Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/21/2006 Minutes - Regular MeetingCITY OF DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION FEBRUARY 21, 2006 STUDY SESSION: Mayor Pro Tem Zirbes called the Study Session to order at 4:36 p.m. in Room CC -8 of the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA. Present: Council Members Chang, Tanaka, Mayor Pro Tem Zirbes. C/Tye arrived at 4:38 p.m. and Mayor Herrera arrived at 4:45 p.m. Also Present: Linda Lowry, City Manager; David Doyle, Assistant City Manager; John Cotti, Asst. City Attorney; David Liu, Public Works Director; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Nancy Fong, Interim Community Development Director; Linda Magnuson, Finance Director; Sharon Gomez, Senior Management Analyst; Kimberly Molina, Assistant Engineer; Fred Alamoholda, Consulting Engineer; Kim Crews, Human Resources Manager; Ken Desforges, IS Director, and Tommye Cribbins, Executive Assist. 1) DISCUSSION OF LEMON AVENUE ON/OFF RAMP IMPROVEMENTS John Ballas, City of Industry, reported that this project began 15 years ago with a proposal to construct the on/off ramps at Lemon Ave. and at that time Caltrans responded that the distance between Lemon Ave. and Brea Canyon Rd. was too short and that there was a lead-in conflict with the current ramps. As a result, the project went dormant. With City of Industry's development proposal for the area east of Brea Canyon, Industry's then Mayor suggested bringing truck traffic in and out of Lemon Ave., north on Lemon, east on Currier Rd. to Brea Canyon in order to relieve the truckload at the intersection of Brea Canyon Rd. at Colima Rd. In order to prove the feasibility of a Lemon Ave. on/off ramp Industry sought to mitigate the industrial park by contributing to the hiring of the design team as well as a 20 percent contribution of matching funds for the $15 million dollar project. Industry prepared plans to widen Currier Rd. in conjunction with the Brea Canyon Grade Separation Project. In addition,, Congressman Miller appropriated $9.6 million for the project. Chou Chang said that his firm (JE Jacobs) was hired last year by the City of Industry to follow up on the Caltrans project. Three alternatives were initially identified and the number was expanded to five. During the last three months his firm has held discussion with Caltrans, City of Industry and D.B. staff with the consensus that the project would move forward based on three build alternatives. JE Jacobs is prepared to present the scope of the Project to the residents of D.B. As a result of a 1968 agreement between LA County and Caltrans this Project seemed very unlikely. However, without the new interchange, studies show that by the year 2025 both interchanges (Fairway Dr. and Brea Canyon Rd.) would not be able to handle the projected traffic and the proposed Lemon Ave. FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 2 CC STUDY SESSION interchange would be necessary to relieve the congestion on the neighboring interchanges. The SR57/60 interchange is very congested and the weaving lane is considerably below Caltrans standards and there is an opportunity to improve the standard with this project. He reported on the following alternatives. 1) Partial interchange and no improvements on the SR60; this alternative would confuse the traveler — anticipated cost $9 million — not recommended. 2) Partial interchange, closure of Banning Way, no improvement on SR60 (no additional right-of-way required) — no significant improvement over Alternative 1. 3) Addition of an eastbound on-ramp (remove on/off ramp) — no need to redo the current agreement. 4) Full service interchange, safety improvement on SR60, eliminate bottleneck resulting in high construction cost, more right of way impact and an impact to existing businesses. 5) Suggested by D.B. staff— remove the Brea Canyon Rd. on/off ramp to improve circulation — potential impact to existing businesses; Relocate the on/off ramp to the area between Brea Canyon Rd. and Lemon Ave.; Improve weaving on the SR60, eliminate bottleneck on Golden Springs Dr. Mr. Chang said his firm proposed to move forward with the following alternatives: 1) Mandatory No Build (an option not mentioned above). 2) Alternative 2 3) Alternative 3 4) Alternative 4 In short, all four alternatives will be presented to the residents. At the request of Mr. Ballas, Mr. Chang explained the role of the cities versus the role of Caltrans in selecting an alternative for the final selection. Because this Project is receiving Federal funding, a Federal level environmental document must be prepared. Caltrans is the lead agency as well as the project owner. As part of the process, JE Jacobs will present the alternatives to the public and give them an opportunity for input to the Technical Environmental Study. At the same time Mr. Chang's team will work with Caltrans on the environmental standard issues and produce a draft environmental document that will be circulated through the cities for review and comment. Once comments are reviewed, his firm will evaluate which alternative would present the least impact. Cities can take a position as to their preferred alternatives or remain neutral. Ultimately, Caltrans has a majority stake in choosing the alternative along with the FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 3 CC STUDY SESSION public, City officials and other resource agencies. The entire process is likely to take about two years to complete. Mr. Chang outlined the proposed project development procedure: The Project Study Report approved February 2003; Move forward with a project report on the environmental document and final design on the preferred alternative. If the preferred alternative is "no project" the process stops. At the end of this process the final design would require Caltrans oversight (review documents, drawings, specifications, process, etc.). Once Caltrans approves the final design a Caltrans Encroachment Permit is produced and cities have the option to do their own construction or have Caltrans do the construction. The project goes out to bid and finally, the project is built. Chris Stevens said that this was a CEQA/NEPA process with Caltrans serving as the lead local agency and NEPA serving as the Federal lead agency. Not every alternative needs to be considered but agencies must look at what CEQA defines as a "reasonable range of alternatives." There are a host of things that will be done in concert with Caltrans, Federal Highways and the two cities to make certain that the public and appropriate agencies are involved through a submission of initiation of studies, letter to elected officials, responsible agencies and interested members of the public. In addition, there will be a scope and .public information meeting and JE Jacobs will work closely with the City's Information Officer to make sure that known outlets are used to distribute information to the public (websites, local newspapers, etc), conduct technical studies and prepare an environmental document for approval and distribution. JE Jacobs also recommends that during the public review process the City of D.B. conduct a formal Public Hearing on the project documents. Mr. Chang proposed the following project milestones: 1) Project kickoff meeting November 2005 2) Public Scoping Workshop March 2006 3) Circulation of Draft Environmental Document January 2007 4) Selection of Preferred Alternative April 2007 5) Project Approval July 2007 6) Begin Final Design July 2007 7) Final Design Approval July 2008 8) Bid and Award Contract December 2008 9) Commence Construction 2009 and complete construction July 2010. , Mr. Ballas explained that with respect to Alternative 3 the new HOV connector road currently under construction passes over the top of Brea FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 4 CC STUDY SESSION Canyon Rd. and connects back to the through lanes on the westbound S R60. CM/Lowry asked if Alternative 4 involved more of a taking of the School District property adjacent to Lemon Ave. Mr. Chang and Mr. Ballas said the area in Alternative 3 involved only the existing right-of-way. Mr. Ballas said he would love to do Alternative 4 but if the road goes up to residents' back doors there would be a problem. If more of the back yard areas were intact Alternative 4 might be feasible and preliminary engineering would provide the details of the severity or benefit of those alternatives. C/Chang asked if there was a cost estimate connected with Alternative 4. Mr. Chang estimated it would add four to five million dollars to the project. Alternative 3 is estimated to be $14 to $15 million at today's cost. CM/Lowry asked if the analysis would address the economic impact to the City. Mr. Stevens responded yes and said that it was difficult to estimate the economic impact but that the report would look at existing traffic volumes, future traffic volumes and the impacts to the traffic volumes using the various alternatives. Mr. Stevens responded to C/Chang that Caltrans owns the Brea Canyon on/off ramp land. If the ramp were closed, Caltrans could build a park and ride, retain it as land for retention basins or maintenance facilities or, sell the property and eliminate it from the State right-of-way. ICDD/Fong reminded Council that this was a subject discussed during the Economic Development Workshop and if Caltrans were to give up its property the City could plan for future use of the available land. Public Comments: None Offered. 