Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/03/1992 Minutes - Adj. Regular meetingMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 3, 1992 1. CLOSED SESSION: Litigation - Government Code 54956.9 Personnel - Government Code 54957.6 No reportable action taken. 2. CALL TO ORDER: M/Kim called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by M/Kim. ROLL CALL: Mayor Kim, Mayor Pro Tem Papen, Councilmen Forbing, Miller and Werner. Also present were Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; Andrew V. Arczynski, City Attorney; George Wentz, Interim City Engineer; James DeStefano, Community Development Director; and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: William Gross, 21637 High Bluff Rd., requested clarification from the City Attorney as to whether or not the JCC project would in any way be hampered by the effects of the Referendum. He asked whether the City spent any money, on behalf of Judge Mills, to help the $100 million project further along. CA/Arczynski stated that the City had not spent any money in preparing a legal brief for Judge Mills or the company that owns the property. He indicated that, as announced at the last meeting, it was staff's opinion that neither the Referendum nor the General Plan process would not stop a vesting map application. There has been no definitive ruling on whether permits could be issued. 4. COUNCIL COMMENTS: C/Werner commended CM/Belanger for arranging with Southern California Edison to volunteer the use of their electric shuttle to provide transportation for voters to polling places during this election. MPT/Papen noted that the JPA agreement between the City and Brea for provision of recreation services was discussion in an article in a recent issue of Western Cities magazine as an example to other cities. She congratulated the City's Parks & Recreation Department. 5. CONSENT CALENDAR: CM/Belanger asked that "Broken Arrow Drive" be added to the Resolution for consideration as Item 5.11 regarding one-hour parking signage. C/Werner requested that the Minutes reflect his abstention from voting for approval of the Minutes of October 6, 1992 because he was absent during that meeting. It was moved by C/Miller, seconded by C/Werner, to approve the Consent Calendar as amended. With the following Roll Call NOVEMBER 3, 1992 PAGE 2 vote, motion carried unanimously. AYES: COUNCILMEN: Forbing, Miller, Werner, MPT/Papen, M/Kim NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None 5.1 SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1.1 Planning Commission - November 9, 1992 - 7:00 p.m. - AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.1.2 November 11, 1992 - VETERANS DAY OBSERVED - CITY OFFICES CLOSED. 5.1.3 Traffic & Transportation Commission - November 12, 1992 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.1.4 City Council Meeting - November 17, 1992 - 6:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES - 5.2.1 Meeting of October 6, 1992 - Approved as submitted. 5.2.2 Meeting of October 20, 1992 - Approved as submitted. 5.3 WARRANT REGISTER - approved Warrant Register dated November 3, 1992 in the amount of $417,419.85. 5.4 TREASURER'S REPORT - Received & filed Treasurer's Report for the Month of September, 1992. 5.5 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - 5.5.1 MEETING OF AUGUST 10, 1992 - Received and filed. 5.5.2 MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 28, 1992 - Received and filed. 5.6 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular Meeting of September 10, 1992 - Received and filed. 5.7 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES - Minutes of September 24, 1992 - Received and filed. 5.8 BOND EXONERATION - $4,000 GRADING SECURITY BOND FOR 23107 E. RIDGELINE RD. - Approved release of grading security bond retained for landscaping as requested by Mr. Hamendra Rana, owner of a single family residence at 23107 Ridgeline Rd. 5.9 AGREEMENT WITH LANTERMAN DEVELOPMENTAL 'CENTER FOR WEED/ LITTER ABATEMENT - Approved agreement for weed/litter abatement services with Lanterman Development Center in the amount of $16,483 and authorized the City Manager to sign the agreement. NOVEMBER 3, 1992 PAGE 3 5.10 PARATRANSIT SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1992-93 - Approved the Paratransit Services Agreement and directed the City Clerk to forward the Agreements to L.A. County Department of Public Works for further processing. 5.11 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 92-57: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING "1 -HOUR PARKING, 7:00 A.M. - 3:00 P.M., SCHOOL DAYS ONLY" SIGNS ON VIENTO VERANO DRIVE, EVERGREEN SPRINGS DRIVE, BROKEN ARROW DRIVE AND CAZADERO PLACE. 