HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/01/1994 Minutes - Adj. Regular MeetingMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
JUNE 1, 1994
1. CALL TO ORDER: M/Werner called the meeting to
order at 9:33 a.m. in the Walnut Valley Unified School
District Board Room, 880 S. Lemon Ave., Diamond Bar,
California.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the
Pledge of Allegiance by C/Ansari.
ROLL CALL: Mayor Werner, Mayor Pro Tem
Harmony, Council Members Papen and Ansari. (C/Miller was
absent due to a potential conflict of interest.)
Also present were: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager;
Frank Usher, Assistant City Manager; Michael Montgomery,
Interim City Attorney; James DeStefano, Community
Development Director; David Liu, Senior Engineer and
Lynda Burgess, City Clerk.
2. PUBLIC HEARING:
2.1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NOS. 92-1 AND 2; VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51407, CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 92-8; AND OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 92-8;
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 32400, CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 91-5, AND OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 91-2;
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 51253 AND CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 92-12; OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 92-9; THE
SOUTH POINTE MASTER PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT NO. 92-1 - M/Werner reported that there was
discussion at the May 31, 1994 meeting regarding a
concern that the proposed roadway, as indicated in
Alternative #1, would significantly impact the
remainder of the canyon and if a secondary road
access to the school could be provided that would
cause little or no impact on the canyon.
MPT/Harmony expressed support of Alternative #3
because the EIR provides for the grading permit to
be issued, giving some options to WVUSD on
exporting the dirt.
ICA/Montgomery stated that the Council could
certify the EIR and adopt only one of the
alternatives, as selected by the Council, which
would allow the 30 -day process to begin. He
explained that certifying the EIR does not deny any
of the other applications and carries them over to
allow for further negotiations at a later time.
C/Papen noted that Alternative #3 does not call for
stockpiling the dirt but rather for exportation of
the dirt.
ICA/Montgomery explained that the EIR allows for
exportation of the dirt to either be dumped,
JUNE 1, 1994
PAGE 2
stockpiled or trucked as necessary, to include
dumping the dirt into the canyon.
It was moved by MPT/Harmony to issue a grading
permit to the School District, certify the EIR and
adopt Alternative #3.
C/Papen offered a substitute motion, seconded by
M/Werner to approve the certification of the EIR
with no action taken on any of the projects at this
time. Motion failed 2-2 by the following Roll Call
vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Papen, M/Werner
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, MPT/Harmony
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller
C/Ansari pointed out that certifying the EIR and
granting a grading permit will begin the process
until the Council can decide what will be done.
MPT/Harmony requested clarification as to what
30 -day process would begin upon certification of
the EIR.
Peter Lewendowski, EIR consultant, explained that a
comprehensive Environmental Impact Report was
prepared to assist the decision makers and the
public understand and evaluate potential
environmental implications of their actions, as
required by CEQA. He stated that the certif-
ication of the EIR, or the EIR itself, is only an
informational document and not a policy document
obligating the City to take any actions or
non -actions. He explained that certification of
the EIR begins a 30 -day statutory review period
during which legal challenges to the document's
adequacy can be brought and, if none are received,
the record is deemed complete and the EIR is
certified. He further stated that various
provisions of the Government Code and Subdivision
Map Act dictate that after certification of the
EIR, actions on the project must occur within five
or six months subject to the Permit Streamlining
Act, or failure to take action constitutes a tacit
approval of the project.
ICA/Montgomery, in response to MPT/Harmony, stated
that a tie vote does not constitute a denial of the
projects, and once the EIR is certified, the
Council must reach a consensus on one of the
alternatives or else all alternatives would
automatically be approved.
In response to C/Papen, ICA/Montgomery explained
JUNE 1, 1994 PAGE 3
that the Permit Streamlining Act does not apply to
projects where the developer has voluntarily
continued the matter or requested an extension.
C/Papen stated that a compromise and a decision
needs to be made regarding the South Pointe Master
Plan so the school can be built. She noted that it
is appropriate for the City to lift map and deed
restrictions if there is a significant benefit to
the City, which would result with Alternative #1.
C/Ansari requested further discussion as to the
part of the canyon that should be saved. She
suggested that the Arciero project in Alternative
#1 could be modified to save the blue line stream
and construct a road going through Brea Canyon or
further up toward the Shea homes.
C/Papen pointed out that Alternative #1 saves the
canyon from Rapid View south, which has always been
the part considered to be Sandstone Canyon.
ICA/Montgomery stated that, upon further review, he
determined that the EIR, which was approved by the
` Planning Commission in 1993, has been pending for
more than a year; therefore, the six-month
requirement of the Permit Streamlining Act of the
EIR no longer applies.
