Director 1. City Council Resolution No. 2011 -XX 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2012-02 dated January 24, 2012 3. City Council Resolution No. 2007-62 and 2007-63 dated November 20, 2007 GPA No. 2007-03, ZC No. 2007-04, SP No. 2007-01, TTM No. 70687, EIR No. 2007-02 Page 3 ATTACHMENT 1 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-10 AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2006-11 TO CONSTRUCT A NINE -UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM LOCATED AT 23671 GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 (ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 8281-028-030). A. RECITALS 1. Property Owner and Applicant, Joe Kwok, on behalf of GSDB Investment Group, LLC, has filed an application request for a one-year extension of time for Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-10 and Development Review No. 2006-11 to construct a new nine -unit residential condominium located at 23671 Golden Springs Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California ("Project Site"). Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit and Development Review shall be referred to as the "Proposed Project." 2. On November 20, 2007, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on the Proposed Project. At that time, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2007-62 and 2007-63 approving the project. This approval included an initial three-year expiration date for the applicant to commence construction. 3. On February 15, 2011, the City Council 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. At that time, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2011-04 approving a one-year time extension. 4. The subject property is made up of one parcel totaling 0.62 acres. It is located in the High Density Residential -Planned Development Overlay (RH-PD) zone with an underlying General Plan designation of High Density Residential. 5. The legal description of the subject property is Tract 24725 Lot 20. The Assessor's Parcel Number is 8281-028-030. 6. Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section (DBMC) 22.66.050 authorizes the Planning Commission to recommend approval to the City Council for a time extension for approved projects, provided that certain findings can be made to establish good cause for such time extensions. 7. On January 23, 2012, notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 500 -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. 8. On January 24, 2012, 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. At that time, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the time extension, subject to conditions. 9. On March 23, 2012, notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 500 -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. 10. On April 3, 2012, the City Council 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 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. On November 20, 2007, the City Council determined the Project required a Negative Declaration (ND) and approved the ND and related documents in reference to the Project. ND No. 2007-03 has been prepared according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. The 20 -day public review period for the ND began August 16, 2007, and ended September 4, 2007. Furthermore, the no further environmental review is required to extend the time limit for the approved project. C. FINDINGS OF FACT Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein and as prescribed under Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 22.66.050, this City Council hereby finds as follows: Extension of Time Findings 1. There have been no changes to the provision of the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, or the Development Code applicable to the project since the approval of the Development Review; There have been no changes to the provision of the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, or the Development Code. The construction of a nine -unit residential condominium is consistent with the zoning designation and will not be altered in any way by approving the requested extension of time and all conditions of approval adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2007-62 and 2007-63 will remain in full force and effect. 2. There have been no changes to the character of the site or its surroundings that 2 City Council Resolution No. 2012 -XX affect how the policies of the General Plan or other standards of the Subdivision Ordinance or the Development Code apply to the project; and Since the time that the City Council approved the project, there have been no changes to the character of the site or its surroundings that affect how the policies of the General Plan or other standards of the Subdivision Ordinance or the Development Code apply to the project. 3. There have been no changes to the capacities of community resources, including but not limited to water supply, sewage treatment or disposal facilities, roads or schools so that there is no longer sufficient remaining capacity to serve the project. Since the time that the City Council approved the project, there have been no changes to the capacities of community resources, including but not limited to water supply, sewage treatment or disposal facilities, roads or schools, so that there is no longer sufficient remaining capacity to serve the project. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein and as prescribed under DBMC Section 22.66.050, the City Council hereby finds and approves the time extension of Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-10 and Development Review No. 2006-11, subject to the following conditions: 1. The project shall substantially conform to the approved plans as submitted and approved by the City Council and on file with the Community Development Department. 2. All conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-10 and Development Review No. 2006-11 approved by City Council Resolution No. 2007-62 and 2007-63 shall remain in full force and effect except as amended herein. 3. This approval shall extend the expiration date of Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-10 and Development Review No. 2006-11 to November 20, 2012. 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 Mr. Joe Kwok, GSDB Investment Group, LLC, 625 Fair Oaks Avenue, #115, South Pasadena, CA 91030. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 3rd DAY OF APRIL 2012, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. 0 Ling Ling Chang, Mayor 3 City Council Resolution No. 2012 -XX 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 3rd day of April, 2012, 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 4 City Council Resolution No. 2012 -XX ATTACHMENT 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2012-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-10 AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2006-11 TO CONSTRUCT A NINE -UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDIMUNIUM LOCATED AT 23671 GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 (APN 8281-028-030). A. RECITALS 1. On September 11, 2007, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-10 and Development Review No. 2006-11 to construct a new nine -unit residential condominium located at 23671 Golden Springs Drive, Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California ("Project Site"). Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit and Development Review shall be referred to as the "Proposed Project." At that time, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2007-63 recommending City Council approval of the application. 2. On November 20, 2007, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on the Proposed Project. This approval included an initial three-year expiration date for the applicant to commence construction. 3. The subject property is made up of one parcel totaling 0.62 acres. It is located in the High Density Residential -Planned Development Overlay (RH-PD) zone with an underlying General Plan designation of High Density Residential 4. The legal description of the subject property is Tract 24725 Lot 20. The Assessor's Parcel Number is 8281-028-030. 5. Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section (DBMC) 22.66.050 authorizes the Planning Commission to recommend approval to the City Council for a time extension for approved projects, provided that certain findings can be made to establish good cause for such time extensions. 6. On October 19, 2010, applicant, Joe Kwok, on behalf of GSDB Investment Group, LLC, filed a request for a one-year extension of time for the Project. 7. On January 11,2011, 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. On February 15, 2011, the City Council 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. The City Council approved a one year time extension for the applicant to commence construction. 9. On November 11, 2011, applicant, Joe Kwok, on behalf of GSDB Investment Group, LLC, filed a request for a one-year extension of time for the Project. 10. On January 13, 2012, notification of the public hearing for this project was published in -the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 500400t 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. 11. On January 24, 2012, 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. On September 11, 2007, the Planning Commission determined the Project required a Negative Declaration (ND). ND No. 2007-03 has been prepared according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. The 20 -day public review period for the ND began August 16, 2007, and ended September 4, 2007. Furthermore, the City Council has reviewed and approved the ND and related documents in reference to the Project. 3. Based on the findings and conclusions setforth herein, this Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: Extension of Time Findings Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein and as prescribed under DBMC Section 22.66.050, this Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: 1. There have been no changes to the provision of the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, or the Development Code applicable to the project since the approval of the Development Review; There have been no changes to the provision of the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, or the Development Code. The construction of a nine -unit residential condominium is consistent with the zoning designation and will not be altered in any way by approving the requested extension of time and all conditions of approval adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2007-63 will remain in full force and effect. 2. There have been no changes to the character of the site or its surroundings that affect how the policies of the General Plan or other standards of the Subdivision Ordinance or the Development, Code apply to the project; and Since the time the Planning Commission recommended approval of the project to the City Council, there have been no changes to the character of the site or its surroundings that affect how the policies of the General Plan or other standards of the Subdivision Ordinance or the Development Code apply to the project. 2 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2012 02 3. There have been no changes to the capacities of community resources, including but not limited to water supply, sewage treatment or disposal facihities, roads or schools so that there is no longer sufficient remaining capacity to serve the project. Since the time the Planning Commission recommended the approval of the project to the City Council, there have been no changes to the capacities of community . resources, including but not limited to water supply, sewage treatment or disposal facilities, roads or schools, so that there is no longer sufficient remaining capacity to serve the project Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above and as prescribed under DBMC Section 22.66.050, this Planning Commission hereby recommends to City Council the approval of the Application subject to the following conditions: 1. The project shall substantially conform to the approved plans as submitted and approved by the City Council and on file with the Community Development Department. 2. All conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No.2007-10 and Development Review No. 2006-11 approved by City Council Resolution No. 2007-63 shall remain in full force and effect except as amended herein. 3. This approval shall extend the expiration date of Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-10 and Development Review No. 2006-11 to November 20, 2012. 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 . Mr. Joe Kwok, GSDB Investment Group, LLC, 625 Fair Oaks Avenue, #115, South Pasadena, CA 91030 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24th DAY OF JANUARY 2012, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. k- Jac By: S ah, 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 24th day of January, 2012, by the following vote: ,. AYES: - Commissioners: Lin, Nelson, Torng, Chair/Shah. NOES: , Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: VC/Lee ABSTAIN: 'Commissioners: None ATTEST -- Greg Gubman, Secretary 3 - - Planning Commission Resolution ATTACHMENT 3 CITY COUNCIL ' RESOLUTION NO. 2007- 63 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND 13AR ADOPTING OF NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2007-03 AND APPROVING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-10 AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 2006-11 FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 64881, A NINE UNIT DETACHED RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION, LOCATED AT 23671 GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA (APN NO. 82814-028-030) A. RECITALS The property owner/applicant, Joe Kwok, GSDB Investment Group, LLC, has filed an application for Planned Development Overlay District Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-10 and Development Review No. 2006-11 for Tentative Tract Map No. 64881 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Planned Development Overlay Conditional Use Permit and Development Review shall be referred to as the "Application." ' 2. On September 11, 2007, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. Atthattime, the City Council adopted Resolution No.2007-46 recommending City Council approval of the application 3'. On November 2, 2007, public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 210 property owners of record within a 500 -foot radius of the project site, a copy of the legal notice was posted at the City's designated community posting sites, and a public notice display board was posted at the site. On November 8, 2007 notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. 4. On November 20, 2007, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: ' 1. This City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. The City Council hereby finds that the project identified above in this Resolution required a Negative Declaration (ND). ND No. 2007-03 has been prepared according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. The 20 day public review period for the ND began August 16, 2007, and ended September 4, 2007. Furthermore, the City Council has reviewed the ND and related documents in reference to the Application. 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 wildlife 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, this City Council hereby finds as follows: (a) The project site is an irregularly shaped lot located on the northerly side of Golden Springs Drive west of Platina Drive. It is approximately 27,003 square feet (0.62 acres) in area. The site is elevated above the surrounding properties by retaining walls and slopes. From 1966 to 1986, the project site was occupied by a service station. In 1986, the site building was remodeled into a mini -mart with drive-thru known as Diamond Jim's Dairy. (b) The project site has a General Plan land use designation of High Density Residential (RH) Maximum 20 DU/AC which authorizes a maximum density of 20 dwelling units per acre. (c) The project site is within the Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) zone. However, Zone Change No. 2006-01 within City Council Resolution No. 2007-44 recommends that the City Council approve the zone change from C-1 to High Density Residential -Planned Development (RH-PD) for General Plan compliance. (d) __u.. si.... 4_11—-;n ,nne nnrl imps currnund the Droiect site: l�Clltll all Site ulc wnvvv,n w„�. --- General Plan --- - - Zone Uses Project High Density Residential - Neighborhood Commercial Site Maximum 20 Dwelling Unit Commercial (C-1) Per Acre RH North & RH C-1 and R-1-8,000 Residential & Condoms West South Low Density Residential R-3-8,000 Church Maximum 3 Dwelling Units Per acre RL 2 2007--53 7 (e) The Application request includes the following: (1) Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 to address impacts that the proposed project may have on the environment; (2) Zone Change application to change the project site's zoning from C-1 to RH-PD -20 Dwelling Units/Per Acre for General Plan compliance; (3) Subdivision application to create a tract map for condominium purposes; (4) Conditional Use Permit application to establish a Planned Development Overlay District (PD) to modify setbacks and wall heights that are appropriate for the property characteristics and the type of development proposed for the site; and (5) Development Review application to demolish the existing mini- ma) with drive-thru and to review the project's overall design and site plan configuration and its effect on surrounding properties. Conditional Use Permit for Planned Development Overlay District In accordance to Municipal Code Section 22.22.150, pertaining to required findings for a Conditional Use Permit for Planned Development Overlay District, the City Council finds as follows: (f) Zone Change 2006-01 will change the existing zoning from C-1 to High Density Residential (RH) which is consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the project site. However, the Planned Development Overlay is needed because units 7 through 9 will not maintain the required 20 foot front setback. Unit 7 will maintain a varying front setback of 20 to 17.5 feet. Units 8 and 9 will maintain a setback of 17.5 feet. Because of the irregular shape of the site, the angle of the rear property line and the requirement to maintain a minimum 26 foot wide drive isle for backing out of the garages, and to have an end product that marketable in terms of livable square footage, a consistent 20 foot front setback can not be maintained. Considering the about of patio and planting areas in the front yards and common area between units 7 and 8, staff believes that the front setbacks provided for these units is appropriate for this project. For approximately 10 lineal feet a retaining wall with an exposed height of nine feet is proposed at the west property line. Another wall in the same area which encloses the side yard for unit one is proposed at the same height. These walls are needed because of the grade difference between the neighboring property and the project site. Almost all of the exposed height of the walls will be viewed from inside the project site. The applicant believes that the exposed height of the walls could be reduced to eight feet. Because of the grade 007-63 differences and the lineal feet of the walls is minimal and the walls will be viewed from inside the project site, staff believes that the height of the walls is appropriate for this project. Since the rear of each condominium unit faces the center of the project site and drive isle that is 26 to 30 ft. wide, there is no rear yard. However, considering that 24 percent of the project site is landscaped which exceeds the minimum 15 percent requirement and the garages are not part of the streetscape, staff believes that the placement of the units is appropriate. Additionally, the purpose of setbacks is to provide light and separation between structures. The drive isle provides this. (g) The proposed map is a non -gated subdivision for a nine unit detached condominium development with private entry and drive isle. The allowed density for the High Density Residential General Plan designation and zoning district is 20 units per acre. The project is 27,003 square feet (0.62 acres) could be developed with a maximum density of 12 units. In orderto meet the City's development standards and provide the appropriate access and drive isles, landscaping, and condominium units that are marketable in size, the project is proposed at nine units which is 25 percent below the General Plan and zoning allowed density. Furthermore, the proposed land use represents an extension of the existing development pattern in the project area which is condominiums and single-family residential. As a result, TTM 64881 is consistent with the General Plan including its design and improvements. (h) As discussed in Finding (g), Q), (1) and (o) above, the design, location, size and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity. (i) The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed including access, provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and the absence of physical constraints as described in Findings (g), (j), (1) and (o) above. (j) The ND reviewed issues related to public interest, health, safety and improvement related to this project. It was found that the project will not have a significant effect on these issues. In some instances mitigation measures are incorporated into the project to ensure that the project's effect on these issues will be "less than significant". Therefore, granting the Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, injurious to persons, property, or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located. 0 2007--63 (k) The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The proposed project required a Negative Declaration (ND). ND No. 2007-03 has been prepared according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. 5. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above, the City Council hereby recommends that the City Council approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-10 Planned Development Overlay and Development Review No. 2006-11 for TTM No. 64881 subject to the following conditions and Standard Conditions attached and referenced herein: a. GENERAL 1. This approval shall be null and void and of no effect unless the Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 is adopted and TTM No. 64881, Zone Change No. 2006-01, Planned Development Overlay Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-10 and Development Review No. 2006-11 are approved. This approval is valid for three years. Two extensions of time, one year each, may be approved pursuant to Development Code Section 22.66. I b. SITE DEVELOPMENT 1. Approximately ten lineal feet of a retaining wall located at the west property line and a wall in the same area which encloses the side yard for unit one is shall not exceed an exposed height of eight feet. 2. Exterior or perimeter walls shall be constructed from split face block with a decorative cap. Interior walls may be stucco in a color to match and/or complement the condominium units. Sample of said construction materials and colors shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to plan check submittal. 3. Uses permitted in the RH zoning district as listed in the Development Code shall be the only uses allowed in the RH- PD zoning designation for the project site. 4. Prior to final map, the applicant shall provide a final landscape and irrigation plan listing all plant species, size quantity and location for Planning Division review and approval. All ' landscaping and irrigation shall be installed prior to final inspection or Certificate of Occupancy 5 Prior to plan check submittal, the applicant shall submit an exterior lighting plan and photometric study for Planning Division review and approval. All lighting shall be designed to confine direct rays to the subject property. Spillage beyond the property lines shall not be permitted. Lighting shall be on a time -clock or photo -sensor system. C. BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION 1. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit to the Building and Safety Division the design of all retaining walls for review and approval concurrently with the grading plan check. LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE PREVENTION 1. Access shall comply with Section 902 of the Fire Code, which requires all weather access. All weather access my require paving. 2. Fire Department access shall be extended to within 150 feet distance of any exterior portion of all structures. 3. Where driveways extend further than 300 feet and are of single access design, turnarounds suitable for fire protection equipment use shall be provided and shown on the final map. Turnarounds shall be designed, constructed and maintained to insure their integrity for Fire Department use. Where topography dictates, turnarounds shall be provided for driveways that extend over150 feet in length. 4. Private driveways shall be indicated on the final map as "Private Driveway and Fire Lane" with the widths clearly depicted and shall be maintained -in accordance with the Fire Code. 5. Vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable throughout construction to all required fire hydrants. All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted prior to construction. 6. Applicant shall provide Fire Department or City approved street signs and building access numbers prior to occupancy. 7. Applicant shall provide water mains, fire hydrants and fire flows as required by the County of Los Angeles Fire Department, for all land shown on map which shall be recorded. 0 20UT U3 8. Fire hydrant shall conform to the following requirements: ' (a) Install one fire hydrant; (b) Measure 6" x 4" x 2%" brass or bronze, conforming to current AWWA standards C503 or approved equal; (c) On site hydrants shall be installed a minimum of 25 feet from a structure or protected by two hour fire wall. 9. The required fire flow for public fire hydrants at this location shall be 1500 gallons per minute at 20 psi for duration of two hours, over and above maximum daily domestic demand. Two hydrant flowing simultaneously, may be used to achieve the required fire flow 10. All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted or bonded for prior to final map approval. 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: Mr. Joe Kwok, GSDB Investment Group, LLC, 625 Fair Oak Avenue, #115, South Pasadena, CA 91030 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2007, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. BY: Steve Ty Mayor 7 20G7--63 I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 20jak day ofNoy t y+' f>— , 2007 by the following vote: AYES: Council Members: Chz ngr ,.verettc ;./Tye NOES: Council Members: iiolle ABSENT: Council Members: Nuiie ABSTAIN: Council Members: iu=:e H. Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk, City of Diamond Bar 2007-63 1 i COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS USE PERMITS, COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL NEW AND REMODELED STRUCTURES PROJECT #: TTM No. 64881, ND No. 2007-03 ZC No. 2006-01/Planned Development Overlay CUP No. 2007-11 and DR No 2006-11 SUBJECT: Nine unit, detached, residential condominium subdivision APLICANT: Joe Kwok 23671 Golden Springs Drive LOCATION: 23671 Golden Springs Drive ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION AT (909) 839-7030, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS In accordance with Government Code Section 66474.9(b) (1), the applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, and its officers, agents and employees, from any claim, action, or proceeding to attack, set-aside, void or annul, the approval of Tentative Tract No. 64881 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) Applicant 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) Applicant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the City descendents. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action of proceeding, and shall cooperate fully in the defense thereof. 2. Applicant shall include signed copies of City Council Resolution Nos. 2007- 44, 2007-45, 2007-46, Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 3. Revised plans (such as but not limited to site plan, elevations, landscape/irrigation plan, grading plan, etc.,) incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval prior to the plan check. 4. Notwithstanding any previous subsection of the resolution, the Department of Fish and Game requires payment of the fee pursuant to Section 711.4 of that Fish and Game Code. Said payment shall be made by the applicant to the city within five days of this approval. 5. The project site shall be maintained and operated in full compliance with the conditions of approval and all laws, or other applicable regulations. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and any applicable Specific Plan in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 7. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.,) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 8. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all conditions of approval shall be completed. B. FEES/DEPOSITS 1. Applicant shall pay development fees (including but not limited to Planning, Building and Safety Divisions, Public Works/Engineering Department and Mitigation Monitoring) at the established rates, prior to final map approval, issuance of building or grading permit (whichever comes first), as required by the City. School fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permit. In addition, the applicant shall pay all remaining prorated City project review and processing fees prior to the map's recordation or issuance of building permit, whichever come first. 2. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall pay a fee to the City in -lieu of dedication for parkland pursuant to Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 21.32. 10 I3. Prior to any public hearing or final map approval, all deposit accounts for the processing of this project shall have no deficits. 4. Notwithstanding any previous subsection of the resolution, the Department of Fish and Game required payment of the fee pursuant to Section 711.4 of that Fish and Game Code. Said payment shall be made by the applicant to the city within five days of this grant's approval. C. TIME LIMITS 1. This approval shall not be effective for any purpose until the applicant and owner of the property involved have filed within 15 days of approval of this map, at the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department/ Planning Division an Affidavit of Acceptance stating that they are aware of and agree to accept all the conditions of this approval. 2. In accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66463.5, TTM No. 64881 is valid for three years. An extension of time may be requested in writing and shall only be considered if submitted to the city no less than 60 days prior to the approval's expiration date. Final map approval will not be granted unless the map is in substantial compliance with TTM No. 64881 including all conditions and the applicant has entered into a subdivision improvement agreement to the satisfaction of the City Attorney. D. SITE DEVELOPMENT 1. The project site shall be developed in substantial conformance with TTM No. 64881 except as conditions herein, and as conditioned in Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-11 and Development Review No. 2006-11 submitted to and recommended approval by the City Council to the City Council collectively referenced herein as Exhibit "A" - the subdivision map and site plan, elevations, grading plan, sections, landscape/irrigation plans, and colors and materials board, Exhibit "B"- Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 dated September 11, 2007, as modified herein. 2. A Home Owner's Association (HOA) shall be formed. The HOA shall have Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) and Articles of Incorporation of the HOA are subject to the approval of Planning Division and Public Works/Engineering Department and the City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be recorded concurrently with the final map or prior to the issuance of any City permits, which ever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. The HOA shall submit to the Planning Division a list of the ' names and addresses of the officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and whenever said information changes. 3. All ground -mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, air conditioning condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and 11 adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonrywalls, berms, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. 4. Prior to final map approval or issuance of building permit, whichever come first, street names shall be submitted for City review and approval. Street names shall not duplicate existing streets within the City of Diamond Bar's postal service zip code areas. 5. House numbering plans shall be submitted to and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. House numbering plans shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permits. 6. All lighting fixtures adjacent to interior property lines shall be approved by the Planning Division as to type, orientation and height. 7. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. E. LANDSCAPE, PRESERVED AND PROTECTED TREES 1. Prior to final map approval, a detailed landscape/irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits and recordation of the map, which ever occurs first. F. SOLID WASTE 1. The site shall be maintained in a condition, which is free of debris both during and after the construction, addition, or implementation of the entitlement granted herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent to construction shall be done only by the property owner, applicant or by a duly permitted waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial, construction, and industrial areas within the City. It shall be the applicant's obligation to insure that the waste contractor utilized has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar to provide such services. 2. Mandatory solid waste disposal services shall be provided by the City franchised waste hauler to all parcels/lots or uses affected by approval of this project. 12 3. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-ups shall be for ' individual units with all receptacles shielded from public view. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, (909) 839-7040, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. GENERAL 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. A permit from the Los Angeles County Public Works Department shall be required for work within its right-of-way or connection to its facilities. Prior to final map approval, written certification that all utility services and any other service related to the site shall be available to serve the proposed project and shall be submitted to the City. Such letters shall be issued by the district, utility and cable television company, within ninety (90) days prior to final map approval. ' 4. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit to the City Engineer the detail cost estimates for bonding purposes of all public improvements. 5. Priorto final map approval, if any public or private improvements required as part of this map have not been completed by applicant and accepted by the City, applicant shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the City and shall post the appropriate security. 6. Prior to final map approval all site grading, landscaping, irrigation, street, sewer and storm drain improvement plans shall be approved by the City Engineer, surety shall be posted, and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all public and private improvements. 7. Prior to issuance of grading permits, surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all drainage facilities necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 8. Any details or notes which may be inconsistent with requirement or ordinances, general conditions or approval, or City policies shall be specifically approved in other conditions or ordinance requirements are modified to those shown on the tentative parcel map upon approval by the Advisory agency. ' 9. All identified geologic hazards within the vesting tentative tract map boundaries which cannot be eliminated as approved by the City Engineer shall be indicated on the final map as 'Restricted Use Area" subject to 13 geologic hazard. The applicant shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit the erection of buildings or other structures within such restricted use areas shown on the final map. 10. Easements for disposal of drainage water onto or over adjacent parcels shall be delineated and shown on the final map, as approved by the City Engineer. 11. Prior to any work performed in the street right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Department in addition to any other permits required. 12. Applicant shall label and delineate on the final map any private drives or fire lanes to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 13. 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. 14. After the final map records, applicant shall submit to the Public Works/Engineering Department, at no costto 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. 15. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall provide to the City as built mylars, stamped by appropriate individuals certifying the plan for all improvements at no cost to the City. 16. Applicant shall contribute funds to a separate engineering trust deposit against which charges can be made by the City or its representatives for services rendered. Charges shall be on an hourly basis and shall include any City administrative costs. 17. Applicant shall provide digitized information in a format defined by the City for all related plans, at no cost to the City. 18. All activities/improvements proposed for this TTM No. 64881 shall be wholly contained within the boundaries of the map. Should any off-site activities/improvements be required, approval shall be obtained from the affected property owner and the City as required by the City Engineer. B. GRADING No grading or any staging or construction shall be performed prior to final map approval by the City Council and map recordation. All pertinent improvement plans shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval by the City Council. 14 2. Retaining wall location shall be shown on the grading plan and submitted with a soils report to the Public Works/Engineering Department for review and approval concurrently with the grading plan check. 3. Exterior grading and construction activities and the transportation of equipment and materials and operation of heavy grading equipment shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. Dust generated by grading and construction activities shall be reduced by watering the soil prior to and during the activities and in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 402 and Rule 403. Reclaimed water shall be utilized whenever possible. Additionally, all construction equipment shall be properly muffled to reduce noise levels. 4. All equipment staging areas shall be located on the project site. Staging area, including material stockpile and equipment storage area, shall be enclosed within a 6 foot -high chain link fence. All access points in the defense shall be locked whenever the construction site is not supervised. 5. Precise grading plans for each lot shall be submitted to the Community Development Department/Planning Division for approval priorto issuance of building permits. (This may be on an incremental or composite basis). ' 6. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California Building Code, City Grading Ordinance, Hillside Management Ordinance and acceptable grading practices. 7. The maximum grade of driveways serving building pad areas shall be 15 percent. In hillside areas driveway grades exceeding 10 percent shall have parking landings with a minimum 16 feet deep and shall not exceed five (5) percent grade or as required by the City Engineer. Driveways with a slope of 15 percent shall incorporate grooves for traction into the construction as required by the City Engineer. 8. At the time of submittal of the 40 -scale grading plan for plan check, a detailed soils and geology report shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval. Said report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer and/or geologist licensed by the State of California. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the report shall address, but not be limited to the following: a. Stability analyses of daylight shear keys with a 1:1 projection from daylight to slide plane; a projection plane shall have a safety factor of 1.5. b. All soils and geotechnical constraints (i.e., landslides, shear key ' locations, etc.,) shall be delineated in detail with respect to proposed building envelopes. Restricted use areas and structural setbacks shall be considered and delineated prior to recordation of the final map. 15 C. Soil remediation measures shall be designed for a ,worst case" geologic interpretation subject to verification in the field during grading. d. The extent of any remedial grading into natural areas shall be clearly defined on the grading plans. e. Areas of potential for debris flow shall be defined and proper remedial measures implemented as approved by the City Engineer. f. Gross stability of all fill slopes shall be analyzed as part of geotechnical report, including remedial fill that replaces natural slope. g. Stability of all proposed slopes shall be confirmed by analysis as approved by the City Engineer. h. All geologic data including landslides and exploratory excavations must be shown on a consolidated geotechnical map using the 40 - scale final grading plan as a base. i. All geotechnical and soils related findings and recommendations shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any grading permits and recordation of the final map. 3. Prior to issuance of grading permits, storm drain improvement plans shall be approved by the City Engineer and Los Angeles County Public Works Department and surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all drainage facilities to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 10. Final grading plans shall be designed in compliance with the recommendations of the final detailed soils and engineering geology reports. All remedial earthwork specified in the final report shall be incorporated into the grading plans. Final grading plans shall be signed and stamped by a California registered Civil Engineer, registered Geotechnical Engineer and registered Engineering Geologist and approved by the City Engineer. 11. A Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP) conforming to City Ordinance is required to be incorporated into the grading plan and approved by the City Engineer. The applicant shall incorporate Structural or Treatment Control Best Management Practices for storm water runoff into the grading plans for construction and post -construction activities respectively. 12. An erosion control plan shall be approved by the City Engineer. Erosion control plans shall be made in accordance to the City's NPDES requirements. 13. Submit a stockpile plan showing the proposed location for stockpile for grading export materials, and the route of transport. 16 14. Prepare a horizontal control plan and submit concurrently with the grading ' plan for review and approval. 15. Prior to the issuance of Building Permits, a pre -construction meeting must be held at the project site with the grading contractor, applicant, and city grading inspector at least 48 hours prior to commencing grading operations. 16. Rough Grade certifications by project soils engineer shall be submitted prior to issuance of building permits for the foundations of structures. Retaining wall permit may be issued without a rough grade certificate. 17. Final Grade certifications by project soils engineer and civil engineers shall be submitted to the Public Works/Engineering Department prior to the issuance of any project final inspections/certificate of occupancy. C. DRAINAGE 1. All terrace drains and drainage channels shall be constructed in muted earth tones so as not to impart adverse visual impacts. Terrace drains shall follow landform slope configuration and shall not be placed in an exposed positions. All down drains shall be hidden in swales diagonally or curvilinear across a slope face. 2. All drainage improvements necessary for dewatering and protecting the subdivided properties shall be installed prior to issuance of building permits, for construction upon any parcel that may be subject to drainage flows entering, leaving, or within a parcel relative to which a building permit is requested. 