5.12 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 92-58: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING "NO PARKING, 12:00 P.M. - 6:00 P.M., MONDAY - FRIDAY, EXCEPT BY PERMIT" SIGNS ON FOUNTAIN SPRINGS ROAD AT DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD. 5.13 RESOLUTION NO. 92-59: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR CONSENTING TO THE REMOVAL OF EXISTING "NO PARKING, 6:00 A.M. - 8:00 A.M., MONDAY -FRIDAY" SIGNS AND ESTABLISHING "2 -HOUR PARKING, 8:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.M., MONDAY -FRIDAY" SIGNS ON FALLOWFIELD DRIVE AND PASCO COURT. 5.14 RESOLUTION NO. 92-60: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING A RIGHT -TURN LANE AND PAINTED/STRIPED ISLAND ON PROSPECTORS ROAD AT FALL CREEK CONDOMINIUMS. 5.15 AGRICULTURAL ZONING DESIGNATION - REPORT ON ACTION TAKEN FOLLOWING ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 5(1992) - Received and filed. 6. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, ETC. 6.1 PROCLAIMED NOVEMBER 19, 1992 AS "GREAT AMERICAN SMOKEOUT" DAY - Leona Wu, representing L.A. County Health Services, received the proclamation and thanked the City Council for their endorsement of the event. 7. OLD BUSINESS: 7.1 ORDINANCE NO. 6 (1992): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REPEALING SECTION 22.28.230 OF PART 6 OF CHAPTER 22.28 OF TITLE 22 AND ADOPTING AMENDED SECTION 22.28.230, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - CDD/DeStefano stated that staff had amended the -- Commercial Manufacturing Zone Ordinance as a result of modifications directed by the Council at the last meeting. It was moved by C/Miller and seconded by C/Forbing to adopt Ordinance No. 6 (1992). Motion carried unanimously by the following Roll Call vote: NOVEMBER 3, 1992 PAGE 4 AYES: COUNCILMEN: Forbing, Miller, Werner, MPT/ Papen, M/Kim NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None 7.2 MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE COLLECTION DISPOSAL & RECYCLING CONTRACT - CM/Belanger reported that the City Council previously referred this matter to the Solid Waste Subcommittee and requested that they and staff negotiate with Western Waste Industries for a contract for exclusive solid waste collection and disposal services. He reviewed the franchise agreement and options available to the Council as outlined in the staff report and pointed out that one option is not predicated upon approval or disapproval of the other. William Gross expressed concern that citizens would have to give up their rights to better pricing and service because the City chooses to manage its trash needs through the method of franchising. He further expressed concern regarding a provision in the contract allowing the company the power to file a lien against properties with unpaid bills. Further, he questioned MPT/Papen's interests in supporting Western Waste Industries. CA/Arczynski confirmed that there is a provision in the contract allowing a lien against a property for someone who does not pay. However, a 30 -day advanced notice is required to be given and protection is there for the property owner. CM/Belanger pointed out that the proposed rate of $9.74 is lower than the current charge for single family residences by any provider. This rate includes regular garbage pickup as well as recyclables. Don Gravdahl, 23988 Minnequa, stated that he has corresponded with the Council expressing his concern on not going out to bid for this project. He noted the following provisions in the proposal: 1) the way pricing is set up; 2) penalization of those who do not reduce their trash by the indicated 36%; 3 ) though Western Waste will pick up large size items along the street at any time, they will only continue to pick up large size items from the home for a one year period; 4) the City is only asking for a $10,000 Performance Bond for a $5 million contract; 6) there is no provision for green waste; 7) the company is being allowed to bill 90 days in advance for services not yet rendered and place a lien on property with a 30 day notice for a bill not paid; if someone inadvertently forgets to pay, not only is there a lien on their property, but it will also ruin someone's credit report; and 8) a profit-making company is using the City as a hammer to collect their bills. NOVEMBER 3, 1992 PAGE 5 CM/Belanger responded as follows to Mr. Gravdahl's concerns: if the Council chooses, the contract could include an option for variable size containers to allow for even smaller