Jan Dabney, noting that they did not voluntarily
concur with a continuance to the project following
Planning Commission approval, stated that their
lawyers would contest ICA/Montgomery's opinion
regarding the Permit Streamlining Act because they
were not allowed to continue the project but
rather, were asked by the Council to come back the
following year since a General Plan was not in
place. He requested that the Council conclude on
the EIR and identify the site where the dirt is to
be moved. He then noted that RnP paid $25,000 a
year in property tax and not the $9 a year
suggested by MPT/ Harmony at the last meeting.
CM/Belanger stated that the City was statutorily
prohibited from continuing forward due to the
referendum; therefore, it is arguable if the
operation of law, as it relates to the Streamlining
Act, would be affected. He stated that the Council
created ordinance No. 4 to allow for discretionary
acts; however, one of those discretion-ary acts was
not on this map.
ICA/Montgomery, in response to MPT/Harmony, stated
that if the EIR is certified and the applicant is
correct that he did not voluntarily agree to a
continuance, then the six-month requirement of the
JUNE 1, 1994 PAGE 4
Permit Streamlining Act would apply.
MPT/Harmony asked if the grading permit could be
issued without certifying the City's EIR, only the
WVUSD's EIR to allow them to begin their project.
Mr. Lewendowski stated that the WVUSD previously
certified their EIR as is referenced in the City's
DEIR. He explained that the issuance of a grading
permit is a discretionary action on the part of the
City and requires the City to comply with CEQA
provisions by either certifying WVUSD's prior EIR
or undertaking a separate action such as the
certification of the South Pointe EIR. He noted
that WVUSD's EIR does not thoroughly discuss the
environmental impacts associated with the project
and may have potential technical deficiencies;
however, those deficiencies could be reconciled
allowing the document to be utilized as the CEQA
basis and allowing WVUSD to certify the City's part
of the EIR so the grading permit can be issued.
C/Papen pointed out that the City would need to
approve a truck haul route to export the dirt as
indicated in Alternative 13, either on Larkstone
Dr. down Lemon Ave. or through the project site,
which would destroy the canyon area to Brea Canyon
Rd. She also pointed out that the only identified
site where the dirt could go is the Spadra
landfill. She stated that these actions are
costly.
MPT/Harmony amended his motion, seconded by
C/Ansari, to approve issuance of a grading permit,
subject to WVUSD's certification of an EIR.
M/Werner pointed out that the City's EIR indicates
that the dirt can be dumped anywhere outside the
site, including the RnP property. He expressed
concern that the motion, if approved, would issue a
permit for development without first seeing the
plans.
MPT/Harmony stated that WVUSD has full authority to
make decisions on the same issues and concerns as
the City and is accountable to the voters on those
decisions. He expressed his opinion that none of
the development project alternatives are
acceptable; however, issuing a grading permit would
allow for immediate construction of the school
until an acceptable project has been submitted.
JUNE 1, 1994
PAGE 5
Motion failed 2-2 by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, MPT/Harmony
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Papen, M/Werner
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller
C/Papen suggested that the concerns regarding
Alternative 11 should be itemized by C/Ansari so
they can be addressed.
Mr. Lewendowski provided statistics in terms of
cost for exporting 30,000 trips of dirt from the
site.
M/Werner asked Dr. Hockwalt, WVUSD Superintendent,
to respond to the grading options regarding
exportation of the dirt.
Dr. Hockwalt stated that the timeframe of 18 weeks
to remove the dirt by truckloads is not a viable
option, nor is the cost factor relating to
exporting the dirt by truckloads and the impact to
the neighborhood during exportation.
MPT/Harmony requested clarification of WVUSD's
agreement with Arciero when the South Pointe Master
Plan was originally developed.
Dr. Hockwalt stated that the original agreement was
to place the dirt in the canyon; however, Mr.
Arciero decided not to move the dirt when the City
was in the process of incorporating so that a
Master Plan could be considered. He explained that
the litigation involving Arciero and the School
District was to submit that agreement in place that
he did have a commitment, legally and financially,
to remove the dirt. He pointed out that WVUSD does
not need a grading permit but Mr. Arciero does, who
is the lead agency. He reiterated that an 18 -week
period for removal of the dirt would not allow
WVUSD to maintain the bid for construction.
MPT/Harmony suggested that the City issue WVUSD a
grading permit, allowing the School District to
decide how the dirt would be removed or stockpiled.
He asked Dr. Hockwalt to identify the original
plan.