3. All identified flood hazard locations within the tentative map boundaries which cannot be eliminated as approved by the City Engineer shall be shown on the final map and delineated as "Flood Hazard Area." 4. Storm drainage facilities shall be constructed within the street right-of-way or in easements satisfactory to the City Engineer and the Los Angeles County Flood Control Districts. All storm drain facilities plans shall be plan checked by the City and County of Los Angeles and all fees required shall be paid by the applicant. 5. A final drainage study and final drainage/storm drain plan in a 24" x 36" sheet format shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer and Los Angeles Public Works Department prior to grading permit. All drainage facilities shall be designed and constructed as required by the City Engineer ' and in accordance with County of Los Angeles Standards. Private (and future) easements for storm drain purposes shall be offered and shown on the final map for dedication to the City. 17 3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a complete hydrology and hydraulic study shall be prepared by a Civil Engineer registered in the State of California to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Los Angeles Public Works Department. 7. A comprehensive maintenance plan/program shall be submitted concurrently with the storm drain plans to the Public Works/Engineering Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. D. STREETIMPROVEMENT The applicant shall replace and record any centerline ties and monuments that are removed as part of this construction with the Los Angeles County Public Works Survey Division. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall provide written permission to the satisfaction of the City from any property owners which will be affected by offsite grading. Prior to building occupancy, applicant shall construct base and pavement for all streets in accordance with soils report prepared by a California registered soils engineer and approved by the City Engineer or as otherwise directed by the City Engineer. E. UTILITIES Easements, satisfactory to the City Engineer and the utility companies, for public utility and public services purposes shall be offered and shown on the detailed site plan for dedication to the City. �_. Prior to final map approval, a water system with appurtenant facilities to serve all lots/parcels in the land division designed to the Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD) specifications shall be provided and approved by the City Engineer. The system shall include fire hydrants of the type and location as determined by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. The water mains shall be sized to accommodate the total domestic and fire flows to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, WVWD and Fire Department. 3. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall construct or enter into an improvement agreement with the City guaranteeing construction of the necessary improvements to the existing water system according to Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD) specifications to accommodate the total domestic and fire flows as may be required by the City Engineer, WVWD and Fire Department. 4. Prior to final map approval or issuance of building permit whichever comes first, written certification that all utility services and any other service related to the site shall be available to serve the proposed project and shall be 18 ' submitted to the City. Such letters shall be issued by the district, utility and cable television company, if applicable, within ninety (90) days prior issuance of grading permits. 5. Prior to recordation of final map, applicant shall provide separate underground utility services to each parcel per Section 21.30 of Title 21 of the City Code, including water, gas, electric power, telephone and cable TV, in accordance with the respective utility company standards. Easements required by the utility companies shall be approved by the City Engineer. Applicant shall relocate and underground any existing on-site utilities to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the respective utility owner. Underground utilities shall not be constructed within the drip line of any mature tree except as approved by a registered arborist. F. SEWERS 1. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit a sanitary sewer area study to the City and County Engineer to verify that capacity is available in the sewerage system to be used as the outfall for the sewers in this land division. If the system is found to be of insufficient capacity, the problem ' shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the County Engineer. 2. Each dwelling unit shall be served by a separate sewer lateral which shall not cross any other lot lines. The sanitary sewer system serving the tract shall be connected to the City or District sewer system. Said system shall be of the size, grade and depth approved by the City Engineer, County Sanitation District and Los Angeles County Public Works and surety shall be provided and an agreement executed prior to approval of the final map. 3. Applicant shall obtain connection permit(s) from the City and County Sanitation District prior to issuance of building permits. The area within the tentative map boundaries shall be annexed into the County Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District and appropriate easements for all sewer main and trunk lines shall be shown on the final map and offered for dedication on the final map. 4. Applicant, at applicant's sole cost and expense, shall construct the sewer system in accordance with the City, Los Angeles County Public Works Division and County Sanitation District Standards prior to occupancy. . APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, ' (909) 839-7020, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Plans shall conform to State and Local Building Code (i.e., 2001 California Building Code, California Plumbing Code, California Mechanical Code, and the 2001 National Electrical Code) requirements and all other applicable 19 construction codes, ordinances and regulations in effect at the time of plan check submittal. 2. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been met. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 3. The minimum design load for wind in this area is 80 M.P.H. exposures "C and the site is within seismic zone four (4). The applicant shall submit drawings and calculations prepared by a California State licensed Architect/Engineer with wet stamp and signature. 4. This project shall comply with the energy conservation requirements of the State of California Energy Commission. Kitchen and bathroom lights shall be fluorescent. 5. Submit Public Works/Engineering Department approved grading plans showing clearly all finish elevations, drainage, and retaining walls locations. 6. Number of plumbing fixtures shall be in compliance with CBC Appendix 29. 7. All balconies shall be designed for 601b. live load. 8. Guardrails shall be designed for 20 load applied laterally at the top of the rail. 9. Submit grading plans showing clearly all finish elevations, drainage, and retaining wall locations. No building permits shall be issued prior to submitting a pad certification. 10. All retaining walls shall be submitted to the Building & Safety and Public Work Departments for review and approval. 11. Check drainage patterns with Engineering Department. Surface water shall drain away from building at a 2% minimum slope. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE PREVENTION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: Emergency access shall be provided, maintaining free and clear, a minimum 28 foot at all times during construction in accordance with Fire Department requirements. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Fire Department that temporary water supply for fire protection is available pending completion of the required fire protection system. 20 3. Prior to recordation, the final map shall comply with all Fire Department ' requirements. n L 21 END RESOLUTION NO. 2007 E2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 64881 AND ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO, 2007-03 SET FORTH THEREIN FOR A NINE UNIT CONDOMINIUM RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 23671 GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE, DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA (APN NO. 8281-028-030). A. RECITALS 1. The property owner/applicant, Joe Kwok, GSDB Investment Group, LLC, has filed an application for approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 64881 and adoption of Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Map and Negative Declaration shall be referred to as the "Application." 2. On September 11, 2007, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. At that time, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.2007-45 recommending City Council approval of the application 3 On November 2, 2007, public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 210 property owners of record within a 500 -foot radius of the project site, a copy of the legal notice was posted at the City's designated community posting sites, and a public notice display board was posted at the site. On November 8, 2007 notification of the public hearing for this project was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. 4. On November 20, 2007, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on the Application. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. This City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct_ 2; The City Council hereby finds that the project identified above in this Resolution required a Negative Declaration (ND). NO No. 2007-03 has been prepared according to the requirementsof the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. The 20 day public review period for the ND began August 16, ended September 4, 2007. Furthermore, the City Council has reviewed the 2007, and en loation. I ND and related documents in reference to the App The Cit Council hereby specifically finds and determines that, having considered alteations 3. y the findings set forth below, and changes record as a whole; including rth which have incorporatedthere evidencetoa dbeforeltthis City Council that the project proposed in the application itat herein wthe wildliiffe depial of an ends- Based adverse esubstantliaf evidenfe ce,thies sCity Cor the uncil upon which presumption of adverse effects contained in Section 753.5 (d) of Title hereby rebuts the 14 of the California Code of Regulations. . 4 Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, this City Council hereby finds as follows: d 1 t located on the northerly side of (a) (b) (c) (d The project site is an irregularly shape ° approximately 27,003 square Golden Springs Drive west of Platina Drive. it is app feet (0.62 acres) in area. The site is elevated above the surrounding properties by retaining walls and slopes: From 1966 to 1986, tthewas eprodeledOct tnt as mini -mart by a service station, In 1986, the site building with drive-thru known as Diamond ,1im's Dairy. project site has a General Plan land use The designation of High Density idential (RH) Maximum 20 DU/AC which authorizes a maximum density of 20 ResI dwelling units per acre. commercial The P se No. 2006-01 within ite is within the hPlann ong Comm is on(Resolut on No. 2007-44 Change 9 the zone change from C-1 to High recommends that the City Council approve Development (RH-PD) for General Plan Density Residential -Planned compliance. Generally the following zones and uses surround the projectu5es Zone II Project u Site North West South Hgh RDe nsiesidential - Maximum 20 Dwelling Unit Density Residenial Low Maximum 3 Dwelling Units Per acre (RL) Neighbornocu I �. • Commercial and &I (e) The Application request includes the following.- Negative ollowing_Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 to address impacts that the proposed project may have on the environment; I ite's zoning fromance, Zone Change application to change the project s C-1 to RH-PD-20 Dwelling Units/Per Acre for General Plan compli (2) (3) Subdivision application to create a tract map for condominium purposes, (4) Conditional Use Permit application to establish a Planned Development Overlay District (PD) to modify setbacks and wall heights that are appropriate for the property characteristics and the type of development proposed forthe site; and (5) Development Review application to demolish the existing mini -mart with drive-thru and to review .the project's overall design and site plan configuration and its effect on surrounding properties. Tentative Map Findings Pursuant to Subdivision Code Section 21.20 the City Council has made the following required findings: (f) The General Plan land use designation for the project site is High Density Residential (RH). The General Plan describes this designation as a residential land use category for town homes, condominiums, apartments, mobile homes and other multiple family residential properties. This land use category can maintain a maximum density of 20 dwelling units per acre. The proposed map is a non -gated subdivision for a nine unit detached condominium development with private entry and drive aisle. The allowed density for the High Density Residential General Plan designation and zoning district is 20 units per acre. The project is 27,003 square feet (0.62 acres) could be developed with a maximum density of 12 units. In order to meet the City's development standards and provide the appropriate access and drive isles, landscaping, and condominium units that are marketable in size, the project is Proposed at 9 units which is 25 percent below the General Plan and zoning allowed density. Furthermore, the proposed land use represents an extension of the existing development pattern in the project area which is condominiums and single-family residential. As,a result; TTM 64881 is consistent with the General Plan including its design and improvements. _(g) The project site is approximately 0.62 gross acres (27,003 square feet) in area. TTM 64881 proposes to create a common -interest subdivision to facilitate the ' development of 9 detached residential condominium units with two car garages and guest parking for each unit, landscaping and private patios. In accordance to " the General Plan density provisions, it is permissible to develop up to12 condominium units. However, the proposed density of 9 units is 25 percent below General Plan and zoning potential density. Additionally, the ND prepared for this project reviewed the suitability of the project site, circulation, grading, aesthetics, land use, etc. The ND concluded that the proposed map would not have a significant effect on the environment and with the incorporation of conditions of approval Therefore, the project site is physically suitable for the proposed type _ of development and density; 1 would cause.... \ h) The ND for this project analyzed whetner or not the proposed map � substantia( environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The 1 as discussed in the ND, it is ND concluded that theProposedwith conditions osfimp rovawould be reduced to a levelless anticipated than significant" and the use subs antial of tal damage or proposees e elfish or wildlife for is not likely to ca their habitat. ision and The ND analyzer impacts her projectted . Theedesigngnof of the projectt'vmeets the improvements relate standards set forth in Development Code standards nd the tyspecfi d in Guidelines - Design project's design maintains the quality with the existing residential Guidelines and thDat surrounpme ds the code.nt project site. As su t, the propo ed project's neighborhood ments is not likely to cause serious public health or design Or type of improve safety problems. (j) There are no easements of record for the project sit evee. AoP mentis dcus ed in findings he project site is suitable the above, titable for hof improvements will not conflict with design of the subdivision or the type easements; acquired by the public at large for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. I mental issues ed to (k) According to'the a ND peare less than lsignificant" l�and discharge sewerage would hydrology and w quality :would not result in violation of existing requirements prescribed by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. ty. The (1) A geotechnical report w th ornditionsfor this project and that are incorporated reviewed nto the project ldes gn. report was approved y; the ND prepared. for this. project indicates that with the ion Additionally, t of these conditions in combination with applicable Municipal priate engineering practices will ensure Code and UBC requirements and appro impacts related to geology will be "less than significant". gym) The proposed subdivision is consistent with the applicable provisions of Title 21, the City's ed su Subdivision ordinance, Subdivision Map Act and the Development Code as discussed in the above findings. he l hereby ts 5. Based on the findings and 2007-031�and app rovns set forth es TTM t64881ysubject `to the following Negative Declaration N I conditions and Standard Conditions attached and referenced herein a. GENERAL 1. This approval shall be null and void and of no effect unless the Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 is adopted and Zone Change No, 2006-01, Planned Development Overlay, Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-10 and Development Review No. 2006-11 are approved, This approval is valid for three years. Two extensions of time, one year each, may be approved in accordance to Development Code Section 22.66. b. SITE DEVELOPMENT 1. Approximately 1.0 lineal feet of a retaining wall located of the west property ; dine and a wall in the same area which encloses the side yard for unit one is shall not exceed an exposed height of eight feet. 2. Exterior or perimeter walls shall be constructed from split face block with a decorative cap. Interior walls may be stucco in a color to match and/or complement the condominium units. Sample of said construction_ materials and colors shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review_ and approval prior to plan check submittal. 3. Uses permitted in the'RH zoning district as listed in the Development Code shall be the only uses allowed in the RH-PD zoning designation for the project. site. 4. Prior to final map, the applicant shall provide a final landscape and irrigation plan listing all plant species, size quantity and location for Planning Division review and approval. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed prior to final inspection or Certificate of Occupancy 5. Prior to plan check submittal, the applicant shall submit an exterior lighting plan and photometric study for Planning Division review and approval All lighting shall be designed to confine direct rays to the subject property. Spillage beyond the property lines shall not be permitted. Lighting shall be on a time -clock or photo -sensor systema G. BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION 1. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit to the Building and Safety Division the design of all retaining walls for review and approval'.' concurrently with the grading plan check. d. LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE PREVENTION Access shall comply with Section 902 of the Fire Code; which requires all 1. P weather access. All weather access my require paving. 2. Fire Department access shall be extended to within 150 feet distance of any exterior portion of all structures. 3 Where driveways extend further than 300 feet and are of single access design turnarounds suitable for fire protection equipment use shall be provided and shown on the final map. Turnarounds shall be designed, constructed and maintained- to insure their integrity. for Fire Department use. Where topography dictates, turnarounds shall be provided for driveways that extend over150 feet in length. 4 Private driveways shall be indicated on the final map as °Private Driveway and Fire Lane" with the widths clearly depicted and shall be maintained in accordance with the Fire Code. 5. Vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable throughout construction to all required fire hydrants. All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted prior to construction. 6. Applicant shall provide Fire. Department or City approved street signs and building access numbers prior to occupancy. 7. Applicant shall provide water mains, fire hydrants and ;fire flows as required by the County of Los Angeles Fire Department for all land shown on map which shall be recorded. S. Fire hydrant shall conform to the following requirements: (a) Install one fire hydrant; (b) Measure 6" x 4' x 2'/2'` brass or bronze, conforming to current AWWA standards C503 or approved equal; (c) On site hydrants shall be installed a minimum of 25 feet form a structure or protected by two hour fire wall : 9. The required fire flow for public fire hydrants at this location shall be 1500 gallons per minute at 20 psi for duration of two hours, over and above maximum daily, domestic demand. Two hydrant flowing simultaneously, may be used to achieve the required fire flow 10. All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted or bonded for prior to final map approval Fhe 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: Mr. Joe Kwok, GSDB Investment Group, LLC, 625 Fair Oak Avenue, #115, South Pasadena, CA 91030 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED This 20th Day of November 2007. eve, Tye, ayor I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed, approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the .20th day of November :2007 by the following vote: AYES: Council Members: Cher..g, .t erect, icrrcrap ;PT/Tzm kap rf3'zv NOES: Council Members: iqure ABSENT Council Members: None ABSTAIN: Council Members: zitme Tommye"Cribbins, City Clerk, City of Diamond Bar ` COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Grlfl F DEP ARTMENT USE PERMITS; COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL NEW AND REMODELED STRUCTURES PROJECT #: TTM No. 64881 ND No. 2007-03 ZC No. 2006 01IPlanned Development Overlay CUP No. 2007-10 and DR No. 2006-11 SUBJECT: Nine unit detached residential condominium subdivision APLICANT: Joe Kwok 23671 Golden Springs Drive LOCATION: 23671 Golden Springs Drive ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION AT (909) 839-7030, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1 In accordance with Government Code Section 66474.9(b) (1), the applicant shall defend,, indemnify,: and hold harmless the City, and its officers, agents and employees, from any claim, action, or proceeding to attack, set-aside, void or annul, the approval of Tentative Tract No. 64881 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) Applicant 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) Applicant shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the City descendents The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action of proceeding, and shall cooperate fully in the defense thereof. 2. Applicant shall include signed copies of the City Council Resolution Nos. 2007 44, 2007-45, 2007-46, Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the constructionlgrading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by licensed Engineer/Architect. 3. Revised plans (such as but not limited to site plan, elevations, landscape/irrigation plan, grading plan, etc.,) incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval prior to the plan check. 4.Notwithstanding any previous subsection of the resolution, the Departmentof Fish and Game requires payment of the fee pursuant to Section 719.4 of that Fish and Game Code. Said payment shall be made by the applicant to the city within five days of this approval. 5. The project site shall be maintained and operated in full compliance with the conditions of approval and all laws, or other applicable regulations 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and any applicable Specific Plan in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 7. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits, (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.) or priorto final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichevercomes first. 8. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all conditions of approval shall be completed, B. FEESIDEPOSITS 1, Applicant shall pay development fees (including but not limited to Planning, Budding and Safety Divisions, Public Works/Engineering Department and Mitigation; Monitoring) at the established rates, prior to final map approval, issuance of building or grading permit (whichever comes first), as required by the City. School fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permit. In addition, the applicant shall pay all remaining prorated City project review and processing fees prior to the map's recordation or issuance of building permit, whichever come first. 2. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall pay a fee to the City in lieu of dedication for parkland pursuant to Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 29:32. 3. Prior to any public hearing or final map approval, all deposit accounts for the processing of this ,project shall have no deficits. 9 4. Notwithstanding any previous subsection of the resolution, the Department of Fish and Game required payment of the fee pursuantto Section 711.4 of that Fish and Game Code. Said payment shall be made by the applicant to the city within five days of this grant's approval C. TIME LIMITS 1. This approval shall not be effective for any purpose until the applicant and owner of the property involved have filed within 15 days of approval of this map, at the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department/ Planning ,Division an Affidavit of Acceptance stating that they are aware of and agree to accept all the conditions of this approval. 2. In accordance with the Subdivision Map Act; Section 66463.5, TTM No. 64881 is valid for three years. An extension of time may be requested in writing and shall only be considered if submitted to the city no less than 60 days prior to the approval's expiration date. Final map approval will not be granted unless the map is in substantial compliance with TTM No. 64881 including all conditions and the applicant has: entered into a subdivision improvement agreement to the satisfaction of the City Attorney. " D. ' SITE DEVELOPMENT 1 The project site shall be developed in substantial conformance with TTM No. 64881 except as conditions herein, and as conditioned in Conditional Use Permit 'No. 2007-10 and Development, Review No. 2006-11 submitted to and recommended approval by the City Council to the City Council collectively referenced herein as Exhibit "A"`-the subdivision map and site plan, elevations, grading plan, sections, landscape/irrigation plans, and colors and materials board, Exhibit `B Negative Declaration No. 2007-03 dated September 11, 2007, as modified herein 2. A Home Owner's Association. (HOA) shall be formed. The HOA shall have Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) and Articles of Incorporation of the HOA are subject to the approval of Planning Division and Public Works/Engineering Department and the City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be recorded concurrentlywith the final map or prior to the issuance of any City permits, which ever occurs first A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. The HOA shall submit to the Planning Division list of the names and addresses of the officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and whenever said information changes. 3. All ground mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, air conditioning condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berms, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Division, 4 Prior to final map approval or issuance of building permit, whichever come first, street names shall be submitted for City review and approval. Street names shall 10 not duplicate existing streets within the City of Diamond Bars postal service zip code areas. 5. House numbering plans shall be submitted to and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. House numbering plans shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permits. 6. All lighting fixtures adjacent to interior property lines shall be approved by the Planning Division as to type, orientation and height. 7. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination,location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. E. LANDSCAPE, PRESERVED AND PROTECTED TREES 1. Prior to final map approval, a detailed landscape/irrigation plans' shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits and recordation of the map, which ever, occurs first. F. SOLID WASTE i. The site shall be maintained in a condition,which is free of debris both during and after the construction, addition, or implementation of the entitlement granted herein. The removal of all trash, debris, and refuse, whether during or subsequent; to construction shall be done only by the property owner, applicant or by a duly permitted waste contractor, who has been authorized by the City to provide collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste from residential, commercial, construction, and industrial areas within the City It shall be the applicant's obligation to insure that the waste contractor utilized has obtained permits from the City of Diamond Bar to provide such services. 2. Mandatory solid waste disposal services shall be provided by the City franchised waste hauler to all parcels/lots or uses affected by approval of this project. 3. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-ups shall be for individual units with all receptacles shielded from public view. APPLIGANT SHALL CONTACT TETE PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, (909) 839-7040, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH TETE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. GENERAL 1. A title report/guarantee showing all fee owners, interest holders, and nature of (1 - 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. 2. A permit from the Los Angeles County Public Works Department shall be required for work within its right-of-way or connection to its facilities. 3. Prior to final map approval, written certification that all utility services and any other service related to the site shall be available to serve the proposed project and shall be submitted to the City. Such letters shall be issued by the district, utility and cable television company, within ninety (90) days prior to final map approval 4. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit to the City Engineer, the detail cost estimates for bonding purposes of all public improvements. S. Prior to final map approval, if any public or private improvements required as part of this map have not been completed by applicant and accepted by the City, applicant shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the City and shall post the appropriate security. G. Prior to final map approval all site grading, landscaping, irrigation, street, sewer and storm drain improvement plans shall be approved by the City Engineer, surety shall be posted, and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all public and private improvements. 7 Prior to issuance of grading permits, surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all drainage facilities necessary, for dewatering all parcels to the satisfactionof the City Engineer. 8. Any details or notes which may inconsistent with requirement or ordinances, general conditions or approval, or City policies shall be specifically approved in other conditions or Ordinance requirements. are modified to those shown on the tentative' parcel map upon approval by the Advisory agency. 9 All identified geologic hazards within the vesting tentative tract map boundaries which cannot be eliminated as approved bythe City Engineer shall be indicated on .the final map as "Restricted Use Area" subject to geologic hazard-` The applicant shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit the erection of buildings or other structures within such restricted use areas shown on the final map 10. Easements for disposal of drainage water onto or over adjacent parcels shall be delineated and shown on the final map, as approved by the City Engineer. 11. Prior to any work performed in the street right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained' from the Public -Works Department in addition to any other permits required. 12 Applicant shall label and delineate on the final map any private drives or fire lanes to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. �7 i 13: 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: 14. After the, final map records, applicant shall submitto 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. 15. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall provide to the City as built mylars, stamped' by appropriate individuals certifying the plan for all improvements at no cost to the City. 16. Applicant shall contribute funds to a separate engineering trust deposit against which charges can be made by the City or its representatives for services rendered. " Charges shall be on an hourly basis and shall include any City administrative costs: 17. Applicant shall provide digitized information in a format defined by the City for all related plans, at no cost to the City. 18. All activities/improvements proposed for this TTM No. 64881 shall be wholly contained within the boundaries; of the map.Should any off-site activities/improvements be required, approval shall be obtained from the affected property owner and the City as required by the City Engineer. B. GRADING 1. No grading or any staging or construction shall be performed prior to final map approval by the City Council and map recordation. All pertinent improvement' plans shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval by the City Council. 2 Retaining wall location shall be shown on the grading plan and submitted with a soils report to the Public Works/Engineering Department for review and approval concurrently with the grading plan check. 3. Exterior grading and construction activities and the transportation of equipment and materials and operation of heavy grading equipment shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. Dust _generated by grading and construction activities shall be reduced by watering the soil prior to and during the activities and in accordance with South; Coast Air. Quality Management District Rule 402 and Rule 403: Reclaimed water shall be utilized whenever possible. Additionally, all construction equipment shall be properly muffled to reduce noise levels. 13 4. All equipment staging areas shall be located on the project site. Staging area, including material stockpile and equipment storage area, shall be enclosed within a six foot -high chain link fence. All access points in the defense shall be locked whenever the construction site is not supervised. 5. Precise grading plans for each lot shall be submitted to the Community Development Department/Planning Division for approval prior to issuance of building permits`. (This maybe on an incremental or composite basis). 6 Grading of the subject property shall be in accordancewith the California Building Code, City Grading Ordinance, Hillside Management Ordinance and acceptable grading practices. 7 The maximum grade of drivewaysserving building pad areas shall be 15 percent In hillside areas drivewaygrades exceeding 10 percentshall have parking landings with a minimum 16 feet deep and shall not exceed five (5) percent grade OF as required by the City Engineer, Driveways with a slope of 15 percent shall incorporate grooves for traction into the construction as required by the City Engineer. B. At the time of submittal offhe 40 -scale grading plan for plan <check, 'a detailed soils and geology, report shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval. Said report shall be prepared by a`qualified engineer and/or geologist licensed by the State of California. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the report shall address, but not be limited to the following: a. Stability analyses of daylight shear keys with a 1:1 projection from daylight to slide plane; a projection plane shall have a safety factor of 1.5. b. All soils and geotechnical constraints (i.e., landslides, shear key locations, etc.,) shall be delineated in detail with respect to proposed building envelopes Restricted . use areas and structural setbacks shall be considered and delineated prior to recordation of the final map. C. Soil remediation measures shall be designed for a "worst case" geologic -interpretation subject to verification in the field during grading. d. The extent of any remedial grading into natural areas shall be clearly defined on the grading plans. e. Areas of potential for debris flow shall be defined and proper remedial measures implemented as approved by the City Engineer. f. Gross stability of all fill slopes shall be analyzed as part of geotechnical report, including remedial fill that replaces natural slope. gi Stability of all proposed slopes shall be confirmed by analysis as approved by the City Engineer. h. All geologic data including landslides and exploratory excavations most be shown on a consolidated geotechnical map using the 40 scale final grading plan as a base. 1h All geotechnical and soils related findings and recommendations shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any grading permits and recordation of the final map. g. Prior to issuance of grading permits, storm drain improvement plans shall be approved bythe City Engineer and Los Angeles County PublicWorks Department and surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all drainage facilities to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 10. Final grading plans shall be designed in compliance with the recommendations of the final detailed soils and engineering geology reports. All remedial earthwork specified in the final report shall be incorporated into the grading plans. Final grading plans shall be signed and stamped by a California registered Civil Engineer, registered Geotechnical Engineer and registered Engineering Geologist and approved by the City Engineer. 11. A Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP) conforming to City Ordinance is required to be incorporated into the grading plan and approved by the City Engineer. The applicant shallincorporate Structural or Treatment Control Best Management Practices for storm water runoff into the grading plans for constructionand post-construction activities respectively. 12. An erosion control plan shall be approved by the City Engineer. Erosion control plans shall be made in accordance to the City's NPDES requirements. 13. Submit a stockpile plan showing the proposed location for stockpile for grading export materials, and the route of transport_ 14. Prepare a horizontal control plan and submit concurrently with the grading plan for review and approval. 16 Prior to the issuance of Building Permits, a pre-construction meeting must be held at the project site with the grading contractor, applicant, and city grading inspector at least 48 hours prior to commencing grading operations. 16. Rough Grade certifications by project soils engineer shall be submitted prior to issuance of building permits for the foundations of structures. Retaining wall permit may be issued without a rough grade certificate. 17. Final Grade certifications by project soils engineer and civil engineers shall be submitted to the Public WorkslEngineering Department prior to the issuance of any project final inspections/certificate of occupancy. C DRAINAGE 1. All terrace drains and drainage channels shall be constructed in muted earth tones so as'.not to impart adverse visual impacts. Terrace drains shall follow landform 15 slope configuration and shall not be placed in an, exposed positions. All down drains shall be hidden in swales diagonally or curvilinear across a slope face. 2. All drainage improvements necessary for dewatering and protecting the subdivided Properties shall be installed prior to issuance of building permits, for construction upon any parcel that may be subject to drainage flows entering, leaving, orwithin a parcel relative to which a building permit is requested. 3. 'All identified flood hazard locations within the tentative map boundaries which cannot be eliminated as approved bythe City Engineer shall be shown on thefinal map and delineated as "Flood Hazard Area." 4. Storm drainage facilities shall be constructed within the street right-of-way or in easements satisfactory to the City Engineer and the Los Angeles County Flood Control Districts. All storm drain facilities plans shall be plan checked by the City and County of Los Angeles and all fees required shall be paid by the applicant 5. A final drainage study and final drainage/storm drain plan in a 24" x 36' sheet format shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer and Los Angeles Public Works Department prior to grading permit. All drainage facilities shall be designed and constructed as required bythe City Engineer and in accordance with County of Los AngelesStandards. Private (and future) easements for storm drain purposes shall be offered and shown on the final map for dedication to the City. 6. Prior to the issuance of,a grading permit, a complete hydrology and hydraulic study shall be prepared by a Civil Engineer registered in the State of California to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Los Angeles Public Works Department 7. Acomprehensive maintenance plan/program shall be submitted concurrentlywith the storm drain plans to the Public Works/Engineering Departmentfor review and approval by the City Engineer. D. STREET IMPROVEMENT 1. The applicant shall replace and record any centerline ties and monuments that are removed as part of this construction with the Los Angeles 'County Public Works Survey Division. 2 Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall provide written permission to the satisfaction of the City from any property owners which will be affected by offsite grading 3. Prior to building occupancy, applicant shall construct base and pavement for all streets in accordance with soils report prepared by a California registered soils engineer and approved by the City Engineer or as otherwise directed by the City Engineer 16 E. UTILITIES 1. Easements, satisfactory to the City Engineer and the utility companies, for Public utility and public services purposes shall be offered and shown on the detailed site plan for dedication to the City: 2. Prior to final map approval, a water system with appurtenant facilities to serve all lots/parcels in the land division designed to the Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD) specifications shall be provided and approved bythe City Engineer. The system shall include fire hydrants of the type and location as determined by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. The water mains shall be sized to accommodate the total domestic and fire flows to the satisfaction of the City ; Engineer, WVWD and Fire Department. 3. Prior to final mapapproval, the applicant shall construct or enter into an improvement agreementwith the City guaranteeing construction of the necessary improvements to the existing water system according to Walnut Valley Water District(WVW D) specifications to accommodate the total domestic and fire flows as may be required by the City Engineer, WVWD and Fire Department, 4. Prior to final map approval or issuance of building permit whichever comes first, written certification that all utility services and any other service related to the. site shall be available to serve the proposed project and shall be submitted to the City. Such letters shall be issued by the district, utility and cable television company, if applicable, within ninety (90) days prior issuance of grading permits. 5 Prior to recordation of final map, applicant shall provide separate underground utility services to each parcel per Section 21.30 of Title 21' of the City Code, including water, gas, electric power, telephone and cable TV, in accordance with the respective utility company standards. Easements required by the utility companies shall be approved by the City Engineer. g. Applicant shall relocate and underground any existing on-site utilities to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the respective utility owner. 7 Underground utilities shall not be constructed within the drip line of any mature tree except as approved by registered arborist. F. SEWERS 1 Prior to final map approval, applicant shall submit a sanitary sewer area study to the City and County Engineer to verify that capacity is available in the sewerage system to be used as the outfall for the sewers in this land division. If the system is found to be of insufficient capacity, the problem shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the County Engineer. 