containers for protrusable garbage; the bulk item pickup proposal is typical for most Southern California communities and is provided so that the hauler can plan for its removal; after one year, the hauler will pick up bulk items for free on a semi-annual basis; there is a process where an individual can have an item picked up anytime with a special pickup order; the performance bond required is standard; there is a pilot program in process relating to greenwaste and its disposal; green - waste will be picked up; it is anticipated that a greenwaste program will be in effect before the first year the contract is expired; and an individual will have prior notice before a lien is assessed so that he can correct whatever delinquency is asserted by the company. Marshall Wise, 2600 Broken Feather Lane, stated that a City in the trash business is a step toward socialism. The rate may be low now, but it will rise as it did for the City of Pinole who, ten years ago, paid $9.00/month for trash and now pays $35.00/month. The Council is imposing a system that most of the people in Diamond Bar do not agree with. He questioned the ethics involving MPT/Papen's relationship with the person who negotiated the contract with the City for Western Waste Industries. He stated that keeping trucks off the street as a reason to go with one contractor is a weak excuse to do away with the free enterprise system. MPT/Papen stated that the reason for the high rate increase in the City of Pinole and in other cities is because of the cost of landfill closures in those areas. CM/Belanger explained that, because there didn't appear to be an alternative system in place for the disposal of solid waste for the year 2,000 when all these landfills in the immediate proximity will begin to go over the top, the State passed AB939, superimposing laws on various cities and other local agencies to get something done. Negotiations with Western Waste Industries took place between City staff and the City Council Subcommittee, which consists of C/Werner and C/Miller. The individual alluded to by Mr. Wise was not present during those negotiations. C/Werner stated that, for the record, there are no closures of landfills on the horizon. The L.A. County Board of Supervisors is considering extending the permit for the Puente Hills Landfill for possibly another 20 years. He also stated that the increase in cost of landfills may have partially been responsible for the high rates of trash collection in the City of Pinole, but NOVEMBER 3, 1992 PAGE 6 it is not the entire reason for the increase. Mr. Wise may have been pointing out that once the City grants the franchise, there will be every opportunity made by the franchise holder to increase fees every time landfill prices increase. M/Kim stated that, though he is against any bills mandating cities to comply with certain government regulations, AB939 has been passed and the City must comply with that. The City is obligated to reduce its trash 25% by 1995 and 50% by the year 2,000. The most effective way to accomplish this is through recycling and hiring of one company for better control in complying with AB939. C/Werner noted that there has not been any testimony submitted to the Council to support the claim that a franchise is the best way to solve AB939 concerns. Staff has indicated that it is easier to control one franchise than many. He further stated that Diamond Bar became a City to provide a greater and more efficient level of service than the County, not to make it easier to provide these services. -- MPT/Papen pointed out that the Source Reduction Recycling Element (SRRE), which was unanimously approved by the Council, states a number of times that the City should franchise. Currently, there are eight trash companies permitted to operate within the City. However, only one company of the eight is in compliance with permit requirements despite continuous correspondence by staff. The overall program of the SRRE has 54 programs that need to be implemented by the City in order to reach AB939 mandated requirements. The City has not started imple- menting those 54 programs. No one has yet suggested how the City can meet AB939 requirements other than by franchising. C/Werner pointed out that he previously suggested that the City issue non-exclusive franchises to respond to SRRE requirements, requiring the companies to do business in town and to pay fees to the City to cover recycling costs, monitoring costs and advertising costs. However, the Council has chosen to franchise instead of consider- ing other viable options. C/Miller stated that he too is against