2) BUDGET AMENDMENT/PERSONNEL RESOLUTION CM/Lowry gave a presentation on the proposed Budget amendment regarding personnel/salary indicating that it was staffs belief that the proposed changes would bring salaried positions into alignment with cities that resemble D.B. Staff is requesting further adjustments similar to the previous realignment of the Assistant City Manager position that the salary be adjusted to five percent below the median of the scheduled cities. With FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 5 CC STUDY SESSION other positions in the upper portion of the salary structure involving mostly senior technical positions, Division Heads and Department Heads. In reviewing these positions staff took an average rather than a median of the other cities. Staffs report includes an explanation for each of the positions for which staff seeks an adjustment. Some of the positions have incumbents, and Department Heads are proposed to have the largest and immediate increases of 15 percent. Staffs theory remains that the adjustments take the Department Heads to five percent below the market average. Staff is further recommending funding for the City Clerk position in an amount that would exceed the amount of only one city, the City of Walnut. The two senior technical positions are currently vacant. D.B. is having a problem recruiting for the Senior Engineer and Senior Planner because the positions and salary do not compete well in the marketplace. Staff believes that if the City becomes more competitive it will attract a larger pool of qualified applicants. The upside is that with the adjustment the City would not be paying the fees currently being paid for consultants to provide the services. CM/Lowry explained that the amendment would abolish two titles for part time positions in the Community Services Division and new titles would be implemented to better define the duties and responsibilities of changes with the opening and operation of the Diamond Bar Center. In addition, the changes in mid-level management would provide internal operational efficiencies that do not currently exist with respect to purchasing and personnel policies. CM/Lowry stated that these adjustments would result in a full fiscal year budget adjustment increase of $169,150 with the current year request for funding at $59,000. She said that the lower positions in the proposed salary structure are decently compensated at the median or mean market salary and remain competitive. However, with the current upper management remaining more stable, those positions have not been marketed and have fallen behind the competing cities. CM/Lowry said she believed that D.B. Department Heads were one of the City's best assets and that the fact that many had been with the City since incorporation brought added value to the City that the Council and residents rely on for day-to-day service to the community. In fact, bringing the salaries to, within five percent of the median is an appropriate goal. This is a matter that has been ignored long enough and the amendment would get the City to the point where everyone would feel a sense of adequate and equitable compensation and security so that the City would be able to quickly market for replacements. CM/Lowry also commented that the proposed adjustment for the Human Resources Manager would bring the position to a division head level and authorize that position to appropriately deal with current policies and procedures. The Senior Engineer adjustment was 100 percent market driven. C/Tye asked if staff felt that the Senior Engineer position adjustment would allow the City to hire qualified applicants to the position. FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 6 CC STUDY SESSION PWD/Liu said that he received very few applications for the position and in talking with other cities he believed that the marketplace was very competitive and that cities were paying a much higher salary for the quality of individual D.B. was seeking. C/Tye said he was concerned that such a small difference in the salaries of competing cities would not allow D.B. to attract individuals from neighboring cities. In addition, the private sector jobs probably pay more so how can D.B. compete. ACM/Doyle pointed out that there are other factors in recruiting such as people living in D.B. and working in Calabasas for example and the adjustment would allow D.B. to be more competitive in the marketplace. On the other hand it would not make sense for someone to move from. Chino Hills to D.B. M/Herrera felt that although the City had lost some good people there were many wonderful employees that worked very hard and the City would want to retain those employees by being competitive. Public Comments: Clyde Hennessee wanted to know what cities were compared with D.B. in the analysis. CM/Lowry responded Walnut, Chino Hills, Yorba Linda and La Mirada. Mr. Hennessee said that the comparisons were unfair because the other cities had much greater populations and budgets compared to D.B. People change jobs and positions for reasons other than money and D.B. should not compare itself to surrounding cities. D.B. has to live within its budget and if D.B. cannot afford to buy stamps to send out agendas it cannot afford a 15 percent across the board increase for employees. 3. GRAND AVENUE TREES CSD/Rose stated that the first proposed project was the removal of all trees on Grand Ave. medians between the SR60 and Diamond Bar Blvd. followed by the planting of fifty-one (51) 24" box replacement trees for a lump sum amount of $20,213. Fourteen (14) trees on these medians have died and been removed and staff believes that this is an opportunity to move away from the use of large eucalyptus trees to a more decorative Camphor and Ginkgo tree and that these trees when mature will enhance this City entry. If approved, staff would complete the work in two phases with Phase One replacement of trees from the SR60 to approximately Cahill Pl. and Phase Two replacement from Cahill Pl. to Diamond Bar Blvd. Staff further recommended a second project that resulted from an FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 7 CC STUDY SESSION Arborist's evaluation for the removal of nine (9) sycamore trees at Sycamore Canyon Park to be replaced with nine (9) 24" box London Plane replacement trees for a lump sum amount of $7,562. C/Zirbes wondered if the street improvement contractor would be good for replacement of some of the trees. CSD/Rose said that there may be some remuneration but staff knew there was a risk of losing trees on public right-of-ways when curbs were being cut. M/Herrera asked if any of the trees were flowering trees. CSD/Rose said he believed that both species provided flowering growth. M/Herrera asked if it would cause a problem on the median CSD/Rose said that staff would maintain the area. C/Tye asked how tall a 24" box tree is. CSD/Rose responded that it was not very tall. In addition, there was a significant price difference between 24" and 36" box ($200 to $500 or $600 per tree). And, if trees are younger when planted they have a better chance at acclimation and faster growth. C/Chang felt that eucalyptus and pine trees were not good for the City streets and recommended that the City plant more Camphor and Ginkgo trees along the City streets. CSD/Rose reported that tonight's agenda item 8.2 contained a request for removal of nine sycamore trees at Sycamore Canyon Park. There are 10 sycamore trees scheduled for removal as part of the ADA retrofit project at the park and he wanted the City Council to be aware that a total of 19 sycamore trees would actually be removed at Sycamore Canyon Park. , ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to come before the City Council, M/Herrera adjourned the Study Session at 6:00 p.m. r Tommye ribbins, City Clerk FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 8 CC STUDY SESSION The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this _-7th day of ma,,b, 2006. CAROL HERRERA, Mayor MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FEBRUARY 21, 2006 STUDY SESSION: 4:36 p.m., Room CC -8 ► Discussion of Lemon Avenue On/Off Ramp Improvements ► Budget Amendment/Personnel Resolution ► Grand Avenue Trees M/Herrera adjourned the Study Session at 6:00 p.m. to the Regular City Council Meeting. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Herrera called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in The Government Center/SCAQMD Auditorium, 21865 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA. M/Herrera announced that the City Council began its evening with a Study Session at 4:30 p.m. to discuss the Lemon Avenue On and Off Ramp Improvements; discussed a budget amendment and personnel resolution and discussed various types of replacement trees for the Grand Ave. median between the SR60 and Diamond Bar Blvd. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: M/Herrera led the Pledge of Allegiance. INVOCATION: None Offered. ROLL CALL: Council Members Chang, Tanaka, Tye, Mayor Pro Tem Zirbes and Mayor Herrera. Staff Present: Linda Lowry, City Manager; David Doyle, Assistant City. Manager; John Cotti, Asst. City Attorney; David Liu, Public Works Director; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Linda Magnuson, Finance Director; Nancy Fong, Interim Community Development Director; Ken Desforges, Information Systems Director; Marsha Roa, Public Information Manager; Ann Lungu Associate Planner; Kimberly Molina, Assistant Engineer; Sharon Gomez, Senior Management Analyst, Debbie Gonzales, Senior Administrative Assistant and Tommye Cribbins, Executive Asst. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS: 1.1 C/Tye acknowledged Tom Mangham's accomplishments on the occasion of his retirement. Because Mr. Mangham was unable to attend tonight's meeting the City Tile would be mailed. FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS OF THE MONTH: 1.2 M/Herrera presented a Certificate Plaque to Harry Yan, Owner, Champs Elysees Bakery as Business of the Month for February 2006. OTHER PRESENTATIONS: 1.3 Video presentation by the L.A. County Library regarding "Homework Help Online" presented by Mary Yogi, Young Adult Librarian. Kathleen Newe encouraged students to take advantage of the free on-line service. She invited residents to attend the "Friends of the Library" 13th Annual Wine Soiree at the Diamond Bar Center on March 26. Tickets are on sale for $45 at the library, Basically Books, Diamond Mail and Shipping, PFF Bank and Vineyard Bank or individuals may call 861-2002 for tickets. All proceeds benefit the Diamond Bar Library. 2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 2.1 Presentation regarding the Trailhead at Sycamore Canyon Park. CSD/Rose reported that later this evening the City Council would consider the Notice of Completion for this project. The ribbon -cutting ceremony is slated for Saturday, February 25 at 10:00 a.m. Parking is available on the west side of Diamond Bar Boulevard and the City will provide shuttles from inside the park and from Clear Creek Canyon. Additionally, shuttles will be available to transport trail hikers from the park back up to the trailhead for those who wish to hike the trail. He. presented a slide presentation of the recently completed 100 percent grant funded trailhead. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Rainbow Yeung, Public Affairs Department, SCAQMD, was recently assigned as liaison to an additional geographical area that includes D.B. and said she would soon schedule time with staff to provide updates on the District's initiative and services. She said she hoped to have an opportunity to work with each Council Member in the near future. She thanked M/Herrera, C/Tye and CM/Lowry for agendizing Consent Calendar Item 6.12 requesting adoption of a resolution opposing AB2015 seeking expansion of the AQMD Board. Lydia Plunk reported that the March edition of The Windmill had gone to print and should be in homes on March 4. The publication is dedicated to individuals who have refused to be knocked down. Individuals wishing to be included in the April edition should contact her atthe.windmiI1@horizon.net. She thanked the community for their support. FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL Clyde Hennessee reiterated his call for people to reject any calls regarding the library, to just say "No" and not tax themselves. 4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting — February 23, 2006 -- 7:00 p.m., Hearing Board Room, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr. 5.2 Ribbon Cutting at Sycamore Canyon Park Trail Head — February 25, 2006 —10:00 a.m., Diamond Bar Blvd. 5.3 Planning Commission Meeting — February 28, 2006 — 7:00 p.m., Auditorium, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr. 5.4 City Council Meeting — March 7, 2006 — 6:30 p.m., Auditorium, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr. 5.5 Traffic and Transportation Commission — March 9, 2006 — 7:00 p.m., Hearing Board Room, AQMDIGovernment Center, 21865 Copley Dr. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR: MPT/Zirbes moved, C/Tanaka seconded to approve the Consent Calendar as presented with the exception of Items 6.1.2 and 6.9. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Tanaka, Tye, MPT/Zirbes, M/Herrera NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 6.1 APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: 6.1.1 Study Session of February 7, 2006 — as submitted. 6.2 RATIFIED CHECK REGISTER—containing checks dated February 3, 2006 to February 16, 2006 totaling $1,309,254.62. 6.3 ACCEPTED WORK PERFORMED BY C.S. LEGACY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS AT SYCAMORE CANYON PARK TRAILHEAD; DIRECTED CITY CLERK TO FILE THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION AND RELEASE THE RETENTION THIRTY-FIVE DAYS AFTER THE RECORDATION DATE; INCREASE THE CONTRACT BY $3,734.96 FORA TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $462,363.51. FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL 6.4 APPROVED $28,601 INCREASE IN THE CONTRACT WITH ADVANTEC CONSULTING ENGINEERS FOR A TOTAL. CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $53,101.00. 6.5 APPROVED SECOND READING BY TITLE ONLY, WAIVED FULL READING AND ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 02(2006) APPROVING ZONE CHANGE NO. 2005-01 CHANGING THE EXISTING ZONING OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES CITY WIDE IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION AND AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY. 6.6 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2006-09: APPROVING THE CITY'S RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULES AND AUTHORIZING DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN CITY RECORDS. 6.7 APPROVED CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 8 TO ADD MAINTENANCE OF SYCAMORE CANYON PARKTRAILHEAD AND SUMMITRIDGE MINI -PARK TO CITYWIDE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE CONTRACT WITH TRUGREEN LANDCARE FOR EIGHTEEN MONTHS; JANUARY 1, 2006 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2007 IN THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $11,850, FOR A TOTAL AUTHORIZATION OF $508,863; PLUS AUTHORIZATION FOR AS - NEEDED WORK AS APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE IN THE AMOUNT NOT -TO -EXCEED $80,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005106 AND $80,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006107. APPROVED. 6.8 APPROVED CONTRACT AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $30,000 WITH A.C.T. GIS, INC. FOR ADVANCED GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIS) SERVICES AND SUPPORT FOR A TOTAL AUTHORIZATION OF $55,000. 6.10 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2006-10: APPROVING FINAL TRACT MAP NO. 62482, FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF 14.3 ACRE SITE INTO 180 CONDOMINIUMS (BROOKFIELD HOMES) LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF GRAND AVENUE SOUTH OF GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE. 6.11 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2006-11: AMENDING THE CITY'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005106 TO INCREASE FUNDING TO $26,375 FOR THE DIAMOND BAR YMCA CHILDCARE PROGRAM BY REALLOCATING $8,000 FROM THE DIAMOND BAR YMCA DAY CAMP PROGRAM. 6.12 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2006-12: OPPOSING ASSEMBLY BILL 2015 TO EXPAND THE SIZE OF THE SCAQMD GOVERNING BOARD. FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL 6.13 APPROPRIATED $162,959 FOR THE INSTALLATION AND INSPECTION OF ELECTRICAL SUBSTRUCTURE FACILITIES WITHIN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON EASEMENT ACROSS TARGET PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GRAND AVENUE AND GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE. ITEMS WITHDRAWN FROM CONSENT CALENDAR: 6.1.2 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7, 2006. CITye asked that Item 8.4 reflect a unanimous vote supporting the amendment. MPTIZirbes moved, C/Chang seconded to approve Consent Calendar Item 6.1.2 as amended. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Tanaka, Tye, MPTIZirbes, M/Herrera NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 6.9 APPROVAL OF CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 1 WITH DH MAINTENANCE FOR SERVICES FOR JANITORIAL AND BUILDING MAINTENANCE SERVICES TO INCREASE AUTHORIZATION FOR AS -NEEDED WORK, AS APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR HER DESIGNEE BY $50,000, FOR A TOTAL AUTHORIZATION OF $225,194 FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 1, 2005 TO JUNE 30, 2006. CITye asked CM/Lowry to explain the need for a contract amendment that was in excess of 20 percent. CSD/Rose explained that the contract was a service contract based on the amount of use and the amount of time spent maintaining Diamond Bar Center. The actual standard contract for ongoing maintenance is $25,494 and that has not changed. What has changed is that D.B. has DH Maintenance providing four staff members who support the City's recreation staff that run the facility. The estimated hours based on the way the facility was being used at the beginning of last summer have significantly increased. The basis for renting space is determined by how quickly staff can take down one facility, clean the premises and be ready for the next event. Staff has set a standard from a 400 (person) setup to another 400 to 500 (person) setup in about two hours. DH Maintenance provides staffing assistance for this work and in some cases DH Maintenance provides as many as six employees at one time on a Sunday to change the facility from a church use to a reserved wedding reception later'in the FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL afternoon. One person is provided for in the initial contract and additional assistants are paid in addition to the initial contract. Initially staff estimated annual revenues of $315,000 and based on use, the estimate has increased to $440,000. Any increase in the contract requires City Council approval. The request for an additional $50,000 is to make certain that revenues are available to cover the balance of the current fiscal year even though the entire amount may not be spent. And, whatever amount is spent will be covered by additional revenue for use of the facility. CITye moved, C/Chang seconded to approve Consent Calendar Item 6.9. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Tanaka, Tye, MPTIZirbes, M/Herrera NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 (a) FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY, WAIVE FULL READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 03 (2006) APPROVING ZONE CHANGE NO. 2005-03 CHANGING THE EXISTING ZONING FOR GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE FROM 4-1-20,000 TO RURAL RESIDENTIAL (RR) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED DIRECTION SOUTH OF ROCKY TRAIL ROAD AND ALAMO HEIGHTS DRIVE AND WEST OF HORIZON LANE IDENTIFIED BY APN NO.S 8713-023-002, 8713-023-004; 8713-023-005, 8713-024-001 AND 8713-024-002 (MILLENNIUM/CHEUNG PROJECT). (b) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2006-13: CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) (SCH NO. 2003051102) AND APPROVING MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR TTM NO. 53430 AS SET FORTH THEREIN FOR A 48 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED DIRECTLY SOUTH OF ROCKY TRAIL ROAD AND ALAMO HEIGHTS DRIVE AND WEST OF HORIZON LANE. (c) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2006-14: APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 53430, A 48 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED DIRECTLY SOUTH OF ROCKY TRAIL ROAD AND ALAMO HEIGHTS DRIVE AND WEST OF HORIZON LANE, AND DENYING THE APPEAL FILED BY DR. HUFU WU, ET. APN NO'S 8713-023-002, 8713-023, 8713-023-005, 8713-024-001 AND 8713- 024-002. FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 7 CITY COUNCIL (d) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2006-15: APPROVING HILLSIDE MANAGEMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2002-01, VARIANCE NO. 2005-03 AND TREE PERMIT NO. 2005-10 FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 53430. ICDDIFong reported that the proposed project within "The Country Estates" is an approximate 80 -acre site. The project requires rezoning to be consistent with the City's General Plan that allows for one unit per acre. The applicant has proposed 48 lots, well within the density requirement. The project is accessible from Alamo Heights and the extension of Alamo Heights requires retaining wails to deal with the significant difference between the street grade and contour of the lots that back up to the street. Initially, the applicant proposed to build a retaining wall to a maximum height of 26 ft. within the existing 50 -ft. easement for slope purposes and existing 40 -ft. easement for street improvements. At the conclusion of its review of the Project, staff recommended that the applicant work with the residents to acquire an additional easement area for off-site grading to eliminate the necessity for a retaining wall. The applicant has attempted to explain how an easement would benefit all parties. However, the adjacent property owners are opposed to granting the additional grading easement. The Planning Commission also asked the applicant to work more closely with the adjacent property owners and to look into the feasibility of lowering Alamo Heights as suggested by resident Dr. Wu. As a result, the applicant submitted revised plans to build two retaining walls with a maximum height of 15 ft. within the 90 -ft. easement. In addition, the applicant studied a third alternative to lower Alamo Heights. The study revealed that in order to build Alamo Heights the applicant would have to construct three retaining walls. Ultimately, the Planning Commission determined that the project should include fewer walls and recommended two retaining walls within the 90 -foot easement. ICDDIFong continued that the project required an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) because the project would have some impact to the physical environment. The EIR process was completed and notices were mailed to adjacent residences in August 2004. In addition, the Draft EIR was circulated to the proper State and Federal agencies for review and comment. The City's geotechnical consultants have reviewed the grading concept and determined it to be feasible. Tom Smith, Bon Terra Consulting, stated that the EIR included eight separate topic areas that were evaluated in detail. The most significant topic was biological resources. There are seven multi- faceted mitigation measures proposed to address the loss of oak and walnut trees as well as habitat values and biological resources on the site. The significant ecological area of Tonner Canyon is the major FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL canyon drainage feature that trends somewhat northeast and southeast and lies adjacent to the project site and "The Country Estates." While the proposed Project would fill a local drainage the drainage area is not a major movement area. In addition to the mitigation measures the City proposes to place on the Project, permits will be required from the Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Game and the Regional Water Quality Control Board, permits that the applicant is required to obtain prior to the City's issuance of a grading permit. In short, Bon Terra believes there is adequate protection for the City to make sure that the environmental resources that would be impacted by the project would be mitigated in compliance with all City, State and Federal requirements. In response to MPT/Zirbes, Mr. Smith indicated that the stream on the. proposed development site is a blue line stream. City staff has ensured sufficient mitigation to move the water through the project back into Tonner Canyon through a storm drain pipeline beneath the fill. According to the geotechnical borings the water is not native to the site and is believed to be coming from upstream development in the form of excess irrigation runoff and runoff from upstream areas. CDD/Fong reported that adjacent residents have filed an appeal of the project. In addition, staff this evening handed the Council additional conditions of approval as recommended by the City's Attorney. The applicant was notified of the additional conditions. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend project approval. ICDD1Fong explained to MPTIZirbes that the retaining wall is within the neighboring lots. However, there is an existing dedicated and recorded easement controlled by the LA County Flood Control District and the applicant would have to obtain authorization to build the retaining walls within that easement. She further indicated to MPTIZirbes that she was certain the applicant had approached LA County for the authorization in order to prepare the plans for the retaining walls and the affected residents would have full knowledge of the recorded easement. M/Herrera opened the Public Hearing. John Bostik, Millennium Diamond Road Partners, LLC, 3731 Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90010 gave a slide presentation to orient the City Council to the project. The presentation included a picture of the Tentative Tract Map, the alternative of the Tract Map assuming that the applicant would reach an agreement with the adjacent landowners and achieve a slope instead of using retaining walls; an aerial view of the proposed project area (indicating the area of ridgeline used for cut to fill the lots), 3-D drawings of what the project would look like from FEBRUARY 21, 2008 PAGE 9 CITY COUNCIL the lots on Kicking Horse toward Alamo Heights Rd. with the depiction including the retaining walls and absent the retaining walls with acquisition of an easement from the adjacent property owners; a view from the end of Rocky Trail Rd. showing the lot pads that would accommodate future homes; a view from Horizon Ln. directly across the site; and a view from the highest point on Lot 47 looking at the highest point of the requested retaining wall. Mr. Bostik explained that his firm worked with local contractors to come up with solutions for well-designed and architecturally pleasing retaining walls and showed samples of the finished product. Mr. Bostik offered to return to the podium to respond to public comment concerns. MPTIZirbes verified with Mr. Bostik that the use of Shotcrete was the result of a Planning Commission condition. MPTIZirbes said it was his understanding that the applicant had settled on the two 15 -ft. retaining wall options. MPTIZirbes asked if the applicant planned further discussions with the residents to obtain an easement to eliminate the retaining walls. Mr. Bostick said he planned to continue discussing the matter after the hearing because he felt the easement would afford the applicant the best way to build the project. Mr. Bostick indicated to MPTIZirbes that "The Country Estates" attorney wrote a letter to the City verifying that the project had