2. Each dwelling unit shall be served by a separate sewer lateral which shall not cross any other lot lines The sanitary sewer system serving the tract shall be 17 connected to the City or District sewer system. Said system shall be of the size, grade and depth approved by the City Engineer, County Sanitation District and Los Angeles County Public Works and surety shall be provided and an agreement executed prior to approval of the final map. 3 Applicant shall obtain connection permits) from the City and County Sanitation District prior to issuance of building permits. The area within the tentative map boundaries shall be annexed into the County Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District and appropriate easements for all sewer main and trunk lines shall be shown on the final map and offered for dedication on the final map. 4. Applicant, at applicant's sole cost and expense, shall construct the sewer system in accordance with the City, <Los Angeles County Public Works Division and County Sanitation District Standards prior to occupancy. . APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 839-7020, FOR COMPLIANCEWITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1 Plans shall conform to State and Local Building` Code (Le., 2001 California Building Code, California Plumbing Code, California Mechanical Code, and the 2001 National Electrical Code)requirements and all other applicable construction codes, ordinances and regulations in effect at the time of plan check submittal 2 Occupancy of the facilities shallnot commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been met. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 3. The minimum design load for wind in this area is 80 M.P.H.exposures "C' and the site is within seismic zone four (4). The applicant shall submit drawings and calculations prepared by a California State licensed Architeet/Engineer with wet stamp, and signature. 4. This project shall complywith the energy conservation requirements of the State of Energy room lights shall be fluorescent ' California Ener Commission: Kitchen and bath 5 Submit Public Works/Engineering Department approved, grading: plans showing clearly all finish elevations, drainage,, and retaining walls locations. 6. Number of plumbing fixtures shall be in compliance with CBC Appendix 29. 7. All balconies shall be designed for 601b. live load. 8 Guardrails shall be designed for 20 load applied laterally at the top of the rail. 9 Submit grading plans showing clearly all finish elevations, drainage, and retaining wall `locations.` No building permits shall be issued prior to submitting a;pad certification CITY COUNCIL Agenda # 7.2 Meeting Date: April 3, 2012 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Manager TITLE: Development Code Amendment No. PL2011-454. To amend the following sections of Title 22 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code: 22.10.030 Tables 2-5 and 2-6; 22.16.060(1); 22.22.100(a); 2.22.120(a)(1); 22.38.030; 22.36.130 Table 3-14; 22.34.030; 22.42.060(2)0); 22.42.100(1); 22.42.100(c); 22.42.130; 22.68.030; and 22.80.020. APPLICANT: City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department PROJECT LOCATION: Citywide RECOMMENDATION: Approve for First Reading by Title only, Waive full reading of Ordinance No. XX(2012) and schedule Second Reading for April 17, 2012. FINANCIAL SUMMARY: The costs associated with the review of this application have been borne by the City. BACKGROUND: The City of Diamond Bar's Development Code (Title 22 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code) became effective in December of 1998. Through routine implementation of the Code, it becomes evident that amendments are needed from time to time to better serve the City, residents and the development community, or to comply with changes in State law or case law. Staff is recommending adoption of an omnibus ordinance that amends several sections of the Development Code as part of this a periodic "cleanup" effort. Making these relatively straightforward and simple changes will improve the Code, and allow it to better serve the City's residents, development community, and City. The amendments proposed in the attached ordinance provide sensible refinements to existing Development Code standards, while still protecting the character, and social and economic stability of Diamond Bar's residential, commercial and industrial areas. In many situations, these refinements will eliminate unnecessary bureaucratic obstacles that property and business owners may face when requesting permits or approvals from the City; others eliminate conflicting provisions found in different chapters of the Code, or simply codify recent mandates under State Law that the City is already subject to. On March 13, 2012 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Development Code Amendment and after discussion and the incorporation of comments, the Commission recommended with a 5-0 vote that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance. The Planning Commission staff report is attached. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The City has determined that the proposed Development Code Amendment is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as prescribed under Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines (no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment) and Section 15378(b)(5) of the CEQA Guidelines (administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment). Therefore no further environmental review is required. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Notice for this hearing was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on March 23, 2012, in a 1/8 page display. Pursuant to Planning and Zoning Law Government Code Section 65091(a)(3), if the number of property owners to whom a public hearing notice would be mailed is greater than 1000, a local agency may provide notice by placing a display advertisement 1/8 page in one newspaper of general circulation. Prepared by: KatherineL enbr Senior Planner REVIEWED BY: David Doyle, Asst. City Manager Reviewed by: Greg Gubman, AICD Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Summary table of code amendments 2. Ordinance No. XX (2012) 3. Planning Commission Report and Resolution from March 13, 2012 ATTACHMENT N c U d C Q m a� N a) a .0 _0 N a T C 0) NF N cG = m o -p C O c N � C m o '6 Y O Ca) d o U Q a) 0 L r N ,c E (6 0 "00 N w > 3 :C N O E .,, a) = 0 O a) Q w O_0 a) TCU _4 >. LL 0 O M O 7 Q O O> 2 N C 7 c U C 7 m(6 (q T O N N d L cli 0 C E O C a) c U Zn Q^ O 0~ E g a)�- CU U N N (a a) 4j C 0—U c M V O 0) Q a) c O C �p 0 E N (a C (n a7 a) 0 0 Z3 `� a7 -O m O O C C T 0 .0 L .O 'O a) OV 0 O- > 'a) t .�.. C O. a) 0 a) 0 0 O N - N U N N @'0w 3 a) N E m� L �= m a) a) -0c m o E vo ami L) Cs Lf) p l(D=L)'3 m o N E cu a� �U To OL)mac)°�0w(0a)U)0 L u p ���o 0 U �.5 -.m m cm Sm��a)acaEi0'�0 E ��r��ac: a7 i ..c N L c 0 -O o a) a) a) a) N N T c c 01 c s .L.. O O a) >O V) U¢ C i O C E ' �- C 0 O M 3 C N "m 0 T 'c > U 0 a) .�.. a) O c N () E CO a) ac. U O U N C) (q N N 0(D >, Q,Q U a) Om- N 0 O tf a) oa) co 0— C C C7 a)oa)2r�-0.Ew(aa5 N a) -0 C N V) N w 0 .N 2U acmy.5wrn O '0 N o (D 2T .N. 0 = co c: --a 0 OO ' 0) ¢ ..O c a) CO a) W 0 CO a) N r a) C C a) O C c C 0_ 0) N (j c0 O CD N C U N :� N v- "0 w a3 N a) -p m Z' a3 @ "E N p -C 0)'C -0 E a) (� y i E a) 0 a) 'N 'C O O N U N ' a) 'c Lp N as En u c a) o c= -t U o Z3i ,v rn a C ' N N .c )c 70 0 O U U 0 O a) O O N a) N t U N N 0 C N Q N O (�j O N N a._ N C O a) (/a) (n E 0 U .N L (0) L_ U F .E .0 w .� 2i O 0 Q 0 $ U N s> 2 o m c "0 m e S 0) N N ° p (D a a) 0-0 a) E o a) N a) a) - L O Mn .O U 4 ;t - U E U NN a) 0).N C ^O 0) OL a) O M c N .,^w L YvOi C N a7 0 nOL ((n O Q) � N V _ 0 U 73N Oo ) a7 a) 0 c 0 0 E M O a) O '6 N a) ,N .- -C.. -0 = E M 0 C 0 �o E Nc? crn'o C m� ul 3E 0 O a) C 0 C 0 C a) N 00- r � 0 C) w a3 _O U T'Ea) >1 a) �U E !E aoi' o p rn� a)c a) 3 L o c a) E c 0- (D O) O Mn c T S a3 @ 7 .� a) N O O C '6 a) U) m so o p `a y a? E a) N E a o [n N C a) 0 — i U N > Q a) i W -o L (D O N N (N 0 (D a) o 0 Q -0 -0 O a3 O O (O O O N O p ON OOC' 6 (6 Nj 7-0 N c 1 N r, I , N N a) N N N N N N d N y V Y Y mE Li U a) c a a)� y w °) �E A w E E E C l y O= E C i " m aN C E H w (p7 M a)Q'a LL Lu (YnU w m > ( a2 m2 N � N t N >+ y 'O O 3 Y L 3 m o N a) L 0 0 0 OL m m N N m ur N y E 7 (o L L ° Q wCv a) a) w� >o �aCi E w c°3 V ° ��`m �°n L > > Xa)0 m C a) Q) a) E: yN — ° C s m OLU C� N m o C. E C a) o y_ a) y@ y Q m .� a) C w C 7 Y Lm Co y >,NM ns E u)- O O w O O UCL m to E L y O 7 E a) — o L -C y a) 0 OL Cy E ym ='°( Ca> a)TD co E osE E C oiQ x a cONLL a) a)E U) Y mE Q C m ° CT-oo m io m a OQ o oaa) ), �tE o � NOD C a„) ° O UU Q E O' mC mO w,rN M U to a) a) O O a) .0C y O]�6 E . Q N Q OCO N > E W OOOCL E Q m O d° ' W I— Q N i) N O W' U > �O j 0)..«L. CO a) a) U .N O N m N a) 'O y O C 3 0 m C O 9 L 0 cuO 7 N C o- m O m 'O 0) CO C ..L. C N 'm a) C_ U5 y p m C N m 3 m .N ;O L O O m 0-.— C) O� m d 0-0 a) m L E L a) C �6 C Q y N C Y) L L O N m> a) O7 'L a C a) 0 Q 7 N Q L O M ° m i Y o L a) O w0 m N� .N O 'O N L U 7 _° U O L O "06 m i O U -O L a) m y m m m C a) .E X _o ~ L y U O L^. w U m -O L +�. m O L N a �U � C� ) E a m m a°— d) m y 0 c -o a)Y � w (D -ti �_� aCi -6 n Q m .N L O a) C o) C C C y Q O C o N � a) D (� Q _L Q O 0 3 N L 7 y o O 'IC -6 N Ln N Q,fn N m m -°o w a O) Q C.x X s> is o N> ) U N �) o"— y 0 w y 4- m > _° E IE fo a) o c O y i C a) N a) m -o a) N a) O N m L m y° O) O C 7 a) Q) E y >+L a) y s C m ,N .0 m 3-'yL Q 0 - N m'�r'O � O -O �)w amC C C Lo C, cu cn � N (n c~ m.N.N-o�o.� �ai>'� y E me m 3 E Co E °' N L E asi v Y _ 7 a) Q m C m -o a) E a) m m m C m C o_ -o "ai L i L y y O@ y L M m 7 `�— O (�4 E y L .� wL„ C wL.. y U 'O U C-,� 0 m mow? a o C m�vi CL a) L C Z y c m m° m C L '7 aa).°' > C a>i C O asi L o y N a) m m U� 0-0 U m N Q U m m O a y CO d 0 U° ..O m� 0� a) E w � C �'O 'N � o U 3: Y a O Q N m 7 c y 0) U C y o m a) Q L a) F- m n — H _°C Z F— w Q C I— o M -m Cl) 9 j M O O F O) N U O) co .Q O 00 Cl) O O O O O N M OC) NO O O O O O � M Cl)M V ��W N N' N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N y C + Y ✓� {Q O L U V y E d O> L LL L m O 6 a) L C p K y C = C. > a) V x V S C 7 i L d m L O �Q� •m O.'L m O () Y am. a) Oy a) Q �Q❑ f7Y �wQm� u zfo Attachment 2 ORDINANCE NO. XX(2012) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF TITLE 22 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE: 22.10.030 Tables 2-5 and 2-6; 22.16.060(1); 22.22.120(a)(1); 22.38.030; 22.36.130 Table 3-14; 22.34.030; 22.42.060(2)0); 22.42.100(1); 22.42.100(c); 22.42.130; 22.68.030; 22.80.020. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Section 22.10.030 of Title 22, Chapter 22.10 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended by amending Table 2-5 by adding footnote (6) under the heading "Service Uses" entitled 'Personal services—Acupressure, massage therapy, tattoo parlors," as follows: LAND USE OP OB 3) CO Personal services - Acupressure, massage therapy, tattoo parlors CUPL6 CUPS CUP[6j (6) Massage businesses or establishments that are sole Proprietorships, where the sole proprietor is certified by the California Massage Therapy Council (CAMTC) and massage businesses or establishments that employ or use only persons certified by the CAMTC are permitted uses that do not require approval of a conditional use permit. SECTION 2. Section 22.10.030 of Title 22, Chapter 22.10 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended by amending Table 2-5 by adding "Veterinary clinics and animal hospitals" under the heading "Service Uses," as follows: LAND USE OP OB CO Veterinary clinics and animal hospitals CUP CUP CUP SECTION 3. Section 22.10.030 of Title 22, Chapter 22.10 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended by amending Table 2-6 to revise the land use provisions under the heading "Manufacturing & Processing" entitled "Recycling -reverse vending machines" and 'Recycling -Small collection facility", and adding under the same heading "Recycling -Large collection" and 'Recycling -Light and Heavy Processing (scrap and dismantling yards," as follows: LAND USE C-1 C-2 C-3 I See Standards in Section: Recycling -Reverse vending machines P_ P P P 22.42.100 Recycling -Small collection facility P P P 22.42.100 Recycling Large collection martial arts, dance, aerobics. etc. CUP 22.42.100 RecvclingzLight and heavy Processing CUP CUP 22.42.100 (scrap and dismantlin arils SECTION 4. Section 22.10.030 of Title 22, Chapter 22.10 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended by amending Table 2-6 to revise the land use provisions under the heading 'Recreation, Education & Public Assembly Uses" entitled "Studios—Photograph, portrait, etc.," as follows: LAND USE C-1 C-2 C-3 I Studios Photograph, portrait, CUP( CUPf6� CUPS P martial arts, dance, aerobics. etc. CUP CUP CUP SECTION 5. Section 22.10.030 of Title 22, Chapter 22.10 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended by amending Table 2-6 by adding footnote (6) under the heading "Service Uses" entitled "Personal services—Acupressure, massage therapy, tattoo parlors," as follows: LAND USE C-1 C-2 C-3 I Personal services — Acupressure, massage therapy, tattoo parlors CUP( CUPf6� CUPS P 6) Massage businesses or establishments that are sole proprietorships, where the sole proprietor is certified by the California Massage Therapy Council (CAMTC), and massage businesses or establishments that employ or use only persons certified by the CAMTC are permitted uses that do not require approval of a conditional use permit SECTION 6. Section 22.10.030 of Title 22, Chapter 22.10 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended by amending Table 2-6 under the heading "Service Uses" entitled "Veterinary clinics and animal hospitals," as follows: LAND USE C-1 C-2 C-3 I Veterinary clinics and animal hospitals CUP I CUP CUP P SECTION 7. Section 22.16.060(1) of Title 22, Chapter 22.16 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended by striking out the text "natural or" where it occurs, as follows: See. 22.16.060(1). Maximum height. The height of structures shall not exceed the standards established by the applicable zoning districts in article II (Zoning Districts and Allowable Land Uses). Maximum height shall be measured from the natal er finished grade adjacent to any point at each exterior wall of the structure to the highest point of the roofline, above and parallel to the natu4•,�r finished grade. Structures in hillside areas shall comply with the height regulations provided in section 22.22.120 (Architecture). N:\CCSTAFF\7.2.doc SECTION 8. Subsection (1) of Subsection (a) of Section 22.22.120 of Title 22, Chapter 22.22 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended by striking out the text "natural or" where it occurs, as follows: Section 22.22.120(a)(1). Architecture standards. The maximum structure height shall be 35 feet as measured from natural om finished grade at the front setback, extending towards the rear of the parcel. The maximum height at the side setback shall be 25 feet extending up to the center of the lot at a 45 degree angle to a maximum height of 35 feet as measured from uatur� �ade�- finished grade. SECTION 9. Subsection (1) of Section 22.38.030 of Title 22, Chapter 22.38 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended by eliminating pepper trees from the category of "protected trees," as follows: Sec. 22.38.030. Protected trees. A protected tree is any of the following: (1) Native Oak, walnut, sycamore and willow trees with a diameter at breast height (DBH) of eight inches or greater; pepper +_.ee .,,;�u r > + ;g inches or greater whe� SECTION 10. Section 22.36.130 of Title 22, Chapter 22.36 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended by amending Table 3-14 by revising the maximum sign area for center identification signs for multi -tenant shopping center sites, as follows Sign Class Sign 7ype Maximum Number Maximum Si n Area Maximum Sl n Height Location Requirements Lighting Allowed? Additional Re uirements B. Multi -tenant sites shopping center 1. Center Monument 1 per street 7? 36 s.f. 6 ft. Signs shall be set Yes Allowed in identification frontage per sign back 10 ft. from addition to other property lines or business ultimate row line identification and shall not block signs traffic safet azea SECTION 11. Section 22.34.030 of Title 22, Chapter 22.36 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended by adding subsection (g), as follows: (g) Maintenance of paved driveway and similar areas All paved surfaces visible from an adiacent street or sidewalk shall be kept and maintained so as not to detract from the appearance of adjacent properties Areas shall be kept in a neat and clean condition, free of trash debris or rubbish and free of standing water, oil stains, cracks exceeding one-half inch in width lifting exceeding one-half inch, and/or broken areas. SECTION 12. Subsection j. of Subsection (2) of Section 22.42.060 of Title 22, Chapter 22.42 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended as follows: N:\CCSTAFF\7.2.doc j. Kitchens prohibited. The guest house shall not contain a kitchen other than r the purpose „e +r.; , _ A kitchen is defined to include, but not necessarily r be limited to, the following: 1. Cooking stove with or without an oven; 2. Kitchen sink, cabinets and appurtenant plumbing; 3. Convection ovens; and 4. All appurtenances, related to the above. SECTION 13. Subsection (1) of Section 22.42.100 of Title 22, Chapter 22.42 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended to include small collection recycling facilities in the C-2 and C-3 zones as follows: (1) Permit requirements. Recycling facilities are subject to permit review in the commercial and industial zoning districts in compliance with the following schedule: Type of Facility Zoning Districts Allowed Permit Required Reverse vending machine(s) All Commercial Development review for up to 5 reverse vending machines Small collection C-2, C-3, I Development Review Large collection I Conditional Use Permit Light and heavy processing (scrap and dismantling yards) I Conditional Use Permit SECTION 14. Subsection c. of Section 22.42.110 of Title 22, Chapter 22.42 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended by adding a new Subsection 4, as follows: 4. Building Height.- A detached accessory structure shall not exceed one-story or fifteen feet in height; and shall not exceed the height of the main residential structure. SECTION 15. Subsection d of Subsection (3) of Subsection (g) of Section 22.42.130 of Title 22, Chapter 22.42 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended by replacing the word "fixture" with "future," as follows: d. Freestanding antenna support structure setback. The setback for a freestanding antenna support structure will be no less than 15 meters (50 feet) or the height of the antenna plus 20 percent, whichever is greater, from any existing or fuiture &ture residential structure. SECTION 16. Paragraph 2 of Subsection (b) of Section 22.68.030 of Title 22, Chapter 22.68 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended as follows: In the case of residential dwelling units, the director may ,approve the r ' i a minor conditional use permit shall not be required if the proposed chance or expansion is limited to thearound floor and meets the following criteria: NACCSTAFF\7.2.doc (1) The An addition or improvement is less than 50 percent of the existing square footage of all structures on site and lot coverage does not exceed 40 percent as listed n Table 2-4; (2) The An addition or improvement conforms to all other applicable provisions of this development code; SECTION 17. Section 22.80.020 (Definitions of specialized terms and phrases) of Title 22, Chapter 22.80 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code is amended by revising the definitions for "Director" and "Indoor amusement/entertainment facilities," as follows: Director. Where the term "director is used in this development code, the title shall mean the d^ gma anger director of the Community Development Department or designee respr,..:;hi^ r ; Indoor amusement/entertainment facilities... Four or more electronic games or coin-operated amusements in any establishment, or a premises where 50 percent or more of the floor area is occupied by amusement devices, are considered an electronic game arcade as described above, three or less fewer are not considered a land use separate from the primary use of the site.' PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _ day of 2012. Ling -Ling Chang, Mayor I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the day of , 2012, and was finally passed at the regular meeting of the City Council of City of Diamond Bar held on the day of 2012, by the following vote: AYES: Council Members: NOES: Council Members: ABSENT: Council Members: ABSTAIN: Council Members: ATTEST NACCSTAFF\7.2.doc ATTACHMENT 3 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21825 COPLEY DRIVE - DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 - TEL. (909) 839-7030 - FAX (909) 861-3117 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.1 MEETING DATE: March 13, 2012 CASE/FILE NUMBER: Development Code Amendment No. PL2011-454 PROJECT LOCATION: Citywide APPLICATION REQUEST: To amend the following sections of Title 22 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code: 22.10.030 Tables 2-5 and 2-6; 22.16.060(1); 22.22.100(a); "''.'�--- .49" 22.22.120(a)(1); 22.38.030; 22.36.130 Table 3-14; 22.34.030; 22.42.060(2)0); 22.42.100(1); 22.42.100(c); 22.42.130; 22.68.030; and 22.80.020 APPLICANT: City of Diamond Bar Community Development Department Summary The City of Diamond Bar's Development Code (Title 22 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code) became effective in December of 1998. Through routine implementation of the Code, it becomes evident that amendments are needed from time to time to better serve the City, residents and the development community, or to comply with changes in State law or case law. Staff is recommending adoption of an omnibus ordinance that amends several sections of the Development Code as part of this a periodic "cleanup" effort. Making these relatively straightforward and simple changes will improve the Code, and allow it to better serve the City's residents, development community, and City. After holding the public hearing, staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution recommending the City Council approve Development Code Amendment No. PL2011-454 by adopting the attached ordinance. BACKGROUND: The purpose and intent of the Development Code, as stated under Section 22.01.020, "is to implement the policies of the Diamond Bar general plan by classifying and regulating the uses of land and structures within the City of Diamond Bar." One of the desired outcomes of furthering this intent is to assist "in maintaining a high quality of life without unduly high public or private costs for development or unduly restricting private enterprise, initiative, or innovative design." The amendments proposed in the attached resolution provide sensible refinements to existing Development Code standards, while still protecting the character, and social and economic stability of Diamond Bar's residential, commercial and industrial areas. In many situations, these refinements will eliminate unnecessary bureaucratic obstacles that property and business owners may face when requesting permits or approvals from the City; others eliminate conflicting provisions found in different chapters of the Code, or simply codify recent mandates under State Law that the City is already subject to. /_1L41_1W&I1.5 Adoption Process Before the City Council may adopt an ordinance to amend the Development Code, the Planning Commission must first conduct a public hearing to consider the proposed amendments. The Commission then forwards its recommendations via a resolution advising the Council whether or not the proposed amendments should be adopted. Proposed Amendments The following analysis lists the current Diamond Bar Municipal Code section for which amendments are recommended. Italicized and underlined text indicates the recommended revisions, while strikeouts indicate proposed deletions. Explanations for the proposed revisions are also provided. ARTICLE II. ZONING DISTRICTS AND ALLOWABLE LAND USES CHAPTER 22.10—COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Section 22.10.030—Commercial/Industrial district land uses and permit requirements 1. Recommendation: Add footnote 6 to Tables 2-5 and 2-6 (Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for Office and Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts). Page 2 of 11 H:\Staff Reports-PC\DCA PL2011-454 pc staff report draft 3-13-12.docx Table 2-5—Office Zoninq Districts LAND USE I OP OB(3) CO Personal services — Acupressure, CUPS CUPS CUPS massage therapy, tattoo parlors massage therapy, tattoo parlors Table 2-6—Commercial/Industrial Zonina Districts LAND USE C -I C-2 C-3 I Personal services — Acupressure, CUP(6) CUPS CUPS massage therapy, tattoo parlors Notes: (6) Massage businesses or establishments that are sole proprietorships. where the sole proprietor is certified by the California Massage Therapy Council (CAMTC), and massage businesses or establishments that employ or use only Pei -sons certified by the CAMTC are permitted uses that do not require aporoval of a conditional use perm.i.t Discussion: California Senate Bill 731 (2009) created a new agency, the California Massage Therapy Council (CAMTC), which provides the massage therapists and practitioners the opportunity to obtain certification directly from the State. CAMTC certification requires candidates to fulfill specific requirements, such as a minimum amount of education and training hours, and fingerprint and background checks by the Department of Justice. Under SB 731, if a prospective or existing proprietor of a massage establishment receives CAMTC certification, the City cannot require a conditional use permit, or compliance with requirements that do not apply to other office uses, prior to granting the proprietorship a business license. 2. Recommendation: Revise Table 2-6 to allow studios for martial arts, aerobics, dance, pilates, etc. in the C-3 zone with a conditional use permit. Table 2-6—Commercial/Industrial Zonina Districts LAND USE C-1 C-2 Studios—Photograph, portrait, i -tial arts. dance aerobics etc. CUP CUP CG'P Discussion: Definitions for the technical terms used in the Development Code are found under Article VI, Chapter 22.80, Section 22.80.020. The definition for "studios" is broad and includes facilities such as martial arts, dance instruction, and aerobics centers. These services are similar to those commonly available in larger fitness centers, such as LAIFitness, where martial arts, aerobics, pilates, and various other classes are offered. Given this overlap, and since health/fitness facilities are currently permitted in the C-3 zone with a CUP, it is appropriate to allow studios in the C-3 zone as well. Page 3 of 11 HAStaff Reports-PC\DCA PL2011-454 pc staff report draft 3-13-12.docx 3. Recommendation: Revise Table 2-6 to allow reverse vending machines in the C-1 zone, and large recycling collection and processing facilities in the Industrial zones. Table 2-6—Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts LAND USE C-1 I C-2 C-3 I See Standards in Section: Recycling -Reverse vending machines P P P P 2 2.42.100 Recycling -Small collection facility Large collection P P P 22.42.100 Recncline-Large collection I CUP 22.42.100 Recychng-Light and Heary Processing CUP 22.42.100 /scrap and dismandim, i7ardsl Discussion: Chapter 22.42 of the Development Code (Standards for Specific Land Uses) provides detailed land use and development standards for recycling facilities (Section 22.42.100) with the following zoning provisions: 7yypeofFacility Zoning Districts Allowed PermitRe uired Reverse vending machine(s) A11 Commercial Development review for up to CUP CUP 5 reverse vending machines Large collection I Conditional Use Permit Light and heavy processing I Conditional Use Permit (scrap and dismantling yards) The recommended revision to Table 2-6 will make the two sections of the Development Code consistent with each other. (See related discussion affecting Section 22.42.100 later in this staff report.) 4. Recommendation: Revise Tables 2-5 and 2-6 to update the provisions applicable to veterinary uses. Table 2-5—Office Zoning Districts LAND USE OP OB CO I Veterinary clinics and animal hospitals CUP CUP CUP Table 2-6—Commercial/Industrial Zoning Districts LAND USE C-1 C-2 C-3 I Veterinary clinics and animal hospitals CUP CUP CUP P Discussion: The Development Code currently limits veterinary offices to the Regional Commercial (C-3) and Industrial (1) zones. However, since their client base is largely from the local residential population, and because veterinary offices are generally benign land uses, it is appropriate to allow them to also operate in neighborhood -serving commercial and office districts There are, in fact, four veterinary clinics/animal hospitals in the City, but two of them are presently classified as nonconforming uses because they are located in the OP and C-2 zones. Allowing such uses to operate and expand in all nonresidential zones is not only rational from a land use planning standpoint, but would also Page 4 of 11 HAStaff Reports-PC\DCA PL2011-454 pc staff report draft 3-13-12.docx remove the encumbrance that the nonconforming status currently imposes on these existing businesses that serve and benefit the community. ARTICLE 111. SITE PLANNING AND GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CHAPTER 22.16—GENERAL PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT AND LAND USE STANDARDS & CHAPTER 22.22—HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT 5. Recommendation: Revise Section 22.16.060(1) as indicated below. Sec. 22.16.060(1). Maximum height. The height of structures shall not exceed the standards established by the applicable zoning districts in article II (Zoning Districts and Allowable Land Uses). Maximum height shall be measured from the natui-al-er finished grade adjacent to any point at each exterior wall of the structure to the highest point of the roofline, above and parallel to the �,�al-t,r finished grade. Structures in hillside areas shall comply with the height regulations provided in section 22.22.120 (Architecture). Discussion: The existing language implies that an option exists to measure building and structure heights from either finished or natural grades, which is inappropriate. For example, if the finished grade on a building site is lower than natural grade, the above sections could be interpreted to allow excessively tall buildings and walls if their heights were allowed to be measured from the natural grade. Also, the height measurement criteria in other sections of the Code use finished grade as the baseline; the proposed strikeouts to the above sections ensure internal consistency within the Development Code. 6. Recommendation: Revise Section 22.22.100(a) as indicated below. Sec. 22.22.100(a). Access, trails, and roadways. [subsections (1) and (2)] (1) Driveway grades up to a maximum of 20 15 percent are allowed, and shall be aligned with the natural contours of the land. Proper design considerations shall be employed (e.g., vertical curbs and parking landings). Parking landings shall be utilized on all drives over ten percent grade. In hillside areas, driueway grades exceeding 15 percent shall have harking landings with a minimurn 16 feet deep and shall not exceed flue (5) percent Grade or as required bythe City Engineer. (2) Grooves for traction shall be incorporated into the construction of driveways with a slope of 20 15 percent or greater. Discussion: The County of Los Angeles Fire Department allows a maximum driveway grade of 15 percent; the revision will ensure consistency between City Fire Department standards. Page 5 of 11 H:\Staff Reports-PC\DCA PL2011-454 pc staff report draft 3-13-12.docx 7. Recommendation: Revise Section 22.22.120(a)(1) as indicated below. Section 22.22.120(a)(1). Architecture standards. The maximum structure height shall be 35 feet as measured from ufttui, er finished grade at the front setback, extending towards the rear of the parcel. The maximum height at the side setback shall be 25 feet extending up to the center of the lot at a 45 degree angle to a maximum height of 35 feet as measured from n 4-gi-a�- finished grade. Discussion: See discussion above for the recommended revisions to Section 22.16.060(1) ("maximum height"). CHAPTER 22.38—TREE PRESERVATION AND PROTECTION 8. Recommendation: Revise Section 22.38.030 to eliminate pepper trees from the list of protected trees. Sec. 22.38.030. Protected trees. A protected tree is any of the following: (1) Native Oak, walnut, sycamore and willow trees with a diameter at breast height (DBH) of eight inches or greater; peppei—nc v aT ti gz (2) Trees of significant historical or value as designated by the council; (3) Any tree required to be preserved or relocated as a condition of approval for a discretionary permit; (4) Any tree required to be planted as a condition of approval for a discretionary permit; and (5) A stand of trees, the nature of which makes each tree dependent upon the others for survival. Discussion: Brazilian and Peruvian Pepper trees (genus Schinus) are listed as invasive species on the California Invasive Plant Council's California Invasive Plant Database. Therefore, these trees should no longer be given protected status unless they meet one of the other criteria listed under Section 22.38.030. Page 6 of 11 HAStaff Reports-PC\DCA PL2011-454 pc staff report draft 3-13-12.docx CHAPTER 22.36—SIGN STANDARDS 9. Recommendation: Correct a typographical error found in Table 3-14 of Section 22.36.130 Table 3-14 Sign Class Sign Type Maximum Number Maximum Sign Area Ma hn nn Sign Height Location Requirements Lighting Allowed? Additional Requirements B. Multi -tenant sites shopping center 1. Center Monument 1 per street ,T2 36 s.f. 6 ft. Signs shall be set Yes Allowed in identification frontage per sign back 10 ft. from addition to other property lines or business ultimate row line identification and shall not block signs traffic safety area Discussion: Section 22.36.030(c)(3) states that signs composed of more than one sign face shall be computed as including only the maximum single display surface that is visible from any ground position at one time. In other words, a double -sided sign which has 36 square feet per sign face (72 square feet total) is defined as a 36 square -foot sign. Table 3-14 states that the maximum sign area for a six-foot tall center identification monument is 72 square feet. This has long been regarded as a typographical error, with the actual intent for such signs to be up to 36 square feet, or half of what is currently stated in the code. CHAPTER 22.34—PROPERTY MAINTENANCE STANDARDS 10. Recommendation: Add the following subsection to Section 22.34.030 (Single-family standards): Maintenance of paved driveway and similar areas. All paved surfaces risible from an adiacent street or sidewalk shall be kept and maintained so as not to detract from the appearance of adiacent properties. Areas shall be kept in a neat and clean, condition, free of trash, debris or rubbish, and free of standine water, oi.l stains, cracks exceeding one-half inch in width, liftin,<s exceeding one-half inch. and/or broken areas Discussion: There is currently no requirement for maintenance and appearance of unsightly driveways and paved areas on single-family residential properties, even though such requirements do apply to multi -family and non-residential properties. Therefore staff recommends the addition of language to the single-family property maintenance standards to require the upkeep of driveways and other paved surfaces. The half-inch threshold for cracks and lifting is based on the City's sidewalk repair criteria. Page 7 of 11 HAStaff Reports-PC\DCA PL2011-454 pc staff report draft 3-13-12.docx CHAPTER 22.42—STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC LAND USES: 11. Recommendation: Revise Section 22.42.060(2)(j) as indicated below. Sec. 22.42.060(2)(j). Kitchens prohibited. The guest house shall not contain a ^tl , *_. f F p ^� * .gin , A kitchen is defined to include, kitchen „_ =c= _ ar= Qr �==e a <,�;e��^^ but not necessarily be limited to, the following: 1. Cooking stove with or without an oven; 2. Kitchen sink, cabinets and appurtenant plumbing; 3. Convection ovens; and 4. All appurtenances, related to the above. Discussion: Removal of unnecessary language that may cause confusion. 12. Recommendation: Revise Section 22.42.1 00(l) as indicated below. Sec. 22.42.100. Recycling facilities. (1) Permit requirements. Recycling facilities are subject to permit review in the commercial and industial zoning districts in compliance with the following schedule: Type of Facility Zoning Districts Allowed Permit Required Reverse vending machine(s) All Commercial Development review for up to 5 reverse vending machines Small collection C-2 G3 I Development Review Large collection I Conditional Use Pennit Light and heavy processing (scrap and dismantling yards) I Conditional Use Pemut Discussion: This revision will make Sections 22.10.030 and 22.42.100 consistent with each other (see discussion above for Recommendation 1.c.) 13. Recommendation: Add the following subsection to Section 22.42.110(c): Sec. 22.42.110(c)4. &uilding Height: A detached accessory structure shall not exceed one-story or fifteen feet in height; and shall not exceed the height of the main residential structure. Discussion: There is currently no height limit for detached accessory structures. Since all other structures regulated by the Development Code are subject to height limitations, staff recommends accessory structures also be subject to height restrictions. Page 8 of 11 HAStaff Reports-PC\DCA PL2011-454 pc staff report draft 3-13-12.doex 14. Recommendation: Revise Section 22.42.130(g)(3)(d) as indicated below. Sec. 22.42.130. Radio and television antennas and wireless telecommunications antenna facilities. 22.42.130(g)(3)(d) Freestanding antenna support structure setback. The setback for a freestanding antenna support structure will be no less than 15 meters (50 feet) or the height of the antenna plus 20 percent, whichever is greater, from any existing or fixV&re &tyre residential structure. Discussion: Correction of a typographical error. ARTICLE IV. LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT PROCEDURES CHAPTER 22.68—NONCONFORMING USES, STRUCTURES, AND PARCELS 15. Recommendation: Eliminate the requirement for minor conditional use permits to allow minor additions to residential dwelling units with nonconforming setbacks. Sec. 22.68.030. Restrictions on nonconforming structures. ...In the case of residential dwelling units, ��� x a minor conditional use permit shall not be required if the proposed chauge or expansion is limited to the ground floor and meets the following criteria: (1) Th.e An addition or improvement is less than 50 percent of the existing square footage of all structures on site and lot coverage does not exceed 40 percent as listed n Table 2-4; (2) I7te An addition or improvement conforms to all other applicable provisions of this development code; (3) The exterior limits of new construction do not exceed the applicable height limit or encroach further into the setbacks than the comparable portion of the existing structure (follow the development line of the existing structure); however, if the existing side yard setback is less than five feet, the exterior limits of new construction shall maintain a minimum five-foot side yard setback. Discussion: The City receives dozens of building permit requests each year for minor additions to homes that were originally built under Los Angeles County standards. In some neighborhoods, there are homes do not meet the current minimum setback requirements. If a homeowner wishes to construct an addition along a nonconforming setback line, they must apply for and receive approval of a minor conditional use permit (MCUP). This is a somewhat costly and lengthy Page 9 of 11 HAStaff Reports-PC\DCA PL2011-454 pc staff report draft 3-13-12.docx process that requires public noticing and a hearing before the Community Development Director. Every MCUP request within the past five years—and perhaps longer—has been approved with no objections from neighboring property owners. On the basis of this track record, and because the criteria for allowing an addition along a nonconforming setback line are so precisely defined, a fair argument exists to contend that the MCUP requirement for such situations is unnecessary and burdensome. Therefore staff recommends that these types of requests be reviewed and approved administratively. ARTICLE VI. DEVELOPMENT CODE DEFINITIONS CHAPTER 22.80 --DEFINITIONS 16. Recommendation: Revise the definitions listed below. Sec. §22.80.020. Definitions of specialized terms and phrases Director. Where the term "director is used in this development code, the title shall mean the ?eputy eAy manage} director of the Community Development +.- a Department or designee Discussion: Updated to reflect the current organizational structure of the Diamond Bar administration. Indoor amusement/entertainment facilities... Four or more electronic games or coin-operated amusements in any establishment, or a premises where 50 percent or more of the floor area is occupied by amusement devices, are considered an electronic game arcade as described above, three or lees &uer are not considered a land use separate from the primary use of the site. Discussion: Correction of a typographical error. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The City has determined that the proposed Development Code Amendment is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as prescribed under Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines (no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment) and Section 15378(b)(5) of the CEQA Guidelines (administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment). Therefore no further environmental review is required. Page 10 of 11 HAStaff Reports-PC\DCA PL2011-454 pc staff report draft 3-13-12.docx NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing notices of at least 118 page display were published in the Inland Valley Daily Tribune and San Gabriel Valley Tribune newspapers on February 17, 2012, and a copy of the public notice was posted at the City's three designated community posting sites. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment #1) recommending approval of Development Code Amendment No. PL 2011-454 to the City Council. Prepared by: Grace S. Lee Senior Planner Attachment: Reviewed by: Greg Gubman, AICP Community Development Director 1. Resolution No. 2012 -XX recommending City Council approval of Development Code Amendment No. PL 2011-454 Page 11 of 11 HAStaff Reports-PC\DCA PL2011-454 pc staff report draft 3-13-12.docx PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2012-06 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO. PL 2011- 454 AMENDING THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF TITLE 22 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE: 22.10.030 Tables 2-5 and 2-6; 22.16.060(1); 22.22.120(a)(1); 22.38.030; 22.36.130 Table 3-14; 22.34.030; 22.42.060(2)0); 22.42.100(1); 22.42.100(c); 22.42.130; 22.68.030; 22.80.020. A. RECITALS 1. On February 17, 2012, notice for the proposed amendments was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune. Pursuant to Planning and Zoning Law Government Code Section 65091 (a)(3), if the number of property owners to whom a public hearing notice would be mailed is greater than 1,000, a local agency may provide notice by placing a display advertisement of at least one-eighth page in at least one newspaper of general circulation. 2. On February 28, 2012, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed amendment, and continued the matter to March 13, 2012. All persons wishing to testify at the public hearing in connection with said amendments were heard, said amendments were studied, and the Planning Commission closed said hearing. 3. The proposed amendments will not have a substantial adverse impact on the environment and the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. 4. The proposed changes are consistent with multiple objectives and policies in the City of Diamond Bar General Plan. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar as follows: 1. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth above, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Development Code Amendment No. PL 2011-454 by adopting the ordinance attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. The Planning Commission shall: (a) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and (b) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution to the City Council. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH OF MARCH, 2012 BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. M Planning Commission Chairman I, Greg Gubman, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of February, 2012, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN ATTEST: Commissioners: Farago, Shah, Torng, VC/Nelson, Chair/Lin Commissioners: None Commissioners: None Commissioners: None Greg Gubman, Secretary 1a CITY COUNCIL Agenda # 7.3 (ab, Meeting Date: April 3 2012 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Copncil VIA: James DeStefano, City Manager 0 TITLE: Urgency Ordinance No. XX(2012)U and i t Reading of Ordinance No. XX(2012) adopting amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No 2005-01 between The City of Diamond Bar and JCCL-South Pointe West LLC for the South Pointe West Specific Plan (Case no. 2012-27) PROPERTY OWNER: JCCL-South Pointe West, LLC 1156 N. Mountain Ave. Upland, CA 91785 APPLICANT: JCCL-South Pointe West, LLC 1156 N. Mountain Ave. Upland, CA 91785 PROJECT LOCATION: South of Larkstone Dr., east of Morning Sun Ave., west of Brea Canyon Rd., and northwest of Peaceful Hills Rd ("South Pointe West'), further identified as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 8765-001-001, 8765-002- 002, 8765-005-003, 9765-005-007, and portions of 8765-005-905,9763-026-907 and 8763-026-901 RECOMMENDATION: A. Adopt Urgency Ordinance No XX(2012)U B. Approve for first reading by title only, wave the full reading or Ordinance No XX(2012), and schedule the second reading for April 17, 2012. FISCAL IMPACT: None AMENDMENT #1 TO DA 2005-01 PAGE 1 of 3 BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: South Pointe West is a 34.5 -acre site located in the southwesterly portion of Diamond Bar. In 2007, the City approved the South Pointe West Specific Plan and related tentative tract map that authorizes the development of 99 single-family dwellings, and requires the developer to construct and dedicate to the City a 4.68 -acre neighborhood park. A Development Agreement ("Agreement') between the City and Owner was concurrently adopted which provides the Owner and successors in interest certain vested rights in return for specified consideration that will benefit the City. The Agreement has a five-year term that is set to expire on April 19, 2012. Both Owner and City wish to extend the terms of the agreement for another five years to provide the additional time necessary to complete the project. In addition to the request to extend the terms of the agreement, the parties to the agreement also propose that the amendment include the removal of Section 4.4.1.2 from the Agreement, which requires the developer to place $500,000 into an escrow account after the 49th dwelling is occupied. Upon further review, staff does not believe that encumbering these funds would serve a benefit to the City, and therefore supports the removal of this requirement. Planning Commission Public Hearing On March 13, 2012, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 2012-08 recommending the City Council approve the Amendment to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 (Case No.PL 2012-57) based on the findings in DBMC Sections 22.62.030(e). The staff report is attached. Prepared by: Reviewed by: Katherine Laufenburger Senior Planner Reviewed by: David D ` Assistant City Greg Gubman, AICP Community Development Director AMENDMENT #1 TO DA 2005-01 PAGE 2 of 3 Attachments: 1. Urgency Ordinance No. XX(2012)U 2. Ordinance No. XX(2012) 3. City Council Ordinance No. 02(2007) and Development Agreement No. 2005-01, adopted March 20, 2007 (effective 30 days thereafter) 4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2012-08 5. Planning Commission Staff Report March 13, 2012 AMENDMENT #1 TO DA 2005-01 PAGE 3 of 3 ATTACHMENT ORDINANCE NO. XX(2012) U AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2005-01 BETWEEN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AND JCCL-SOUTH POINTE WEST LLC FOR THE SOUTH POINTE WEST SPECIFIC PLAN AND DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF A. RECITALS 1. The City of Diamond Bar and JCCL-South Pointe West LLC, desire to amend a development agreement approved on April 6, 2007, pursuant to Government Code Sections 65864 through 65869.5, and Chapter 22.62 of Title 22 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code with respect to real property South of Larkstone Dr., east of Morning Sun Ave., west of Brea Canyon Rd., and northwest of Peaceful Hills Rd ("South Pointe West"), further identified as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 8765-001-001, 8765-002-002, 8765-005-003, 9765-005-007, and portions of 8765-005-905, 9763-026-907 and 8763-026-901 2. The Project Site is currently comprised of one parcel totaling 34.5 -acre site located in the southwesterly portion of Diamond Bar. In 2007, the City approved the South Pointe West Specific Plan and related tentative tract map that authorizes the development of 99 single-family dwellings, and requires the developer to construct and dedicate to the City a 4.68 -acre neighborhood park. 3. On March 13, 2012, 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. At that time, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the amendment based on the findings in DBMC Sections 22.62.030(e). 4. On March 23, 2012, notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1000 -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. 5. On April 3, 2012, the City Council 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. 6. 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, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. B. NOW. THEREFORE, the City Council 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. This On December 19, 2006 the Diamond Bar City Council approved Resolution 2006-78 certifying Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 2005-01 (SCH 2005111118). No changes in the South Pointe West project are proposed ad there is no new information or change in circumstances that would call for a re-examination of the original CEQA determination. Therefore, according to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines, the time amendments requested by the applicant would not necessitate new or separate environmental review. 3. In accordance with Development Code Section 22.62.030(e) (Findings), the City Council makes the following findings of fact regarding the Development Agreement 2012-01: a. Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 is in the best interest of the City. b. Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 implements the proposed South Pointe West project and will provide certainty to the City and the Applicant that the project continues forward with the development. Because of this, the Agreement is in the best interest of the City and its residents. c. Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 is consistent with the General Plan, any applicable Specific Plan and the Development Code. The subject of Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 is consistent with the General Plan and meets all applicable standards of the Development Code. The administrative record and findings of this Ordinance demonstrate conformance with City requirements. d. Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 would promote the public interest and welfare of the City. Development Agreement No. 2005-01 implements this development plan and thus promotes the public interest and welfare. e. Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01, prepared in accordance with Government Code Section 65864 et seq., and Chapter 22.62 of the Development Code, establishes a mutually beneficial agreement between the City and the applicant setting forth obligations and benefits to the City and the developer. f. The Agreement has a five-year term that is set to expire on April 9, 2012. Both Owner and City wish to extend the terms of the agreement for another five years to provide the additional time necessary to complete the project. In order to ensure the development of the South Pointe West Specific Plan takes place, this Urgency Ordinance is adopted to extend the development agreement immediately so that it does not expire. This Urgency Ordinance is adopted pursuant to California Government Code Section 36937 and shall take effect immediately upon adoption by a four-fifths vote of the City Council. 4. This Urgency Ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") as prescribed under Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA guidelines (no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment) therefore, no further environmental review is required. 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: JCCL-South Pointe West, LLC 1156 N. Mountain Ave. Upland, CA 91785. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2012, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. M Ling -Ling Chang, Mayor I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 3rd day of April 2012, by the following vote: AYES: Council Member: NOES: Council Member: ABSTAIN: Council Member: ABSENT: Council Member: ATTEST: Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar EXHIBIT "A" FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AND JCCL-SOUTH POINTE WEST LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RECITALS A. JCCL-South Pointe West, LLC ("Developer") is the owner of that certain real property in the City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, State of California, commonly known as South Pointe West Specific Plan more fully described on Exhibit A of the Development Agreement described in Recital D below (the "Property"). B. The City of Diamond Bar ("City'), is authorized to enter into development agreements with persons having legal or equitable development interests in real property located in the City pursuant to Government Code Sections 65864, et seq. C. The City has adopted rules and regulations for consideration of development agreements including any amendments of such agreements pursuant to Government Code Section 65865 and Chapter 22.62 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code. D. The Developer and City entered into a Development Agreement dated April 6, 2007 (the "Agreement') pursuant to proceedings undertaken in accordance with Chapter 22.62 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code for the development of the Property as more fully described on Exhibit A of the Agreement (the "Project'). E. Owner has requested pursuant to Section 2.5 of the Agreement that the City modify the Agreement to extend certain deadlines contained in Section 2.3 thereof, and to delete Section 4.4.1.2 which would obligate the Developer to place monies into an escrow account, and proceedings to amend the Agreement have accordingly been undertaken in accordance with Chapter 22.62 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code. F. The City finds that entering into this First Amendment to Development Agreement ("First Amendment') will continue to serve the public interest, will implement the policies, objectives and standards of and is consistent with the General Plan. AGREEMENT NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals, the mutual covenants and conditions contained in the Agreement, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: Section 2.3 is deleted and the following inserted in place thereof: 2.3 Term. The term of this Agreement commenced on the Effective Date which was April 19, 2007, and shall continue for a period of ten (10) years until April 19, 2017.° 2. Section 4.4.1.2 and references thereto are deleted in its entirety. 3. This Amendment may be executed by the parties in counterparts, which counterparts shall be construed together and have the same effect as if all of the parties had executed the same instrument. 4. Except as amended above, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. DEVELOPER JCCL-SOUTH POINTE WEST, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: LEWIS OPERATING CORP., a California corporation - Its Sole Manager By: Name: Its: Authorized Agent 2 CITY CITY OF DIAMOND BAR By: Name: Title: EXHIBIT A-1 Legal Description of the Property LOTS 46, 47 48 AND A PORTION OF 49 OF TRACT NO. 32576, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 927, PAGES 28 TO 31, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, AND THAT PORTION OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 9 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF SAID LAND, ALLIN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. ATTACHMENT ORDINANCE NO. XX(2012) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2005-01 BETWEEN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AND JCCL-SOUTH POINTE WEST LLC FOR THE SOUTH POINTE WEST SPECIFIC PLAN A. RECITALS 1. The City of Diamond Bar and JCCL-South Pointe West LLC, desire to amend a development agreement approved on April 6, 2007, pursuant to Government Code Sections 65864 through 65869.5, and Chapter 22.62 of Title 22 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code with respect to real property South of Larkstone Dr., east of Morning Sun Ave., west of Brea Canyon Rd., and northwest of Peaceful Hills Rd ("South Pointe West"), further identified as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 8765-001-001, 8765-002-002, 8765-005-003, 9765-005-007, and portions of 8765-005-905, 9763-026- 907 and 8763-026-901 2. The Project Site is currently comprised of one parcel totaling 34.5 -acre site located in the southwesterly portion of Diamond Bar. In 2007, the City approved the South Pointe West Specific Plan and related tentative tract map that authorizes the development of 99 single-family dwellings, and requires the developer to construct and dedicate to the City a 4.68 -acre neighborhood park. 3. On March 13, 2012, 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. At that time, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the amendment based on the findings in DBMC Sections 22.62.030(e). 4. On March 23, 2012, notification of the public hearing for this project was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and the Inland Valley Dailv Bulletin newspapers. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within a 1000 -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. 5. On April 3, 2012, the City Council 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. 6. The documents and materials constituting the administrative record of the proceedings upon which the City's decision is based are located at the 1 City of Diamond Bar, Community Development Department, Planning Division, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. B. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council 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. On December 19, 2006 the Diamond Bar City Council approved Resolution 2006-78 certifying Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 2005-01 (SCH 2005111118). No changes in the South Pointe West project are proposed ad there is no new information or change in circumstances that would call for a re-examination of the original CEQA determination. Therefore, according to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines, the time amendments requested by the applicant would not necessitate new or separate environmental review. 3. In accordance with Development Code Section 22.62.030(e) (Findings), the City Council makes the following findings of fact regarding the Development Agreement 2012-01: a. Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 is in the best interest of the City. b. Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 implements the proposed South Pointe West project and will provide certainty to the City and the Applicant that the project continues forward with the development. Because of this, the Agreement is in the best interest of the City and its residents. c. Amendment No.1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 is consistent with the General Plan, any applicable Specific Plan and the Development Code. The subject of Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 is consistent with the General Plan and meets all applicable standards of the Development Code. The administrative record and findings of this Ordinance demonstrate conformance with City requirements. d. Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 would promote the public interest and welfare of the City. Development Agreement No. 2005-01 implements this development plan and thus promotes the public interest and welfare. e. Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01, prepared in accordance with Government Code Section 65864 et seq., and Chapter 22.62 of the Development Code, establishes a mutually 2 beneficial agreement between the City and the applicant setting forth obligations and benefits to the City and the developer. 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: JCCL-South Pointe West, LLC 1156 N. Mountain Ave. Upland, CA 91785. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2012, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. M Ling -Ling Chang, 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 by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 3rd day of April 2012, by the following vote: AYES: Council Member: NOES: Council Member: ABSTAIN: Council Member: ABSENT: Council Member: ATTEST: Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar 3 EXHIBIT "A" FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AND JCCL-SOUTH POINTE WEST LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RECITALS A. JCCL-South Pointe West, LLC ("Developer") is the owner of that certain real property in the City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, State of California, commonly known as South Pointe West Specific Plan more fully described on Exhibit A of the Development Agreement described in Recital D below (the "Property"). B. The City of Diamond Bar ("City'), is authorized to enter into development agreements with persons having legal or equitable development interests in real property located in the City pursuant to Government Code Sections 65864, et seq. C. The City has adopted rules and regulations for consideration of development agreements including any amendments of such agreements pursuant to Government Code Section 65865 and Chapter 22.62 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code. D. The Developer and City entered into a Development Agreement dated April 6, 2007 (the "Agreement') pursuant to proceedings undertaken in accordance with Chapter 22.62 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code for the development of the Property as more fully described on Exhibit A of the Agreement (the "Project'). E. Owner has requested pursuant to Section 2.5 of the Agreement that the City modify the Agreement to extend certain deadlines contained in Section 2.3 thereof, and to delete Section 4.4.1.2 which would obligate the Developer to place monies into an escrow account, and proceedings to amend the Agreement have accordingly been undertaken in accordance with Chapter 22.62 of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code. F. The City finds that entering into this First Amendment to Development Agreement ("First Amendment') will continue to serve the public interest, will implement the policies, objectives and standards of and is consistent with the General Plan. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals, the mutual covenants and conditions contained in the Agreement, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Section 2.3 is deleted and the following inserted in place thereof: 2.3 Term. The term of this Agreement commenced on the Effective Date which was April 6, 2007, and shall continue for a period of ten (10) years until April 6, 2017." 2. Section 4.4.1.2 and references thereto are deleted in its entirety. 3. This Amendment may be executed by the parties in counterparts, which counterparts shall be construed together and have the same effect as if all of the parties had executed the same instrument. 4. Except as amended above, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. DEVELOPER JCCL-SOUTH POINTE WEST, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: LEWIS OPERATING CORP., a California corporation - Its Sole Manager By: Name: Its: Authorized Agent 2 CFi1 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR By: Name: Title: EXHIBIT A-1 Legal Description of the Property LOTS 46, 47 48 AND A PORTION OF 49 OF TRACT NO. 32576, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 927, PAGES 28 TO 31, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, AND THAT PORTION OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 9 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF SAID LAND, ALLIN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. ATTACHMENT 3 ORDINANCE1 00 AN ORDINANCE OF CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING _ DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 200 5-01 AUTHORIZING DEVELOPMENT OF A SITE COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 34.52 ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF LARKSTONE DRIVE, EAST_ AVENUE,AND D =,F CANYON ROAD (ASSESSORS F. •_ NUMBERS .. _! i 8765-005-02, 8765-005-03,8765-005-07, AND PORTIONS OF 8765-005-905,": (126-907, AND 8763-026-901) WITH A 99 -UNIT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM P. 1. The applicant, South Pointe West, LLC, filed an application for Development Agreement 2005-01 for a site comprised of approximately 34.52 acres generally located south of Larkstone Drive, east of Morning Sun Avenue, and west of Brea Canyon Road (Assessors Parcel Numbers 8765-005-01, 8765-005-02, 8765-005-03, 8765-005-07, and portions of 8765-005-905, 8763-026-907, and 8763-026-901). 2.. In accordance to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15164 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 require adoption of "Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations'. 3. On December 19, 2006, the Diamond Bar City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the EIR for the South Pointe West Project and approved Resolution No. 2006-78 certifying Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 2005-01 (SCH No. 20051 1 1 1 1 8) as complete and adequate. The applicant has requested approval of Specific Plan 2005-01 (South Pointe West Specific Plan) that is being reviewed concurrently with this application, which includes a land use plan that divides the property into four sub -planning areas (Open Space, Low -Medium Density Residential, Park, and Circulation) and includes standards and guidelines for future development of the specific plan site. 5. Public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 518 property owners of record within a 1,000 -foot radius of the project site. Three public places within the City of Diamond Bar were posted with the public hearing notices and a display board was posted at the project site. Notification of the public hearing for this project was properly advertised in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. CC -DA On November 14, 2006, and continued to November 28, 2006, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on the Application, and approved Resolution No. 2006-54 recommending that the City Council approve the Developemtn Agreement No. 2005-01. 7. On December 19, 2006, and continued to January 16, February 6, February 20, and March 6, 2007, the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar conducted a duly noticed public hearing on Zone Change No. 2006- 03; S. The City Council has determined that the proposed Development Agreement represents a consistent, logical, appropriate and rational land use designation and an implementing tool that furthers the goals and objectives of the City General Plan. 9. The documents and other 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 ORDINAFICE 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 I of this Resolution 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. 2005-01, (SCH No. 2005111118) be prepared. An EIR has been prepared according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines promulgated thereunder. On December 19, 2006, the City Council reviewed the EIR and adopted Resolution No. 2006-78 certifying the EER as complete and adequate after conducting and concluding a duly noticed public hearing. On December 20, 2006, the City filed a Notice of Determination with the Los Angeles County Clerk's office pursuant to Section 15094 of the CEQA Guidelines. Following the certification of the EIR, in response to comments received during the public hearings of January 16, February 6 and February 20, 2007, the Council caused the Applicant to prepare a Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum (Traffic Addendum). The Traffic Addendum included additional traffic counts on selected street segments and intersections with CC -DA South Pointe Middle School in session, studied the results of different limitations on vehicular use (exit only, entry only and emergency only) of the secondary gate at Morning Sun Avenue and Shepherd Hills Road, and considered the pedestrian safety issues with respect to the residential streets in the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County located near to the project's secondary Morning Sun Avenue gate. 4. At the continued public hearing March 6, 2007, the Council reviewed the Traffic Addendum report dated February 22, 2007. The Council finds that the traffic volume expected to be generated by the Project is within the City adopted Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines and that after construction of the Project the streets will continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service. Furthermore, the Council finds that the Traffic Addendum concludes that there is no impact to pedestrian safety as a result of the traffic generated by the proposed project. The City's independent consultant has reviewed the Traffic Addendum and determined that it is complete and accurate. 5. The Council finds that certified EIR (which includes the previous Traffic Impact Analysis dated ,lune 23, 2006) together with the Traffic Addendum dated February 22, 2007 are a complete and accurate assessment of traffic impacts from the Project. Further, the Council finds that the additional data analyzed in the Traffic Addendum did not result in the introduction of any new significant impact that has not been previously disclosed in the FEIR. The Council determines that according to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 none of the criteria exists requiring a supplemental or subsequent EIR. 6. The Council has reviewed the Addendum to the Certified EIR and determined that the Addendum complies with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines. 7. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the City Council hereby finds the approval of Development Agreement No. 2005-01, with finalization and execution by the City Manager, for South Point West based on the following findings, as required by 22.62.030(e) of the Municipal Code is in conformance with California Government Code Section 65864 et seq.: a. The Development Agreement would be in the best interest of the City. Development Agreement No. 200501 implements the proposed South Point West project and provides significant benefits of $1.5 million and other impact fees to the City. The proposed South Point West project will also transform a vacant site into a functional and attractive development that will provide additional housing within the City. Consequently, the Agreement is in the best interest of the City and its residents. 3 CG -DA b. The Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan, any applicable Specific Plan and the Development Code. South Point West, the subject of Development Agreement 2005-01, is consistent with the General Plan (as amended), is the subject of an appropriate Specific Plan and meets all applicable standards of the Development Code. The administrative record and findings of this Resolution demonstrate conformance with City requirements. C. The Development Agreement would promote the public interest and welfare of the City. As stated above, South Pointe West is a 99 -unit residential and neighborhood park development that preserves open space and provides additional housing and recreational opportunities within the community. It retains a substantial portion of the site as open space and limits development to the least environmentally sensitive areas of the site. Development Agreement No. 200501 implements this development plan and thus promotes the public interest and welfare. d. The proposed Development Agreement, prepared in accordance with Government Code Section 65864 at seq., and Chapter 22.62 of the Development Code establishes a mutually beneficial agreement between the City and the applicant setting forth obligations and benefits to the City and the developer. The City Council does hereby approve South Pointe West Development Agreement No. 2005-01 attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The City Council shall: (1) Certify to the adoption of this Ordinance; and (2) Provide notice to South Pointe West, LLC, the applicant, that the time limit within which judicial,review of the decision represented by this Ordinance must be sought is governed by the provision of the California Code of Civil Procedures Section 1094.6; and (3) Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Ordinance by certified mail to, South Pointe West, LLC, 2632 W. 237th Street, Suite 201, Torrance, CA 90505. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2007, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. CC -DA 0 0 Steve Tye, May r I, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk of the City of Diamond Bar, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on the 6`n day of March 2007 and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar held on 20th day of March, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: Chang, M/Tya NOES: Councilmembers: m),,n ABSENT: Councilmembers: None ABSTAI�: Councilmembers:1,ont ATTEST: — laa LL Tomm e Cribbins, City Clerk 5 GC -DA L E A D S H E E T Assessor's Identification Number (AIN) To be completed by Examiner OR Title Company in black ink. Number of AIN's Shown THIS FORM IS NOT TO BE DUPLICATED rR. This page is part of your document - DO NOT DISCARD d. 1 49 IIIIIIIIfllllllllll1111111111111lIIIII[IIIlllllilllllllllll 042es: Recorded/Filed in Official Records pee: OAO Recorders Office, Los Angeles County, California Tax: 0.00 Other: 06/25107 AT 10:09AM 0.00 Total: 0.00 SU885 200706250030037 Counter TITLE(S) o 1 r��11R1 den Ililr nrn nl �lillll� IIII 11110IIIII IIICt� 11 Oe1 L E A D S H E E T Assessor's Identification Number (AIN) To be completed by Examiner OR Title Company in black ink. Number of AIN's Shown THIS FORM IS NOT TO BE DUPLICATED rR. 06/25/07 ►11f lllllf lllllllllll11I11111I1IIIIIIIiIIf l�liililllfllllNlllll Recorded at request of ) 20071519492 Clerk, City Council } City of Diamond Bar } When recorded return to ) City of Diamond Bar ) 21825 Copley Drive ) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 ) Attention: City Clerk } ExemT>t ftom Filing Fees Gov. Code section 6103 SOUTH POINTE WEST DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005-01 A STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT between CITY OF DIAMOND BAIL a California municipal corporation and JCCL-SOUTH POINTE WEST, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Developer") DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT This Development Agreement (hereinafter "Agreement") is entered into effective on the Effective Date (defined below) by and between the City of Diamond Bar (hereinafter "CITY"), and J CCL -South Pointe W est, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (hereinafter "DEVELOPER"): RECITALS WHEREAS, CITY is authorized to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property, pursuant to Section 65864 et sem, of the Government Code and Chapter 22.62 of the City's Municipal Code (collectively the "DA Laws"); and WHEREAS, DEVELOPER, as of the Effective Date, owns the real property which is the subject of this Agreement (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, DEVELOPER has requested CITY to enter into a development agreement and proceedings have been taken in accordance with the DA Laws and all other rules and regulations of CITY; and WHEREAS, by electing to enter into this Agreement, CITY shall bind future City Councils of CITY by the obligations specified herein and limit the future exercise of CITY's ability to regulate development on the Property; and WHEREAS, the terms and conditions of this Agreement have undergone extensive review by CITY and the City Council and have been found to be fair, just and reasonable; and WHEREAS, the best interests of the citizens of the City of Diamond Bar and the public health, safety and welfare will be served by entering into this Agreement; and WHEREAS, all of the procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act have been met with respect to the Project and the Agreement; and WHEREAS, this Agreement and the Project are consistent with the Diamond Bar General Plan and any Specific Plan applicable thereto; and , WHEREAS, all actions taken and approvals given by CITY have been duly taken or approved in accordance with all applicable legal requirements for notice, public hearings, findings; votes, and other procedural matters; and WHEREAS, development of the Property in accordance with this Agreement will provide substantial benefits to CITY and will further important policies and goals of CITY; and t h; WHEREAS, this Agreement will eliminate uncertainty in planning and provide for the orderly development of the Property, ensure progressive installation of necessary improvements, provide for public services appropriate to the development of the Property, and generally serve the purposes for which development agreements under the DA Laws are intended; and WHEREAS, DEVELOPER has incurred and will in the fixture incur substantial costs in excess of the generally applicable requirements in order to assure vesting of legal rights to develop the Property in accordance with this Agreement. COVENANTS NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals and of the mutual covenants hereinafter contained and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. DEFINITIONS AND EXHIBITS. 1.1 Definitions. The following terms when used in this Agreement shall be defined as fol lows: 1.1.1 "Agreement" means this Development Agreement, 1.1.2 "CITY" means the City of Diamond Bar, a municipal corporation and general law city. 1.1.3 "City Council' means the City Council of the CITY. 1.1.4 "Condominium" means an estate in real property as defined in Civil Code Sections 783 and 135l (f); Condominium units as defined in Civil Code Section 1351(f) are DUs as defined in this Agreement. 1.1.5 "Current Development Approvals" mean all Development Approvals approved or issued prior to the Effective Date. Current Development Approvals includes the Approvals incorporated herein as Exhibit "C" and all other Development Approvals that are a matter of public record on the Effective Date, 1.1.6 "Development" means the improvement of the Property for the purposes of completing the structures, improvements and facilities comprising the Project including, but not limited to: grading; the construction of infrastructure and public and private facilities related to the Project whether located within or outside the Property; the construction of buildings and structures; and the installation of landscaping. "Development" does not include the maintenance, repair, reconstruction or redevelopment of any building, structure, improvement or facility after the construction and completion thereof. 3 1.1.7 "Development Approvals" mean all permits and other entitlements for use subject to approval or issuance by CITY in connection with development of the Property including, but not limited to: (a) specific plans and specific plan amendments; (b) tentative and final subdivision and parcel maps; (c) conditional use permits and site plans; (d) zoning; (e) design review approvals; and (f) grading and building permits. 1.1.8 ' "Development Exaction" means any requirement of CITY in connection with or pursuant to any Land Use Regulation or Development Approval for the dedication of land, the construction of improvements or public facilities, or the payment of fees in order to lessen, offset, mitigate or compensate for the impacts of development on the environment or other public interests. 1.1.9 "Development Impact Fee" means a monetary exaction other than a tax or special assessment; whether established for a broad class of projects by legislation of general applicability or imposed on a specific project on an ad hoc basis, that is charged by a local agency to the applicant in connection with approval of a development project for the purpose of defraying all or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to the development project, but does not include fees specified in Government Code Section 66477, fees collected by CITY for other -public agencies other than the CITY, fees for processing applications for governmental regulatory actions or approvals, fees collected under development agreements adopted pursuant to Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 65864 of Chapter 4 of the Government Code), or fees collected pursuant to agreements with redevelopment agencies which provide for the redevelopment of property in furtherance or for the benefit of a redevelopment project for which a redevelopment plan has been adopted pursuant to the Community Redevelopment Law (Part 1 (commencing with Section 33000) of Division 24 of the Health and Safety Code). "Development Impact Fee" expressly excludes processing fees and charges of every kind and nature imposed by CITY to cover the estimated actual costs to CITY of processing applications for Development Approvals or for monitoring compliance with any Development Approvals granted or issued, including, without limitation, fees for zoning variances; zoning changes; use permits; building inspections; building permits; filing and processing applications and petitions filed with the local agency formation commission or conducting preliminary proceedings or proceedings under the Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, Division 3 (commencing with Section 56000) of Title 5 of the Government Code; theprocessing of maps under the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, Division 2 (commencing with Section 66410) of Title 7 of the Government Code; or planning services under the authority of Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 65100) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code, fees and charges as described in Sections 51287, 56383, 57004, 65104, 65456, 65863.7, 65909.5, 66013, 66014, and 66451.2 of the Government Code; Sections 17951, 19132.3, and 19852 ofthe Health and 4 Safety Code, Section 41901 of the Public Resources Code, and Section 21671.5 of the Public Utilities Code, as such codes may be amended or superceded, including by amendment or replacement. 1.1.10 "Development Plan" means the Current Development Approvals and the Existing Land Use Regulations applicable to development of the Property. 1.1.11 "DEVELOPER" means JCCL- South Pointe West, LLC, and/or its assignee(s), transferee(s) or successor(s)in interest (as permitted under Section 2.4 hereof) to all or any part of the Property. 1.1.12 "DU's" means single-family and Condominium/townhouse residential dwelling units, including detached and attached units for sale to the general public but do not include residential units developed for rental purposes. 1.1.13 "Effective Date" means the date that is 31 days following the date that this Agreement is approved by the City by final action of the City Council. 1.1.14 "ETR" means that certain Environmental Impact Report No. SCH No. 2005111118 as described in Exhibit "C" attached hereto. 1,1.15 "Existing Land Use Regulations" mean all Land Use Regulations in effect on the Effective Date. Existing Land Use Regulations include the Regulations incorporated herein as Exhibit "D" and all other Regulations that are a matter of public record on the Effective Date. 1.1.16 "Land Use Regulations" mean all ordinances, resolutions, codes; rules, regulations and official written policies of CITY governing the development and use of land, including, without limitation, the permitted use of land, the density or intensity of use, subdivision requirements, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to the development of the property, as modified or supplemented by the Current Development Approvals. "Land Use Regulations" does not include any CITY ordinance, resolution, code, rule, regulation or official policy, governing: (a) the conduct of businesses, professions, and occupations; (b) taxes and assessments; (c) the control and abatement of nuisances; (d) the granting of encroachment permits and the conveyance of rights and interests that provide for the use of or the entry upon public property; or (e) the exercise of the power of eminent domain. 1,1.17 "Lot" means a legal subdivided lot: 5 1,1.18 "Mortgagee" means a mortgagee of a mortgage, a beneficiary under a deed of trust or any other security -device lender, and their successors and assigns. 1.1.19 "Park Parcel' means that real property described in Exhibit E and incorporated herein by reference to be conveyed to City by the Walnut Walley Unified School District and / or by Developer for the development of a public park pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 1.1.20 "Project" means the development of the Property as contemplated by, the Development Plan as such Plan may be further defined, enhanced or modified pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 1.1.21 "Property" means the real property described on Exhibit "A-1" and shown as South Pointe West Specific Plan Map on Exhibit "B" to this Agreement. 1.1.22 'Reservations of Authority" means the rights and authority excepted from the assurances and rights provided to DEVELOPER under this Agreement and reserved to CITY under Section 3.6 of this Agreement. 1.1:23 "Specific Plan' means the South Pointe West Specific Plan No. 2005-01 approved by the City, Ordinance No. XX (2007) 1.1.24 "Subsequent Development Approvals" means all Development Approvals approved by the City subsequent to the Effective Date in connection with development of the Property. 1.1,25 "Subsequent Land Use Regulations" means any Land Use Regulations adopted and effective after the Effective Date of this Agreement. 1.2 Exhibits. The following documents are attached to, and by this reference made apart of; this Agreement: Exhibit "A-1 " -- Legal Description of Property. Exhibit "B" -- Map of Specific Plan Area Exhibit "C" -- Current Development Approvals. Exhibit "D" -- Existing Land Use Regulations. Exhibit "E"— Description of Park Parcel Exhibit "F"-- Park Plans and Specifications Schedule 1 -Entitlement Processing Schedule Schedule 2 — Project Impact Fees 6 2. GENERAL PROVISIONS. 2.1 Binding Effect of Agreement. The Property is herebymade subject to this Agreement. Development of the Property is hereby authorized and shall be carried out only in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 2.2 Ownership/Option. DEVELOPER represents and covenants that, as of the Effective Date, itis the owner of the fee simple title to the Property 2.3 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue for a period of five (5) years thereafter. This Agreement shall be void and of no force and effect if DEVELOPER is not the owner of fee simple title to the Property and if the Walnut Valley Unified School District or developer, as applicable, has not conveyed to the City the park parcel by December 31, 2007. 2.4 Assigrunent: 2.4,1 Right to Assign. DEVELOPER shall have the right to sell, transfer or assign the Property in whole or in part (provided that no such partial transfer shall violate the Subdivision Map Act, Government Code Section 66410; et seq.), to anyperson, partnership, joint venture, firm or corporation at any time during the term of this Agreement; provided, however, that any such sale, transfer or assignment shallinclude the assignment and assumption of the rights, duties and obligations arising under or from this Agreement and be made in strict compliance with the following conditions precedent: (a) No sale, transfer or assignment of any right or interest under this Agreement shall be made unless made together with the sale, transfer or assignment of all or a part of the Property. (b) Concurrent with any such sale; transfer or assignment, or within fifteen (15) business days thereafter, DEVELOPER shall notify CITY, in writing, of such sale, transfer or assignment and shall provide CITY with an executed agreement; in a form reasonably acceptable to CITY, bythe purchaser, transferee or assignee and providing therein that the purchaser, transferee or assignee expressly and unconditionally assumes all the duties and obligations of DEVELOPER under this Agreement. Any sale, transfer or assignment not made in strict compliance with the foregoing conditions shall constitute a default by DEVELOPER under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the failure of any purchaser, transferee or assignee to execute the agreement required by Paragraph (b) of this Subsection 2.4.1, the burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon such purchaser, transferee or assignee, but the benefits of this Agreement shall not inure to such purchaser, transferee or assignee until and unless such agreement is executed, and the CITY approves of such purchaser, transferee, or assignee, which approval shall not be unnecessarily withheld so long as the requirements for Release of DEVELOPER are met in Section 2.4,2 below. 