Dr. Hockwalt stated that it would appear that if
the dirt was placed into the canyon, as originally
planned, there would be nothing left of the canyon
because of the volume of dirt. He expressed their
desire to stockpile the dirt immediately south of
the school on the RnP property westerly, which
would fill the knolls.
JUNE 1, 1994 PAGE 6
C/Papen pointed out that Alternative #1 calls for
moving the dirt to a temporary fill position, which
fills the knoll but preserves the canyon and levels
the property westerly. She also pointed out that
once WVUSD does the temporary fills of the knolls,
those knolls are gone forever.
M/Werner stated that stockpiling is not as good a
grading technique as grading for a project, which
is subject to landform grading, compaction and so
forth, for a finished project. He asked Dr.
Hockwalt what WVUSD would do if the grading permit
was issued.
Dr. Hockwalt stated that it is no longer viable,
due to time constraints, to go through the permit
process and delay construction of the school;
therefore, the most viable alternative at this time
would be to stockpile the dirt.
C/Ansari requested clarification if it is possible
to receive a temporary permit from the Dept. of
Fish and Game.
CM/Belanger explained that permits are required if r`
a blue line stream is to be covered; however, the
Corps of Engineers and the Dept. of Fish and Game
issue a second type of permit, allowing you to
cross the blue line stream temporarily. He stated
that a temporary permit may be received in order to
expedite the front end of the project while getting
the permits for the back end of the project'
approved, as indicated in Alternative #2.
C/Ansari asked how much dirt would be left if Mr.
Arciero could modify his project to save the blue
line stream.
SE/Liu stated that less than 100 cubic yards of
dirt could be stockpiled along the ridgeline,
maintaining it at a 2:1 slope.
It was moved by C/Papen to modify Alternative 11
to: allow grading to begin immediately; construct
the road on the subject property to the southerly
point toward Pathfinder, preserving Sandstone
Canyon and 88% of the trees; transfer no densities
to Grand Ave. in The Country area; require the
developer to improve Brea Canyon Rd. south to
Pathfinder with a traffic intersection at Road A
and Brea Canyon; merge the properties and rights of
Arciero & Sons and RnP Development so they could
jointly offer decision of 72 acres of Sandstone
Canyon to the City in the northside direction, with
development rights of no less than 107 and up to
JUNE 1, 1994
PAGE 7
115 homes on the property; and that restrictions
desired by the development on the dedication as to
City usage be worked out in the future.
M/Werner suggested that the motion be amended to
include issuance of a grading permit to the School
District.
C/Papen accepted the amendment to her motion and
M/Werner seconded. Motion failed 2-2 by the
following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Papen, M/Werner
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, MPT/Harmony
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
It was moved by MPT/Harmony, seconded by C/Ansari
to issue a grading permit to WVUSD as provided
under Section 3 of the EIR.
C/Papen noted that WVUSD indicated that the 18
weeks needed to implement MPT/Harmony's motion is
not an acceptable timeline for construction of the
_. school.
M/Werner pointed out that Dr. Hockwalt stated that
it is not the responsibility of WVUSD to do the
grading but it is the responsibility of Mr.
Arciero.
MPT/Harmony stated that, since it is not known how
WVUSD will solve the grading problem, the time
needed to do the grading is unknown. He further
stated that, since the Middle School is the WVUSD's
project, then they should come back with plans and
an acceptable project.
M/Werner amended his motion, seconded by C/Papen to
approve Alternative 11 as a separate amendment as
previously offered. Motion failed 2-2 by the
following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Papen, M/Werner
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, MPT/Harmony
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller
ICA/Montgomery noted that the motion to issue a
grading permit need not specify the WVUSD but
rather the responsible party, which in essence,
would certify Alternative 13.
M/Werner reiterated his concern that it is
inappropriate to issue a grading permit for a plan
that is not defined.
JUNE 1, 1994 PAGE 8
ICA/Montgomery noted that the grading permit would
be as defined in the EIR.
C/Papen pointed out that WVUSD is not part of the
South Pointe Master Plan and is not the applicant
that will be doing the grading nor do they need the
grading permit to build the school.
MPT/Harmony expressed his willingness to amend his
motion to include "the WVUSD and/or the appropriate
developer." He explained that, since none of the
alternatives presented are acceptable, the intent
is to create a mechanism for WVUSD to move forward,
noting that WVUSD has significant authority to
implement their plans.
C/Ansari expressed concern that the lifting of deed
and map restrictions is being presented in
Alternative #1 as the only proposal that will work.
She suggested that a modified proposal be addressed
that allows Mr. Arciero to build on his property
and WVUSD to proceed with building the school, yet
preserving the canyon and the blue line stream.