access rights into the property along Alamo Heights, Rocky Trail and Horizon Ln. The project cannot be annexed until the details of the approved project are available to the HOA for approval. An annexation approval would follow the City Council's approval of the project. MPTIZirbes asked if it was the applicant's intention to do all of the grading at one time or in phases. Bostick responded that it would all be done at one time and the cut and fill would be balanced on-site. CITye asked for clarification of what road would be used to access the development. Mr. Bostick reiterated that the three points of access were Horizon Lane, Alamo Heights and Rocky Trail Rd. There has been no discussion with "The Country Estates" Homeowners Association about a specific route. If there were no agreement the project would be accessed via Alamo Heights and Horizon Ln. FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 10 CITY COUNCIL Gary McGavin, 447 Laverne St., Redlands said he is a Professor of Architecture and Structures at Cal Poly Pomona and former Seismic Safety Commissioner for the State of California. He commented that grading along Street A takes water to the south with termination adjacent to lot 44. There is only a single outfall at that point that puts Lots 41, 42, 43 and 44 at risk for flooding should the drainage ever clog up_ The below -grade drainage may be excessive for outfall velocities at Lot A and could cause excessive erosion and/or sedimentation within the undeveloped area. The proposed development is dumping water collected inside the proposed development and allowing it to drain outside of the development and could cause sedimentation and/or erosion in the area. The proposed 15 -ft. high retaining wall along Alamo Heights would place existing. homeowners at risk and they cannot sign away their liability. The excessive grading in the area does not appear to have taken into account any of the natural dip slopes that are within the grades beneath the grading. There is no indication on the tract map for any de -watering below the fills. All of the de -watering is done at the surface. He said he could guarantee that all ground systems have ground water and ground water tables fluctuate over time. The proposed development is altering and burying a stream wetland and while it is not completely natural it is somewhat natural and is, in fact a wetland. Hofu Wu, a Fellow of the American Institute of Architects, 22368 Kicking Horse Dr. contiguous to the Development, showed slides of the project area. He said that the proposed project would cut the hill 50 ft.instead of running the street on. Rocky Trail and the fill will be used to fill the canyon, a very devastating situation for the entire development. He pointed out the mature trees that would be removed and replaced by less mature trees and the animals he felt would be displaced. The major fill would obscure the natural terrain and redirect the water under the ground. What the applicant did not show was the hill on the other side. The applicant said that the project site would be flat. The so-called slope easement so that when there is a hill the road would have 50 ft. on either side to accommodate the road but the applicant does not want to sacrifice any of their slopes and instead want to build retaining walls. The old maps show most developments along the ridgelines and most residences were built on hillsides instead of cutting hills and flattening the areas for building. He said he was surprised to see a new developer using techniques that were used in the 60's and 70's that caused a lot of environmental damage. Paul Aikin, 22505 Lazy Meadow Drive within walking distance of the project, said he was not opposed to the project but pointed out that he has lived in the area for 30 -years and although not as abundant, there is still wildlife in the area. Last week he saw a bobcat in his backyard with a rabbit in its mouth. He and his neighbors have heard Coyotes in FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 11 CITY COUNCIL the area and there is ground water throughout "The Country Estates." He wanted the applicant to explain why there would not be an access on Rocky Trail to mitigate traffic. If the applicant were allowed to cut off the top of the ridge it would be a first for the area. All of the other homes are built on the ridge to provide views. He said that annexation was his biggest concern because of the problems with Crystal Ridge and hoped there would be an honest effort between "The Country Estates" and the applicant toward annexation. He encouraged the City Council to withhold approval until both sides reach common ground. Evelyn Leong, 22372 Kicking Horse Dr. said that based on the proposed project the negative environmental impact would be enormous. Almost 1000 trees would be gone and the stream that animals and plants depend on would also be gone. About 2 million cubic feet of landfill would be dumped into the canyons and valleys to make an artificial plain. She asked the Council if they believed this type of construction would be able to withstand natural disasters such as earthquakes. She begged the Council to give this project sufficient consideration to make sure it moved forward responsibly. Kimberly Yi, 22376 Kicking Horse Dr. felt that retaining walls in excess of the City's six-foot code were unacceptable. After the Planning Commission continued this project on December 13, 2005 the Developer made a slight change in the wall height and the final recommendation of the Planning Commission reverted back to the original unacceptable and dangerous wall height. Tim Zhu, 22360 Kicking Horse Dr. felt that both sides of the road should be used to accommodate the street, not just the side where he and his neighbors live. Mr. Bostik responded to Mr. Gavin's comments. The storm drain system was designed by a civil engineer and reviewed by the City's civil engineers. Charlie Liu, Focus Engineering, said that this project was not a special or unusual case. The final design of the storm drain system includes a large catch basin and storm drain in the flat cul-de-sac area to make sure that the water above the intersection flows easterly. This plan was reviewed and approved by the City's Engineer. The picture of the pipe blocking the water that was shown by Dr. Wu does not depict what will happen in this case. In fact, the water flowing out of the property will meet the current condition and when the water is released from the property line to the adjacent property (City of Industry and/or County of Los Angeles) the velocity will remain equal or less than the current condition. He explained how the system would work to meet those conditions. He said he did not believe there would FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 12 CITY COUNCIL be any erosion in accordance with the agreement between the applicant, the LA Flood Control District and the City of Industry. Mr. Liu said that although the retaining wall exceeds the City's six-foot standard 15 -foot retaining walls are not unusual to the City of D.B and. he believed the 15 -foot wall would be approved in accordance with proper engineer design. Mr. Bostik said in response to Mr. Gavin's comments about excessive grading and fill, that the applicant was not in the business of moving dirt and that the project was progressing based on the City's standards for flat pad areas and lot sizes. Soils reports are official documents reviewed by the City's Engineer and that in addition, this project is 40% below the density called out in the City's General Plan. Mr. Liu stated that most homes in "The Country Estates" are built on hills so that water naturally flows down the hill. If the homeownerwere. watering the back yard the chemicals would flow into the drainage system. This project controls the water quality before it is released into the natural system. In his opinion, this project would provide a much better water quality standard than other projects in "The Country Estates." Mr. Bostik responded to Mr. Gavin that the project does in fact include subsurface drains behind all of the retaining wails and in the area of Lot A. The proposed project requires permits from the entities that control wetlands and he needs approval of the basic plan before he requests the permits from the proper agencies. With respect to Dr. Wu's comment about cutting the ridgeline to fill the canyon, the ridge needs to be cut to provide fill for the canyon in order to create lots that meet the City's Ordinances and Building Standards. In this case, the project does not contemplate moving excessive dirt because the project is 40 percent below density outlined in the City's General Plan. He said that it would not serve a useful purpose nor would it make sense to lower the other side of the road in order to raise the road. The slope along Horizon Ln. flows naturally down to the grade where - the road is contemplated. Mr. Bostik said that he has been unsuccessful in several attempts to get Dr. Wu to understand this premise. Again, it would not make sense to build the road up high with slopes on both sides. The old map that Dr. Wu showed indicates a density that the project could not meet. It is not a recorded map and promotes a project that would not be feasible. Mr. Bostik responded to a speaker that the watershed size is controlled by the requirements of the City and County to control the water as it flows off-site. Mr. Liu