2.4.2 Rel ease of DEVELOPER. Notwithstanding any sale, trans fer or assignment, DEVELOPER shall continue to be obligated under this Agreement as to that portion of the Property _7 7 sold, transferred or assigned unless DEVELOPER is given a release in writing by CITY, which release shall be provided by CITY upon the full satisfaction by DEVELOPER of the following conditions: (a)" DEVELOPER no longer has a legal or equitable interest in all or any part of the Property sold; (b) DEVELOPER is not then in default under this Agreement; (c) DEVELOPER has provided CITY with the notice and executed agreement required under Paragraph (b) of Subsection 2.4.1 above; (d) The purchaser, transferee or assignee provides CITY with security equivalent to any security previously provided by DEVELOPER to secure performance of its obligations hereunder; and (e) The purchaser, transferee, or assignee is a limited liability company in which DEVELOPER, either of DEVELOPER`S Members (or their affiliates) is a Member, or a merchant home builder of DUs generally recognized by the Southern California Building Industry Association as a quality, financially sound, developer. 2.4.3 Subsequent Assipnment: Any subsequent sale, transfer or assignment after an initial sale, transfer or assignment sball be made only in accordance with and subject to the terms and conditions of this Section: 2,4.4 Termination of A¢reement With Respect to Individual Lots Upon Sale to Public and Completion of Construction. The restrictions and requirements of Subsection 2.4.1 shall not apply to the sale or lease (for a period longer than one year) of any (i) Lot that has been finally subdivided and/or any (ii) Condominium unit that is described on a condominium plan approved by the City as defined in Civil Code Section 1351(e) (the"Condominium Plan") individually (and not in "bulk") to a member of the public or other ultimate user. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall terminate with respect to any Lot or Condominium unit and such Lot or Condominium unit shall be released and no longer be subject to this Agreement without the execution or recordation of any further document upon satisfaction of both of the following conditions: (a) The Lot has been finally subdivided and individually (and not in "bulk") sold or leased (for a period longer than one year) to a member of the public or other ultimate user; (b) The Condominium unit is described on a Condominium Plan approved by the City and individually (and not in bulk) sold or leased (for a period longer than one year) to a member of the public or other ultimate user; and, (c) A final certificate of occupancy or similar certificate has been issued for a building on the Lot or for the Condominium unit, and the fees set forth under Section 4 of this Agreement have been paid. 2.5 Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended or cancelled in whole or in part only by written consent of all parties or their respective successors or assigns with respect to their respective portions of the Property in the manner provided for in Government Code Section 65868. This provision shall not limit any remedy of CITY or DEVELOPER as provided by this Agreement. 2.6 Termination. This Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further effect upon the occurrence of any of the following events: (a) Expiration of the stated term of this Agreement as set forth in Section 2.3. (b) Entry of a final judgment setting aside, voiding or annulling the adoption of the ordinance approving this Agreement. (c) The adoption of a referendum measure overriding or repeating the ordinance approving this Agreement. (d) Completion of the Project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, including, without limitation, issuance of all required occupancy permits and acceptanceby CITY or applicable public agency of all required dedications. Except as provided in Section 4, upon the termination of this Agreement, no party shall have any further right or obligation hereunder except with respect to any obligation to have been performed prior to such termination or with respect to any default in the performance of the provisions of this Agreement that has occurred prior to such termination or with respect to any ; obligations that are specifically set forth as surviving this Agreement. 2.7 Notices. (a) As used in this Agreement, "notice" includes, but is not limited to, the communication of notice, request, demand, approval, statement, report, acceptance, consent, waiver, appointment or other communication required or permitted hereunder: (b) ' All notices shall be in writing and shall be considered given either: (t) when delivered in person to the recipient named below; or (ii) on the date of delivery shown on the return receipt, after deposit in the United States mail in a sealed envelope as either registered or certified mail with return receipt requested, and postage and postal charges prepaid, and addressed to the recipient named below; or (iii) on the date of delivery shown in the records of the telegraph company after transmission by telegraph to the recipient named below. All notices shall be ` addressed as follows: If to CITY: City of Diamond Bar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 9 Attention`. City Manager with a copy to: Jenkins & Hogin 1230 Rosecrans Ave., Suite 110 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Attn: Michael Jenkins, Esq.; If to DEVELOPER: JCCL-South Pointe West, LLC Attn: Kurt Nelson 2632 W. 237th Street, Suite 200 Torrance, California 90505 with a copy to: Lewis Operating Corp. Attn: W. Bradford Francke; Esq. P. O. Box 670 Upland, CA 91785-0670 1156 N. Mountain Avenue Upland, CA 91786-3633 (c) Either party may, by notice given at any time, require subsequent notices to be given to another person or entity, whether a party or an officer or representative of a party, or to a different address, or both. Notices given before actual receipt of notice of change shall not be invalidated by the change. 3. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY. 3 1 Rights to Develop. Subject to the terms of this Agreement including the Reservations of Authority, DEVELOPER shall have a vested right to develop the Property in accordance with, and to the extent of; the Development Plan. The Project shall remain subject to all Subsequent Development Approvals required to complete the Project as contemplated by the Development Plan. Except as otherwise provided expressly in this Agreement, the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposedbuildings, the design, improvement; and construction standards applicable to development of the Property, and provisions for reservation and dedication of land for public purposes and Development Exactions shall be those set forth in the Development Plan. Without limiting the foregoing, CITY and DEVELOPER agree that the maximum density permitted for the Property is 99 DU's as provided in the Specific Plan, 3.2 Effect of 'Agreement on Land Use Regulations. Except as otherwise provided expressly under the terms, of this Agreement including the Reservations of Authority, the rules,' 10 1� regulations and official policies of the City governing permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and the design,' improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to development of the Property shall be the Existing Land Use Regulations as modified by the Specific Plan and as reflected in the other Current Development Approvals. In connection with any Subsequent Development Approval, CITY shall exercise its discretion in accordance with the Development Plan, and as provided by this Agreement including, but not limited to, the Reservations of Authority. CITY shall accept for processing, review and action all applications for Subsequent Development Approvals, and such applications shallbe processed in the normal manner for processing such matters, provided CITY shall use its best efforts to comply with the processing schedule attached hereto as Schedule 1. 3.3 Timing of Development. The parties acknowledge that DEVELOPER cannot at this time predict when or the rate at which phases of the Property will be developed. Such decisions depend upon numerous factors that are not within the control of DEVELOPER, such as market orientation and demand, interest rates, absorption, completion and other similar factors. Since the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo (1984) 37 Cal .3d 465, that the failure of the parties therein to provide for the timing of development resulted in a later adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over such parties' agreement, it is the parties' intent to cure that deficiency by acknowledging and providing that DEVELOPER shall have the right to develop the Property in such order and at such rate and at such times as DEVELOPER, in its sole and absolute discretion deems appropriate, subject only to any timing or phasing requirements set forth in the Development Plan_ Developer shall have the right to obtain permits and commence improvements to the Property (including construction of DU's) prior to approval and recordation of the subdivision map. Any such commencement of improvement by DEVELOPER prior to approval and recordation of the final subdivision map shall be at DEVELOPER's risk, and DEVELOPER shall effect recordation of the approved, final subdivision map prior to occupancy of any DU. 3.4 Phasing Plan. Development of the Property shall be subject to all timing and phasing requirements established by the Development Plan. 3.5 Changes and Amendments. The parties acknowledge that development of the Project will require Subsequent Development Approvals and may include changes that are appropriate and mutually desirable in the Current Development Approvals. In the event DEVELOPER finds that a change in the Current Development Approvals is necessary or appropriate, DEVELOPER shall apply for a Subsequent Development Approval to effectuate such change and CITY shall process and act on such application in accordance with the Existing Land Use Regulations, except as otherwise provided by this Agreement, including, without limitation, the Reservations of Authority: If approved, any such change in the Current Development Approvals shall be incorporated herein as an addendum to Exhibit "C", and may be further changed from time to time as provided in this Section. Unless otherwise required by law, as determined in CITY's reasonable discretion, a change to the Current Development Approvals shall be deemed "minor" and not require an amendment to this Agreement but instead require only the approval of the City Manager (or its designee) provided such change does not: I1 (a) Alter the permitted uses of the Property as a whole; or, (b) Increase the density or intensity of use of the Property as a whole; or, (c), Increase the maximum height of permitted buildings; or; (d) Delete a requirement for the reservation or dedication of land for public purposes within the Property as a whole or modify the Development Exactions; or, (e) Constitute a project requiring a subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report pursuant to Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code; or (f) Permit material changes to the architecture, design, or materials provided for in the Current Development Approvals or Subsequent Development Approvals for the Project; or (g) ` Extend the term of this Agreement; or (h) Reduce the benefits to the CITY or Development Exactions provided for in this Agreement For the purposes hereof, changes to the interior floor plan (including without limitation, changes in thenumber of bedrooms) which do not alter the height or footprint of the DU, density or intensity of use; and minor changes in architecture, design or materials shall be permitted. 3.6 Reservations of Authority 3.6.1 Limitations, Reservationsand Exceptions.' Notwithstanding ,any other provision of this Agreement; the following Subsequent Land Use Regulations shall apply to the development of the Property. (a) Processing fees and charges of every kind and nature imposed by CITY to cover the estimated actual costs to CITY of processing applications for Development Approvals or for monitoring compliance with any Development Approvals granted or issued. (b) Procedural regulations relating to hearing bodies, petitions, applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendations, appeals and any other matter of procedure. (c) Regulations governing construction standards and specifications including, without limitation, the CITY's Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code, Electrical Code, Fire Code and Grading Code 'that `are applied uniformly and on a City-wide basis to all development projects of a similar type as the Project. (d) Regulations imposing Development Exactions except as set forth in this Agreement; provided, however, that no such' subsequently adopted Development Exaction shall be applicable to development of the Property unless such Development Exaction is applied uniformly to development, either throughout the CITY or within a defined area of benefit that includes the 12 Property. No such subsequently adopted Development Exaction shall apply if its application to the Property would prevent or increase the cost of development of the Property for the uses and to the density or intensity of development set forth in the Development Plan. in the event any such subsequently adopted Development Exaction fulfills the same purposes, in whole or in part, as the fees set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement, CITY shall allow a credit against such subsequently adopted Development Exaction for the fees paid under Section 4 of this Agreement to the extent such fees fulfill the same purposes. (e) Regulations that may be in conflict with the Development Plan but that are reasonably necessary to protect the public health and safety of the residents of the Project or immediate community. To the extent possible, any such regulations shall be applied and construed so as to provide DEVELOPER with all of the rights and assurances provided under this Agreement, (f) Regulations that are not in conflict with the Development Plan. Any regulation, whether adopted by initiative or otherwise, limiting the rate or timing of development of the Property shall be deemed to conflict with the Development Plan and shall therefore not be applicable to the development of the Property. (g) Regulations that are in conflict with the Development Plan provided DEVELOPER has given written consent to the application of such regulations to development of the Property. (h) Regulations that impose non-discriminatory City-wide taxes. assessments , and/or fees, including but no limited to franchise fees or business taxes upon all residents or nonresidential users (commercial or industrial) of real property in the CITY similar to the DU's or the Commercial Componembut not including any Development Exaction or other fee designed to mitigate the impacts of the development of the Project.- 3.6.2 Subsequent Development Approvals, This Agreement shall not prevent CITY, in acting on Subsequent Development Approvals from applying Subsequent Land Use Regulations that do not conflict with the Development Plan, nor shall this Agreement prevent CITY from denying or conditionally approving any Subsequent Development Approval on thebasis of the Existing Land Use Regulations or any Subsequent Land Use Regulationnot in conflict with the Development Plan. Without limiting the foregoing, DEVELOPER acknowledges that nothing in this Agreement limits the right of the City to conduct design review in accordance with its Existing Land Use Regulations 'prior > to issuing any building permits for improvements on the Property. DEVELOPER further acknowledges that such design review may result in modifications to the conceptual elevations and site plans included in the Specific Plan.' 3.63 Modification or Suspension by State or Federal Law. In the event that State or Federal laws or regulations, enacted after the Effective Date of this Agreement, prevent or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as maybe necessary to comply with such State or Federal laws or regulations, provided, however, that this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it isnot inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. 13 3.6.4 Intent. The parties acknowledge and agree that CITY is restricted in its authority to limit its police power by contract and that the foregoing limitations reservations and exceptions are intended to reserve to CITY all of its police power that cannot be so limited. This Agreement shall be construed, contrary to its stated terms if necessary, to reserve to CITY all such power and authority that cannot be restricted by contract. 3.7 Public Works. If DEVELOPER is required by this Agreement to construct any improvements that will be dedicated to CITY, or any other public agency upon completion, and if DEVELOPER is required by applicable laws to do so, DEVELOPER shall perform such work in the same manner and subject to the same requirements as would be applicable to CITY or such other public agency should it have undertaken such construction: " 3.8 Provision of Real Property Interests by CITY. In any instance where DEVELOPER is required to construct any public improvement on land not awned by DEVELOPER, DEVELOPER shall at its sole cost and expense provide or cause to be provided, the real property interests necessary for the construction of such public improvements. This Section 3:8 is not intended by the parties to impose upon the DEVELOPER an enforceable duty to acquire land or construct any public improvements on land not owned by DEVELOPER, except to the extent that the DEVELOPER elects to proceed with the development of the Project, and then only in accordance with valid conditions consistent with the Development Plan imposed by the CITY upon the development of the Project under the Subdivision Map Act or other legal authority. 3.9 Regulation by Other Public Agencies. It is acknowledged by the parties that other public agencies not within the control of CITY possess authority to regulate aspects of the development of the Property separately from or -jointly with CITY and this Agreement does not limit the authority of such other public agencies. 3.10 Tentative Tract Map Extension. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 66452.6 of the Government Code, no tentative subdivision map or tentative parcel map; heretofore or hereafter approved in connection with development of the Property, shall be granted an extension of time except in accordance with the Existing Land Use Regulations. 3.11 Vesting Tentative Mans. If any tentative or final subdivision map, or tentative or final parcel map, heretofore or hereafter approved in connection with development of the Property, is a vesting map under the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section 66410, et seq.) and if this Agreement is determined by a final judgment to be invalid or unenforceable insofar as it grants a vested right to develop to DEVELOPER; then and to that extent the rights and protections afforded DEVELOPER under the laws and ordinancesapplicable to vesting maps shall supersede the provisions of this Agreement. Except as set forth immediately above, development of the Property shall occur only as provided in this Agreement, and the provisions in this Agreement shall be controlling over any conflicting provision of law or ordinance concerning vesting maps. 4. PUBLIC BENEFITS. 4.1 Intent. The parties acknowledge and agree that development ofthe Property will result in substantial public needs that will not be fully met by the Development Plan and further 14 I� acknowledge and agree that this Agreement confers substantial private benefits on DEVELOPER that should be balanced by commensurate public benefits. Accordingly, the parties intend to provide consideration to the public to balance the private benefits conferred on DEVELOPER by providing more fully for the satisfaction of the public needs resulting from the Project. Developer's obligations under this Section 4'shall survive any termination of this Agreement except termination under Section 7.5. 4,2 Development Impact Fees/Traffic Fee. 4.2.1 City Traffic Fee, DEVELOPER shall pay to the City a development impact fee (the "City Traffic Impact Fee") equal to the "fair share" cost of those traffic improvements allocable to the Property as determined by the Project traffic study in accordance with Government Code Section 66000 et seq. 4.2.2 Time of Payment. The City Traffic Fee required pursuant to Subsection 4.2.1 for the Property shall be paid to CITY on the dates set forth in Schedule 2. During the term of this Agreement, commencing as of the Effective Date, the City Traffic Fee shall not be increased with respect to this Project, 4.2.3 In -Lieu Construction. DEVELOPER shall be entitled to credit against the City Traffic Fee for the construction of any of the improvements for which those fees are paid. Such credit shall be equal to the City's program costs for such improvement(s) listed on the"Fair Share" studies used by City to determine those fees. 4.3 Protect Park Requirement. 4.3.1 Quimby Fees. DEVELOPER currently contemplates the construction of 99 Condominium/townhouse DU's for which DEVELOPER shall pay Quimby Act Fees in the amount and at the times set forth in Schedule 2 attached hereto in accordance with Chapter 21.32.040(D) of the City's Municipal Code (the "Quimby Act Fees"). CITY agrees that the Quimby Act Fees shall not be increased during the term of this Agreement. CITY and DEVELOPER agree that the Quimby Act Fees were determined by using the fair market value of land located in the CITY reasonably suitable for park purposes as mutually agreed by CITY and DEVELOPER. 4.3.2 Improvement Credits. Completion of all park improvements to the satisfaction of City shall be deemed to have fully satisfied all of DEVELOPER's Quimby Act Fee obligations, 4.3.3 Park improvement and Dedication. DEVELOPER shall construct and dedicate to CITY a fully improved neighborhood park on the Park Parcel described in Exhibit Band incorporated herein by reference. The plans and specifications for the park, including grading, landscape, hardscape, signage, furniture and play equipment, are set forth in Exhibit F, and incorporated herein by reference. The park shall be under construction by the time City issues a building permit for the 25'h DU and completed to CITY's satisfaction prior to issuance of a building ' permit for the 75`l' DU of the Project; building permits after the 75a' DU shall not be issued until and unless the park is timely commenced and completed to CITY's satisfaction. In the event that the Walnut Valley Unified School District and / or developer, as applicable, does not convey the Park 15 Parcel to the City, then this Agreement and all of the entitlements approved concurrently herewith for development of the Project shall be null and void and of no effect 4.4Development Agreement Fees. 4.4:1 Residential Fees. In consideration of the vested rights to be accorded DEVELOPER under this Agreement and CITY's release of the deed' restriction limiting the development of the Property, Developer agrees to pay to the CITY a development agreement fee computed as follows: 4.4:1.1 Upon the issuance of certificates of occupancy for each DU in the Project, $10,000 per DU; 4.4.1.2 Upon issuance of certificates of occupancy for the last fifty (50) DUs, Developer shall pay into an escrow account an additional $10,000 per DU (for a total of $500;000). Upon close of escrow for conveyance of the last DU in the Project, City will be paid from the escrow account an amount representing 20% of all gross sales of DUs in excess of $89,000,000, but in no event to exceed $500,000 in total additional fees to City. Any amounts remaining in the escrow account after City is paid its 20% share shall revert to Developer,. Any interest earned on the principal amount in the account shall be provided to City.' 4.4.1.3 The total development agreement fee shall be the amount paid pursuant to subsection 4.4.1.1($990,000) plus the amount (if any) paid pursuant to the formula contained in subsection 4.4.1,2. 16 4.5 Processing Fees. 4.5.1 DEVELOPER shall pay to CITY all applicable processing fees regularly charged by CITY, the amount of which may be increased from time to time on a City-wide, non- discriminatory basis. 4.5.2 Within 30 days of DEVELOPER'S receipt of an invoice from CITY, DEVELOPER shall reimburse CITY for additional costs incurred by CITY in connection with preparing, reviewing, or evaluating this Agreement and the Development Approvals. Such reimbursement shall include staff time and materials charges in excess of those charges included within CITY'S usual processing fees, including overtime, and shall include the CityAttomey's fees, 4,5.3 DEVELOPER shall reimburse CITY for any and all actual costs incurred, including staff time at standard CITY rates, in monitoring and enforcing DEVELOPER's performance of its obligations hereunder. This reimbursement is exclusive of the annual review fee provided for in Section 5.1 herein. 4.6 No Additional Impact Fees. Except for the City Traffic Fee and the Quimby Fees, the City may not impose any new, additional, or increased Development Impact Fees upon the Property during the term of this Agreement. , DEVELOPER acknowledges that a reasonable relationship exists between the Development Impact Fees, Development Exactions and Processing Fees imposed herein and in the Development Approvals and the impacts of the Project on the City and the community and CITY's costs of processing. DEVELOPER agrees not to challenge the legality of the Development Impact Fees, Development Exactions and Processing Fees. 5. REVIEW FOR COMPLIANCE. 5.1 Periodic Review. The City Manager (or its designee) shall review this Agreement annually, on or before the anniversary of the Effective Date, in order to ascertain the good faith compliance by DEVELOPER with the terms of the Agreement. DEVELOPER shall submit an Annual Monitoring Report, in a form acceptable to the City Manager (or its designee), within 30 days after written notice from the City Manager (or its designee). The Annual Monitoring Report' shall be accompanied by an annual review and administration fee sufficient to defray the estimated costs of review and administration of the Agreement during the succeeding year. The amount of the , annual review and administration fee shall be set annually by resolution of the City Council. 5.2 Special Review. The City Council may order a special review of compliance with this Agreement at any time. The City Manager (or its designee) shall conduct such special reviews. 5:3 Procedure. (a) During either a periodic review or a special review, DEVELOPER. shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the Agreement. The burden of proof on this issue shall be on DEVELOPER. (b) Upon completion of a periodic review or a special review, the City Manager (or its designee) shall submit a report to the City Council setting forth the evidence concerning 17 good faith compliance by DEVELOPER with the terms of this, Agreement and his or her recommended finding on that issue. (c) If the City Council finds on the basis of substantial evidence that DEVELOPER has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the review shalt be concluded: (d) If the City Council makes a preliminary finding that DEVELOPER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the City Council may ` modify or terminate this Agreement as provided in Section 5.4 and Section 5.5. Notice of default as provided; under Section 7.4 of this Agreement shall be given to DEVELOPER prior to or concurrent with, proceedings under Section 5.4 and Section 5.5, 5.4 Proceedinns Upon Modification orTermination. If, upon a finding under Section 63, CITY determines to proceed with modification or termination of this Agreement, CITY shall give written notice to DEVELOPER of its intention so to do. The notice shall be given at least ten calendar days prior to the scheduled hearing and shall; contain: (a) The time and place of the hearing; (b) A statement as to whether or not CITY proposes to terminate or to modify the Agreement; and, (c) Such other information as is reasonably necessary to inform DEVELOPER of the nature of the proceeding. 5.5 Hearing on Modification or Termination. At the time and place set for the hearing on modification or termination, DEVELOPER shall be given an opportunityto beheard. DEVELOPER shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms and conditions of this - Agreement. The burden of proof on this issue shall be on DEVELOPER. If the City Council finds, based upon substantial evidence, that DEVELOPER has not complied in good faith with the tenns or conditions of the Agreement, the City Council may, terminate this Agreement or modify this Agreement and impose such conditions as are reasonably necessary to protect the interests of the CITY. The decision of the City Council shall be final, subject only to judicial review pursuant to Section 1044.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 5.6 Certificate of Agreement Compliance.If, at the conclusion of a periodic or special review, DEVELOPER is found to be in compliance with this Agreement, CITY shall, upon request by DEVELOPER; issue a Certificate of Agreement Compliance ("Certificate") to DEVELOPER stating that after the most recent periodic orspecial review and based upon the information known or made known to the City Manager (oras designee) and City Council that (1) this Agreement remains in effect and (2) DEVELOPER is not in default. The Certificate shall be in recordable farm,.shall containinformation necessary to communicate constructive record notice of the finding of compliance, shall state whether the Certificate is issued after a periodic or special review and shall state the anticipated date of commencement' of the next periodic review. DEVELOPER may record ` the Certificate with the Los Angeles County Recorder. 18 Whether or not the Certificate is relied upon by assignees or other transferees or DEVELOPER, CITY shall not be bound by a Certificate if a default existed at the time of the periodic or special review, but was concealed from or otherwise not known to the City Manager (or its designee) or City Council: 6. PREVAILING WAGES. 6.1 Public Works Determination. DEVELOPER has been alerted to the requirements of California Labor Code section 1770 at §qq., including, without limitation S.B. 975, which require' the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements if it is determined" that this Development Agreement constitutes a public works contract. It shall be the sole responsibility of DEVELOPER to determine whether to pay prevailing wages for any or all work required by this Development Agreement. As a material part of this Development Agreement, DEVELOPER, agrees to assume all risk of liability arising from any decision not to pay prevailing wages for work required by this Development Agreement.` 6.2 Indemnification. As a further material part of this Development Agreement, DEVELOPER agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the CITY; its officials, officers, employees, consultants and agents from any and all claims, liability; loss, costs, damages, expenses, fines and penalties, of whatever type or nature, including all costs of defense and attorneys' fees, arising from any alleged failure of the DEVELOPER or DEVELOPER's contractors to comply with the prevailing wage laws of the State of California. If the CITY or any of the other indemnified: parties is named as a party in any dispute arising from the failure of DEVELOPER or DEVELOPER's contractors to pay prevailing wages, DEVELOPER agrees that the CITY and those other indemnified parties may appoint their own independent counsel, and DEVELOPER agrees to pay all attorneys' fees and defense costs of the CITY and the other indemnified parties as billed, in addition to all other damages, fines, penalties, and losses incurred by the CITY and those other indemnified parties as a result of the action. 7. DEFAULT AND REMEDIES. 7.1 (a) DEVELOPER's Remedies . It is acknowledged by the parties that CITY would not have entered into this Agreement if it to be liable in damages under this Agreement, or with respect to this Agreement or the application thereof. In addition, the parties agree that monetary damages are not an adequate remedy for DEVELOPER if CITY should be determined to be in default hereunder. The parties further agree that specific performance shall be DEVELOPER's only remedy under this Agreement and DEVELOPER may not seek monetary damages in the event of a default by CITY under this Agreement. ' DEVELOPER covenants not to sue for or obtain monetary damages for breach by CITY of any provisions of this Agreement. (b) CITY's Remedies. The parties agree that CITY shall have limited remedies for monetary damages and specific performance as provided in this Section 7.2 CITY shall not have any right to compel specific performance with respect to the construction of the Project or any obligation to construct the Project: Further, CITY shall have no right to monetary damages as a result of DEVELOPER'S failure to construct the project. However CITY shall have the right to sue for monetary damages for failure by DEVELOPER to pay any amounts owing under this 19 Agreement including without limitation any amounts owing pursuant to Sections 4 and 5:1 In no event shall CITY be entitled to consequential damages or punitive damages for any breach of this Agreement. CITY shall also have the right to seek monetary damages for reimbursements of the actual costs incurred by CITY to construct, complete, demolish, remove or restore any physical infrastructure improvement in the public right of way that DEVELOPER commences constructing but fails to complete. Further, nothing in this Agreement precludes CITY from exercising its rights to enforce bonds orother security furnished byDEVELOPER 'to CITY as required in the Development Plan. 7.2 Release. DEVELOPER, for itself; its successors and assignees, hereby releases the CITY, its officials, officers, agents and employees from any and all claims, demands, actions, or suits of any kind or nature arising out of any liability, known or unknown, present or future, including, but not limited to, any claim or liability, based or asserted, pursuant to Article 1, Section 19 of the California Constitution, the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, or any other law or ordinance that seeks to impose any other liability or damage, whatsoever, upon the CITY because it entered into this Agreement or because of the terms of this Agreement. 7.3 Termination or Modification ofApreementforDefault ofDEVELOPER. Subject to the provisions contained in Subsection 5.5 herein, CITY may terminate or modify this Agreement for any failure of DEVELOPER to perform any material duty or obligation of DEVELOPER under this Agreement, or to comply in good faith with the terms of this Agreement (hereinafter referred to as "default"); provided, however, CITY may terminate or modify this Agreement pursuant to this Section only after providing written notice to DEVELOPER of default setting forth the nature of the default and the actions, if any, required by DEVELOPER to cure such default and, where the default can be cured, DEVELOPER has failed to take such actions and cure such default within 60 days after the effective date of such notice or, in the event that such default cannot be cured within such 60 day period but can be cured within a longer time, has failed to commence the actions necessary to cure such default within such 60 day period and to diligently proceed to complete such actions and cure such default 7.4 Termination of Agreement for Default of CITY. DEVELOPER may terminate this Agreement only in the event of a default by CITY in the performance of a material term of this Agreement and only after providing written notice to CITY of default setting forth the nature of the default and the actions; if any, required by CITY to cure such default and, where the default can be cured, CITY has failed to take such actions and cure such default within 60 days after the effective date of such notice or, to the event that such default cannot be cured within such 60 day period but can be cured within a longer time, has failed to commence the actions necessary to cure such default within such 60 day period and to diligently proceed to complete such actions and cure such default. 8. THIRD PARTY LITIGATION. 8.1 General Plan Litigation. CITY has determined that this Agreement is consistent with its General Plan, and that the General Plan meets all requirements of law. DEVELOPER has reviewed the General Plan and concurs with CITY's determination. " 20 Mr CITY shall have no liability in damages under this Agreement for any failure of CITY to perform under this Agreement or the inability of DEVELOPER to develop the Property as contemplated by the Development Plan of this Agreement as the result of a judicial determination that on the Effective Date, or at any time thereafter, the General Plan, or portions thereof, are invalid or inadequate or not in compliance with law. 8.2 Third Party Litigation Concerning Agreement. DEVELOPER shall defend, at its expense, including attorneys' fees, indemnify, and hold harmless CI'T'Y, its agents, officials, officers, ` independent contractors, subcontractors; and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against CITY, its agents, officials, officers, independent contractors, subcontractors, or employees to attack; set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Agreement or the approval of any Subsequent Development Approval granted pursuant to this Agreement.CITY shalt promptly notify, DEVELOPER of any such claim, action or proceeding, and CITY shall cooperate in the defense. If CITY fails to promptly notify DEVELOPER of any such claim, action or proceeding, or if CITY fails to cooperate in. the defense, DEVELOPER shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless CITY. CITY may; in its discretion, participate in the defense of any such claim, action or proceeding, at DEVELOPER's expense, with counsel of CITY's choosing.. 8.3 Indemnity. In addition; to the provisions of Section 8.2 above, DEVELOPER shall indemnify and hold CITY, its officials, officers, agents, employees and independent contractors free and harmless from any liability whatsoever, based or asserted upon any actor omission of DEVELOPER, its officers, agents, employees, subcontractors and independent contractors, for property damage, bodily injury, or death (DEVELOPER's employees included) or any other element of damage of any kind or nature, relating to or in any way connected with or arising from the activities contemplated hereunder, including; but not limited to, the study, design ' engineering, construction, completion, failure or conveyance of the public improvements, save and except claims for damages to the extent arising through the gross active negligence or willful misconduct of CITY. DEVELOPER shall defend, at its expense, including attorneys' fees,' CITY, its officers, officials, agents, employees, subcontractors and independent contractors in any action or proceeding based upon such alleged acts or omissions. CITY may, in its discretion, participate in the defense of any; such action or proceeding_ This indemnity provision shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 8.4 Environment Assurances. DEVELOPER shall indemnify and hold CITY, its officers, officials, agents, independent contractors, subcontractors, and employees free and harmless from any; liability, based or asserted, upon any act or omission of DEVELOPER; its officers, agents, employees, subcontractors, predecessors in interest, successors, assigns and independent contractors for any violation of any federal, state or local law, ordinance or ,regulation relating to industrial hygiene or to environmental conditions on, under or about the Property, including, but not limited to, soil and groundwater conditions, and DEVELOPER shall defend, at its expense, including attorneys' fees, CITY, its officers, officials, independent contractors, subcontractors, agents and employees in any action based or asserted upon any such alleged act or omission. CITY may, in its discretion, participate in the defense' of any such action, 8,5 Reservation of Rights. With respect to Sections 8.2, 8.3 and 8.4 herein, CITY reserves the right to either (1) approve the attomey(s) that DEVELOPER selects, hires or otherwise engages to defend CITY hereunder, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, or (2) conduct its 21 own defense, provided, however, that DEVELOPER shall reimburse C17Y forthwith for any and all reasonable expenses incurred for such defense, including attomeys' fees, upon billing and accounting therefor. 8.6 Survival. The provisions of this Sections 8.1 through 8.6, inclusive, shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 9. MORTGAGEE PROTECTION,` The parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit DEVELOPER, in any manner, at DEVELOPER's sole discretion, from encumbering the Property or anyportion thereof or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device securing financing with respect to the Property. CITY acknowledges that Mortgagees providing such financing may require certain Agreement interpretations and modifications and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with DEVELOPER and representatives of such Mortgagees to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. CITY will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification provided such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purposes of this Agreement. Any Mortgagee of the Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges: (a) Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any mortgage on the Property made in good faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law. (b)The Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the Property, or any part thereof, which Mortgagee, has submitted a request in writing to the CITY in the manner specified herein for giving notices, shall be entitled to receive written notification from CITY of any default by DEVELOPER in the performance of DEVELOPER's obligations under this Agreement. (c) If CITY timely receives a request from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given to DEVELOPER under the terms of this Agreement, CITY shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within ten (10) days of sending the notice of default to DEVELOPER. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure the default during the remaining cure period allowed such party under this Agreement. (d) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any part thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage or deed of trust, or deed in lieu of such foreclosure, shall take the Property, or part thereof, ,subject to the terms of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform any DEVELOPER's obligations or other affirmative covenants of DEVELOPER hereunder, or to guarantee such performance; provided, however, that to the extent that any ,covenant to be performed by DEVELOPER is a condition ` precedent to the performance of a covenant by CITY, the performance thereof shall continue to be a condition precedent to CITY's performance hereunder, and further provided that any sale, transfer 22 or assignment by Mortgagee in possession shall be subject to the provisions of Section 2.4 of this Agreement. 10. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS, 10.1 Recordationof Agreement. This Agreement and any amendment or cancellation thereof shall be recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder by the City Clerk within the period required by Section 65868,5 of the Government Code. 10.2 Entire Agreement. This Agreement sets forth and contains the entire understanding and agreement of the parties, and there are no oral or written representations, understandings or ancillary covenants, undertakings or agreements that are not contained or expressly referred to herein. No testimony or evidence of any such representations, understandings or covenants shall be admissible in any proceeding of any kind or nature to interpret or determine the terms or conditions of this Agreement. 10.3 ' Severability. If any term, provision, covenantor condition of this Agreement shall be determined invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby to the extent such remaining provisions are not rendered impractical to perform taking into consideration the purposes of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the provision of the public benefits set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement, including the payment of the fees set forth therein, are essential elements of this Agreement and CITY would not have entered into this Agreement but for such provisions, and therefore in the event such provisions are determined to be invalid, void or unenforceable, this entire Agreement shall be null and void and of no force and effect whatsoever: 10.4 Interpretation and Governing Law. This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. This Agreement shall be construed as a whole according to its fair language and common meaning to achieve the objectives and purposes of the parties hereto, and the rule of construction to the effect ` that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not employed in interpreting this Agreement, all parties having been represented by counsel in the negotiation and preparation hereof 10.5 Section Headings. All section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect any construction or interpretation of this Agreement. '- 10.6 Singular and Plural. As used herein, the singular of any word includes the plural. 