C/Papen pointed out that Mr. Arciero presented the `^
Council with a modified project in 1958; however,
the slope's steepness was unacceptable according to
D.B. standards and a Master Plan was desired to
include the Hillside Grading Ordinance. She
pointed out that South Pointe Master Plan
construction had been reduced by approximately 60%
in Alternative #1 over what was originally proposed
and saves the entire canyon.
M/Werner noted that Alternative 12 focuses around
preserving the trees and blue line stream. He also
stated that, in exchange for lifting map and deed
restrictions on a portion of the property, as
indicated in Alternative #1, a public benefit is
gained with a 72 -acre dedication of public open
space that can be used and enjoyed.
MPT/Harmony pointed out that Alternative #1 has
significant ecological impacts, and severely
impacts the Pathfinder Homeowners Assn. when the
dirt is moved westerly. He stated that WVUSD could
consider the use of a conveyor belt system to
export the dirt or create a road from the school
property down the hill to Brea Canyon, avoiding the
neighborhoods. He concurred that money is a
consideration; however, this is the situation that
WVUSD got themselves into.
M/Werner stated that WVUSD would stockpile the dirt
onto the RnP property once the permit is issued,
JUNE 1, 1994 PAGE 9
which is an area desired to be preserved by
MPT/Harmony and C/Ansari.
RECESS: M/Werner recessed the meeting at 10:47 a.m.
RECONVENE: M/Werner reconvened the meeting at 11:05 a.m.
2.1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NOS. 92-1 AND 2 (Contfd.) -
C/Papen suggested that the boundaries of Sandstone
Canyon be specifically defined because they are
creating a lot of confusion. She expressed her
opinion that Sandstone Canyon is the area that runs
north/south.
C/Ansari stated that she needed further
clarification as to which area, the lower canyon
area or the upper canyon area on RnP property is
the most pristine and should be saved.
C/Papen pointed out that grading only the RnP
property saves 88% of the trees.
MPT/Harmony noted that 88% of the trees are not on
v the Arciero property only, but are on both
properties.
M/Werner referred to a letter to the editor written
by Mr. Schad a few years ago which described the
Arciero property as an area of unparalleled beauty.
He agreed that Sandstone Canyon, as has been
referenced by many, is the area that runs
north/south.
MPT/Harmony stated that Mr. Arciero has full
development rights and the City will not deny him
the right to develop his property in an
ecologically -sensitive manner, observing the
Hillside Maintenance Ordinance; however, the RnP
property is restricted property and those
restrictions should not be lifted.
M/Werner clarified that the Council decides on what
is ultimately developed and developers have no
rights, other than zoning, until the privilege is
exercised through the entitlement process or
granted through Council action. He stated that the
Council owes the applicant a decision.
MFT/harmony stated that he was under the impression
that a denial of a motion denies the project.
ICA/Montgomery reiterated that the Council would
need to affirmatively deny the project to kill the
proposal.
JUNE 1, 1994 PAGE 10
C/Papen reminded the Council that WVUSD is
operating under a time constraint for construction
in order to obtain the $8 million in matching
funds. She stated that WVUSD needs a site to place
the dirt, which is outlined in Alternative f1.
It was moved by C/Papen, seconded by M/Werner to
approve Alternative 11 as modified and previously
stated, certifying the EIR. Motion failed 2-2 by
the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Papen, M/Werner
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, MPT/Harmony
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller
CM/Belanger suggested that the Council may desire
to adjourn the meeting and continue the matter to
another time to work out an acceptable solution.
It was moved by C/Papen to adjourn for lunch and
return at 2:30 p.m. Motion died for lack of a
second.
MPT/Harmony requested ICA/Montgomery to research
the Map Act in relationship to the issue.
i
Jan Dabney stated that, if the intent is to
preserve the trees and the blue line stream, Mr.
Arciero would be better off building nothing in
light of the effective yield. He stated that Mr.
Arciero would consider reconsideration of his
project as submitted in 1988, which could
accommodate a road to access the school at a
reduction of his development potential.
It was moved by C/Papen, seconded by MPT/Harmony to
continue the meeting to June 3, 1994 at 9:30 a.m.
in the WVUSD Board Room.
3. ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
4. ADJOURNMENT:
conduct, the meeting was
3, 1994 at 9:30 a.m.
District Board Room, 880
California.
With no further business to
adjourned at 12:35 p.m. to June
in the Walnut Unified School
S. Lemon Avenue, Dlaxcjnd Bar,
D
L DA BURGE.SN, amity _Cerk
ATTE
Mayor
r"N