the continuous passing of State legislation that restricts citizens' rights. He suggested that people write to their State legislator and express their anger and frustrations. Red Calkins, 240 Eagle Nest Dr., stated that he had attended nearly all waste meetings and that there had never been any discussion regarding how trash will be NOVEMBER 3, 1992 PAGE 7 reduced by 25%. Further, the quoted fee for senior citizens does not include a franchise fee or green waste costs; green waste seems to have to be stored in the ,_ _ _,____-J r_- -'1-....4- ..enr U= rannrtc?d that Waste NOVEMBER 3, 1992 PAGE 8 service and his rates would increase $3.00/month with this franchise agreement; and unless bulk items are picked up, some people will begin dumping them in vacant lots. Max Maxwell thanked C/Werner for his consideration of the concerns voiced by the people regarding the trash issue. He stated that he is opposed to this franchise agreement. Stan Granger, 23800 Gold Nugget, stated that he wonders who is benefiting from this arrangement since, according to AB939, the City should be able to monitor trash pick up at the dump site and control it by permitting. It will be suspicious, whether warranted or not, if the Council passes this measure and acts so blatantly against the citizens desire for a free enterprise trash collection system, not a controversial monopoly. Bill Tinsmen, 1014 Capen Ave., asked if the 25% recycling requirement would force people to turn in their private recycling products, giving more profit to the company. He then made the following comments: it is not unusual for people to have more than one container which will now cost them more money; he asked if AB939 mandates a 90 -day advance payment and a 30 -day notice lien; if a house is rented, the homeowner, not the occupant, must suffer if a bill is not paid; and other monopolies do not put liens on property for bills unpaid but simply cuts off the service. He also inquired why Diamond Bar does not have a toxic waste collection process. Troy Butzlaff explained that the City has opted to participate in the County's Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program because of the limitations and the liabilities involved. The City Council also adopted Resolution 91-59, which allows individual single family residential units to dispose of up to 4 quarts per month of used waste motor oil at curbside as long as it is visibly marked "Waste Motor Oil" and placed in a resealable plastic container. The Mobile station on the corner of Grand Ave./Golden Springs will accept waste motor oil from residents. CM/Belanger stated that the City Council has discretion over whether or not it wishes to incorporate a prepayment provision in the contract. Troy Butzlaff, in response to Mr. Tinsmen's inquiry, stated that the proposed agreement does not prohibit individual homeowners from recycling on their own accord. Single family homeowners are required to participate either in the recycling program of their waste hauler or to take the material to a designated recycling location. NOVEMBER 3, 1992 PAGE 9 CM/Belanger explained that the purpose of the legislation is to divert material out of current disposal facilities. The City also needs to record the percentage of waste that is being diverted. RECESS: M/Kim recessed the meeting at 7:50 p.m. RECONVENE: M/Kim reconvened the meeting at 8:06 p.m. M/Kim expressed concern that the Chamber of Commerce had not had an opportunity to review the contract and was concerned over the 50% increase in commercial bills. He suggested that the matter be postponed to give the Chamber time to review the contract and make recommendations. It was moved by C/Miller and seconded by M/Rim to continue discussion to a later date. MPT/Papen requested that the Council first address the franchise fee and term of the contract before continuing the matter. C/Miller suggested that if the item is to be continued, then it may be more appropriate and less confusing for the public to discuss the body of the contract at the next hearing following Council's comments. C/Werner suggested that the Subcommittee meet with the Chamber on its review of the contract. MPT/Papen expressed concern that a third party, the Chamber of Commerce, is being allowed to negotiate the terms of the agreement. C/Miller indicated that since the Chamber had commented that the contract may somehow be subsidized by a very depressed business community, it would be appropriate to meet with them to receive input on their current situation and clarify any issues of concern. It is not a means of negotiating any of the terms. C/Werner