10.7 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance of the provisions of this Agreement as to which time is an element. 10.8 Waiver. Failure by a parry to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by the other party, or the failure by a party to,exercise its rights upon the default of the other party, shall not constitute a waiver of such party's right to insist and demand strict compliance by the other party with the terms of this Agreement thereafter. 23 109 No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the parties and their successors and assigns. No other person shall have any right of action based upon any provision of this Agreement. 10.10 Force Mai cure. Neither party shall be deemed to be in default where failure or delay in performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement is caused by floods, earthquakes, other Acts of God, fires; wars, riots or similar hostilities, strikes and other labor difficulties beyond the party's control, (including the partys employment force), government regulations, court actions (such as CEQA challenge(s), restraining orders or injunctions), or other causes beyond the part's control. If any such events shall occur, the term of this Agreement and the time for performance by either party of any of its obligations hereunder may be extended by the written agreement of the parties for the period of time that such events prevented such performance, provided that the term of this Agreement shall not be extended under any circumstances for more than five (5) years. 10,11 Mutual Covenants. The covenants contained herein are mutual covenants and also constitute conditions to the concurrent or subsequent performance by the party benefited thereby of the covenants to be performed hereunder by such benefited party. 10.12 Successors in Interest. The burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of this Agreement shall inure to, all successors in interest to the parties to this Agreement. All provisions of this Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitudes and constitute _covenants running with the land. Each covenant to do or refrain from doing some act hereunderwith regard to development of the Property:. (a) is for the benefit of and is a burden upon every portion of the Property; (b) runs with the Property and each portion thereof, and, (c) is binding upon each party and each successor in interest during ownership of the Property or any portion thereof. 10.13 Counterparts. This Agreement maybe executed by the parties in counterparts, which counterparts shall be construed together and have the same effect as if all of the parties had executed the same instrument. 10.14 Jurisdiction and Venue. Any action at law or in equity arising under this Agreement or brought by a party hereto for the purpose of enforcing, construing or determining the validity of any provision of this Agreement shall be filed and tried in the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, State of California, and the parties hereto waive all provisions of law providing for the filing, removal or change of venue to any other court. 10.15 Project as a Private Undertaking. It is specifically understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that the development of the Project is a private development, that neither " party is acting as the agent of the other in any respect hereunder, and that each party is an independent contracting entity with respect to the terms, covenants and conditions contained in this; Agreement. No partnership jointventureor other association of any kind is formed by this Agreement. The only relationship between CITY and DEVELOPER is that of a government entity; regulating the development of private property and the developer of such property. 10.16 Further Actions and Instruments. Each of the parties shall cooperatewith and provide reasonable assistance to the other to the extent contemplated hereunder in the performance of all 24 obligations under this Agreement and the satisfaction of the conditions of this Agreement. Upon the request of either party at any time, the other party shall promptly execute, with acknowledgment or affidavit if reasonably required, and file or record such required instruments and writings and take any actions as maybe reasonably necessary under the terms ofthi s Agreement to carry out the intent and to fulfill the provisions of this Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. 10.17 Eminent Domain. No provision of this Agreement shall be construed to limit or, restrict the exercise by CITY of its power of eminent domain. 10.18 Agent for Service of Process. In the event DEVELOPER is not -a resident of the State of California or it is an association, partnership or joint venture without a member, partner or joint venturer resident of the State of California, or it a foreign corporation, then in any such event, DEVELOPER shall file with the City Manager (or its designee);upon its execution of this Agreement, a designation of'a natural: person residing in the State of California, giving his or her name, residence and business addresses; as its agent for the purpose of service of process in any court action arising out of or based upon this Agreement, and the delivery to such agent of a copy of any process in any such action shall constitute valid service upon DEVELOPER. If for anyreason service of such process upon such agent isnot feasible, then in such event DEVELOPER may be personally served with such process but of Los Angeles County and such service shall constitute valid service: upon DEVELOPER. DEVELOPER is amenable to the process so served, submits to thejurisdiction of the Court referenced in Section 10.14 so obtained and waives any and all objections and protests thereto, DEVELOPER for itself, assigns and successors hereby waives the provisions of the Hague. Convention (Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extra Judicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, 20 U.S.T. 361, T.I.A.S. No. 6638). 10.19 Authority to Execute. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of DEVELOPER warrants` and, represents that he or sheithey have the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of his or her/their corporation, partnership or business entity and warrants and represents that he or she/theyhas/have the authority to bind DEVELOPER to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 10.20 DEVELOPER ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT DEVELOPER THOROUGHLY REVIEWED THIS AGREEMENT THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF DEVELOPER` UNDER THIS AGREEMENT, WITH LEGAL COUNSEL, AND DEVELOPER; HAS EQUAL`'` BARGAINING POWER AND THE REQUISITE 'EXPERIENCE; SOPHISTICATION, AND FINANCIAL STRENGTH TO UNDERSTAND, INTERPRET, AND AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THISAGREEMENT, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE; TERMS OF SECTION 4.4 OF THIS AGREEMENT. DEVELOPER ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT IT HAS EVALUATED THE RISKS AND MERITS OF OBLIGATIONS AND BENEFITS OF THIS AGREEMENT AND IS WILLING' AND ABLE TO BEAR THE ECONOMIC RISK OF THIS AGREEMENT AND ALL REMEDIES RELATED THERETO. 25 26 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss. COUNTY OF Les Ao-06;;-' ) On �1 to 12 0 2-op `1 before me, GES . a Notary Public in and for said county and state, personally appearedP—XT kj&-S personally known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. tEEaEU R OF'= ♦�v t - '�•—�n 6w Y Signature p My Co."". ENO= Alae 7, 301 oSTATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF Lc)--s_) On ��< �\ �rtc» before me ✓ytrn�c, IA71M Ok A allotary Public in and fors county and state, personally appeared `j I c `Ttit personally known to me ( ) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature _ Y� T®MMYE pNME CRIBBINS Cot�mlesloa 0 1731409 Nofory Public • Catitoania I CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT ^C� ^r'c'bc(`-�.'�' - .E`C' �C"� FC'^Y,Nt..n.CY'.Y.(Mc1EF�.(YKK..M.\^.<�t2<ti -• State of California County of `�/ %l� % C� 7� }�•�' On before me, and milef er (e.g.,'Jana Or., Nelary ic•) personally appeared (Name -Le ��– � • a� Namelsl of street.) personally known to me to be the personN whose name(sa isiar&subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged tome that he/sheA#ey executed the same in his/het:t:,RIF authorized and that by hi&ltefAhe EDNAA.JOHNSON �,`capaoltyie*, slgnature(slpn the instrument the persol,or the Comrnthslon # 1419983 Notary Public • California a&6PAY entity upon behalf of which the person(3) acted . executed the instrument. - San Bernardino County Comm. Expires Jun 4, 2007 WITNESS my handl and official seal, Poara Notary $eel Above' L/L /. , - Sgnetme el u ry Public OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying On the document' ' and could prevent fraudulent removal' and reattachment of this form to another document Description ttached Document `.Title or Typo of Docu -.. Document Date: - Number of Pag - Signers) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed bySigner(s) Signer's Name: S' er's ❑ Individual ❑' Individual ❑ Corporate Officer —Title(s)i.. ❑ Corporate Officer- tle(s): - O Partner—.❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Partner — ❑ Limned ❑ eral '.. ❑ Attorney In Facttop of thumb here ❑ Attorney in Fact lop nt thumb here -. ❑ Trustee ❑ Trustee ❑. Guardian orConservator ❑ Guardian orConservator -. ❑ Other: - ❑ Other: Signer I Re enting: .Signer Is. Representing: 92004 National Notary Accodation • 9350 De Sao Ave ; P.O. Box 24W • Chat bnh, CA 9t313 2402 Item No. &bp7 FeoNec Cap ToI4Freo 1A00. 76> cs2] EXHIBIT A ANNEXABLEPROPERTY VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO, 063623 SOUTH POINTE WEST CLTY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA R +1 _ 1,/S� v% off `� PU6LC U1tlIt1F3 - t b� r•• m.ww. NOTA PARr ' hYn'APMT GENEIW.OE5�GN NGlE3 ME par r, � r •m oo.r..�.ra ' 1 •' �. -. "✓. / '? LEGnL 0ES'.Aw110N �. � �\' ` � nua.T' HFN(JgWiX •mrQ y ` wi/ow"mm m - owNrwsuemwPa PROJECTMAP �=K„� „ "r"a ,"."' . fu dFu '�YNMI 'j'I'llu CONDOMWNM)VES TR4CTMAPNO.038 3623TATNE' . ..�3 SOUTH POINTE WEST Exhibit "A" EXHIBIT "C" TO SOUTH POINTE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Current Development Approvals R. Certified Final EIR No. 2005-01, SCH 2005111118, Findings of Facts, Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program B. General Plan Amendment No. 2005-01, changing the three smaller parcels (APN: 8765-005-001 through 003) within the project site from Low Density Residential to Planning Area 4/Specific Plan; and changing the Planning Area 4/Specific Pan for the future public park to Park. C. Zone Change No. 2006-03, changing the zoning district from R-15,000 and RPD 10,000 to; Specific Plan (SP) for the project and Recreation (REC) for the future park. D. Specific Plan No. 2005-01 for the project area. E. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 63623, a 99 -unit single-family residential subdivision for condominium purposes. F. Conditional Use Permit No 2005-05, Development Review No. 2005-27 and Tree Permit No. 2005-06. EXHIBIT "E TO SOUTH POINTE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Description of Park Parcel A. 3.24 acres of land described as a portion of Lot 49 of Tract No. 32576, Assessor parcel map no. 8765-005-905. B. 1.44 acres of land described as Lot A of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 63623 VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 063623 SOUTH I POINTE WEST `CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA NOTA PART / 'NOTA?Mi' Il`0"t""�C> k II PROJECT MAP nesaEvwnoNs. �•,••�,•�• ;m�„e � corsunrncwr M G:fS( I Wives �A. or Exhibit "F" City of Diamond Dar ;Larkstone Park General Specifications Revised 3/6/07 Overriding Consideration: Construction Plans and specifications for Larkstone Park shall be approved by the Community Services Director before the start of any work.The Improvement information set forth below shall serve as the general specifications for the construction of Larkstone Park. The Community Services Director, City Manager and other City staff shall cooperate with Developer in the finalization of the specific plans and specifications, share information with Developer concerning the procurement of improvement materials (such as benches, play equipment, etc.) for existing City parks (Pantera Park, Starshine Park, etc.), and shall be flexible in final park specifications, all -in,a good faith effort to keep Developer's expense for improvement of Larkstone Park reasonable: The project plans and; specifications utilized include: 1. Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head Project completed January 10, 2006. 2, Starshine Park Improvement Project completed June 29, 2005. 3. Sycamore Canyon Park Improvement Project Phase II completed August 10,'2005. 4. Brea Canyon Cut-off Improvement Project completed December 8, 2005 5. Brea Canyon Road / GemdalLandscape Project completed December 8, 2005. 6. Diamond Bar Center Landscaping Plan approved by City Council October 5, 2004, 7, Pantera Park Pre -fab restroom building currently under design by RJM Design Group. 8. `SycamoreCanyon Park—mpror vemenFProlecf Phase Ill -(Under construction ss of 3(6/07):--- Improvements to Upper Pad: 1. Tot Lot for 5-12 year olds with accessible fibar surfacing and sump drain. • Landscape Structures Play Equipment per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). • FibarSurfacing per Sycamore Canyon Park Improvement Project Phase III specs (#8 above). • Sump Drain per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). 2. Tot Lot for 2-5 year olds with accessible fibar surfacing and sump drain. • Landscape Structures Play' Equipment per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). • Fibar Surfacing per Sycamore Canyon Park Improvement Project Phase Ill specs (#8 above). • Sump Drain per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). 3. Concrete Perimeterwalk way with security lights and 4 trash receptacles. • 5 foot wide'X 4 inch thick concrete walkway per. Starshine Park specs (#2 above). • Trash receptacles (Quick Crete modellORCRL-2436-WD19 P2 Light Sandblast- -. Natural Gray C-1) per Sycamore Canyon Park Improvement Project Phase II specs (#3 above). ® Security Lights manufactured by Kim, model 1A/AR3/250MH/120/DB- P/W/PRA20/4188/A/DB-P per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). 4. Trail head to Larkstone Trail per Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head specs (#1 above) ® Single -sided Information Kiosk model L1087 from R.G.:.:Detmers & Asso. 5 foot wide X 3 inch thick decomposed granite path with binder from Gail Materials.' 5. Grass play area Marathon II Sod per Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head specs (#1 above). 6. Picnic area with 1 table, 1 barbecue and 1 trash receptacle per location - 2 locations ® Concrete pads, concrete picnic tables (Quick Crete model Q-LBT-96PT);barbecues (LA Steelcraft model 300) and trash receptacles (Quick Crete model QRCAL- 2436-WD19-P2 Light Sandblast -Natural Gray C-1) per Sycamore Canyon Park Improvement Project Phase II specs (#3 above). 7. Park benches - 3 each ® `Wabash Decorative benches per Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head specs (#1 above). B. Drinking fountain ® Most Dependable Fountains model; 440 with sand trap and sump drain per Sycamore Canyon -Park -Trail -and -Trail Head specs (#1 -above)-.---- - --- - 9. Restroom building. ® 400 sq ft. pre -fab building from The Public Restroom Company per Pantera Park pre -fab restroom specs (#7 above), ® ''Security lights required on outside of building..'. ® Automatic electrical timer to control restroom lights and all security lights in Larkstone Park. ® :Electrical outlets outside building for two beverage vendor machines (vendors to be provided by others). 10. Parking lot for 11 cars plus one handicap stall per Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head specs (#1 above). * - 2'/Z" Class 'C' A.C. Pavement. a 2" of 3/<". Minus crushed rock leveling course.' Q 6" of 1Y2" Minus crushed rock base. a -90% compacted subgrade. a :Security Lights manufactured by Kim, model lA/AR3/250MH/120/DB- P/W/PRA20/4188/A/DB-P per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). 11. Monument park identification sign per existing monument sign at Starshine Park. ® Calsense Controller model ET2000-24-RR-SSE-R-FM-1B Radio Controlled per Brea Canyon Cut-off Improvement Project specs (44 above).* ® Febco Backflow device with stainless steel protective cage from Strongbox, model SBBC-45SS per Starshine Park specs (#2 above).* • Remote Control Valves from Hunter, model IVC -101G -FSB -ASR in purple valve box per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). • Must meet all WVWD Recycled Water requirements including purple pipe and purple boxes. 13. Trees to be planted per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). ® Trees to include are: London Plane, Liquid Amber, Jacaranda, Canary Island Pine; Camphor, Australian Willow and crape myrtle as an accent tree. • Trees to be minimum size of 24 inch box. Improvements to Lower Pad: 1. Concrete Perimeter walkway with security lights and 4 trash receptacles. ® 5. foot wide X 4 inch thick concrete walkway per Starshine Park specs (#2 above).: ® Trash receptacles (Quick Crete model .QRCAL-2436-WD19-P2.Light Sandblast - Natural Gray C-1) per Sycamore Canyon Park Improvement Project Phase 11 specs (#3 above). o :Security Lights manufactured by Kim, model :1A/AR3/250MH/120/DB- PAN/PRA2014188/A/DB-P per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). 2. Grass play area ® Marathon 11 Sod per Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head specs (#1; above)., 3. Picnic area with 1 Table,1 barbecue and 1 trash receptacle —1 location ® Concrete pad, concrete picnic table (Quick Crete model Q-LBF-96PT), barbecue (LA Steelcraftmodel 300) and trash receptacle (Quick Crete modeLQRCAL- 2436-WD19-P2 Light Sandblast -Natural Gray C-1) per Sycamore Canyon Park Improvement Project Phase 11 specs (#3 above). 4. Drinking fountain ® Most Dependable Fountains model 440 with sand trap and sump drain per Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head specs (91 above). 5. Flowering garden area per planting plan specs for Brea Canyon Road ! Gemdal Landscape Project (#5 above). Planting material to include: Indian Hawthorn, Rockrose, Lily of the Nile, Daylily,' Pink Carpet Rose, Gazania Mitsuwa "Yellow" and Crape Myrtle trees. 6. Parking lot for cars including one handicap stall per Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head specs (#1 above). e 91C' (`Parc. `!` 6-(`' PwornonF Cp • 2" of '/4" Minus crushed rock leveling course. 6" of 1'/2° Minus crushed rock base: • 90% compacted subgrade. • Securitylights manufactured by Kim, model 1A/AR3l250MH/120/DB- PIWIPRA20/4188/A/DB-P per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). 7. Park benches - 2 each • Wabash Decorative benches per Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head specs (#1 above). 8. Monument park identification sign per existing monument sign at Starshine Park. 9. Automatic irrigation controller (Edison powered) and irrigation system. • Calsense Controller model ET2000-24-RR-SSE-R-FM-1B Radio Controlled per Brea Canyon Cut-off Improvement Project specs (#4 above).* • Febco Backflow device with stainless steel protective cage from Strongbox, model, SBBC-45SS per Starshine Park specs (#2 above).* ` • Remote Control Valves from Hunter, model IVC -101 G -FSB -ASR in purple valve box per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). • Must meet all WVWD Recycled Water requirements including purple pipe and purple boxes. 10. Trees to be planted per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). reT es to inclu ed are; London Plane Liquid Ambo, Jacaranda, Ganary�sland-Pine, Camphor, Australian Willow and crape myrtle as an accent tree. • Trees to be minimum size of 24 inch box. Slopes Planting: 1. Planting Plan Per Diamond Bar Center Landscaping specs (#6 above) • Automatic irrigation controller (Edison powered) and irrigation system per Brea Canyon Cut-off Improvement Project specs (94 above).* • Calsense Controller model ET2000-24-RR-SSE-R-FM-1 B Radio Controlled per Brea Canyon Cut-off improvement Project specs (#4 above).* • Febco Backflow device with stainless steel protective cage from Strongbox, model SBBC-45SS per Starshine Park Improvement Project (#2 above).* • Remote Control Vatves from Bunter, model IVC -101 G -FSB -ASR in purple valve box per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). • Must meet all WVWD Recycled Water requirements including purple pipe and purple boxes. • Slope planting material to include: Oaks, California Peppers, Walnuts, London Planes (trees to be minimum 24 inch box) .toyon, pyracantha, acacia'redolens and cotoneaster per Diamond Bar Center Landscaping specs (#6 above). 41 "F" m-,� EXHIBIT TO SOUTH POINTE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 'NJ � U U --- `'-Lu � L Ck � 'AL CS� i v U Z g ;. : F a 0 SCHEDULE2 TO SOUTH POINTE WEST DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Project Impact Fees FEE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT TIME OF PAYMENT City Traffic Fee [To be Determined per Section 4.2.1] Quimby Fee $8,501 per DU total $841,000 Schedule 2 Residential — prior to each certificate of occupancy Prior to each certificate of occupancy TITLE(S) n This page is part of your document - DO NOT DISCARD 20071519492 p42es: Illlllilflllllllil[11lIlNllillllllll[II�11111181111NIII1lII Recorded/Filed in Official Records Fee: 0.00 Recorder's Office, Los Angeles County, California Tax: 0.00 Other: 0.00 06/25/07 AT 10:09AM Total: 0.00 844885 200706250030037 Counter 111111111111111111111111111 Assessor's Identification Number (AIN) To be completed by Examiner OR Title Company in black ink. 0 Number of AIN's Shown FORM IS NOTDUPLICATED ; 06/25/07 Recorded at request of ) 20071519492 Clerk, City Council ) ` City of Diamond Bar ) Oy When recorded return to ) City of Diamond Bar ) 21825 Copley Drive ) Diamond Bar, CA 91765 ) Attention: City Clerk } } Exempt ftom Filing Fees Gov. Code section 6103 SOUTH POINTE WEST DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005-01 A STATUTORY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT between CITY OF DIAMOND BAR a California municipal corporation and JCCL-SOUTH POINTE WEST, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Developer") to DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT This Development Agreement (hereinafter "Agreement") is entered into effective on the Effective Date (defined below) by and between the City of Diamond Bar (hereinafter "CITY"), and JCCL-South Pointe West, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (hereinafter "DEVELOPER"): RECITALS WHEREAS, CITY is authorized to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property, pursuant to Section 65864 et 5M. of the Government Code and Chapter 22.62 of the City's Municipal Code (collectively the "DA Laws"); and WHEREAS, DEVELOPER, as of the Effective Date, owns the real property which is the subject of this Agreement (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, DEVELOPER has requested CITY to enter into a development agreement and proceedings have been taken in accordance with the DA Laws and all other rules and regulations of CITY; and WHEREAS, by electing to enter into this Agreement, CITY shall bind future City Councils of CITY by the obligations specified herein and limit the future exercise of CITY's ability to regulate development on the Property; and WHEREAS, the terms and conditions of this Agreement have undergone extensive review by CITY and the City Council and have been found to be fair, just and reasonable; and WHEREAS, the best interests of the citizens of the City of Diamond Bar and the public health, safety and welfare will be served by entering into this Agreement; and WHEREAS, all of the procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act have been met with respect to the Project and the Agreement, and WHEREAS, this Agreement and the Project are consistent with the Diamond Bar General Plan and any Specific Plan applicable thereto; and WHEREAS, all actions taken and approvals given by CITY have been duly taken or approved in accordance with all applicable legal requirements for notice, public hearings, findings, votes, and other procedural matters; and WHEREAS, development of the Property in accordance with this Agreement will provide substantial benefits to CITY and will further important policies and goals of CITY; and 0 t b; WHEREAS, this Agreement will eliminate uncertainty in planning and provide for the orderly development of the Property, ensure progressive installation of necessary improvements, provide for public services appropriate to the development of the Property, and generally serve the purposes for which development agreements under the DA Laws are intended; and WHEREAS, DEVELOPER has incurred and will in the future incur substantial costs in excess of the generally applicable requirements in order to assure vesting of legal rights to develop the Property in accordance with this Agreement. COVENANTS NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals and of the mutual covenants hereinafter contained and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: DEFINITIONS AND EXHIBITS. 1.1 Definitions. The following terms when used in this Agreement shall be defined as follows: law city. 1.1.1 "Agreement" means this Development Agreement. 1.1.2 "CITY" means the City of Diamond Bar, a municipal corporation and general 1.1.3 "City Council" means the City Council of the CITY. 1.1.4 "Condominium" means an estate in real property as defined in Civil Code Sections 783 and 1351(f); Condominium units as defined in Civil Code Section 1351(f) are DU's as defined in this Agreement. 1.1.5 "Current Development Approvals" mean all Development Approvals approved or issued prior to the Effective Date. Current Development Approvals includes the Approvals incorporated herein as Exhibit "C" and all other Development Approvals that are a matter of public record on the Effective Date. 1.1.6 "Development" means the improvement of the Property for the purposes of completing the structures, improvements and facilities comprising the Project including, but not limited to: grading; the construction of infrastructure and public and private facilities related to the Project whether located within or outside the Property; the construction of buildings and structures; and the installation of landscaping. "Development" does not include the maintenance, repair, reconstruction or redevelopment of any building, structure, improvement or facility after the construction and completion thereof. T A 1.1.7 'Development Approvals" mean all permits and other entitlements for use subject to approval or issuance by CITY in connection with development of the Property including, but not limited to: (a) specific plans and specific plan amendments; (b) tentative and final subdivision and parcel maps; (c) conditional use permits and site plans; (d) zoning; (e) design review approvals; and (f) grading and building permits. 1. 1.8 "Development Exaction" means any requirement of CITY in connection with or pursuant to any Land Use Regulation or Development Approval for the dedication of land, the construction of improvements or public facilities, or the payment of fees in order to lessen, offset, mitigate or compensate for the impacts of development on the environment or other public interests. 1.1.9 "Development Impact Fee" means a monetary exaction other than a tax or special assessment, whether established for a broad class of projects by legislation of general applicability or imposed on a specific project on an ad hoc basis, that is charged by a local agency to the applicant in connection with approval of a development project for the purpose of defraying all or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to the development project, but does not include fees specified in Government Code Section 66477, fees collected by CPI'Y for other public agencies other than the CITY, fees for processing applications for governmental regulatory actions or approvals, fees collected under development agreements adopted pursuant to Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 65864 of Chapter 4 of the Government Code), or fees collected pursuant to agreements with redevelopment agencies which provide for the redevelopment of property in furtherance or for the benefit of a redevelopment project for which a redevelopment plan has been adopted pursuant to the Community Redevelopment Law (Part 1 (commencing with Section 33000) of Division 24 of the Health and Safety Code). "Development Impact Fee" expressly excludes processing fees and charges of every kind and nature imposed by CITY to cover the estimated actual costs to CITE' of processing applications for Development Approvals or for monitoring compliance with any Development Approvals granted or issued, including, without limitation, fees for zoning variances; zoning changes; use permits; building inspections; building permits; filing.and processing applications and petitions filed with the local agency formation commission or conducting preliminary proceedings or proceedings under the Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, Division 3 (commencing with Section 56000) of Title 5 of the Government Code; the processing of maps under the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, Division 2 (commencing with Section 66410) of Title 7 of the Government Code; or planning services under the authority of Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 65100) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code, fees and charges as described in Sections 51287, 56383, 57004, 65104, 65456, 65863.7, 65909.5, 66013, 66014, and 66451.2 of the Government Code, Sections 17951, 19132.3, and 19852 of the Health and Li J Safety Code, Section 41901 of the Public Resources Code, and Section 21671.5 of the Public Utilities Code, as such codes may be amended or superceded, including by amendment or replacement. 1.1.10 "Development Plan" means the Current Development Approvals and the Existing Land Use Regulations applicable to development of the Property. 1.1.11 "DEVELOPER" means JCCL- South Pointe West, LLC, and/or its assignee(s), transferce(s) or successor(s)in interest (as permitted under Section 2.4 hereof) to all or any part of the Property. 1.1.12 "DU's" means single-family and Condominium/townhouse residential dwelling units, including detached and attached units for sale to the general public but do not include residential units developed for rental purposes. 1.1.13 "Effective Date" means the date that is 31 days following the date that this Agreement is approved by the City by final action of the City Council. 1.1.14 "ETR" means that certain Environmental Impact Report No. SCH No. 2005111 118 as described in Exhibit "C" attached hereto. 1.1.15 "Existing Land Use Regulations" mean all Land Use Regulations in effect on the Effective Date. Existing Land Use Regulations include the Regulations incorporated herein as Exhibit "D" and all other Regulations that are a matter of public record on the Effective Date. 1.1.16 "Land Use Regulations" mean all ordinances, resolutions, codes, rules, regulations and official written policies of CITY governing the development and use of land, including, without limitation, the permitted use of land, the density or intensity of use, subdivision requirements, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to the development of the property, as modified or supplemented by the Current Development Approvals. "Land Use Regulations" does not include any CITY ordinance, resolution, code, rule, regulation or official policy, governing: (a) the conduct of businesses, professions, and occupations; (b) taxes and assessments; (c) the control and abatement of nuisances; (d) the granting of encroachment permits and the conveyance of rights and interests that provide for the use of or the entry upon public property; or (e) the exercise of the power of eminent domain. 1.1.17 "Lot" means a legal subdivided lot. r 1.1.18 "Mortgagee" means a mortgagee of a mortgage, a beneficiary under a deed of trust or any other security -device lender, and their successors and assigns. 1.1.19 "Park Parcel" means that real property described in Exhibit E and incorporated herein by reference to be conveyed to City by the Walnut Valley Unified School District and / or by Developer for the development of a public park pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 1.1.20 "Project" means the development of the Property as contemplated by the Development Plan as such Plan may be further defined, enhanced or modified pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 1.1.21 "Property" means the real property described on Exhibit "A-1" and shown as South Pointe West Specific Plan Map on Exhibit "B" to this Agreement. 1.1.22 "Reservations of Authority" means the rights and authority excepted from the assurances and rights provided to DEVELOPER under this Agreement and reserved to CITY under Section 3.6 of this Agreement. 1.1.23 "Specific Plan" means the South Pointe West Specific Plan No. 2005-01 approved by the City, Ordinance No. XX (2007). 1.1.24 "Subsequent Development Approvals" means all Development Approvals approved by the City subsequent to the Effective Date in connection with development of the Property. 1.1.25 "Subsequent Land Use Regulations" means any Land Use Regulations adopted and effective after the Effective Date of this Agreement. 1.2 Exhibits. The following documents are attached to, and by this reference made a part of, this Agreement: Exhibit "A -l" -- Legal Description of Property. Exhibit "B" -- Map of Specific Plan Area Exhibit "C" -- Current Development Approvals. Exhibit "D" -- Existing Land Use Regulations. Exhibit, "E" — Description of Park Parcel Exhibit "F" -- Park Plans and Specifications Schedule 1 — Entitlement Processing Schedule Schedule 2 — Project Impact Fees 0 B W, 2, GENERAL PROVISIONS. 2.1 Binding Effect of Agreement. The Property is hereby made subject to this Agreement, Development of the Property is hereby authorized and shall be carried out only in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 2.2 Ownership/Option. DEVELOPER represents and covenants that, as of the Effective Date, it is the owner of the fee simple title to the Property 2.3 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue for a period of five (5) years thereafter. This Agreement shall be void and of no force and effect if DEVELOPER is not the owner of fee simple title to the Property and if the Walnut Valley Unified School District or developer, as applicable, has not conveyed to the City the park parcel by December 31, 2007. 2.4 Assignment. 2.4.1 Right to Assign. DEVELOPER shall have the right to sell, transfer or assign the Property in whole or in part (provided that no such partial transfer shall violate the Subdivision Map Act, Government Code Section 66410, et seq.), to any person, partnership, joint venture, firm or corporation at any time during the term of this Agreement; provided, however, that any such sale, transfer or assignment shall include the assignment and assumption of the rights, duties and obligations arising under or from this Agreement and be made in strict compliance with the following conditions precedent: ` (a) No sale, transfer or assignment of any right or interest under this Agreement shall be made unless made together with the sale, transfer or assignment of all or a part of the Property. (b) Concurrent with any such sale, transfer or assignment, or within fifteen (15) business days thereafter, DEVELOPER shall notify CITYY, in writing, of such sale, transfer or assignment and shall provide CITY with an executed agreement, in a form reasonably acceptable to CITY, by the purchaser, transferee or assignee and providing therein that the purchaser, transferee or assignee expressly and unconditionally assumes all the duties and obligations of DEVELOPER under this Agreement. Any sale, transfer or assignment not made in strict compliance with the foregoing conditions shall constitute a default by DEVELOPER under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the failure of any purchaser, transferee or assignee to execute the agreement required by Paragraph (b) of this Subsection 2.4.1, the burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon such purchaser, transferee or assignee, but the benefits of this Agreement shall not inure to such purchaser, transferee or assignee until and unless such agreement is executed, and the CITY approves of such purchaser, transferee, or assignee, which approval shall not be unnecessarily withheld so long as the requirements for Release of DEVELOPER are met in Section 2.4,2 below. 2.4.2 Release of DEVELOPER. Notwithstanding any sale, transfer or assignment, DEVELOPER shall continue to be obligated under this Agreement as to that portion of the Property 9 sold, transferred or assigned unless DEVELOPER is given a release in writing by CITY, which release shall be provided by CITY upon the full satisfaction by DEVELOPER of the following conditions: (a) DEVELOPER no longer has a legal or equitable interest in all or any part of the Property sold; (b) DEVELOPER is not then in default under this Agreement; (c) DEVELOPER has provided CITY with the notice and executed agreement required under Paragraph (b) of Subsection 2.4.1 above; (d) The purchaser, transferee or assignee provides CITY with security equivalent to any security previously provided by DEVELOPER to secure performance of its obligations hereunder; and (e) The purchaser, transferee, or assignee is a limited liability company in which DEVELOPER, either of DEVELOPER'S Members (or their affiliates) is a Member, or a merchant home builder of DU's generally recognized by the Southern California Building Industry Association as a quality, financially sound, developer. 2.4.3 Subsequent Assignment. Any subsequent sale, transfer or assignment after an initial sale, transfer or assignment shall be made only in accordance with and subject to the terms and conditions of this Section. 2.4.4 Termination of Azreement With Respect to Individual Lots Upon Sale to Public and Completion of Construction. The restrictions and requirements of Subsection 2.4.1 shall not apply to the sale or lease (for a period longer than one year) of any (i) Lot that has been finally subdivided andlor any (ii) Condominium unit that is described on a condominium plan approved by the City as defined in Civil Code Section 1351(e) (the "Condominium Plan") individually (and not in "bulk") to a member of the public or other ultimate user. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall terminate with respect to any Lot or Condominium unit and such Lot or Condominium unit shall be released and no longer be subject to this Agreement without the execution or recordation of any further document upon satisfaction of both of the following conditions: (a) The Lot has been finally subdivided and individually (and not in "bulk") sold or leased (for a period longer than one year) to a member of the public or other ultimate user; (b) The Condominium unit is described on a Condominium Plan approved by the City and individually (and not in bulk) sold or leased (for a period longer than one year) to a member of the public or other ultimate user; and, (e) A final certificate of occupancy or similar certificate has been issued for a building on the Lot or for the Condominium unit, and the fees set forth under Section 4 of this Agreement have been paid, /d 2.5 Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended or cancelled in whole or in part only by written consent of all parties or their respective successors or assigns with respect to their respective portions of the Property in the manner provided for in Government Code Section 65868. This provision shall not limit any remedy of CITY or DEVELOPER as provided by this Agreement. 2.6 Termination, This Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further effect upon the occurrence of any of the following events: (a) Expiration of the stated term of this Agreement as set forth in Section 2.3. (b) Entry of a final judgment setting aside, voiding or annulling the adoption of the ordinance approving this Agreement. (c) The adoption of a referendum measure overriding or repealing the ordinance approving this Agreement. (d) Completion of the Project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, including, without limitation, issuance of all required occupancy permits and acceptance by CITY or applicable public agency of all required dedications. Except as provided in Section 4, upon the termination of this Agreement, no party shall have any further right or obligation hereunder except with respect to any obligation to have been performed prior to suchtermination or with respect to any default in the performance of the provisions of this Agreement that has occurred prior to such termination or with respect to any obligations that are specifically set forth as surviving this Agreement. 2.7 Notices. (a) As used in this Agreement, "notice" includes, but is not limited to, the communication of notice, request, demand, approval, statement, report, acceptance, consent, waiver, appointment or other communication required or permitted hereunder. (b) All notices shall be in writing and shall be considered given either: (i) when delivered in person to the recipient named below; or (ii) on the date of delivery shown on the return receipt, after deposit in the United States mail in a sealed envelope as either registered or certified mail with return receipt requested, and postage and postal charges prepaid, and addressed to the recipient named below; or (iii) on the date of delivery shown in the records of the telegraph company after transmission by telegraph to the recipient named below. All notices shall be addressed as follows: If to CITY: City of Diamond Sar 21825 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Attention: City Manager with a copy to: Jenkins & Hogin 1230 Rosecrans Ave., Suite 110 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Attn: Michael Jenkins, Esq. If to DEVELOPER: JCCL-South Pointe West, LLC Attn: Kurt Nelson 2632 W. 237th Street, Suite 200 Torrance, California 90505 with a copy to: Lewis Operating Corp. Attn: W. Bradford Francke, Esq. P. O. Box 670 Upland, CA 91785-0670 1156 N. Mountain Avenue Upland, CA 91786-3633 (c) Either party may, by notice given at any time, require subsequent notices to be given to another person or entity, whether a party or an officer or representative of a party, or to a different address, or both. Notices given before actual receipt of notice of change shall not be invalidated by the change. DEVELOPMENT OF T14H PROPERTY. 3,1 Rights to Develop. Subject to the terms of this Agreement including the Reservations of Authority, DEVELOPER shall have a vested right to develop the Property in accordance with, and to the extent of, the Development Plan. The Project shall remain subject to all Subsequent Development Approvals required to complete the Project as contemplated by the Development Plan. Except as otherwise provided expressly in this Agreement, the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, the design, improvement, and construction standards applicable to development of the Property, and provisions for reservation and dedication of land for public purposes and Development Exactions shall be those set forth in the Development Plan. Without limiting the foregoing, CITY and DEVELOPER agree that the maximum density permitted for the Property is 99 DU's as provided in the Specific Plan, 3.2 Effect of Agreement on Land Use Regulations. Except as otherwise provided expressly under the terms of this Agreement including the Reservations of Authority, the rules, 10 regulations and official policies of the City governing permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to development of the Property shall be the Existing Land Use Regulations as modified by the Specific Plan and as reflected in the other Current Development Approvals. In connection with any Subsequent Development Approval, CITY shall exercise its discretion in accordance with the Development Plan, and as provided by this Agreement including, but not limited to, the Reservations of Authority. CITY shall accept for processing, review and action all applications for Subsequent Development Approvals, and such applications shall be processed in the normal manner for processing such matters, provided CITY shall use its best efforts to comply with the processing schedule attached hereto as Schedule 1. 