Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/03/1997 Minutes - Regular MeetingMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR JUNE 3, 1997 CLOSED SESSION: None 2. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Huff called the meeting to order at 6:39 p.m. in the SCAQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Harmony. INVOCATION: Reverend Mark Hopper, Evangelical Free Church ROLL CALL: Council Members Ansari, Harmony, Werner, Mayor Pro Tem Herrera and Mayor Huff. Also present were: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; Frank Usher, Assistant City Manager; Amanda Susskind, Assistant City Attorney; James DeStefano, Community Development Director; George Wentz, Public Works Director; Bob Rose, Community Services Director and Tommye Nice, Deputy City Clerk. 3. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS: 3.1 Presented City Tile to Ruth Avila, owner of Xavier's Florist. 3.2 Presented Certificate of Recognition to Felix Giles, D.B. resident, for his work with youth in helping to educate them against drug abuse and gang and street violence. 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Bob Zirbes, D.B. Improvement Association President, asked the Council to place the Property Maintenance Standards issue on the November ballot, grant the Code Enforcement Officer citation authority and adopt a proactive property maintenance standards approach. He presented property maintenance standards survey results from the Windmill publication and asked that the matter be placed on the June 17, 1997 agenda for discussion. Barbara Beach-Courchesne stated that as an affected property owner, she was not notified about the May 20, 1997 Joint Public Hearing. She asked for a list of notified residents. Clyde Hennessee inquired about Voucher Register items. He wanted to know in what part of the City the 200 survey respondents live. Heinz Gehner, D.B. Chamber of Commerce President, asked Council to support a contract for services between the City and the Chamber. JUNE 3, 1997 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL 5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 PLANNING COMMISSION - June 10, 1997 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.2 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - June 12, 1997 - 7:00 P.M., AQMD Board Room, 21865 E, Copley Dr. 5.3 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - June 17, 1997 - 6:30 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.4 CONCERTS IN THE PARK - "Film at Eleven" Classic 60's & 70's - June 25, 1997 - 6:30 to 8:30 p.m., Sycamore Canyon Park, 22930 E. Golden Springs Dr. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR: CM/Belanger asked that Council consider inclusion of an item from the SCJPIA regarding membership of the Cities of Rolling Hills and LaQuinta in the Authority. This matter came to the attention of the City within the last 72 hours and there is a need to act immediately. ClWerner moved, MPT/Herrera seconded, to approve the inclusion of membership request by the SCJPIA. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony, Werner, MPT/Herrera, MIHuff NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ClWerner moved, MPT/Herrera seconded, to approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Items No. 6.8 and 6.9 and inclusion of 6.10 (SCJPIA). Motion carried by the following Rall Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony, Werner, MPT/Herrera, MIHuff NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None 6.1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 6.1.1 Regular Meeting of April 22, 1997 - Received and filed. 6.1.2 Regular Meeting of May 13, 1997 - Received and filed. 6.2 APPROVED VOUCHER REGISTER - dated June 3, 1997, in the amount of $856,701.74. 6.3 RECEIVED AND APPROVED TREASURER'S REPORT - Month of April, 1997. 6.4 RECEIVED, ACCEPTED AND FILED PROPOSITION A LOCAL RETURN FUND, PROPOSITION C LOCAL RETURN FUND AND JUNE 3, 1997 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT AUDITS FOR THE FISCAL YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 1996 AND 1995. 6.5 EXONERATED CASH DEPOSIT IN LIEU OF GRADING BOND (FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE, LABOR & MATERIAL) FOR 2194 INDIAN CREEK ROAD. 6.6 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 97-38: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, RESCINDING RESOLUTIONS 89-11 AND 89-11AAND APPROVING COVERAGE OF ALL OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES UNDER ONE MASTER FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND. 6.7 AWARDED CONTRACT FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD BETWEEN PALOMINO DRIVE AND NORTHERLY CITY LIMIT AT TEMPLE AVENUE - to Dewan Lundin & Assoc. in an amount not to exceed $44,960 with a contingency of $3,000. 6.10 APPROVED MEMBERSHIP OF THE CITIES OF LA QUINTA AND ROLLING HILLS TO THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY and authorized C/Werner to sign. MATTERS WITHDRAWN FROM CONSENT CALENDAR: 6.8 AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR PANTERA PARK - Following discussion, C/Werner moved, C/Ansari seconded to award a construction contract for Pantera Park to Valley Crest Landscape, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $2,251,208 and provide a contingency of $168,840 for project change orders to be approved by the City Manager, for a total authorization of $2,420,048. Motion carried by the following Rall Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari , Werner, MPT/Herrera, M/Huff NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Harmony ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None 6.9 ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF CONTRACT WITH DIVERSIFIED PARATRANSIT FOR DIAMOND RIDE SERVICES - Following discussion, MPT/Herrera moved, C/Ansari seconded, to approve a one year extension of the contract with Diversified Paratransit for Diamond Ride Services in the amount of $240,000. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony, Werner, MPT/Herrera, M/Huff JUNE 3, 1997 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 REQUEST TO REVIEW THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A PROPOSED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 24401 DARRIN DRIVE (CUP 96-10 AND DR 96-9) - Jeff McHaddad, Pacific Bell Mobile Communications, in response to C/Ansari, stated that the installation had been lowered 2'. Responding to C/Harmony, he said there was no grading at the site. Top soil was imported for the mockup. He referred Council to the presentation folder. Also in response to C/Harmony, Mr. McHaddad stated that the applicant had not requested a tract amendment for removal of the access restriction. There will be foot traffic only to the site once or twice monthly and no vehicular access to the project site. He clarified that the project involves the attachment of 2 antennas to each of 3 pipes. The visual impact is minimal. He indicated there are two existing facilities in D.B. that exist in residential zones (D.B. High School). He further stated that although several locations, including Peterson Park, were considered for this installation, the proposed site grants the best line of site and presents no visual impact to surrounding residences. The applicant never proposed a tower with flashing red light. The site will not interfere with television, radio or wireless telephone communications. The resident's concerns regarding EMF's have been addressed by the applicant. Mr. McHaddad also indicated that a resident requested a 5' berm instead of the proposed 3' berm and that the applicant is willing to extend the berm to 5', if necessary. He pointed out that an independent real estate appraiser's opinion is that installations of this type add valuable services to the area and do not contribute to declining real estate values. He believed the applicant had responded positively to the concerns of the residents, the Planning Commission and Council. The proposed installation will add a valuable service to the community. Dr. Jerry Bushberg explained that he conducted broad banned MRF exposure surveys of the mockup facility. Maximum levels measured were approximately less than .2% of the allowed standard. Bernie Garcia, 3748 Woodhurst Dr., Covina, Real Estate Appraiser, stated that he holds a Senior Designation with the American Society of Appraisers, a Senior Designation with the National Association of Independent Fee Appraisers, and a Senior Designation with the American Association of Certified Appraisers. He indicated he served for three years on the Appraisal Qualifications Board, a five member board in Washington, D.C., with the Appraisal Foundation whose function it is to determine education and experience for Licensed JUNE 3, 1997 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL Certified Appraisers throughout the country. He inspected the subject property to determine whether or not there would be a decline in value of properties approximate or adjacent to the proposed site. Sales of Residential property, one in 1993 (prior to the D.B. High School cellular site installation) not in the vicinity of the High School site, and one in January, 1997 which occurred immediately adjacent to the D. B. High School site, revealed no negative impact to property values as a result of the installation. Mr. McHaddad stated that the applicant's landscape plan had been upgraded to include additional vegetation and berming. He asked that Council approve the project with appropriate enhancements or modifications. Responding to C/Werner, Mr. McHaddad indicated the existing trees which camouflage the antenna shown on the plans were slated to be removed; however, since the Planning Commission hearing, the trees will now be trimmed and not removed. Existing plans are relevant only to the extent that the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission's approval are applicable. C/Werner asked what condition provides that the trees will not be removed. He asked the proposed height of the commercial metering pedestal and wanted to know how the structure will look. Mr. McHaddad verified to C/Werner that the dashed line represents the lease line. Grey gravel will be placed in the lease area so that weeds do not grow. Further, he confirmed that the gravel will not be visible from the surrounding area and that the center antenna on the plans should be labeled "Cox". Each pole will have two antennas, the dimensions of which differ slightly between the two carriers. The antenna, point in a specific direction, half pointed uphill and half pointed downhill, all pointed away from the residences in order to cover the freeway corridor. Technically, this site has not been left open for a third provider. The Planning Commission asked if the applicants would be opposed to letting another provider consider co - locating at the site. He said they are not opposed to a third provider co -locating at the site provided they obtain the City's permission and conform to the conditions of the approval. The cabinets proposed for the site are for Cox/Sprint PBS (one carrier) and Pacific Mobile Services (a second carrier). Further, he stated that the chain link fencing can be green vinyl or light brown vinyl with current plans to provide a green vinyl fencing. The block wall is proposed to be slump stone colored to blend with the surrounding vegetation. In response to MPT/Herrera, Mr. McHaddad responded that currently, the antenna are proposed to be placed 2' below pad grade. The drawings provided to Council show the antennas flush with the pad. JUNE 3, 1997 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL The mockup antenna are 2' below the pad. The applicant's engineers would prefer the tops of the antenna be flush with