concurred. C/Miller's motion to continue the matter to allow for Chamber of Commerce review was unanimously approved by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Forbing, Miller, Werner, M/Kim NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSTAIN/NOT VOTING: COUNCILMEN: Papen ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None MPT/Papen, in response to the statements made by Mr. NOVEMBER 3, 1992 PAGE 10 Dursa, Mr. Wise and Mr. Gross, stated that, under the rules of the FPPC, political contributions do not apply because they are not considered income to her. 8. NEW BUSINESS: 8.1 RESOLUTION NO. 92 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING A "RIGHT -TURN" LANE ON DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD AND RELOCATION OF A STOP BAR ON FOUNTAIN SPRINGS ROAD - ICM/Wentz reported that the Traffic & Transportation Commission discussed visibility restrictions motorists may experience when attempting to exit out of Fountain Springs Road onto Diamond Bar Blvd. In addition to red curbing the north side of Fountain Springs Rd., the Commission recommended installation of a "Right Turn Only" lane on southbound Diamond Bar Blvd. at Fountain Springs Rd. and relocation of the stop bar on Fountain Springs by five feet. He indicated that staff felt that the best solution would be to work with the property owner to see if the wall could be redesigned and the Cypress tree could be trimmed. C/Miller suggested that the matter be sent back to staff for further negotiations. ICM/Wentz, in response to M/Kim's inquiry, stated that he feels that if the wall is modified and the trees trimmed, then neither the "Right Turn " lane nor the median island would be needed. Ken Anderson, 2628 Rising Star Drive, noted that according to County statistics, 6,000 southbound cars get of f Diamond Bar Blvd. at either "The Country" or Fountain Springs Rd. He expressed concern that the only inter- section at that end of the City having a priority for placement of a signal is at Shadow Canyon but statistics show only 900 trips into that area. There have been 7 accidents in 9 months at Fountain Springs, but no accidents at Shadow Canyon for over a year. Furthermore, no visibility restrictions exist at Shadow Canyon, but there are at Fountain Springs. CM/Belanger pointed out that the City has not budgeted for construction of a traffic signal at Shadow Canyon and indicated that the issues raised by Mr. Anderson are being seriously considered by the City. MPT/Papen noted that river rock has been used throughout the rest of the medians in our landscaping programs, not stamped concrete. She requested that there be consistency in all medians throughout the community as they are improved and modified. She expressed concern that the median could interfere with the bike lane. She noted that there have been other requests for signals at NOVEMBER 3, 1992 PAGE 11 other intersections; however, the City must look at what funds are available for stop signs in this fiscal year. She requested that traffic counts at both corners be discussed and that the area not be "piece mealed." C/Werner stated that putting a median on a residential collector is more of a traffic hazard than a traffic safety device. He suggested that the intersections of Fountain Springs, Shadow Canyon and Cold Springs be looked at in the context of a larger traffic solution. The City Engineer should continue his discussions with the property owner. CM/Belanger stated that it is anticipated that staff will present to the Council on November 17, 1992 an analysis of funds that may be available during fiscal year 1992/93 for construction of traffic signals. Motion was made by C/Miller and seconded by C/Werner to refer the matter back to staff for further negotiations. Motion carried unanimously. 9. PUBLIC HEARING: 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as matters can be heard. 9.1 ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 92-2; CONSIDERATION OF A HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE (HMO) TO ESTABLISH PERMANENT STANDARDS FOR HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT - CM/ Belanger recommended that the City Council continue the Public Hearing November 17, 1992 in order to provide Council an opportunity to review the recommended Ordinance. M/Kim opened the Public Hearing and continued the Hearing to the meeting of November 17, 1992 at 7:00 p.m.. 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS: None offered. 11. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Kim adjourned the meeting at 9:40 p.m. 6&DA BURGS., Citi Cleik -- nmmFcm.