3.3 Timing of Development. The parties acknowledge that DEVELOPER cannot at this time predict when or the rate at which phases of the Property will be developed. Such decisions depend upon numerous factors that are not within the control of DEVELOPER, such as market orientation and demand, interest rates, absorption, completion and other similar factors. Since the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo (1484) 37 Ca1.3d 465, that the failure of the parties therein to provide for the timing of development resulted in a later adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over such parties' agreement, it is the parties' intent to cure that deficiency by acknowledging and providing that DEVELOPER shall have the right to develop the Property in such order and at such rate and at such times as DEVELOPER, in its sole and absolute discretion deems appropriate, subject only to any timing or phasing requirements set forth in the Development Plan. Developer shall have the right to obtain permits and commence improvements to the Property (including construction of DU's) prior to approval and recordation of the final subdivision map. Any such commencement of improvement by DEVELOPER prior to approval and recordation of the final subdivision map shall be at DEVELOPER's risk, and DEVELOPER shall effect recordation of the approved, final subdivision map prior to occupancy of any DU. 3.4 Phasing Plan. Development of the Property shall be subject to all timing and phasing requirements established by the Development Plan. 3.5 Changes and Amendments. The parties acknowledge that development of the Project will require Subsequent Development Approvals and may include changes that are appropriate and mutually desirable in the Current Development Approvals, In the event DEVELOPER finds that a change in the Current Development Approvals is necessary or appropriate, DEVELOPER shall apply for a Subsequent Development Approval to effectuate such change and CITY shall process and act on such application in accordance with the Existing Land Use Regulations, except as otherwise provided by this Agreement, including, without limitation, the Reservations of Authority. If approved, any such change in the Current Development Approvals shall be incorporated herein as an addendum to Exhibit "C", and may be further changed from time to time as provided in this Section. Unless otherwise required by law, as determined in CITY's reasonable discretion, a change to the Current Development Approvals shall be deemed "minor" and not require an amendment to this Agreement but instead require only the approval of the City Manager (or its designee) provided such change does not: 11 J� (a) Alter the permitted uses of the Property as a whole; or, (b) Increase the density or intensity of use of the Property as a whole; or, (c) Increase the maximum height of permitted buildings; or, (d) Delete a requirement for the reservation or dedication of land for public purposes within the Property as a whole or modify the Development Exactions; or, (e) Constitute a project requiring a subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report pursuant to Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code; or (f) Permit material changes to the architecture, design, or materials provided for in the Current Development Approvals or Subsequent Development Approvals for the Project; or (g) Extend the tern of this Agreement; or (h) Reduce the benefits to the CITY or Development Exactions provided for in this Agreement. For the purposes hereof, changes to the interior floor plan (including without limitation, changes in the number of bedrooms) which do not alter the height or footprint of the DU, density or intensity of use, and minor changes in architecture, design or materials shall be permitted. 3.6 Reservations of Authority. 3.6.1 Limitations, Reservations and Exceptions. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the following Subsequent Land Use Regulations shall apply to the development of the Property. (a) Processing fees and charges of every kind and nature imposed by CITY to cover the estimated actual costs to CITY of processing applications for Development Approvals or for monitoring compliance with any Development Approvals granted or issued. (b) Procedural regulations relating to hearing bodies, petitions, applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendations, appeals and any other matter of procedure. (c) Regulations governing construction standards and specifications including, without limitation, the CITY's Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code, Electrical Code, Fire Code and Grading Code that are applied uniformly and on a City-wide basis to all development projects of a similar type as the Project. (d) Regulations imposing Development Exactions except as set forth in this Agreement; provided, however, that no such subsequently adopted Development Exaction shall be applicable to development of the Property unless such Development Exaction is applied uniformly to development, either throughout the CITY or within a defined area of benefit that includes the 12 t� Property. No such subsequently adopted Development Exaction shall apply if its application to the Property would prevent or increase the cost of development of the Property for the uses and to the density or intensity of development set forth in the Development Plan. In the event any such subsequently adopted Development Exaction fulfills the same purposes, in whole or in part, as the fees set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement, CITY shall allow a credit against such subsequently adopted Development Exaction for the fees paid under Section 4 of this Agreement to the extent such fees fulfill the same purposes. (e) Regulations that may be in conflict with the Development Plan but that are reasonably necessary to protect the public health and safety of the residents of the Project or immediate community. To the extent possible, any such regulations shall be applied and construed so as to provide DEVELOPER with all of the rights and assurances provided under this Agreement. (f) Regulations that are not in conflict with the Development Plan. Any regulation, whether adopted by initiative or otherwise, limiting the rate or timing of development of the Property shall be deemed to conflict with the Development Plan and shall therefore not be applicable to the development of the Property. (g) Regulations that are in conflict with the Development Plan provided DEVELOPER has given written consent to the application of such regulations to development of the Property. (h) Regulations that impose non-discriminatory City-wide taxes, assessments and/or fees, including but no limited to franchise fees or business taxes upon all residents or nonresidential users (commercial or industrial) of real property in the CITY similar to the DU's or the Commercial Component but not including any Development Exaction or other fee designed to mitigate the impacts of the development of the Project. 3.6.2 Subsequent Development Approvals. This Agreement shall not prevent CITY, in acting on Subsequent Development Approvals, from applying Subsequent Land Use Regulations that do not conflict with the Development Plan, nor shall this Agreement prevent CITY from denying or conditionally approving any Subsequent Development Approval on thebasis of the Existing Land Use Regulations or any Subsequent Land Use Regulation not in conflict with the Development Plan. Without limiting the foregoing, DEVELOPER acknowledges that nothing in this Agreement limits the right of the City to conduct design review in accordance with its Existing Land Use Regulations prior to issuing any building permits for improvements on the Property. DEVELOPER further acknowledges that such design review may result in modifications to the conceptual elevations and site plans included in the Specific Plan, 3.6.3 Modification or Suspension by State or Federal Law. In the event that State or Federal laws or regulations, enacted after the Effective Date of this Agreement, prevent or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as maybe necessary to comply with such State or Federal laws or regulations, provided, however, that this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such Iaws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. 13 1� 3.6.4 Intent. The parties acknowledge and agree that CITY is restricted in its authority to limit its police power by contract and that the foregoing limitations, reservations and exceptions are intended to reserve to CITY all of its police power that cannot be so limited. This Agreement shall be construed, contrary to its stated terms if necessary, to reserve to CITY all such power and authority that cannot be restricted by contract. 3.7 Public Works. If DEVELOPER is required by this Agreement to construct any improvements that will be dedicated to CITY or any other public agency upon completion, and if DEVELOPER is required by applicable laws to do so, DEVELOPER shall perform such work in the same manner and subject to the same requirements as would be applicable to CITY or such other public agency should it have undertaken such construction. 3.8 Provision of Real Property Interests by CITY. In any instance where DEVELOPER is required to construct any public improvement on land not owned by DEVELOPER, DEVELOPER shall at its sole cost and expense provide or cause to be provided, the real property interests necessary for the construction of such public improvements. This Section 3.8 is not intended by the parties to impose upon the DEVELOPER an enforceable duty to acquire land or construct any public improvements on land not owned by DEVELOPER, except to the extent that the DEVELOPER elects to proceed with the development of the Project, and then only in accordance with valid conditions consistent with the Development Plan imposed by the CITY upon the development of the Project under the Subdivision Map Act or other legal authority. 3.9 Regulation by Other Public Agencies. It is acknowledged by the parties that other public agencies not within the control of CITY possess authority to regulate aspects of the development of the Property separately from orjointly with CITY and this Agreement does not limit the authority of such other public agencies. 3.10 Tentative Tract Map Extension. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 66452.6 of the Government Code, no tentative subdivision map or tentative parcel map, heretofore or hereafter approved in connection with development of the Property, shall be granted an extension of time except in accordance with the Existing Land Use Regulations. 3.11 Vesting Tentative Maps. If any tentative or final subdivision map, ortentative or final parcel map, heretofore or hereafter approved in connection with development of the Property, is a vesting map under the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section 66410, et we,) and if this Agreement is determined by a final judgment to be invalid or unenforceable insofar as it grants a vested right to develop to DEVELOPER, then and to that extent the rights and protections afforded DEVELOPER under the laws and ordinances applicable to vesting maps shall supersede the provisions of this Agreement. Except as set forth immediately above, development of the Property shall occur only as provided in this Agreement, and the provisions in this Agreement shall be controlling over any conflicting provision of law or ordinance concerning vesting maps. 4. PUBLIC BENEFITS. 4.1 Intent. The parties acknowledge and agree that development of the Property will result in substantial public needs that will not be fully met by the Development Plan and further 14 14 acknowledge and agree that this Agreement confers substantial private benefits on DEVELOPER that should be balanced by commensurate public benefits. Accordingly, the parties intend to provide consideration to the public to balance the private benefits conferred on DEVELOPER by providing more fully for the satisfaction of the public needs resulting from the Project. Developer's obligations under this Section 4 shall survive any termination of this Agreement except termination under Section 7.5. 4.2 Development Impact Fees/Traffic Fee. 4.2.1 City Traffic Fee, DEVELOPER shall pay to the City a development impact fee (the "City Traffic Impact Fee") equal to the "fair share" cost of those traffic improvements allocable to the Property as determined by the Project traffic study in accordance with Government Code Section 66000 et seq. 4.2.2 Time ofPayment. The City Traffic Fee required pursuant to Subsection 4.2.1 for the Property shall be paid to CITY on the dates set forth in Schedule 2. During the term of this Agreement, commencing as of the Effective Date, the City Traffic Fee shall not be increased with respect to this Project, 4.2.3 In -Lieu Construction. DEVELOPER shall be entitled to credit against the City Traffic Fee for the construction of any of the improvements for which those fees are paid. Such credit shall be equal to the City's program costs for such improvement(s) listed on the "Fair Share" studies used by City to determine those fees. 4.3 Project Park Requirement. 4.3.1 Ouimby Fees. DEVELOPER currently contemplates the construction of 99 Condominium/townhouse DU's for which DEVELOPER shall pay Quimby Act Fees in the amount and at the times set forth in Schedule 2 attached hereto in accordance with Chapter 21.32.040(D) of the City's Municipal Code (the "Quimby Act Fees"). CITY agrees that the Quimby Act Fees shall not be increased during the term of this Agreement. CITY and DEVELOPER agree that the Quimby Act Fees were determined by using the fair market value of land located in the CITY reasonably suitable for park purposes as mutually agreed by CITY and DEVELOPER. 4.3.2 Improvement Credits. Completion of all park improvements to the satisfaction of City shall be deemed to have fully satisfied all of DEVELOPER's Quimby Act Fee obligations. 4.3.3 Park improvement and Dedication. DEVELOPER shall construct and dedicate to CITY a fully improved neighborhood park on the Park Parcel described in Exhibit E and incorporated herein by reference. The plans and specifications for the park, including grading, landscape, hardscape, signage, furniture and play equipment, are set forth in Exhibit F, and incorporated herein by reference. The park shall be under construction by the time City issues a building permit for the 25111 DU and completed to CITY's satisfaction prior to issuance of a building permit for the 75111 DU of the Project; building permits after the 75h DU shall not be issued until and unless the park is timely commenced and completed to CITY's satisfaction. In the event that the Walnut Valley Unified School District and / or developer, as applicable, does not convey the Park 15 1) Parcel to the City, then this Agreement and all of the entitlements approved concurrently herewith for development of the Project shall be null and void and of no effect 4.4 Development Agreement Fees. 4.4.1 Residential Fees. In consideration of the vested rights to be accorded DEVELOPER under this Agreement and CITY's release of the deed restriction limiting the development of the Property, Developer agrees to pay to the CITY a development agreement fee computed as follows: 4.4.1.1 Upon the issuance of certificates of occupancy for each DU in the Project, $10,000 per DU; 4.4.1.2 Upon issuance of certificates of occupancy for the last fifty (50) DUs, Developer shall pay into an escrow account an additional $10,000 per DU (for a total of $500,000). Upon close of escrow for conveyance of the last DU in the Project, City will be paid from the escrow account an amount representing 20% of all gross sales of DUs in excess of $89,000,000, but in no event to exceed $500,000 in total additional fees to City. Any amounts remaining in the escrow account after City is paid its 20% share shall revert to Developer,. Any interest earned on the principal amount in the account shall be provided to City. 4.4.1.3 The total development agreement fee shall be the amount paid pursuant to subsection 4.4.1.1 ($990,000) plus the amount (if any) paid pursuant to the formula contained in subsection 4.4.1.2. 16 IV 4.5 Processing Fees. 4.5.1 DEVELOPER shall pay to CITY all applicable processing fees regularly charged by CITY, the amount of which may be increased from time to time on a City-wide, non- discriminatory basis. 4.5.2 Within 30 days of DEVELOPER'S receipt of an invoice from CITY, DEVELOPER shall reimburse CITY for additional costs incurred by CITY in connection with preparing, reviewing, or evaluating this Agreement and the Development Approvals. Such reimbursement shall include staff time and materials charges in excess of those charges included within CITY'S usual processing fees, including overtime, and shall include the City Attorney's fees. 4.5.3 DEVELOPER shall reimburse CITY for any and all actual costs incurred, including staff time at standard CITY rates, in monitoring and enforcing DEVELOPER's performance of its obligations hereunder. This reimbursement is exclusive of the annual review fee provided for in Section 5.1 herein. 4.6 No Additional Impact Fees. Except for the City Traffic Fee and the Quimby Fees, the City may not impose any new, additional, or increased Development Impact Fees upon the Property during the term of this Agreement. DEVELOPER acknowledges that a reasonable relationship exists between the Development Impact Fees, Development Exactions and Processing Fees imposed herein and in the Development Approvals and the impacts of the Project on the City and the community and CITY's costs of processing. DEVELOPER agrees not to challenge the legality of the Development Impact Fees, Development Exactions and Processing Fees, 5. REVIEW FOR COMPLIANCE. 5.1 Periodic Review, The City Manager (or its designee) shall review this Agreement annually, on or before the anniversary of the Effective Date, in order to ascertain the good faith compliance by DEVELOPER with the terms of the Agreement. DEVELOPER shall submit an Annual Monitoring Report; in a form acceptable to the City Manager (or its designee), within 30 days after written notice from the City Manager (or its designee). The Annual Monitoring Report shall be accompanied by an annual review and administration fee sufficient to defray the estimated costs of review and administration of the Agreement during the succeeding year. The amount of the annual review and administration fee shall be set annually by resolution of the City Council. 5.2 Special Review. The City,Council may order a special review of compliance with this Agreement at any time. The City Manager (or its designee) shall conduct such special reviews. 5.3 Procedure. (a) During either a periodic review or a special review, DEVELOPER shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the Agreement. The burden of proof on this issue shall be on DEVELOPER. (b) Upon completion of a periodic review or a special review, the City Manager (or its designee) shall submit a report to the City Council setting forth the evidence concerning 17 good faith compliance by DEVELOPER with the terms of this Agreement and his or her recommended finding on that issue. (c) If the City Council finds on the basis of substantial evidence that DEVELOPER has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the review shall be concluded. (d) If the City Council makes a preliminary finding that DEVELOPER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the City Council may modify or terminate this Agreement as provided in Section 5.4 and Section 5.5. Notice of default as provided under Section 7.4 of this Agreement shall be given to DEVELOPER prior to or concurrent with, proceedings under Section 5.4 and Section 5.5, 5.4 Proceedings Upon Modification or Termination. If, upon afinding under Section 6.3, CITY determines to proceed with modification or termination of this Agreement, CITY shall give written notice to DEVELOPER of its intention so to do. The notice shall be given at least ten calendar days prior to the scheduled hearing and shall contain: (a) The time and place of the hearing; (b) A statement as to whether or not CITY proposes to terminate or to modify the Agreement; and, (c) Such other information as is reasonably necessaryto inform DEVELOPER of the nature'of the proceeding. 5.5 Hearing on Modification or Termination. At the time and place set for the hearing on modification or termination, DEVELOPER shall be given an opportunity to be heard. DEVELOPER shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The burden of proof on this issue shall be on DEVELOPER. If the City Council finds, based upon substantial evidence, that DEVELOPER has not complied in good faith with the terms or conditions of the Agreement, the City Council may terminate this Agreement or modify this Agreement and impose such conditions as are reasonably necessary to protect the interests of the CITY. The decision of the City Council shall be final, subject only to judicial review pursuant to Section 1044.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 5.6 Certificate of Agreement Compliance. If, at the conclusion of a periodic or special review, DEVELOPER is found to be in compliance with this Agreement, CITY shall, upon request by DEVELOPER, issue a Certificate of Agreement Compliance ("Certificate") to DEVELOPER stating that after the most recent periodic or special review and based upon the information known or made known to the City Manager (or its designee) and City Council that (1) this Agreement remains in effect and (2) DEVELOPER is not in default. The Certificate shall be in recordable form,•shall contain information necessary to communicate constructive record notice of the finding of compliance, shall state whether the Certificate is issued after a periodic or special review and shall state the anticipated date of commencement of the next periodic review. DEVELOPER may record the Certificate with the Los Angeles County Recorder. 18 �O Whether or not the Certificate is relied upon by assignees or other transferees or DEVELOPER, CITY shall not be bound by a Certificate if a default existed at the time of the periodic or special review, but was concealed from or otherwise not known to the City Manager (or its designee) or City Council. PREVAILING WAGES. 6.1 Public Works Determination. DEVELOPER has been alerted to the requirements of California Labor Code section 1770 et seg., including, without limitation S.B. 975, which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements if it is determined that this Development Agreement constitutes a public works contract. It shall be the sole responsibility of DEVELOPER to determine whether to pay prevailing wages for any or all work required by this Development Agreement. As a material part of this Development Agreement, DEVELOPER agrees to assume all risk of liability arising from any decision not to pay prevailing wages for work required by this Development Agreement. 6.2 Indemnification. As a further material part of this Development Agreement, DEVELOPER agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the CITY, its officials, officers, employees, consultants and agents from any and all claims, liability, loss, costs, damages, expenses, fines and penalties, of whatever type or nature, including all costs of defense and attorneys' fees, arising from any alleged failure of the DEVELOPER or DEVELOPER's contractors to comply with the prevailing wage laws of the State of California. If the CITY or any of the other indemnified parties is named as a party in any dispute arising from the failure of DEVELOPER or DEVELOPER's contractors to pay prevailing wages, DEVELOPER agrees that the CITY and those other indemnified parties may appoint their own independent counsel, and DEVELOPER agrees to pay all attorneys' fees and defense costs of the CITY and the other indemnified parties as billed, in addition to all other damages, fines, penalties, and losses incurred by the CITY and those other indemnified parties as a result of the action. DEFAULT AND REMEDIES. 7.1 (a) DEVELOPER's Remedies . It is acknowledged by the parties that CITY would not have entered into this Agreement if it were to be liable in damages under this Agreement, or with respect to this Agreement or the application thereof. In addition, the parties agree that monetary damages are not an adequate remedy for DEVELOPER if CITY should be determined to be in default hereunder. The parties further agree that specific performance shall be DEVELOPER's only remedy under this Agreement and DEVELOPER may not seek monetary damages in the event of a default by CITY under this Agreement. DEVELOPER covenants not to sue for or obtain monetary damages for breach by CITY of any provisions of this Agreement. (b) CITY's Remedies. The parties agree that CITY shall have limited remedies for monetary damages and specific performance as provided in this Section 7.2 CITY shall not have any right to compel specific performance with respect to the construction of the Project or any obligation to construct the Project. Further, CITY shall have no right to monetary damages as a result of DEVELOPER's failure to construct the project. However, CITY shall have the right to sue for monetary damages for failure by DEVELOPER to pay any amounts owing under this 19 �1 Agreement including without limitation any amounts owing pursuant to Sections 4 and 5.1, In no event shall CITY be entitled to consequential damages or punitive damages for any breach of this Agreement. CITY shall also have the right to seek monetary damages for reimbursements of the actual costs incurred by CITY to construct, complete, demolish, remove or restore any physical infrastructure improvement in the public right of way that DEVELOPER commences constructing but fails to complete. Further, nothing in this Agreement precludes CITY from exercising its rights to enforce bonds or other security fumished by DEVELOPER to CITY as required in the Development Plan. 7.2 Release. DEVELOPER, for itself, its successors and assignees, hereby releases the CITY, its officials, officers, agents and employees from any and all claims, demands, actions, or suits of any kind or nature arising out of any liability, known orunknown, present or future, including, but not limited to, any claim or liability, based or asserted, pursuant to Article I, Section 19 of the California Constitution, the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, or any other law or ordinance that seeks to impose any other liability or damage, whatsoever, upon the CITY because it entered into this Agreement or because of the terms of this Agreement. 7.3 Termination or Modification ofAereementforDefaultofDEVELOPER. Subject to the provisions contained in Subsection 5.5 herein, CITY may terminate or modify this Agreement for any failure of DEVELOPER to perform any material duty or obligation of DEVELOPER under this Agreement, or to comply in good faith with the terms of this Agreement (hereinafter referred to as "default"); provided, however, CITY may terminate or modify this Agreement pursuant to this Section only after providing written notice to DEVELOPER of default setting forth the nature of the default and the actions, if any, required by DEVELOPER to cure such default and, where the default can be cured, DEVELOPER has failed to take such actions and cure such default within 60 days after the effective date of such notice or, in the event that such default cannot be cured within such 60 day period but can be cured within a longer time, has failed to commence the actions necessary to cure such default within such 60 day period and to diligently proceed to complete such actions and cure such default. 7.4 Termination of Agreement for Default of CITY. DEVELOPER may terminate this Agreement only in the event of a default by CITY in the performance of a material term of this Agreement and only after providing written notice to CITY of default setting forth the nature of the default and the actions, if any, required by CITY to cure such default and, where the default can be cured, CITY has failed to take such actions and cure such default within 60 days after the effective date of such notice or, in the event that such default cannot be cured within such 60 day period but can be cured within a longer time, has failed to commence the actions necessary to cure such default within such 60 day period and to diligently proceed to complete such actions and cure such default. THIRD PARTY LITIGATION. &I General Plan Litigation. CITY has determined that this Agreement is consistent with its General Plan, and that the General Plan meets all requirements of law. DEVELOPER has reviewed the General Plan and concurs with CITY's determination. 20 m CITY shall have no liability in damages under this Agreement for any failure of CITY to perform under this Agreement or the inability of DEVELOPER to develop the Property as contemplated by the Development Plan of this Agreement as the result of a judicial determination that on the Effective Date, or at any time thereafter, the General Plan, or portions thereof, are invalid or inadequate or not in compliance with law. 8.2 Third Party Litigation Concerning Agreement. ement. DEVELOPER shall defend, at its expense, including attomeys' fees, indemnify, and hold harmless CITY, its agents, officials, officers, independent contractors, subcontractors, and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against CITY, its agents, officials, officers, independent contractors, subcontractors, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Agreement or the approval of any Subsequent Development Approval granted pursuant to this Agreement. CITY shall promptly notify DEVELOPER of any such claim, action or proceeding, and CITY shall cooperate in the defense. If CITY fails to promptly notify DEVELOPER of any such claim, action or proceeding, or if CITY fails to cooperate in. the defense, DEVELOPER shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless CITY. CITY may, in its discretion, participate in the defense of any such claim, action or proceeding, at DEVELOPER's expense, with counsel of CITY's choosing.. 8.3 Indemnity, in addition to the provisions of Section 8.2 above, DEVELOPER shall indemnify and hold CITY, its officials, officers, agents, employees and independent contractors free and harmless from any liability whatsoever, based or asserted upon any act or omission of DEVELOPER, its officers, agents, employees, subcontractors and independent contractors, for property damage, bodily injury, or death (DEVELOPER's employees included) or any other element of damage of any kind or nature, relating to or in any way connected with or arising from the activities contemplated hereunder, including, but not limited to, the study, design, engineering, construction, completion, failure or conveyance of the public improvements, save and except claims for damages to the extent arising through the gross active negligence or willful misconduct of CITY. DEVELOPER shall defend, at its expense, including attorneys' fees, CITY, its officers, officials, agents, employees, subcontractors and independent contractors in any action or proceeding based upon such alleged acts or omissions. CITY may, in its discretion, participate in the defense of any such action or proceeding. This indemnity provision shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 8.4 Environment Assurances. DEVELOPER shall indemnify and hold CITY, its officers, officials, agents, independent contractors, subcontractors, and employees free and harmless from any liability, based or asserted, upon any act or omission of DEVELOPER, its officers, agents, employees, subcontractors, predecessors in interest, successors, assigns and independent contractors for any violation of any federal, state or local law, ordinance or regulation relating to industrial hygiene or to environmental conditions on, under or about the Property, including, but not limited to, soil and groundwater conditions, and DEVELOPER shall defend, at its expense, including attorneys' fees, CITY, its officers, officials, independent contractors, subcontractors, agents and employees in any action based or asserted upon any such alleged act or omission. CITY may, in its discretion, participate in the defense of any such action. 8,5 Reservation of Rights. With respect to Sections 8.2, 8.3 and 8.4 herein, CITY reserves the right to either (1) approve the attorney(s) that DEVELOPER selects, hires or otherwise engages to defend CITY hereunder, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, or (2) conduct its 21 S own defense, provided, however, that DEVELOPER shall reimburse CI'T'Y forthwith for any and all reasonable expenses incurred for such defense, including attorneys' fees, upon billing and accounting therefor. 8.6 Survival. The provisions of this Sections 8.1 through 8.6, inclusive, shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 9. MORTGAGEE PROTECTION, The parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit DEVELOPER, in any manner, at DEVELOPER's sole discretion, from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device securing financing with respect to the Property. CITY acknowledges that Mortgagees providing such financing may require certain Agreement interpretations and modifications and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with DEVELOPER and representatives of such Mortgagees to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. CITY will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification provided such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purposes of this Agreement. Any Mortgagee of the. Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges: (a) Neither entering into this Agreement not a breach of this Agreement shalt defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any mortgage on the Property made in good faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law. (b) The Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the Property, or any part thereof, which Mortgagee, has submitted a request in writing to the CITY in the manner specified herein for giving notices, shall be entitled to receive written notification from CITY of any default by DEVELOPER in the performance of DEVELOPER's obligations under this Agreement. (c) If CITY timely receives a request from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given to DEVELOPER under the terms of this Agreement, CITY shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within ten (16) days of sending the notice of default to DEVELOPER. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure the default during the remaining cure period allowed such party under this Agreement. (d) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any part thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage or deed of trust, or deed in lieu of such foreclosure, shall take the Property, or part thereof, subject to the terms of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform any of DEVELOPER's obligations or other affirmative covenants of DEVELOPER hereunder, or to guarantee such performance; provided, however, that to the extent that any covenant to be performed by DEVELOPER is a condition precedent to the performance of a covenant by CITY, the performance thereof shall continue to be a condition precedent to CITY's performance hereunder, and further provided that any sale, transfer 22 or assignment by any Mortgagee in possession shall be subject to the provisions of Section 2.4 of this Agreement. 10. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 10.1 Recordation of Agreement. This Agreement and any amendment or cancellation thereof shall be recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder by the City Clerk within the period required by Section 65868.5 of the Government Code. 10.2 Entire Agreement. This Agreement sets forth and contains the entire understanding and agreement of the parties, and there are no oral or written representations, understandings or ancillary covenants, undertakings or agreements that are not contained or expressly referred to herein. No testimony or evidence of any such representations, understandings or covenants shall be admissible in any proceeding of any kind or nature to interpret or determine the teras or conditions of this'Agreement. 10.3 Severability. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall be determined invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby to the extent such remaining provisions are not rendered impractical to perform taking into consideration the purposes of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the provision of the public benefits set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement, including the payment of the fees set forth therein, are essential elements of this Agreement and CITY would not have entered into this Agreement but for such provisions, and therefore in the event such provisions are determined to be invalid, void or unenforceable, this entire Agreement shall be null and void and of no force and effect whatsoever. 10.4 Interpretation and GoverningLaw. This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the. State of California. This Agreement shall be construed as a whole according to its fair language and common meaning to achieve the objectives and purposes of the parties hereto, and the rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in interpreting this Agreement, all parties having been represented by counsel in the negotiation and preparation hereof. 10.5 Section Headings. All section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect any construction or interpretation of this Agreement. 10.6 SinWlar and Plural. As used herein, the singular of any word includes the plural. 10.7 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance of the provisions of this Agreement as to which time is an element. 10.8 Waiver. Failure by a party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by the other party, or the failure by a party to exercise its rights upon the default of the other party, shall not constitute a waiver of such party's right to insist and demand strict compliance by the other party with the terms of this Agreement thereafter. 23 10.9 No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the parties and their successors and assigns. No other person shall have any right of action based upon any provision of this Agreement. 10.10 Force Majeure. Neither party shall be deemed to be in default where failure or delay in performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement is caused by floods, earthquakes, other Acts of God, fires, wars, riots or similar hostilities, strikes and other labor difficulties beyond the party's control, (including the party's employment force), government regulations, court actions (such as CEQA challenge(s), restraining orders or injunctions), or other causes beyond the party's control. If any such events shall occur, the term of this Agreement and the time for performance by either party of any of its obligations hereunder maybe extended by the written agreement of the parties for the period of time that such events prevented such performance, provided that the term of this Agreement shall not be extended under any circumstances for more than five (5) years. 10.11 Mutual Covenants. The covenants contained herein are mutual covenants and also constitute conditions to the concurrent or subsequent performance by the party benefited thereby of the covenants to be performed hereunder by such benefited party. 10.12 Successors in Interest. The burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of this Agreement shall inure to, all successors in interest to the parties to this Agreement. All provisions of this Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitudes and constitute covenants running with the land. Each covenant to do or refrain from doing some act hereunder with regard to development of the Property: (a) is for the benefit of and is a burden upon every portion of the Property; (b) runs with the Property and each portion thereof; and, (o) is binding upon each party and each successor in interest during ownership of the Property or any portion thereof. 10.13 Counterparts. This Agreement maybe executed by the parties in counterparts, which counterparts shall be construed together and have the same effect as if all of the parties had executed the same instrument. 10.14 Jurisdiction and Venue. Any action at law or inequity arising under this Agreement or brought by a party hereto for the purpose of enforcing, construing or determining the validity of any provision of this Agreement shall be filed and tried in the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, State of California, and the parties hereto waive all provisions of law providing for the filing, removal or change of venue to any other court. 10.15 Project as a Private Undertaking. It is specifically understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that the development of the Project is a private development, that neither party is acting as the agent of the other in any respect hereunder, and that each party is an independent contracting entity with respect to the terms, covenants and conditions contained in this Agreement. No partnership, joint venture or other association of any kind is formed by this Agreement. The only relationship between CITY and DEVELOPER is that of a government entity regulating the development of private property and the developer of such property. 10.16 Further Actions and Instruments. Each of the parties shall cooperate with and provide reasonable assistance to the other to the extent contemplated hereunder in the performance of ail 24 obligations under this Agreement and the satisfaction of the conditions of this Agreement. Upon the request of either party at any time, the other party shall promptly execute, with acknowledgment or affidavit if reasonably required, and file or record such required instruments and writings and take any actions as maybe reasonably necessary under the terms of this Agreement to carry out the intent and to fulfill the provisions of this Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. 10.17 Eminent Domain. No provision of this Agreement shall be construed to limit or restrict the exercise by CITY of its power of eminent domain. 10.18 Agent for Service of Process. In the event DEVELOPER is not a resident of the State of California or it is an association, partnership or joint venture without a member, partner or joint venturer resident of the State of California, or it is a foreign corporation, then in any such event, DEVELOPER shall file with the City Manager (or its designee), upon its execution of this Agreement, a designation of a natural person residing in the State of California, giving his or her name, residence and business addresses, as its agent for the purpose of service of process in any court action arising out of or based upon this Agreement, and the delivery to such agent of a copy of any process in any such action shall constitute valid serviceupon DEVELOPER. If for anyreason service of such process upon such agent is not feasible, then in such event DEVELOPER may be personally served with such process out of Los Angeles County and such service shall constitute valid service upon DEVELOPER. DEVELOPER is amenable to the process so served, submits to thejurisdiction of the Court referenced in Section 10.14 so obtained and waives any and all objections and protests thereto. DEVELOPER for itself, assigns and successors hereby waives the provisions of the Hague Convention (Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, 20 U.S.T. 361, T.I.A.S. No. 6638). 10.19 Authority to Execute. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of DEVELOPER warrants and represents that he or she/they have the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of his or her/their corporation, partnership or business entity and warrants and represents that he or shelthoy has/have the authority to bind DEVELOPER to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 10.20 DEVELOPER ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT DEVELOPER THOROUGHLY REVIEWED THIS AGREEMENT THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF DEVELOPER UNDER THIS AGREEMENT„ WITH LEGAL COUNSEL, AND DEVELOPER HAS EQUAL BARGAINING POWER AND THE REQUISITE EXPERIENCE, SOPHISTICATION, AND FINANCIAL STRENGTH TO UNDERSTAND, INTERPRET, AND AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE TERMS OF SECTION 4.4 OF THIS AGREEMENT. DEVELOPER ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT IT HAS EVALUATED THE RISKS AND MERITS OF OBLIGATIONS AND BENEFITS OF THIS AGREEMENT AND IS WILLING AND ABLE TO BEAR THE ECONOMIC RISK OF THIS AGREEMENT AND ALL REMEDIES RELATED THERETO. 25 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year set forth below. Dated: 4.L ed oto% "DEVELOPER" JCCL-SOUTH POINTE WEST, LLC a Delaware limited liability company By: South Pointe West Invest LLC a Califomnia4mited lj.6il'6 company Name: Title: By: Lewis-LJCC Member, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company LEWIS OPERATING CORP., a California corporation — sole manager "CITY" CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Dated: AU n D00-7 By: Name: Title: MrtA 26 M STATE OF CALIFORNIA } } ss. COUNTY OF Los AEeL`T ) On Aeg-I L, l2 0 ?.00-7 before me, t -VE -77 ��� , a Notary Public in and for said county and state, personally appeared k�X7— t -r&-5 personally known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF Lc» e On 7 etc. Public in and for �nQ-7 oeroreme, t UMM county and state, personally appeared �s a Notary personally known to me { ) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature 11A-t.,C,K....