pad grade in order to provide more effective coverage. In response to C/Harmony, Mr. McHaddad stated that due to the radius, highway, and topography, the Peterson Park site does not offer handoff line of site to other digital installations. He indicated that the equipment sites are fenced for security purposes. In addition, the site requires a 220 watt/100 AMP power source. The antenna and fencing are grounded and do not give off electrical shock during transmission. Responding to C/Werner's prior question, Mr. McHaddad stated the commercial metering pedestal is proposed to be a cabinet approximately 36 inches high and 18 inches in diameter. In response to M/Huff, Mr. McHaddad explained that the Planning Commission approved the antenna tip height at grade. Since Commission approval, the applicant has lowered the antenna 2' below grade. The Commission approved the project without the berm. He indicated the front page of the notebook provided to the Council shows a 1 112 to 2' berm. The actual height of the tallest antenna is 24' with the 2' reduction. In response to M/Huff, ACA/Susskind responded that the law states that wireless telecommunications providers must meet Federal requirements which are not subject to interpretation by cities, counties or states. She stated that although cities may not disallow providers, distance requirements, zoning and other limitations may be imposed. M/Huff opened the public hearing. Joe Ruzicka, Planning Commission Chairman, fully understood Council's concern for this controversial issue and its decision to review the Planning Commission's determination. Nothing that has to do with the maintenance of the City should be taken lightly. However, the Planning Commission as a whole, abided by this maxim when it received for consideration the installation of this facility. The end product of the Commission's deliberations took into account the health and safety of the neighborhood, potential disruption of views, maintenance of property values due to aesthetics of the project, and the rights of both the citizens and the applicant. He said he personally called five agencies that deal with telecommunications facilities, the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Institute of Health, the National Institute of Environmental Health Services, the Federal Communications Commission, and the Motorola Consortium. He indicated the research information he received was made available to the Council Members through the City's Planning Department. He JUNE 3, 1997 PAGE 7 CITY COUNCIL further stated that his fellow Commissioners conducted extensive research on this matter. As a result of citizen and Planning Commission concerns, the final project proposal was completely changed from the initial submission. In view of this thorough review process, he requested that Council confirm the Planning Commission's 4-1 approval decision. Don Schad, Planning Commission Vice Chairman, stated he voted "NO" on this project. He said he feels the City Council has an obligation to honor the citizens' wishes to not permit this project in their neighborhood. He indicated he has received inconsistent information from the applicant regarding the facility's power usage. He pointed out that C/Werner's question regarding the antenna dimensions was not answered by the applicant. He further stated he is concerned about the applicant pruning black walnut trees on the site. Mary Yuen asked why the project is deemed appropriate to be placed on a hillside and indicated the applicant previously stated the antennas could not be placed below top of grade and now they are advocating it is okay to place them 2' below grade. She is concerned that the applicant will come back to the City after installation to say the antennas do not work at the installation level and need to be raised. She expressed concern about inconsistencies voiced by the applicant and indicated that she had contacted a couple of realtors who told her it was possible that property values could be jeopardized due to antenna installations. Also, she was concerned about setting a precedent by placing these types of antenna in residential neighborhoods. The installation is visible from her property which is up the hill from the site and she was concerned that antenna waves could reach her property. The residents have no financial interest in this project. However, the people who have spoken previously have a financial interest and are not residents of the City. She said it is important that the Council listen to the concerns of its citizens. Denise Delgado said they purchased their view lot 11 years ago. Health of her children is her number one concern. She said she and her neighbors were not previously aware that 60 people signed a CC&R amendment allowing this installation. The site is visible from her home. She expressed concern about the applicant's inconsistent statements. Ellen Stepada, Jan Court, said she was not notified about the project and expressed concern about the potential health effects of these types of installations and property values. She complained that the appraisal offered by the applicant had no bearing on the proposed site in her neighborhood. She felt that the City will be sorry if the project is approved because the residents have not been properly notified. JUNE 3, 1997 PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL Dr. Lawrence Rhodes asked how this project will be affected if the City Council passes a moratorium on these types of facilities (Agenda Item No. 8.3). Rose Madunnen, Carpio, believed that it was wrong for a commercial establishment to be allowed in a residential area. Mr. McHaddad said the residents gain a utility service with the installation of this system like any other utility service such as the gas company, the television cable company, the telephone company, etc. Location of this type of installation in a residential