responded to Mr. Aikin's comment about accessing Rocky Trail Rd. that the control point and elevation is Alamo Heights according to the City's approved Tract Map. There are two possible solutions to make the canyon usable. One is to import the dirt and FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 13 CITY COUNCIL create better water quality control and make a smoother access road. However, an emergency use access road is required so the project has created the emergency access from Rocky Trail to the site, a road that was approved by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. Mr. Bostik said that Mr. Aikin commented he would prefer annexation to take place with one person and not 48 homeowners and he completely agreed with that statement. Also, it is the reason that the applicant agreed to the condition to make a good faith effort negotiation to annex prior to recordation of the final map. Mr. Bostik responded to Mrs. Leong he believed that Tom Smith answered her comments about the trees and wildlife. Kimberly Yi's comment about a variance request for a 26 -foot high retaining wall is incorrect. The variance request is for 15 -foot walls. Mr. Zhu wanted the applicant to share the easement and slopes on both sides of Alamo Heights and again, it would not make sense to build the road up high and slope both sides of the road. If the road could be lowered it would be done. However, the Planning Commission and staff did not like the outcome of that analysis. Mr. Bostik said that as a developer he takes all public input very seriously and took extra time at the Planning Commission level to develop a study based on Dr. Wu's comments. While he continues to respect the public's input he found that there were no new comments beyond those presented at the Planning Commission level and all of the aforementioned comments were addressed during the Planning Commission's Public Hearing. He asked for Council approval of -the project based on staff's reports and recommendations. In response to C/Tye's request that he comment on the problems with putting Alamo Heights at a lower elevation Mr. Bostik referred Council to staffs report and the comments regarding the alternative study of street grade and location of three wails. If Alamo Heights Rd. was lowered beginning at the control point — the approved entrance for Jerry Yeh's property would begin a gradual down slope of Alamo Heights Rd. It would conflict with the approved lots and create a 10 - foot high retaining wall between the lot and the street (Attachment 11- 1). This process would create a dip in Alamo Heights Rd. and necessitate three retaining walls instead of two retaining walls. The major issue with a third retaining wall is that it would fall eight ft. from Alamo Heights Rd. allowing insufficient room to add landscaping and mitigation for a 10 -foot high retaining wall. Staff and the Planning Commission decided that it would be better to eliminate the dip from Alamo Heights Rd. and place the wall on the other side of the street. MPT/Zirbes asked how the applicant would ensure the integrity of a 50 -foot deep fill. Mr. Bostik said that fill is done under controlled FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 14 CITY COUNCIL conditions in one to two feet segments and the City's Engineer tests, each lift for structural integrity before the next lift can be constructed. Additionally, before a home can be constructed on the fill, settlement survey monuments are established on the properties to check future settlement and until the test is satisfactorily completed homes cannot be constructed on the site. In fact, if the tests were negative the lifts would have to be redone and retested. MPT/Zirbes asked if the applicant would build the homes once the grading was completed and pads were in place. Mr. Bostik responded that his pro -forma is to sell lots to individuals and the individuals would hire a custom homebuilder to build their homes. M/Herrera closed the Public Hearing at 8:20 p.m. C/Chang pointed out that other projects within "The Country Estates" involved more cut and fill than this project. In addition, certified engineers closely monitor the cut and fill process to ensure integrity. He said he would like to avoid the two 15 -foot retaining walls and said he preferred to have Mr. Bostik continue negotiating toward an agreement with the adjacent homeowners in order to eliminate the retaining walls but agreed that the developer had the right to build the walls. He also encouraged the applicant to continue negotiating for annexation. M/Herrera said she had been aware of this project for many years and had knowledge that the applicant had worked with staff and the Planning Commission for several years to bring this project to fruition. There were issues the property owner needed to overcome and with today's recommendation for approval she ventured that the property owner successfully overcame the hurdles and if the City Council approves the project tonight the applicant still has many more hurdles to jump. She was pleased it had come to this point and that staff and the Planning Commission were recommending approval. C/Tanaka said he too had followed the project for several years and was happy that the Developer was sensitive to the residents' needs and concerns and had made a good faith effort toward resolving several issues. He felt it would be an excellent project for the City. C/Tye stated that he had also been involved with this project for several years during the time that he, MPT/Zirbes and C/Tanaka were on the Planning Commission and that Mr. DeStefano outlined three criteria for considering projects: Was it right for the location, was it a good project and was it good for the City. After listening to speakers he had written down several questions that Mr. Bostik answered FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 15 CITY COUNCIL before he asked them. It seemed to him that the applicant had made every effort to make sure that everyone was heard and everyone's comments were considered. He felt that citizens were most interested in an excellent project and that this project met that test. He concurred that this project should move to the next level. MPTIZirbes moved, C/Tanaka seconded to approve First Reading by Title Only, waive full reading of Ordinance No. 03 (2006) approving Zone Change No. 2005-03 changing the existing zoning for General Plan compliance from 4-1-20,000 to Rural Residential (RR) for property located direction south of Rocky Trail Road and Alamo Heights Drive and west of Horizon Lane identified by APN No's 8713- 023-002, 8713-023-004, 8713-023-005, 8713-024-001 and 8713-024- 002 (Millennium/Cheung project). Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Tanaka, Tye, MPTIZirbes, MlHerrera NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None M1Chang moved, CITye seconded to adopt Resolution No. 2006-13 Certifying the Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2003051102) and approving Mitigation Monitoring Program for Tentative Tract Map No. 53430 as set forth therein for a 48 lot residential subdivision located directly south of Rocky Trail Road and Alamo Heights Drive and west of Horizon Lane. Motion carried- by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Tanaka, Tye, MPTIZirbes, MlHerrera NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CITye moved, MPTIZirbes moved, to adopt Resolution No. 2006-14 approving TTM No. 53430 a 48 lot residential subdivision located directly south of Rocky Trail Road and Alamo Heights Drive and west of Horizon Lane, and denying the Appeal filed by Dr. Hufu Wu, et. APN No's 8713-023-002, 8713-023, 8713-023-005, 8713-024-001 and 8713-024-002 subject to the following amendments: The Council would prefer the applicant to continue to make every effort to work with the neighbors to reach an agreement to eliminate the retaining walls. In lieu of an agreement the City Council approves construction of the two 15 -foot high retaining walls as recommended and, directs the applicant to work closely with "The Country Estates" Homeowners Association to reach agreement for annexation prior to commencement of grading. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 16 CITY COUNCIL AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS COUNCIL MEMBERS COUNCIL MEMBERS Chang, Tanaka, Tye, MPTIZirbes, MlHerrera None None MPTIZirbes moved, C/Chang seconded to adopt Resolution No. 2006-15: approving Hillside Management Conditional Use Permit No.' - 2002 -01, o:2002-01, Variance No. 2005-03 and Tree Permit No. 2005-10 for Tentative Tract Map No. 53430 subject to the following amendments: The Council would prefer the applicant to make every effort to work with the neighbors to reach an agreement to eliminate the retaining. walls. In lieu of an agreement the City Council approves construction of the two 15 -foot high retaining walls as recommended and, directs the applicant to work closely with "The Country Estates" Homeowners Association to reach agreement for annexation prior to commencement of grading. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Tanaka, Tye, MPTIZirbes, MlHerrera NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: 8.1 ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2006-16: ESTABLISHING SALARY RANGES FOR ALL CLASSES OF EMPLOYMENT EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 21, 2006 RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2005-58 IN ITS ENTIRETY IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT SALARY ADJUSTMENTS FOR VARIOUS FULL TIME POSITIONS; TITLE CHANGES FOR VARIOUS PART TIME POSITIONS; AND, APPROPRIATION OF $57,250 FROM GENERAL FUND RESERVES TO FUND PAY ADJUSTMENTS. CM/Lowry reported that each year Council includes as part of the budget adoption process, approval of a compensation structure for all City employees including part time, regular and exempt employees. As changes are required staff requests adjustments within the salary structure. Tonight's request to adjust the City's salary structure was formulated because in the fall when she requested an adjustment to the Assistant City Manager's position the City had lost one of its Assistant City Managers who took a position with a neighboring City and she was afraid the second Assistant City Manager would accept a position with another City. The City Council responded by approving the request. At the same time she requested similar increases for Department Heads and was told it was not an appropriate time. She included requests for salary adjustments in tonight's request as a result of the job market and the City's unsuccessful attempts to fill FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 17 CITY COUNCIL current vacancies. This evening Council received testimony from the applicant's very experienced engineers and consultants. D.B. needs experienced engineers as well and D.B. needs to compete with the private sector and with other cities in order to woo them to work for D.B. With staff's workload and the magnitude of projects that the Council embraces it is essential for D.B. to attract the best staff possible. Because of Senior Planner and Senior Engineer vacancies the City is paying consultant wages to have responses to project demands and to continue with the very demanding public works schedule and public transportation issues. In order to adjust current salaries to barely remain at a competitive market level staff is seeking an increase that would raise the Senior Engineer position to just five percent below the level of the current Public Works Director level. The current City Engineer has been with the City for well over a decade and if you approve the adjustment allowing him to have a fair chance of recruiting a qualified engineer he would very likely have an employee under his management working for five percent less the salary that he currently earns. She believed that it was time for the City to address the salaries. of the Department Heads that are currently about 20 percent below the market that includes the contract cities of Walnut, Chino Hills, La Mirada and Yorba Linda that have similar or smaller populations and similar budgets. CM/Lowry said she was not asking the Council to raise the salaries to the level of the adjacent cities, merely to please grant a 15 percent increase to the department heads which would still leave the salaries at five percent below market competition level. CM/Lowry stated that D.B. enjoys very dedicated and long-term Department Heads and she is concerned that they will decide they can no longer justify making 20 percent less than they could make with another City. She believed that it was her job as City Manager to encourage the strongest organization possible that would guarantee a continued level of service that the community has come to enjoy. Waiting for the system to become more broken is not necessarily the best answer and this resolution seeks promotions for staff that have been working through the years and that have taken on additional responsibilities. As the Council knows the Public Works Department has been short a number of staff people and has had considerable turnover. Despite these changes the remaining staff members have willingly taken on additional duties without remuneration. CM/Lowry said that with all of the added responsibilities and increased level of service to the community through the Information Services division, etc. the City must create an additional layer of management as reflected in the recommendation under a separate schedule of manager positions. FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 18 CITY COUNCIL CM/Lowry explained that the changes would allow the City to have an appropriate position in the marketplace and still leave the City at the bottom rung of the competing salary levels. This change would allow D.B. to have relationships inside of the compensation structure that. would provide integrity between positions within the City; it allows staff to create promotions where appropriate and gives opportunities to current and future employees. The recommendation seeks $57,000 in the current year and $169,000 in annual adjustments for the 20 positions. She recommended that if the Department Head increase was unacceptable to the Council that it at least approve the salary tables as recommended with the Department Heads at the F Step rather than the G Step for a 10 percent increase and Department Heads to move to Step G at the beginning of the new fiscal year for an additional five percent increase. In this scenario the current fiscal year request would be for $42,390, a reduction of $14,860 over the initial request. MPT/Zirbes felt that CM/Lowry had assembled a terrific team and those who preceded CM/Lowry were essential to the team: He had no major issue with the request but felt that it could wait until the new fiscal year on July 1. CM/Lowry responded that her reason for bringing this matter to the Council at this time was because of the need to recruit the two positions. And when these types of salary adjustment requests are bundled in a budget process they tend to not get the kind of consideration that they deserve and that she feels is so important. This item presented at this time allows for the request to have its own discreet discussion and deliberation and it also allows for dialogue that sets a tone for future negotiation. MPT/Zirbes reiterated his feeling that the increases should be effective July 1, 2006. CM/Lowry agreed that it would be a good faith response to approve the recommendations now to be effective July 1, 2006. MPT/Zirbes agreed that D.B. should be competitive with respect to recruiting forthe new positions and approve the balance of the increases for July 1, 2006. M/Herrera said she viewed this request in a different light and felt that - timing was everything. D.B. has experienced, well-qualified and knowledgeable employees and the City is dealing with a number of very complicated projects. Today the Council was discussing an additional on/off ramp at Lemon Ave. When Council Members are not knowledgeable on a host of topics they looks to staff to supply their recommendations and she would not want the good employees to leave D.B. for a higher salary nor would she want it to be known that all D.B. could afford was entry-level staff. D.B. accomplishes a tremendous amount within the region considering that the City has a FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 19 CITY COUNCIL population of 58,000 with about 44 full time staff members. Council Members are busy promoting the City and look to staff to provide support and prepare Council Members to participate ' in the organizations that allow D.B. to compete with larger cities for dollars, rights -of -ways, roadways, etc. She felt the best way to thank people for the work they perform is through their salary. We give staff a lot of public accolades which is nice, but the bottom line is that staff has to make a decent living in orderto support themselves and their families. C/Tanaka agreed that timing is everything and he believed this evening was the time to adopt the resolution as presented. He believed that D.B. had an outstanding staff that worked very hard on behalf of the residents and in order for the City to be competitive and move with greater economic development it must depend on a professional staff. C/Tye said that for years he has bragged about D.B. staff and now he has the privilege of serving on the City Council and brag that D.B. is a lean -mean operating machine. When he can rely on ICDD/Fong to be at City Hall until 6:30 on a Friday evening in order to get a packet to him for the next Council meeting and when Bob Rose has been with the City for 15 plus years and David Liu has been with the City for how many years it is time to acknowledge their service. And, he does not hear anybody saying that the City Council had better do this tonight or staff members will leave. As a City D.B. scrambled to do what it could to keep Jim DeStefano. C/Tye believed that D.B. was able to get more done with fewer people than all of the adjacent cities mentioned in the discussion. This is not a matter of merit increases or raises - this is a matter of adjusting current salaries to be competitive in the current marketplace. Even at that the City Manager is commenting that the increase will bring the level to `only five percent less than everybody else." D.B. needs to be competitive and keep good employees. If this is the right thing to do it is the right thing to do now. C/Tanaka believed that there should not be compaction and thatthere should be separation between supervisors and managers and the rank and file, and that everyone should be compensated accordingly. There was no one present who wished to speak on this matter. M/Herrera moved, C/Tanaka seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 2006-16: Establishing Salary Ranges for all classes of employment effective February 21, 2006 rescinding Resolution No. 2005-58 in its entirety in order to implement salary adjustments for various full time positions, title changes for various part time positions and, appropriate $57,250 from the General Fund Reserves to fund the pay adjustments. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 20 CITY COUNCIL AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Tanaka, Tye, MPT/Zirbes, M/Herrera NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CM/Lowry thanked the Council Members on behalf of all of the Department Heads and staff. 8.2 APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 WITH WEST COAST ARBORISTS FOR TREE MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR REMOVAL/REPLACEMENT OF ALL TREES ON GRAND AVENUE MEDIANS FROM THE SR60 TO DIAMOND BAR BOULEVARD AND NINE (9) TREES AT SYCAMORE CANYON PARK: TREE MAINTENANCE SERVICES AS AUTHORIZED BY THE CITY MAANAGER OR HER DESIGNEE; AND APPROPRIATION FROM THE GENERAL FUND RESERVES OF $27,775 FOR A TOTAL FISCAL YEAR 2005/06 AMOUNT OF $235,125. CSD/Rose reported that this request was for removal and. replacement of all trees on the Grand Avenue medians from the SR60 to Diamond Bar Boulevard as well as removal and replacement nine. (9) trees at Sycamore Canyon Park. The request also includes an authorization to perform tree maintenance services as authorized by, the City Manager or her designee for the remainder of the fiscal year. If items one and two are approved the appropriate from the General Fund Reserves would be $20,231 and $7,562 respectively. Also, 10 additional trees will be removed at Sycamore Canyon as a result of the ADA retrofit project and removal of these trees will result in a significant impact to the park. CSD/Rose gave a slide presentation depicting the proposed work. Staff recommends approval and appropriation of the funds. Lydia Plunk, 1522 Deerfoot Dr. pointed to the General Plan's Vision Statements that the City would retain the country living character and create a nurturing community environment. She asked that during; deliberation of this item the City Council remember those two points.- She oints.She understood that diseased trees needed to be removed but questioned why a ramp could not be moved around a tree. The loss of the large trees completely changes the character of the park. She felt that the London Plane tree was an excellent choice for replacement of the Sycamore trees. However, she disagreed that Camphor trees were more interesting and while Gingko's were excellent urban trees they were sometimes listed as inappropriate for streetscape because of the canopy size and problems with the roots. When D.B. became a City the trees in the parkway became more interesting and she hoped that D.B. would not revert back to the county's way of finding the cheapest tree for replacement trees. She liked the current assortment and felt it provided a more interesting look and was more in keeping., FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 21 CITY COUNCIL with what the citizens responded to most favorably since D.B. became a City. CSD/Rose responded that the primary reason the trees on Grand Ave. were being considered for removal was that several had died and it was time to make a decision about how Grand Ave. would look in the future. This was an opportunity to create a different type of entry look at whatwill surely be one of the City's most heavilytraveled access points when the new Target Project is completed. Based on staff's research, the type of eucalyptus tree that currently resides on Grand Ave. is not recommended for medians and street areas. Eucalyptus trees tend to be brittle and present a safety hazard on a heavily traveled boulevard. Staff believes that the Evergreen Camphor tree with its canopy offers a beautiful entry statement. Because of the current condition of the Eucalyptus trees staff believes it is time to, make a decision about changing the treescape for the area. CSD/Rose affirmed to CITye that the Camphor and Gingko trees would be used for the Grand Ave. median from the SR60 to Diamond Bar Blvd. only and that other median varieties would remain in place. CSDIRose confirmed to M/Herrera that the 19 Sycamore trees slated for removal would be replaced with 24 Sycamore trees. C/Chang moved, MPTIZirbes seconded, to approve Amendment No. 1 with West Coast Arborists for Tree Maintenance Services for removal and replacement of all trees on Grand Ave.medians from the SR60 to Diamond Bar Blvd.and nine (9) trees at Sycamore Canyon Park; Tree Maintenance Services as authorized by the City Manager or her designee; and, appropriation from the General Fund Reserves of $27,775 for a total FY 2005106 appropriation of $235,125. AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Tanaka, Tye, MPTIZirbes, M/Herrera NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 9. COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS: CITanaka attended the Seniors Valentine Dinner and Dance; attended the LA County Division League of California Cities meeting at Paramount Studios in Hollywood. Alex Padillo, President, used the studio to show a movie and showcase the region to point out how important the movie industry was to the Southern California economy; attended the Council of African-American Parents Cultural Faire at Sycamore Canyon Park, listened to good music, ate good food and purchased a few items; learned from the Three Valley's Water District Leadership Breakfast Meeting how important water is to the area and to keep it clean and preserve it for cities like D.B.; FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 22 CITY COUNCIL attended the Neighborhood Watch meeting on Gerndal and stood outside of the motorhome due to the large attendance; attended the Miss Diamond Bar Fashion Show and attended the Lyons District 404 Teen Dinner and. presentation during which two D.B. students were recognized. C/Chang said that he and other Council Members attended many meetings during the two-week period between Council meetings. He enjoyed the African-American Cultural Faire but had to leave early to attend another event. He joined the Red Cross annual party and continues to support the organization in their fundralsing efforts. He was invited to Washington, D.C. by Congress to attend the meeting at the Chinese Embassy to discuss how' China could attract small businesses and import products from America as well as create more traffic and trade between the two countries. The Pomona Fair Board requested that he ask D.B. residents to promote the Diamond Bar Day at the LA County Fair. He spoke with staff about Kaiser-Permanente's desire to open a service center in D.B. C/Tye again congratulated Tom Mangham on his retirement. He complimented CSD/Rose and his team on the outstanding Sycamore Canyon Trailhead Project. He reiterated that the Project was paid for 100 percent by grant money and it came in under budget. He was excited to see benches dedicated to the memory of Steve Tamaya and Hal Sturm. He was proud to report that the Walnut Valley Rotary Club also installed a bench at the entryway and it was heartwarming to see it used on a regular basis. Last week he joined M/Herrera at the California Contract Cities Association and it was his privilege to vote in favor of a resolution to support the 2006 California State Library Bond. He was confident that ACM/Doyle would fight for a fair share of the bond money should it be approved in June. On Saturday he participated in the Counsel of African-American Parents at Sycamore Canyon Park and it was especially nice to hear compliments about staff. The President of the Counsel wrote a note acknowledging Ryan Wright and his staff for their fine work. C/Tye asked CSD/Rose to pass on his thanks for the terrific work staff does on behalf of the City. MPT/Zirbes commented that the trailhead looks great and people who are using the trailhead and benches are thrilled with the project. He encouraged everyone to join the Council for the dedication ceremonies on Saturday at 10:00 a.m. The Miss D.B. Pageant is scheduled for March 25 at Mt. San Antonio College. Unfortunately he will be out of town and unable to host the Pageant this year. In his stead, Bob Huff has agreed to host the event. All nine contestants are outstanding and he believed it would be a wonderful evening. If interested in attending, please call the pageant at 909-861-8454. He congratulated D.B.H.S. and D.R.H.S. varsityboys'teams. Both advanced to the CIF playoffs. The girls' varsity soccer team from D.B.H.S. also advanced to the playoffs and played and lost a tough game to an. outstanding team. It was exciting for him to see so many D.B. residents attend the games. D.B. is a great City in which to live and he is honored to serve on the City Council. FEBRUARY 21, 2006 PAGE 23 CITY COUNCIL MlHerrera said that it had been a long evening and she would not repeat the many events she and her colleagues attended during the past two weeks. She thanked Council Members for their resolve and residents for their interest and for attending tonight's meeting. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, MlHerrera adjourned the regular City Council meeting at 9:34 p.m. Tommye tribbins, City Cierk The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 7fh day of mar, -h _, 2006. CAROL HERRERA, MAYOR