<, TOMMYE ANNE CRIBBINS Commission @ 1734909 Notory Public • COMOM10 Los Angeles County ��Y44g�ppay,201T .. . .. e•u u u re o x w c, w r x waw .w A_w A.A .A .A A A.w>l A.N 9 State of California Ly2 ss County of ^ — On yp!2 before me, pat. r) Name and TIOer (e.g., `Jane floe, Nolmry P la-) personally personally appeared 4�1r• r Namafa) of Signers) EDNAA.JOHNSON _a0Commisslon # 1419983 Notary Publlc • Caitfomla San Bernardino County GIy Comm. Uplres Jun 4, 20QJ personally known to me to be the personN whose name( is/afe-subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/aheM# ey executed the same in his/heelt.;e;;- authorized capacity(ies), and that by hla tr signature( on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the personN) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand/ and official sea] PMO.Notary Seal Above VCV — r� V `e' . - Sgnafure ela ry Public OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document - and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. ition ttached Document Title or Type of Document Date: Number of Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: S' er's ❑ individual ❑Individual EI Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Corporate Officer— tie� O Panner —❑ Limited ❑ General7thumb ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ O Attorney in Fact ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian orConservator❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: ❑ Other: Signer Is Signer Is Representing: Top 02004 National Notary Association • 9350 De Sato Ave- P.D. boa 2402 <Clfanw.nh, CA 91313-2402 Item W. 5907 a.ortler. Cell TdtFtee 1 e 871 6027 )0 EXHIBIT "A-1" TO SOUTH POINTE WEST DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Legal Description of Property Exhibit "A-1" ANNEXABLE PROPERTY VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.OW623 SOUTH POINTE VILEST CttY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA PROJECTMAP 911904Vlz • I�:d �J3J Exhibit "A" LoYsuaaduav c&mw.eure^, wsw urrtmFs cn+��sroxNores 1-01 "r 'o E4&E#NfM11JiE5 LEWLOESGAlPF10N eFJ:C1WX{K < .vµU�wP�vR�an uaw atpncN LYNIOpMMILq(AC1iE rcSu�aw��v��u�s� CON00M1NIUWVEST1N3TEMATNE• TRACT MAP M 083623 SOUTH POINTE WEST CllydfYarnv,vd Oet,CMtpnh / i}i EXIHBIT "C" TO SOUTH POINTE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Current Development Approvals A. Certified Final EIR No. 2005-01, SCH 2005111118, Findings of Facts, Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program B. General Plan Amendment No. 2005-01, changing the three smaller parcels (APN: 8765-005-001 through 003) within the project site from Low Density Residential to Planning Area 4/Specific Plan, and changing the Planning Area 4/Specific Pan for the future public park to Park. C. Zone Change No. 2006-03, changing the zoning district from R-15,000 and RPD 10,000 to Specific Plan (SP) for the project and Recreation (REC) for the future park. D. Specific Plan No. 2005-01 for the project area. E. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 63623, a 99 -unit single-family residential subdivision for condominium purposes. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-05, Development Review No. 2005-27 and Tree Permit No. 2005-06. EXHIBIT "D" TO SOUTH POINTE WEST DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Existing Land Use Regulations 1. City of Diamond Bar, Development Code Adopted November 3, 1998. 2. City of Diamond Bar, General Plan Adopted July 25,1995. Exhibit "D" a EXHIBIT "E" 3� TO SOUTH POINTE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Description of Park Parcel 3.24 acres of land described as a portion of Lot 49 of Tract No. 32576, Assessor parcel map no. 8765-005-905. 1.44 acres of land described as Lot A of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No, 63623 VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 063623 :. SOUTH POINTE WEST CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA nErA PARI' Aear.�rwnoris �� W epti( iv a¢ni RU P.+L v. uurx�c'x a •' PROJECT MAP .W L It PFF �� ">' cvr�uehnwrc ,ESmrt14 I�Rc it(R( iC lMCy� � V fD14 Exhibit "F" City of Diamond Bar Larkstone Park General Specifications Revised 3/6/07 Overriding Consideration: Construction Plans and specifications for Larkstone Park shall be approved by the Community Services Director before the start of any work. The Improvement information set forth below shall serve as the general specifications for the construction of Larkstone Park. The Community Services Director, City Manager and other City staff shall cooperate with Developer in the finalization of the specific plans and specifications, share information with Developer concerning the procurement of improvement materials (such as benches, play equipment, etc.) for existing City parks (Pantera Park, Starshine Park, etc.), and shall be flexible in final park specifications, all in a good faith effort to keep Developer's expense for improvement of Larkstone Park reasonable. The project plans and specifications utilized include: 1. Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head Project completed January 10, 2006. 2. Starshine Park Improvement Project completed June 29, 2005. 3. Sycamore Canyon. Park Improvement Project Phase II completed August 10, 2005. 4. Brea Canyon Cut-off Improvement Project completed December 8, 2005 5. Brea Canyon Road l Gemdal Landscape Project completed December 8, 2005. 6. Diamond Bar Center Landscaping Plan approved by City Council October 5, 2004. 7. Pantera Park Pre -fab restroom building currently under design by RJM Design Group. ---'--8---SycamoreaC nyon Park— mprovemenfProject-Phase Ill-(Un`derconstruction as oM16107):"`— Improvements to Upper Pad: Tot Lot for 5-12 year olds with accessible fibar surfacing and sump drain. ® Landscape Structures Play Equipment per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). ® Fibar Surfacing per Sycamore Canyon Park Improvement Project Phase III specs (#8 above). • Sump Drain per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). 2, Tot Lot for 2-5 year olds with accessible fibar surfacing and sump drain. ® Landscape Structures Play, Equipment per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). ® Fibar Surfacing per Sycamore Canyon Park Improvement Project Phase III specs (#8 above). ® Sump Drain per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). 3. Concrete Perimeter walkway with security lights and 4 trash receptacles. ® 5 foot wide X 4 inch thick concrete walkway per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). ® Trash receptacles (Quick Crete model QRCAL-2436-VVD19-P2 Light Sandblast - Natural Gray C-1) per Sycamore Canyon Park Improvement Project Phase fl specs (#3 above). ® Security Lights manufactured by Kim, model 1A/AR3/250MH/120/DB- P/W/PRA20/4188/A/DB-P per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). 4. Trail head to Larkstone Trail per Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head specs (#1 above) ® Single -sided Information Kiosk model L1087 from R.G. Detmers & Asso. 9 5 foot wide X 3 inch thick decomposed granite path with binder from Gail Materials. 5. Grass play area ® Marathon II Sod per Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head specs (91 above). Picnic area with 1 table, 1 barbecue and 1 trash receptacle per location — 2 locations ® Concrete pads, concrete picnic tables (Quick Crete model Q-LBT-96PT), barbecues (LA Steelcraft model 300) and trash receptacles (Quick Crete model QRCAL- 2436-WD19-P2 Light Sandblast -Natural Gray C-1) per Sycamore Canyon Park Improvement Project Phase It specs (#3 above). 7. Park benches — 3 each Wabash Decorative benches per Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head specs (#1 above). 8. Drinking fountain • Most Dependable Fountains model 440 with sand trap and sump drain per Sycamore Canyon -Park rail -and Trail Head -specs (#1-above)-.--- 9. #1-above)--- 9. Restroom building. ® 400 sq ft. pre -fab building from The Public Restroom Company per Pantera Park pre -fab restroom specs (#7 above). o Security lights required on outside of building. o Automatic electrical timer to control restroom lights and all security lights in Larkstone Park. o Electrical outletsoutside building for two beverage vendor machines (vendors to be provided by others). 10. Parking lot for 11 cars plus one handicap stall per Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head specs (#1 above). 2'/z' Class `C' A.C. Pavement. 0 2" of 3/4' Minus crushed rock leveling course. o 6" of 1'/2" Minus crushed rock base. ® 90% compacted subgrade. a Security Lights manufactured by Kim, model 1A/AR3/250MH/120/DB- P/W/PRA20/4188/A/DB-P per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). 11. Monument park identification sign per existing monument sign at Starshine Park. 7� • Calsense Controller model ET2000-24-RR-SSE-R-FM-1B Radio Controlled per Brea Canyon Cut-off Improvement Project specs (#4 above).* • Febco Backflow device with stainless steel protective cage from Strongbox, model SBBC-45SS per Starshine Park specs (#2 above).* • Remote Control Valves from Hunter, model IVC -1016 -FSB -ASR in purple valve box per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). • Must meet all WVWD Recycled Water requirements including purple pipe and purple boxes. 13. Trees to be planted per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). • Trees to include are: London Plane, Liquid Ambar, Jacaranda, Canary Island Pine, Camphor, Australian Willow and crape myrtle as an accent tree. • Trees to be minimum size of 24 inch box. Improvements to Lower Pad: Concrete Perimeter walkway with security lights and 4 trash receptacles. • 5 foot wide X4 inch thick concrete walkway per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). • Trash receptacles (Quick Crete model QRCAL-2436-WD19-P2 Light Sandblast - Natural Gray C-1) per Sycamore Canyon Park Improvement Project Phase 11 specs (#3 above). • Security Lights manufactured by Kim, model 1A/AR3/250MH/120/DB- P/W/PRA20/4188/A/DB-P per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). 2. Grass play area • Marathon II Sod per Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head specs (#1 above). 3. Picnic area with 1 Table, 1 barbecue and 1 trash receptacle — 1 location • Concrete pad, concrete picnic table (Quick Crete model Q-LBT-96PT), barbecue (LA Steelcraft model 300) and trash receptacle (Quick Crete model QRCAL- 2436-WD19-P2 Light Sandblast -Natural Gray C-1) per Sycamore Canyon Park Improvement Project Phase 11 specs (#3 above). 4. Drinking fountain • Most Dependable Fountains model 440 with sand trap and sump drain per Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head specs (#1 above). Flowering garden area per planting plan specs for Brea Canyon Road / Gemdal Landscape Project (#5 above). • Planting material to include: Indian Hawthorn, Rockrose, Lily of the Nile, Daylily, Pink Carpet Rose, Gazania Mitsuwa "Yellow" and Crape Myrtle trees. 6. Parking lot for 6 cars including one handicap stall per Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head specs (#1 above). 7 1Q+ r�[v `r' A r` pwomonP • 2" of %" Minus crushed rock leveling course. • 6" of 1'/2" Minus crushed rock base. 90% compacted subgrade. • Security lights manufactured P/W/P RA20/4188/A/DB-P 7. Park benches -2 each by Kim, model 1A/AR31250MH/120/DB- per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). • Wabash Decorative benches per Sycamore Canyon Park Trail and Trail Head specs (#1 above). 8. Monument park identification sign per existing monument sign at Starshine Park. 9. Automatic irrigation controller (Edison powered) and irrigation system. • Calsense Controller model ET2000-24-RR-SSE-R-FM-1 B Radio Controlled per Brea Canyon Cut-off Improvement Project specs (#4 above).* • Febco Backflow device with stainless steel protective cage from Strongbox, model SBBC-46SS per Starshine Park specs(#2 above).* • Remote Control Valves from Hunter, model IVC -101G -FSB -ASR in purple valve box per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). • Must meet all WVWD Recycled Water requirements including purple pipe and purple boxes. 10. Trees to be planted per Starshine Park specs (#2 above). ------------ o - rees tou ed are: London Plane, -Liquid mbar, Jacaranda,-Canaryylsland-Pine,—'"'— -" Camphor, Australian Willow and crape myrtle as an accent tree. • Trees to be minimum size of 24 inch box. Slopes Planting: Planting Plan Per Diamond Bar Center Landscaping specs (#6 above) • Automatic irrigation controller (Edison powered) and irrigation system per Brea Canyon Cut-off Improvement Project specs (#4 above).' • Calsense Controller model ET2000-24-RR-SSE-R-FM-1 B Radio Controlled per Brea Canyon Cut-off Improvement Project specs (#4 above)* • Febco Backflow device with stainless steel protective cage from Strongbox, model SBBC-45SS per Starshine Park Improvement Project (#2 above).` • Remote Control Valves from Hunter, model IVC -101 G -FSB -ASR in purple valve box per Starshine Park specs (42 above). • Must meet ail WVWD Recycled Water requirements including purple pipe and purple boxes. • Slope planting material to include: Oaks, California Peppers, Walnuts, London Planes (trees to be minimum 24 inch box), toyon, pyracantha, acacia redolens and cotoneaster per Diamond Bar Center Landscaping specs (#6 above). qU Two water meters will be required by Walnut Valley Water District (WVWD), one for domestic and one for landscaping. One automatic irrigation controller should control irrigation to the entire site. Two backflow prevention devices will be required, one to each water meter. ql lvw EXHIBIT "F" W > TO SOUTH POINTE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Lit U � Lu Y1 1 �n AL ci a Y i. 1 !sl �!'� • {� l 5 1 'y 1 lir � 7 3 yyy m r / P L I 3 ' ul� N ffiP SCHEDULE1 TO SOUTH POINTE WEST DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Entitlement Processing Schedule Schedule 1 ATTACHMENT 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2012-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005-01 BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AND JCCL-SOUTH POINTE WEST LLC. A. RECITALS 1 The applicant, JCCL-South Pointe West, LLC , acting as a property owner, has filed an application for Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 authorizing development of a site comprised of approximately 34.52 acres generally located south of Larkstone drive, east of Morning Sun Avenue, and west of Brea Canyon Road (assessor's parcel numbers 8765-001-001, 8765-002-002, 8765-005-003, 9765-005-007, and portions of 8765-005-905, 9763-026-907 and 8763-026-901) with a 99 -unit single- family residential condominium project 2. The applicant has specifically requested the City to approve Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 concerning the expiration terms of the agreement as outlined in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. 3. On February 17, 2012, notification of the public hearing for this application was provided in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune and Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspapers. Furthermore, public hearing notices were mailed to approximately 407 property owners of record within a 1000 -foot radius of the project. Furthermore, the project site was posted with a required display board and public notices were posted in three public places. 4. The Community Development Department has determined that the proposed Amendment No. 1 to the Development Agreement represents a consistent, logical, appropriate and rational implementing tool that furthers the goals and objectives of the City General Plan and it is in the public interest. 5. On March 13, 2012, the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar conducted and concluded a public hearing on the Application. 6. The documents and other 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, 21810 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. This Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the Planning Commission hereby finds and recommends that the City Council approve Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01. 3. On December 19, 2006 the Diamond Bar City Council approved Resolution 2006-78 certifying Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 2005-01 (SCH 2005111118). No changes in the South Pointe West project are proposed ad there is no new information or change in circumstances that would call for a re-examination of the original CEQA determination. Therefore, according to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines, the time amendments requested by the applicant would not necessitate new or separate environmental review. 4. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the proposed Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01, with finalization and execution by the City Manager, based on the following findings, as required by 22.62.030(e) of the Municipal Code and in conformance with California Government Code Section 65864 et seq. a. Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 is in the best interest of the City. b. Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No, 2005-01 implements the proposed South Pointe West project and will provide certainty to the City and the Applicant that the project continues forward with the development. Because of this, the Agreement is in the best interest of the City and its residents. C. Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 is consistent with the General Plan, any applicable Specific Plan and the Development Code. The subject of Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 is consistent with the General Plan and meets all applicable standards of the Development Code. The administrative record and findings of this Resolution demonstrate conformance with City requirements. 4 d. Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 would promote the public interest and welfare of the City. Development Agreement No. 2005-01 implements this development plan and thus promotes the public interest and welfare. e. Amendment No.1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01, prepared in accordance with Government Code Section 65864 et seq., and Chapter 22.62 of the Development Code, establishes a mutually beneficial agreement between the City and the applicant setting forth obligations and benefits to the City and the developer. 5. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend City Council approval of Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. The Planning Commission shall: (1) Certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2012, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. Planning Commission Chairman I, Greg Gubman, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of March 2012, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: Farago, Shah, Torng, Chair/Lin NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: VC/Nelson ABSTAIN: Commissioners: None ATTEST: Greg Gubman, Secretary 3 ATTACHMENT 5 T I I I B PLANNING I I ORPa9 AGENDA REPORT CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - 21810 COPLEY DRIVE -DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 -TEL. (909) 839-7030 -FAX (909) 861-3117 AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 10.2 MEETING DATE: March 13, 2012 CASE/FILE NUMBER: Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No 2005-01 (Case No. PL 2012-57) PROJECT LOCATION: South of Larkstone Dr., east of Morning Sun Ave., west of Brea Canyon Rd., and northwest of Peaceful Hills Rd ("South Pointe West"), further identified as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 8765-001-001, 8765-002-002, 8765-005-003, 9765-005-007, and portions of 8765-005-905, 9763-026-907 and 8763-026-901 PROPERTY OWNER: JCCL-South Pointe West, LLC 1156 N. Mountain Ave. Upland, CA 91785 APPLICANTS: Darren McCleve City of Diamond Bar JCCL-South Pointe West, LLC 21810 Copley Drive 1156 N. Mountain Ave. Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Upland, CA 91785 South Pointe West is a 34.5 -acre site located in the southwesterly portion of Diamond Bar. In 2007, the City approved the South Pointe West Specific Plan and related tentative tract map that authorizes the development of 99 single-family dwellings, and requires the developer to construct and dedicate to the City a 4.68 -acre neighborhood park. A Development Agreement ("Agreement") between the City and Owner was concurrently adopted which provides the Owner and successors in interest certain vested rights in return for specified consideration that will benefit the City. The Agreement has a five-year term that is set to expire on April 9, 2012. Both Owner and City wish to extend the terms of the agreement for another five years to provide the additional time necessary to complete the project. 1 In addition to the request to extend the terms of the agreement, the parties to the agreement also propose that the amendment include the removal of Section 4.4.1.2 from the Agreement, which requires the developer to place $500,000 into an escrow account after the 4gth dwelling is occupied. Staff finds it to be in the City's best interest to amend the Agreement. The applicant has continued to work with City staff to process and submit the final map and civil engineering plans for on-site and off-site infrastructure, walls, gates, entry monuments, a neighborhood park and all agency permits. An amendment to the development agreement extending the terms for a total of 10 years ensures the City and the developer continue to receive the benefits that the approved development will provide. The removal of Section 4.4.1.2 is warranted in that the requirement for the developer to set aside $500,000 until project completion is unlikely to result in any benefit to the City. The South Pointe West project area is highlighted in the illustrations below: 2 3 The Agreement reduces The Developer's' risk by locking in the development approvals and related project fees for a period of time. This assures the Developer that future City development policy changes or regulation changes would not affect the approved project. In exchange, the City receives several benefits, including a 4.6 acre neighborhood park to be constructed by the developer to City specifications and dedicated to the City, and a development fee of $10,000 per dwelling unit above and beyond building permit revenues. Extending the duration of the development agreement will guarantee that the City will continue to receive these benefits. Both parties to the Agreement, JCCL-South Pointe West, LLC and the City, have worked diligently to implement the terms of the Agreement. The following timeline provides an outline of all processing that has taken place for the South Pointe West development and all expenditures by the developer to date. Project Timeline: 2007: ® Tentative Tract Map - Approved March 6. ® Final Map - 1St Plan Check Submitted June 16. ® Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan — Approved July 12. ® Rough Grading Plan —Approved July 13. ® Verdura Walls Plan —Approved July 13. ® Soils Engineering Study —Approved September 4. ® Storm Drain Plan — Approved October 2. ® Sewer Plan/Study — Approved October 26. 2008: ® Street Plans (Intract) — 1St Plan Check submitted February 17. ® Street Plans (Intract) — 2nd Plan Check review submitted September 10. 2009: ® Landscape Plans (Front Yard Typical) — 1St Plan Check submitted April 13. ® Landscape Plans (Slopes/Fuel Mod) — Approved June 9. ® Street Plans (Larkstone) — Approved July 13. ® Erosion Control Plan — Approved August 29. ® Street Plans (Morning Sun Entry) — Approved September 16. ® Landscape Plans (Non -slopes & Entries) —Approved September 18. • Entry Materials — Approved September 24. • Neighborhood Park (Bldg, Irrigation, P&R) — 1St Plan Check sent September 24. • Neighborhood Park (Civil Engineering & Planning) — 1St Plan Check sent September 24. ® Landscape Plans (Front Yard Typical) — 2nd Plan Check submitted September 30. • Storm Drain Connection (Morning Sun) — Approved October 11. V ® Storm Drain Plan (Entry Revisions) — 1st Plan Check submitted October 16. ® Rough Grade w/ Entry Revisions — 1St Plan check submitted October 20. m Street Light Plan (Larkstone) — 1St Plan Check submitted October 20. ® Street Light Plan (Larkstone) — 2nd Plan Check submitted December 8. ® Street Names —'Ist Plan check submitted December'14. 2010: ® Street Names — 2nd Plan check submitted January 5. • Landscape Plans (Front Yard Typical) — 3rd Plan Check submitted January 12. ® Rough Grading Plans w/ Entry Revisions — 2nd Plan check submitted January 20. ® Storm Drain Plan (Entry Revisions) — 2nd Plan Check submitted January 20. ® Hydro and Hydraulic Report/Drainage Study — Approved January 27. ® Storm Drain Plan (Entry Revisions) — 3rd Plan Check submitted February 11. ® Rough Grading Plans w/Entry Revisions 3m Plan check submitted February 11. ® Rough Grading Plans w/Entry Revisions — Approved March 3. ® Storm Drain Plan (Entry Revisions) — Approved March 3. ® Neighborhood Park (Bldg, Irrigation, P&R) — 2nd Plan Check sent March 30. ® Neighborhood Park (Civil Engineering and Planning) — 2nd Plan Check sent March 30. ® Final Map — 2nd Plan Check Submitted March 31. ® Street Plan (Intract Signing and Striping) — 3`d Plan check submitted March 31. ® Street Dedication (Larkstone East) — Approved March 31. ® Landscape Plans (Front Yard Typical) — Approved May 19. ® Final Map — 3`d Plan Check Submitted July 23. • Street Plan (Intract Signing and Striping) — 4t" Plan check submitted July 23. 2011: • Street Plan (Intract Signing and Striping) —Approved March 3. ® Neighborhood Park (Bldg, Irrigation, P&R) — 3`d Plan Check sent September 1. ® Neighborhood Park (Civil Engineering and Planning) — 3rd Plan Check sent Sept 1. ® Street Light Plans (Intract) — 'Ist Plan Check submitted August 29. • Street Light Plans (Larkstone) — 1st Plan Check submitted August 29. Biological Permit Extension — Survey commenced in September & October. 2012: • Street Light Plans (Intract) — 2nd Plan Check submitted January 4. • Street Light Plans (Larkstone) — 2nd Plan Check submitted January 4. ® Neighborhood Park (Bldg, Irrigation, P&R) — Final Mylars submitted Feb 23. Vn • Neighborhood Park (Civil Engineering and Planning) — Final Mylars submitted Feb 23. • Street Light Plans (Intract) — 3rd Plan Check submitted Feb 24. • Street Light Plans (Larkstone) — 3"d Plan Check submitted Feb 24, Expenditures: 2007 — 2012: • Design Guidelines.................................................................. $50,289 • Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment.....................................$263,923 • Legal Fees (Non Dev Agrmnt)...................................................$195,852 • Fees/Permits (Landslide Mitigation)............................................$188,648 • Survey/Staking/Soils Testing .................................................... $72,697 • Erosion Control/SWPPP/Grading/Sewer/Storm Drain/Fence ........... $490,793 • Recycled Water In -lieu fee to WVWD (Offsite)..............................$192,812 • Structural and Architectural Engineering/Consulting .....................$156,783 • Civil Engineering (Onsite and Offsite)............................................$551,095 • Landscape/Dry Utility Consultants .............................................$325,334 • Soils/Geo Engineering.... ..... . ..... ........... ............................ $285,420 • Sound/Bio/Enviro/Toxics Engineering and Consulting .....................$124,348 • Traffic Engineering/Reports...................................................... $51,740 TOTAL...................................................................................... $2,949,734 Proposed Amendments to the Development Agreement Extension of the Expiration Date (Section 2.3) Despite the ongoing, diligent efforts to move the project forward, the effects of the recession have slowed the progress in the Owner's efforts to partner with a developer to purchase and construct the project. The proposed five-year extension provides a reasonable period of additional time to enable the project to reach completion within the proposed extended lifespan of Agreement. Deletion of the Set -Aside Fund Requirement (Section4.4.1.2) Section 4.4.1.2 requires the developer to place $500,000 into an escrow account prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy for the final 50 homes in the project. If the gross sales of all 99 dwellings exceed $89 million, then the City would receive a payment from that escrow account equal to 20% of the gross revenue above $89,000. For the City to receive any payment from this account, the homes would have to sell for an average of more than $900,000. As a small -lot subdivision located within the prestigious Walnut Valley Unified School District boundaries, the homes 0 ® Neighborhood Park (Civil Engineering and Planning) — Final Mylars submitted Feb 23. ® Street Light Plans (Intract) — 3`d Plan Check submitted Feb 24. ® Street Light Plans (Larkstone) — 3`d Plan Check submitted Feb 24. Expenditures: 2007 — 2012: • Design Guidelines.................................................................. $50,289 ® Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment.....................................$263,923 ® Legal Fees (Non Dev Agrmnt)...................................................$195,852 • Fees/Permits (Landslide Mitigation)............................................$188,648 ® Survey/Staking/Soils Testing .................................................... $72,697 ® Erosion Control/SWPPP/Grading/Sewer/Storm Drain/Fence ........... $490,793 ® Recycled Water In -lieu fee to WVWD (Offsite)...............................$192,812 m Structural and Architectural Engineering/Consulting ......................$156,783 ® Civil Engineering (Onsite and Offsite)............................................$551,095 ® Landscape/Dry Utility Consultants .............................................$325,334 ® Soils/Geo Engineering............................................................$285,420 ® Sound/Bio/Enviro/Toxics Engineering and Consulting ......................$124,348 ® Traffic Engineering/Reports...................................................... $51,740 TOTAL...................................................................................... $2,949,734 Proposed Amendments to the Development Agreement Extension of the Expiration Date (Section 2.3 Despite the ongoing, diligent efforts to move the project forward, the effects of the recession have slowed the progress in the Owner's efforts to partner with a developer to purchase and construct the project. The proposed five-year extension provides a reasonable period of additional time to enable the project to reach completion within the proposed extended lifespan of Agreement. Deletion of the Set -Aside Fund Requirement (Section 4.4.1.2) Section 4.4.1.2 requires the developer to place $500,000 into an escrow account prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy for the final 50 homes in the project. If the gross sales of all 99 dwellings exceed $89 million, then the City would receive a payment from that escrow account equal to 20% of the gross revenue above $89,000. For the City to receive any payment from this account, the homes would have to sell for an average of more than $900,000. As a small -lot subdivision located within the prestigious Walnut Valley Unified School District boundaries, the homes 6 may sell for $600,000 or more; but it is unlikely that sale prices could approach $1 million, particularly in light of the post -recession economy. Therefore, staff believes that it would be counterproductive to require the developer to encumber $500,000 that could otherwise be put to productive use. On December 19, 2006, the Diamond Bar City Council approved Resolution 2006-78 certifying Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 2005-01 (SCH 2005111118). No changes in the South Pointe West project are proposed ad there is no new information or change in circumstances that would call for a re-examination of the original CEQA determination. Therefore, according to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines, the time amendments requested by the applicant would not necessitate new or separate environmental review. Public Notice for the City Council public hearing was published in the Inland Valley Bulletin and the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on February 17, 2012. Public Notices were mailed to all property owners within a 1000 -foot radius of the project site on February 17, 2012. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment 1) recommending the City Council approve the Amendment to Development Agreement No. 2005-01 (Case No.PL 2010-191) based on the findings in DBMC Sections 22.62.030(e). Prepared by: } Katherine EaIe6burger Senior Planner w i . Reviewed by:,-, Greg Gubman Community Development Director 1. Planning Commission Resolution amending Development Agreement No. 2005-01 2. City Council Ordinance No. 02(2007) and Development Agreement No. 2005-01, adopted March 6, 2007 (effective 30 days later) 7 Agenda # 8. 1 Meeting Date: April 3, 2012 CITY COUNCILj� x -� AGENDA REPORT N ♦�S9 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: James DeStefano, City Manager TITLE: An Interim Urgency Ordinance Pursuant to Government Code Section 65858 prohibiting the issuance of permits for establishment of land uses on the site of the former Diamond Bar Honda Dealership and its adjacent parcels at the northwest corner of the SR60/Grand Avenue interchange. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Interim Urgency Ordinance No. (2012) to place a 45 -day moratorium on issuing permits for establishment land uses on the parcels located at the northwest corner of the SR60/Grand Avenue interchange, with street addresses of 525 and 527 Grand Avenue, and Assessor's Parcel Numbers 8719-020-001, 8719-020-006 and 8719-020-007. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The property located at 525 Grand Avenue has been vacant since Diamond Bar Honda relocated operations to the City of Industry in mid -2008. The property is zoned C-3, which allows—either by right or conditional use permit—a broad spectrum of land uses, including retail stores, restaurants, auto rental agencies, hotels and offices. Several of these uses are at odds with the City Council's adopted Goals and Objectives, particularly the Fiscal Responsibility/Economic Development goal which states, " (i)dentify and implement development opportunities for the former Honda dealership property that will result in the greatest net benefit to the community." Coincident to the closure of Diamond Bar Honda, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) commenced the preparation of plans to construct a direct westbound on-ramp to SR 60 at the Grand Avenue interchange, immediately adjacent to the premises. The current design proposed for this on-ramp will require the acquisition of approximately 0.71 acres of the southern portion of the premises (which will result in the removal of a freeway -oriented pylon sign that provides critical freeway visibility for any businesses occupying the premises) and the elimination of at least one of its two drive approaches along Grand Avenue. Sight distance and lane geometry issues still being studied may require the elimination of both Interim Urgency Ordinance—Honda Property Page 1 of 2 driveways along the Grand Avenue frontage of the premises, completely eliminating vehicular access to the premises from this major arterial roadway. Under an agreement between the City of Diamond Bar and the City of Industry, the loss of acreage to accommodate the aforementioned on-ramp would be offset by the vacation and granting of right-of-way to the premises, which would result from the realignment of Old Brea Canyon Road in conjunction with the construction of a National Football League stadium planned to the northwest of the premises, in the City of Industry. However, because a competing stadium project was subsequently proposed in downtown Los Angeles, it remains uncertain as to whether the Industry stadium project will come to fruition. If the Industry stadium project is not developed, then the land area of the premises formerly occupied by Diamond Bar Honda will then be reduced by approximately 0.71 acres. The City is currently studying new development standards and zoning for the vacant dealership site that are consistent with the City Council's adopted Goals and Objectives. Because of the uncertainty regarding the final size, configuration and access to the former Diamond Bar Honda premises, the viability of the site to attract stable land uses that will benefit both the property owners and the City of Diamond Bar is unclear at this time. Because of its prominent, freeway -adjacent location, proper development of the site is critically important to the City for reasons including, but not limited to, aesthetics, services available to Diamond Bar residents, and economic impacts on residents and the City itself. It is likely that zoning standards for the site will change as a result of this update. Because time will be required to prepare and adopt these new regulations and update the zoning ordinance, this Ordinance is intended to place an interim prohibition on the establishment of new facilities and uses on the site as of the date of adoption hereof until new permanent regulations are prepared and adopted by the City Council. The Interim Ordinance will be effective from the date of adoption and will place a 45 -day moratorium of issuing permits for the establishment of land uses on the affected parcels. Consistent with Government Code Section 65858, the Council may adopt up to two extensions of the moratorium after providing notice pursuant to section 65090 and holding a public hearing. The maximum duration of the extensions are ten (10) months, fifteen (15) days for the first, and twelve (12) months for the second. The City has determined that the adoption of the Urgency Ordinance is exempt in accordance to the 1970 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Sections 15061 (b) (3) and 15308. Prepared By Greg Gubman, AICP Community Development Director Attachment: 1. Urgency Ordinance No. _ (2012) __O)o Reviewed By Dave Doyle Assistant City Manager m Urgency Ordinance—Honda Property Page 2 of 6 ATTACHMENT ORDINANCE NO. XX(2012)U AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858 PROHIBITING THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF LAND USES ON THE PARCELS ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SR60/GRAND AVENUE INTERCHANGE, AND DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF. The City Council of the City of Diamond Bar does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Purpose and findings. Diamond Bar Honda was an automotive dealership that occupied premises located at the northwest corner of Grand Avenue/State Route 60 interchange, with the remainder of the property perimeter bounded by Old Brea Canyon Road. In 2008, Diamond Bar Honda vacated the premises. With the exception of a Burger King restaurant also located on the premises, the location remains vacant at the time of this ordinance. Coincident to the closure of Diamond Bar Honda, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) commenced the preparation of plans to construct a direct westbound on-ramp to SR 60 at the Grand Avenue interchange, immediately adjacent to the premises. The current design proposed for this on-ramp will require the acquisition of approximately 0.71 acres of the southern portion of the premises (which will result in the removal of a freeway -oriented pylon sign that provides critical freeway visibility for any businesses occupying the premises) and the elimination of at least one of its two drive approaches along Grand Avenue. Sight distance and lane geometry issues still being studied may require the elimination of both existing driveways along the Grand Avenue frontage of the premises, completely eliminating vehicular access to the premises from this major arterial roadway. Under an agreement between the City of Diamond Bar and the City of Industry, the loss of acreage to accommodate the aforementioned on-ramp would be offset by the vacation and granting of right-of-way to the premises, which would result from the realignment of Old Brea Canyon Road in conjunction with the construction of a National Football League stadium planned to the northwest of the premises, in the City of Industry. However, because a competing stadium project was subsequently proposed in downtown Los Angeles, it remains uncertain as to whether the Industry stadium project will come to fruition. If the Industry stadium project is not developed, then the land area of the premises formerly occupied by Diamond Bar Honda will then be reduced by approximately 0.71 acres. The City is currently studying new development standards and zoning for the vacant dealership site. Because of the uncertainty regarding the final size, configuration and access to the former Diamond Bar Honda premises, the viability of the site to attract stable land uses that will benefit both the property owners and the City of Diamond Bar is unclear at this time. Because of its prominent, freeway -adjacent location, proper Page 1 of 3 development of the site is critically important to the City for reasons including, but not limited to, aesthetics, services available to Diamond Bar residents, and economic impacts on residents and the City itself. It is likely that zoning standards for the site will change as a result of this update. Because time will be required to prepare and adopt these new regulations and update the zoning ordinance, this Ordinance is intended to place an interim prohibition on the establishment of new facilities and uses on the site as of the date of adoption hereof until new permanent regulations are prepared and adopted by the City Council. SECTION 2. The issuance of permits for any uses or facilities on the parcels in the City of Diamond Bar more commonly known as the former site of Diamond Bar Honda, located northwest of the Grand Avenue/SR60 interchange, with street addresses of 525 and 527 Grand Avenue (APNs 8719-020-001, 8719-020-006 and 8719-020-007) (the "Site"), is hereby prohibited. Notwithstanding any provision of the Diamond Bar Municipal Code to the contrary, no zoning permits or approvals, subdivision maps or building permits for any new facilities or uses shall be approved or issued for the Site during the pendency of this Ordinance or any extension thereof. SECTION 3. Penalties. Violation of any provision of this Ordinance shall constitute a misdemeanor and shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed $1,000 or by imprisonment in County jail for not to exceed six (6) months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each and every day such a violation exists shall constitute a separate and distinct violation of this Ordinance. In addition to the foregoing, any violation of this Ordinance shall constitute a public nuisance and shall be subject to abatement as provided by all applicable provisions of law. SECTION 4. Severability. If any part or provision of this Ordinance or the application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this Ordinance, including the application of such part of provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. SECTION 5. Urgency. Based on the findings set forth in Section 1 hereof, the potential uncontrolled development of the site poses a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety and welfare. This Ordinance is necessary to alleviate and address that threat by prohibiting the establishment of new facilities or uses that may be inconsistent with new zoning standards currently being developed until those revised regulations can be established and adopted. This ordinance is adopted pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858 and shall take effect immediately upon adoption by a four-fifths vote of the City Council. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect for a period of forty-five (45) days from the date of its adoption unless extended by the City Council in accordance with the provisions of California Government Code Section 65858. Page 2 of 3 SECTION 7. Conflicting Laws. For the term of this Ordinance, or any extension thereof, the provisions of this Ordinance shall govern over any conflicting provisions of any other City code, ordinance, resolution or policy. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of April, 2012. Ling -Ling Chang 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 by the City Council of the City of Diamond Bar, at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 3rd day of April 2012, by the following vote: AYES: Council Member: NOES: Council Member: ABSTAIN: Council Member: ABSENT: Council Member: Page 3 of 3 Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk City of Diamond Bar o � � o UJ L LU LU o LU�,. LU. o o E5 E7 . 0 4- `D ❑ f .. L!1 � N dy "C