neighborhood is not precedent setting. This is not a commercial establishment. He asked Council to uphold the Planning Commission's approval. There being no further testimony offered, MIHuff closed the public hearing. C/Harmony believed protecting the City's neighborhoods is at issue. Telephone pole installations are a blight on neighborhoods, There are currently 18 telecommunications facilities in the City and the City needs to gain control of these types of installations. Council has proposed a moratorium on these types of installations until guidelines are established. He said he was not satisfied with answers regarding map restrictions and the original intent for use of the proposed site. He questioned a review of the CC&Rs for the entire neighborhood and indicated his discomfort with inconsistencies in the applicant's proposal. He suggested Council deny the project without prejudice and recommend that the applicant reapply to the City after guidelines are established. In response to C/Ansari regarding 60 signatures obtained for the CC&R amendment, CDDIDeStefano explained that the applicant sought and obtained an amendment to the CC&Rs that control his property and some surrounding homes within the tract. The amendment permits the type of application he has placed before the City for consideration. An amendment to the CC&Rs requires 75% approval of property owners within the tract, which he has obtained according to the recorded document. Residents of the specific Tract Map would have been notified. For instance, Jan Court is a different tract and those residents would not have been notified about the CC&R amendment. In response to C/Ansari regarding raising of the berm to 5' and lowering the antenna 2', Mr. McHaddad responded that the berm does not affect the radio waves because it is behind the antennas and serves only to mitigate the visual impact of the antenna. C/Ansari said she visited the site. The installation is on the far side of JUNE 3, 1997 PAGE 9 CITY COUNCIL the property next to the fire station and surrounded by substantial open space. She was concerned with setting a precedent in residential neighborhoods and the potential impact to the neighbors; however, she believed this project would have a minimal impact on the neighbors. She disagreed with the project as she viewed it last night with the 1 112' berm. Mr. McHaddad explained the project plan's color representations to C/Werner. In response to CNWerner, CDDIDeStefano read the language of the R1 Single Family Residential Zone, Section 22.20.100, which describes permitted property uses under which this project was considered. There is no ownership distinction. Other R1 land uses that require Conditional Use Permits and could be construed as commercial activities include Adult Day Care Facilities, Airports, Golf Courses, Heliports, Libraries, Schools, Cemeteries, Museums, etc. Home based businesses do not require a Conditional Use Permit. He was not aware of any D.B. ordinance specifying or regulating numbers of uses in addition to primary use. C/Werner stated that the Planning Commission apparently made an extraordinary effort in its review process. The only "NO" vote is based upon the EMF's, a subject which the City is not able to regulate. In response to CNWerner, ACA/Susskind explained that the City could insert wording into the finding that if the FCC later determines that these kinds of uses are found to be of health risk, and if the government releases the clause, the City would be able to retroactively remove the site on the basis of health risk. C/Werner stated that the applicant's incomplete plans render a decision difficult. In addition, there are no Planning Commission conditions of approval indicating no trees shall be removed from the site. He asked that the applicant provide conforming plans for Council's consideration. MPT/Herrera stated that it is never easy to make a decision that is controversial, but Council has an obligation to make decisions based upon the overall good to the City and behave in a proper business sense. She did not believe it communicates a good message about the City and how it wants to conduct business when it changes rules in the middle of the game. At this time, D.B. is making a concerted effort to promote economic development. The economic well-being of D.B. depends on economic development. if the City continues to chase away business, it will fall upon the backs of the homeowners to support the City and its facilities and services. Further, Council has an obligation to consider resident's concerns and views, and to modify JUNE 3, 1997 PAGE 10 CITY COUNCIL projects accordingly while meeting the City's financial obligations. M/Huff agreed with ClWerner regarding the view. Council cannot make an informed decision without complete and accurate project plans. With respect to property values, the applicant hired a professional appraiser who made a good faith comparison effort. Itis difficult to obtain comparables within a portion of the community where no facilities exist. He suggested the applicant be asked to provide a complete mockup with a 5' berm in place. ClWerner moved, MIHuff seconded, to continue the matter to June 17, 1997, and request the applicant provide Council with complete and accurate site plans and mockup. ClHarmony offered a substitute motion to overturn the Planning Commission's approval and deny the application without prejudice. Motion died for lack of a second. C/Werner continued with his motion to include that the following information be provided by the applicant: Height of antennas, precise location relative to the flat pad, where the gravel is proposed to be placed and what color it will be, location of the lease line, length of the property lease and whether the lease constitutes a subdivision of land, provide accurate and complete details of projected tree maintenance/removal, provide precise landscape plan, provide mockup of the commercial metering pedestal placed further away from the right-of-way, and provide evidence that the site is not visible as stated by the applicant. ACA/Susskind suggested this meeting be adjourned to a time and location specific for purposes of visiting the site in accordance with the Brown Act. ClWerner amended his motion to include a site visit at 5:30 p.m. on June 17, 1997. ClHarmony moved, C/Ansari seconded to amend C/Werner's motion to include a written legal opinion/analysis of map restrictions. Further, he requested an analysis of L.A. County's intent with respect to the original Tract approval with respect to CC&Rs as the provisions relate to open space. Motion to amend ClWerner's motion failed by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Harmony NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Werner, MPT/Herrera, M/Huff ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None M/Huff called for the question on C/Werner's motion to continue this JUNE 3, 1997 PAGE 11 CITY COUNCIL item to June 17, 1997 to 5:30 p.m. for a site visit. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 8. OLD BUSINESS: COUNCIL MEMBERS - COUNCIL MEMBERS - COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Werner, MPT/Herrera, MIHuff Harmony None 8.1 RESOLUTION NO. 97-32A: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 97-32 (RELATING TO THE VOLUNTARY EXPENDITURE CEILING FOR CITY ELECTIONS) - Following discussion, C/Ansari moved, MIHuff seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 97-32A. Motion failed by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, MIHuff NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Harmony, MPT/Herrera ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Werner ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None 8.2 SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 02(1997): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ENACTING A VOLUNTARY EXPENDITURE CEILING FOR CITY ELECTIONS - C/Ansari moved, MIHuff seconded, to approve second reading by title only, waive full reading and adopt Ordinance No. 02(1997). Motion failed by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, MIHuff NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Harmony, MPT/Herrera ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Werner ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None 8.3 ORDINANCE NO. XX(1997): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM ON LAND USE ENTITLEMENTS FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES AND DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF - Continued to June 17, 1997. 9. NEW BUSINESS: 9.1 FISCAL YEAR 1997-1998 MUNICIPAL BUDGET - Barbara Beach- Courchesne expressed concern that the City was not addressing the shortfall. She asked how the City can entice new business when it cannot retain old business. D.B. is not suitable to be a large commercial site and she believed the people do not want commercial development in the City. Further, she did not agree with proposed JUNE 3, 1997 PAGE 12 CITY COUNCIL staff salary increases. Regarding donation to the Chamber of Commerce, she felt that it would be Illegal to do so and felt that redevelopment would take money from the City. Debby O'Connor asked for consideration of a budget item for security at Diamond Ranch High School. Council concurred to continue the matter to June 17, 1997, RECESSED TO DIAMOND BAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING: 10:43 P.M. RECONVENE: MIHuff reconvened the Joint Public Hearing at 11:05 p.m. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Con't.) 7.2 CONTINUED JOINT PUBLIC HEARING - CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. 7.2.1 RESOLUTION NO. 97 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY FROM THE PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA. Council concurred to continue the Joint Public Hearing to June 10, 1997 at 6:30 p.m. 9. NEW BUSINESS: 9.2 JOINT CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NEW BUSINESS. 9.2.1 RESOLUTION NO. 97 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ADOPTING WRITTEN FINDINGS IN RESPONSE TO ORAL AND WRITTEN OBJECTIONS, COMMUNICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DIAMOND BAR ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA OF THE DIAMOND BAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - Continued to June 10, 1997. 9.2.2 RESOLUTION NO. R -97 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE DIAMOND BAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE DIAMOND BAR ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA; ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM; JUNE 3, 1997 PAGE 13 CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING THE FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND APPROVING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN - Continued to June 10, 1997. 9.2.3 RESOLUTION NO. 97 -XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE DIAMOND BAR ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA; ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM; ADOPTING THE FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, APPROVING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH - Continued to June 10, 1997. 9.2A FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. XX (1997): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DIAMOND BAR ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION AREA - Continued to June 10, 1997. RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING: 11:06 p.m. 10. COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS: None 11. COUNCIL COMMENTS: None 12. ANNOUNCEMENTS: None 13. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to conduct, M/Huff adjourned the meeting at 11:06 p.m. to June 10, 1997 at 6:30 p.m. I Tommye Nice Deputy City Cllerk A Mayor